Why is the Chief, National Guard Bureau a four-star position while the Chief, Army Reserve is only a three-star position?

SFC William Farrell — Mon, 29 May 2017 21:55:42 -0400

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2017 10:07 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 29 May 2017 22:07:37 -0400

The Chief of NGB was elevated to the Joint chiefs of staff in the last 10-15 years as the Guard had transformed from a reserve force to more of an operational force from all the deployments. Plus the Army Reserve is more of a component to the Active Army than the Guard. Plus there are 54 different National Guards, one for each state and territory, which are controlled by the governors when not on Title 10 orders. That was my understanding of it.

Response by CPT Andrew Wright made May 29 at 2017 11:56 PM

CPT Andrew Wright — Mon, 29 May 2017 23:56:18 -0400

1. Politics. 2. The state Adjutant Generals are authorized two-star positions and the chain of command works just a little better if the higher command has higher rank. It has only elevated to the three and four star ranks in the last twenty years or so. 3. Strength: The National Guard has about 340,000 soldiers. The Army Reserve has about 199,000 so the Chief of Army Reserve is authorized at a lower rank to compensate. 4. More politics.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2017 12:24 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 May 2017 00:24:09 -0400

My pride says because we're better than the Reserves.
In reality I didn't know the Reserves didn't have a 4 Star, I assumed they did.
My best guess would be size, the Guard is larger than the Reserves, and that most if not all States have a 2 Star as their Adjutant General with at least two 1 Stars below them as the Land Component Commander and Air Component Commander.

What I find interesting is that most States AG is an Air Force 2 Star and that the Chief of the NGB is also an Air Force General. For example my States AG is Air Force.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made May 30 at 2017 1:37 AM

SPC Erich Guenther — Tue, 30 May 2017 01:37:05 -0400

Ha, I watched the hearings on CSPAN back when this happened. The Army represented by General Odierno wanted to keep the NG subordinate to it's chain of command and vehemently objected to the elevation of the NGB head to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Their excuse for objecting (total bullshit, btw) just reinforced the belief in Congress the Army was never serious about integrating the National Guard into the larger Army missions and deployments and just motivated Congress to seal the deal. The Army's argument was basically one more Army General on the Joint Chiefs of Staff would only confuse everyone. Congress's argument that the NGB had to have a voice on the JCS because in the past the Army had made mistakes in misrepresenting or not presenting at all, the National Guard's position and that broader input was better than restricted input.

Response by LTC Stephen B. made May 30 at 2017 7:33 AM

LTC Stephen B. — Tue, 30 May 2017 07:33:04 -0400

Because the Chief, NGB represents both the Army AND Air National Guard at the National level - NGB is a Joint Activity of the Department of Defense - OCAR only represents the USAR.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2017 8:53 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 May 2017 08:53:01 -0400

I agree the Chief-NGB should be a four star. I don't agree that they're on the JCS. They already had representation on the JCS via the Army & Air Force CoS.

Response by LTC Stephen B. made May 30 at 2017 11:51 AM

LTC Stephen B. — Tue, 30 May 2017 11:51:09 -0400

Also, the Director of the Army National Guard, a more appropriate comparison with the CAR, is a 3-Star. The real question should be why does the Army Reserve have TWO 3-Stars - CAR and Commander USARC? :-)

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2017 5:19 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 May 2017 17:19:27 -0400

to my recolection NG was never a four star position.

Response by CSM Clifford Fargason made May 30 at 2017 7:00 PM

CSM Clifford Fargason — Tue, 30 May 2017 19:00:41 -0400

As others have said, politics is the reason. At one time, the Chief-NGB and CAR were both 2 star positions. CNGB became a 3 star slot in 1979, CAR became a 3 star slot in 2001. The importance of the 3 star slot is that 3 star generals sit on the resourcing board. The Army Reserve had no effective voice for resources at the Army level until this happened. In the Army, the Guard and Reserve compete for resources, so if the boss of one out-ranks the other they have a significant advantage when it comes to training resources, etc.

Response by SPC John Decker made May 30 at 2017 7:46 PM

SPC John Decker — Tue, 30 May 2017 19:46:52 -0400

Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 of the Constitution states that congress has the power To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; As this is the first use of the word militia in the Constitution, I have always considered militia to be synonymous with National Guard. That being said, there should not be a Federal level National Guard Bureau.

Response by LTC John Shaw made May 30 at 2017 10:31 PM

LTC John Shaw — Tue, 30 May 2017 22:31:13 -0400

Most people have address this issue, it speaks to the Joint nature and depth of the National Guard force vs the Army Reserve. The National Guard has a dual hat role for the State or Territory when not on Title 10 orders that most Army Reserve units don't have to program missions or funding.
I started in the KYNG and will end my career in the Army Reserve and I have loved being in both of these organizations in my 30+ years. I agree with the CAR being subordinate Army, when many of the Army Reserve roles are Combat Service Support that plan rotations to support the enduring missions we have around the world.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2017 1:51 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 31 May 2017 01:51:38 -0400

It may also have to do with size. The reserve is much smaller than the Guard.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made May 31 at 2017 8:43 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 31 May 2017 08:43:08 -0400

The NGB has it's own, state driven mission independent of the Regular Army. The Reserves exist solely to support the RA. The ranks/positions reflect that.

Response by LTC Russ Smith made May 31 at 2017 10:11 AM

LTC Russ Smith — Wed, 31 May 2017 10:11:34 -0400

There is no excuse. The CAR should be a four star command. The National Guard should be its own branch of service. The first Army Guard four star never deployed. He was a colonel or BG on 9/11 and dodged combat all the way to four stars. What a joke. Cronyism is the original sin of the Guard.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made May 31 at 2017 4:47 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Wed, 31 May 2017 16:47:57 -0400

The main reason 50 state governors.

Response by COL Thom Brooks made Jun 1 at 2017 5:57 PM

COL Thom Brooks — Thu, 01 Jun 2017 17:57:40 -0400

the Chief, National Guard incorporates both Army and Air Force Reserve Guard. Huge amount of responsibility. It has transitioned over time, starting many decades ago as a COL position.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Jun 3 at 2017 1:04 AM

COL Charles Williams — Sat, 03 Jun 2017 01:04:00 -0400

Honestly, neither one should be 4 star... SFC William Farrell ... The ARNG has more influence, so a few year back convinced us (them) he should be a 4 star.... Redunk in my perspective...

Response by LTC Bill Koski made Jul 12 at 2017 8:37 PM

LTC Bill Koski — Wed, 12 Jul 2017 20:37:01 -0400

Politics