STATEMENT OF

GOVERNOR MICHAEL F. EASLEY

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Before the

Senate Judiciary Committee

On

THE INSURRECTION ACT RIDER'

AND STATE CONTROL OF THE NATIONAL GUARD

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

**THE INSURRECTION ACT RIDER'**

**And State Control of the National Guard**

Thank you Chairman Leahy and members of the Senate Judiciary Committee
for the opportunity to speak to you today. I am here in two capacities.

First, I am here as the Governor of North Carolina, a state recognized
as one of the most military friendly in the country.

Second, I am here in my capacity as the co-lead on National Guard issues
for the National Governors' Association. I appreciate the opportunity to
speak to you, wearing both these hats, to let you know how important the
Guard is, not only to homeland security and homeland defense, but in the
critical role these units play in emergency preparedness and disaster
response efforts at the state level.

This role must be [strengthened]{.underline} and that is why governors
unanimously support repeal of portions of last year's National Defense
Authorization Act that expanded presidential control of the National
Guard without consultation with governors or Congress.

North Carolina is home to more than 101,000 active-duty military
personnel at Fort Bragg, Pope Air Force Base, Camp Lejeune Marine Corps
Base, Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, the U.S. Coast Guard Air Station
at Elizabeth City and Marine Corps Air Stations at New River and Cherry
Point. The active duty bases are supported by 17,000 civilians.

North Carolina has 164 Army and Air National Guard units, nearly 12,000
members strong, as well as another 10,234 Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine
and Coast Guard reservists.

In North Carolina and in many other states, there is strong community
support for our active, Guard and Reserve service members. And I am
proud to say North Carolina is a model for other states in serving our
National Guard families.

Our employers in North Carolina and across the country have been
supportive of their employees serving the nation in the National Guard.
In North Carolina, we pay our state employees the difference between
their regular salary and their Guard salary if they are called into
active federal duty.

This kind of support is not unique. Many businesses also do this and we
are working on other ways to make it more attractive and affordable to
get more employers to support the Guard and their employees who serve.

Since September 11, 2001, these 12,000 members of the N.C. National
Guard have proven themselves at home and abroad. More than 10,000 of our
North Carolina National Guard soldiers and airmen have been mobilized in
Operations Iraqi Freedom, Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle. During the
same time period, more than 3,800 have been called to duty to support
civil authorities responding to hurricanes, floods, ice storms and other
disasters.

The National Guard units in the states are committed to the national
defense and the role they play in keeping our country secure. They are
equally committed, and, I believe all governors would agree, essential,
in keeping our communities safe when called upon in response to natural
and manmade disasters.

In North Carolina, during the ice storms that blanketed our state in
2002, 2003 and 2004, Guard personnel, in addition to their usual
emergency response duties, went door-to-door in many of our rural
communities to check on residents who were without power. They also
worked during power outages to direct traffic, rescue stranded motorists
and provide emergency power.

During Hurricane Isabel in 2003, our Guard troops were on duty when
flood waters rose around the isolated coastal town of Harlowe. The Guard
rescued more than 130 trapped residents.

When Hurricane Frances soaked the western areas of the state in
September 2004, residents escaping flood waters, stranded in trees and
on top of cars, were rescued by chopper crews from the 126th Aviation
Regiment based in Salisbury.

Without the assistance of the Guard in these cases, clearly commanded by
the governor, there would have been significant loss of life in North
Carolina.

And [that]{.underline} is why it is critical for Congress to repeal
Section 1076 of the National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law
109-364).

This section was slipped, with [little]{.underline} debate and
[no]{.underline} open discussion, into the National Defense
Authorization Act. The section was added without regard to a call by the
nation's governors for hearings on the consequences of this action.

There is [unanimous]{.underline} support, and you know [how
hard]{.underline} that is to find among the nation's governors, to
repeal these dangerous provisions. They unnecessarily expand the
president's authority to federalize the National Guard during natural
disasters and manmade disasters and encroach on our constitutional
authority to protect the citizens of our states.

The role of the Guard to the states and nation is too important to have
major policy decisions made without input from governors and full debate
throughout the policy-making process.

