South Dakota Politics

LA Times on Thune

LA Times:

Thune lobbied panel to save S.D. air base

Commission's changes would cut billions from Pentagon's savings figures

By John Hendren

Los Angeles Times

Originally published August 27, 2005

ARLINGTON, Va. - The military base closing commission continued to defy the Pentagon's wishes yesterday, voting to spare South Dakota's politically charged B-1 bomber base and averting the shutdown of a major Air Force base in New Mexico.

Ellsworth Air Force Base was kept open after feverish lobbying by lawmakers from South Dakota, while New Mexico officials claimed a "partial victory" from a compromise that keeps Cannon Air Force Base open through 2009 and urges Defense officials to find new missions to keep it open thereafter.

Conservative Reform in Germany

German elections are approaching.  The question facing the electorate is not whether to reform Germany's welfare state, but how and how fast.  Whatever happens, Germany will remain far to the left of the U.S. in its institutions; but it will surely move in a direction that conservatives in this country would recommend.  There is no other way to solve the enormous problems that European economies are facing.  This from The Financial Times  (tip to RealClearPolitics):

Gerhard Schröder, the present chancellor, earns respect for having started the reform process. His welfare reforms have made it harder for the long-term unemployed to claim permanent benefits. His reforms have often been criticised as being non-transparent, incoherent and insufficient. But at least they were a start.

Ms Merkel is more ambitious. She has promised to modernise Germany's obscure income tax system and to cut company contributions to unemployment insurance. If she wins, she will be in a position to implement her agenda because her party enjoys a majority in the Bundesrat, the upper chamber of parliament. She will maintain that majority for at least two years. If Mr Schröder wins, he will need at least tacit support from the opposition for any of his reforms to pass.

An example of Ms Merkel's determination to embrace audacious reform came last week when she appointed as her finance spokesman Paul Kirchhof, a former Constitutional Court justice.

Mr Kirchhof has campaigned for a flat income tax rate of 25 per cent and for the total abolition of Germany's 418 categories of tax subsidies. His plan stands few chances of being implemented, even if he were to become finance minister in a Merkel cabinet. But the appointment has demonstrated that Ms Merkel intends to think boldly about a comprehensive tax reform.

Bi-Partisanship

Joel at South Dakota Straight Talk has a post on the bi-partisanship displayed by our delegation, in particular Sen. Thune and Sen. Johnson. 

Hat tip SD Blogwatchman

More on Industry

Professor Schaff mentioned comments made by Talmage and Chad that the state shouldn't be depending on government jobs .  Yesterday Don Frankenfeld made similar comments on Mt. Blogmore.

Now, right now, South Dakota should turn its attention to the question of how to thrive without depending on Ellsworth. Ellsworth WILL close, just not right away. I repeat my call to re-incarnate Peter Norbeck. Yesterday, we needed vision and leadership to control our own destiny. We need it today as well.

I Told You It Was Sweeping The Nation (or at least South Dakota)

Mt. Blogmore has a funny string on "the picture".  I have no comment on anything in this string having to do with Sibby, although it is unclear why anyone would want to put Tim Johnson in a ringer. 

More Industry

Talmage, seconded by Chad, points out that one lesson from the Ellsworth adventure is that the state shouldn't be depending on government jobs to bring progress to our state.  As a public employee I have profound respect for the good done by government spending, but government spending is generally not productive spending.  What I mean by that is the government, as a rule, does not create new things, market new things, and produce profit.  The government is generally a redistributive force, not a creative force.  That said, government can often grant seed money that leads to productive enterprise.  For example, Gov. Rounds is keen on using state money for research and development at our universities.  While SDSU, USD, and SDSMT will see the lion's share of this money, all the schools will benefit and the state will in the long run.  I also think that we should be welcoming to employers like Wal-Mart and Lowes.  While these businesses do not represent the kind of creative industry just discussed, welcoming them with open arms creates an employer friendly environment that can hopefully attract other business.  And hey, these businesses do create wealth by making us more efficient in the use of our shopping dollars.  I think our state should accept employers when they want to locate here.  One thing about employers, they do tend to have employees.  And that's good for South Dakota. I would be interested in hearing solid ideas from Talmage, Chad or anyone else on how we can get more and better industry/productive business in South Dakota.  I will say that state Republicans have to get over their reflexive anti-government stance since government aid can help lure and create productive industry.  Let's not turn support for limited government into a fetish that stops the state from doing sensible things.  Also, conservatives must remember that spending that might be inappropiate for the federal government might be entirely appropriate for state and local government.  Conversely,  Democrats need to stop being antagonistic to businesses like Wal-Mart. 

Just a note on the Brookings/Lowes thing. It is only my gut instinct that Brookings will be better off with Lowes, and offering incentives to lure businesses is quite typical.  That said, like PP over at the War College, I don't know enough about it to have a strong opinion.  I'm not interested in arguments against Lowes as a company, but if someone has a good argument against this particular deal I'd be willing to hear it. 

