What are your thoughts on the Army eliminating the MP Corps?

I agree 100% with Your View Colonel and having spent 22 years as a military Member in USAF Air/Security Police there is no good substitute for that. We have worked with DOD Police and that's fine but as a supplement NOT a replacement. My Military Police career also led to a career as a Full time civilian Police officer as well which I had the training and experience for. The Military Police background also put Me at the top of the list for any civilian Department I had applied and I had a choice of jobs.

It is my understanding that the core mission of POWs, traffic control and VIP security is not changing. The main change is in the stateside garrison law enforcement mission and additional cross training for 11B and 19D.
When I was in, 35+ years ago we had that cross training and that became apparent as to how much training there was when I attended the NCO Academy. MPs and Scouts were singled out in weapons and navigation classes.
I'm not opposed to more DOD Police on bases but wonder how that reception will be from other commanders on base. Whatever form the changes are, the critical mission needs to be priority.

I totally agree with you SGM...Internment and Resettlement Operations: Army Field Manual FM 3-39. 40. There's a HUGE need for this and we need trained Soldiers who know what to do in and what not to do when working with detainees in the theater internment facility (TIF). I was the COG in Iraq at Taji, and that amount of politcal and red tape when working with detainees is ridiculous! Definitely isn’t not the most desirable or sought off job, but it provided great opportunities for HUMINT operations and the amount of intel it provided to the US Forces was instrumental. In all....We still need 31B and 31E MOSs

That is a major issue every time any of the military services decides to "save money" by either civilianizing or privatizing military positions -- especially privatizing. Civilianizing makes sense when the position needs (or at least benefits from) reduced turnover. But the idea that the government can save money by privatizing is always a disaster (but we keep doing it anyway).
DoD civilian employees do cost extra for overtime and do job descriptions and union contracts, but most of the employees are veterans are will usually go along with that "and other duties as assigned" crap as long as it isn't ridiculous.
When the government privatizes a job one of the problems is that they are no longer dealing with the employees and the union, now they are dealing with the contractor first and then with the union, and neither really gives a damn about the employees (not even "their" union). The basic idea that the government can hire a contractor who then hires workers who by law are paid at least "the prevailing wage" but somehow this costs less than the government hiring the workers is clearly ridiculous. The only way the contractor makes any money in the basic contract is by paying the workers less than what the government would have paid for that job and qualifications, unless there is a lot of unemployment in the area this means the contractor has to higher less qualified people willing to work for less money. But the contractor knows that their big payday is when anything changes because anything that wasn't explicitly included in the "Statement of Work" is extra and the contractor gets to price that extra work on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.

Having served over 30 years, I never understood the logic behind "Contracted anything is more cost affective than a service member". How is paying a contractor millions to operate a dining facility more cost affective than a dining facility NCO or Warrant Officer with a good team of enlisted cooks? How is paying DynCorp millions to run a motor pool more cost affective than mechanics you've already trained? How is paying KBR millions , more cost affective than using truck drivers and fuelers that you've already trained? And to top it off we usually have to provide security for these contractors in a combat zone. But then again we contract that as well?

It may have reemerge but there is no longer any LE training done at the academy. They have lost their national accreditation. SF are now just grunts of the AF.