Category: Bryan McGonigle
Malden Mills Sees Flow of Federal Fundin
Millsmoney
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Dec. 12
WASHINGTON, Dec. 12 – Eleven years ago, Malden Mills was engulfed in one of the worst fires in Massachusetts history, which devastated the Merrimack valley textile manufacturer and led the company into bankruptcy.
But in recent years, Malden Mills has been awash in a stream of federal funds and military contracts, making it a leading developer of combat gear and helping the Merrimack Valley economy.
Malden Mills, which produces Polartec fabrics for clothing worn by U.S. troops, has received about $58 million in earmarks from defense appropriations bills since 2002.
“Congressional funding gets the product to the field,” Malden Mills spokesman David
Costello, of Marblehead, said.
Pipeline for Polartec
Costello was the company’s business manager until 2003 and
continues to serve as its manager of government business. He is a lobbyist with ADS
Ventures in Boston, the firm that represents Malden Mills in Washington.
“We couldn’t follow [product development] all the way through,” Costello said. “I couldn’t sell the jacket. I had to sell the fabric. I wanted to follow the whole process, and what I do now enables me to do that.”
Malden Mills paid ADS Ventures $90,000 last year, according to the company’s lobbying reports.
The Department of Defense creates a list each year of products the military needs, called unfunded requirements, and Costello goes to Congress to get funding for development of those products, he said.
“What we’re doing is very client-focused,” Costello said. “We only work on things that
are supported by the Department of Defense. We really think it’s
important to be lined up with their needs.”
For example, the military is trying to find new ways to deal with improvised explosive
devices. Polyester melts into skin and drips when hit with extreme heat, so Malden Mills
is developing a fabric that will withstand heat and pressure unleashed by such an
explosion, Costello said. That project is being tested in the field with Marines.
“We’re not making a joint strike fighter here, but we’re making something that impacts the soldier every day,” Costello said. “Our goal is focused on the war fighter and trying to improve their comfort and safety in the field.”
Out of the Ashes, Into the Budget
Federal money has taken the company a long way since December 1995, when a fire destroyed three of the nine buildings on Malden Mills’ 29-acre complex. Aaron Feuerstein, who owned the company at the time, gained national attention when he decided to keep paying his idled workers through the rebuilding process
But the company lost business while the new plant was being built, and it amassed a $140 million debt. So the company’s leaders – in an effort to keep alive the legacy started by Feuerstein’s grandfather in 1907 – decided to take their business to Uncle Sam.
Malden Mills, working with Natick Labs, began designing fabrics for U.S. troops in Bosnia in 1998.
“The products they had were extremely bulky, took up a lot of room in their backpacks and were not very effective,” Costello said.
The company filed for bankruptcy in 2001 but continued to research and develop new fabrics for the military. In 2003, Malden Mills emerged from bankruptcy and Feuerstein relinquished control of the company to a group of creditors led by GE Capital. Feuerstein remained chairman and president but stepped down as CEO.
The company’s sales rose eight percent last year to between $180 and $190 million, and military contracts account for 15 percent of total sales, Costello said.
Under a Marine contract this year, Malden Mills will supply the fabric for 317,644 combat desert jackets over the next five years and receive $10 million.
“Operating in some of the most unforgiving regions of the world, our service men and women need the best possible equipment and technology,” Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said. “The work of
[Natick Labs] and the quality products of Malden Mills, have led to the continuing development of better and better protective clothing and equipment for our troops.”
Earmarks, however, have been a focus in the debate over ethics in Congress in recent years. Earmarks are money for a specific interest that is added to a Congressional spending bill outside of the usual appropriations process. Critics refer to them as “pork” and say the earmarks are used to boost a lawmaker’s image in his or her district at the expense of an already enormous budget.
One district’s gift, another district’s pork
In 1994, there were 4,126 earmarks on appropriations bills, according to the Congressional Research Service. In 2005, there were 15,877 earmarks. Funding for earmarks has increased from $23 billion in 1994 to $64 billion in 2006, and $30 billion of that increase was in this past year alone.
Defense earmarks have more than doubled since Sept. 11, 2001. For fiscal year 2006, the number of congressional earmarks on defense appropriations bills was 2,847 with a total value of more than $9.4 billion.
Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, said defense earmarks have become an enormous problem because there is no independent examination of them.
“Evaluation is the issue,” Wheeler said. “The earmark needs not just to be described. It needs to be evaluated by an entity that does not receive money from federal government or defense contractors.”
Wheeler said earmarks like those that Kennedy and Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., deliver to Malden Mills may make them heroes in Massachusetts, but those earmarks also give Massachusetts an unfair advantage.
“When Congressman Meehan wants to stuff in fleece liners for the Army, he should be happy that the Army is getting the best available, so let’s compete other states against his manufacturer and get the military the lowest price,” Wheeler said. “He is dead set against doing that because he wants to bring the money to his district.”
Meehan disagreed, saying that there is already a competitive process for Malden Mills’ fabrics and the earmarks.
“The materials have been tested by the services over the years,” Meehan said. “And based on those tests and based on best available fabrics, [the military] put out request for proposals from various companies.”
Meehan is an outspoken advocate of overhauling the rules for both earmarks and lobbying, having introduced legislation in 2004 and 2005. Neither of those bills passed, but earlier this month, he vowed to once again push the issues on the first day of the Democratic-controlled 110th Congress in January.
“I believe there should be a transparency in earmarks, but it’s not an effort to eliminate earmarks altogether,” Meehan said. “The process should be legitimate. This should not be something that’s done in secret, in a way that gets around the process that debates these things openly.”
