Monthly Archives: January 2008

Veterans: Getting the short end of the stick in D.C.

As many of my faithful readers know, I am a veteran. With that being the case, I always take politicians getting involved in veterans’ issues with a grain of salt because they have getting reelected in their windshield. For most of them that’s more important than anything. It’s called posturing.

Here in Montana, politicians know that a large voting block for them is veterans. With Montana having over 100,000 veterans living in the state, politically it is a smart move to give the veterans a little love.

Politics have been involved in Veterans issues for many years and that is the problem.

Some of us see through the smokescreen. Sometimes when politicians “demand” an investigation into something in the Veterans Administration (VA), it has more to do with getting votes than really helping veterans.

I have always thought that a major problem we veterans have with the elected officials in D.C. is that a majority of them did not serve, so they really don’t understand what it’s like to sign their name on the line and be sent anywhere in the world.

Unfortunately, that’s the case with Montana’s congressional delegation as not one of the three served. They lack the basic understanding of veterans’ issues. Personally, I believe they also lack an understanding of sacrifice, too, but that’s a story for another day.

I would be more inclined to vote for a candidate who is a veteran and not care if he/she was a Democrat or Republican. You can’t win me over by telling me that your dad, grandpa or brother served, either.

I did a little research and I believe that in the 435 member United States House of Representatives, there are around 90 veterans. In the 100 member United States Senate, there are about 29 veterans.

But what is really wrong is the House and Senate Veterans Committees have a small number of veterans serving on the committees. In the Senate, it looks like out of 15 members on the Veterans Committee, only six are veterans (two Democrats and four Republicans). On the House Veterans Affairs Committee, it looks like out of 29 members, only six are veterans (four Democrats and two Republicans). The Chairman of the Veterans Committee in the House is not even a veteran.

The House and Senate Veterans Appropriations committees (these committees actually fund the VA) should have a majority of veterans on them, too.

Until these committees have a majority of their seats occupied by veterans, we’ll continue to see politics with the funding and with the overall running of the Veterans Administration.

Until that is changed, veterans will never really be fully represented no matter how much the non-veterans representing us say they understand.

Senate Montana: 2008

Billings resident Kirk Bushman announced yesterday that he is running for U.S. Senate. That means there are two Republican candidates (Michael Lange and Kirk Bushman), so there will be a primary to see who will take on Max Baucus. There may be more candidates especially from a third party.

January 22, 2008, is the first day to file for office and March 20, 2008, is the last day to file for office here in Montana.

Baucus has not announced he is running again, but with his war chest, I would say there’s a 99.9% chance he will. Although there has been some talk from disgruntled Democrats, nobody has announced they would run against Max Baucus in the primary. More talk than action, so far. There has probably been a lot of talk (and deals made) from Baucus insiders with some disgruntled Democrats.

Ironically, Bushman announced his candidacy the same day that a story was written about Max Baucus’ getting 91% of his $8.9 million in campaign donations from outside of Montana. As we’ve seen in the past, Montanans are not really that keen on outsiders telling them what to do and buying access.

Heck, $8.9 million may not be enough money to buy the seat. I’m thinking $13 or $14 million by the end of this cycle. Baucus’ rich war chest will buy him a lot of TV and radio time, advertisements, and campaign staff so he can convince Montanans he deserves another term. He should be nervous as times are changing in the political world. Seniority is not a big thing to the voters these days.

Whoever makes it to the general election could lose in a landslide, but I don’t think they will. Montanans don’t too much care about the tons of money from out of state or the perception that their senator is owned by others. They support the home team more times than not, and right now Baucus is starting to look like a visitor. Then there’s the old saying, “He’s been there too long” that Baucus will have to deal with, again.

And who knows, Harry Reid may come to Montana and promise Baucus a seat on the powerful appropriations committee, which is a step up from the finance committee to most observers.

Bushman could present some problems to the other candidates. He has no voting record, which reminds me of Schweitzer in the 2000 Senate race and in the 2004 gubernatorial race. A person in that situation can be for almost anything.

Bushman also owns a home in Montana and went to college here. Bushman’s home is probably not worth a million dollars. I doubt Bushman’s wife has an assault on her record or flew an anti-war poster in their Billings home, but that’s just a hunch. Bushman, his wife and new born child look young, educated, and refreshing – like an all-American family.

