Category: Steve Peoples
Living In The Bulls-Eye
WASHINGTON, Oct. 10–I try not to let it stop me from living my life as usual.
So, as I do most weekdays, I went for a run through Rock Creek Park a few days ago. I told myself I’d be safe. That the sniper who’s been killing people in this area probably wouldn’t target a jogger in a wooded area. That it’d be too difficult to get off a clean shot. I told myself he seemed to prefer gas stations and shopping centers or middle schools and post offices.
My building is located in a quiet area on Connecticut Avenue, about two blocks from the National Zoo and about five miles from where a sniper killed five people last week.
So, before leaving my building, I stopped off to tell a few friends I was about to go jogging. I laughed as I instructed them to call the police if I didn’t come back in an hour.
But I was only half joking.
As I stretched on the front steps of the building I casually glanced at the rush-hour traffic headed out of the city. I saw more white delivery trucks and vans than I could count. I wondered if the description of the sniper’s vehicle could have been any more vague.
I thought about what we know. Police say the sniper drives a white truck with no distinguishable markings. His victims are normal people, doing normal things in normal places. And he’s good at what he does. He has killed seven people in 10 separate shootings in eight days (as of Thursday afternoon), most of them killed by a single shot.
I crossed the street and started jogging towards the park. When I reached the trail in the woods I tried to put the sniper out of my mind. But I was painfully aware of the fact that there were no other joggers on the popular jogging trail. I wondered if the overcast weather or the sniper had kept them away.
I was startled several times by the sound of unseen wildlife rustling leaves. I was jumpy. I scanned the ridges along the sides of the trail. I told myself I was being silly and tried to think of something else. But I started thinking how easily a sniper could sneak into these woods and wait for an unsuspecting jogger. I ran a little faster.
When I got home I spoke with my girlfriend on the phone and told her things were fine. I told her that the people who live here know that the odds of being killed by a sniper are slim to none. I told her that it’s something we laugh about. That when we walk down the street we jokingly hide behind each other. That we sometimes playfully jump behind trees when white trucks pass.
But the truth is that we are afraid.
But there is still life to live. I still walk along Connecticut Avenue to the Metro station most days. I still run through the park most afternoons. And I still get my morning coffee at a café a couple of blocks away most mornings.
But now, I prefer to go places with other people. I prefer to be inside. I’ve been told fewer people leave their offices during lunchtime. I don’t blame them. Some coffee shops and restaurants have removed their patio furniture to discourage people from sitting outside, at the request of the police.
Things have changed here in the last week. I am always thinking about the sniper. And judging from most of my colleagues, so are they.
I knew there would be some sacrifices in living in Washington. That if there was going to be another major terrorist attack it would probably be here. But no one expected this kind of terrorism. Everyday people doing everyday things are dying.
It’s scary, but do not think that Washington has become a ghost town full of people hiding away in their homes. Many of us are afraid, but we are living our lives.
And after work today I’ll run through the park again. I’ll tell my friends where I’m going and I’ll stretch on the front steps. Then I’ll talk to my girlfriend and tell her I’m fine.
Published in Foster’s Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
N.H. Natives Edgy About Sniper
WASHINGTON, Oct. 10--Last year there were 20 murders in Montgomery County. Last week the Maryland community of almost 900,000 people that lies just north of Washington saw five murders in a 16-hour period.
"This is the kind of thing we're used to seeing in other jurisdictions," said 1972 Portsmouth High School graduate Steven Silverman, who now serves as president of the Montgomery County Council. "We've had other tragedies, but this brings out the real definition of terror, that you just don't know who's going to be next or where it's going to be."
Since last Wednesday, a sniper has killed seven people and seriously wounded two others in the greater Washington area. Police and federal authorities have been working around the clock to find the person or people responsible for the attacks, but so far report little progress in the case that has area residents on edge.
"We are trying to go about business as usual, but the people who were killed were doing exactly that," Silverman said. "So now all of us are thinking twice about which gas station we go to, where we park our cars and where we go shopping."