Meehan added that giving Malden Mills defense earmarks was a rigorous process that took several years of testing and military scrutiny.
“Anyone who would criticize the Malden Mills earmarks would be someone who did not have a clue as to the process by which Malden Mills garments have qualified for the unfunded requirement list and the testing that has gone on,” Meehan said.
From the Federal Well to the Local Pail
Joseph Bevilacqua, president of the Merrimack Valley Chamber of Commerce, said congressional funding has helped the north of Boston community on many levels.
“Malden Mills has been a tremendous asset to the Merrimack Valley area,” he said. “There have been earmarks in the past, for every state, that I didn’t think were justified. But an earmark set aside to employ people and keep the economy moving is a good thing.”
Malden Mills employs 1,000 people, most of them at the Lawrence plant and about 40 at the company’s Hudson, N.H., facility.
“Those employees shop at local stores, eat at local restaurants, pay rent, taxes, and
that money goes into the community,” Bevilacqua said.
Put into perspective, the almost $58 million in earmarks to Malden Mills over five years represents $11,600 a year per employee at the company.
Malden Mills is only one of several Massachusetts companies seeing a financial boost in the war on terror. Defense contracts awarded annually to Massachusetts increased from $5.3 billion in 2001 to $8.3 billion in 2005, according to the Department of Defense.
Malden Mills’ Washington cash flow is relatively small compared to Raytheon in Andover, which has received more than $300 million in product orders in the past three months as part of ongoing contracts of more than $600 million to support the Patriot missile system. Raytheon’s defense contracts increased from $6.3 billion to more than $9 billion from 2001 to 2005, according to the Department of Defense.
But Wheeler said that earmarking should not be used as a means for boosting local economies.
“[The earmark] is going to help somebody’s economy somewhere,” Wheeler said. “I don’t know why the people of Massachusetts should be privileged over Minnesota.”
Meehan said that no matter how much Massachusetts gets in earmarks, when it comes to military supplies, quality trumps geography every time.
“I would never, ever advocate products that weren’t the best products, no matter where they’re made,” Meehan said.
He did acknowledge the benefits, however, to having ties to a district supplying those products.
“This is a win-win situation for me, because [the military] wants it and it happens to be manufactured in my district,” he said.
Bevilacqua commended local members of Congress for getting funding from Washington for Malden Mills and said that if the funding keeps one of the nation’s oldest manufacturing companies alive, then it’s worth the investment.
“If a manufacturer is doing well in the Merrimack Valley, it’s doing well in the United
States,” he said.
####
Meehan Joins Legislators in Pushing for Lobbying Reform
Lobbyreform
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Dec. 5
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5 – Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers on Capitol Hill Tuesday to press for lobbying and earmark reform – a key voter concern in last month’s mid-term elections.
“I don’t think you’d have a Democratic House but for this issue,” Meehan said at a press conference. “So Democrats better recognize the need for reform.”
In a CNN poll taken during the election season, 92 percent of participants said they were concerned about congressional ethics. That percentage was higher than that of those concerned about the economy and the Iraq war.
Points of reform proposed Tuesday included:
-- A ban on gifts from lobbyists and organizations that employ lobbyists.
-- A requirement that former members of Congress wait two years (instead of the current one year) after leaving office before they may lobby Congress.
-- Stronger lobbying disclosure and transparency, including quarterly reports and a publicly accessible online database showing all lobbying activities.
-- A requirement that members of Congress pay market value for charter flights and flights on private airplanes.
-- A new Office of Public Integrity to offer oversight of lobbying and spending earmarks.
Often called “government pork,” earmarks – additions made by lawmakers to spending bills to benefit specific interests in their states and districts – have been a controversial topic of ethics debate for years.
“The growth in earmark funding during the past 12 years has been staggering,” Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said at the news conference.
In fiscal year 1994, there were 4,126 earmarks on appropriations bills, according to the Congressional Research Service. In 2005, there were 15,877 earmarks. Funding for earmarks increased from $23 billion in 1994 to $64 billion in 2006, and $30 billion of that increase was in this past year alone.
McCain added that 96 percent of earmarks are written into parts of legislation that cannot be amended.
The proposed Office of Public Integrity would be a nonpartisan group comprising a professional staff – not members of Congress – who would be appointed by the congressional leadership.
The office would investigate non-frivolous complaints of potential ethics violations and present its findings to the Senate Ethics as well as provide guidance to members and their staffs about conduct under House and Senate rules. It also would provide guidance to registered lobbyists on reporting requirements and conduct random audits of reports.
“You cannot have meaningful rules reform and lobbying reform if you don’t have a mechanism for meaningful enforcement,” Meehan said.
Meehan is a longtime advocate of lobbying reform. In 2004, he introduced the Democracy in Congress Act. In 2005, he introduced the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act in response to the scandals involving lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas. Both bills called for tighter restriction, more oversight and more transparency regarding lobbying; neither was passed.
McCain also has called for more transparency in government spending and lobby reform, having co-sponsored the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act earlier this year.
“Despite Abramoff… and other scandals, the status quo remains,” McCain said. “We believe that inaction is unacceptable. We think that same message was sent loud and clear by the voters in November.”
Meehan said he is confident that with Democrats controlling both the House and Senate in the forthcoming 110th Congress, lobby and earmark reform will pass within the first 100 hours of the new Congress.
“Next year, we’ll have an opportunity to get it right,” Meehan said. “Addressing ethics reform is the first order of business for the 110th Congress, and I believe we’re going to make history early on.”
###
Iraq War Surpasses Time Span of U.S. Involvement in World War II
Iraq
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 28, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 28 – The war in Iraq has lasted longer than U.S. involvement in World War II, leaving analysts to ponder the differences between the two wars.
