Category: Scott Brooks
Coast Guard Moves to New Home
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON – A year and a half of structural surgery on the U.S. Coast Guard culminates Saturday as the agency officially leaves the Transportation Department and joins the ranks of the new Department of Homeland Security.
With a new boss and a redefined mission, it’s a different world for Group Woods Hole, which patrols the coastline from Plymouth to the Rhode Island-Connecticut border. For nearly 150 years, the group has balanced securing New England waters with a laundry list of other duties, from conducting search and rescue missions to stemming the flow of illegal drugs into the United States. As with other agencies, however, the Coast Guard’s priorities took a new direction on Sept. 11, 2001.
Today’s Coast Guard is a central piece of the nation’s terror-fighting network, and though its focus has shifted, the spectrum of its responsibilities has only expanded.
At home, Group Woods Hole is still doing what it has always done, but it has had to adapt to a new environment in which security is of premium importance, Lt. j.g. Michael Kahle said.
“We’ve asked a little more of our people,” Lt. Kahle said. “The Coast Guard is kind of unique. We’ve always been multi-mission. Our people are used to bending with the times.”
Along the Massachusetts coast, the Coast Guard has increased its port security patrols. Since Sept. 11, the agency has been escorting suspicious or “high interest” ships into Bay State ports, including foreign ships and others carrying dangerous cargo, as well as fuel tankers.
At Station Menemsha on Martha’s Vineyard, search and rescue remains mission number one, said Mark Coady, boatswain’s mate second class. But, he said, the crews have received extra training to deal with weapons of mass destruction, and they are more aware of what could happen on their watch.
Mostly, he said, the station has found an easy balance between those safety concerns and the agency’s traditional duties.
“We do maritime security while doing regular law enforcement,” he said. “We’ve become more aware of some of the things we should be keeping our eye on, which is something we can do while doing other missions.”
Nationwide, however, the Coast Guard’s transition to its new home is considered “high risk,” as the General Accounting Office dubbed the move last month. Coast Guard units are facing a sudden surge of thousands of personnel, with about 4,000 new staffers expected to be added over the next year and a half. At the same time, the agency is in the middle of its most ambitious project ever to modernize its fleets. The $17 billion program, known as the Deepwater Project, updates the agency’s aging fleet with new cutters, helicopters and command-and-control systems.
This, along with the largest budget increase in the agency’s history this year, marks a period of great expansion for the Coast Guard, which makes a smooth transition all the more critical.
“It won’t be easy,” Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta told his service personnel at a change of watch ceremony earlier this week. “It will take some getting used to. There will be some confusion. The change will be stressful, and you will witness the growing pains up close.”
In the Northeast, the majority of the work right now is administrative, with offices working to align the varied computer and personnel systems of the agencies entering the new department, said Lt. Dean Jones, a public affairs officer for the Coast Guard’s Boston-based First District.
In the ports and waterways, however, Coast Guard crews have been refining their security mission since the day America was attacked, he said.
“We’re out here in the field,” Lt. Jones said. “People are doing their mission.”
Partnerships with local and state agencies have become more important than ever, Lt. Jones said. The Coast Guard has enhanced its relationship with Massachusetts and local police forces, he said, as well as with local fishing and boating industries. Since Sept. 11, the agency has held regular meetings with its partners in each port to ensure that both security and non-security needs are being met.
Immediately after the terror attacks, fisheries enforcement across the nation reportedly dropped by as much as 90 percent. Cutters, aircraft and Coast Guard personnel were redirected toward homeland security, with fisheries accepting a secondary place in the agency’s mission.
The Coast Guard’s rush to fulfill its new security duties was hard on the federal government’s fisheries management agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries. NOAA Fisheries spokesman Mark Oswell said the transition, along with changes to his own agency since Sept. 11, has strained enforcement efforts nationwide.
And while fisheries enforcement has improved since just after the attacks, levels have still not yet returned to normal, he said.
“When you’ve got finite resources and attach them to other obligations, it’s going to hurt,” Mr. Oswell said.
