Category: Max Heuer
Gregg Breaks with Bush on 9/11
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept 25, 2002–New Hampshire’s two Republican Senators have ended up on different sides on the question of whether an independent commission is needed to investigate the events that led up to the Sept. 11 attacks.
A measure sponsored by Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) was approved, 90-8, on Tuesday as an amendment to the Homeland Security bill.
President Bush, who initially had opposed the idea, supported it last week after Senate Democrats agreed to exclude the White House from the investigations.
Sen. Bob Smith, recently defeated in his re-election bid, supported the amendment, but the White House endorsement wasn’t enough for Sen. Judd Gregg, who served as President Bush’s s debate practice partner when Bush prepared to face Al Gore during the 2000 presidential election.
“I feel very strongly that in this instance we know most of what happened,” Gregg said Thursday. “We know there were huge failures in the intelligence community, we know that people that were out there who were threatening us were not being properly tracked.
“I think there are a lot better places to put the money,” Gregg said, estimating that the commission will cost $10 million to $15 million.
Smith, noting in a press release that he supported the president’s request for the commission, said, “As we work to establish a Department of Homeland Security, the more we can learn about the facts and circumstances that led up to the horrific events, the better we can protect our country from future terrorist activity.”
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Majority of Americans Support Funds for Low-Income Heating
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 24, 2002--A vast majority of Americans support an increase in funds for a program designed to keep low-income families and seniors warm through the coming winter months, a recent survey says.
Several Northeastern lawmakers gathered Tuesday to tout the new survey as a potential bargaining chip for additional funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), a federal program that helps low-income Americans pay their energy bills.
The annual survey, conducted by the Behavior Research Center, a polling firm, found that 78 percent of Americans believe it is more difficult now than five years ago for low-income families to pay energy bills, up from 67 percent three years ago; 78 percent said LIHEAP funding should be increased, and 31 percent of them said the increase should be "substantial."
"The messages we are hearing could not be any more clear," said Rep. Jack Quinn (R-NY), head of the Northeast-Midwest Congressional Coalition. "Americans believe in lending a hand when help is needed most."
New Hampshire's House delegation weighed in on the issue Tuesday as well.
"LIHEAP is one of the most important safety nets the government offers to
low income families" second district Rep. Charlie Bass said in a statement.
"This program provides critical fuel assistance to low-income families, and I will work to ensure that funding remains available in the coming fiscal year," first district Rep. John Sununu pledged in a statement.
New Hampshire is set to receive $10.8 million to $13.2 million out of a total federal package that could range from $1.4 billion to $1.7 billion, said New Hampshire Fuel Assistance Program manager Celeste Lovett.
Still, she said, the $13.2 million maximum was "bare bones."
Despite concerns over national security and war, most Americans realize the need for the LIHEAP program, said the survey, which interviewed 800 Americans. It was commissioned by the Campaign for Home Energy Assistance, a lobbying group.
Among the figures included in the survey results: 72 percent of respondents said home heating help for the poor is too important to sacrifice for military spending; and 73 percent said it makes more sense for the federal government to pay the winter heating bills of low-income and elderly people than to pay for housing them in hospitals or shelters if they become ill or are forced from their homes.
Two-thirds of families receiving LIHEAP assistance earn less than $8,000 a year, and home heating costs are expected to grow by an average of 17 percent for natural gas customers and over 40 percent for Northeast heating oil customers, according to the Department of Energy's forecast.
Now uncertainty is high, Lovett said, because the budget plan for fiscal year 2003, and emergency funding for the coming winter, have not been released.
An appropriations bill for LIHEAP funding was passed by the Senate but is pending in the House.
The Senate legislation allots a guaranteed $1.7 billion for the program and an extra $300 million for emergency - termed contingency - spending.
But while growing uncertainty over a potential showdown with Iraq also has helped contribute this year to the rise in fuel prices, the Bush administration has not released any LIHEAP contingency funding for the winter.
The administration released $100 million from the contingency allotment in August, but New Hampshire did not qualify for the aid. That package was intended to provide relief from the summer heat and did not focus on home heating.