Last Saturday, the Iraq War reached 1,348 days – the same amount of time between the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 and the United States victory in 1945.
“I think there have been incredible miscalculations as to how long this war would last,” Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., said about the Iraq War. “The war was mishandled from the very beginning and every step along the way.”
How did it take less time to win a massive war on three continents than it has taken to win a war in a country smaller than the northeastern United States? Analysts cite factors on both the battlefield and the home front.
“The fundamental difference is that there were armies to fight in World War II,” said Owen Cote Jr., associate director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Security Studies Program in Cambridge. “It was a traditional war. You basically have a struggle between two armies, and the one that gets defeated gives up.”
The United States is fighting a counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq – rather than a standard military conflict such as World War II – which makes it a tougher conflict to win, Cote said.
John Pike, director of the military analysis Web site globalsecurity.org, agreed.
“When we got into Berlin, it was game over,” Pike said. “But when we got to Baghdad, that was just the beginning of it.”.
Religion plays a role that wasn’t seen in the Second World War as well, Pike said. Now that Iraq is occupied by the United States and has a new government, religious sectarian violence among Sunni and Shiite Muslims has increased.
“After the world war, it was not as though the German Catholics were gunning down the German Lutherans,” Pike said. “Our problem with the Sunni is that they have not yet tasted defeat, and they do not think they’ve been defeated. They think that if the Americans go home, they can get right back in the saddle.”
Meehan said a major difference in the two wars was the cooperation of other nations in World War II versus the virtual unilateral effort of the United States in Iraq. He said he blames the Bush administration for going to war without a large international coalition.
“In World War II, we had significant allies committed to working with us,” Meehan said. “Allies came together. That’s what the big three at Yalta was all about, coming together to defeat the Germans.”
Army mobilization was a large factor in our success in World War II, Cote said. But since the Iraq invasion the U.S. military has not seen a significant increase in numbers, which Cote said is another reason the United States is struggling in this war.
“Most people would agree that if you wanted to add 50,000 to 100,000 to our Army, you wouldn’t need a draft,” Cote said. “You would have to lower standards. The standards we have are very high.”
Earlier this month, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., suggested sending more troops to Iraq. The bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker, discussed that option as well.
But military officials have said deploying more troops to Iraq would strain the U.S. military and wouldn’t offer a long-term solution. Gen. John P. Abizaid, who leads the U.S. Central Command, which includes Iraq, testified on Capitol Hill two weeks ago that sending more U.S. troops would discourage Iraqi troops from taking a lead in security operations there.
During World War II, the home front was united in the war effort. Food and supplies were rationed, Americans collected tin cans for war supplies and invested in war bonds. The government encouraged Americans to plant “victory gardens,” supplying themselves with fruits and vegetables.
“In World War II, we knew that we were at war,” Pike said. “The government did a lot of things to boost morale on the home front. [The Bush administration] is trying to have it both ways. They’re trying to fight a war when the home front’s at peace. They have not done anything to build solidarity on the home front.”
Public support for President Roosevelt remained high during World War II. Since the Iraq invasion, President Bush’s approval rating and public support for the war have both dropped below 50 percent – a major factor that ousted Republicans from Congress in the mid-term elections, according to exit polls.
“It’s pathetic,” Pike said. “[Bush Administration officials] talk about us being at war when it’s convenient for them to talk about it, but they have not mobilized the home front. The fact that the war is very unpopular is a direct result of that.”
Meehan said the window of opportunity for winning the Iraqi people’s hearts and minds has closed, and installing an American-style democracy is unrealistic and would take generations to accomplish. It may be impossible, he added, with the growing Iraqi impatience with the American occupation and the expanding insurgency.
“Ninety percent [of insurgents] are insurgents from within Iraq,” Meehan said. “The insurgency has been growing at a faster rate than we can eliminate the enemy. No unpopular occupying country can ever defeat insurgency in that country.”
Pike said he is not optimistic about American prospects in Iraq, either. Given the drawn-out nature of insurgencies in the last century and given the fact that Iraq doesn’t have a stable military, he said the United States will not see a victory in Iraq for a long time.
“Typically a counterinsurgency campaign takes at least a decade,” Pike said. “I would see us having Americans in Iraq for another 10 years on top of what we’ve been in there, unless it collapses on us in which case we’ll be out a lot sooner.”
Another major difference between World War II and the Iraq War is also seen in the death tolls. In World War II, more than 400,000 U.S. military personnel were killed, according to military reports. Since the Iraq invasion more than three years and eight months ago, almost 3,000 U.S. men and women have been killed in Iraq.
Although the death toll of the Iraq War has been significantly lower than that of World War II, critics of the Iraq War have maintained that the numbers are high enough to warrant a new course of action.
“I think we desperately need a change of direction in Iraq,” Meehan said. “We need a responsible exit strategy that will move Iraqi forces up front and allow us to safely redeploy our troops over six to eight months.”
U.S. Involvement in World War II Timeline
Dec. 7, 1941: Japanese bomb American Naval Base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, prompting United States to enter war.
1942: Germany and Japan achieve large victories against U.S. troops; United States and Britain land in North Africa.
1943: Roosevelt and Winston Churchill agree on goal of unconditional surrender; German 6th Army surrenders at Stalingrad; Nazis defeated in Africa; Allied troops land on Italian mainland.
1944: U.S. and British troops enter Rome; Allies launch invasion of Normandy, liberate Paris; Americans invade Philippines; Germans launch Battle of the Bulge.