Washington Post on Thune

In today's Washington Post:

washingtonpost.com

Thune Delivers on Campaign Vow
Senator's Future Brightens as S.D. Base Survives the Cut

By Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 27, 2005; A06

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) sat tense, crouched and glowering as the base-closing commission delivered its verdict about Ellsworth Air Force Base in the ballroom of a Crystal City hotel yesterday, then leapt up gleefully when the bomber base's death sentence was commuted.

The 44-year-old's political career may have been spared as well.

Last fall, Thune unseated Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) in part by claiming that a Republican tight with the White House would have a better chance of saving the perennially impaired Ellsworth, a Cold War arsenal in the middle of the prairie. So it was potentially calamitous for Thune back home in May when the Pentagon put Ellsworth on the list of closure recommendations for the independent Base Realignment and Closure commission.

Thune, a former House member whose status as the Daschle slayer has made him a popular speaker before GOP groups, had long told the White House that losing Ellsworth -- South Dakota's largest employer after the state government -- was the one issue that could make him a one-term senator.

"There's something about my Scandinavian heritage that knows that life shouldn't be easy -- life's got to be hard," a relieved Thune said by telephone shortly after the commission's 8 to 1 vote to discard the Pentagon recommendation to close Ellsworth and move the base's B-1B bombers to Texas.

Picture from Washington Post:

Hildebrand Vows to Fight On

Washington Post reports:

Steve Hildebrand, Daschle's campaign manager, said Thune, who won by two percentage points after losing a Senate race two years before, is likely to have a strong challenger when he seeks reelection in 2010. "He's still going to have to watch his back every step of the way," Hildebrand said.

Give it up Hildebrand!

New York Times on Thune

The New York Times has a story this morning about Thune and Ellsworth:

He pulled out all the stops and virtually camped out at the commission hearings being held at a hotel just outside Washington, buttonholing anyone he could to make the case for Ellsworth. "I've spent more time with this BRAC commission than I've spent with my wife and my family in the last three months," he said.

Mr. Thune noted that in his 2004 run for the Senate, he had never run advertisements or made statements promising to keep the base open. But the idea that a Republican lawmaker could be more useful to the state given the party's hold on Washington - more influential than even the Senate's top Democrat - was a persistent undercurrent of the campaign.

But Daschle ran lots of ads and made statements about Ellsworth during 2004.  Then the New York Times put a call in to Daschle:

Reached Friday, Mr. Daschle politely sidestepped inquiries about the political implications of the decision. "I'm very happy for South Dakota," he said in an e-mail message.

Anyone wonder if he's been able to get to a phone to call Thune and congratulate him?

More Bias from Kranz

Dave Kranz, Tom Daschle's long-time college buddy, has an article in today's Argus in which he's whining about the Republican Senate Committee's press release about Thune's victory.  The problem is that when the Democratic Senate Committee wrote a release in May gloating over the closure of Ellsworth KRANZ SAID NOTHING.  You see, it's only bad when Republicans do something according to Kranz.  What Kranz doesn't mention is that the GOP release yesterday was just reprinting the Democratic release from May to make the point about the Democrats gloating over closure. 

Sibby has more on Kranz's long-time college buddy:

Then yesterday Tom Daschle downplays the importance of the Ellsworth issue. Excerpt from a Rapid City Journal report:

Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle said Friday that the debate over the future of Ellsworth Air Force Base during last year's Senate race was "overblown."

In downplaying the significance in last year's campaign, he said Friday: "I think that part of it was overblown from the very beginning."

But the report goes on to disclose what Daschle did during the 2004 campaign:

In the months leading up to the 2004 election, Daschle used radio, television and full-page newspaper ads to emphasize his leadership post, his past efforts to support Ellsworth and the power he would have in the coming BRAC round.

In a debate a few weeks before the election, Daschle revealed that he had convinced President Bill Clinton to personally intervene during the 1995 BRAC round and have Ellsworth removed from the closure list. ...

Daschle’s selfishness was again evident with this quote from the RCJ report:

He said he would not be able to call Thune to congratulate him.

"I am in Western Montana, so I'm not in a very good position to make calls," he said in a telephone interview. He said he would be "contacting the delegation and giving them my best wishes."

Wow…in a phone interview Daschle was "not in a very good position to make calls". Or should we say calls to John Thune.

More Funny Caption Entries

If you are anware of what this is about, see here and here.  Here are two more entries in the funny caption contest.  I must say I never thought anyone would respond.  Thanks to all of those willing to engage is this silliness. 
New entry #1:
The cartoon bubble above John's head says.  " Karl Rove sure did know what he was doing!"

And what might be the winner:

"Senator Johnson reacts to Senator Thune's announcement that he saved a
bunch of money on his car insurance by switching to Geico."

Iraq Blog, etc.

This blog by Michael Yon has received much attention in the last couple days, including stories from the Star Tribune and Powerline.  If you want real Ernie Pyle type war reporting, Yon seems to be the only game in town. 

