Sep 20 2008
Breaking News: Union Political Tricks Behind Palin’s Troopergate Issue – Updated
Updates below the fold – more from SBD
Reader SBD, who is one of the best researchers I have seen, has pulled together an exhaustive history of events and reports surrounding Palin’s battles with Walt Monegan and is allies. It is a comment worthy of being a post all on its own, and is being copied here.
Not surprising, the records shows that at the time Monegan was asked to take another position (he was not fired, he quit instead of taking the other job) all the reporting and screaming from Palin’s opponents revolved around the budget issues.
That’s right folks, back when it happened, Monegan and his allies are on record CONFIRMING Governor Palin’s contentions this was a battle over budgets. And it was a battle over measely 0.06% cut! It could not be the cost cutting, it was minor. SBD says the record shows the real battle was over union control of the cabinet position.
But let’s do this in stages. Let’s look at the reporting SBD has pulled together and note how it all focuses on the budget battle, not some trooper/ex-brother-in-law:
The series of events surrounding this issue points to the Union.
Here is the sequence of events.
‘Out of the blue,’ top cop Monegan gets Palin’s axe; PUBLIC SAFETY: The head of the troopers union says replacing him is wrong. Anchorage Daily News
 (Alaska) July 13, 2008 Sunday
The head of the union that represents state troopers, one of the agencies Monegan oversaw, said replacing him was the wrong move and that troopers were happy with department leadership “for the first time in years.â€
Palin has called for cuts to the public safety budget, while Monegan wanted more troopers, said John Cyr, executive director of the Public Safety Employees Association.
“Her basic mission is to cut the basic cost of government,†he said. “I understand that. But when you do that with public safety, that means that people are less safe in their homes.â€
Palin owes explanation in firing of Walt Monegan; COMPASS: OTHER POINTS OF VIEWÂ Anchorage Daily News
Against the backdrop of a law enforcement system that has been stretched beyond the breaking point, Gov. Palin fires the commissioner and “suggests†that $2.5 million be cut from the Alaska State Troopers budget.
Cut $2.5 million from a budget that comes nowhere close to protecting Alaska’s citizens, while we have billions of dollars in surplus? Fire a commissioner who understands what the problems are and who had a long-range plan to move law enforcement into the 21st century?
And the reason is that the governor wants to head in a new direction. What direction would that be, Governor? What exactly is your plan to make our families safer? What will be the consequence of cutting $2.5 million from public safety? Who did you talk to before you decided to “change direction�
Governor appoints new commissioner; CHUCK KOPP: Kenai police chief will lead the Department of Public Safety. Anchorage Daily News (Alaska)
In a press release, Kopp said he will be fiscally responsible and address recruitment and retention needs.
Kopp’s challenges are significant. Recruitment has been a problem for years. About one in seven troopers positions is unfilled.
“Law enforcement across rural Alaska is in shambles,†said John Cyr, executive director of the Public Safety Employees Association, which is the troopers union. “There are absolutely not enough guys out there to meet the needs.â€
Monegan was working on that and had filled the ranks more than previous commissioners, Cyr said.
From these first three reports it is clear the issue is budget. But if you did not have 20-20 hindsight and know that the total budget cuts were small, you would think there was two opposing sides of principle battling it out, and the Monegan side lost because it did not have the power to win and was trying to circumvent the constitutional authority to decide – the Governor.