Area residents are most startled by the complete randomness of the attacks. Victims have been killed at gas stations, a grocery store and outside a post office. Another was killed while mowing the lawn of a car dealership; an elderly man was fatally wounded while walking down the street. Monday morning a 13-year-old boy was shot moments after being dropped off at school by his aunt.
"I consider this of the same ilk of bin Laden and his cronies. There's no difference here," said Dover native Alec Koromilas, who works in Washington during the week as an administrative appeals judge. "Someone wants to strike terror in the hearts of innocent people. The mentality is one and the same."
Police have no reported suspects in the case. They say the sniper or snipers most often kill their victims with a single shot at long range, making it difficult to find eyewitnesses. Police have not released much information about the sniper, except that he may be driving a white truck or minivan.
"I didn't know how many white trucks were out there until this happened," Silverman said. "It's a constant focus. It's hard to believe it's only been a week because it feels like a month."
Koromilas said he's noticed fewer people at outdoor cafes and restaurants near his home on Connecticut Avenue, less than five miles from the Montgomery County shootings. "What I don't see on the streets is kids riding bicycles anymore," he said. "There's an absence of a lot of kids, which is a shame."
Since the shooting of the 13-year-old outside his school Monday morning, area schools have been in a lock-down status, which prohibits children from spending any time outside and requires doors to be locked at all times.
Silverman, who has a 10-year-old son in an area school, said most parents are concerned about their children's safety. He said he makes sure his son is safely inside the school when he drops him off at the front door and keeps him inside as much as possible.
Koromilas said he's noticed coworkers joking about the sniper, saying they're about to run out of gas because they've been avoiding gas stations. "People are joking about situations they fear," he said. Three people have been killed at gas stations since last Wednesday.
Koromilas said that he's not afraid for his personal safety as he goes through his daily life here but that he pays more attention to his surroundings. "If some psycho wants to take a gun and start shooting people I don't think we have to stop our lives and hide," he said. "We just have to be aware."
Since Sept. 11 of last year the people of Washington have become more aware of potentially dangerous situations, Koromilas said. But he said the randomness and proximity of these attacks make the threat unique. "He could be anywhere at any time or any place," he said. "This guy isn't just somewhere else. This guy is within a stone's throw away."
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Collins Backs Iraq Plan
WASHINGTON, Oct. 10--Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, on Thursday endorsed President Bush's plan to use force against Iraq, saying that authorizing military action would be the best way to avoid war.
The Senate later overwhelmingly voted to approve the resolution, which had been approved by the House earlier that day, meaning that President Bush could have authorization to use force against Iraq early next week.
"By early next week it could be on the president's desk," said Dave Lackey, spokesman for Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. "I think that Congress is on an express train out of here. They're ready to go home, and this is the last major hurdle."
The House voted in favor of the resolution 296 to 133, while the Senate passed it, 77-23.
Collins had not committed to a position until Thursday, when she said that the president needs the strength of Congress behind him. "Only if Saddam understands that we are prepared to use military force will a peaceful means for disarming him have a chance to succeed," Collins said in a prepared statement. "In my view there are times in dealing with a tyrant when the best - indeed, perhaps the only - chance to avoid war is to express in unmistakable terms your willingness to wage it."
The resolution gives the president authority "to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to…enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
The entire New Hampshire delegation voted in favor of the Bush plan, as did Maine senators Collins and Snowe. Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, however, voted against the resolution. Allen favored an alternative version that would have required, not merely encouraged, the president to work with the United Nations.
Some lawmakers had criticized Bush's plan for being too broad, equating it to a blank check for the president to do as he pleases. But Collins said she supports the resolution in part because it encourages Bush to seek multilateral support before acting alone. The measure also gives Congress some oversight authority.
The president is required to report to Congress within 48 hours of launching any military action and to explain why diplomatic means were no longer sufficient to avoid war. He would also have to report to Congress every 60 days while military action continues.
