PHOENIX — Saying they’re “our’’ National Guard soldiers, Republican state lawmakers are picking a fight with Washington over who controls them.
But if the lawmakers get their way, a general says the Guard will be left with no money and no equipment, yet Arizona soldiers will still be subject to being called up for overseas duty.
Legislation awaiting Arizona House action would forbid the deployment of state Guard members for active duty combat absent an actual declaration of war by Congress. Senate Bill 1121, approved this week by the Republican-controlled Senate on a 16-12 party-line vote, would also provide exceptions in cases of repelling an invasion or suppressing an insurrection.
Sen. Wendy Rogers, a retired Air Force pilot, said this is about protecting Arizona soldiers from missions such as the one in Jordan, where three soldiers from other states were killed last month by an unmanned drone attack. About 40 Arizona Guard soldiers were wounded, one of them critically.
“It is high time we passed this and keep our Guard where it should be unless the United States Congress declares war,’’ said Rogers, a Flagstaff Republican.
Brig. Gen John Conley, director of administrative services for the Arizona Guard, told senators he understands the sentiment. But he said it’s not that simple.
“It will be the beginning of the end of the Arizona National Guard,’’ he said. “It will be sending a signal to the active duty and the Department of Defense that the Arizona National Guard is unwilling and unable to go overseas and perform overseas missions.’’
That would result in automatic loss of federal funding of $636 million a year for the Guard, Conley said. That is more than 96% of its total operating budget, he said.
Also gone would be the equipment.
“That’s every helicopter, every KC-135 (refueling) aircraft you see over there at Sky Harbor airport, every fighter jet, every truck, every piece of equipment that we have,’’ Conley said.
And even with all the funds and equipment gone, SB 1121 still wouldn’t stop Arizona Guard soldiers — there are now about 8,000 — from being deployed, he said.
When they enlist in the Arizona Guard, they also enlist as members of the National Guard of the United States.
“When you join that federal entity, it’s no different than raising your hand and swearing to be an airman out of Luke Air Force Base or a soldier down at Fort Huachuca,’’ Conley said.
“So when the president says, ‘Hey, I need these folks from the Arizona National Guard to go to Jordan or to go to wherever,’ he’s not mobilizing them as members of the Arizona National Guard,’’ the general continued, but as members of the Guard of the United States. “So if this law passes, the governor doesn’t get a swing into whether those troops leave the state.’’
Rogers remained unconvinced that what Conley is predicting would happen.
“General, I think that’s a leap of assumption,’’ she said. If nothing else, Rogers said she is convinced there are many who would continue to serve without pay.
“I’m one of them,’’ Conley responded. But he said that ignores reality.
He said recruiting is “always a challenge for us.’’
“And that’s recruiting to a fully funded, fully equipped force,’’ Conley continued. “If we’re recruiting to an underfunded or unfunded force with no equipment, that’s going to be a real challenge.’’
Rogers responded, “All I want to say is, that is our job, to do what’s right.’’
She said that means going ahead even if it means an anticipated veto by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs who, by virtue of her elected position, is also commander of the Arizona National Guard. Ditto, Rogers said, of worrying how the measure might play out in court if there is litigation.
Rogers predicted that if Arizona adopts SB 1121, “other states will follow.’’
Sen. Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City, said he doubts Washington would actually follow through.
The federal government, which is fighting with Texas over its border enforcement and its use of the Texas National Guard, has not federalized those soldiers, he said.
“I don’t think the federal government is going to come down and rip our stuff out,’’ Borrelli said.
Conley, however, said what Arizona is threatening to do — refuse to cooperate with Washington and participate as demanded when called to active duty — is quite different than what is going on in Texas and would have different results.
“It’s not a ‘whether’ the president will take away our stuff,’’ he said. “Once we say that we won’t make mission, once we say that we’re not going to use that stuff for its intended purpose — which, right or wrong, is to go fight in operations other than war overseas or do other missions overseas — once we say we won’t do that, then the president has no choice but to take away our federal recognition because we’re refusing to do the federal part of our job.”
He also urged them to think about that loss from a more selfish perspective.
Conley said those federal dollars provide the finances the state has been using to send Guard troops to the border with Mexico to help local communities and provide aerial reconnaissance.
“It costs $400 a day to put a guardsman on the border, on average,’’ he said.
Sen. Eva Burch, D-Mesa, said that argument resonated with her.
“I know how important matters of border security are to this state and the people in my district,’’ she said. “And I cannot put forth a vote that acts against those interests.’’
But Borrelli, a retired Marine gunnery sergeant, said he sees it through the lens of states’ rights.
“If the federal government wants to come in and wipe out our Guard and do that, they’re really, really tipping their hand on how much tyranny and how much overreach they’re going to have,’’ he said.
Get your morning recap of today's local news and read the full stories here: tucne.ws/morning