Then something really disgusting happens. The politics of personal destruction starts up. The Monegan replacement is hit with rumors that supposedly can only be found in private records of events. Clearly, a major and entrenched force, with many tentacles, is coming out to take down the Governor’s choice for Monegan’s old position. We can see this in the fact the information being used to smear the man is information that would not be public, but a personnel matter in someone’s private record:
Kopp denies account of sexual harassment; ACCUSATION: State’s new public safety boss claims no “skeletons.â€Â Anchorage Daily News (Alaska)
Asked at a press conference to get his side of the sexual harassment allegations, Kopp responded: “There has never been a sexual harassment allegation that resulted in a lawsuit or a settlement by the city of Kenai.â€
Asked how many complaints have been filed against him, he said: “I do not have a history of complaints. Obviously, there has been a source that has talked about an incident, and anything that would be a personnel matter with another individual I would not be able to comment on. But, again, I just want to encourage you guys, there is absolutely nothing in my record that I’m ashamed of. There’s no skeletons in my closet.â€
Someone knew that there was a complaint lodged by one person against Kopp. In positions of power over other’s careers this happens quite a bit by underlings who try to threaten their way to the top. What I noticed is how fast it came out. So we went from budget issues to rumors of sexual harrassment. Governor Palin is one smart person, she sees this for what it is and reacts. Then a someone steps into the play the news media would prefer us not to know about:
GOV. PALIN ISSUES STATEMENT ON ALLEGATION AGAINST HER US States News July 17, 2008 Thursday 12:18 AM EST
“As governor, I expect a certain amount of criticism. When I took the oath of office, I even encouraged Alaskans to ask me questions, to hold me accountable. But some critics have taken this to ridiculous extremes that threaten to distract from the vital business currently facing the state and its residents.
“To allege that I, or any member of my family, requested, received or released confidential personnel information on an Alaska State Trooper, or directed disciplinary action be taken against any employee of the Department of Public Safety, is, quite simply, outrageous. Any information regarding personnel records came from the trooper himself. I question the timing of these false allegations. It is unfortunate, as we seek to address a growing energy crisis in this state, that this matter has been raised now.
Lawmakers may look into Monegan firing; QUESTIONS: An investigator and a legislative hearing are possibilities. Anchorage Daily News (Alaska)
Accusations tying Monegan’s firing to an attempt by the governor to get Wooten fired first became public Thursday on former state lawmaker Andrew Halcro’s blog. Halcro, who lost to Palin in the 2006 governor’s race, wrote on his post about the Monegan firing that the public safety budget was cut by .06 percent for this year under Palin. He conceded that was an error Friday.
But Halcro also suggested Monegan’s Friday revelation that he felt pressured by Todd Palin and others to fire Wooten should make those who attacked his blog reconsider.
“And just a note for all our skeptics and the Palin defenders since our story broke yesterday morning. … here’s looking at you kids,†Halcro wrote Friday.
The blog of the man Palin defeated is the source for the third attack on Palin? This is reporting? Have journalists now become nothing but repeater stations for any information they wish could be true, and so the avoid even investigating it so that their hopes can be realized? The man lost to Palin and then posts on his blog an accusation that the Monegan mess is not about budgets (as Monegan and his allies agreed it was) but about Mike Wooten, and people felt this was a credible source?
So, what is all this about if not 0.06% budget cuts. SBD fills in more details for us:
Who you might ask is Halcro and what is his connection to the Union?? Halcro is the only person who was backed by the PSEA who lost during that election. Sarah Palin ruined the PSEA record which stood at 18 out of 19 for the 2006 election.
PSEA President’s Report December 2006
Its been about 6 months since I last updated you with a President’s Report and a lot has happened during that time. One of the most significant events was the gubernatorial and legislative elections. As we all know, Sarah Palin was elected as our new governor and although PSEA did not endorse her during the campaign, we have seen some moves in a very positive direction. Most of our members are probably not aware that of the 19 legislative candidates endorsed by PSEA, 18 won their elections. This is a very significant accomplishment since a number of incumbents that have historically voted against our issues lost this year and were replaced by candidates endorsed by PSEA and friendly to our cause. Already, we have learned of significant shifts in the way both the house and senate are doing business in a less exclusive manner. As a result, we look forward to this legislative session with optimism.Governor Palin has appointed Walt Monegan, former APD Chief, as the new DPS Commissioner. Commissioner Monegan has expressed a strong desire to engage in regular meetings and conversations with PSEA for the common good of DPS and PSEA members – this is very promising. I view the changes he has made thus far as bold and believe that now we, PSEA members, must do all we can to work with the next administration for a positive future while holding fast to our rights and aspirations.