1945: Yalta Agreement signed, establishing plan for occupation of Germany; Hitler commits suicide; Allies declare victory in Europe; atomic bombs are dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; Soviet Union declares war on Japan; Japan surrenders.
Sept. 2, 1945: V-J day, Japanese sign surrender terms aboard the battleship Missouri.
Iraq War Timeline
March 20, 2003: United States launches Operation Iraqi Freedom at 5 a.m. Baghdad time.
2003: U.S. forces take control of Baghdad; President Bush declares end to major combat operations; Saddam Hussein is captured.
2004: Attacks on U.S. troops ensue; violence between Sunnis and Shiites increases; Sunni mob kills and mutilates four American civilians in Falluja; U.S. death toll in Iraq reaches 1,000.
2005: Iraqis elect a National Assembly, with 260 attacks on election day; Gen. John Abizaid says Iraq insurgency is as strong as it had been six months earlier; Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish leaders demand a specific time for the pullout of foreign troops; U.S. death toll in Iraq reaches 2,000;
2006: Abizaid says sectarian violence is strong and Iraqi civil war is possible; Pentagon reports dramatic death increase in Iraq; Hussein sentenced to death by hanging; U.S. mid-term elections reflect national dissatisfaction with the war; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld resigns; U.S. death toll in Iraq approaches 3,000.
Nov. 25, 2006: Iraq War has lasted as long as U.S. involvement in World War II.
Source: Information Please Almanac, Pearson Education, infoplease.com.
####
House Democrats Pick Leadership, Spurn Pelosi’s Choice
Housevote
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 16, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 16 – House Democrats Thursday elected Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., to be the next majority leader – going against the wishes of Speaker-elect Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Pelosi had publicly supported Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who gained national fame last year when he called for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
Pelosi, D-Calif., was unanimously elected Speaker of the House – putting her behind only Vice President Dick Cheney in the line of succession for the presidency.
"I am extremely pleased that Nancy Pelosi will be the next Speaker of the House and look forward to working with her as she leads the Congress in a bold new direction,” Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., said.
But Pelosi’s choice for the next highest House position was spurned by the Democratic caucus. Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., who has served 25 years in Congress, was elected House majority leader, defeating Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., 149 to 86 in the secret ballot vote.
Hoyer, 67, is finishing his 13th term in Congress. He has been the House minority whip since 2003.
Murtha, 74, was Pelosi’s campaign manager in 2001 when she successfully ran for minority leader against Hoyer.
Pelosi was criticized by many in the party after she intervened in the heated contest between Murtha and Hoyer, issuing a letter Sunday to House Democrats expressing her support for Murtha. Critics accused Pelosi of choosing favoritism over the well-being of the party and failing to stand by her pledge to end corruption in the House.
Murtha has been accused by some Democrats of overstepping ethical boundaries and thwarting attempts to tighten rules on lobbying. He gained national attention last year when he called for an end to the war in Iraq.
In the new Congress, Murtha will chair the Defense Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, which funds the war in Iraq and the Pentagon budget.
After the vote Pelosi said, “I was proud to support him [Murtha] for majority leader because I thought that he would be the best way to bring an end to the war in Iraq
Hoyer, in contrast, has cautioned against leaving Iraq too quickly.
“Steny was more where the mainstream of the party was,” Rep. Barney Frank told the Associated Press after the vote. Frank will chair the House Financial Services Committee.
Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass., didn’t say who got his vote for majority leader but said he was pleased with the new leadership.
“I think we have an extraordinarily strong team,” Tierney said. “We’re all looking forward in a unified fashion to take this country in a new direction.”
Meehan also did not say for whom he had voted and did not comment about that election’s outcome.
But it was reported before the leadership election that Meehan supported Murtha for the position. Meehan said on MSNBC on Tuesday that Murtha “shows his courage by standing up on the Iraq war and calling for America to go in a new direction. So that’s the type of leadership I’m looking for.”
Dr. Frank Talty, political science professor at UMass Lowell, said the issue of political fallout over majority leader election won’t likely affect party performance or public opinion.
“I can’t help but think that the story is being overblown,” Talty said.
Talty said he thinks Pelosi will exercise her power with the same effectiveness as if her top choice had won. Even with the huge margin of victory for Hoyer, Talty said, “It’s going to be the speaker’s job now to move the party in a single direction. I don’t think the two or three items that they put on their immediate agenda are going to suffer in any way.”
The fact that the party is still new to power also will diminish the impact of the leadership election, Talty said.
“They really haven’t had a chance to govern or act as the majority party yet,” he said.
###
Wilderness Protection Bill Passes House
Wilderness
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 15, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15– Reps. Jeb Bradley, R-N.H., and Charles Bass, R-N.H., will leave Washington having successfully helped pass a bill in the House that would protect nearly 35,000 acres of wilderness in the Granite State.
The New England Wilderness Act, which would designate land in the Wild River Valley as protected wilderness and expand the existing safe-guarded wilderness area in the Sandwich Range, passed on a voice vote Wednesday. It also would protect more than 46,000 acres in the Green Mountain National Forest in Vermont.
“I’ve hiked in those mountains, and I’ll have a lot more time to hike them now,” Bradley, who lost his bid for reelection last week, joked on the House floor. He then said that the positive impact from the bill will be felt in New Hampshire long after he’s left Washington.
Earlier this year, Bass and Bradley pushed for legislation that would protect the land in New Hampshire but did not include Vermont. In September, the legislation was voted down after Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., urged members to oppose it because it didn’t protect Vermont.
The Senate, however, passed legislation that would protect wilderness in both states, and after Bass and Bradley compromised with Sanders, the House passed that bill.