Collins stressed her belief that the passage of the resolution did not necessitate military action. In fact, she said, it could help avert war. "The president correctly noted in his recent speech that the passage of this resolution does not mean that war is imminent and unavoidable," she said.
Following House passage of the bill, the president said he was pleased with Congress's progress. "Today's vote also sends a clear message to the Iraqi regime: it must disarm and comply with all existing U.N. resolutions, or it will be forced to comply," he said. "There are no other options for the Iraqi regime…. The days of Iraq acting as an outlaw state are coming to an end."
Collins said the world must ensure that Iraq is disarmed. "The risks are simply too catastrophic for the world to allow Iraq to continue on its present course," she said. "I believe our policy should be focused on disarming Iraq rather than regime change, much as I would like Saddam Hussein to be deposed."
Snowe's spokesman Lackey said that Congress was likely to be in session for the first few days of next week and then adjourn until after the November election. He said the Senate would probably pass a defense appropriations bill and a long-term continuing resolution to fund the government until after the election.
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
N.H. Delegation Supports Bush Resolution; Maine Not Committed
WASHINGTON, Oct. 03--New Hampshire lawmakers in the House and Senate openly support a resolution to give President Bush authority to use force against Iraq, while the Maine delegation may not be far behind.
Spokesmen for Maine Republican Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins said Thursday afternoon the senators think the administration's latest compromise resolution is "a step in the right direction" but stopped short of saying they would vote to support it.
Collins "did think the latest bipartisan resolution proposed by the administration is a considerable improvement over previous resolutions," her spokesman Joe Palmieri, said. "But she's still reviewing the language of the most current resolution and looking at any alternatives."
The administration and some congressional leaders reached agreement on a compromise resolution Wednesday that would authorize the president "to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to…enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."
Reps. John Sununu and Charlie Bass, R-N.H., have endorsed Wednesday's proposal, along with a majority of House Republicans. House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., recently joined the GOP in supporting the plan, all but ensuring that the measure would have enough Democratic support to pass the House next week, when it's expected to come to the floor.
Both of New Hampshire's Republican senators also support the resolution, but the Democratic leadership in the Senate has not committed to it. Instead, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said the Senate would be likely to vote on three versions of a resolution to use force against Iraq. The votes could come late next week.
Sen. Judd Gregg was critical of Daschle's reluctance to support Wednesday's compromise plan. "Unfortunately, the Democratic leadership of the Senate under Sen. Daschle has decided to be reticent in this area," said Gregg in a statement. "And I think that is a mistake."
Spokesmen for Snowe and Collins said the senators are continuing to speak with Democrats and Republicans about possible alternatives to Wednesday's resolution but thy wouldn't make their positions known until the issue comes to the floor next week.
"It's too early to say where she is," Snowe spokesman Dave Lackey said. "Sen. Snowe is reviewing the resolution, and she will announce her decision when debate starts on the floor."
A spokesman for Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, said the congressman also was undecided. "He's carefully examining the resolution, but he hasn't made up his mind," Allen spokesman Mark Sullivan said. "But he still feels we should exhaust all of our options in terms of diplomacy and working with our allies before taking any military action against Iraq."
Some Senate Democrats have criticized Wednesday's plan as being too broad, while most Republicans say it is an adequate compromise. The resolution encourages the president to "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council" but does not require U.N. approval. The president would be required to report to Congress within 48 hours of launching any military action to explain why diplomatic means were no longer sufficient to avoid war. He would also have to report to Congress every 60 days while military action continues.
Bass said that such congressional oversight and encouragement to work with the United Nations is a good thing. "I am confident that the president will be successful in his efforts to build support from the United Nations," he said in a statement. "Nevertheless, if the president decides he needs to act to protect Americans he has the authority under this resolution to do so."
Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., said Congress must support the president. "The president deserves our support in whatever mission he needs to conduct in Iraq to protect Americans and preserve our national security," he said in a statement.
