HB 104 Supportive Testimony from the Public
This is a production of Citizen in a Republic, which covers New Hampshire legislative politics.
28 year Air Guardsman (1988-2016), 2 years Air Force Reserve (2016-2018)
—Colonel Eric Pauer, USAF (ret) of Brookline, NH
As a 100% combat-disabled veteran and proud resident of New Hampshire, I am writing to express my strong support for the proposed legislation that limits the activation of the New Hampshire National Guard to only those times when the United States Congress has passed an official action pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. This bill is not just about policy—it is about protecting the rights and dignity of those who have served and ensuring that the sacrifices of the National Guard are made with full constitutional justification.
Having experienced firsthand the toll of military service, I know the cost of putting on the uniform and answering the call of duty. The men and women of the New Hampshire National Guard are citizen-soldiers, serving their state with pride while balancing careers, families, and lives within our communities. Their activation should be undertaken with the utmost care and only when Congress has fulfilled its constitutional duty to authorize military action.
The Constitution is clear: the power to declare war lies solely with Congress under Article I, Section 8. This safeguard was established to ensure that decisions involving the lives of service members are made with full accountability and representation, not unilaterally or without due process. Aligning the activation of our National Guard with this constitutional mandate reaffirms that their sacrifices are made under proper authority and for just cause.
This legislation also recognizes the unique role of the National Guard as a state-focused force. Guardsmen and women are critical to New Hampshire’s ability to respond to emergencies and protect its citizens. Ensuring that their activation for federal purposes is done only when Congress has acted preserves their primary mission to serve our state and prevents unnecessary strain on these essential individuals.
As someone who has already given so much in service to this nation, I urge you to support this bill. It honors the Constitution, respects the sacrifices of our National Guard members, and ensures that those who serve are called to action only under clear, lawful, and just circumstances.
Thank you for your dedication to upholding the rights of service members and the principles that make our nation strong.
Please keep our troops in our state when necessary we strongly support this bill
As a military Veteran I strongly support this bill please pass.
The use of the New Hampshire National Guard should never include authorized deployment to any foreign nation for any undeclared warfare. According to U.S. military casualty statistics 482 Army national guard died in Iraq and Afghanistan between 2002 and 2024. The deployment of national guard to these wars was based on false information (weapons of mass destruction WMD in Iraq) and a breach of U.S. law since in neither case was there a formal declaration of war by the president. The impact on national guard members and their families of year long deployments, injury or death was immense. I fully support this legislation as means to keep in check misguided and possibly unlawful use of our New Hampshire National Guard soldiers. I am a board member of New Hampshire Peace Action which is a 43 old non-profit organization dedicated to our vision of a future in which international relations are based in cooperation instead of competition and conflict, and win-win models of shared security are promoted, leading to a more peaceful and just global community.
—William Maddocks of Amherst, NH
I believe the National Guard is just exactly that: people who guard our nation, not people who are sent to fight in foreign countries.
—Katherine Morgan of Durham, NH
Unless the United States is involved in an officially declared war, it is only fair to the Guard and their families that they remain stateside so they are ready to help with national needs, such as all the natural disasters that keep happening.
I see Defend the Guard as a last ditch Tenth Amendment attempt to contain DC within constitutional boundaries. I suffered boomers peace love and understanding music, while enduring their forever wars, all of which we lost. Just the past 20 years DC reaped a “peace dividend” of negative 8 trillion. Gee, I can’t imagine why federal programs are bankrupt. Could it be the War Department? Looks like the flag still has only 50 stars to me.
NH national guard is OUR militia. This is NH department of defense. The rest is the failed War Department of DC.
I hear Lynyrd Skyrnyd’s “Gimme Back my Bullets”.
Raytheon’s war profiteering needs a constitutional no. That’s what Defend the Guard represents. No. To an empire we can’t afford and don’t want.
No more enmeshing in myriad global wars.
—Daniel Richardson of Nashua, NH
Dear Honorable NH State Representatives: I fully support a yes vote on following the US Constitution to stop sending our troops to foreign conflicts and wars which are NOT voted on by our Congress. PTSD is very real, wars are also very expensive, often we need not take side in others’ civil wars. Make history New Hampshire. Let our troops stay stateside to assist here. Thank-you for your service and your consideration Mrs. Kathy Peterson, Nashua VFW Auxiliary.
—Kathryn Peterson of Nashua, NH
This seems rather simple. In order for the national guard to be used at the federal level for military operations, Congress must actually declare war first. This should not be confused with peace time missions and training. The states must maintain their respective National Guard units’ readiness and preparedness. This requires training alongside active army lines. However, the National Guard’s primary responsibility is to the state government, not the federal government. Especially for combat operations. Until Congress declares war, the federal government has no business using state National Guard for military combat operations. Active military should not be being used until Congress declares war, let alone state national guards. Tho, it seems our government doesn’t view the constitution in a serious light. When was the last time Congress actually declared war?
—Ben Polizotti of Springfield, NH