“A wilderness designation adds additional protections to areas of the White Mountain National Forest that are among the most beautiful and unique in the White Mountains,” Bradley said in a statement after the vote. “The passage of this important legislation will help to preserve the areas for future generations to be able to enjoy."
Susan Arnold, director of conservation for the Appalachian Mountain Club, applauded the passage of the bill.
"Protecting wilderness is one of the many valuable uses of our public lands, and the congressmen's work on behalf of wilderness in the White Mountain National Forest is a legacy that will be appreciated by Granite State residents and visitors today, and for generations to come," Arnold said.
####
Meehan Honored in Ireland for Peace Efforts
Belfast
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 15, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 – Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., journeyed to Belfast last week and promised to act as Northern Ireland’s peace envoy on Capitol Hill.
Meehan, in turn, was applauded for his commitment to peace in that long-suffering corner of Europe.
Meehan met with several Irish groups to observe and discuss the region’s plan for peace and economic development and was the keynote speaker at the annual Aisling Awards Person of the Year ceremony. The Andersonstown News Group, which organizes the awards ceremony, sponsored his trip.
"The timing of my visit couldn't have been better, coming on the heels of the midterm elections,” Meehan said. “I think having Democrats in control of the House of Representatives and the Senate will bring a renewed sense in Washington that the United States needs to reexamine our foreign policy and become engaged and proactive again."
Meehan is a member of the Congressional Friends of the Irish National Caucus – a congressional organization focusing on Ireland and Northern Ireland – and has been involved with the Northern Ireland peace process since first taking office in 1993, making many trips to the region, including a 2000 visit with President Clinton. Meehan also has pushed for free trade between the United States and Northern Ireland.
The Aisling Awards started 10 years ago as a grassroots effort to bring the feuding communities in Northern Ireland together. Past speakers at the event have included Irish presidents as well as the Rev. Jesse Jackson.
“It was the first major private-sector event that really pulled the people together over there,” said Art McCabe of Andover, a lawyer who joined Meehan on the trip last week and has been involved with the Northern Ireland peace process for nearly a decade.
In 1997, Meehan returned from a fact-finding mission in the region and asked McCabe to help with economic development there because McCabe had implemented some successful economic development programs in Lawrence.
"Economic development and prosperity is one of the keys to achieving a lasting peace,” Meehan said. “I took this trip to meet with and see first-hand the economic and community partnerships that are developing throughout Belfast.”
Northern Ireland has been ripped apart by violence in the past several decades. The Irish Republican Army organized a campaign in the 1960s to drive out the ruling British military and Protestant domination over Catholics. Sectarian violence ensued –with more than 3,100 killed by the mid-1990s – until a ceasefire between the Irish Republican Army and the Protestant Unionist paramilitary groups was declared in 1994.
In 1998, the Good Friday Agreement was signed in Belfast, marking an unofficial end to Northern Ireland’s civil war. The agreement established the Northern Ireland Assembly, a 108-member legislature, to ensure that all parties participate in government.
“The people over there are so resilient and determined to have a peaceful and stable society that it’s been rewarding for me to be involved in the peace process,” McCabe said. “Its pretty historic stuff over there, and it would be a good model for other parts of the world.”
Organizers of peace efforts in Ireland have used their methods to work for peace in other areas of the world, including Africa and the Middle East, McCabe said.
Meehan said that “while there is no doubt that the North of Ireland has undergone incredible changes since my last visit, it is my hope that the U.S. will work alongside the British and Irish governments to help continue the buildup of Northern Ireland's economy."
###
Bradley Says ‘Goodbye’ To Washington
Byebradley
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Program
Nov. 15
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 – Boxes and large bins covered the floor of Room 1218 in the Longworth House Office Building on Capitol Hill this week as Rep. Jeb Bradley, R-N.H., prepared to leave the nation’s capital.
“It’s amazing how much stuff you accumulate over four years,” Stephanie Dubois, Bradley’s press secretary, said, looking around at all the pictures and plaques that still needed to be packed.
After two terms as New Hampshire’s 1st District representative, Bradley was defeated by the under-funded and little-known liberal activist Carol Shea-Porter in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, which brought a wave of new Democrats to Congress and ousted many Republicans.
“I had gone into Election Day feeling pretty good and felt we had run a good campaign,” Bradley said, adding that Shea-Porter had worked very hard as well. “I still felt optimistic, but we came up a little short.”
Bradley said he didn’t think he or his staff could have done any more than they did to win. He said the national disapproval of President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress, combined with the increased statewide popularity of Gov. John Lynch, D-N.H., and party line voting were factors out of his office’s control that had a great impact on the election.
“It was a perfect storm, and I got caught in it,” he said.
In the state’s 2nd District, which includes Concord and western New Hampshire, six-term Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H., was defeated by Democrat Paul W. Hodes.
The midterm elections delivered both of New Hampshire’s House seats to Democrats for the first time since 1912.
Yellow Post-its were stuck on many of the pictures hanging in Bradley’s office, indicating which ones were to go back to New Hampshire with him. Outside his door was a large trash bin filled with discarded items that wouldn’t be making the trip.
“It is what it is,” Bradley said with a shrug. “You can’t win every race, and we didn’t.”
Bradley, 56, hasn’t given up on politics. He said he plans to run for elected office in 2008 but wouldn’t say if he would be running for the 1st District congressional seat again.
“I need to decompress and have a chance to talk to friends and supporters,” Bradley said. “[This election] was a historic change, but I trust that it will be somewhat temporary in nature.”
Bradley added that Republicans should unite and offer a clear contrast to the Democrats on state and federal issues, and he predicted that the contrast will be clear in the months ahead as Democrats take control of both the House and the Senate.
