CAP-state relationships

[RiverAux]

One of the issues that has come up in another (now-locked) thread is the relationship between CAP and state governments.  While CAP is a federally chartered nonprofit that is considered the Air Force Auxiliary under certain circumstances, it is very common for CAP members in many states to receive certain other protections.

For example, as mentioned in the Volunteer recently, several states have laws authorizing paid or unpaid leave be given to CAP members (sometimes for everybody, sometimes just for government workers depending on where you are).  Other states have official offices for CAP within state government, often associated with the Adjutant General.  Some other states provide liability and insurance protection to CAP members while on state missions and in effect have made CAP and CAP members part of state government under certain circumstances.  Many states provide funding to CAP, which may or may not come with various strings attached. 

Now, of course no state has any real say in how CAP is run as an organization and CAP always has final say over what CAP does, though (as discussed many times) they can request (or not request) CAP to participate in SAR/DR. 

While the legalities of the relationship are somewhat clouded, in some states CAP does more or less function as an volunteer civilian auxiliary to state government.  Despite the efforts of some to imply that it is, this does not mean the CAP has or can have the same relationship between the AF and state governments that the AF and ANG do to state governments. 

Generally, I'm in favor of CAP trying to get more benefits at the federal level, but historically we've made much more progress on these issues with the states.  If the AF keeps pushing CAP away from them, this will only continue. 

[RogueLeader]

The way I see it is as a way for Wings to get in good with the AF through the State.  Note that this does not diminish the good with the state; it does both.  It makes the State happy, by the Wing providing a service that the States need.  The State sees, gee they are doing a lot of good from us, lets help them.  This creates a positive working relationship between CAP and the State and State Mil Forces.  AF sees that such and such is doing a lot of good, making CAP look good, and boom- helps draw CAP back close with Mother Blue.  Some Wings are in good with their respective States, some are not.  How do you think things would work best?  As they are now?  Or in a better working relationship  that makes many more people in power happy?  The choice is yours your Wings.  Where do you want to go?

[JohnKachenmeister]

That's the "Beauty" of the Congressionally-chartered corporation method of organizing.  It was not done to "Push us away from the USAF," it was done to provide the flexibility in accomplishing out Congressionally-imposed missions.  We can fly as the USAF on any non-combat mission they want to give us, OR we can fly on a contract with a state or local government, OR a non-governmental organization like the Red Cross.

And the Air Force is NOT pushing us away.  If anything, they want us to do MORE missions.  I'm doing one for them later today.

[RogueLeader]

I, for one ,am not saying the AF is pushing us away, but it seems that we are drifting away.  Some has had to do with some CAP/CC's as well as some others.  I'm just glad that there are many trying to get us even closer.

[afgeo4]

Your idea of doing state work to draw us closer to USAF may be somewhat flawed.

First, we aren't separating from the Air Force. We now have a much tighter relationship with them than ever before (WW2 wasn't the Air Force).

Second, don't forget that us peforming aerial missions for the state sometimes takes missions away from Air National Guard which causes the State to shift funding to Army National Guard (GWOT doesn't help) or to State Police.

Now... the ANG isn't always our best friend, but in NY State they are a closer friend than any active duty USAF can be. I wouldn't want them upset at us because in the end that'll worsen our relationship with USAF.

[RiverAux]

First, we aren't separating from the Air Force. We now have a much tighter relationship with them than ever before (WW2 wasn't the Air Force).

How in the world could you say that?  For most of CAP's history we were the AF Auxiliary at all times.  Now we are only considered the AF Aux when conducting missions for the AF.   That is a major change that was instigated by AF lawyers who didn't want to take any responsibility for any liability associated with CAP activities not associated directly with an AF emergency services mission. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

1.  Don't mistake the actions of lawyers for actions of the organization

2.  What was happening in CAP back then was 'way worse than the current "Scandals."

3.  We ALMOST became a part of the Coast Guard.  They wanted our airplanes.  The Air Force stood up to retain us as a part of the USAF.

4.  The AF wants us for loads more missions.  It is CAP senior leadership that is balking.  I don't know why, but I suspect the "Corporate mentality" is driving the train.

[RiverAux]

Lawyers have no authority to do anything on their own, however they convinced the people with authority to distance the AF from CAP as much as possible.

I wasn't talking about anything current just pointing out the fact that CAP has a more distant relationship with the AF than we had for most of our history. 

I see very little evidence that the AF is making any new significant use of CAP on a large scale.  Yes, there have been a few neat AF-CAP missions out there but not enough to have any relevance to the vast majority of members.  I very sincerely wish that wasn't the case but it is. 

I strongly doubt that anyone in the CAP chain of command is actively turning away AF missions.  I don't think there is a Wing commander out there that would turn down any AF mission and have a hard time believing anyone at national would do any such thing either. 

I believe that there is much more that CAP could do for the AF in terms of individual augmentation at AFBs and AF Reserve units, but see very few opportunities for new opportunities to use CAP aircraft for AF missions.  I believe that while we cannot survive without the AF, any growth we want to see in our missions will have to come either from working with other agencies or with state and local governments.