HR1333 - current status

[RiverAux]

Here is a link to the ammended version (with reports) of HR1333: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_reports&docid=f:hr691p1.110.pdf
This is what was reported by the House homeland security committee on June 5th.  Apparently the House Committee on Transportation has granted itself an extension until the 13th to study it some more. 

[sarflyer]

Thanks for the update!

[James Shaw]

At 12:48 the House Passed HR1333 06/18/08

[mikeylikey]

woo-hoo.........

So we will wait on the report from the GAO.  Can anyone guess what the report will say.  Most likely something along the lines of "it is not feasible to use CAP.......".  Why would they say to use CAP, when it would cut into funding of other Federal agencies and make known the incredible costs that taxpayers are already paying for those agencies. 

This was not the intent of the original legislation.  Oh well. 

[Cecil DP]

woo-hoo.........

So we will wait on the report from the GAO.  Can anyone guess what the report will say.  Most likely something along the lines of "it is not feasible to use CAP.......".  Why would they say to use CAP, when it would cut into funding of other Federal agencies and make known the incredible costs that taxpayers are already paying for those agencies. 

This was not the intent of the original legislation.  Oh well. 

More along the lines of we'll continue to use the free manpower, but not the things that cost money

[Psicorp]

Incredible cost to taxpayers? Like the $1 million dollar cost of conducting a 180 day study?  yikes!   

[RiverAux]

I'm pretty sure that they just use "less than a million dollars" as a cost estimate for tiny projects where it isn't actually worth their time to come up with a specific cost estimate.  I'm sure the study price will be much, much less than that. 

[Frenchie]

Is there a companion bill in the Senate on this?

[mikeylikey]

After thinking about this even more I came to a realization.  We will have AFAM's, Corporate Missions, and hopefully Federal Missions (where FED agencies pay directly).  So If we have more Federal Missions than AFAM's, should we become something more than the USAF Auxiliary?  If we don't perfrom for the AF, but for another Agency, say DHS......could we possibly see a new piece of legislation in a few years moving us from the AF budget to another agencies budget?

Face it, in my estimation, we perform more Corporate missions now than Air Force assigned.  Maybe this is the first step to move the organization into a more federal operating capacity. 

We can easily do everything aerial for DHS that we now do for the AF and more.

This actually may be the turning point that we all look back on in ten years. 

NOTE:  I am not starting a "move CAP from AF, but keep the cadet program, but be more corporate" argument.  We already have like 12 of those!! 

[RiverAux]

Any mission done for another federal agency is done as an AFAM per regs. 

[Earhart1971]

HR1333 says that CAP will be the Air Force Auxiliary only when performing AF Missions.

I thought the reason for that was the HLS Police functions that the Military cannot be involved with.

[mikeylikey]

^ Correct. 

So maybe we will become the major flying asset of DHS.  Not a bad thing in my opinion.  In fact, since we really are not the AF AUX anymore, maybe the flying AUX to DHS. 

[Earhart1971]

We got our budget cut last year, what was it 3 to 5 million.

I say we get clear on the money, first before accepting more missions.

[RiverAux]

I think that money got restored.

[SDF_Specialist]

HR1333 says that CAP will be the Air Force Auxiliary only when performing AF Missions.

I thought that's all we were to begin with. Either way, I'm happy to be a member, and I'm anxious to see what comes of this new bill.

[FW]

I think that money got restored.

It did, plus a few extra dollars were added for my new Porsche   (just kidding).

BTW, As I've posted on a couple of occasions, CAP is the Auxiliary of the USAF all the time.  Flying AFAM missions only gives us the extra protection of the US govt.  We don't do many "other" missions for U.S.  because of  certain sensitivities with the LEA status some requestors have.

If, and that's a big if, the GAO study concludes CAP is the "best bang for the buck", our "Statement of Work" and Cooperative Agreement" will be renegotiated.  We will then be able to fly any "outside agency" mission as a AFAM and have govt. protections given to us.

[mikeylikey]

BTW, As I've posted on a couple of occasions, CAP is the Auxiliary of the USAF all the time.  

It is?  Funny.....didn't we have this long drawn out debate when CAP legal said we had to remove "USAF AUX" from our planes?  Same arguments when we got an "updated" Command Patch.  We can all dig up the AF documents that say "Part time Auxiliary" or "Auxiliary ONLY on AFAM's"

We are not the AF Aux.  They only want us when we actually do work for them, then we get medical, death and certain legal protections. 

[RiverAux]

Please refer to this thread in which I make a compelling argument that CAP, as an organization, is always the AF Auxiliary, it is only certain members who are, or are not. 
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=4407.0

[JohnKachenmeister]

It is possible that we might end up like the Coast Guard... assigned to DHS for most missions, but attached to the Air Force on call.  Just like the CG is a part of DHS, unless the Navy wants them, then those assets they need fall under the Navy Dept.

But... be careful what you wish for.

If we fall under DHS, you will not be able to hide behind the Posse Comitatus Act.  You will be called upon to perform law enforcement, port security, border patrol, surveillance, and even combat missions.  You will have to get additional training and you will most likely have to qualify to federal standards with weapons.

I don't have a problem with it, but there's a lot of folks who like to tell me that they are, first, foremost, and always, CIVILIANS.  They just might have some heartburn with our proposed new role.

[RiverAux]

If we fall under DHS, you will not be able to hide behind the Posse Comitatus Act.  You will be called upon to perform law enforcement, port security, border patrol, surveillance, and even combat missions.  You will have to get additional training and you will most likely have to qualify to federal standards with weapons.

I guess I'm missing out on all those CG Aux combat missions that they're doing for DHS....