Gregg agreed. "I do think it is important that we speak with one voice and [that] we lead the world," he said. "The president has shown leadership here, and we should support him on it."
No one would venture a guess as to when the issue might be resolved, though Bush has said he wants a resolution passed before the November election.
"We could be on this for all of October or we could be done next week," Lackey said. "We'll see."
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Area Senators Say Homeland Security Bill Unlikely
WASHINGTON, Oct. 02--Echoing the concerns of Senate leaders, area senators say passage of a homeland security bill before the November elections is less likely as each day passes
.
The Senate has been debating the bill to establish a Department of Homeland Security for more than four weeks, but has recently been stuck in a virtual stalemate over an amendment on union protections for federal workers.
Area senators said the bill might be set aside soon so the Senate can focus on other issues, including a resolution to use force against Iraq and the passage of a federal budget.
"The likelihood of the Senate passing Department of Homeland Security legislation looks dim, given the Iraq resolution debate that will take place and the appropriations bill that must be passed before Oct. 11," Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., said in an e-mail interview.
The Senate traditionally adjourns in early October in election years to allow candidates to campaign. Senate leaders have indicated Oct. 11 would be the adjournment date, leaving just over a week to pass a budget and debate the Iraq resolution.
"It's too early to write the obituary for the homeland security bill now," said Dave Lackey, spokesman for Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. But he acknowledged that passage of such a bill before the November elections is unlikely in light of the current gridlock.
A spokeswoman for Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, expressed similar thoughts. "The outlook right now looks like we won't get anything until after the election," Collins spokeswoman Felicia Knight said. "But I think there's always hope for progress as long as people continue to talk."
A spokesman for Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., didn't return repeated phone calls.
The proposed Department of Homeland Security would represent the largest restructuring of a government department in more than 50 years, with an estimated 170,000 employees and a $40 billion budget.
Smith said delaying the creation of the new department would be a mistake. "Any delay in passing legislation…is harmful since it will prevent the U.S. government from organizing and implementing the necessary infrastructure and policies to prevent further acts of terrorism," Smith said.
While none of the politicians wanted to cast blame, Knight said such gridlock often accompanies election-year congressional sessions. "That is an unfortunate byproduct of an election year, especially in such a closely divided Senate," she said.
The Senate is divided over a provision that would restrict President Bush's ability to remove union protections for federal employees. Senate Republicans say such flexibility is vital if the president is to adequately defend national security.
Lackey said Snowe, a moderate Republican, is frustrated that the two sides can't find a compromise. "This is an issue that senators should have been able to work out," he said. "They're looking for a bridge that would allow the president to maintain his authority while protecting workers' rights. That's been an elusive search."
The Maine senators expressed a desire to work beyond the likely Oct. 11 adjournment date if necessary to take care of unfinished business.
"The Senate has an obligation to finish its work even if that means staying in session until Election Day," Snowe's spokesman Lackey said. "The fact is time is running short. Senator Snowe believes they should be staying in nights and weekends until this gets done."
Collins's spokeswoman Knight agreed. "She's always wiling to stay and do the job."
A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said a decision to extend the Oct. 11 deadline or to work extended hours is still up in the air. "It's possible, but nothing has been agreed to," Daschle spokesman Ranit Schmelzer said.
Though Lackey said things don't look good now, he retains hope that this Congress will pass a homeland security bill. "Nothing's over 'til it's over," he said.
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Area Looks to Next Round of Base Closures
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26--The stakes are high.
Almost 4,300 jobs. More than $233 million in annual wages. Millions more pumped back into the local economy.
The seacoast community doesn't want to lose the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Area leaders don't think the shipyard will face a serious threat in the next round of base closures, scheduled for 2005, but Defense Department officials say every base is potentially on the chopping block. Including the shipyard.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he wants to eliminate 25 percent of active bases - more than 100 of about 425 such installations - in what defense officials say could be the final and most contentious round of closures yet. "We know there are too many unnecessary bases out there," Pentagon spokesman Glenn Flood said. "But some people say what's left is the real meat of the infrastructure. So we have communities that are probably going to be very vocal."