“Well, 2008 is a long way away, and it’s hard to know what the dynamics will be in 2008,” he said. “I don’t believe we’ll have the same dynamics we had in 2006.”
Bradley reflected on accomplishments made during his two terms in Washington, primarily keeping the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard open. In 2005, the Base Realignment and Closure Committee placed the shipyard on a list for base closures, effective by 2008. Employees of the shipyard, along with New Hampshire and Maine members of Congress and state legislators, campaigned to get the decision reversed, and in August 2005, the shipyard was taken off the list.
“That took a lot of people coming together,” Bradley said, adding that the shipyard’s high performance and top-notch workforce made it easier for the New Hampshire and Maine delegations to make a case for the facility to remain open. “Portsmouth was the best at what it did, saving money and getting ships back in the water.”
Bradley highlighted other issues he’s fought for and voted on, such as funding both disability and retirement for veterans, small-business legislation and environmental protection.
Bradley served in the New Hampshire legislature for 12 years before being elected to Congress in 2002. In 2000, he was named Legislator of the Year by Ski New Hampshire. He also was named New Hampshire Leader for the 21st Century by Business New Hampshire Magazine.
Before his life in politics, Bradley owned and operated several small businesses.
Bradley’s immediate priority is to find jobs for his staff – most of whom have been with him since day one.
“The toughest thing for me is the impact it’s had on all my staff,” he said. “I thought that all of them worked exceptionally hard in the campaign office and the congressional office, and the fact that we came up a little bit short, they should not see it as a reflection on them and their abilities.”
Dubois, a Goffstown native who joined Bradley’s staff in Washington right out of college said it will be difficult going to a new job since she enjoyed working for the congressman representing her home district.
Bradley and his staff must vacate their office by Nov. 27.
Bradley said he plans to spend more time with his four children, who live out West. He said he’ll also use his time off to climb mountains in his home state – all 48 of the mountains with elevations of more than 4,000 feet. He’s climbed them all during the summers but said he would like to try it during the winter – something he hasn’t been able to do with his congressional schedule.
“It’s not something I’ll do in one winter, but I will have the opportunity to pick my days better,” he said. “If the weather’s right and I feel like climbing Mt. Washington, I can climb Mt. Washington.”
####
Andover Native Becomes ‘Darling’ of Washington Conservatism
Darlingprofile
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 15
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15--Conservative activist Brian Darling sat in his Washington office just days before the midterm elections trying to fit in a quick lunch between a barrage of media appearances.
Speaking as director of Senate relations for a heavyweight conservative think tank, he’d been interviewed that morning for the Dave Chadwick Show in North Carolina and
then appeared on CNBC debating about voter issues. He had more interviews to get to before the day was done.
“I’m really busy now, because people want to know what we think of all these issues
coming up with the election,” Darling said, looking for his schedule. “There’s just so much that I can’t even keep track of it.”
Clearly, he’s no longer in Andover.
Darling left the Merrimack Valley years ago and put on his figurative boxing gloves to champion the conservative cause across the nation. He’s also forged a legal and political career entangled in a few of the most pivotal and controversial fights of the new millennium: the Bush-Gore election recount, the Elian Gonzalez asylum dispute and an unfavorable incident during the Terri Schiavo case that would bring him national attention.
Average grades and ‘left-wing crazies’
Darling, 41, grew up in Andover, the middle of five children of Chester and Daphne
Darling. His father was a Boston trial lawyer famous for representing the organizers of the Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade in their legal battle against gay and lesbian groups who wanted to march in the procession.
Chester Darling said his son was well-behaved and knew the value of a dollar, proudly noting that Brian Darling washed dishes at a restaurant as a kid. He also recalled an incident in which a woman’s car was stuck on train tracks in Andover while a train was arriving, and Brian Darling took action.
“It was like one of those silent movies, and my son jumped in the car and pulled the lady out of the car,” he said.
Darling graduated in 1983 from Andover High School, where he received average grades. He played sports with his friends, but he wasn’t on any school teams. He wasn’t political-minded in high school, either.
But Darling found his calling at UMass Amherst. A student in his dorm was involved with the College Republicans, and when Darling went to a meeting, he realized that this was where he belonged.
“UMass was a very leftist campus,” Darling said. “The feeling was one of being in a very
contentious atmosphere. We had the Young Communists League on campus… left-wing crazies who were all over the place.”
Darling said his newfound love for conservatism and the opposition from such
“left-wing crazies” are what toughened his punches and nurtured his fighting spirit.
“It gave me a lot of training,” Darling said. “I find that I have an easier time arguing with people because of my experience at UMass. It was baptism by fire.”
W. Greg Rothman befriended Darling when they were freshmen together at UMass.
“Brian and I took several classes, or should I say, ‘missed’ several classes,”
said Rothman,. who is the CEO of a Pennsylvania real estate company and was recently named to the board of the National Veterans Business Development Corp. by President Bush.
Although they had active social lives, Rothman said, their lives at school revolved around politics.
Darling started a conservative newspaper at UMass called The Minuteman, which is still in publication, with classmate Tony Rudy – a man who would become a lobbyist and recently pleaded guilty to conspiracy for his involvement in the Jack Abramoff scandal.
David R. Mark, a liberal blogger and managing editor of a national real estate publication, was an editor on UMass’s newspaper, The Daily Collegian, in the mid-1980s. Last January, Mark wrote an article for Blogcritics Magazine about Darling and Rudy, referring to them as “one half of a quartet that led conservatives” at UMass.
