Who has control over The National Guard?

I believe this was done in part to help out or bail out Texas. The previous Texas Governor ordered the Texas National Guard to the southern border a couple of years ago. It was supposed to be a short-term deal, but the new Governor liked the politics of it so much he continued the deployment. It has cost the state an estimated $63 million so far-no federal bailout possible since this was done by the state itself. Well, now they get to continue and expand their presence all on the federal dime. Sweet deal for the state. I am sure Trump got a few thank you cards from his friends down south for this.

Not relevant to this discussion, but does any other state have it’s own independent military?
See the “State Guard” where you get to play with all the cool toys but are guaranteed never to have to deploy overseas!

That mission transitioned to Title 32 status funded by the federal government last July. The latest move continues the mission. It may well expand it. It’s not bailing the state out of the costs. That already happened.

The main question seems to have petered out so…

Many although not a majority. Those are the generically named state defense forces discussed above. Formal names vary on a state by state basis. Some even have naval components. In a different sense almost every state has one whenever the Governor legally calls for it. Those are the unorganized militias provided for almost universally in state law or constitution. States without a currently organized SDF effectively form one if the Governor chooses to institute a call-up.

Toys, let alone the cool military specific ones, are typically pretty limited in state defense forces. You may want to stop with that simple answer if discussions of Army logisitics and cites of Guard Bureau and Army regs aren’t your thing. :stuck_out_tongue:

The National Guard gets provided federal equipment as part of their dual status. It’s effectively on loan from the federal government and managed by the US Property and Fiscal Office that exists in each state and territory. Every piece of equipment related to the relevant Table of Organization and Equipment for a given type of unit in the Guard comes from the Federal Government. As long as it’s on hand, it’s generally available for state missions. States tend to jealousy protect force structure like National Guard utility helicopter units for that reason. Things specific to the state mission need to be funded by the state; that applies whether it’s National Guard or a state defense force. In my two NG company commands, I had a small chunk of state property directly relevant to a state mission - crowd and riot control. That included things like riot batons and the face shields that hooked onto our federally provided helmets. That equipment was paid for by the state, managed separately, and had to be left behind if the unit mobilized onto Title 10 active duty. The SDFs don’t have federally supplied equipment.

NGR 10-4 National Guard Interaction with State Defense Forces pretty clearly speaks to what it’s title says. (Note, it’s not uncommon for .mil addresses to have bad security certificates because DOD uses it’s own root certificates that aren’t typically installed on private computers. I assume that last will throw an exception for most.) The meat of the regulation is a mere two pages because the line is pretty clear.

[quote]
2-1. Policy
a. The States are responsible for all aspects of SDFs including organization, recruiting, training, equipping, funding, management and employment, subject to the restrictions stated in this regulation.
b. The NGB recognizes that SDFs may cooperate with the State NG during domestic operations. The State NG may train or conduct exercises and maneuvers in conjunction with SDFs. However, a State NG shall not spend federal funds (including pay and allowances) or use federal equipment in activities which have the primary purpose of training or otherwise supporting SDFs.

[quote]

There’s a little bit of grey area in AR 700-131 Loan, Lease, and Donation of Army Materielreferenced in the NG Reg if you really want to dig into the weeds. The approval authority tends to be relatively high and well outside the state chain of command or the state USPFO. There’s a section of table 2-2 that covers loan of federal property to states if you really want to dig. From personal experience, let me supply two words to describe having to go outside the state chain of command for the approval of equipment requests needed just to support a federal mission - difficult and slow.

States tend to limit the roles of their SDFs to a subset of what the Guard can perform. It helps reduce the equipment the state needs to pay for. States then mostly equip on the cheap because budgets are tight. Joining a SDF is a good way to buy your own uniforms and food, while not being paid for training attendance. It’s not a good way to play with “all the cool toys.” SDFs mostly don’t have the cool toys.

an all those hawks who never served in combat(Reagan, Bush jr Quayle, Chaney, et al), but Vietname vets Like Kerry and Gore get slammed as unpatriotic! Go figure.

[quote=“DinoR, post:22, topic:811887”]

That mission transitioned to Title 32 status funded by the federal government last July. The latest move continues the mission. It may well expand it. It’s not bailing the state out of the costs. That already happened.
The main question seems to have petered out so…

Many although not a majority. Those are the generically named state defense forces discussed above. Formal names vary on a state by state basis. Some even have naval components. In a different sense almost every state has one whenever the Governor legally calls for it. Those are the unorganized militias provided for almost universally in state law or constitution. States without a currently organized SDF effectively form one if the Governor chooses to institute a call-up.

Toys, let alone the cool military specific ones, are typically pretty limited in state defense forces. You may want to stop with that simple answer if discussions of Army logisitics and cites of Guard Bureau and Army regs aren’t your thing. :stuck_out_tongue:

The National Guard gets provided federal equipment as part of their dual status. It’s effectively on loan from the federal government and managed by the US Property and Fiscal Office that exists in each state and territory. Every piece of equipment related to the relevant Table of Organization and Equipment for a given type of unit in the Guard comes from the Federal Government. As long as it’s on hand, it’s generally available for state missions. States tend to jealousy protect force structure like National Guard utility helicopter units for that reason. Things specific to the state mission need to be funded by the state; that applies whether it’s National Guard or a state defense force. In my two NG company commands, I had a small chunk of state property directly relevant to a state mission - crowd and riot control. That included things like riot batons and the face shields that hooked onto our federally provided helmets. That equipment was paid for by the state, managed separately, and had to be left behind if the unit mobilized onto Title 10 active duty. The SDFs don’t have federally supplied equipment.

NGR 10-4 National Guard Interaction with State Defense Forces pretty clearly speaks to what it’s title says. (Note, it’s not uncommon for .mil addresses to have bad security certificates because DOD uses it’s own root certificates that aren’t typically installed on private computers. I assume that last will throw an exception for most.) The meat of the regulation is a mere two pages because the line is pretty clear.

[quote]
2-1. Policy
a. The States are responsible for all aspects of SDFs including organization, recruiting, training, equipping, funding, management and employment, subject to the restrictions stated in this regulation.
b. The NGB recognizes that SDFs may cooperate with the State NG during domestic operations. The State NG may train or conduct exercises and maneuvers in conjunction with SDFs. However, a State NG shall not spend federal funds (including pay and allowances) or use federal equipment in activities which have the primary purpose of training or otherwise supporting SDFs.

Thanks!
You provided a lot of clarification and good information on the subject. As you could surely tell, I know almost nothing about SDFs-I didn’t realize they existed at all, much are relatively common. I figured the SDFs wouldn’t have all the coolest toys (heavy armored vehicles, helicopters, missiles, etc) but would have access to federal equipment on loan. Heck, my local sheriff has a couple of MRAPs and military scout helios (not sure they are flyable-they may be just for spare parts) just because he can.