Some legislators, including Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-MA, have argued that the Coast Guard was in critical condition even before Sept. 11. Delahunt, a former Coast Guard reservist, has maintained for years that insufficient funding has left the agency to make do with outdated and ineffective equipment. The attacks, according to Delahunt spokesman Steve Schwadron, “made an urgent situation catastrophic.”
“It’s a real tribute to the Coast Guard personnel that they’ve accomplished as much as they have,” he said. “But certain things even Superman can’t do.”
With “nearly all” of the Coast Guard’s resources drawn away after Sept. 11 to handle water security, the agency was spread too thin, Mr. Schwadron said.
“Put it this way,” he said. “If the fire department needs to be trained in biochem to address problems, we still need to put out fires. We still need to rescue people from burning buildings.”
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Mass. Residents Write Congress: We Don’t Want War
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON - Letters from the SouthCoast and across the state continue to pour in, and the verdict is overwhelming: Keep U.S. troops out of Iraq.
House and Senate members from Massachusetts say they are receiving abnormally large amounts of mail from local residents with profound concerns about a war with Iraq that seems to be drawing ever closer. Legislative staffers are also fielding phone calls, e-mails and faxes from large groups of constituents with anti-war sentiments.
"They seem quite passionate about it. It's not just the volume of mail you look at, but the intensity," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA. "People are quite anguished about it."
On Wednesday, hundreds of thousands of protesters put that intensity to work, flooding congressional offices with phone calls and e-mails in an organized show of the anti-war movement's strength. The so-called "virtual march" congested congressional phone lines for most of the day, including those of Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-MA, and John Kerry, D-MA.
In the offices of Democrats who voted last fall against the war, such as Rep. Frank and Sen. Kennedy, the influx of communication often includes mounds of thank-yous and requests that they continue to fight against military action. For Sen. Kerry, who voted to give the administration authority to launch a war, it means something a bit less complimentary.
"I guess Sen. Kerry is the only one I'm worried about," said Fall River musician Judith Conrad, who has tried to contact Sen. Kerry's office both by mail and by phone since the war vote last October. "Frank and Kennedy are very much on our side."
The majority of letters to Sen. Kerry have opposed unilateral action against Iraq, according to Kerry spokesman Tony Wyche. Many have said they would like to see the United States work harder to garner international support before going to war, he said.
Some residents who have contacted Sen. Kerry suggested that the senator voted against his better instincts by supporting President Bush's authority to launch a military strike.
"I think Kerry is just a little too worried about being the next president," said the Rev. Evan Johnson of Westport, who has written to several legislators on the subject. "But he can't be afraid to take a risk. Somebody's got to say the truth, and I don't hear anyone saying it."
Rev. Johnson, a retired Methodist pastor, said he was "halfway between disappointed and furious" when Sen. Kerry voted to approve the war resolution. His dissatisfaction prompted him to draft a letter, on behalf of several other members of his church, "out of the religious/ethical convictions of our faith."
"We had hoped that the political dimension of this crucial Senate action might have been less evident," he wrote. "Instead, on this crucial issue, politics seems to have played a large part in the stand of many."
Many of Sen. Kerry's critics have organized group letter-writing drives. Fall River activist Joe Carvalho said his organization, the Southeastern Massachusetts Committee for Peace, produced roughly 300 letters to the senator during an anti-war rally in January. Those letters were collected in a coffin and sent to Sen. Kerry's Fall River office.
Frank spokesman Peter Kovar said the residents contacting Rep. Frank's office have been "overwhelmingly opposed to war, or at least to unilateral action." Most letter writers have shown a preference for continued cooperation with the United Nations, he said.
"For a lot of people, it's just important to be able to register their opinion," Mr. Kovar said. "The more communications we receive, it helps us develop a better sense of what opinion is like in the district."
Often, people who call or write in with comments are answered with written responses from the legislator. Ms. Conrad said she received a thick packet from Rep. Frank containing a number of the congressman's speeches on the war. "Quite impressive," she said.
In response to the flood of mail reaching his office, Rep. Frank recently posted on his website a statement explaining his opposition to war.