So to quote Lloyd Christmas from the classic movie, Dumb and Dumber, “So you’re telling me there’s a chance?”

Yes. It’s a long way to November, and there can always be health issues, ethics issues, and mistakes along the campaign trail. It should be fun to watch.

Great Googly Moogly and Jets…Jets…Jets


Great Googly Moogly!

Eight Point Nine Million Dollars! No, this is not the winnings from the lottery. This is the amount of money reportedly raised by Senator Max Baucus for his 2008 reelection.

The interesting part is that 91% of his donations come from out of state donors. 91%! That must also be a record. No matter how his spokesperson spins it, Montana is not coming first. What really concerns me is that it does not seem to bother Baucus. Most people would feel just a little dirty, when they can only raise 9% from their own voters.

The good news is that we get the final say at the voting booth.

Jets…Jets…Jets

The Montana Air National Guard “may” get the F-22 Raptor and/or the F-35 Lightning according to the Great Falls Tribune – but not until 2025 to 2030.

Or was it the year 2525? Remember the song?

Well, at least they made the list. They “may” also get the F-15.

Or, they “may” get nothing.

Of course, Montana’s Congressional Delegation were overjoyed with this news and gave statements.

Maybe by 2025 Montana will have a member of congress serving on a defense or military committee who can put some leverage on the Air Force to place a mission in Montana.

Tuesday Potpourri


Real ID

Boy, it sure sounded like a great idea back in 2005. Basically it required people to present identification, like state driver’s licenses, that met certain security and authentication requirements.

Then, someone brought up the ideas of privacy and state sovereignty. It all went to hell after that and 17 states have rejected it, including Montana. Besides privacy and state sovereignty, the feds wanted the states to pay for part of it. The paying part probably had more to do with it than anything.

Of course, those states did not reject the tons of money that came in after 9/11 in the form of Homeland Security funding.

It’s been over six years since the United States was attacked. Somebody has been doing something right.

Earmarks

We’ve heard how some politicians were going to stop or cut earmarks. Heck, some even said they would do away with earmarks, period. It looks like the President is trying to find a way to do away with the earmarks added to 2008 spending bill.

It appears that both Democrats and Republicans are against his idea. That means it must be a pretty good, huh?

Congressional Websites

A recent story in The Hill tells many of us web surfers what we already knew: Congressional websites are terrible. According to the story:

The so-called Gold Mouse Report, released Monday by the non-partisan Congressional Management Foundation (CMF), analyzed and ranked 618 House, Senate, committee, and leadership websites based on five major categories over three months: Clearly defining the site’s audience; tailoring the site’s information to the audience in a timely-fashion; the user-friendliness of the site; the ease and promotion of communication between user and the site; and the sites creative license while still maintaining user ease and interest.

It appears Montana’s three members did not get a Gold, Silver or Bronze mouse award (I guess all that hullabaloo about those stupid schedules did not garner any points).

In a quick check of the Congressional Management Foundation’s website, it appears that former Senator Conrad Burns’s website in 2006 has been the only Medal (Mouse) winner for Montana since the start of this competition. That year Burns’ website received a Bronze Mouse.

Tough Times

Almost a year ago, after seeing the 2007-08 committee assignments for Montana’s Congressional delegation, I blogged with a question: “Tough Times Ahead for the Military Folks in Montana?”

It appears the tough times are here. Today in the Great Falls Tribune there is a story about the problem the delegation is having securing the funding for new housing at the base. It has been wrapped up in red tape for a year partly because the Democratic minority in late 2006 did not want to pass any funding bills that would give the Republican majority at that time a positive issue to run on. Like I have said, “It is all about winning the next election.”

In winning the next election for the Democrats, Malmstrom AFB became the loser.

In the past, Malmstrom AFB received a dramatic influx of money from the federal government, starting around 1995 until 2007. Most of the construction at the base was a direct result of former Sen. Conrad Burns and his assignment on the Military Construction and the Defense committees in the senate. This funding also created hundreds of jobs, many done by local contractors.

So, here we are in January 2008 and the Air Force has cut the number of houses they will build by 111 (maybe more if the money is never released) because they are losing part of their missile mission and 500 personnel.

Tough times? You bet.

Structural Problems

Yesterday the United States Air Force released details of the F-15 crash in Missouri last November. You can watch an animation of the crash HERE. The pilot ejected and received a few injuries.