Thanks to Representatives Roses, Lynn and Dahlstrom — Senators French and McGuire
PSEA encourages its members to thank the Senate sponsors of SB 99 and the House sponsors of HB 193 for all their hard work especially as this last minute lobby against police involvement on the APSC is exposed.
The Union did not want Monegan fired because he was doing their bidding for them against the wishes of his boss Palin.
The Union knew about the Wooten investigation because they represented the trooper in the investigation. He was not fired because he was a foe of Palin.
The Union knew about the accusation of sexual harassment against Kopp because they represent the Troopers in the grievance process and they leaked a matter that is supposed to be confidential.
The Union knew Halcro who they back in the 2006 election would have no problem throwing the Wooten accusation out there.
The Union knew that Monegan would go along with it.
The Union knew that with 18 knew politicians in their pocket, they could get an investigation on these trumpted up charges by the Legislature to try to ruin Palin.
Living in “Enron by the Sea†AKA San Diego, I can spot these Union tactics a mile away.
SBD
I will have to come back and update this later, but what SBD points out makes sense. I have been wondering why Wooten has a Union lawyer with him when he does interviews, like he did with CNN. Clearly the puppet masters at PSEA wanted to keep a close eye on Wooten as they passed him in front of the news media. And is it any surprise the Democrat State Senator, French, who promised the “October surprise” for Palin is also a PSEA ally?
Update: SBD has much more on this. Now he finds PSEA caught in a lie about their ability to support a national election:
This is from the President of the Union, Rob Cox dated September 15, 2008
September 15, 2008
It was brought to my attention that the latest press conference orchestrated by the McCain campaign displayed a flow chart indicating that PSEA is directly connected to the Obama Campaign. This is not true!
Let me give a little background as to how this may have happened. During an interview with CNN, John Cyr was asked if we had been in contact with the Obama Campaign. John replied that we have not but that the Obama Campaign telephoned our office a number of months earlier asking if we normally endorse presidential candidates and if so, whether we had decided on an endorsement. John informed them that we do not, that we have no federal PAC, and would not be endorsing either candidate. The phone call ended and no contact or attempted contact has been made between our offices. John also emphasized that we have not ever discussed the Governor and the allegations surrounding her with anyone from Obama’s team. While televising the interview CNN capped the broadcast with a statement that PSEA had been in contact with the Obama Campaign. This was a gross mischaracterization of the facts. I have confirmed through another media source that the CNN broadcast is the source relied upon for making the connection during the press conference.
So, the PSEA has no Federal PAC, therefore they could not endorse Obama. FALSE
PAC 2004 BATTING AVERAGE: .909!!
A Publication for PSEA MembersThis election, PSEA’s PAC took probably its biggest step into the political arena, financially supporting and endorsing not only state candidates at a record level, but alsoentering a federal race for the first time through the endorsement of Lisa Murkowski for the United States Senate.
On the Senate side, the PAC endorsed and financially supported Tom Waggoner, Bettye Davis and Hollis French and provided financial support to Lyda Green, John Cowdery and Carl Moses; only Moses lost.
A reminder: Hollis French is the Democrat Senator who claimed the investigation into this would result in an October surprise for Palin. So they connection is complete between PSEA and those now trying to smear Palin.
Â
Those carefully reviewing this report will observe that the PAC has thrown its support in favor of candidates regardless of party affiliation. This reflects an important factor in the PAC Committee’s decision-making: when candidates approach us for support, the PAC Committee evaluates their record not only as it pertains to law enforcement issues, but also support for PSEA members as public employees. A critical question posed to each individual was: where do you stand on the issue of funding PSEA’s collective bargaining agreement, whether created through bargaining, or imposed by an arbitrator? The answer to that question was a significant determining factor in deciding who to support.
Those carefully reviewing this report will observe that the PAC has thrown its support in favor of candidates regardless of party affiliation.
I definitely observed all right and you would be amazed what that observation found when you know how to observe correctly!!
For instance, lets take a look at “so called†Republican Nancy Dahlstrom who is quoted in this September 5, 2008 Bloomberg article
“We also discussed and agreed amongst ourselves that no subpoena will be issued for the governor,†said Republican Representative Nancy Dahlstrom. “She has told the public that she intends to cooperate with the investigation, indeed, she has told the public that she welcomes the investigation, and I have every faith that she means it.â€
So “Republican†Nancy Dahlstrom, should we have every faith that you meant what you said above??
