Category: Fall 2005 Newswire
Veterans Affairs Department Celebrates 75th Birthday
By Tara Fehr
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 – Today is not only a celebration of America’s veterans, but the 75th anniversary of the establishment of a federal agency to provide health and other benefits to veterans and their families.
With an increasing number of military men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, the quality and timeliness of that health care is still a primary concern for many veterans as well as for the Department of Veterans Affairs, created in 1989 to replace the Veterans Administration.
Waiting to receive treatment is a problem for many veterans, but there has been an improvement, according to Rep. Robert Simmons, R-2 nd District, who served on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee for four years.
When he first came to Congress, Simmons said, Connecticut veterans could wait a year or longer for the VA to address their claims, but now the backlog is reduced. All claims, including education, pension and disability compensation, are included in the backlog.
“Once you get in the door it’s excellent,” Joe Davis, director of public affairs for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, said of the VA benefits system. But as of last week, he said, about 763,000 claims remain unsettled.
Simmons said the department is part of the problem.
“It’s an inefficient system,” Simmons said. “A lot of the money that we spend on the VA is to sustain these inefficiencies.”
For example, if veterans want to get their medicine through the department, prescriptions from civilian doctors can not be used. Instead, they would need a physical and complete diagnosis by a VA. Simmons said this could take up to a year.
“This is ridiculous,” Simmons said. “That’s part of what contributes to the backlog.”
Laurie Tranter, a VA public affairs official, said the program does not have a standard waiting time because each case is different, depending on the location of the claim and the health care needs of the veteran.
According to Simmons, there have been improvements as a result of legislation. Before he ran for Congress, he said, active-duty military families in his district were living off food stamps and veterans weren’t receiving adequate health care through the VA.
“When I ran for Congress veteran issues were one of my issues,” Simmons said. “I believed that the United States of America had not kept its promise to its veterans.”
During his four years on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, funding for veterans’ health care was increased by 38 percent and overall VA spending was increased by 50 percent, he said.
The VA has $30.8 billion in its discretionary budget for 2006, up from last year’s $30.6 billion. The senior Democrat on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Rep. Lane Evans of Illinois., said this increase is not enough to keep pace with growing “medical inflation” rates resulting from today’s wars.
“The growth in the number of VA patients is almost twice the amount of growth in resources available per patient,” Evans said.
Part of this growth is due to the return of service members from Iraq and Afghanistan, 15 percent of whom will develop post-traumatic stress disorder, according to a report last year by the Government Accountability Office(GAO).
The report said the VA lacked “information needed to determine whether it can meet an increase in demand for Veteran Affairs post-traumatic stress disorder services.” It stated that the department did not have enough veteran centers and facilities.
After meeting with officials from the GAO early this year, the department issued this response: “GAO failed to incorporate our data in their report.. We welcome any evaluation of our programs; we ask only that accuracy guide the process.”
An estimated 430,000 soldiers returned from Iraq and Afghanistan this year. Of that number about 119,000 asked for health care through the VA and about 36,000 asked for mental health care, with 16,000 receiving a provisional diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, the VA’s Tranter said.
The department can only help veterans who enroll in the program, she said.
When you look at the number of patients enrolled in the department’s health care system the number diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder is small, Tranter said.
Mental disorders are one of the three biggest medical problems that veterans face, along with joint and back disorders and dental problems, she said. These issues have only been addressed in the past few years.
While on the committee, Simmons sponsored a bill that called for chiropractic and dental care through the VA health system. That bill became law.
“This is a way of bringing the VA to current standards,” Simmons said. “How’s a veteran going to get a job without any teeth?”
Veterans with mental health disabilities also have a hard time maintaining jobs and often end up homeless. The VA estimates that more than one-third of the adult homeless population are veterans.
“Traditionally, the military deals with health care as a physical phenomena, but America has overcome that.” Simmons said.
The VA’s homeless assistance programs serve about 40,000 homeless veterans a year, with about $231 million budgeted to support the programs, according to the department’s Web site.
Health care for veterans continues to be a high priority for many in Congress.
“The system is facing a financial crisis, yet the administration’s continuing response is to force veterans to pick up the slack – impose new fees, increase co-payments and force thousands of veterans who need care to go find it elsewhere,” Evans said.
Brooke Adams, a spokeswoman for Steven Buyer, R-Ind., the chairman of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, said that every piece of committee legislation affects health care. For example, the House unanimously passed Buyer’s bill to improve management of information technology within the VA and the Department of Defense, and that will ultimately improve the quality and efficiency of veterans’ health care,.