In addition, legislation attached to a congressional energy that House and Senate lawmakers are currently negotiating would increase the LIHEAP authorization ceiling to $3.4 billion.
Sununu and Bass, along with 72 other House members, have signed a letter to President Bush asking for the release of $200 million in contingency funds left over from last year for the coming winter.
"I am hopeful that President Bush will answer our call for the release of contingency LIHEAP funds to help New Hampshire and other Northeast states properly serve the many families in need for the coming winter," Bass said.
But Lovett said that, at least in the past, the Bush administration hasn't supplied adequate help.
"This past year our funding level was much less because no contingency funds were released" until after the winter, Lovett said. "New Hampshire did not have enough funds to supply all of the people" who qualified.
In fact, according to Lovett, 3,860 New Hampshire residents who qualified for the aid did not receive full benefits. Although some emergency and partial benefits were released, 527 of those people did not receive any funds at all.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Capitol Police Testing Segway
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept 24, 2002--The Capitol Police Department began testing two Segway Human Transporters last week in an effort to improve response time and effectiveness around Capitol Hill.
"It is very important" for Capitol police officers "to interact with the public and do hands-on work," deputy chief Marsha Krug said. "Standing on the Segway gives you the ability to have that personal interaction."
The two Segway devices are being leased from the New Hampshire-based company for two months, and Krug said different divisions within her department would be testing the vehicles every day.
Officers need to move from the various congressional office buildings quickly, she said.
"On the Segway a person can move rather quickly to an incident to assist in any kind of situation."
While the units have a clear upside, Krug said, there is already some concern that the department's money would be better spent on mountain bikes or motorcycles.
She said that the Segway costs $4,000 to $5,000, depending on the features, and that there is some concern officers would become "less fit" if they rarely had to walk on patrols.
Krug said a company representative approached the Capitol Police with the idea while in Washington, and the department is making a constant attempt to try out different options and delivery systems.
She said the District of Columbia Parks Department has been experimenting with the device as well.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Pro-Israel Lobby Targeting NH Senate Race
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 18, 2002--Pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington are paying close attention to the New Hampshire Senate race, preparing to lend support to Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen while at the same time working quietly behind the scenes to salvage relations with her Republican rival, Rep. John E. Sununu, according to a Jewish newspaper.
In a story last Friday in The Forward, a weekly Jewish newspaper headquartered in New York City, an unnamed source whom the newspaper described as a "prominent pro-Israel activist in Washington" said the Granite State race would be "the focal point of the pro-Israel activity" in the November elections.
But a Republican pro-Israel activist who declined to be identified said such attention is simply "not happening."
"The community is not united on this," the activist said Wednesday. "Pro-Israel Democrats will support Shaheen, and pro-Israel Republicans will support Sununu."
The Forward story quoted one source who said openly that supporters of Israel are opposing the Republican candidate.
Sununu "hasn't been outrageous" in his Israel policy, but "he's definitely not the preferable candidate," Morris Amitay, director of the Washington PAC - a pro-Israel political action committee that supports candidates in federal elections - told The Forward.
This sentiment in the pro-Israel lobby stems from Sununu's votes against several pro-Israel resolutions, Forward reporter Ori Nir wrote in the article. He also wrote that Sununu is said to have supported direct aid to the Palestinian Authority, which many pro-Israel activists consider a terrorist organization.
But Sununu's campaign staff doesn't think the charges are warranted.
"Congressman Sununu has always voted to protect America's national security interests around the world, and that includes support for Israel, our most important strategic ally in the Middle East," said Sununu's press secretary, Barbara Riley.
The article's "assessment of [Sununu's] record is not accurate, nor balanced," the GOP pro-Israel activist said, emphasizing Sununu's vote for the DeLay-Lantos resolution supporting Israel's right to defend itself. The House passed the measure in May by a vote of 351-21.
The resolution, which also condemned Palestinian terrorism, was the main reason for Jewish lobbying against Reps. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) and Earl Hilliard (D-AL) after both voted against it, the activist said. McKinney and Hilliard lost their primary elections earlier this year.