The answer to that question is a resounding NO!! Why you ask?? I just happened to find the PSEA PAC Questionnaire filled out by “Republican†Nancy Dahlstrom. She answered every question basically agreeing ahead of time to either sponsor or vote for specific legislation in favor of PSEA.
One question asks how much money she wants and she says $50,000 – $60,000 is reasonable!!
One question asks if the PSEA endorses her, how does she envision their help? Her answer was “Your name is worth a million dollars to me.â€
She ends with a personal note that says “I will always (underlined) be supportive.†It is dated and personally signed on 08-05-06, which was apparently late according to her final note. She was concerned by that fact, so she wrote her personal cell phone number on it and asked for a call upon receipt.
I do not want to provide a link to their website to the document or explain how easy it was to find. It was not password protected and was wide open to download for anyone who could find it.
I will send it to AJ by email along with several other Questionnaires that I found. It will be up tp him to post them on his site.
SBD
I will look over SBDs results, but I doubt I will publish anything private (though I doubt the answers to the questions are private). What SBD has uncovered is the common denominator in all this. They had access to the private details related to individuals because they repesented those individuals in government personell matters. The fact this private information keeps finding its way into mainstream media propaganda is troubling, and may be a violation of the law. Will the professional journalists follow this story to where the evidence and money lead? Â We shall see. SBD has given them a great starting point from the public record.
Update: After having the stage so well set by SBD, I strongly suggest people head over to Flopping Aces on the latest complaint from PSEA – which of ironically (or coincidentally) is based on a wild claim that Wooten’s personal file was exposed (when it seems he was scamming money from Workman’s Compensation while off snowmobiling). The pattern from Kopp to Wooten to Monegan is pretty clear, PSEA is using its knowledge of personell records to throw mud at Palin, claiming her administration is the one opening up files to public scrutiny. Clever, but not good enough to withstand scrutiny surrounding a national election. These folks are not able to play big time politics – they did not set the stage well enough.
 Interestingly, someone sniffed out the Palin-Union clash apparently before she was even named the VP nominee.
This is off topic, Aj, but I wondered if you had seen this. It is an excerpt from a post by DJ Drummond at Wizbang:
So, put it all together, and in the past week Obama has stayed steady or lost support in every party identification group, yet Gallup says his overall support went up four points. And McCain stayed steady or went up in every party identification group, yet we are supposed to accept the claim that his overall support went down by four points? Anyone have an answer for how that is even possible?
Well, actually I do. There is one, and only one, possible way that such a thing can happen mathematically. And that way, is that Gallup made major changes to the political affiliation weighting from the last week to now. Gallup has significantly increased the proportional weight of Democrat response and reduced the weight of Republican response. Bear in mind that this assumes that people change the foundation of their political opinion like a showgirl changes costumes, which has no scientific basis or historical support whatsoever. As I said earlier, the Gallup Organization is very much a professional polling agency, who tries their level best to gauge the national mood. That, after all, is why I chose to use their poll for my examination. I could do the same thing with any other of the major published polls, and I can tell you straight-up that I would find the same practice going on everywhere. But just because something is popular, does not validate it as a scientific method. Rather than report the rising and falling levels of support for Obama and McCain with constant party identification weighting, the Gallup and other polls are shifting the party weights over time, which pretty explains how the ‘bounce’ happens for each convention. When the Democrats held their convention, the polls increased the weight of Democrats and lowered the Republican response, and when the Republicans had their convention, the polls gave the Republicans more weight. That’s why Palin made such an immediate difference in the polls; the Liberals were not all that impressed with her, but the Republicans were happy and with a bigger share of the weight their response was magnified. I can’t prove it, since the Gallup people do not invite me into their strategy meetings, but I think somewhere they are weighting the party ID by the mood as they see it. The problem there, is that such weighting is still very subjective, and what’s more it fails to consider that someone may consider themselves a member of one party with respect to the House and Senate races, but something else entirely when it comes to voting for the President. The state of Oklahoma, for example, is a very Democratic place, but it’s pretty solid for McCain, just as it was for Bush. So weighting a presidential poll for party identification on the basis of how they think someone will vote for Congress, is going to miss the mark.