In war related news, it seems Cindy Sheehan thinks those trying to kill Americans are the real freedom fighters.  You can read about it here and here.  This opinion ought to remove her from respectable debate, but I suppose it won't.  Michael Moore once compared the terrorists who kill American soldiers and Iraqi civilians to the Minutemen of the American Revolution.  And then he was given a place of honor at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.  Last night I watched Michael Moore Hates America, a film by Michael Wilson from Minnesota.  What an amazing documentary.  The title is misleading.  The film is partially about Wilson's attempt to both show the dishonest way in which Michael Moore makes "documentaries" and also to get an interview with Moore himself (which never happens).  But something funny happened on the way to bashing Michael Moore.  Wilson starts to question himself, even the title of his movie.  By saying "Michael Moore Hates America" is he poisoning the nation's rhetoric with the same kind of vitriol that Moore spews?  There are two points where he does serious on camera soul searching about his own documentary methods.  The film ends up being a celebration of American freedom and the opportunity it represents and attacks the cynics and conspiracy theorists of the left (Michael Moore) and right (David Horowitz, in a disturbing on camera appearance).  As Wilson travels around America to talk to many of the subjects of Moore's own films, Wilson discovers an essential goodness and optimism in the American soul.  This film turns out to be an antidote to cynicism.  And hey, it got two thumbs up from Ebert and Roper.  Warning:  Wilson spends considerable time talking to Penn Gillette of Penn and Teller, and Mr. Gillette has a very foul mouth.  So the downside is that this very hopeful film about America can't be shown to children. 

Now The Important News

Pheasant numbers are at a 40 year high.  Giddy up! 

Local Ellsworth Reaction

The American News has a story on local reaction to the resurrection of Ellsworth.  Yours truly, wearing my political science hat, is quoted saying much the same thing as I have said here.  Thune received more grief than he deserved when the base was put on this list and perhaps will receive too much attention now that it has been taken off.  Still, Thune will no doubt benefit politically from this event. 

Credit where Credit is Due

Our Democratic colleagues in the regional blogsophere are being rather more generous in sharing the credit for today's good news than they were when Ellsworth was put on the BRAC list, which is probably what we at SDPolitics would have done if, say, Daschle had been reelected and this thing had played out the same way.

Trent Dlugosh at Proud Liberal  has a very honest and insightful comments on this.  He must be right, because he supports what I and my colleague Jon Schaff have written.

[W]e on the left were set to blame Thune if Ellsworth had closed, even though there obviously would have been additional factors at work had that come to pass.  Now that Ellsworth has been saved, the perception is going to be that Thune saved it, which is the chance we took by laying all the blame at his feet.  Of course Sen. Johnson and Rep Herseth played large roles in this process as well, and to his credit Thune has said as much, but the perception is going to be both locally and nationally that Thune saved the base, and as we all know, perception is reality.

That strikes me as right on every count.  Thune probably gets more credit than he deserves because his critics overplayed their hand.  I can't help but wonder if this was some kind Rovean strategy.  What a story that would make. 

At the other end of the scale is Don't Worry About the Government.

Ellsworth should have never made it on the list May 13th. It did, despite John’s campaign promises. Yes, Ellsworth was saved today -- not because of John Thune’s influence, but because the arguments for saving Ellsworth were strongly in our favor. The ‘eggs in one basket’ argument in particular was a solid one -- one made not just by Thune, but by our entire delegation. Remember that.  That said, I would be a complete ass if I didn't at least say, "You did good today, John.  Real good."

That's Jer Bear being somewhat less than a complete ass.  Still, that counts for graciousness in some quarters.

Probably more representative of South Dakota's Democrats are these comments by CCK:

Johnson, Thune, Herseth, Rounds, and the Ellsworth Task Force deserve equal credit in making this happen. They built a very strong case over the last 15 weeks or so and the Commission listened.

and this by Thunewatch:

This is great news for South Dakota and we would like to thank Senator Tim Johnson, Senator John Thune, Representative Stephanie Herseth, Governor Mike Rounds, the Ellsworth Task Force and all those involved in the process. Everyone worked together well to get the best possible outcome for South Dakota and it worked. Ellsworth, against all odds, was given a stay of execution. 

That's as fair as one could ask for. Right now we can sit back and enjoy an era of good feeling that should last, well, at least until I read Chad Schuldt's next blog.  Well done all.

More on KOS and Ellsworth

Quentin mentions just below the Daily Kos and some comments on Ellsworth posted Tuesday.  KOS's comment on today's news is priceless.

Someone took pity on poor Sen. Thune and spared SD's base from closure.

The commission is voting on which bases to close and which to spare in a marathon session today. Google news is a good resource to catch the latest news.

Regardless of what gets cut and what doesn't, Republican lawmakers are feeling betrayed the Bush Administration even put their bases on the chopping block.

Of course it was "bush league". That's what happens when you have an incompetent running the joint.

Well, yeah they are.  Almost everyone agrees that the military keeps too many bases open.  No one at all (at least no one in Congress) wants bases cut in his or her own districts.  So what exactly would the non-Bush league, competent policy have been?  I suppose Bush could have cut bases only in districts controlled by Democrats.  That would not have left any Republicans feeling betrayed.  But he did it in a more fair and square way. 

