You wonder, with what SGAUS is supposed to do, why they can't seem to get any tangible support for the SDF through federal sources.
We've all seen the legislative attempts - all a failure. And I think I know why.
Whoever is running this effort at SGAUS doesnt'd know what they are doing...they don't know the system; they don't know how DoD policy is established, etc...
I've taken a position at the Pentagon for several months and work for the Office of the SECDEF..aka OSD POL in the Policy Component. Today I just finished a week-long the DoD Policy Component "Action Officer Course", whose students are mostly 0-4s to 0-6s and their civilian equivalents. OSD POL is where policy is developed for all DoD and the Services - this is the place it happens. The training was eye opening on how policy is designed, researched, coordinated and finally sent up to the SECDEF as an "Action Package" for signature; also known as a "decision memorandum". It's complex, but simple at the same time. It can all start with efforts of an Action Officer - doing the work, and putting together a good product and sending it up the channels until it gets in front of the SECDEF.
Of course, there will be legislative involvement (consultations) even when there is no need to actually create new law - via the House and Senate committees. In fact, I don't see a need for legislation at all for the SDF - all what we need can be done via the SECDEF via Policy actions, etc...
The legislative route is the way to go when you are stuck against an agency that doesn't want to do anything and they need to be "forced" into it. I see NOTHING indicating that was the case for the SDF; I just don't think anyone did the darn work.
Unfortunately, due to my dual status as also and SDF officer, I can't work it since I'm also an USG employee in that office; but if the people who are responsible for actually getting policy changes to benefit the SDF did their work, they would know they need to get it going to go through OSD POL - that's where you can get what you need...or a decision that says "No". Either way, it's a decision; instead of avoidance or trying to bypass the policy process by forcing upon legislation.
Why should the federal government provide any support when the states don't? If the states don't care enough about their SDFs to give them more than a pittance in funding, why should the feds kick anything in? They're already paying 95% of the cost of the NG which the states have full use of most of the time so its not really in their interest to pay for a secondary force over which they have even less control.
If all the NG gets called up like WWII and SDFs are all that is left, then the feds will very likely start providing support just like they did back then.
That being said, there are a few things that the feds could do that wouldn't cost much at all such as providing better accesss to training for SDF members.
River has a point. While we all could use some money, it should really come out of the state's coffers. It's only fair. However, the feds could really support us by officially allowing us access to training materials, classes, and areas. Also, sanctioning us to receive surplus DOD equipment would be a no-brainer.
Here's something: authorize and guarrantee slots in in-residence schools for SDF members. (Funding is a different issue; SDFs/states should be responsible for transport, billeting, etc.) But the fact that we will learn the same things in the same way will help bolster professionalism and recognition.
Lots of things the feds can do without committing a whole lot of money.
That is the key. Standardize access to schools and clarify training as well.
The Marine Corps Institute gives us access to their schools and the Air Force gives access to CAP to their schools. This could easily be standardized especially with so many courses and options online by a simple revision of NGR 10-4 or perhaps a new reg overall.
SDF's can receive surplus goods, clarify Clothing Sales access (which many of us already get here), SDF soldiers have slots for in-resident schools and like most others unlimited access to on-line/correspondence schools, perhaps require FBI background checks just like CAP members (since we wear uniforms and access military installations), and a few other reg clarifications.
As gasdf said, it shouldn't take a new law to overhaul this. All that is needed is a few clarifications for us and the Armed Forces, not new laws.
River Aux is right, so are the other posts. My interpretation is that the SDF act will not fly ever, because it is generally opposed by DoD. Why should the Feds give us assistance when the states don't step up to the plate as much as they could? Why should congress pass laws that support us when DoD doesn't support us? Why should DoD do anything since the states don't properly support us and congress doesn't pass any legistlation?
It's kind of like fabricating a triangle using magnets. All sides push away from each other.
I think DoD policy needs to change. How old is the NG instruction on SDFs? 1986 or something? The SDFs are the state responsibility and they (Govs and AGs) need to lobby the NG to properly set some standards.
I think the proper statement for describing DoD feelings about SDFs is probably, "huh, what are you talking about?" Except for one or two staffers, SDFs are very unlikely to be anywhere on their radar screen.
Originally posted by RiverAux: I think the proper statement for describing DoD feelings about SDFs is probably, "huh, what are you talking about?" Except for one or two staffers, SDFs are very unlikely to be anywhere on their radar screen.
Take it a step further... I don't think DoD ever received ANY staffing on the legislative whatsoever... I'm willing to bet it never made it out of the House sub-committe...meaning it never got into the hands of ANYONE at DoD to even do some staff work on the issue. I see no paper trail.
All I meant is that somewhere in the bowells of the Pentagon are one or two people who are supposed to be in charge of SDF-affairs. It is probably one of their lowest priorities and the work probably consists of making sure the file cabinet with 30-year old SDF documents doesn't disappear.
Originally posted by RiverAux: All I meant is that somewhere in the bowells of the Pentagon are one or two people who are supposed to be in charge of SDF-affairs. It is probably one of their lowest priorities and the work probably consists of making sure the file cabinet with 30-year old SDF documents doesn't disappear.
There is NOBODY, in the "bowels" of the Pentagon that is supposed to be in charge of SDF-Affairs. It was "supposed" to be the National Guard Bureau... Ha!
I for one really don't want federal support. If you want federal money, go jump over to the national guard. SDF's are supposed to be completely independent of the Fed's. The second we start taking Federal resources, we become their's. The whole point SDF's exist today is because Washington has taken over the National Guard and has sent them over to the sand box and left the Homeland unprotected. SDFs are state military forces and should be funded accordingly.
Originally posted by 9063779: I for one really don't want federal support. If you want federal money, go jump over to the national guard. SDF's are supposed to be completely independent of the Fed's. The second we start taking Federal resources, we become their's. The whole point SDF's exist today is because Washington has taken over the National Guard and has sent them over to the sand box and left the Homeland unprotected. SDFs are state military forces and should be funded accordingly.
I disagree - the whole point of the SDF is to "AUGMENT" the National Guard. The days of the SDF "replacing" the NG are no longer valid - it's obselete.
Secondly, SDF's have not been funded, and I don't see any major funding anytime soon.
Third, the reason the Feds started funding the NG is because the State's wouldn't.... seems history comes full circle here.
Fourthly, Homeland is not unprotected with the Guard overseas. Of course, the more troops the better but since Katrina there is a EMAC "emergency management agency compact" which means not State stands alone... They can draw from neighboring states (or States very far away) for almost immediate support; backed up by U.S. Army and Air Force logistical assets (airlift capability).
Reality is that the use of "state military forces" have become pretty much obselete, except for drawing on such "forces" for specialized skills support in professional trades (JAG, medical, etc...) State's would much prefer to draw on trained civilian resources or the NG.
I think if it's possible for the SG to diversify and affiliate themselves with other disaster relief groups and made themselves more marketable to recieve funding from other sources
There are other federal funding available in the form of grants for homeland security, OUTSIDE of DOD that can be tapped also. As long as you apply those funds for training and equipment for your missions. Their is state grants also available
A one time small kicker here and there would go a long way in the SDF world.