He said that no base would be exempt from the process. "We're starting with a blank sheet," Flood said. "We're looking at every base."
Complicating matters in the next round are President Bush's war on terror and the unrest in the Middle East. In gearing up for the fight to save their bases, community officials and politicians cite these new threats as cause for avoiding or delaying any further closures.
"Proponents can make a populist sounding appeal that we need all the bases we can get because of homeland security and the war on terror. The counter argument from the Pentagon is that these are bases we've determined we don't need," said Peter W. Singer, a national security expert at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "What you have is a duel between military and political need."
Communities in an estimated 20 states have created organizations to protect military bases from possible closure, including Portsmouth's Seacoast Shipyard Association. The groups will be intent on lobbying congressional leaders to spare their bases as the Pentagon creates a new Base Realignment and Closure Commission that will decide on any new closings.
The Shipyard Association released a report earlier this year outlining the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard's economic impact on the region, stating that the shipyard last year accounted for a civilian payroll of over $233 million to almost 4,300 employees from Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
In response to the war on terror, the Bush administration has increased its 2002 defense spending by $33 billion and requested an additional increase of $48 billion for 2003. Analysts predict that defense spending is likely to be sustained at such levels for at least a few years, giving local officials hope that the Pentagon might postpone plans to close any more military bases.
But that isn't likely, experts say.
"After Sept. 11 everyone thought that base closures would be thrown out the window. That's not the case," said Tim Ford, deputy executive director of the National Association of Installation Developers, a Washington group that deals with economic development at military sites. "I think the thought from the administration is they want to be able to use resources to fight the war on terrorism and not support infrastructure that they're not using," he said.
Congress's General Accounting Office released a report earlier this year stating that the Defense Department has saved $16.7 billion a year by closing more than 350 installations in the first four rounds of closures. The report outlines expected additional savings of $6 billion a year.
Ford said those savings are hard to argue with from the Pentagon's standpoint, even in light of terrorist threats and the potential war with Iraq.
"The military has already been up front [by saying that] they feel they have a 25 percent excess capacity," he said. "I don't think there's any scenario that they would feel they could change that number."
An area member of the Shipyard Association said he's not overly concerned that the next round of base closings will present a major threat to the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
"I guess I would be cautiously optimistic," said Russ Van Billiard, who is also a retired shipyard worker. "They should be in good shape but you never know."
In the last round of closures the Pentagon eliminated all but four of the nation's naval bases, leaving two on the East Coast and two on the West Coast, one of which is in Hawaii.
Van Billiard said that Portsmouth is the only shipyard that specializes in working on the Navy's 688-class nuclear submarine, which represents the vast majority of subs in the Navy's fleet. He said that the specialization probably saved the shipyard in the last round of closures in 1995 and should ensure its safety in the future.
Sen. Bob Smith, R-NH, a vocal opponent of base closings in the past, will step down in January as the state's senior senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee. A Smith spokeswoman said the senator has always fought closings. "He believes that our national defense should not be further reduced," Lisa Harrison said. "He believes the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is too integral a part of our nation's defense to even consider closure."
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, said that as a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense he would also work to protect the shipyard. "I will continue to work with the shipyard and the community, as I have done in the past, to guarantee that the vital role of the shipyard in our national defense is properly presented, understood and evaluated," he said.
Analysts say that instead of arguing against closures on the basis of the war on terror, communities should focus on a base's uniqueness, such as Portsmouth's ability to work on submarines.
"I don't find the homeland security argument convincing," said Singer of Brookings. "I think a better plan is to focus on making the base relevant."
Rep. Tom Allen, D-Maine, said that in addition to the shipyard's specialization, its workers make it invaluable.