The future of the F-15 might be in trouble according to recent reports. About 40% are out of commission and many may never fly again.

That could be a problem for the Montana Air National Guard. Montana’s F-15Cs were to come from the Missouri Air National Guard. Yes, it appears the plane that crashed was scheduled to come to Montana. Since the crash in Missouri, most F-15s were grounded. Some reports say 160 of the jets nationwide have structural problems. The Air Force released the accident report yesterday, and here is the story from the Air Force news service.

Montana’s Air Guard is supposed to get 15 of the F-15s to replace their F-16s. In 2005, the BRAC Commission initially decided to take all the planes (F-16s) from the Montana Air Guard, but with a little elbow twisting, the BRAC commission decided to replace them with F-15C/D aircraft.

Not too many people may want to think about it, but Montana may end up without any planes or less planes than previously scheduled to come here. It may come down to which state has the most clout to convince the Department of Defense to deploy their planes there. Clout was used in 2005 after the Montana Guard was schedule to lose all their F-16s. It may take even more clout to keep the F-15s on schedule to come to Montana.

Times have changed since the 2005 BRAC round, and with fewer planes to deploy for our air defense and without newer planes being built very quickly like the F-22, it may mean some locations will do without. Let’s hope that down the road, we’ll hear the sound of freedom flying across the Big Sky state, and with the Montana Air National Guard logo on them.

$169,300

The number of the day is $169,300. Your elected Federal representatives (Senators/Representatives) received a salary increase for 2008. The were bumped up $4,100 per year and they will make $169,300 per year.

With the approval ratings the lowest in history, should members of Congress get any type of pay increase? I could write a book on what they did not accomplish in 2007, but then I would have to sit back and read comments from both sides on what they claim they did accomplish. Here in Montana, we hear and read almost daily the “great” work they are doing or, more importantly, taking credit for doing.

Realistically, most members of Congress don’t need the money. Many are rich beyond our wildest imagination. Being a member of Congress is kind of a hobby for many – a mountain to climb and a mountain to stay on, like they are the king of the hill.

To settle this, why don’t we just place a salary question on the ballot every two or four years and let the voters decide? Every two years each member of the House of Representatives and a third of the U.S. Senate face reelection. Every four years, we elect a President. Surely we could place a question on the ballot asking if members of Congress should receive a Cost of Living increase? (I know, don’t call you Shirley. Sorry.). The answer is either Yes or No. If more than 25 states vote yes, they get a salary increase. If 25 or less states agree to it, then we’ll have to tell them, “Sorry, your employer does not feel you have performed well enough to merit a salary increase.”

I know, I know, I’m dreaming.

Take it or leave it?

Just about everyone in this nation wants to see our country less dependent on foreign oil. Many of us try to drive less and find ways to cut our energy consumption. The Air Force is getting into the energy-saving business, tying it to national security. They seem to be picking on the weakest link.

I read in the Great Falls Tribune that the first public meeting will be held by the United States Air Force on January 30 in Great Falls about the development of a coal to liquids (CTL) fuel plant on Malmstrom AFB.

It appears to me that the messengers from the federal government, Col. Bob Griffin and Assistant Secretary William Anderson, are backing Malmstrom and Montana into a corner. They are actually saying your future is in a CTL plant, take it or leave it.

I blogged about this plan before HERE and HERE.

Currently Malmstrom is losing 50 missiles. The Air Force already cut the number of houses they are building at the base. They are losing personnel. The future looks dim for the base to stay active and engaged in our national security. Although some politicians talk of jobs being lost, the real issue must always be national security.

Malmstrom has always been a great location for the defense of our nation, whether it be the clear flying weather, low population for training flights, and support from the local citizens. Plus, Homeland Security operations would be a great fit for the base to protect our northern border and the Air Guard could use the base.

Unfortunately, the Department of Defense has not seen it that way. Griffin said in the Tribune story that, “So a potential flying mission at the base is not germane to discussions about putting a coal-to-liquid-fuel plant there.”

It’s not germane because nobody has the clout in our congressional delegation to tell the Air Force to make it germane.

The writing appears to be on the wall. Malmstrom and Montana are the weak link when it comes to military clout compared to the other two missile bases. Malmstrom missiles are being taken and all the base may have left is a CTL plant, which from what I understand is very risky and unproven.