Anyway, going back to my earlier piece on party weighting, if we go back and look at the historical track record for the last ten years in terms of self-identified party affiliation from actual exit polls, we see a clear standard of weights; 38.4% Democrat, 35.8% Republican, 26.0% Independent. If we then work them out to fill the liberal/moderate/conservative slots used by Gallup, the following weights have historical validity and may be used as a constant for poll responses:
Liberal Democrat 9%
Moderate Democrat 16%
Conservative Democrat 13%
Independent 26%
Liberal/Moderate Republican 23%
Conservative Republican 13%
If we apply those weights to the poll response, here is what happens to the Gallup polling responses:
August 21: Obama 39.94%, McCain 43.43%, Undecided 16.63%
August 28: Obama 40.04%, McCain 43.60%, Undecided 16.36%
September 4: Obama 41.06%, McCain 41.77%, Undecided 17.17%
September 11: Obama 42.04%, McCain 42.45%, Undecided 15.51%
September 18: Obama 39.62%, McCain 45.71%, Undecided 14.67%
This is from the President of the Union, Rob Cox dated September 15, 2008
DPS Weekly Update
September 15, 2008
It was brought to my attention that the latest press conference orchestrated by the McCain campaign displayed a flow chart indicating that PSEA is directly connected to the Obama Campaign. This is not true!
Let me give a little background as to how this may have happened. During an interview with CNN, John Cyr was asked if we had been in contact with the Obama Campaign. John replied that we have not but that the Obama Campaign telephoned our office a number of months earlier asking if we normally endorse presidential candidates and if so, whether we had decided on an endorsement. John informed them that we do not, that we have no federal PAC, and would not be endorsing either candidate. The phone call ended and no contact or attempted contact has been made between our offices. John also emphasized that we have not ever discussed the Governor and the allegations surrounding her with anyone from Obama’s team. While televising the interview CNN capped the broadcast with a statement that PSEA had been in contact with the Obama Campaign. This was a gross mischaracterization of the facts. I have confirmed through another media source that the CNN broadcast is the source relied upon for making the connection during the press conference.
So, the PSEA has no Federal PAC, therefore they could not endorse Obama. FALSE
PAC 2004 BATTING AVERAGE: .909!!
A Publication for PSEA Members
This election, PSEA’s PAC took probably its biggest step into the political arena, financially supporting and endorsing not only state candidates at a record level, but also entering a federal race for the first time through the endorsement of Lisa Murkowski for the United States Senate.
On the Senate side, the PAC endorsed and financially supported Tom Waggoner, Bettye Davis and Hollis French and provided financial support to Lyda Green, John Cowdery and Carl Moses; only Moses lost.
Those carefully reviewing this report will observe that the PAC has thrown its support in favor of candidates regardless of party affiliation. This reflects an important factor in the PAC Committee’s decision-making: when candidates approach us for support, the PAC Committee evaluates their record not only as it pertains to law enforcement issues, but also support for PSEA members as public employees. A critical question posed to each individual was: where do you stand on the issue of funding PSEA’s collective bargaining agreement, whether created through bargaining, or imposed by an arbitrator? The answer to that question was a significant determining factor in deciding who to support.
Those carefully reviewing this report will observe that the PAC has thrown its support in favor of candidates regardless of party affiliation.
I definitely observed all right and you would be amazed what that observation found when you know how to observe correctly!!
For instance, lets take a look at “so called” Republican Nancy Dahlstrom who is quoted in this September 5, 2008 Bloomberg article as saying:
“We also discussed and agreed amongst ourselves that no subpoena will be issued for the governor,” said Republican Representative Nancy Dahlstrom. “She has told the public that she intends to cooperate with the investigation, indeed, she has told the public that she welcomes the investigation, and I have every faith that she means it.”