"I'm very impressed by the way the Portsmouth yard has improved their productivity and performance," said Allen, who sits on the Armed Services Committee. "They're now starting to finish their projects on time and ahead of budget, and that's the most important thing they can do."
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Smith Back in Action
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25, 2002--Sen. Bob Smith, R-NH, has been a busy politician lately.
The lame-duck senator hasn't missed a Senate vote since last Thursday and attended all his committee meetings this week.
In the two weeks after losing the Sept. 10 primary, Smith missed the majority of Senate votes and all of his committee meetings.
A Smith spokeswoman had explained the absences by saying the senator's priorities had changed. "Last week's absences were due to some family circumstances and, as I indicated, right now his family comes before politics," Lisa Harrison said last Friday. "I can't tell you how many Little League games he might have missed over the years because of his job, but now his family is coming first."
Smith attended meetings of the Senate Armed Services and Environment and Public Works Committees on Monday and Wednesday. He also attended a top-secret briefing Wednesday with Vice President Dick Cheney.
The senator has cast a vote in all eight opportunities dating back to last Thursday.
Harrison said Wednesday that nothing has changed since last week.
"His priorities are still taking care of his New Hampshire constituents … and taking care of his professional and personal responsibilities," she said. "It's not that he wasn't back last week. It was just a matter of priorities, and things came up."
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Maine Moderates Yield Power in Homeland Security Debate
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25--The fate of a proposed Department of Homeland Security may depend on a handful of moderate senators, including Maine Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, political experts say.
The Senate, which is debating legislation to create the new Cabinet-level department, is divided almost along strict party lines over a provision in the bill that would allow President Bush to eliminate union protections for federal employees. The president has said he would veto any bill not granting him such authority.
Earlier in the week moderate Republican Sen. Lincoln D. Chafee of Rhode Island became the lone member of his party to have crossed party lines to endorse a Democratic plan that limits the president's authority in labor issues. Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia is the lone Democrat to announce his support of Bush's demand. Political experts predicted the move would give Democrats sufficient support to pass their version of the bill.
Chafee's defection has brought to the forefront the role of moderate senators, including Collins and Snowe, in a Senate where Democrats hold a one-seat majority.
"When you have a virtual tie in the Senate you're not going to get anything done unless you can somehow keep everyone together for the Democrats or persuade one or two individuals to cross party lines," said Norman Ornstein, congressional expert for the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank. "So the critical players in this become the moderates."
Ornstein estimated there are a halfdozen moderate Republicans and Democrats, including both Maine senators, who could change the fate of the Homeland Security Act.
Collins publicly expressed concerns about the Republican version of the bill late last week, prompting Republican leaders to slightly amend their proposal to include greater employee protections. The first-term senator now says she stands united with the Republicans.
"She has made up her mind and says she'll support the president," Felicia Knight, a Collins' spokesperson, said Wednesday.
Snowe, however, has openly met with Republicans and Democrats to discuss the issue, but her spokesman, Dave Lackey, said Wednesday: "She has not taken a final position on it. She is still very open to both sides."
Snowe met last week with a group of Senate moderates to discuss the labor provision and has been working with Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and John Breaux, D-La., who helped draft a Democratic compromise to the bill.
"She's trying to bridge the differences," Lackey said. "Thus far she has kept an open mind."
Political experts say moderates like Snowe and Collins get extreme pressure from each of their parties, but that their open-mindedness puts them in a position of power.
"Being undecided is potentially a powerful position to be in," said J. Mark Wrighton, assistant professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.
He said that party leaders often make concessions to accommodate their moderate members. "You can gang up on someone and lobby them, but you have to have something to give," he said.
Snowe spokeswoman Knight said that Republican leaders apply pressure on occasion, but are generally respectful of her position. "They understand that the people of Maine want someone like her who is open-minded," she said. "But because she is a moderate they understand that her vote is not taken for granted by either side."
Wrighton said the timing of elections also could help push a moderate in one direction or the other.