But according to the article in The Forward, Shaheen is the more attractive choice for supporters of Israel and should be the one to receive significant backing from pro-Israel PACs.
Pro-Israel PACs already have donated at least $14,000 to Shaheen's campaign and $29,700 to Sen. Bob Smith, who lost his bid for reelection in last week's Republican primary campaign to Sununu, according to a report by the Center for Responsive Politics based on Federal Election Commission (FEC) data for the first six months of this year.
Sununu did not receive any donations from those PACs in that period.
The GOP activist said this was because incumbent candidates like Smith, "if they have been friendly" toward Israel, as Smith clearly was, typically get support from pro-Israel groups during the primary. The activist said pro-Israel support for Sununu would show up "now that this is an open race."
Data on pro-Israel groups' donations to Sununu and Shaheen after the primary will not be available until Oct. 15, when the first general election financial disclosure report is released by the FEC.
Calls to Washington PAC and National PAC - another pro-Israel group that directly supports House and Senate candidates - were not returned.
The Forward article noted that some Jewish leaders are cautious about coming out too strongly against Sununu. The congressman's national backing - his father was White House chief of staff for the first President Bush - and his solid position in the fall election mean that "an all-out Jewish effort against Sununu may alienate him and make him more of an adversary than he actually is" if he gets elected, according to the article.
The story also reported that a spokesperson at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) confirmed that "Israel supporters" had contacted Sununu but that the spokesperson denied any attempt to "co-opt him" toward Israel. The supporters also reportedly "distanced themselves" from Smith's comments during his campaign that "made reference to Sununu's Lebanese-Palestinian origin while accusing him of being soft on terrorism."
Instead the supporters were "suggesting that" Sununu "make a public statement supporting Israel" before the Sept. 10 primary - which he did not do.
According to the article, Sununu is considering making such a statement in his general election campaign. In fact, his campaign released a statement today on the issue and Sununu has made statements of support in the past.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Smith Ditches GOP Unity for Senate Floor Action
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 12, 2002--Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH), who lost his reelection bid to Rep. John Sununu in Tuesday's primary election, was skipping a Republican Unity Breakfast Thursday morning in New Hampshire so that he could be on hand that day to cast an important vote on the Senate floor, his staff said Wednesday.
But Smith did not vote on Thursday's first order of business, a 10 a.m. roll-call vote on the nomination of Timothy J. Corrigan of Florida to be a U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Florida. The nomination was approved, 88-0.
Smith also failed to vote in the afternoon on two amendments to the Homeland Security bill.
On Wednesday, a spokesman for Smith said he would have attended the breakfast if not for key votes on the Senate floor. "Otherwise, he'd be" at the breakfast, Smith's press secretary Lisa Harrison told the Union Leader on Wednesday. "He said he would spend the rest of his term furthering President Bush's agenda on homeland security and fighting terrorism," she said.
But on Thursday, Harrison backtracked. "We called the Republican cloakroom (on Wednesday) and (officials there) just told us there were votes," she said, without specifying what the votes were on.
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) attended the breakfast event in New Hampshire and flew directly to Washington, missing the early vote but making both roll calls later in the day on the Homeland Security bill.
Smith, who did not return phone calls, was driving back to Washington on Thursday morning, according to Harrison.
Gregg said he was not concerned that Smith's actions reflected any division in the party.
"Sometimes when something like this happens you've got to take some time and put your house in order," Gregg said, referring to Smith's defeat. He added that he had no doubt Smith is supporting "Sununu, the Republican party and the agenda of George W. Bush."
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire Delegation Praises Bush Speech
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 12, 2002--New Hampshire's Republican congressional delegation reacted to President Bush's speech to the United Nations Thursday on Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein with resounding approval.
"I thought the president's speech was excellent," Sen. Judd Gregg said. "He really put forward the case why Hussein is a threat."
Rep. Charlie Bass said in a statement that he applauded Bush's resolve on Hussein and fully supports the effort to effect a change in leadership in Iraq.