I confess I find this whole affair deliciously ironic.  The Democratic regional blogosphere spent months blasting Thune because he did not have the power to corrupt the process in our favor.  Now we Republican bloggers are beating our chests because it looks like he did have such power.  This is not to say that the arguments in favor of saving Ellsworth were not sound.  But that wasn't the issue in the blog wars.  It was whether Thune or Daschle would have had more power to "influence" the process, and I take influence to be a euphemism for corruption. 

Alexander Hamilton once observed that the British government was corrupt, but that that was a good thing.  Otherwise, it would not work.  The same is no doubt true for any political system operated by modified chimpanzees.  I'm just glad my group of chimps got what we wanted. 

 

Write That Caption!

It's the fastest growing game sensation that's sweeping the nation. More entries in the contest to write a caption for the funny picture in the New York Times.  The original post is here, and other entries are here and here.  I will repost the picture below.  Here are some new entries:

Sen. Johnson:     "John, "Stop the Negative Attack!" on my spine!"

Sen. Thune:  "It's all happening exactly the way Dick and I planned it two years ago."
Sen. Johnson:     "What just happened? And why is John hurting my neck?"
Gov. Rounds:       "It's all happening exactly the way Stan and I planned it
two years ago."
Rep. Herseth:     "I'm here too!"

Rep. Herseth:     "Um, excuse me, anyone want to see the new
necklace I got in Sturgis?"

Sen. Johnson: "This sucks, at least I could look down on Tom
when he didn't have his stool."

Ryne McClaren and Daily Kos

Ryne is talking about how Daily Kos viewed the Thune/Ellsworth situation and of course has many important things to say:

Ellsworth Saved

Note to our friends on the left: John Thune refused to take any sort of sole credit for the committee's decision. He referred to it many times as being a "joint" effort by all of South Dakota's concerned delegation. In short, your talking points are no longer operative. See this laugher from one of the Kos Kidz earlier this week:

Daschle would've likely saved Ellisworth (like he had done in the past), just like ND's two Dems did their part to protect their local economy (whether BRAC is truly justified or not). But Thune argued in 2004 that he would be best positioned to save Ellsworth as a Republican in a GOP-trifecta-led D.C.

Now, he's been made a fool by his own president, has proven his impotence to the SD voters, and has likely lost 6,000 mostly GOP-leaning jobs in western South Dakota.

Not bad for a first-year Senator.

And how does it make you feel that your Sugar Daddy refuses to give Sen. Johnson or Rep. Herseth any credit for the base being kept open, preferring instead to say that "someone" (oh, please) took "pity" on John Thune? I know that if I were a left-winger, and I woke up to that turd floating in my Cheerios, I'd be pissed.

Oh, and Bob Novak? You can shut the hell up, too.

Note to our friends on the left: John Thune refused to take any sort of sole credit for the committee's decision. He referred to it many times as being a "joint" effort by all of South Dakota's concerned delegation. In short, your talking points are no longer operative. See this laugher from one of the Kos Kidz earlier this week:

Daschle would've likely saved Ellisworth (like he had done in the past), just like ND's two Dems did their part to protect their local economy (whether BRAC is truly justified or not). But Thune argued in 2004 that he would be best positioned to save Ellsworth as a Republican in a GOP-trifecta-led D.C.

Now, he's been made a fool by his own president, has proven his impotence to the SD voters, and has likely lost 6,000 mostly GOP-leaning jobs in western South Dakota.

Not bad for a first-year Senator.

And how does it make you feel that your Sugar Daddy refuses to give Sen. Johnson or Rep. Herseth any credit for the base being kept open, preferring instead to say that "someone" (oh, please) took "pity" on John Thune? I know that if I were a left-winger, and I woke up to that turd floating in my Cheerios, I'd be pissed.

Oh, and Bob Novak? You can shut the hell up, too.

Assoc. Press

Here's a part of a long story on Ellsworth from Associated Press:

When the Pentagon announced that it wanted to shut down Ellsworth Air Force Base, it was an enormous setback for Sen. John Thune. The Republican got elected in part by repeatedly telling voters he could save the base because of his close ties to President Bush.

Thune responded to the Ellsworth news by going on the offensive: He and fellow South Dakota leaders from both parties launched an intense lobbying effort. He also stopped fund-raising for the Republican Party and opposed the Bush administration on a few important Senate votes.

On Friday, Thune's political future got a big boost when a federal commission decided to save Ellsworth, home to B-1B bombers and a major player in the Cold War. He and other South Dakota politicians hailed the decision as the result of an extraordinary bipartisan campaign that convinced the commission that the military and nation need Ellsworth.

Daschle and the Boys on Ellsworth

After Daschle paid his former staffers all year to bash Thune about Ellsworth, which they claimed to be the biggest campaign issue last year (it wasn't that big a deal of you followed the race), now Daschle finally admits it wasn't a big deal.  Sibby is also talking about Daschle's sudden change of heart.  But let's remember how the Rapid City Journal reported on the Daschle-financed "war" against Thune using Ellsworth:

But it didn't really end the 2004 campaign — at least, not for some former members of Daschle's staff.  Led by public statements from former Daschle campaign manager Steve Hildebrand and the pointed and sometimes profane Internet sniping from other former staffers, the Daschle team continues to wage political war against Thune.

