Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida penned letters Friday condemning a proposal that would effectively allow the Democratic administration to wrest control over National Guard units away from governors across the country.

The Republican duo was late to the party when signaling opposition to U.S. Air Force's Legislative Proposal 480. The governors of 48 states and the leaders of five American territories voiced their opposition to LP480 last month in a letter to the Pentagon.

An indecent proposal

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall approved the draft legislation on March 15. The Pentagon subsequently delivered LP480 to the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 29.

LP480 would enable the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer the covered space functions currently performed by the Air National Guard to the U.S. Space Force. The secretary would be enabled to change the status of an ANG unit to a unit of the USSF, to deactivate the unit, or to assign the unit to "a new Federal mission."

The proposed legislation also waives the requirement to first obtain a governor's consent prior to making such changes to a National Guard unit.

Kendall suggested to lawmakers that the legislation would not set a precedent that would enable other services to cannibalize elements of the National Guard without gubernatorial consent, reported Breaking Defense.

"This [issue] is an artifact of the creation of the Space Force," said Kendall. "It's a unique situation. There's absolutely no intention to make any other changes, moving things out of the Guard."

Following a House Armed Services Committee hearing last month on the USAF and USSF fiscal year 2025 budget requests, Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) reportedly said he was "fully supportive."

"I think that what the Air Force is suggesting is going to be successful," said Rogers. "We are used to the National Guard Association being a very political organization that deploys these kind of political activities. This is not one in which they should waste their time and this is not one in which they're going to be successful."

If every governor in the country has their way, then the National Guard Association will prove Rogers wrong.

Backlash

Ret. Maj. Gen. Francis M. McGinn, head of the National Guard Association of the United States, noted in an April 16 op-ed that the proposal constituted "an existential threat to the National Guard."

"This move represents a significant federal overreach that should concern governors and federal lawmakers alike," wrote McGinn. "This is an attempt to bypass the longstanding authority Congress gave to governors requiring their consent before any National Guard units can be removed from their states."

Noting that the proposal states that the transfer of units "shall occur without regard to" two existing laws concerning gubernatorial authority, McGinn likened the legislation to "asking the government for permission to rob your neighbor by asking legislators to ignore laws against robbery. Such a ham-fisted approach is legally dubious at best and a breach of the established legislative process."

Kendall said in response that the "reaction from the Guard, quite frankly, has been over the top on this."

"We're not talking an existential threat. No one is suggesting dismantling the guard," he added.

The Air Force secretary evidently did a poor job of winning over skeptics.

Several weeks after Colorado's Democratic Gov. Jared Polis more or less told the Pentagon to keep its hands off the state's ANG units, and days after the Council of Governors wrote to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin with its objections, the governors of 48 states plus the five U.S. territories followed suit.

The National Governors Association noted in its late April letter to Secretary Austin that the proposed legislation "disregards gubernatorial authorities regarding the National Guard and undermines over 100 years of precedent as well as national security and military readiness."

Recognizing the importance of ensuring that the National Guard is equipped and ready to serve as the "operational combat reserve for national security mission and to support domestic emergencies," the governors stressed it is imperative that they "retain the authority laid out in United States Code (U.S.C.) Title 32, Section 104."

The governors' letter further noted that LP480 conflicts specifically with Section 18238 of Title 19, which "states that there should be no removal or withdrawal of a unit of the Air National Guard without consultation and approval from Governors. Additionally, section 104 of Title 32 states there is to be no change in the branch, organization or allotment of National Guard units within a state or territory without the approval of its Governor."

The governors indicated that the legislation would ultimately strain their relationship with the Pentagon; undermine governors' authority; adversely impact military readiness; and threaten the careers of state-based service members.

Abbott, DeSantis, and congressional lawmakers join in

Abbott and DeSantis got in on the action Friday.

The Texas governor underscored in his Friday letter to President Joe Biden that LP480 would sideline governors as the commanders-in-chief of their respective National Guards.

After highlighting the crucial role the Texas National Guard plays in protecting Texans, addressing civil disturbances, and in responding to disasters, Abbott wrote that LP480 "poses an intolerable threat" to the service.

"Congress has long required the consent of a governor before units can be transferred out of the National Guard he commands. See 32 U.S.C. § 104; 10 U.S.C. § 18238. By departing from this sensible arrangement, and allowing the Secretaries to dismantle National Guard units on a whim, Legislative Proposal 480 would set a dangerous precedent," added Abbott.

In the X post accompanying his statement, Abbott wrote, "President Biden and his Admin. are making a power grab for the National Guard. They want to give the Secretaries unilateral authority to dismantle National Guard units on a whim."

DeSantis penned his condemnatory Friday letter to the Senate chairs and ranking members of the Senate and House Armed Services committees.

"As a low-lying, storm-prone state, Florida is uniquely vulnerable to hurricanes and flooding that require significant, operationally ready logistics and disaster support, including from our National Guard units," wrote DeSantis. "This legislative proposal weakens that guarantee and sidesteps the authority of the Governor to ensure Floridians are prepared and protected to address whatever domestic emergencies may arise, especially as we approach another hurricane season."

Extra to the governors, there has been bipartisan opposition to the scheme in both chambers of Congress.

Twenty-nine senators and 56 representatives have urged the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Service committees to keep the proposal out of the fiscal 2025 National defense Authorization Act, reported the Washington Examiner.

In their letter to their respective committees, the lawmakers called LP480 "deeply flawed" and noted that Congress "has a duty to maintain the integrity and longstanding tradition of the National Guard," adding that "a proposal of this magnitude threatens to under [sic] over 120 years of precedent."

According to The Hill, a White House official indicated the Biden administration supports the proposal.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!