So “Republican” Nancy Dahlstrom, should we have every faith that you meant what you said above??
The answer to that question is a resounding NO!! Why you ask?? I just happened to find the PSEA PAC Questionnaire filled out by “Republican” Nancy Dahlstrom. She answered every question basically agreeing ahead of time to either sponsor or vote for specific legislation in favor of PSEA.
One question asks how much money she wants and she says $50,000 – $60,000 is reasonable!!
One question asks if the PSEA endorses her, how does she envision their help? Her answer was “Your name is worth a million dollars to me.”
She ends with a personal note that says “I will always (underlined) be supportive.” It is dated and personally signed on 08-05-06, which was apparently late according to her final note. She was concerned by that fact, so she wrote her personal cell phone number on it and asked for a call upon receipt.
I do not want to provide a link to their website to the document or explain how easy it was to find. It was not password protected and was wide open to download for anyone who could find it.
I will send it to AJ by email along with several other Questionnaires that I found. It will be up tp him to post them on his site.
SBD
[…] The Strata-Sphere » Breaking News: Union Political Tricks Behind Palin’s Troopergate Issue. […]
[…] the mainstream media won’t play it straight in its reporting of so-called Troopergate, enter blogs and their readers to do the job for them: Not surprising, the records shows that at the time Monegan was asked to […]
[…] upset the whole establishment in Alaska and has enemies on both sides of the aisle in Alaska. Strata-sphere has a great post about all of this from a commentor on his site. Reader SBD, who is one of the best […]
At Last: the True Skinny on the Scandal that Wasn’t!…
Did She or Didn’t She? Did Sarah Palin fire Moneghan so she could shut down the schools and teach creationism as science, barring non-Christians from having children in Alaska so that the oil reserves could be used up quicker and…
This email proves ABC story is a farce, but the story gets deeper and deeper and reached Biden and Clinton!!
To John K. Waltz
Director of State/Federal Relations
and Special Counsel to the Governor
From Randy Ruaro July 6, 2008
Also, as an FYI, Commissioner Monegan may be traveling to DC at the end og the month. He is pursuing his statewide plan to add 30 retired troopers to take over sexual assault investigations from existing troopers. We met with Karen Rehfeld last week. He does not have a green light on this initiative as we want to vet it with other agencies involved, and review whether putting the funding into troopers would get the best results as oppossed to DHSS and new treatment and education progams.
The abc news document is too pathetic for what they want it to be, but it was another valuable resource to my puzzle.
According to the abc document, guess who Monegan was going to meet in DC?
None other than Senator Murkowski, the Federal candidate that PSEA PAC endorsed even though they don’t have a Federal PAC.
According to the authorization to travel, Monegan was supposed to arrive in Washington on July 22, 2008. When he got there, everything would have already been setup and prearranged for him. Monegan would have come back from DC with everything he had been pushing for and say I told you so to the Palin administration. The Union was grooming him for a future run for office.
The Union came out swinging during this week because they already knew their money was going to get approved by a bill sponsored by Biden, Clinton, and Murkowsky.
This is because Senator Murkowsky had already approved what Mongean wanted on behalf of the PSEA in a bill that passed on July 16, 2008.
That bill which was supposed to be for Global Aids Assistance, had a ear mark that provided for the following:
“Another $30 million would be set aside for Department of Justice grants to tribes and Alaska Native organizations to support tribal courts, domestic violence prosecution and community violence prevention activities. Ten million dollars would be allocated for partnerships between Native organizations and state and local law enforcement agencies, such as Alaska’s Village Public Safety Officer program. These funds could also help support state and municipal law enforcement activities on Alaska Native lands.”
It gets better!!
Senator Joe Biden, a Delaware Democrat and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led the debate in support of the bill. A frequent critic of President Bush, Biden says he has no dispute with the president over this program.
“I am often critical of the president’s foreign policy and his aid programs,” said Senator Biden. “But the President of the United States, George W. Bush, deserves great credit. If the president did nothing else in his administration, this is justification enough for his legacy to be looked back on favorably because of the phenomenal and dramatic impact this initiative has and will have on the rest of the world.”
