[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 53 (Friday, May 5, 2006)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E740]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  INTRODUCTION OF THE DC NATIONAL GUARD HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2006

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 4, 2006

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the fourth bill in the 
Free and Equal DC series. This series includes measures that all 
involve obsolete or inappropriate intervention into the local affairs 
of the District of Columbia. The other bills in the series are the 
District of Columbia Budget Autonomy Act, the District of Columbia 
Legislative Autonomy Act, and the District of Columbia Hatch Reform 
Act. This bill would give the Mayor of the District of Columbia the 
same authority over the District of Columbia National Guard (DCNG) as 
the governors of all 50 States have over their guard units. My work on 
the Homeland Security Committee convinces me that this bill is 
necessary now more than at any time in the District's history. In most 
circumstances involving a suspected terrorist incident and in all 
circumstances constituting local emergencies, the Mayor of the District 
of Columbia should have the same authority as governors. The National 
Guards in the 50 states operate under similar dual federal and local 
jurisdiction. Yet the President of the United States as the Commander 
in Chief alone has the authority to call up the DC National Guard for 
any purpose here, local or national. Each governor, however, as the 
head of state, has the authority to mobilize the National Guard to 
protect the local jurisdiction, just as local militia did historically. 
Today, the most likely need is to call upon the National Guard to 
restore order in the wake of civil disturbances and natural disasters. 
Today it could prove necessary to act quickly without knowing the 
origin of an event. The Mayor, who knows the city better than any 
federal official and works closely with federal security officials, 
should be able to call on the DCNG to cover local natural disasters or 
civil disturbances without relying on the President, who may be 
preoccupied with national matters, including perhaps war or security 
matters, or relying on a delegated official with little familiarity 
with the city. It does no harm to give the Mayor the authority. 
However, it could do great harm to leave him powerless to act quickly. 
If it makes sense that a governor would have control over the 
mobilization and deployment of the state National Guard, it makes the 
same sense for the Mayor of the District of Columbia, with a population 
the size of that of small states, should have the same authority.
  The Mayor of the District of Columbia, acting as head of state, 
should have the authority to call upon the DCNG in instances that do 
not rise to the level of federal importance necessary to implicate the 
authority of the President. Today requiring action by the President of 
the United States could endanger the life and health of DC residents, 
visitors and federal employees. Procedures that require the Mayor to 
request the needed assistance from the Commander in Chief for a local 
National Guard matter are as old as the republic, and are dangerously 
obsolete. This bill would deprive the President of his authority over 
the DC National Guard. The President could still nationalize the Guard 
at will, as he can with the Guards of the 50 states, and particularly 
here in the nation's capital.

  Following the September 11th terrorist attacks, I succeeded in 
including a provision in the Homeland Security Act recognizing that the 
District of Columbia must be an integral part of the planning, 
implementation, and execution of national plans to protect city 
residents, federal employees, and visitors by including the District of 
Columbia, as a separate and full partner and first responder in federal 
domestic preparedness legislation. At a minimum, such recognition also 
demonstrates the respect for local governance and home rule that every 
jurisdiction that recruits members of the military to its National 
Guard deserves, especially today when the Guards are no longer weekend 
warriors, as the Iraq war demonstrates. The confusion that accompanied 
the September 11 attack plainly showed the danger inherent in allowing 
bureaucratic steps to stand in the way of responding to emergencies in 
the nation's capital. September 11 has made local control of the DCNG 
an imperative.
  This bill is another important step necessary to complete the 
transfer of full self-government powers to the District of Columbia 
that Congress itself began with the passage of the Home Rule Act of 
1973. District authority over its own National Guard apparently was not 
raised during the Home Rule Act process. However, it was almost 
unthinkable then that there would be war in the homeland, much less 
terrorist threats to the nation's capital. What should be unthinkable 
after 9-11 in an era of global terrorism is allowing to stand old and 
antiquated layers. Giving the mayor of the District of Columbia 
authority to call up the National Guard could make the difference in 
protecting the safety of the residents, federal employees, and visitors 
alike. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________