“I remember arguing with Tony [Rudy], Brian and their colleagues about all things Reagan,” Mark wrote. “But basically, I remember them as being fun, smart guys who happily wasted time in the campus center arcade and who weren’t against getting a beer.”
A Right Hook, far-right hook
Darling is a conservative, unapologetic and unhindered. His heroes are his father and Ronald Reagan. Pro guns and against abortion, welfare and same-sex marriage, he’s a hard-line right-winger who wears his ideology on his sleeve and does so with a confident smile.
The talking Ann Coulter doll next to his desk can attest to that.
“If I was going to be involved in politics, I had to leave Massachusetts,” Darling said.
“There was no future for a conservative, pro-gun, pro-life Republican in the state of
Massachusetts.”
So he left the Bay State for redder pastures.
Darling’s first political job in Washington was for Sen. Steve Symms, R-Idaho, in the fall of 1992. After Symms retired, Darling worked for Sen. Paul Coverdell, R-Ga., in 1993.
Darling left Washington in 1993 to get his law degree at New England School of Law,
and later worked for his father’s law firm in Boston and for the Massachusetts Civil Service Commission.
But in the fall of 1999, Darling stepped back into the ring in Washington as legal counsel for Sen. Robert Smith of New Hampshire. Smith had quit the Republican Party, accusing it of abandoning its core conservative values, and was seeking the presidency as a third-party candidate.
Hanging from the wall in Darling’s office is the speech Smith gave when he left the
Republican ranks.
“I remember watching that [speech] on TV in Andover, and I thought it was really
wonderful that this guy was quitting the Republican Party on principle,” Darling said.
“So when I got a call to go work for him, it was an offer I couldn’t refuse.”
Battles in the Sunshine State
In January 2000, Darling and Smith traveled to Florida to help a child.
Elian Gonzalez was a 6-year-old Cuban who had fled his home country with his mother. She died at sea, and the boy’s father wanted him to return to Cuba. Darling and Smith visited the boy and proposed legislation to grant him permanent residence in Florida. Their battle would eventually be lost when Elian was sent back to Cuba to live with his father.
“We did our best to try to help provide that little guy with some sort of recourse so he
could stay here if he wanted to,” Darling said, still visibly saddened at the outcome.
“It’s sad when you think his mother gave her life to get that boy to freedom and out of a
communist dictatorship, and we just sent the kid back.”
Darling – who believes in tough border security but also wants open borders for those fleeing communism – said he thinks Elian’s family members were being intimidated and threatened by Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
Darling’s career would gain further notoriety in Florida in the wake of another
controversy – the contested 2000 presidential election. He headed to Miami-Dade County, expecting the issue to be resolved by the time he got there.
“That ended up being a very important count,” Darling said. “All of those ballots were
counted before the count was stopped in Miami. They all mattered in the final tally.”
They counted for several days. Darling said one man at his counting table became so stressed that he ran out and got sick.
Darling said he found nine extra votes – all for Al Gore – and he objected to the count, forcing another five-hour recount which ended with a correct count.
“It was nice to be a part of it,” Darling said. “That year, 2000, was an interesting year, with Elian Gonzalez and the Florida recount, and I somehow was right in the middle of both.”
Darling spent the next few years as a lobbyist, mostly for gun interests, and worked for the Alexander Strategy Group – the same firm his friend Tony Rudy worked for and that shut down early this year after the Abramoff scandal hit.
After Sept. 11, 2001, Darling was instrumental in helping Smith with legislation allowing airplane pilots to carry firearms.
Misstep in a Memo
Florida beckoned Darling again in January 2005, when he went to work for Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla. – a move that would bring national fame – or infamy – to Darling’s
career.
Terri Schiavo was in a persistent vegetative condition for 15 years, and her husband wanted to take out her feeding tube and let her die. Her family, the Schindlers, wanted to keep her alive. Despite congressional legislation intended to help keep Schiavo alive, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that her husband could remove her feeding tube, allowing her to die. The issue divided America along cultural lines.
In March 2005, as Schiavo lay dying, Darling wrote a memo about how Republicans could use the Schiavo case as a political issue to rally the conservative base against Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., in the 2006 election.
"This is an important moral issue, and the pro-life base will be excited that the Senate is debating this important issue," the memo said.
The memo found its way into Democratic hands and was made public, causing a media frenzy and nationwide outrage. Darling admitted writing it and resigned from his job immediately.
Nelson, the target of Darling’s strategy, was re-elected to the Senate earlier this month.
“Clearly, it wasn’t the smartest thing I’ve ever done,” Darling said humbly.
Other than the memo, Darling is proud of the role he played in the Schiavo case. He helped draft the legislation passed by Congress to keep Schiavo alive. Even though the Florida courts eventually ruled against keeping her alive, Darling said he didn’t regret his efforts to save the woman.
“The memo controversy is not something I’m proud of,” Darling said. “But the
only persons that I really was concerned about offending were the Schindler family, who I worked very closely with.”
Mark, who had once played video games with Darling in the UMass campus center, has referred to Darling as a “tragic hero” of the conservative movement.
“I don’t think the Terri Schiavo memo was meant for publication, but I still found it in poor taste,” Mark said. “You shouldn’t capitalize on someone’s pain.”
Darling said the Schindler family has never given him any indication that they were
displeased with what he did.
“It was a tough time, when my career was going so well,” Darling said.
But Darling still was not down for the count. Just a few months later, he joined the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank down the street from the Capitol where he’d climbed up the conservative ladder. Darling was named director of the foundation’s Senate relations.
Next Round
“The way Washington works, it’s funny, because if you’re in the right place at the right
time, things will work out for you,” Darling said.