"Saddam Hussein does not present the threat to the United States that the president claims, nor has he engaged in aggressive action against a neighbor," Rep. Frank wrote, "and lacking either of these causes, I do not think war is justified."
Letter writers do not always expect their letters to change a legislator's mind. For some, writing to a government official is a form of democratic participation. In his own letters and phone calls, Mr. Carvalho said, his first thought was merely to provide information.
"When I was a kid, knowledge was power. If you had facts, you could make a thoughtful decision," he said. "Given an ample amount of thought about it [the war], I want to think people would choose to hold off on such a horrific scenario."
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Marion Student Gets Political In DC Program
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON - Sixteen-year-old Brent Shoemaker left behind Old Rochester Regional High School last weekend for a first-class education in federal politics.
Turns out, he was ready for the government, but the government wasn't ready for him.
As a participant in the Presidential Classroom program, Mr. Shoemaker arrived in the nation's capital just before Mother Nature dumped a near-record foot and a half of snow on the city. The federal government shut down through Tuesday, and Mr. Shoemaker found himself in lockdown for several days while the snow piled high outside his window.
"They would clear that in two hours in New England," said Mr. Shoemaker, who lives in Marion.
But he rolled with it, and after a snowball fight or two on the Georgetown Conference Center balcony, he and his fellow program members got to take in some political atmosphere. During the week-long program, which brings top students from across the country to Washington for a crash course in government, the students took tours of the White House and the Capitol, heard speeches from government officials and checked out some of the city's many memorials.
Mr. Shoemaker also played the mock stock market, toured the Hungarian embassy and hit the books, boning up on current affairs in preparation for a group presentation at the week's end.
So what if the airport accidentally sent his luggage to Baltimore? As he says, "You do what you can do."
"This is fun," he said. "It's not a punishment that I'm missing vacation."
Much of Mr. Shoemaker's week was spent in "caucus," in which students broke down into small groups for the week. Each group was asked to research a topic in the news and give a report on that topic before the whole class of 175 students. To spice it up, the groups were banned from using the Internet.
Staying away from cyberspace was a challenge, Mr. Shoemaker said. He found himself poring over newspapers -- lots of them -- and asking plenty of questions of every government official he met.
Before the week was up, Mr. Shoemaker's group had drafted a thick report on the United States' conflict with North Korea. They approved of the Bush administration's decision to handle the matter diplomatically, arguing that North Korea does pose a threat but does not require military action.
Mr. Shoemaker said he got into politics while watching TV news analysts. "I
used to disagree with everything they said," he said. He also learned a few
things during political debates with his mother, Anne, who pits her own liberal
views against her son's conservative leanings.
After all those debates, Mrs. Shoemaker was a little shocked to learn that her
son chose not to advocate war with North Korea.
"We had talked about this, and he was very much for the war with Iraq, very
much against North Korea," said Mrs. Shoemaker, 49. "That surprises me. Clearly
he's been listening to some other points of view."
With the workday starting as early as 6 a.m., Mr. Shoemaker didn't get much of
a vacation. But, he reasoned, he could always sleep on the flight home, and
anyway, there was a lot to do.
"I like that," he said. "I don't want a bunch of downtime, because I can do that at home. I didn't come to Washington for that."
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Congress Revokes Protections To Vaccine Manufacturers
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON - Parents of autistic children will regain the chance to sue vaccine manufacturers like Eli Lilly and Co. now that Congress has rescinded a recent measure that shielded the drug industry from lawsuits.
In the last few years, a growing number of parents, including several in the SouthCoast, have sought to hold Eli Lilly accountable for their children's autism, a brain disorder found in fewer than 1 percent of children. However, a pair of paragraphs tucked into last year's Homeland Security Act insulated vaccine makers from lawsuits and left parents to petition the federal government for compensation.
Last week, the provision was taken out just as quietly as it was put in. Congress slipped a measure to undo the provision into its omnibus spending package, a 3,000-page package of must-pass legislation that was expected to receive President Bush's approval this week.
