CHARLESTON, W. Va. (Feb. 10, 2020) – There was political drama in West Virginia last week as the sponsor of a bill that would prohibit unconstitutional foreign combat deployments of the stateโ€™s national guard troops narrowly failed in a parliamentary move to get it discharged from committee. Even so, support for the legislation is growing.

**If you live in West Virginia, scroll to the bottom of the report for important action steps.

House Bill 2732 (HB2732) would prohibit the deployment of West Virginia Guard troops in โ€œactive duty combatโ€ unless there is a declaration of war from Congress, as required by the Constitution.

Last Thursday, bill sponsor Del. Pat McGeehan (R-Hancock) used a parliamentary maneuver to try to discharge the bill from the House Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security Committee. Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center say that committee chair Del. Tom Bibby (R-Berkeley) put the bill on the committee schedule but then withdrew it due to pressure from Speaker of the House Del. Roger Hanshaw (R-Clay).

McGeehan’s attempt to bypass the committee process and bring the bill directly to the House floor failed by a tie 50-50 vote.

But the effort was not a complete loss. It sparked a 30-minute debate on the House floor that drew significant media attention in the state.

McGeehan served as an Air Force intelligence officer with tours in Afghanistan and the Middle East. He said war is the most serious operation, most serious enterprise a government could engage in.

โ€œItโ€™s near and dear to my heart, because itโ€™s been clear to me that over the last two decades weโ€™ve had this sort of status quo where it is somehow acceptable for unilateral action to be taken not by just the executive, but also the Pentagon to send our men and women in the Armed Forces overseas into undeclared wars and unending wars,โ€ย McGeehan said.

Several veterans spoke in favor of the bill, including Bibby.

โ€œAny discussions when it comes to war and peace, those are important things we need to talk about โ€” where we are headed,โ€ Bibby said. โ€œWeโ€™ve gone far from where our Founding Fathers wanted us to be. Itโ€™s important we take a stand. We want our nation to be strong, but weโ€™ve got to stop the endless wars weโ€™ve had in the last 50 years.โ€

Bibby committed to bringing the bill up in committee.

Del. S. Marshall Wilson, (I-Berkeley) also spoke in support of the bill. Wilson served in the Army and said his daughter is currently deployed overseas with the Guard. His son plans to apply to a military academy.

โ€œThey are going to take my kids,โ€ he said. โ€œThey have to answer for it.โ€

In an op-ed, the Morgantown Dominion Post wrote, “”For the record, our newspaper supports HB2732.”

“It’s obvious that Congress has abdicated its duty to declare war, ceding absolute power to the president, who in turn has abused his authority over Guard units. That thought is not just directed at President Trump, but every Democratic and Republican administration since at least the 1950s, that have all engaged in this abuse of the Guard’s members and their families for too long.”

It appears that public support is also behind the measure. In an online poll hosted by the Huntington West Virginia Herald-Dispatch, support was almost 2-1 in favor of the bill.

IN PRACTICE

Guard troops have played significant roles in all modern overseas conflicts, with over 650,000 deployed since 2001.ย Military.comย reportsย that โ€œGuard and Reserve units made up about 45 percent of the total force sent to Iraq and Afghanistan, and received about 18.4 percent of the casualties.โ€ย More specifically, West Virginia National Guard troops have participated in missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Kosovo and elsewhere.

Since none of these missions have been accompanied by a Constitutional declaration of war, the Defend the Guard Act would have prohibited those deployments. Such declarations have only happened five times in U.S. history, with the last being at the onset of World War II.

BACKGROUND

Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16 make up the โ€œmilitia clausesโ€ of the Constitution. Clause 16 authorizes Congress to โ€œprovide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia.โ€ In the Dick Act of 1903, Congress organized the militia into todayโ€™s National Guard, limiting the part of the militia that could be called into federal service rather than the โ€œentire body of people,โ€ which makes up the totality of the โ€œmilitia.โ€ Thus, todayโ€™s National Guard is governed by the โ€œmilitia clausesโ€ of the Constitution, and this view isย confirmed by the National Guardย itself.

Clause 15 delegates to the Congress the power to provide for โ€œcalling forth the militiaโ€ in three situations only: 1) to execute the laws of the union, 2) to suppress insurrections, and 3) to repel invasions.

During state ratifying conventions, proponents of the Constitution, including James Madison and Edmund Randolph, repeatedly assured the people that this power to call forth the militia into federal service would be limited to those very specific situations, and not for general purposes, like helping victims of a disease outbreak or engaging in โ€œkinetic military actions.โ€

It is this limited Constitutional structure that advocates of the Defend the Guard Act seek to restore. That is, use of the Guard for the three expressly-delegated purposes in the Constitution, and at other times to remain where the Guard belongs, at home, supporting and protecting their home state.

ACTION STEPS

HB2732 is scheduled for a hearing inย House Veterans Affairs and Homeland Security Committee. on Feb. 11, at 2 p.m.

  1. W. Va. residents who support the bill should call every member of the committee. Be firm, but professional and urge them to vote YES on HB2732. A phone call is more effective than an email. You will find contact info for committee members HERE.
  2. Contact Speaker of the House Hanshaw. Politely but firmly let them know you support HB2732 and ask them to advance it through the House.
Mike Maharrey
Latest posts by Mike Maharrey (see all)