The former Daschle staff members have hammered on Thune for his failure to keep Ellsworth Air Force Base off a military closure list and compared him unfavorably to Daschle in the levels of funding he has been able to secure for state water projects and highways. ... And in some cases, they receive leftover Daschle campaign funds while they do it. ...  It some cases, it can also be profane. Former Daschle staff member Jeremy Funk, who works with Hildebrand, uses a personal Web log, or blog, to promote "F... Thune" T-shirts. 

[Daschle campaign manager Steve] Hildebrand has commented to reporters and issued news releases critical of Thune, including what Hildebrand considered to be the senator's inability to protect Ellsworth Air Force Base. ... Hildebrand said he does not get any direction from Daschle in making those statements. He does, however, get money each month from both the 2004 campaign fund and Daschle's political action commission — DASHPAC.  HildebrandTewes Consulting — the "Tewes" is Paul Tewes, Hildebrand's partner — receives $2,000 a month from Daschle's campaign fund and another $4,000 a month from DASHPAC. Hildebrand, who manages both funds for Daschle, said the payments his firm receives were to maintain and manage the political action committee and to wrap things up from the campaign.

Also, the comment of the day comes from the Rapid City Journal's Mt. Blogmore:

I just drove by Daschle’s house, I could swear I heard Taps.

Daschle on Ellsworth: It was no big deal

Of course the former Senator his happy and whatever efforts he did make are appreciated. And he also says the issue was not that big of a deal in the 2004 election.

[Daschle] said Friday that he has helped the delegation make calls to commissioners to make the case for Ellsworth.

He also downplayed the significance in last year's campaign.

"I think that part of it was overblown from the very beginning," he said.

He said he would not be able to call Thune to congratulate him Friday.

Even More Caption Humor

Again from the email, here is the latest entry in the "Write That Caption" contest: "Thune Gives Johnson The Vulcan Neck Pinch!"  Follow the link above to get the joke. 

Live long and prosper?  I think not! 

The Vote

Red State

Redstate.org has picked up on the Ellsworth/Thune story.  Look for the SDP mention.

My own considered opinion is that Thune's position is akin to the football quarterback.  The football team's quarterback tends to get too much credit when the team wins and too much blame when the team loses.  The left-wing blogs, caught up in anti-Thune hatred, dumped all sorts of invective on Thune in post after post that did not even sniff fair political argument.  Thune didn't even remotely deserve all the invective directed his way.  In the process, as Prof. Blanchard notes, by logic the left-wing blogs made Johnson and Herseth out to be irrelevant.  They made Thune the central figure in this soap opera, and now that Ellsworth has been saved Thune will reap the lion's share of the credit.  Oddly enough, the left-wing blogs have ensured that Thune will be the focus of attention today.  Since I like and support Senator Thune, I have no problem with this. 

KELO-Land

KELO-Land Television:

USD Political Science Chair: Thune Big Winner In Ellsworth Battle

Eating Crow

When it comes to a choice between the high road and the low road, I say just make sure there's at least one SOB lower than you are.  Now that the news of Ellsworth's rescue has been splashed across monitors across the region, it is worth remembering how our esteemed colleagues on the left have treated Senator Thune.  Today Chad at CCK is quite gracious. 

Johnson, Thune, Herseth, Rounds, and the Ellsworth Task Force deserve equal credit in making this happen. They built a very strong case over the last 15 weeks or so and the Commission listened.

I appreciate that, and its my sentiment as well.  But its a brand new sentiment, so far as I can see, on that side of the aisle.  Back when Ellsworth was first put on the closure list, it was John Thune's fault and his alone.  Without realizing it, South Dakota Democratic blogs treated Johnson and Herseth like chopped liver.  Daschle alone, it was assumed, could have saved Ellsworth.  That's why it was so darn terrible that we replaced him with Thune.  Well, if that's right, then we now know that Daschle didn't matter either.  The consequence of placing sole responsibility on Thune when Ellsworth was put on the list is that he gets most of the political benefit now.

Chad had this to say on Thursday:

Thune has stated he talked with the President. He has said he talked to Cheney, Rumsfeld, and that he had “dozens of conversations” with the Pentagon prior the the BRAC announcement on May 13. Nothing ever materialized from Thune’s “clout” prior to the May 13 announcement. The conclusion I draw is one of two things:

1.  Thune never had the conversations he said he had.
2.  Or, Thune never had the clout he claimed.

Either way, Thune isn’t exactly telling the truth.  And that has been the basis of everything written here at CCK.

Now I am kinda simple minded about things like this.  The base either closed or it didn't.  It didn't.  If it had closed, that would have been seem as Thune's fault, and would have been taken as proof that he didn't have the clout that he said he did.  Since it didn't close, this has to be greatly to Thune's credit (if not his alone), and proves that he had all the clout he needed.  It was surely harder to save the base once it was put on the list than afterward, and indeed that was the time that Presidential clout would probably be most effective. 

