Should we be alarmed by the appointment of Stephen Bannon (Trump’s chief strategist) to a membership role in the National Security Council (NSC) Principal Committee?

Heck yes! Please call The Senate Committee on Homeland Security at 202-224-4751 (It’s an answering machine. Leave your name, number and a brief message) or email them (https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/contact) to register your position.

I used some of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s message and tweaked it a bit.

“I very strongly believe that the demotion of key members of the NSC Participial Committee and the inclusion of an individual whose primary responsibility is political in nature is highly detrimental to the strength of our great nation. I am also very concerned about the individual’s role in crafting the executive order behind these changes. Partisan politics have no place in our national security.”

Not convinced? Keep reading.

What is the NSC?

This is how the Trump administration defines the NSC and their role. (you will have to cut and paste the link https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc, as my direct link was mysteriously severed).

Ah, let’s go back to the archived Obama Administration site. There we see: (bolding and italics mine)

“The National Security Council (NSC) is the President’s principal forum for considering national security and foreign policy matters with his senior national security advisors and cabinet officials.”
“Since its inception under President Truman, the Council’s function has been to advise and assist the President on national security and foreign policies.”
“The Council also serves as the President’s principal arm for coordinating these policies among various government agencies. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting.”

As with most Trump moves that have garnered opposition, the objections are two-fold.

The more readily grasped objections are that Bannon has little relevant experience and is a not seen to be a very good person overall.

But the objections aren’t just specific to Bannon. Someone, perhaps Bannon, also included in the EO the demotion of several of the most influential members of the committee, giving Bannon even more influence. More specifically the OE “someone” crafted:

Removed two key members, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence, and said that they would be invited “issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed.” (which should be pretty much every time, but is now at the White House’s discretion)
- The Director of National Intelligence is responsible for starting off discussions with an intelligence briefing, but Trump has made it clear how little he values intelligence
- The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff used to be a key adviser to the president and others on the military consequences
Diminished the role of the national Security Advisor, who would normally be the one to work with the President on NSC matters.