Current Status Introducing Body:Senate Bill Number:1524 Primary Sponsor:Bryan Type of Legislation:CR Subject:Army National Guard Date Bill Passed both Bodies:May 14, 1992 Computer Document Number:CYY/19184.SD Introduced Date:Apr 29, 1992 Last History Body:Senate Last History Date:May 14, 1992 Last History Type:Received from House Scope of Legislation:Statewide All Sponsors:Bryan Wilson Robert W. Hayes Jr. Leventis Carmichael Courson Courtney Drummond Giese Helmly Hinds Leatherman Lourie Macaulay Martin Martschink McConnell McGill Moore O'Dell Peeler Pope Reese Rose Russell Shealy J. Verne Smith Stilwell Williams Type of Legislation:Concurrent Resolution
Bill Body Date Action Description CMN
---- ------ ------------ ------------------------------ ---
1524 Senate May 14, 1992 Received from House
1524 House May 14, 1992 Adopted, returned with
concurrence
1524 House May 13, 1992 Committee Report: Favorable 24
1524 House May 05, 1992 Introduced, referred to 24
Committee
1524 Senate Apr 30, 1992 Adopted, sent to House
1524 Senate Apr 30, 1992 Recalled from Committee 08
1524 Senate Apr 29, 1992 Introduced, referred to 08
Committee
View additional legislative information at the LPITS web site.
ADOPTED
May 14, 1992
S. 1524
Introduced by SENATORS Bryan, Wilson, Robert W. Hayes, Jr., Leventis, Carmichael, Courson, Courtney, Drummond, Giese, Helmly, Hinds, Leatherman, Lourie, Macaulay, Martin, Martschink, McConnell, McGill, Moore, O'Dell, Peeler, Pope, Reese, Rose, Russell, Shealy, J. Verne Smith, Stilwell and Williams
S. Printed 5/14/92--S.
Read the first time April 29, 1992.
TO MEMORIALIZE THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO SUPPORT AND MAINTAIN A STRONG ARMY NATIONAL GUARD BY MANDATING THAT THE "END STRENGTH" OF THE ARMY NATIONAL GUARD BE NO LESS THAN 420,000 PERSONNEL AND THAT THE SOUTH CAROLINA ARMY NATIONAL GUARD UNITS PRESENTLY SERVING THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA BE RETAINED AS PART OF THE FORCE STRUCTURE OF AMERICA'S ARMED FORCES.
Whereas, under the "Base Force Strategy" proposal of the Department of Defense, the strength of the Army National Guard will be reduced approximately from 459,000 to 338,000 personnel which will result in the deactivation of many National Guard units throughout South Carolina and the closing of many local armories; and
Whereas, these proposed reductions would reduce the National Guard to an ineffectual and insignificant role in our nation's defense and would deprive many communities of the services of their local National Guard units and would deprive the citizens in these communities from having the privilege of participating in their nation's defense; and
Whereas, the proposed reductions would cause increased reliance in expensive, unneeded active forces and a decreased reliance in the cost-effective National Guard forces which would be illogical at a time of reduced threat in the world and economic hardships; and
Whereas, the Army National Guard is appropriated only approximately two percent of the entire defense budget, and approximately four National Guard soldiers can be trained and made available for the cost of one active duty soldier; and
Whereas, the base force proposal is not only the least cost-effective method of providing a strong defense for our nation, but is inconsistent with the scheme for national defense of the framers of the Constitution who envisioned that our nation would be defended primarily by citizen-soldiers led and trained by a small active military to be no larger than dictated by "evident necessity"; and
Whereas, the framers of the Constitution were confident that the citizen-soldiers would quickly answer a call to their country's colors when the cause was just and were further confident that free men were well capable of defending their own freedom and would, in fact, prefer to do so; and
Whereas, in The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison clearly indicate that the framers of the Constitution intended to discourage over-reliance on a professional military in order to reserve to the Congress, elected by and responsive to the people, both the decision and the ability to wage war and, accordingly, the base force proposal would alter the balance of authority and ability to wage war that currently exists between the Congress and the executive branch in a fashion contrary to the fundamental scheme of the Constitution; and
Whereas, the National Guard throughout our country's history has consistently proven itself to be a dedicated and effective means of national defense whenever called upon; and
Whereas, the recent "call-up" for the Persian Gulf War demonstrated that present-day National Guard personnel can well perform missions just as did the Minute Men of the past and can be ready for deployment overseas well in advance of the availability of transportation to theaters of operations; and
Whereas, the base force proposal ignores the constraints on available transportation for deployment of active duty divisions overseas demonstrated by the fact that it took approximately six months to build up forces in theater for the Persian Gulf War, and further ignores the absence of a specific threat causing a need for a large, expensive active Army; and
Whereas, in addition to being the most cost-effective means of having ample ground forces for national defense and being a ready, on-call force for local emergencies and drug interdiction, the National Guard has been and should continue to be the focal point for "grass roots" support of our country's defense and a breeding ground of future generations of patriotic, dependable, and fit young people who desire to serve their nation and State both in war and in peace as members of the National Guard; and
Whereas, an Army National Guard with a minimum "end strength" of 420,000 is necessary to maintain the Army National Guard in sufficient numbers to provide a ready force of sufficient size needed for our nation's defense, to maintain a balance between active and reserve forces consistent with the intent of the framers of the Constitution, and to maintain the traditional National Guard presence in local communities throughout the United States which tradition the citizens of our communities wish to continue; and
Whereas, the Congress has historically and constitutionally legislated the strength of the active Army and the Army National Guard and, except for the period between the end of World War II and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, the authorized strength of the Army National Guard has always substantially exceeded that of the active Army. For example, in 1916 the strength was 175,000 active and 400,000 Guard personnel, and in 1920-40, the strength was 280,000 active and 425,000 Guard personnel. Now, therefore,
Be it resolved by the Senate, the House of Representatives concurring:
That the members of the General Assembly hereby memorialize the Congress of the United States to support and maintain a strong Army National Guard by mandating that the "end strength" of the Army National Guard be no less than 420,000 personnel and that the South Carolina Army National Guard units presently serving the State of South Carolina be retained as part of the force structure of America's Armed Forces.
Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to each house of the Congress of the United States, and to each senator and member of the United States House of Representatives from South Carolina.