Give it up, Chad.  If Ellsworth had closed that would be weakness for Thune at least until he were reelected.  Since it didn't, the weakness is erased.  In fact, the near scare probably makes Thune look better.  Note this from AP:

WASHINGTON – The federal base-closing commission has voted to keep Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota open, bucking the Pentagon's recommendation to shutter the state's second-largest employer.

The vote is a major political victory for Republican Sen. John Thune, who argued in the state's Senate race last year that his close ties to President Bush would help save the Rapid City base. He defeated Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, who said he would be better positioned to save it.

 

BTW, I do not think that Chad and his Democratic colleagues wanted Ellsworth to close, just to hurt Thune.  Nor do I think that the contributions of Tim Johnson and Stephanie Herseth, and Governor  Rounds should be discounted.  I have no idea how to rank the various degrees of effort and effectiveness. I do think that SD Democrats enjoyed using the issue against Thune while it lasted, and were hoping to use it against him in the future in the otherwise unfortunate event that Ellsworth did close.  That's what I would have been doing in their shoes.

 

Fun With NYT photo

From the email, here is a contestant in the "Write that caption" contest referenced below: "(Tim Johnson is thinking..) If Thune's hand is on my shoulder, and Rounds' and Herseth's are over there, then WHO IS THAT GOOSING ME?

BTW, here is a good set of "John Thune Helps Save Ellsworth" links.   And here's a brief blurb from NROs Corner. 

NYT on EAFB

Here is the New York Times on the Ellsworth decision.  The news story contains the photo below.  Perhaps we can have a contest to see who can come up with the funniest caption.  The winner gets a full dose of self-satisfaction. My first effort?  "Left to right: Dick Grayson, Barbara Gordon, and Bruce Wayne decide to join forces with Jack Napier."  Batman fans will get the references.  Or how about this: "In a moment of triumph, Sen. Tim Johnson suddenly regrets eating that breakfast taco."  OK, one more: "Rep. Stephanie Herseth shows off her life sized Mike Rounds doll." 

Powerline

Powerline:

Ellsworth survives

John Thune's crusade to save South Dakota's Ellsworth Air Force base has succeeded . The base closing commission has voted to reject the Defense Department's recommendation that the base be closed. Thune unseated then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle partly on the strength of his claim that he would be better positioned to help save the base. The Democrats gloated when it looked like Ellsworth would be closed, but now Thune gets the last laugh.

Via Power Line News.

A brief reaction

I agree with the sentiments expressed by the delegation that this was a team victory, not a partisan or personal one.  I would disassociate myself from any attempt to score short-term political points off of this.  That said, we at SDP are Thune partisans and it's a good day for John Thune.  There must be some feeling of vindication. 

The commission's recommendations do have to go to President Bush and ultimately Congress for approval.  It seems unlikely the commission's recommendations will be rejected. 

News Conference

Our delegation, plus Governor Rounds, is holding a news conference.

Sen. Johnson calls it a victory for national security and for the state.  He praises the work of the delegation, Gov. Rounds, and the Ellsworth taks force. 

Sen. Thune: Great day for South Dakota and for America.  Like Johnson he praises commission's judgment.  Like Johnson he congratulates everyone.  Someone asks a stupid question about whether Thune can take personal credit for this.  Thune, not an idiot, says it is a group effort. 

Rep. Herseth: Jack ass reporters want Thune to make news instead of letting Herseth talk.  She is glad that the commission recognized the impact on Rapid by this closing. 

Gov. Rounds: Wow, he is barely taller than Herseth.  Echoes what the others have said.  Praises the delegation for putting aside partisanship and working together. 

Question: What was most important argument?  Johnson says it was the quality of the base.  It was better than Dyess on many points and no cost savings.

Question: Sen. Thune, how did you benefit politically from this: Thune says it was a group effort and had nothing to do with him.  This was on merits, not politics.  This is the right answer.  Guy follows up by asking whether this was Thune keeping a campaign promise.  Thune again demurs and says it was teamwork and politics isn't relevant.

Question: Were you approached by litigants from Texas?  Thune says they talked to those people and worked with them, but they were only looking at the litigation as one factor among many.  Thune and others only took information from litigants. 

Question: What about the bill delaying implementation of BRAC?  Thune says they will consult with co-sponsors as to what to do with that.  Herseth says that this decision being good for the country and the fact that the commission has already taken other bases off the list might change the circumstances.  The national security concerns are not as high as before. Johnson says that BRAC was the real mountain to climb, and so legislation might not be as relevant.

Good Question: Because many of Rumsfeld's biggest changes have been rejected, does that mean Bush might reject the commission's report?  Johnson says Bush won't want to start this process over.  Thune says the process is about savings and many of the claims from various areas of the country are precisely that no savings are to be had by closing various bases. 

Question: Come on Thune, do some political gloating. Thune says this isn't political.  This was the result of teamwork.  There is no political advantage to be gained.  On this it doesn't matter if you are Democrat or Republican.  Rounds says that if politics had been played with this we would not have been successful.  Every member of the delegation made contacts and their staffs worked together.  This was critical to success. 