The nation\'s governors [unanimously]{.underline} opposed the inclusion
of this section in the bill because managing the Guard within a state
must rest with the governor. But more importantly, governors have the
responsibility for assuring the security and wellbeing of our residents.
The Guard is a key part of that duty during disasters and other local
emergencies.

The changes in the Act undermine governors\' authority over the Guard,
place the safety and welfare of citizens in jeopardy and should be
repealed.

Unless activated in purely federal service, the National Guard is and
should remain under state control with governors as commanders-in-chief.
The dual mission of the Guard, a combat ready force that can be called
on by the President and a first responder in domestic emergencies or
disasters under the command and control of the governor, requires that
federal law clearly delineate chains of command for each mission.

The changes made to the \"Insurrection Act\" by Section 1076 of the
National Defense Authorization Act confuse the issue of who commands the
Guard during a domestic emergency. By granting the President specific
authority to use the Guard during a natural disaster or emergency
without the consent of a governor, Section 1076 could result in
confusion and an inability to respond to residents\' needs. As currently
written, it calls into question whether the governor or the President
has primary responsibility during a domestic emergency.

In North Carolina, and I know in other states, our National Guard units
train with local and state first responders on specific scenarios and in
disaster preparedness exercises. These drills do not simply involve
role-playing and response, but establish critical lines of communication
and uniform operating procedures. Unwarranted injection of federal
command would result in confusion and miscommunication.

A basic element of our system of government forbids the use of the
military for domestic law enforcement except in the most extraordinary
of circumstances and even then only with the knowledge of Congress. Use
of the military for law enforcement has come only in the rarest of
instances. Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy nationalized the Guard to
enforce Supreme Court civil rights decisions. In 1992 President George
H.W. Bush nationalized the Guard to deal with rioting in Los Angeles
following the Rodney King trial.

The Insurrection Act, prior to passage of the National Defense
Authorization Act, served the nation well as an extraordinary remedy
that allowed the President to take control of the Guard in the most rare
and exceptional of cases. Despite the role of governors as
commander-in-chief of the Guard in their states, Section 1076 of the
National Defense Authorization Act was drafted without consultation with
governors and without full discussion or debate regarding the
ramifications of such a change on domestic emergency response.

Furthermore, I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to
address National Guard training needs and equipment shortfalls. The
availability and status of training and equipment for both state and
federal missions is critical for a timely and effective National Guard
response.

Governors commend the Army and the Air Force for their efforts to
enhance training and better equip the National Guard in recognition of
its vital contribution to our national defense. But here at home, many
states and territories are suffering equipment shortages in critical
mission areas such as responding to natural disasters like hurricanes,
fighting forest fires and other emergencies. Equipment is left on the
battlefields of Iraq or other foreign missions.

Attention must be paid to Army National Guard units returning from
active duty abroad. These units must be re-equipped to ensure they are
ready for redeployment or response to domestic emergencies and other
responsibilities.

Additionally, last month the Commission on the National Guard and
Reserves released a report to the House and Senate Armed Services
Committees. The report made note of the National Guard shortfalls in
equipment and other resources along with facing challenges in
recruiting.

One of the Commission's 23 recommendations directly relates to our topic
today, the changes to the Insurrection Act. That recommendation (Number
8) says that "the Department of Defense should develop protocols that
allow Governors to direct the efforts of federal military assets
responding to an emergency such as a natural disaster."

Governors have had this responsibility in the past and I see no reason
why governors should not be in charge of all National Guard resources,
including active military personnel and materials, so responses to
natural disasters or emergency events are effectively coordinated.
Indeed, I would say that state, local and federal agencies need to begin
training together so that all military, active duty and National Guard,
as well as local and state responders, will know what to expect and who
is in charge.

As a lead for the National Governor's Association on National Guard
matters I can assure you I have never seen governors as united on any
issue as we are on this one. I urge Congress to repeal the provision in
Section 1076 of the Act and open a dialogue with governors regarding how
to best enhance the effectiveness of the Guard in responding to domestic
disasters and emergencies.

I will be happy to respond to any of your questions.

\###