Is the Limited Air Force Jurisdiction over CAP the Best Thing for CAP?

[DNall]

Uhh, CAP has been a corporation for almost all of its history as well.....not just a third.  You are right though in saying that the corporation was also the AF Aux at all times through most of that history. 

CAP has been a corp since after WWII & just before the perm Aux status was added & the then obselete corp status maintained rather than removed. That's not what I said though. For most of CAP's history it has been a non-profit govt corp under the direct command of the AF. We've gone from an AF general officer appointed by the AF to command CAP, to a CAP member Nat/CC but CAP-USAF CC who also served as Executive director of the corp & with CAP reporting directly to CAP-USAF on all matters & on to the AF. As we've moved along Congress has cut the paid-AF positions for budget reasons, but not created a new regulatory process to replace that authority, so the concept of an independent corp has risen up - a thing that was never intended & is not wanted.

That said, an appropriate structure should be created that maintains enough independence to protect CAP (mostly in the budget) if AF gets pissed at us. It may well be that they have good reason for it, but that'll be a short-term situation that we don't want creating long-term damage when they zip back a chunck of our budget to knock us down a bit. That's what the corporation is supposed to be about, but it's been abused by pride & ego to create a bad thing.


The reason I brought up the CG Aux was to show that it was possible to have an Aux that was under the complete control of their parent service and that this has worked well. 

Although the CAP corporation may serve as a nice safety guard for the organization if the AF lets us go, as has been pointed out many times, if the AF cuts us out the corporation would be unable to survive on its own for very long anyway.  I say eliminate CAP corporation entirely (even if it does cost us a few missions). 
[/quote]