The USCGC Active (WMEC-618) was commissioned in 1966 and is still serving–a tribute to the Coast Guard’s “can do” culture.
By admitting that Semper Paratus is an aspiration, the Coast Guard can allow itself to celebrate the truth that while the service is not Always Ready , Coast Guardsmen embrace every task to meet their mission. That might not be the service’s aspiration, but it should be its inspiration.
Seems like I have been pointing to the US Naval Institute publications a lot recently, but it does seem they are paying more attention to the Coast Guard. Latest is “Embrace the Coast Guard’s Strengths” by LCdr. Luke Petersen, USCG. It discusses how we should view the motto, “Semper Paratus–Always Ready.”
Aspirational, Inspirational, or a curse?
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
In case you have heard yet, but Donald Trump took ~$202-Million USD out of the Defense Budget. Approximately $1.8-Million from Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, ~$29-Million from the USCG, ~$9.8-Million from FEMA, ~$34-Million from TSA, ~$33-Million from ICE and Various other Defense Agencies to pay for his “G’D” Border Wall and More Detention Centers. Don’t expect any New Icebreakers or anything else for the USCG anytime soon…
I have to question if that is even legal, It subverts the legislative process.
Only if the US Congress let him get away with it! And so far the (i.e. the US Congress) isn’t showing any reluctance to stop him…
Thanks, It is probably not illegal if the money stays within the same department, but certainly not a choice I would have made.
Ironically the “John S. McCain Defense Authorization Act” passed BOTH the US House of Representatives and the US Senate with Super Majority Votes, to prevent Donald Trump from Vetoing it. Apparently “Neither” of the Two Chambers of US Government had the Foresight of Seeing Donald Trump’s power of the Executive Order Note Pad…
Got a link to confirm that?
I am pro-wall, and there’s no question Trump’s supporters were VERY pro-wall (Wall, lower Taxes, and jail Hillary were the promises which got him elected), but I think it is a VERY bad precedence to set to allow a President to willy-nilly decide he alone knows better than 435 Congress Critters…
And the Congress Critters not stopping this shows their hand: They’re waiting out a few election cycles until their guy gets into office, so they can look the other way when that guy does it… That, and/or they are abdicating their power so they can point fingers during the election cycle we’re in…
As I was thinking about this this morning I realized I did not have confirmation of where in the process this happened. If this was actually done to the FY2019 budget in the appropriations committee then I see no legal question. If it was done to the already approved FY2018 budget, then we have a problem.
I suspect that “you” don’t read a lot of Printed News!!! USA Today dated 11 September 2018, by Christal Hayes…
( https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/11/femas-budget-cut-10-million-support-ice-documents-show/1274723002/ )
My understanding is money can be moved between executive departments (i.e. State to Defense) via a budget process called “transfers.” Movement within an executive department is called “reprogramming”. Either congressional (appropriations) notification, explicit approval or statuatory authority is required dependent on the amount and/or the process.
There is also the requirement that for either process the transferred funds are to be used for the same reasons as obligated by the original Congressional intent. The Coast Guard does not construct buildings to house illegal immigrants as far as I know..
why take money from an agency that stops immigrants? we have been, for quite awhile, the sea wall.
One could argue why USCG Commandant Paul Zuikunft was replaced. Probably because he wouldn’t have stand for Donald Trump using the US Coast Guard as his personal Piggy Bank to redirect funds somewhere else…
( https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/us/politics/state-of-the-coast-guard.html )
I suspect this was done at a lot lower level than Trump. Staffers made decisions based on a general direction he wanted to go. Stupidly, the staffers just started grabbing chunks of momey where it looked “extra.”
I blame Congress more than Trump. He has been adamant about delivering on his promises, and if Congress won’t help him, he’ll go around them. Does that muck up all the carefully laid plans? Yep, sure does… He has a point; he was elected to do certain things. If no one helps, it will result in the “bull-in-a-china-shop” technique. Not saying it’s right, but it was predictable. We have a CEO mindset President in office. He expects what he has a mandate to do, will get done and to hell with “politics…”
Just a reminder we don’t discuss politics here. We discuss what happened but don’t speculate about blame.
The amount deducted from the FY2018 budget was relatively small. I hope there was a reason for the amount selected.
The real question is what will happen with the FY2019 budget. Apparently the Appropriations committee intended to cut the CG budget by $1.4B including the Heavy Polar Icebreaker.
@ Chuck Hill.
I’d be surprised if the USCG got a New Icebreaker before 2025…
( https://gcaptain.com/gao-identifies-multiple-risks-to-9-8-billion-polar-icebreaker-program/ )
( https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-600 )
Even if funded in FY2019 we probably will not see it until 2024.
Thanks for the reminder Chuck.
Do you think jumping all the way to 6 Icebreakers turned some people off, and they are pulling back from the whole thing now?
Actually, I think we are getting a lot of support for the three heavy and three medium program, but at any rate even stronger support for heavy #1.
Canada’s First New Arctic Patrol Vessel Launched…
( https://marinelink.com/news/canadas-first-new-arctic-patrol-vessel-441570?utm_source=MR-ENews-Weekdays-2018-09-17&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MR-ENews )
Suggestion that the Navy should plan on a 50 year life for its ships (for carriers it already does) https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-09/50-new-40-path-355-ship-navy