[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 115 (Monday, July 3, 2023)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E635]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  INTRODUCTION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATIONAL GUARD COMMANDING 
                         GENERAL RESIDENCY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                          Monday, July 3, 2023

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia 
National Guard Commanding General Residency Act, which would require 
the Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard to reside in D.C. 
Last Congress, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform passed this 
bill.
  D.C. has no control over the D.C. National Guard. Instead, the 
president controls the D.C. National Guard, which many Americans first 
learned either during the January 6, 2021, attack on the United States 
Capitol, when the Trump administration delayed deploying the D.C. 
National Guard to the Capitol for several hours, or during the June 
2020 attack by federal law enforcement on largely peaceful protestors 
outside the White House, in which the D.C. National Guard was used by 
the Trump administration as part of the attack. In contrast, governors 
of the states and the three territories that have National Guards each 
control their National Guards.
  I have long introduced a bill, the D.C. National Guard Home Rule Act, 
that would give the D.C. mayor control over the D.C. National Guard. 
Last Congress, the House's fiscal year (FY) 2022 and FY 2023 National 
Defense Authorization Act included the D.C. National Guard Home Rule 
Act, but it was stripped out of the final versions of the FY 2022 and 
FY 2023 NDAA because Republicans threatened to vote against the must-
pass NDAA if it included the D.C. National Guard Home Rule Act.
  The Commanding General of the D.C. National Guard is the top official 
in the D.C. National Guard, is appointed by the president and is a 
federal employee. There are residency requirements for government 
officials in federal law, D.C. law and the laws of jurisdictions 
throughout the country. In fact, several states have laws that require 
the top official in their National Guard to reside in their state, and 
it is highly likely that every state and territory only appoints 
residents as the top official in their National Guard. The primary 
reason residency requirements exist is so that government officials 
have a connection to the residents they serve and in-depth knowledge of 
the unique issues and challenges faced by residents.
  Congress has justifiably required that certain federal officials 
reside in the jurisdiction to which they are appointed, including U.S. 
district court judges, U.S. Marshals and U.S. Attorneys. Similarly, 
Congress, which controls the local D.C. court system, has justifiably 
required local D.C. judges and members of the D.C. Judicial Nomination 
Commission and the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure 
to reside in D.C.
  There is no reason that the Commanding General of the D.C. National 
Guard, a federal entity that serves only D.C. residents and that has 
both a military and law enforcement role, should not be required to 
reside in D.C. A D.C. residency requirement for the Commanding General 
of the D.C. National Guard will lead to a better relationship between 
the D.C. National Guard and D.C. residents and is a matter of fairness 
for D.C. residents.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________