"The President made a strong case that Iraq is violating U.N. resolutions demanding inspections of suspected weapons sites," Sen. Bob Smith, who was recently defeated in his primary bid for reelection by Rep. John Sununu, said in a press release.
Sununu said the president was "clear, forceful and direct."
Still, some of the lawmakers remained guarded on the real potential for a full-scale war.
While Bush, in his address before the U.N. General Assembly, promised that the United States was committed to confronting Iraqi noncompliance with U.N. resolutions, he did not set a formal timetable for attack.
Such a timetable would be "premature," Gregg said.
"The president is pulling together a coalition and getting support from the international community," Gregg said, adding he suspected the United States would have the support of most democracies around the world.
In his speech, Bush directed responsibility to the United Nations, telling the General Assembly that the world body was at a crossroads and could become "irrelevant."
But Bush did not offer any specifics on actions against Iraq, instead issuing demands of Hussein.
"I don't think (Bush has) made a clear determination of what the next steps are in the region," Sununu said after praising the speech.
Sununu added that the United States was already "engaged" in the region. He cited no-fly zones enforced by the United States and Britain in northern Iraq, as well as recent air-to-air combat in the region.
All of these steps, Sununu said, already serve the interests of U.S. policy in opposition to Hussein.
Bush stressed Iraq's lack of compliance with a multitude of U.N. resolutions dating as far back as 1991, most notably in relation to Iraq's development of biological weapons, its refusal to allow weapons inspectors into the country in the past four years, and its potential for nuclear development.
"Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it could create nuclear weapons within a year," Bush told U.N. delegates from around the world. He called any U.N. inaction on Iraq a "reckless gamble."
But Gregg said he thought that U.S. aid to Afghanistan, and its ongoing involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, could slow an offensive on Iraq.
"Resources are always an issue," he said. But Gregg added he thought that Bush would not "move forward in Iraq" until the military could guarantee minimal loss of American life.
"We cannot afford to wait to let Saddam Hussein build weapons of mass destruction" that could be used against Americans at home and abroad, Smith agreed.
"My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolution, but the purpose of the U.S. should not be doubted," Bush said. "The Security Council resolutions will be enforced or action will be unavoidable."
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Washington Media Sound Off on Sununu Primary Win
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 11, 2002--National and insider Washington media outlets wrote Wednesday about Rep. John Sununu's historic New Hampshire Republican primary victory over two-term Sen. Bob Smith (R-NH) as if it were a decision that probably had been made three years ago.
A New York Times headline read "Senator Loses Nomination After Changing Party Twice" while a Washington Post article called Smith an "idiosyncratic conservative" whose "decision to quit the (Republican) party planted the seeds of his defeat."
Sununu won 53 percent of the vote in Tuesday's Senate primary to Smith's 45 percent.
The Washington Times reported that "Mr. Smith lost last night after his strongholds in the northern part of the state did not give him enough votes to close the gap." But most major newspapers said the key to his defeat was his departure from the GOP in 1999 to run as an independent for president after he delivered a speech on the Senate floor harshly criticizing the party only to rejoin it three months later.
The Washington take focused on the national GOP support that Smith's decision to run for president may have swung to Sununu, the son of former Granite State governor and White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu.
"The White House and the National Republican Senatorial Committee had watched the Sununu-Smith race closely - even playing a behind-the-scenes role in persuading Mr. Sununu to give up his House seat and make the Senate run," The Washington Times reported.
In what will be a tight race with Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen for a key seat in the narrowly divided Democratic-controlled Senate, several Washington insiders see Sununu's appeal to centrist Republicans and independents as important.
"Shaheen's got her work cut out for her, as she must convince quite a few independents who backed Sununu" in the primary "to vote Democratic in just a few short weeks. It's not an easy sell," Hotline's Editor-in-Chief Chuck Todd wrote on the political publication's website Wednesday.
"Mr. Sununu is a soft-spoken conservative House member whom many New
Hampshirites perceive as slightly more centrist than" Smith, wrote The Washington Times.