Health care concerns will continue to increase as more soldiers come back from Iraq and Afghanistan. Evans considers this part of the continuing costs of the war.
“Costs of wars extend past the last shot,” Davis of the Veterans of Foreign Wars said.
####
‘Two-hundred Million to Run a Corporation?’
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10-Rep. Barney Frank and Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin introduced legislation Thursday that they said would help control skyrocketing executive salaries and increase accountability at public companies.
"Corporations brag about cost controls, but they also brag about how much they pay their executives," Frank said at a press conference introducing the Protection Against Executive Compensation Abuse Act. "I have not discovered a race of super-beings. who deserve this astronomical compensation."
The payment of corporate leaders has become an issue of increasing concern in the past several years as many top executives received annual compensation packages exceeding $100 million, even, in some cases, after their companies lost money or entered bankruptcy. From 2003 to 2004, the median total compensation received by CEOs of the top U.S. companies increased 30 percent, according to data from the Corporate Library.
Frank's bill focuses on increasing the transparency of public companies' financial statements and requiring full disclosure of executive compensation plans and policies, changes that Frank contended would allow investors to make better-informed decisions about purchasing stocks and casting shareholder votes.
"If this bill becomes law, I think it would accelerate the trend towards bringing salaries under control," Frank said.
The bill also addresses CEOs who negotiate mergers or sales that may not be in the best interest of their company but results in millions of dollars of additional payment for the company's executives.
In such cases, companies would be required to hold a shareholder vote on any additional compensation that the CEO would receive as a result of the sale.
Galvin noted that under current law, merger and acquisition information is often very hard to uncover, specifically citing his own attempts to learn the details of Procter and Gamble's purchase of Boston-based Gillette. That deal earned Gillette chief James Kilts a reported $153 million and was expected to result in nearly 6,000 lost jobs.
Because many executive compensation plans include performance bonuses, the proposed legislation also contains measures to ensure that company chiefs are not hitting their goals through use of what Frank called "creative accounting."
Corporations would be required to take back incentive compensation if it is discovered that financial statements were manipulated or changed to indicate that performance goals had been reached.
Beyond the legal implications, Frank said, it is simply not acceptable for corporate executives to receive such large salaries.
"I am offended by this morally," Frank said. "Two-hundred million to run a corporation? Just for doing their job?"
Galvin expressed optimism that the bill, if passed, would have positive ramifications for shareholders and average workers.
"How do we protect the financial future of Americans?" Galvin asked. "This bill is an important part of doing that."
South Coast Seniors Prepare for Changes in Medicare
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10-More than 130 people crowded into Brooklawn Park in New Bedford last Friday to attend an information session about the new Medicare prescription drug benefit. So many people showed up, according to one of the organizers, that they ran out of chairs.
The attendees asked questions throughout the presentation, and afterwards approached Andrea Mendousa Priest, regional director of Serving the Health Information Needs of Elders (SHINE), with more concerns.
"People just want to make sure they understand what to do next," Priest said. "They're hearing a lot about it, but they're feeling in limbo."
Enrollment for Medicare's new prescription drug coverage begins on Tuesday, with benefits available beginning Jan. 1. The implementation of the program represents a milestone for Medicare, the federal health insurance program for the elderly and people with certain disabilities.
"The key thing is that for the first time, everyone who is on Medicare will have prescription drug coverage," said Dr. Charlotte Yeh, administrator of the Boston regional office of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
Medicare has traditionally covered hospital stays and routine medical care. However, only beneficiaries who purchased private supplemental insurance policies (so-called medigap insurance) or those enrolled in Medicare Advantage Plans-a managed care option akin to an HMO-received any prescription coverage.
The Medicare Modernization Act, signed into law in 2003, created a system for supplying this missing benefit. Private insurance companies will provide a selection of prescription drug plans that meet federal requirements for coverage and affordability.
Those currently enrolled in basic Medicare will have the option of selecting one of these plans or switching to an Advantage Plan that includes prescription coverage.
People who already have separate prescription coverage-from a union, a retirement plan, or one of the costlier medigap policies-will receive letters analyzing whether Medicare or their existing plan would provide better coverage.
Seniors who now receive their medications through Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income people, will receive their prescription coverage under Medicare as of Jan. 1. They must choose a plan before that date or they will be automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan.