Robert Bonsignore, a Medford lawyer for parents with claims against vaccine makers, said removing the protections for drug makers was a "step in the right direction." Still, he criticized Congress for sending an unclear message.
"They took the rights away, and then they give them back, and what does that accomplish other than causing more confusion?" he asked.
Mr. Bonsignore said that he does not expect new lawsuits to spring up. Most parents with claims already have been redirected to the federal government's vaccine injury compensation program, which he said places the burden of compensating victims on consumers, not manufacturers. Some of those cases may now be reopened as lawsuits.
Critics have said the anti-lawsuit provision had no place in the homeland security bill. That bill was rushed through Congress at the president's urging toward the end of last year.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA, blamed Republicans for inserting the provision into the high-priority homeland security bill. Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, the new Republican leader in the Senate, had pushed legislation last term that would have extended broad protections to companies involved in vaccine production.
Ideologically, Rep. Frank said, the GOP is inclined to side with the drug makers over victims.
"They think lawsuits are a bad thing," Rep. Frank said. "They think suits are inefficient. I disagree."
Republicans also were responding to heavy lobbying by Eli Lilly, Rep. Frank said.
Ed Sagebiel, a spokesman for Eli Lilly, said that the company was disappointed that Congress repealed the provision protecting vaccine makers but added that he agreed with critics who said that its inclusion in the Homeland Security Act "was not desirable."
"Ideally, what you want to have is a piece of legislation that everyone has had an opportunity to debate and that passes on those merits," Mr. Sagebiel said. "That healthy debate did not occur."
Mr. Sagebiel expressed hope that Senate Republicans will see fit to reinstating the anti-lawsuit language. Under the compromise to revoke the provision, the Senate is to reevaluate the compensation program within the coming months.
Plaintiffs allege that their children's autism was caused by thimerosal, a compound found in a variety of childhood vaccines that Eli Lilly produces. About 1,700 cases linking the compound to autism have been brought before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims here, according to the court's chief special master, Gary Golkiewicz.
The court plans to decide on the medical issues that the cases have in common to determine which awards are appropriate, Mr. Golkiewicz said.
Since the early 1990s, the rate of autism has increased enormously, according to the Autism Research Institute in California. Researchers are still unclear on what has caused the increase. However, the institute suggests that infant vaccination is the "most likely" cause.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Federal Budget Sends About $6 Million to South Coast Projects
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON – This fiscal year’s long-overdue federal budget contains millions of dollars to improve New Bedford’s transportation system and develop programs highlighting the city’s history.
The House overwhelmingly approved the budget Thursday, and the Senate was expected to pass the bill Friday.
Federal money will go to creating an information “nerve center” for the city’s public and commercial buses and trains, which will provide officials with detailed information on the city’s transportation infrastructure. Money also will be used to transform the historic Corson Block buildings in downtown New Bedford and to develop educational programs at marine museums in the city.
In all, the package gives about $6 million to projects in New Bedford and Fall River, Massachusetts legislators said in a joint statement Thursday.
“With cuts to both federal and state programs across the board having a negative effect on our older urban areas, it’s especially important that we were able to provide at least some specific funding to help New Bedford with important projects,” Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA, said in the statement.
Historical projects comprise a large chunk of the New Bedford allocations. The budget splits $2 million between the New Bedford Whaling Museum and the city’s soon-to-be-built Oceanarium. The money, provided under the No Child Left Behind education act, will assist the two institutions with developing educational and cultural programs on the history of New Bedford’s whaling and fishing industry.
In addition, the budget sends $225,000 to renovate the Nathan and Polly Johnson House, where abolitionist writer Frederick Douglass lived after escaping from slavery. The house, which has been used as three apartments in recent years, was named a national historic landmark three years ago. Part of the money will be used to create housing for a low- to moderate-income tenant.
The city also is expected to receive half a million dollars to complete the expansion of the New Bedford Whaling National Historic Park. That money would be used to renovate the Corson Block buildings for use as educational facilities, as well as a visitor center, for the park.
Among proposed uses for the buildings, space is likely to be given to create archives, classrooms, two conference rooms, a lecture hall, a resource library and possibly several offices.