He said that Collins, who will face off against Democratic challenger Chellie Pingree in November, is aware of the political ramifications of her decisions. "This is all taking place in the environment of the election," Wrighton said. "And so Susan Collins is thinking fairly closely of the politics of this and how it's going to play out in Maine."
Wrighton said such political pressure could be a good thing.
"In thinking about their own re-elections they're forced to think about their constituents," he said. "It forces them to do their jobs, which is to be representatives."
But Ornstein said that above political or party pressure, most moderates value substance. "These are people who genuinely struggle with the substance of these issues and often face substantial political pressure from their parties to support issues they sometimes don't agree with."
Snowe spokesperson Lackey agreed. "(Snowe) makes her decisions based on factual merits, not party pressure," he said. "This is not a party issue. This is a matter of national security."
A vote on the proposed Homeland Security Department could come as early as Thursday.
The department would have a $40 billion budget, combining two dozen federal agencies and nearly 200,000 employees.
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Congressional Members Skeptical of Iraqi Decision
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19, 2002--Most area congressional members responded Tuesday with skepticism to Saddam Hussein's recent promise to allow unconditional weapons inspections in Iraq.
"This announcement by Iraq is a first step," Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., said in a statement. "However, it is rhetoric we have heard before, and compliance with U.N. resolutions will speak louder than any statement Iraq can issue."
Others agreed.
"I don't think it changes anything," Rep. John Sununu, R-N.H., said "It's perfectly reasonable to believe that anything Iraq does is a cynical move."
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan announced Monday that Iraq had agreed to an unconditional return for U.N. weapons inspectors. A timeline for inspections has not yet been set, but Annan said Iraqi leaders were willing to discuss the logistics immediately.
The Bush administration and many congressional Republicans view Iraq's promise skeptically, while others feel cautiously optimistic.
"If they're willing to give unconditional inspections another try, maybe we can avoid military action," Tom Allen, D-Maine, said. "But that's ultimately the President's decision."
He said that Iraq "feels the heat" from mounting international pressure and that its change of policy could be an opportunity for a peaceful resolution. "You can't ever trust Hussein, but there may be a way to effectively disarm him without engaging in a war," he said. "If there is an opportunity to do that, we should explore it."
Rep. Charlie Bass, R-N.H., issued a statement that, while expressing similar skepticism, also supported a peaceful course of action if possible "I am encouraged that Iraq has taken this step…and remain hopeful that military action can be avoided," he said.
The United States is pressing the U.N. to pass a new resolution addressing Iraq in the coming weeks. International leaders have recently supported measures to resume weapons inspections inside Iraq, but few have openly endorsed the Bush administration's ultimate goal of regime change.
"The next move is up to the U.N. Security Council," said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow in government studies at the Brookings Institution, a Washington. think tank. He said that some countries-such as China and Russia-would regard Iraq's decision as "considerable movement," and might favor a resolution to re-establish inspections before making any decisions on military action.
.
Some congressional Democrats said that international support-with the principal exception of Britain-for military action might be difficult to find.
"I think we'd be hard pressed to find allies to support anything beyond inspections at this point," Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said.
Allen agreed. "The correct policy for the United States is to make the elimination of weapons of mass destruction the goal and not necessarily regime change," he said. "If we can eliminate weapons of mass destruction we should."
But most of New Hampshire's Republicans support the President's goal of regime change.
"Saddam's gesture to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq does not negate the threat his regime poses to U.S. interests, and those of our allies and friends," Sen. Bob Smith, R, N.H., said in a statement. "The President has firmly and unequivocally stated his position on Iraq, and I support his views."
The Administration is pressing Congress to debate and adopt an Iraqi resolution before its planned October break. But area members of Congress would not say what the resolution might entail or if it would be passed before the recess.