Standard coverage will pay 75 percent of drug costs, after a $250 deductible, up to $2,250 in total drug spending. To protect against catastrophic expenditures, all of the prescription plans will pay 95 percent of all costs after a beneficiary's annual out-of-pocket drug expenses have reached $3,600.
Some plans will fill part of the coverage gap in exchange for a higher premium. And all plans call for co-payments by beneficiaries that vary according to the cost of the drug.
Monthly premiums for the 44 plans that will be available in Massachusetts range from $7.32 to $65, and some offer a reduced or no-cost deductible. The premiums are in addition to the premiums Medicare beneficiaries already pay for medical coverage.
Many low-income seniors will qualify for additional assistance that will reduce or eliminate premiums, deductibles and drug co-payments. In Massachusetts, people who are currently beneficiaries of the Prescription Advantage program may also receive aid to help them cover their expenses.
"The Prescription Advantage program will fill some of the gaps that are not covered by [Medicare]," said Charles Sisson, executive director of Coastline Elderly Services. "[It] kind of fills in the holes."
Seniors will be able to select a plan anytime between Nov. 15 and next May 15. For those who enroll before the end of the year, coverage will begin on Jan. 1. Those who miss the May deadline can still enroll, but will have to pay a premium penalty of 1 percent for each month after May they are not enrolled.
"It really behooves people to sign up for a plan so they don't face a penalty down the road," Dr. Yeh said. The new program will provide an average savings of around $1,000, according to Dr. Yeh.
Though the program is expected to provide a significant benefit to seniors, it is likely that navigating the complicated maze of options will be confusing to some.
"It's very clear that this is revolutionary," Sisson said. "But it's something that is quite overwhelming to many, many seniors."
Dr. Yeh recommended that all Medicare recipients, or their caregivers, prepare to make a choice by taking stock of their current prescription drug situation. She suggested that each person create a list of all the medications he or she currently takes, the costs associated with each of these and the pharmacies he or she uses.
"What I like to tell seniors is, 'Don't panic, you've got time to think this through,' " she said.
Once seniors have gathered the needed information they have several options. Online tools will be available at www.medicare.gov to guide users through the process of finding plans in their area that are affordable and cover all necessary prescriptions.
The less internet-savvy can call the Medicare help line or a local agency such as SHINE or Coastline Elderly Services (see sidebar). Trained counselors will collect information from the callers and help them select a plan that fits their needs.
"We have people that are trained to sit down with them, go over the various plans and . help pick the best plan for them," Sisson said.
Counselors will outline what options are available to each person, based on the beneficiary's needs and current Medicare coverage. Because not all plans cover all drugs, they will also help seniors make sure that they select a plan that includes all or most of their medications.
Coastline Elderly Services and SHINE are also running educational programs and information sessions.
The responsibility for selecting a plan, however, ultimately belongs to each individual, said Dr. Yeh, who used to work in emergency medicine.
"I used to see patients who got sick . because they weren't taking their drugs, because they couldn't afford it," Dr. Yeh said. "For those who don't have coverage-what a wonderful thing we are offering. But it doesn't mean that they're not going to have to act thoughtfully and make a choice."
Lawmakers Look to Protect Religion in Workplace
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - When it passed in 1965, the Civil Rights Act was a landmark step for the rights of black Americans. Now an unlikely, bipartisan group of legislators wants to expand the law's protections to include religious working Americans.
At issue is the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which would, among other things, require employers to make a "bona fide" effort to accommodate an employee's religion-related needs and would specifically exempt the way an employee dresses and when they take time off from being included in consideration of whether he or she can perform the essential functions of the job.
Under current law, employees may be let go for their religious practices or observances if accommodating these needs constitutes an undue burden on the employer. The bill would define more specifically what would constitute an undue burden on employers.
According to Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.), one of the bill's sponsors in the House, the courts have interpreted that burden too loosely.
"The Supreme Court has effectively thwarted the intent of Congress," he said.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), the bill's other House sponsor, agreed. She said that some court rulings indicate that "any hardship is an undue hardship."
Souder said that the bill enjoys "broad bipartisan support" in both houses of Congress and added that it has caused unexpected people to reach across the aisle - it is sponsored in the Senate by Rick Santorum (R-Penn.) and. John Kerry (D-Mass.).
The House Education and Workforce Committee's subcommittee on employer-employee relations held hearings Thursday on the bill.