Plus, and this is the last straw to me, they plan on using land that would prevent the runway from ever being used for any future military or civilian missions. If Malmstrom closes in the future, the city and county would be left with little if the runway is unusable. There are several newer hangars with office space, vast ramp space, a newer refueling operation, that would be wonderful for a civilian company or defense contractor to use. For example, Boeing used the facilities and runway at Glasgow AFB when it closed.

Unfortunately, it appears all would be lost for the CTL plant.

Another obstacle that the federal government will have to overcome is that many residents of Great Falls and Cascade County seem to be mostly against any plans for coal plants. At least the more vocal citizens are. They know all too well that Lewis and Clark made a journey through this area a couple hundred years ago, and they want the land around the Missouri river to look like it did when Lewis and Clark first visited. They understand that once the scenic beauty around the Missouri River is broken, it can never be repaired.

It will be interesting to watch this being played out over the next few years.

New Hampshire

Wow. How wrong can the polls and pundits be? In the average of all recent polling in New Hampshire, Barack Obama was leading by eight points. Some polls had Obama up by as many as 13 points. It was fun to watch.

In what can only be described as a major upset, the Associated Press declared Hillary Clinton the winner of the New Hampshire primary at 8:30 p.m. Montana time. I think Hillary actually speaking from the heart and letting people see her emotions showed voters a different side of her that was very seldom revealed in the past.

It was a fun to see so many predictions go down in flames.

On the Republican side, John McCain is alive and well! He took an early lead and the race was called in his favor a few minutes after the polls closed. Mitt Romney finished second. So far Romney finished second in Iowa and New Hampshire and won Wyoming. Mike Huckabee finished third, after winning Iowa.

John Edwards vowed to stay in the race. One has to wonder why. Richardson is probably done and will wait for a call for a VP slot.

Mitt Romney is hurting, but he says he is in it for the long haul. Maybe that trip is from New Hampshire to Michigan because he needs to win Michigan or his “long haul” may be over. Romney may need to shake up some campaign people. Something is not catching on with the Romney message.

Giuliani needs to make a move soon, as does Thompson or the tidal wave may take them under.

Up next is Michigan (Jan 15). Nevada comes up January 19. The Republicans go at it in South Carolina on January 19, too. The Democrats go at it in South Carolina January 26.

I would share some polling numbers, but with tonight’s upset, they are probably not accurate.

The Rocket

Like many folks, I was shocked when I heard that Roger Clemens’ name was in the Mitchell Report.

I’ve also been shocked by the reaction of many sportswriters since then. It seems that all we really need in this country is somebody saying someone did something wrong, and as quickly as Tony Soprano can say, “bada bing,” that person is guilty – just send them to jail, write negative things about them in the media, and pull no punches because they are guilty. Someone said it, so it must be true. Let’s pile on!

How can anyone who is innocent ever get their good name back after all that?

Maybe my “older” age has somewhat made me apprehensive to judge someone on what someone else said, and take it to the bank as many sportswriters have with Clemens. I have personally known folks who have been accused in the media of being guilty, and it’s no fun to watch them, their family and friends suffer.

Clemens went on 60 Minutes to try and clear this up. Yesterday Clemens held a press conference. He was pissed. I don’t blame him. I would have liked to see him throw a fastball at some of those sportswriters – high and inside.

Luckily for Clemens, he has the resources and the name to mount a fight to clear his name. If it was me or some other Joe, we’d just have to sit back and take it. We could not call Mike Wallace and get a story on 60 Minutes.

I think the bottom line on all this is Major League Baseball (MLB) screwed up many years ago. When we had the home run fiesta, MLB was there promoting it. Someone in the leadership of MLB must have wondered, “Are these guys juiced up on something?” They failed to have drug tests for steroids until only a few years ago. From what I understand, they still do not have an effective test for Human Growth Hormone (HGH).

MLB must develop performance enhancing drug tests. They must keep on top of the folks who are trying to cheat. The players and their union must agree to these tests. They have the money to combat cheaters. They just need to do it.

Those folks who have fallen into the zone called the steroid era must be convicted on more than one person’s word, or some leaked grand jury testimony like in the case of Barry Bonds.

I agree with Clemens when he said something like after 25 years in baseball, he thought he would get more respect when the Mitchell Report was released. Clemens still has my respect, unless someone has more substantial proof that he really cheated. Until then, he’s still the Rocket to me.