50 Governors Oppose Bush’s Guard Cuts

Governors crossing party lines are criticizing Bush administration policies on the National Guard, questioning a budget plan they say will cut Guard strength and leave states less able to respond to homegrown emergencies like hurricanes or a feared pandemic. The state leaders, attending the winter meeting of the National Governors Association, hoped for answers from President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld at a White House gathering Monday. “We’re going to fight that tooth and nail,” said Republican Gov. Bob Taft of Ohio. “The National Guard is not just important from the standpoint of disaster response in the state of Ohio, and homeland security, but is crucial for overall military preparedness. It would be a real mistake to cut back.”

Bush’s 2007 budget submission would support a state-controlled National Guard of about 333,000 citizen soldiers – the current total – rather than the 350,000 authorized by Congress. It also proposes to pay for 188,000 Army Reserve troops rather than the 205,000 authorized by Congress.

Republican Gov. Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho said the administration has since signaled it would not push for that reduction in strength, but he questioned whether the cuts within the Pentagon’s spending proposals wouldn’t end up forcing reductions anyway. Those plans would cut $789 million next year, totaling $5.3 billion over five years, Kempthorne said.
“We’re going to say ‘Don’t do this,’” he said.

All 50 governors signed onto a letter to Bush earlier this month that opposed any cuts to the Guard.
“We’re getting ready for tsunamis. We’re getting ready for earthquakes. We’re getting ready for forest fires,” said Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire of Washington state. “Cut all that back and I think you’re left with a really troublesome situation.”