New Commission to Study Army's Structure, Guard's Apache Helicopters; Report Due February 2016

This proposed resolution is essentially a two-part administrative package. The first, and much larger, part establishes a temporary, independent group called the National Commission on the Future of the Army. The second part is a standard procedural move by the House.

The Army’s Check-Up: What the Commission Does

Think of this Commission as an external consulting team brought in to give the U.S. Army a comprehensive structural review. The goal is to figure out the optimal mix of forces. Specifically, this eight-member Commission—appointed by the President, the Speaker of the House, and the Senate Majority Leader—must have national security expertise and cannot be current federal employees. Their job is to study and make recommendations on some critical, and often contentious, issues.

Their main focus areas include the appropriate force mixture between the Regular Army, the Army National Guard, and the Army Reserve. This directly impacts the readiness and deployment schedule for thousands of soldiers and their families. They also have to weigh in on the policy for allocating aircraft between the Regular Army and the National Guard, specifically addressing the planned transfer of AH-64 Apache aircraft from the Guard to the Regular Army. This transfer has been a major point of friction between the active duty component and the Guard leadership.

Timeline and Real-World Impact

This isn't a permanent body. The Commission operates on a tight schedule, mandated to submit its final report with findings and recommendations to the President and Congress no later than February 1, 2016. Sixty days after that, it dissolves. This means any policy changes resulting from their recommendations—which could affect everything from unit locations to personnel budgets—will likely start moving through Congress and the Pentagon shortly after that date.

For an Army Reservist or National Guard member, the Commission’s findings on force mixture and aircraft allocation could directly influence their unit's funding, equipment, and mission profile. If the Commission recommends a larger role for the Reserve components, that could mean more resources and potentially more deployment opportunities; conversely, a recommendation to shift resources to the Regular Army could mean budget cuts and less modern equipment for the Guard.

The Procedural Footnote

The resolution also includes a separate, routine action: electing Mr. Knott to the House of Representatives Committee on Ethics. This is a standard piece of House business that keeps the legislative machinery running and ensures committees are fully staffed, though it’s entirely unrelated to the military structure review.