It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The underlying structure –
two votes, on two bills, the second one long called-for by conservatives – is the same.
But leadership strengthened the language of both in a variety of ways, including allowing border state governors to deploy the National Guard without President Obama's approval.
In a closed-door GOP conference meeting, King told colleagues that while the package yesterday had a good purpose, now it has language to match its intent, according to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA).
Tougher Border Bill Proposals
Texas Rep. Pete Sessions entered the meeting saying
“we’re going to win.”
“I think I saw a puff of white smoke,” added Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA).
“Some of the most vocal naysayers getting up and praising it and saying that they're going to be yeses and they're going to be pounding the bushes for yes votes.
It's a new dawn.
I've got to credit both Kevin McCarthy and Steve Scalise for their maiden voyage being a very successful one,” added Salmon.
originally posted by: Montana
I was unaware that state governors required federal approval to deploy the NG unit in their state. I was under the impression they could do this whenever they needed.
If this is true, why would it take legislation in DC to authorize it? Answer: It wouldn't. If this legislation isn't necessary, why is being pushed?
Please correct me if I am mistaken in my understanding.
Title 32 Full-Time National Guard Duty
“Full-time National Guard Duty” means training or other duty, other than inactive duty, performed by a member of the National Guard. Title 32 allows the Governor, with the approval of the President or the Secretary of Defense, to order a member to duty for operational Homeland Defense activities in accordance with the following sections of U.S. Code (USC):
1. 32 USC 502 (f): This statue allows member of the National Guard to be ordered to full-time National Guard duty to perform operational activities. It was used for the Airport Security mission after 9/11 and also for Hurricane Katrina and Rita response effort.
2. 32 USC § 901: The term “Homeland Defense activity” means an activity undertaken for the military protection of the territory or domestic population of the U.S., or of infrastructure or other asset of the U.S. determined by the Secretary of Defense as being critical to national security and at risk of a threat or aggression against the U.S.
3. 32 USC § 902 - Homeland Defense activities: funds. (a) The Secretary of Defense may provide funds to a Governor to employ National Guard units or members to conduct Homeland Defense activities that the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate for participation by the National Guard or members.
Texas Must Act Where Washington Will Not - ( Texas Military Forces )
Texas must act where Washington will not. Gov. Perry has called for 1,000 additional National Guard troops and we can act now to provide them. We urge Gov. Perry, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, and Speaker Straus to utilize all lawful budget authority to deploy additional members of the Texas Military Forces to the border as the Governor requested.
originally posted by: Montana
a reply to: seeker1963
I understand your quote to be speaking about Ng being used in support of DHS operations which would require federal funding because DHS is a federal agency. (not sure about this, but it seems like it to me).
I think state governments can activate state NG units for action in their state without so much as a 'by your leave' from the Feds- they just have to pay for it themselves.
originally posted by: FarleyWayne
Forget this THREAD because 'O' would VETO it anyway ... ( even if it were to pass the Senate; 'O' said so ).
TEXAS ( and perhaps other states ) WILL 'Fund' its OWN Border-Security UNTIL Jan 2015.
Jan 2015? ...
'O' will NOT have ANY VETO-Power with 67 "NON-Liberal/Progressive" Senate-Members.