The two buildings that comprise the Corson Block, 25 and 27 William St., were severely damaged in a 1997 fire that left the complex in critical physical condition. The Waterfront Historic Area League purchased both buildings in 1999.
Nearly $1 million has been earmarked to bring Bristol County into compliance with the federal Clean Water Act. The money, the latest in a long line of federal dollars directed toward remedying the county’s environmental problems, would go to mitigating sewer overflow problems in New Bedford and Fall River. Bristol County has received $29 million for these projects since 1995.
Including the sewage program, the budget allocates nearly $2 million to Fall River projects. Half of that sum will go to a large-scale reconstruction of Route 79, which would be downsized from an eight-lane, limited access highway to a four-lane, tree-lined boulevard.
That project has been in the planning stages for several years and is considered a key aspect of the city’s plans to revitalize the waterfront. City officials have estimated the project’s cost at about $20 million.
“The Route 79 project is vital for the continued development of Fall River,” Rep. James McGovern, D-MA, said in the statement. When it’s completed, the work on Route 79 will enhance not only the aesthetic value of the area but will open up new space for productive use.”
By effectively relocating Route 79, the city expects to gain 8.5 acres of land for possible development as office and retail space. Legislators also say the project will spur the creation of roughly 5,000 new jobs.
In 1999, New Bedford received federal dollars for a similar remodeling of Route 18.
Overall, the Bay State is set to receive more than $35 million in the final budget, much of which will head to projects in and around Boston.
Peter Kovar, a spokesman for Rep. Frank, said there may be other local projects hidden in the new budget. Legislators have rushed to dissect the document, which is typically voted on before most members have time to read it all the way through.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Rep. Frank Named to Homeland Security Committee
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON – Democratic leaders have named Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA, to a senior position on the House’s new Select Committee on Homeland Security.
Rep. Frank is one of 23 Democrats named to the committee, which was designed to oversee the new Department of Homeland Security. Rep. Edward Markey, D-MA, who represents Medford and Framingham, also was named to the committee.
“I’m very flattered. This is a pretty tough committee,” said Rep. Frank, who learned of his appointment Tuesday night in a phone call from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. “Taking on this new role is hard work. I have to learn a lot.”
The new committee will have the responsibility of ensuring a smooth transition for the Homeland Security department, whose creation marked the largest federal reorganization in more than 50 years. Twenty-two federal agencies have been relocated to the department and are currently undergoing major structural and procedural overhauls.
“It’s a lot harder to help something new get formed than to work on something that’s been humming along,” Rep. Frank said. “It’s new, and new is harder than existing.”
Rep. Frank voted against the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which he said was likely a reason for his appointment. He said Rep. Pelosi was looking for “more skeptical” members to work on the committee.
“Oversight means doing some supervision,” Rep. Frank said. “You don’t get supervision if everybody is a cheerleader.”
“House Democrats recognize the urgent need to protect the American people,” Rep. Pelosi said in a statement Wednesday. With the party’s 23 appointees, she said, “the Homeland Security Committee will have the knowledge and experience necessary to help America win the war on terrorism.”
Twenty-seven Republicans also were named to the committee.
Rep. Frank also was active in 2001 in shaping the USA Patriot Act, which vastly increased the government’s authority to track terrorists, although he ultimately voted against it after various revisions altered the bill.
Peter Kovar, a spokesman for Rep. Frank, said the congressman is a strong supporter of getting money to first responders, such as police and fire departments, to handle emergencies.
The congressman has long advocated lower military and defense spending. Last year, he voted against authorizing President Bush to use military force in Iraq.
In January, Rep. Frank was named the Democrats’ ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. He recently lost his post on the Judiciary Committee after party leaders shuffled posts to spread committee slots among freshman members.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Rent Costs to Rise Under Budget Proposal
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON –Many of the Bay State’s poor and unemployed may have to dish out more for rent if Congress approves new federal housing aid standards that the Bush administration has proposed.
