Flag Officers and Politics

[SlightlyCatholic]

I was reading on the promotion procedures for officers of flag rank today and noticed that they are required to have Senate confirmation before being promoted to O-7 and up. What I'm wondering is when a General/Admiral stops being a leader of servicemen and starts being a politician. While they wear military insignia, it seems to me that flag officers almost have to play the political game to advance. Are there generals who don't play politics and still manage to preserve their identity and function as military officers? I just wanted to start a discussion on this because it seems as the stars go on, the lines are blurred between the military and the political.

[mtnsldr]

They are subjected to some political fallout, but it is minimal at the O-7 level.

You'd have to do a great deal to get on a congressman/woman's radar at the O-6 level, especially in the Guard. It is similar to the Federal Recognition board procedures, essentially they review your info to ensure you meet the quals, and as long as there isn't something blatantly negative, you're good to go.

Granted, it takes considerable effort to get considered, but I think once the state makes its selection...

However, as far as state government, that is a really political beast, because every O-4 and above in my state has to be confirmed by the Governor and the Governor's Council. So state wise, its easier to get attention.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Wow, I didn't know the Governor and Governor's Council had so much input. I guess that's one group to put on the "Do Not Disturb" list if you want a decent Guard career. Do you know if it's like that for the Air Guard as well?

[PhilK]

Actually, starting at the O-6 level you get Senate confirmation.

However, I would say that unless you are a taking command of one of the major four star billets (Combatant Commands or Chief of Staff positions), then you are pretty much just signed off. Most of the service specific positions are blessed off within the service first and the Senate confirmation is just a formality.

I have known some O-6s who were very political and were denied their first star because of service related items, and then I have known O-6s who were not political at all get their first star without anyone blinking an eye.

Not sure if that answers your question, but I would say that unless you are at the 4-star level you probably do not have any interaction or contact with many politicians on a regular basis.

[SlightlyCatholic]

Originally Posted by PhilK

Actually, starting at the O-6 level you get Senate confirmation.

However, I would say that unless you are a taking command of one of the major four star billets (Combatant Commands or Chief of Staff positions), then you are pretty much just signed off. Most of the service specific positions are blessed off within the service first and the Senate confirmation is just a formality.

I have known some O-6s who were very political and were denied their first star because of service related items, and then I have known O-6s who were not political at all get their first star without anyone blinking an eye.

Not sure if that answers your question, but I would say that unless you are at the 4-star level you probably do not have any interaction or contact with many politicians on a regular basis.

Thanks for that response, Phil...it's good to get the real deal from officers who have BTDT. I wasn't aware that Senate confirmation started at O-6.

[mtnsldr]

I apologize, I didn't make that clear. Yes, you get senate confirmation at O-6, but like PhilK said, its not necessarily political, just a verification that you meet the standards, and endorsement by your local chain of command.

[PhilK]

No worries MTN, I was writing my post when you were posting, so I didn't even read your post until after I hit "Post Reply".

[mtnsldr]

Hooah Sir! Always good for the double tap...

[HairyEyeball]

Actually, 'political' (as opposed to 'being noticed by politicians') starts at the 'lower middle' officer and enlisted ranks: There is a reason certain officers get 'better' commands and some NCOs always get 'choice' billets, and others (who may be outstanding combat troops or experts in their field) never do. Just as in any large organization, especially one so regimented and tradition-bound, office politics abound, and someone is always choosing the losing side - and 'not playing' is making a choice.

The professional politicians get involved when 'high visibility' posts are involved (the senior enlisted man of the specific service isn't always the 'best qualified' - whatever that means - or the longest-serving E-9), and as for Commanding Generals (or decorations), need we invoke Chesty?

[wukong]

I believe that every officer authorized to administer the oath of office is required to have Senate confirmation.