Speaker Hunt (almost) endorses HB 2556 (Keep the Guard Home)

T.A. Barnhart

Speaker of the House Dave Hunt came this close to endorsing HB 2556 on Saturday. Here is the Speaker said:

"I'm confident I'll support whatever comes out of the Rules Committee."

The Speaker joined Rep Jules Bailey (D-42) for "Java with Jules" to talk to constituents and others about the Legislature's work mid-session. While economic issues were a part of almost every discussion, the topic of the Oregon National Guard's upcoming deployment to Iraq had nothing to do with the economy.

"Can you," the Speaker was asked by Dan Handelman of Oregon Peace & Justice Works, the main force behind HB 2556 (Keep the Guard Home), "assure us you will support this bill?" Here are the Speaker's words in full:

"Two years ago, we passed a resolution specifically condemning the war and specifically talking about the negative impacts of the war has had on Oregon communities, on Oregon National Guard members directly, on other reservists from Oregon. And also on the Iraqi citizen, who've been killed, which we often forget when we talk about impacts on ourselves.

"This is probably one of the most frustrating areas as a legislator, a state legislator, because we don't control foreign policy. Of course, those in Congress may feel like they don't control it either for the past eight years. But we don't have control of the foreign policy, but we definitely have to deal with the impacts: the impacts in terms of health care, the impacts in terms of homelessness .. and it's health care both on the fiscal and mental health side of the equation. The impacts on so many of these folks coming back, having lost their jobs, unemployed, therefore needing additional public assistance.

"So we've spent a lot of time ... we have a specific Veterans Committee that has helped push us and guide us to be making the investments in helping assist those who are coming back, those veterans who are coming back, the families of those who are already gone. I'm confident the Rules Committee is going to come out with a bill, I don't know what the form of it is going to be, I haven't told them what it should be. I'm sure I'll support it when it comes out. There are a lot of very thoughtful folks on that committee."

That's not an unequivocal Yes, but for a politician in Dave Hunt's position, it may be as close as you can get on a controversial bill like HB2556.

Bill locked in Rules Committee

Because HB 2556 (and HR 4) was sent to the Rules Committee, the Tuesday deadline to get bills out of committee does not apply (nor does it for those in the Revenue Committee). But time running out; the session will compress greatly from here. We need to get this bill on to the floor for a vote, but first it has to get to a committee work session. Why? Because it needs to be amended and then moved out for a House vote.

During the hearing last month on HB 2556, Rep Chip Shields, chief sponsor of the bill, and Rep Dennis Richardson, whose support for keeping the Guard home comes from a libertarian-states rights perspective, agreed to amend the bill thusly:

The organized militia is limited to service on behalf of the State of Oregon unless the organized militia is called into federal service pursuant to a valid Congressional enactment consistent with the United States Constitution.

(That's not necessarily the final wording, but it is what the two representatives will be presenting.)

HB 2556, once signed into law, will require the Governor to mobilize the Oregon National Guard only if a valid federal authorization exists, such as the one passed to invade Iraq (yes, many of us believe that authorization was based on lies but it was legally enacted). And while those of us supporting the "Keep the Guard Home Campaign" do not believe that authorization is valid now that Saddam Hussein has been overthrown (and executed) and that the WMDs are finally proven to have been as real as Easter Bunny droppings, it is clear that stopping the July deployment is virtually impossible.

But what about the next deployment, and the next false war?

The possibility is very real that one day in the future, another misguided president will seek to abuse his or her power and federalize National Guards without proper authorization. HB 2556, once signed into law, will prohibit an unlawful and unconstitutional deployment of our Guard. And of equal importance, if Oregon can pass this law, other states gain impetus to do the same. So while we may not be able to keep the Guard home now, we can send the message, and create the legal groundwork, to prevent future unlawful deployments.

I want to repeat the words of Rep Bailey when he testified before the Rules Committee last month:

We support our troops. We honor our troops. Our troops are doing ... what we ask them to do. This bill is not ... a referendum on particular conflicts. This bill is about protecting those who are protecting us in the National Guard. And sometimes when they do what we ask of them, sometimes they are doing what the Federal government asks of them, and sometimes they are doing what the State of Oregon asks of them. What these bills do is allow for a determination to be made about which is which.

Please contact your representative and insist they support HB 2556. Ask them to contact Rep Roblan and ask him to schedule a work session so this bill can move forward. We believe we have enough votes to pass this bill; Chair Roblan just needs to have enough supporters request the work session. Call your representative and make sure he or she does just that.

In two months, our fellow Oregonians will be heading to war in the largest deployment of Oregon National Guard troops since WWII. Those of us who who honor their service, and who believe in the rule of law, owe it to them to ensure the National Guard is called to service only when a lawful authorization exists. HB 2556 codifies that principle into Oregon law.

By T.A. Barnhart April 28, 2009