Rep. John Tierney (D-Salem) said the hearing provided a welcome opportunity to learn more about the bill and noted the importance of achieving the right balance between employee's rights and employer's needs.
"We must protect workers' rights, including their freedom from all types of discrimination, religious or otherwise," said Tierney.
One dissent to the generally positive view of the bill came from Camille A. Olson, who was at the hearing representing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. According to Olson, the current protections of employees' religious civil rights are sufficient.
Samuel A. Marcosson, the associate dean of the University of Louisville's Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, also voiced concerns that the bill might "cross the line into non-neutrality."
"Government must be neutral between religions and between religion and non-religion," he said.
Marcosson expressed concern that the bill excluded non-economic factors that could contribute to an undue hardship determination, such as whether accommodation of a religious person's needs would infringe on the rights of that person's co-workers.
Richard Land, the only expert witness at the hearing who was neither a lawyer nor a member of Congress, urged the subcommittee to pass the bill.
Land, who was there representing the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said it is important for citizens not just to have the right to believe what they want, but also the right to act on that belief.
"This principle unites people of diverse faith because we all have challenges to our religious practice," he said. "To protect one - all must be protected."
The bill's future is unclear because is not currently scheduled for a vote in the committee.
####
College Could Get $20k for Gang Prevention
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - North Shore Community College will receive $200,000 in federal money to establish a continuing gang prevention initiative, thanks to a spending bill the House passed on Wednesday and the Senate is expected to take up shortly.
The money will be used to extend "Project YES," a gang prevention pilot program in Lynn that the college's Education Department ran in the summer and again this fall.
The money was included in a bill that provides funds for the State, Commerce, Justice and related departments; it will be disbursed to the college in fiscal year 2006, which ends next Sept. 30, according to an announcement from the office of Rep. John Tierney (D-Salem).
The program is an effort to fill adolescents' needs in a positive and constructive way, said Wayne M. Burton, president of the college. The program is aimed at preventing middle-schoolers from joining a gang in the first place, because "the problem with the gangs is, once they're in, it's hard to get out," Burton said.
"What's critical is that it may take a village to raise a child, but it takes a city to beat the gangs," he added.
The program provides services to at-risk youth, including computer training, school testing preparation, and recreation, among other things. "We had a former gang member come in and talk about some of the horrors that he endured," Burton said.
Burton said he is working with a task force that he put together with Lynn Mayor Chip Clancy that consists of representatives of many fields in the community, including schools, police representatives and lawyers.
Tierney said in a release that he was "pleased" to have worked to provide the federal funds.
"Engaging young people and providing opportunities will stem a tide of crime and violence that often leads to larger community deterioration and dissolution," Tierney said. "President Burton has shared with me specific cases where the program has had a positive impact."
###
Lawmakers Oppose Alaska Drilling
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - House leaders agreed Wednesday to drop a plan from the budget bill to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling following fierce opposition, led by Congressman Charles Bass (R- N.H.).
"We're happy to report that at this point the budget package will not contain provisions to drill in the Arctic refuge," Bass said at a press conference Thursday. "My colleagues who in the face of considerable pressure -- peer pressure and pressure from leadership -- stuck to their guns and sent a clear message to leadership that we would not vote for this package no matter how long the vote is open, no matter what arm-twisting occurs, no matter who calls on the telephone, and we plan to project that position forward to the final conference committee report."
The debate centers on a 1.5-million-acre section of the 19-million-acre refuge. President Bush has made drilling there a centerpiece of his energy policy, and oil companies have pushed for years for the legislation, arguing that they can drill without ruining the wilderness. Opponents argue that the entire refuge should be left undeveloped.
The language originally in the Deficit Reduction Act would have allowed drilling for oil and natural gas in the refuge, which is also known as ANWR. Bass, who is the co-chairman of the House's Tuesday Group, a moderate Republican organization, authored a letter to the House leadership stating his strong opposition to the inclusion of this language in the budget bill.
"Opening up ANWR to drilling would dramatically shift U.S. environmental policy," Bass said in a press release Tuesday. "A change this significant necessitates an open, substantive policy debate that can only occur in a stand-alone measure."
Bass's letter was signed by 25 other moderate Republican members of Congress and presented to the House leadership, prompting the leaders to remove the provision from the bill. The members opposed the drilling provision on environmental grounds.
