(August 18, 2015) NGAUS testified before the National Commission on the Future of the Army Tuesday, submitting a point-by-point rebuttal to claims made in written testimony earlier this year by Army leaders.
"We believe some critical facts were missing from the testimony, which has led to the misleading representation of how the Army National Guard can contribute to our Total Army going forward," said Andrea Peterson, the NGAUS legislative affairs manager for Army programs.
At issue are assertions that full-time personnel do not contribute to individual or collective training, the Army Guard is a complementary force, reserve-component units cannot execute complex missions and the National Guard is not cost-effective, among other things.
Peterson submitted for the record a matrix that individually address 21 claims made by active-component leaders. The matrix contains data, information, policy and statutes "that we believe counter these assertions," she said. It can be viewed here.
Maj. Gen. Glenn H. Curtis, the president of the Adjutants General Association of the United States, also testified Tuesday. He presented a series of white papers that address the Guard's value, accessibility, readiness and responsiveness, full-time support, combat formations and role in the Total Army.
The meeting was the commission's fourth open hearing in the Washington, D.C. area. Retired Maj. Gen. Gus Hargett, the NGAUS president, testified earlier this year. The eight-member panel was created by Congress in the fiscal 2015 National Defense Authorization Act, and is charged with determining the best structure for the Total Army going forward. Commissioners are expected to submit their recommendations to Congress early next year.