President Bush asked Congress in his budget to set a minimum rent level of $50 per month for recipients of federal housing aid. The new level, designed to “promote work,” would force about 400,000 households nationally to pay higher rents, according to Donna White, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Currently, federal law bars local housing agencies from setting minimum rent at more than $50 per month but leaves them free to set rent levels as low as zero.
In Massachusetts and across the country, federally assisted tenants who have lost their jobs would no longer be exempt from rent payments and could be evicted for failing to pay the minimum rent. The proposed new standards would not apply to the elderly or disabled.
The administration’s plan could cause more pain than good in New Bedford, said Joseph S. Finnerty, executive director of the city’s Housing Authority. About 3,450 New Bedford tenants and their families benefit from federal housing programs, either living in public housing or accepting federal vouchers. Only a few would have to increase rent payments as a result of the proposed change.
Mr. Finnerty estimated that fewer than one-half of one percent of the city’s federal housing beneficiaries are currently paying less than the proposed minimum. About 15-20 New Bedford residents would be forced to pay more in rent or find other accommodations.
“It’s not going to generate a lot of money, but for some people, it’s going to create a lot of hardship,” Mr. Finnerty said.
Right now, New Bedford has a rent minimum of $25 per month. Fall River, where the minimum monthly rent is $50, would not be affected by the proposal.
Close to half of all New Bedford families living in public housing are currently working, Mr. Finnerty said.
“It’s not as if public housing is loaded with people in some kind of assistance program. But there are also people who just have a difficult time finding work,” Mr. Finnerty said. “There are many who don’t have the skills, but they have to have a place to live. They have to have a place they can afford to live in.”
Mr. Finnerty said the city rarely houses residents who are unlikely to find work. But naturally, he said, some tenants face hard times, and the city does not want to send them out onto the streets.
Current federal law bars agencies from evicting tenants for failing to meet the minimum rent requirement. It further allows local agencies to grant exceptions for many tenants who can prove “financial hardship,” such as a recent job loss or a death in the family. Bush’s proposal would eliminate these exceptions and require the federal government to decide on evictions on a case-by-case basis.
Aaron Gornstein, executive director of the Citizens' Housing and Planning Association, a non-profit housing advocacy group in Boston, said President Bush is taking housing “in the wrong direction.” He criticized the proposal for stripping power from the local housing authorities and placing a burden on low-income renters.
“It would affect the poorest families in the commonwealth at a time when we’re facing a housing crisis of huge proportions. There just aren’t many other housing options for low-income people,” Mr. Gornstein said. “I think it would just contribute to the problem of family homelessness we’re facing in this state.”
Ms. White, the HUD spokeswoman, however, said the initiative is meant to “foster accountability and responsibility” among renters.
Half of all housing authorities in the country would be forced to increase their minimum rent requirement, Ms. White said. About 70 percent already have a rent minimum of at least $25.
“This is not something that’s unheard of,” she said. “It’s something that’s out there.”
Housing authorities across the country are expected to get less federal money in future years and therefore will be under additional fiscal pressure to boost minimum rents.
“I’m sure our situation in New Bedford is probably the same as what you’d find in the other 3,000 housing authorities in the United States,” Mr. Finnerty said.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
New England Seeking Funds To Decrease Bycatch
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON -- Almost a third of all federal dollars going to reduce occurrences of bycatch in U.S. fisheries—catching and killing fish and other sea dwellers in nets set for other species—would go to New England regulators, according to President Bush’s budget proposal for fiscal 2004.
New England would receive $830,000 for bycatch. That money, part of a $2.8 million allotment to address the issue nationwide, would be spent to increase the time that government observers spend on commercial fishing excursions as well as on research and testing.
The Northeast would also benefit from a proposed $3 million to meet additional observer requirements. This allotment would pay for regulators who monitor groundfish intakes, with much of their focus on monitoring and reducing bycatch.
Gordon Helm, spokesman for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said bycatch is one of the key issues the agency is addressing. Bycatch, recently a factor in a lawsuit brought against the agency, has troubled the fishing industry and environmentalists alike.