However, others say Sununu's "soft-spoken" tactics may need to change.
"Sununu's low-key campaign has been getting a lot of criticism inside the Beltway," Jennifer Duffy, senior Senate editor at the Cook Political Report, said in an interview, referring to insider Washington opinion.
But Duffy also said that she thought the "national Republicans will make sure there will be a better-run campaign" against Shaheen.
"Polls have consistently showed that Sununu runs stronger against Shaheen than Smith," Todd wrote. "The primary battle between the two Republicans was not nearly as divisive as it could have been (or Democrats had hoped for)."
Moreover, Duffy said, Shaheen has failed to gain ground despite running unopposed in the Democratic primary and serving as governor.
"Her numbers have not moved," Duffy said. "The hardest place in American politics to be right now" is as a governor. She added that this is because history has shown that - at least at the state level - difficult financial times reflect on governors more than on other officials.
Todd, and others in Washington, certainly appreciated the race's historic significance, which he said "shouldn't get lost in all the hype surrounding" the general election campaign.
"Smith is just the third incumbent senator to lose a primary since 1980 and just the second elected senator to lose a primary since that time," he said.
The Hill, a weekly newspaper covering Congress, also noted the historic meaning. "In the Granite State, a politician's candidacy is never a sure thing - even if he is a 12-year incumbent senator who hasn't always walked the party line," the paper wrote on its website Wednesday.
The unusual result was fueled by the fact that "many prominent Republicans, including close advisers to President Bush," supported Sununu in the primary, said a report in The New York Times.
The paper added that Sununu also benefited from the backing of many "party leaders in New Hampshire "because of his family ties in the state and because of discomfort with Mr. Smith."
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
Bush Aide Nixes Importing Drugs From Canada
By Max Heuer
WASHINGTON, Sept. 10, 2002--The top health care advisor to President Bush Tuesday criticized importing cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, saying the idea is neither safe nor practical and touting the administration's own plan to lower the cost of prescription drugs.
"What seniors really need is a prescription drug bill. (Bush administration officials) don't see logistically how (importing drugs from Canada) is going to end up working," said Dr. Mark McClellan, a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.
But New Hampshire residents-the number is unknown-already have found a way to make it work through privately organized bus trips across the border.
"These are prescription drugs that are manufactured in the U.S. and approved by the FDA (the Food and Drug Administration). It makes perfect sense for seniors, and it makes perfect sense for state governments," said Pamela Walsh, press secretary for Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. Shaheen, a Democrat, is running for U.S. Senate this year.
New Hampshire prescription drug expenditures increased 17 percent in fiscal year 2001, costing the state's residents $88 million, according to a study by the Business for Affordable Medicine coalition.
About 147,796 residents of New Hampshire 65 or older, and none of them receive prescription drug coverage through Medicare, according to the New Hampshire Medication Bridge Program.
McClellan, however, dangled the Medicare+Choice plan - a program that fuses Medicare managed care plans with Medicare private fee-for-service plans - as the cornerstone to the administration's health plan for 2003 and an answer to low-income seniors' prescription drug questions.
According to McClellan, 90 percent of Medicare+Choice plan members have access to an "affordable" premium on prescription drugs or no premium at all.
HMOs have been dropping the program because of its cost. But the House Medicare bill, H.R. 4954, passed in July, would allot $3 billion to HMOs offering Medicare+Choice plans to seniors, according to Congress Daily, a publication that covers legislation on Capitol Hill.
The Senate failed to pass four Medicare bills before the August recess - including a tri-partisan effort co-sponsored by Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-VT). But McClellan expressed optimism that the Senate would take bipartisan action on Medicare in the coming weeks.
"I believe and hope there is a real chance for action," he said. "The administration is fully engaged in working with the Senate."
But McClellan put the final responsibility for passage on Senate leaders.
"We need the leadership in the Senate to enact improvements in
Medicare benefits," he said in a speech at the American Association of Health Plans conference.
"Seniors need access to what everyone else has in the private sector," he said.
Published in The Manchester Union Leader, in New Hampshire.