End of press conference.  This is called live blogging.  I apologize for typos.  Update: I did go back and change some of my more obvious typos and made this post more comprehensible in a couple places. 

ELLSWORTH SAVED!!!

ELLSWORTH SAVED!!!!

Thune a hero; South Dakotans Ecstatic; Daschle Comeback Hopes Die; Hildebrand Boys Depressed

Operating cost, etc.

Commissioner Sam Skinner has just made the point that there will be no cost savings per flight by moving all B-1s to Texas.  In fact cost will go up.  He also makes the point that the litigation at Dyess makes Ellsworth's unrestricted air space favorable.  They pilots cannot train at the optimal level at Dyess. 

Commissioner Gehman seems to be questioning the actual savings coming from closing Ellsworth.  He has just said that we are essentially talking about moving planes from one very good base to another very good base with no $ savings.

Commissioner Newton is asking about air space.  Beauchamp claims air space is comparable at both bases, but the staff gives a slight edge to Ellsworth.  Newton says that if pilots cannot train in the desired way they are not getting the best training. He seems to be saying that if the litigation at Dyess limits us at all, we should favor Ellsworth.  I hope I am reading this correctly. 

Skinner has just said he plans to make a motion to reject the Secratary's recommendation.

Beauchamp has just mentioned "piece of the Little Rock".  I don't think he realizes that was funny. 

Commissioner Coyle: 101% of cost savings from closing Ellsworth are from personnel.  That means closing the base will actually cost the Air Force money.  Again, I hope I am hearing this correctly.

Chairman Principi asks about impact on the community.  Beauchamp says it will cost about 8.5% job loss in the area (Rapid City).  That is a conservative estimate.  The community puts the cost at 10%.  Because it is rural it will be harder to attract other industry. 

SKINNER MAKES MOTION: By 8-1 the motion to strike Ellsworth from the list has passed. 

Just a Question

Who is the guy in the yellow tie in the background who keeps nodding his head?

The Upshot

The case being made is familiar.  On the commission's own standards Ellsworth scored well and just as high or higher than Dyess on various criteria.  Consolidating the B-1 to one base is a bad idea.  Pending lawsuits at Dyess make its use limited. 

BRAC Live

The BRAC hearing on Ellsworth is going on now on CSPAN.  I have it on the computer so if something of deep interest occurs I'll blog it.  Right now BRAC analyst Lt Col Beauchamp is comparing Ellsworth favorably to Dyes.  Someone needs to teach this guy something about public speaking. 

David Brooks on the Iraqi Constitution

The master of kinder, gentler conservativism has a good piece on the Iraqi constitution in the New York Times.  A fervent critic of Bush's policies has this to say (from Baghdad):

"The Bush administration finally did something right in brokering this constitution," Galbraith exclaimed, then added: "This is the only possible deal that can bring stability. ... I do believe it might save the country."

Galbraith's argument is that the constitution reflects the reality of the nation it is meant to serve. There is, he says, no meaningful Iraqi identity. In the north, you've got a pro-Western Kurdish population. In the south, you've got a Shiite majority that wants a "pale version of an Iranian state." And in the center you've got a Sunni population that is nervous about being trapped in a system in which it would be overrun. . . .

This constitution gives each group what it wants. It will create a very loose federation in which only things like fiscal and foreign policy are controlled in the center (even tax policy is decentralized). Oil revenues are supposed to be distributed on a per capita basis, and no group will feel inordinately oppressed by the others.

The Kurds and Shiites understand what a good deal this is. The Sunni leaders selected to attend the convention are howling because they are former Baathists who dream of a return to centralized power. But ordinary Sunnis, Galbraith says, will come to realize this deal protects them, too.

BRAC

BRAC.  No, it's not just the sound you make after eating the onion soup.  It seems as though tomorrow (Friday) is the day.  Sometime in the morning we will know whether Ellsworth Air Force Base will stay open or not.  Prediction: If the news is good the left-wing blogs give kudos to everyone except John Thune.  If the news is bad, more Thune bashing. 

More from the mail bag

Got this email today:

Mr. Schaff,

I read your piece entitled Who's Imposing on southdakotapolitics. I've read many conservative viewpoints on abortion and very very few ever consider the woman who has to carry the fetus to term, or the ramifications for her, if the authors had there way, and abortion was made illegal.  How does that affect the woman's right to life and liberty?   In essense, a woman who doesn't want to give birth is made a slave of the state and is forced to.   The Supreme Court indeed saw a right to privacy in the Constitution and I believe that the Constitution is the document that matters in this case. thank you, [name withheld]

First, let me thank this emailer for a respectful argument.  He is referring to this post from some time ago.  Here's a rebuttal to this email.

If a woman is made a "slave" by carrying her child to term, it is slavery to a child not the state.  Obviously what the woman having an abortion is trying to avoid is bearing that child.  Surely her non-legal liberty will be reduced by carrying to term since kids tend to take time and attention.  But I don't think one has a Constitutional right not to have to burp babies.  It is an odd argument to say, "Kids are a pain in the rear, so if you think that kid is too much of a pain, we give you the option to kill him or her in utero."  Once a child is conceived its right to life trumps the mother's "right" to be free of dirty diapers. If one is uninterested in the liberty curtailment represented by children, I suggest steps be taken to avoid finding one's self in that predicament. 