"The critical value of this Refuge to the Arctic and sub-Arctic wildlife is undeniable," Bass wrote in the letter. "Rather than reversing decades of protection for this publicly held land, focusing greater attention on renewable energy sources, alternate fuels and more efficient systems and appliances would yield more net energy savings than could come from ANWR."
Other members critical of the drilling proposal made similar points at Thursday's press conference, citing the preservation of this area as a major concern.
"I am not anti-energy. I'm not anti-oil drilling, but ANWR should stand as a pristine area that should not be despoiled by oil drilling," Congressman Joe Schwarz (R- MI) said Thursday. "There are numbers of things that could be done there without actually drilling in ANWR."
The bill, which was scheduled to be voted on Thursday, was delayed until next week. Assuming it passes the House, it will then go to a conference of House and Senate legislators who will iron out the differences between the two chambers' bills. Because the Senate version of the bill has the drilling provision, it could be reattached there. However, Bass and his moderate Republican coalition intend to continue their opposition.
"We will not waver in our position," Bass said at the press conference on behalf of those who signed the letter.
The deficit reduction bill was passed last week by the Senate. Senator Judd Gregg (R- NH), who voted in favor of the bill, supports seeking energy resources in the refuge.
"Any energy policy should balance the need for energy resources with the need to protect natural resources and the environment," Gregg said in a press release Thursday. "Given the extraordinarily high prices of gas and oil this fall, and the instability of energy from foreign sources, we have a responsibility to find ways to increase the domestic supply of energy and to stabilize the prices of energy.. While it takes a bit of political courage to offer possible solutions to meet our energy needs, I feel we must continue to take the necessary steps to make our country more energy-independent."
Bass and his coalition of other moderate Republicans maintain that using the refuge does not offer long-term solutions for the energy shortage.
"It provides absolutely no alternatives to our continuing dependence on oil as a main source of transportation," Congressman Wayne Gilchrest (R- Md.) said Thursday. "If we can hold the line -- and we will hold the line -- on this provision of ANWR we will begin to open up a much more urgent dialogue on alternatives to oil."
Bass and his congressional colleagues are hopeful of success in preventing the passage of the drilling provisions. "It hasn't looked good for protecting the Arctic wilderness for some time now, and I think the situation looks a lot better," Bass said.
###
House Moderates Serve Blow to Arctic Oil Drilling
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - After last-minute maneuvering Wednesday night, House GOP leaders agreed to strike a clause from a sweeping multi-billion dollar budget-cutting bill that would allow for oil drilling offshore and in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
The debate focuses on a 1.5 million acre section of the 19 million acre refuge. D rilling in the refuge is a key to President Bush's energy policy, and oil companies have been lobbying for years to secure the legislation, arguing that they can drill without spoiling the environment there. Opponents argue that the area should be left pristine.
Rep. Nancy Johnson, R-Conn., played an instrumental role in opposing Artic drilling. She was among the 26 House Republicans who warned GOP leaders they would vote against the budget bill if the oil drilling provision was not removed. Rep. Rob Simmons, R-Conn., and Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., were also among the GOP rebels.
"We're very pleased with the Connecticut delegation on both sides," said John Calandrelli, Connecticut chapter coordinator for the Sierra Club, the nation's largest environmental group.
Calandrelli, who called Johnson's office Thursday morning to express gratitude for her leadership, said, "Everyone's wanting to pop champagne already." But, acknowledging what he calls "middle age skepticism," he said that Arctic drilling is an issue that's far from over.
Republican moderates were able to capitalize on all-out opposition by Democrats to the budget bill's proposed cuts in social programs, and the narrow margin of GOP control in the House. Even so, some analysts predict a backlash by the large majority of Republicans who back drilling.
After the House votes on the budget bill-which was expected as early as Thursday night-lawmakers from the Senate and House return to the negotiating table to hash out differences in their two versions of the bill. The Senate, for instance, narrowly passed the measure allowing for drilling in the refuge, also known by its acronym, ANWR, as a part of its budget package.
"The good news for us is the moderate position makes it unlikely that ANWR will sneak back in," Calandrelli said.
The Bush administration and backers of new oil drilling say it's necessary to lessen dependence on foreign oil. Other benefits, they argue, include job creation and big-time revenue.
Backers of drilling in the region say that between 6 and 16 billion barrels of usable oil exists in the area that would be used for drilling.