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
Sununu Looks to New Opponent
WASHINGTON, Sept. 01--After narrowly defeating incumbent Senator Bob Smith Tuesday in one of the more heated Republican primaries in recent memory, U.S. Rep. John Sununu now must dramatically shift the focus of his Senate campaign to the Democratic candidate, Gov. Jeanne Shaheen.
Because Sununu shared many political views with his primary opponent, his campaign focused on Smith's alleged lack of loyalty to the GOP and generational differences between the 38-year-old Sununu and the 61-year-old Smith.
The Sununu campaign now is likely to draw attention to perceived weaknesses in Shaheen's six-year tenure as governor.
The New Hampshire Republican Party has given Sununu a head start.
"The GOP was active all summer running ads against Shaheen while Sununu was busy with Smith," said Linda Fowler, director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth College.
The ads have been attacking the governor for failing to find a permanent school-funding fix, for failing to deal with high property taxes and for previously endorsing a state sales tax. The state House rejected the idea.
State GOP leaders say Shaheen's inability to resolve such problems speak to her ineffectiveness as a governor "Her failure to solve those problems or to be effective is definitely going to be an issue in the campaign," said Julie Teer, communications director for the state Republican Party. "This is a governor who's shown nothing but a lack of leadership in the six years she's been in office."
But Democratic supporters say it's exactly Shaheen's leadership that most sets her apart from three-term Rep. Sununu, who has been criticized as being a "yes-man" for Republican Congressional leaders and for the Bush administration.
"I do think there's a question of [Sununu's] priorities," said Colin Van Ostern, communications director for Shaheen. "For the last six months he's said over and over again he hasn't done anything that's not in the best interest of the Republican Party."
Van Ostern said Shaheen's record has shown that she is a leader, willing to ignore party lines to pursue the best interests of New Hampshire's people.
Fowler of the Rockefeller Center said Sununu's ties to the Republican Party at the national level would probably bring plenty of financial support, something Sununu badly needs, as his most recently reported fundraising levels were far lower than Shaheen's.
The Center for Responsive Politics reports that Shaheen raised over $3.2 million for her campaign, doubling Sununu's total of $1.6 million. As of Aug. 21, Sununu had spent $1.1 million, leaving over $480,000 in cash on hand, while Shaheen spent $1.8 million, leaving over $1.4 million, according to the center.
Despite the current numbers, few expect Sununu to have any problems raising more money. "I have no doubt he'll get all the support he'll need from Washington," Van Ostern said. "We expect [Shaheen] to be outspent."
Fowler said Sununu's father's national influence as a former New Hampshire governor and White House chief of staff will help his cause. "His name will certainly ensure that he's going to have a lot of money," she said.
But she added that Republican incumbents across the country are generally facing more difficult re-election campaigns than Democrats, meaning popular Republicans may not be able to travel to the state to help Sununu.
But Republican leaders say they are committed to helping the GOP retain the New Hampshire seat in any way they can. "Being 50 to 49 in the Senate, we can't afford not to pay attention," said Dan Allen, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. "We're going to ensure that Sununu has the resources he needs to get his the message out."
Critics say that Sununu, a newcomer to politics in 1996, has yet to prove himself in a difficult election.
He defeated a weak Democratic challenger, Peter Flood, in 1998. Two years later, he narrowly defeated Democratic newcomer Martha Fuller Clark with 53 percent of the vote.
Fowler said that after analyzing those races, she had some questions about Sununu. "I just thought, 'Does this guy really know how to run a tight race?'" Tuesday's primary was clearly the most difficult battle in Sununu's young political life, and Fowler said the heated race might have given him the experience he needed to be an effective candidate.
"Now he seems to be much more effective," she said. "I think he just learned."
Recent polls have indicated that Sununu holds a slight edge over Shaheen, something that may have encouraged Republican voters to back Sununu in the primary.
However, Democrats say polls can be misleading. "Polls in late August have her down one point, so there's no question it's a dead heat," Van Ostern said. "But there's really only one poll that matters, and that's in November."
Published in Foster's Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