Darling said the Heritage Foundation gives him a sense of freedom that comes with working for a think tank, where he can express himself without the restraint that comes with working for elected officials. He enjoys making media appearances and expressing his own views rather than working in the background for politicians. And his family enjoys watching him spar in the media.
“We love taping him when he’s on TV,” his mother, Daphne, said. “I just want him to be happy.”
Darling plans to marry someday. Although he is dating a conservative, he said he doesn’t have a political litmus test for a wife.
“We do want some grandchildren,” Daphne Darling insisted.
Darling – whose job it is to deliver the Heritage Foundation’s message to the Senate – was disappointed with the midterm elections, in which Democrats took control of Congress. But he said it sent a clear message to Republicans that they need to get back to their conservative roots – back to the 1994 Contract with America that had helped bring them to power in the first place.
“I trust that he will become even more sought-after and prominent now that Republicans have lost the Senate and the conservative movement regroups,” Rothman said. “Brian Darling has stayed the same principled person despite all his years in Washington. Most people, that can't be said about.”
###
Rumsfeld Resignation Applauded by Democrats
Rumsfeld
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 8
WASHINGTON, Nov. 8 – Hours after an election in which Democrats rode a wave of Iraq-related voter dissatisfaction to control of the House of Representatives, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld resigned Wednesday.
“Don Rumsfeld has been a superb leader during a time of change,” President Bush said in a press conference Wednesday. “Yet he also appreciates the value of bringing fresh perspective during a critical period in this war.”
Democrats applauded the move.
“Changing policy in Iraq starts first with a change in leadership,” Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said in a statement Wednesday. “This decision is what is best for our troops and for our country.
Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass., called the resignation “long overdue.” Meehan has been publicly calling for Rumsfeld to step down for two years.
"By failing to send in enough troops to secure the peace, by not giving our troops the necessary body armor, and by failing to send up-armored Humvees, Secretary Rumsfeld neglected his responsibility to protect our troops,” Meehan said.
Rumsfeld’s resignation comes after exit polls taken during Tuesday’s election showed nearly 60 percent of voters are dissatisfied with the war in Iraq.
More than 100 Americans were killed in Iraq during October, making it the fourth deadliest month for U.S. troops since the 2003 invasion, according to the Associated Press.
"I hope that Secretary Rumsfeld's resignation will not only change the public face of the Bush administration's policy in Iraq, but will also bring about a meaningful change of course in Iraq,” Meehan said. “We need a strong independent voice in the Pentagon to stand up to the misguided policies coming from the
White House.”
President Bush nominated Robert Gates yesterday to replace Rumsfeld. Gates was a member of the Iraq Study Group – a bipartisan panel that is analyzing how the president should proceed in Iraq.
Gates was also the head of the CIA from 1991 to 1993 and deputy director of the agency during the Reagan years.
Meehan expressed cautious optimism about the replacement.
"I fear that the appointment of another person from the Bush family's inner circle will not lead to a new strategy in Iraq,” Meehan said. “However, I look forward to working with the next Secretary of Defense on what I hope will be a new direction for Iraq in the months ahead."
Rumsfeld, 74, was both the youngest and the oldest person to serve as secretary of defense, having served in that role under Presidents Gerald Ford and George W. Bush.
He was elected to represent Illinois in the House in 1962 and resigned from that office in 1969 to join Nixon’s cabinet as director of the United States Office of Economic Opportunity. He left Washington in 1973 to serve as ambassador to NATO and returned in 1975 to serve in Ford’s cabinet.
“We thank Secretary Rumsfeld for his service,” Kennedy said. “Clearly now is the time to give our men and women in uniform new leadership and a new policy that is worthy of their enormous sacrifice.”
###
If Democrats Win, Meehan and Kennedy in Line for Chairmanships
Committee
The Eagle-Tribune
Bryan McGonigle
Boston University Washington News Service
Nov. 6
WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 – If things go the Democrats’ way tonight, Rep. Marty Meehan (D-Mass.) and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) could get a boost in their committee standings.
Meehan will likely chair the subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities of the House Armed Services Committee if the Democrats win control of the House. If the party wins control of the Senate, Kennedy will likely chair the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Meehan, the senior Democrat on his subcommittee, said he would be in a position to hold oversight hearings, “which thus far the Republicans in Congress have been unwilling to do, on issues such as providing our troops with the equipment they need, addressing the increasing threat of sniper attacks in Iraq, and the military's policy of ‘Don't Ask, Don't Tell.’ ”
Meehan said his focus also would be on the war in Iraq.
"With a Democratic majority, Congress will be able to provide some much-needed oversight of the Bush administration, and hold the president accountable for his failed policy in Iraq," Meehan said.
Kennedy said his top priorities on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee “are to increase minimum wage so that millions of hardworking Americans get the raise they deserve, expand opportunities for families and students struggling to afford college, strengthen retirement security, fix the broken Medicare Part D drug program so that seniors in Massachusetts and across the nation no longer have to choose between their medicine and putting food on the table, and continue the fight to expand access to affordable healthcare."
Polls have the Democrats taking 20 to 35 seats in the House; the party needs 15 to win control. But the Senate is anyone’s guess. Democrats need to pick up six Senate seats to win control, but Senate races are tight in many states. Some polls show the Democrats falling just short of a six-seat gain, while other polls show them picking up the six needed to grasp the majority.
"Democrats are the party of hope, progress, and opportunity and the American people are tired of the cynical divisive politics that the Republicans have been promoting,” Kennedy said. “It’s time for a change and we’re ready to put in place fair policies that help American families.”
###