Fishing nets and traps take in unwanted marine life, including sea turtles and sea birds, which often die before they can be returned to the water. Often, fishermen catch more of a species than they are entitled to under law, or else haul in fish that are too small to meet regulations. These fish are thrown back to the sea, often injured or dead.
Teri Frady, communications director for the Fisheries Service’s Northeast offices, said the observation process is crucial to alleviating the bycatch problem. Observers collect data from groundfish commercial fishing boats, which the government uses to assess the fisheries’ impact on marine life and fishing communities. In addition to bycatch, data includes tallies of overfished stock catch, discarded finfish and total catch.
“Over time, you can try to look for trends. Once you can start to identify how this is occurring, then you can start to reduce it, because that’s what the law requires,” Ms. Frady said.
“It’s a pretty significant job to try to characterize all the bycatch and try to mitigate it,” she said. “No small job.”
In an April ruling intended to force a compromise between fishermen and environmentalists, federal Judge Gladys Kessler ordered an increase in the number of observers to track bycatch. Under the settlement, which is currently being worked out, regulators have been asked to pay for observers on 10 percent of all fishing days. Ms. Frady, however, said that is “more than we really need.”
She said the lawsuit may have helped shape the agency’s budget request, but the agency has been looking to address the problems for many years. Since the 1970s, she said, federal observation of New England fisheries has been financed under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which she said was not written to cover the many problems now being addressed. The lawsuit offered a new impetus to increase observation.
“It may have a lot to do with how much we asked for, but I suspect we were asking for a lot of this money because we really need it,” Ms. Frady said. “Certainly, the fact that we knew we’d have to be in compliance had something to do with the amount we asked for.”
Mr. Helm was reluctant to guess whether the Fisheries Service will receive the funds it has requested.
“We will certainly be happy to explain the need for these funds to members of Congress,” he said.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Mass. Budget Troubles Consistent With National Trend
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON – Massachusetts’s growing budget gap, which is threatening to hit $3 billion in the next fiscal year, is well in line with state budget crises across the nation, according to a report released Tuesday.
While the state’s predicted budget shortfall next year is expected to be among the highest in the nation, a National Conference of State Legislatures report shows that Massachusetts’s current fiscal troubles rank only slightly worse than the median for the 50 states. The survey indicates, however, that the state’s budget crisis may be deepening more rapidly than in other states.
The study estimates Massachusetts’s fiscal 2003 budget gap—the difference between spending and revenue—at 3 percent, which is just above the national median, with all but one state reporting. Next year, however, the gap is expected to surge to 13 percent, a figure exceeding the median gap by almost half. Eleven states did not offer figures on next year’s budget.
Nationwide, state budgets are under siege, and there is no immediate end in sight, according to the NCSL report. Looking ahead to 2004, roughly three-quarters of all states are staring down budget gaps.
“We’re experiencing similar problems as the rest of the country,” said Nicole St. Peter, a spokeswoman for Gov. Mitt Romney, R. “Our economy is lagging a bit in terms of growth, but our budget is very similar to most states in the nation.”
As with most states now facing large gaps, Massachusetts’s struggles are largely due to the collapse of the bull market, according to Robert Tannenwald, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. States knew the drop was coming, he said, but they had no idea just how profound it would be.
Where Massachusetts took a harder hit than most, Mr. Tannenwald said, was in its preference for employee stock options. After the market fell, Bay State employees were left with significantly less dollar power than they expected.
The NCSL report points to several other reasons for Massachusetts’s problems. While tax collections fell well below expectations, the state’s expenses only look to grow. The report notes $1.45 billion in expected spending growth, much of which cannot be cut. Gov. Romney will submit his fiscal 2004 budget proposal by the end of this month.
While many governors have said they are considering a tax hike to reduce their state’s gap, Gov. Romney pledged repeatedly during his campaign last fall that he would not raise taxes. Instead, the governor told voters he would try to slice $1 billion off state spending, and he already has started making cuts.
Last week, Gov. Romney announced about $300 million in appropriation cuts, mainly in health and human services spending. About one-third of the governor’s spending cuts will affect local aid, including a cut of roughly $2.3 million for New Bedford.
