(continued)
The idea for a homeland CINC last received high-level Pentagon
consideration three years ago, but then-Defense Secretary William S.
Cohen quickly dropped it after protests from civil libertarians and
right-wing militia groups alike. Critics expressed alarm at the
prospect of military forces encroaching on areas traditionally
considered the responsibility of civilian emergency response, law
enforcement and health agencies.
Instead, Cohen sought and received approval from President Bill
Clinton to establish a permanent task force headed by a two-star
general officer and charged with coordinating the military's response
to a chemical or biological attack on the United States. That task
force, assigned to the Joint Forces Command, was portrayed as a
modest effort to prepare for logistical, medical and enforcement
demands likely to be placed on the Pentagon in the event of an attack
on the United States.
Senior Pentagon officials say times have changed, and at least some
of those who were critical of a homeland CINC agree -- up to a point.
"We have no objection in principle to the creation of a homeland
commander in chief," said Tim Edgar, legislative counsel for the
American Civil Liberties Union. "But we're still concerned about the
powers he will have, and we'll have strong objections if he's
authorized to act in areas better handled by civilian law
enforcement."
Edgar warned against the danger of "mission creep" and the risk that
military forces could end up threatening individual rights. Recent
decades offer cautionary tales about the use of the military in
domestic law enforcement -- notably in 1957, when the governor of
Arkansas employed Guard troops to block black students from entering
a Little Rock high school, and in 1970, when Guardsmen opened fire on
students at Kent State University protesting the Vietnam War.
Legal barriers to sending the armed forces into U.S. streets were
imposed by the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878, which was prompted by
President Ulysses Grant's use of federal troops to monitor elections
in the former Confederate states. The act prohibits military
personnel from searching, seizing or arresting people in the United
States.
Some exceptions already exist, allowing military forces to suppress
insurrections or domestic unrest or to assist in crimes involving
nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. The bar to military
involvement was lowered further in 1986, when President Ronald Reagan
directed the Pentagon to assist in the war on drugs.
Since Sept. 11, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), the ranking minority
member on the Armed Services Committee, has led a push to revise the
act.
"It's a doctrine that's served us very well," he said at a hearing
Oct. 25. "But there comes a time when we've got to reexamine the old
laws of the 1800s in light of this extraordinary series of challenges
that we're faced with today."