It gets even deeper if you read the Senate transcript!!
TOM LANTOS AND HENRY J. HYDE UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AGAINST HIV/AIDS, TUBERCULOSIS, AND MALARIA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2008 — (Senate – July 16, 2008)
[Page: S6809]
AMENDMENT NO. 5076
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5076, and I ask unanimous consent that Senators Clinton, Dorgan, and Murkowski be added as cosponsors of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The pending amendment is set aside. The clerk will report the amendment.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Thune], for himself Mr. Kyl, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Tester, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dorgan, and Ms. Murkowski, proposes an amendment numbered 5076.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To provide for an emergency plan for Indian safety and health)
In section 401(a), strike “$50,000,000,000” and insert “$48,000,000,000”.
At the end, add the following:
TITLE VI–EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH
SEC. 601. EMERGENCY PLAN FOR INDIAN SAFETY AND HEALTH.
(ii) the State of Alaska (including political subdivisions of that State) for carrying out the Village Public Safety Officer Program and law enforcement activities on Alaska Native land (as defined in section 3 of Public Law 103-399 (25 U.S.C. 3902));
Mr. THUNE: I also thank Senator Biden and Senator Lugar, the managers of the bill, for their cooperation on this, in making it possible for us to proceed to a vote and actually to do something meaningful to address the very desperate and acute needs that exist across this country on America’s Indian reservations.
Mr. DORGAN: My second-degree amendment is supported by a good number of my colleagues–Senator Johnson, Senator Thune, Senator Kyl, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Murkowski. My amendment takes a portion of this $250 million authorization out of the $2 billion, that is the subject of the underlying amendment and says: Let’s do this. Let’s deal with the water issues–which are very important. I commend my colleague. Let’s deal with the law enforcement issues. They are urgent. I commend my colleagues for that. Then let’s also carve a piece out with respect to Indian health, half of which will deal with facilities that are desperately needed and half of which will deal with contract health care funding. This funding is so desperately short that in many parts of Indian Country the refrain is: Don’t get sick after June because there is no money.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I will speak briefly, and then we are ready to vote on this amendment.
I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the Senator from Indiana, and I would add two points.
I am a fan of sunsetting legislation. There used to be a fellow who worked here with us named Lawton Chiles. He got here in 1970 and started sunsetting ideas, and I am a supporter. But here is the deal, what makes this different.
Mr. President, we all want to see effective oversight of taxpayer dollars, but this amendment would exacerbate the very problems it is attempting to solve.
It would create an expensive new bureaucracy that would duplicate functions already being performed by numerous inspectors general, the Government Accountability Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and other outside organizations commissioned by Congress to carry out reviews of this program.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I think everyone admires the humanitarian intent of this legislation. But the American people have a right to know that their money is going to be spent for the intended purpose–to treat AIDS and HIV in the countries covered–and that it is not wasted. One of the reasons foreign aid gets a bad rap is because people wonder whether it is going to be squandered or used appropriately.
The only thing this amendment does is provide an extra set of eyes to make sure every dollar is spent, as Congress intended, on a humanitarian purpose. This is especially important under this particular program because the Congressional Budget Office says that even though this bill authorizes $50 billion for this purpose, only about $35 billion could actually be spent during the 5-year period covered by this bill. What is going to happen to the additional $15 billion? One might ask, are we going to try to jam $15 billion more into the program than can actually be spent effectively and efficiently to accomplish congressional purpose?
These people think they can just get away with anything. There should be congressional investigations into this amendment to the Global Aids Bill!!
SBD
[…] at AJ’s The Stratasphere, another commenter is researching the PSEA’s (trooper union) relationship with Palin’s […]
[…] who runs Jawa Report, seems to be onto something here – though, like the links reader SBD found between Troopergate and a Union in the tank for Obama and against Palin, the media will ignore because it has elevated political agendas over […]
[…] have noted many times the Troopergate saga is a political hit job, and recently one of our readers connected the dots to show it is probably a coordinated smear between Palin’s political enemies (which she has […]