Within the next few months, the governor expects to lay off about 125 state employees, making Massachusetts one of only eight states calling for job cuts this fiscal year. Massachusetts also is among only a handful of states to call for employee furloughs and travel bans as ways to lower expenses.
The goal, according to Ms. St. Peter, is to “find efficiencies and root out duplications.” She said the state already has reduced the number of press secretaries in government and ordered a reorganization of the state’s legal offices.
The NCSL report shows that Massachusetts is cutting costs in ways other states are not considering. In addition to layoffs, the state has sought to lower payrolls by offering early retirement, a method that has otherwise been on the table only in Colorado. Massachusetts also has discussed delaying capital projects and borrowing for some of the capital spending, which also are unpopular actions in most states.
Sen. Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), who until last month chaired the legislature’s Ways and Means Committee, said good planning has kept Massachusetts from falling to the “bottom of the barrel.” The state took advantage of more than $2 billion in reserve funds, and legislators started making cuts and seeking revenue increases over a year ago. Still, he said, when the technology bubble burst a few years back, Massachusetts fell hard.
“We have clearly experienced more pain than many states,” Sen. Montigny said. “Even the pessimists are shaking their heads.”
NCSL president Angela Monson said states are not to blame for their fiscal difficulties. On the whole, she said, economic troubles have trickled down from the national level, where so-called unfunded federal mandates have placed a heavy burden on states.
“The economy is different,” Ms. Monson said. “It’s not because the states have budgeted poorly. Things have happened.”
Although several states have not yet reported 2004 data, only three states -- Arkansas, New Mexico and Wyoming -- are not expecting to face a budget gap next year.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
Kennedy Demands Pre-War Evidence From Bush
By Scott Brooks
WASHINGTON - With President Bush indicating that war with Iraq may be imminent, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-MA, is asking Congress to reconsider its resolution authorizing the president to use military force in Iraq.
Sen. Kennedy, one of only 23 senators to oppose the October resolution, conceived the idea for a new resolution just hours before Mr. Bush addressed the nation Tuesday night. If passed, it would require the president to come back to Congress and present "convincing evidence of an immediate threat" before launching a war against Iraq.
"Circumstances have changed significantly since Congress approved that resolution last October," Sen. Kennedy said. Those changes "have only strengthened my belief that this is the wrong war at the wrong time."
During the fall deliberations on the war resolution, he said, the president had not yet decided to go to war. Despite the failure of United Nations inspectors to find a "smoking gun," Sen. Kennedy said, the president is pushing the nation toward what may become "the first great humanitarian catastrophe of the 21st century."
Sen. Kennedy, who has been outspoken in calling for further debate before the country marches off to war, has long opposed action against Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. In 1991, the senator voted against the resolution giving the first President Bush the go-ahead for the Persian Gulf War.
Mike Spahn, a spokesman for Sen. Kennedy, said "a few" senators already have expressed support for the Kennedy resolution. Among senators calling for further debate before going to war, Sen. Robert Byrd, D-WV, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, complimented the Bay State senator on his proposal. Sen. Byrd Tuesday introduced his own resolution, co-sponsored by Sen. Kennedy, that would postpone an attack on Iraq unless the president receives a second UN resolution authorizing an attack.
Still, some say it is not viable after last year's overwhelming vote to give Bush full authority in sending troops to Iraq. The Republican-controlled House approved the October resolution by more than two to one before winning by an even larger percentage in the then-majority-Democratic Senate.
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-SD, who voted in favor of the October resolution, told CNN Wednesday morning that he is "not sure that a resolution in this case is called for."
"We ought to have one last opportunity to think very carefully about what our options are before we make that commitment" to go to war, Daschle told CNN. However, he said, "I don't think that has to take the form of a resolution."
Tom Mann, a senior fellow in governmental studies at the Brookings Institution, called Kennedy's resolution a "largely rhetorical step."
"There isn't any chance of this being taken seriously," said Mr. Mann, who noted that the president is subject to reporting and consultation requirements before going to war.
Published in The New Bedford Standard Times, in Massachusetts.