Calandrelli said Connecticut played a major role in the national boots-to-the-ground effort to halt the drilling measure. Environmentalists faced a big setback when it appeared in the budget-cutting bill. Connecticut residents, Calandrelli said, moved quickly to inundate lawmakers with letters of opposition.
" Democracy reared its ugly head again," he added with a laugh.
Repeal of Wright Amendment Could Expand Flights to Manchester
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - A Senate subcommittee considered Thursday if lifting restrictions on airline traffic from Love Field in Dallas, Texas, would promote competition and result in lower prices and better service for consumers.
At issue was a 1979 law, commonly called the Wright Amendment, which limited non-stop airline traffic from Love Field to points in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico.
"The 26-year-old Wright Amendment has outlived its usefulness and has no place in federal aviation law in the future," Sen. Kit Bond (R- Mo.) said.
With the passage of the Shelby Amendment in 1997, airlines operating out of Love Field were allowed to expand operations with flights to and from Alabama, Kansas and Mississippi. If repealed, airlines would be allowed to offer non-stop flights to and from all airports in the United States, including Manchester Airport.
Prior to the amendments, and before Southwest Airlines offered service in Texas, all airlines agreed to move their flights from Love Field to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. After the transition took place, Love Field, which is about 10 miles from Dallas/Fort Worth, and other local airports were to close. But Southwest did not sign the agreement and began operating out of Love Field in 1971. Southwest is the primary airline at Love Field, accounting for 97 percent of the flights in and out of the airport.
After a lengthy legal battle, Southwest Airlines and the airlines at Dallas/Forth Worth agreed to the Wright Amendment, which requires all commercial flights from Love Field to touch down at an airport in one of the designated states, unload passengers and re-board before continuing on to states further away.
Explaining that he believes the Wright Amendment has "outlived its usefulness," Sen. John Ensign (R-Nevada) said repealing it and allowing airlines to offer non-stop flights from Love Field to other airports would result in "better deals at better prices and better service."
As a member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the subcommittee on aviation, which sponsored Thursday's hearing, Ensign introduced legislation in the Senate this summer calling for the repeal of the Wright Amendment.
Though he was not at the hearing, New Hampshire Sen. John Sununu, who also serves on the subcommittee, has co-sponsored Ensign's legislation.
"Fair, open markets deliver benefits to consumers in the form of low prices and maximum efficiency," Sununu said in a press release this week. "Airline carriers should operate within the demands of the marketplace."
Officials from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and American Airlines, which is responsible for 82 percent of flights into and out of there, said they believe repealing the Wright Amendment will hurt airlines at the airport, which is also known as DFW.
"Southwest refuses to compete with every other carrier at DFW," said Kevin Cox, chief operating officer and senior executive vice president of Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport, adding that his airport has offered Southwest a year of free rent, valued at $22 million, which would allow the airline to offer flights to all states, promote competition and benefit consumers.
Herbert Kelleher, executive chairman of Southwest Airlines, said repealing the Wright Amendment would allow 3.7 million more passengers to travel, increasing travelers at both airports, and saving consumers about $700 million annually in lower ticket costs. Overall, he said, it would boost the economy by about $4 billion each year.
"DFW has gotten so big that I'm surprised it hasn't been implicated of a steroid scandal," Kelleher said.
Despite concerns from Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) that the Wright Amendment is "a very complicated issue" that should be dealt with at the local and state level, some members of Congress believe that since the amendment was passed in Washington, it should be repealed here as well.
"The Wright Amendment stifles options for travelers headed to Dallas's Love Field, including many New Hampshire passengers who fly from Manchester," Sununu said. "Removal of this out-dated provision is long overdue."
Bass Leads Moderate Republicans in Effort to Stop Oil Drilling in Alaska
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 -- Breaking with the party leadership, the White House and his colleagues in the Senate, Rep. Charles Bass (R-N.H.) led the effort to rally moderate House Republicans to oppose the authorization for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, prompting GOP leaders to agree to strip the provision from the budget reconciliation bill.
At issue is a 1.5-million-acre section of the 19-million-acre refuge. President Bush has made drilling in the refuge a cornerstone of his energy policy, and oil companies have been lobbying for years to secure the legislation, arguing that modern technology allows them to drill without despoiling the environment there. Conservationists argue that the area should be left pristine.
Bass wrote a letter to Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), interim Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier (R-Calif.) on Nov. 8, asking that the drilling provisions be removed. He persuaded 25 other Republicans to sign it, including Rep. Jeb Bradley (R-N.H.) who also opposes drilling in the refuge.
