A Dick Act Dilemma for Space

When Hurricane Helene struck the U.S., it revealed a critical reality: space-based tools are indispensable. With terrestrial networks wiped out, FEMA deployed 180 Starlink kits to restore communications and stabilize chaos (FEMA 2024). This reliance underscores why Admiral Christopher Grady, the nation’s second-highest-ranking military officer, calls space America’s most essential domain. 

Satellites act as intelligence multipliers, driving global operations and fueling a space economy projected to hit $1.8 trillion by 2035 (CSIS 2024; World Economic Forum 2024). Advocates for a Space National Guard argue that state-level access to these tools could strengthen disaster response, but such proposals risk adding bureaucracy and duplication. The real challenge isn’t creating new structures—it’s streamlining the processes that ensure America stays ahead.

The National Guard has always walked a fine line between state and federal responsibilities. Born from the Dick Act of 1903, it operates under Title 32 to tackle state emergencies while benefiting from federal funding. But when federalized under Title 10, Guardsmen pivot to national defense abroad, adhering to the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts military roles in domestic law enforcement. While effective on Earth, this dual-purpose model falters under the unique demands of space.

Space operations require cohesion, a point the White House and Secretary of the Air Force (SecAf) Frank Kendall make clear. Missions like satellite communications and missile detection thrive under unified oversight, not scattered control. Yet proposals to create a separate component risk unnecessary bureaucracy and wasted resources (Executive Office of the President 2022, 7). As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) warns, a smaller force of 1,500 personnel could cost $100 million annually, plus $20 million in one-time construction costs (CBO 2020, p. 2). Scaling up to a larger force of 5,800 personnel would balloon those costs from $385 million to $490 million annually, with construction bills soaring as high as $900 million (CBO 2020, p. 6). By comparison, the Army and Air National Guard field over 430,000 personnel combined, accentuating the relatively small size—and outsized cost—of the proposed Space National Guard. Furthermore, 53 out of 55 U.S. governors (50 states and 5 territories of the U.S. have elected governors) oppose transferring Air National Guard space units into the Space Force, including governors from states without Guard space units, highlighting concerns about eroding state authority and destabilizing critical partnerships (Hadley 2024).

The National Guard’s Earth-focused model also struggles to adapt to the global synchronization that space demands. FEMA’s federal coordination with the use of Starlink during Hurricane Helene restored communications without any need for state-level control. Similarly, FireGuard—a National Guard program using satellites to detect wildfires—has reduced disaster response times. Yet these successes came under federal systems, casting doubt on whether embedding Space Force liaisons in Guard units would add significant value. SecAF Kendall goes further, arguing that part-time service options within the Space Force already provide a more streamlined, effective way to retain talent and ensure readiness (Hadley 2024).

Advocates for state-level roles point to retention challenges among Space Force veterans, who currently lack a formal reserve option. Brigadier General Michael Bruno warns that without such a solution, the military risks losing invaluable expertise (Lehrfeld and Cohen 2024). But existing part-time opportunities within the Space Force already address this gap, making a new structure redundant. Economically, proponents highlight Colorado’s Space Base Delta 1, which generates $4.3 billion annually and supports 30,000 jobs, as evidence of the model’s potential (Todd 2024). Even so, legislation introduced by Senators Marco Rubio and Michael Bennet to create the new force remains stalled in the Senate, despite drawing 16 cosponsors.

Space missions thrive on federal oversight to prevent duplication and maintain efficiency. Existing frameworks—like the Air National Guard and part-time Space Force options—already address many of the challenges advocates seek to solve. The administrative hurdles and exorbitant costs of creating a new force far outweigh any proposed benefits.

Bureaucracy already hampers the commercial space sector: a SpaceX rocket launch, for instance, must pass similar yet independent compliance checks from at least five entities, including NASA, DoD, FAA, FCC, and EPA. At a time when Great Power Competition demands agility, the U.S. must propel its space program, not add more layers of red tape. 

Sources

Congressional Budget Office. 2020. “Costs of Creating a Space National Guard.” Congressional Budget Office. June 2, 2020. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56374.

CSIS. 2024. “DoD’s Warfighting Concept with the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.” Www.csis.org, May. https://www.csis.org/analysis/dods-warfighting-concept-vice-chairman-joint-chiefs-staff.

Executive Office of the President. 2022. “EXECUTIVE OFFICE of the PRESIDENT OFFICE of MANAGEMENT and BUDGET.” https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/S4543-NDAA-SAP.pdf.

FEMA. 2024. “Biden-Harris Administration Continues Whole-Of-Government Response to Hurricane Helene, over 3,500 Federal Personnel across North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, South Carolina and Alabama.” Fema.gov. September 30, 2024. https://www.fema.gov/press-release/20240930/biden-harris-administration-continues-whole-government-response-hurricane.

Hadley, Greg. 2022. “White House: Space Missions Are Federal, so No Need for a Space National Guard | Air & Space Forces Magazine.” Air & Space Forces Magazine. October 19, 2022. https://www.airandspaceforces.com/white-house-space-missions-are-federal-so-no-need-for-a-space-national-guard/.

———. 2024. “Nearly Every Governor Opposes Guard Units Moving into the Space Force.” Air & Space Forces Magazine. April 29, 2024. https://www.airandspaceforces.com/governors-oppose-guard-units-moving-space-force/.

Lehrfeld, Jonathan, and Rachel Cohen. 2024. “Congress Approves Space Force Part-Timers, but Still No Space Guard.” Military Times. January 16, 2024. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2024/01/16/congress-approves-space-force-part-timers-but-still-no-space-guard/.

National Guard. 2022. “FireGuard Program Enhances National Guard Wildfire-Fighting.” National Guard. November 18, 2022. https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/Article/3223104/fireguard-program-enhances-national-guard-wildfire-fighting/.

Todd, Justin. 2024. “Annual State of the Bases Address Unites Guardians, Airmen, Community Partners.” United States Space Force. March 12, 2024. https://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3704712/annual-state-of-the-bases-address-unites-guardians-airmen-community-partners/.

World Economic Forum. 2024. “Space Economy Set to Triple to $1.8 Trillion by 2035, New Research Reveals.” World Economic Forum. 2024. https://www.weforum.org/press/2024/04/space-economy-set-to-triple-to-1-8-trillion-by-2035-new-research-reveals/.

Image Source: https://pixabay.com/de/photos/raumstation-mondlandung-apollo-15-60615/