With all 202 Democrats in the House having pledged to vote against the budget bill, Republican leaders knew that they could not afford to lose that many members of their own party if they were to get the 218 votes needed for passage.
"They knew what was in the letter when I handed it to them," Bass said. "They didn't tear it open like a Valentine."
The language that was dropped from the bill may be re-inserted when House negotiators meet with their Senate counterparts to work out the differences with that chamber's bill, but Bass said he and his colleagues intend to vote against any bill that authorizes drilling in the Alaska refuge.
"We will not waver in our position," Bass said. "No matter how much arm twisting occurs, no matter who calls on the telephone."
"This is the dawning of a new day," said Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-Md.), who joined Bass at a press conference Thursday for the Main Street Partnership, a group of moderate Republicans. "We will hold the line on this."
The Senate on Thursday passed its version of the budget bill, which would authorize drilling in the refuge, which is also known by its acronym, ANWR; the bill was supported by Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) and sponsored by New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg (R), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
"There will be substantial differences between the two versions of the bill, including the ANWR provision," Gregg said in a press release. "Those of us on the joint House/Senate Conference will have a very serious and challenging job ahead of us in reconciling the two bills, but I am optimistic that there is enough support for reducing the deficit that we can bring a final product before Congress before the end of the year."
Drilling advocates expressed frustration with the decision to remove the provision from the House bill.
"Environmentalists have to learn that they just can't keep saying no," said Bob Moran, a spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute. "There is an environmentally sound way to drill in Alaska, and it is being done right now. We hope that the leadership in the Senate and House approve ANWR in their final version of the bill."
The Republican leadership indicated on Thursday evening that they would postpone the vote on the bill until next week, according to Bradley.
"I'm glad ANWR was removed," he said. "I think the bill needs to go forward; we need it to reduce out nation's budget deficit."
###
Georges Bank Safe for Now
WASHINGTON, Nov. 10 - Georges Bank will continue to be free of offshore drilling, for now.
House leaders agreed Wednesday to remove a provision, which would have overturned a federal moratorium on offshore drilling, from a sweeping budget bill. The provision, part of the Deficit Reduction Bill, would have made individual states responsible for renewing or canceling the federal freeze on offshore drilling that was instated in 1998 under President Bill Clinton.
Also stripped from the bill was the controversial plan to allow drilling in a portion of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Had the plan passed, it could have been a critical first step in opening Georges Bank to oil and natural gas drilling.
"We are relieved and glad that the House of Representatives had the good sense to take these important ocean treasures off the development block," said Priscilla Brooks, director of the Healthy Oceans Program at the Boston office of the Conservation Law Foundation. "We believe that oil and gas exploration and development will be harmful to the marine mammals and other ocean life."
Georges Bank has circular currents, Brooks said, which would prevent any spilled oil from dissipating and moving out to sea. The acoustic impact of drilling, she said, would be a threat to whales' extreme sensitivity to underwater sound.
Brooks said she does not believe there is anywhere in New England that is appropriate for drilling, especially on Georges Bank where the amount of oil and gas does not justify the risks involved.
The Senate version of the bill does contain the offshore and Alaska oil drilling plans. If the Deficit Reduction Bill passes the House, it would send the bill to a conference of House and Senate negotiators who would reconcile the differences between the two versions. They could re-attach the drilling plans.
"It's a small victory because the Senate version of this bill actually contains all this language," said Steven Broderick, aide to Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass. Broderick said Delahunt would vote against the House version of the Deficit Reduction bill, which is expected to be voted on next week.
The budget reconciliation plan that originally included the drilling plans was introduced in October by the House Resource Committee Chairman Richard W. Pombo, R-Calif.
Rep. Charlie Bass, R-N.H., and a group of other moderate Republicans, including members of the Republican Main Street Partnership, urged the House leadership Wednesday night to remove the oil drilling plans.
At a press conference Thursday with several Republican congressmen, Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, R-Md., said the issue of drilling deserved its own debate and should not be part of the budget reduction. Bass said he would not vote for the final package if it included oil drilling in the Alaska refuge, which is also known by its acronym, ANWR.
"If you want the thing to succeed you better keep ANWR out," Bass said.
Gilchrest said the moderates' opposition is an example to the public that there is a strong feeling from a centrist group about conservation and fiscal responsibility.
"New England is breathing a sigh of relief," Brooks said, "at least for now."
####