The Supreme Court once argued that blacks could not possibly be citizens (Dred Scott), that racial segregation was just fine under the 14th Amendment (Plessy vs. Ferguson), and that internment of Japanese citizens was OK during WWII (Korematsu v. US).  In Buck vs. Bell Justice Holmes infamously argued that it was just to forcibly sterilize the mentally retarded because "three generations of imbeciles is enough."  While one must give proper legal respect to the Court, that does not mean their rulings are always and everywhere without error.  A general right to privacy and subsequent right to abortion are not in Constitution and one must torture the language and logic of the document to invent such rights.  I'll give a shiny new donkey to anyone who can find these rights firmly grounded in the text of the Constitution.  (Just in case there is any confusion, I'm not serious about the donkey). 

Is Assassination Defensible?

Eugene Volokh, a highly respected law professor, defends the morality of assassination while questioning its practicality.  I would argue that unless a strong argument can be made otherwise a civilian leader should be treated as a non-combatant, making assassination unjust in addition to its impracticality. 

Sense Of Humor Required

What if Jesus spoke at a Republican fundraiser?  Fodder here for both sides. Hat tip NRO. 

And Now For Something Completely Ridiculous

Here's an alternate take on Ellsworth from Tokola Resistance:

Attention government bureaucraps: some South Dakotans support your plan to shut down domestic military installations. Close Ellsworth. We don't need that terrorist camp in our backyard. It makes me sick to think of South Dakota profiting off a training camp for the butchers invading and occupying Iraq.

I say we shut it down and make it a memorial to the brave Iraqis who lost their lives defending their homes against foreign invasion!

It's a free country and thank goodness that these folks and their small band of supporters have the right to express their views.  And then the rest of us have the right to call them daffy.  Just a heads up guys, calling the people who make these decisions "bureaucraps" is probably not the smartest way to achieve your goal. 

The Thune Model

A letter to the editor from the Rapid City Journal:

During his impeachment for perjury, President Clinton taught us that personal attacks never fed a hungry child. Our good friends on the left have obviously forgotten this lesson.

Recently, there have been a barrage of letters, press releases and profanity-laden Web sites attacking Sen. John Thune. These personal attacks stand on the political tripod of half-truths, innuendo and wishful thinking. They represent twisted logic at best or gutter politics at worst.

Apparently, many of Sen. Daschle's operatives have not yet accepted the results of last fall's election. They claim no first-hand participation in the attacks or the Web sites. Yet news accounts suggest they are partially financed by Sen. Daschle's PAC slush funds. More recently we find that the manner and means of financing them may have violated FEC rules.

Those participating in this effort could learn from the Thune model for losing the 2002 election. This had to be difficult. Yet he responded to Sen. Johnson with grace, not mean-spirited vitriol.

JOHN OSBORN
Rapid City

Daschle

Native Voice, July 29-August 12, 2005:

NATIVE VOICE:  Do you think you will run again?

DASCHLE: I haven't decided what my future political plans are.  These are matters that can only become clearer as time goes on.  Life has a lot of unexpected twists and turns.  I'm fully appreciative of the uncertainty about the future, but I have learned never to say never and to continue to look for ways for which I can contribute, and that's what I will be doing.

I intend to stay politically involved and intend to be active with regard to my views relating to the Native American agenda and, I certainly want to continue to be visible on reservations and throughout the country as future issues are debated.  I am not going away.

Footnote:  Posting will be light from me for a while.  With school starting next week, I'm busy getting things together.  Additionally, I won't have Internet at my apartment until Sept. 14 at the latest.  I will post as time permits. 

Ellsworth

The Rapid City Journal is writing about the upcoming decision by BRAC on Ellsworth, which could be today or tomorrow according to the paper:

Reaction from Ellsworth Air Force Base advocates to the initial votes of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, or BRAC, on Wednesday became more favorable as the day wore on.

Community after community learned that their bases would close, jobs would be lost, national security might be compromised. But the independent panel's refusal to go along with the Pentagon's recommendations to close a few major installations, such as the New London submarine base in Connecticut and the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in New Hampshire, was a signal that the commissioners are paying attention to possible discrepancies in projected cost savings associated with base closings, supporters said.

And the fairly quick pace at which the commission worked did not appear to be troublesome.

"They are flying low, at high speed," Pat McElgunn, director of the Ellsworth Task Force, said late Wednesday. "But that is not necessarily a bad thing. They have had a long 15 weeks to digest the data, and by the way they are acting, I am encouraged that we will get a hard look."

Vegetarian Battle

Denise Ross of the Rapid City Journal is talking about the twin press releases from the SD state parties regarding the Democrats' new vegetarian spokesperson. 

Intellectual Dishonesty vs. Intellectual Incompetence

Chad at CCK has a piece on ANWR oil and the current rise in gas prices.  I think a lot of the points he makes are valid, but I can't help commenting on this one:

To understand why Republicans are being intellectually dishonest when they use the price of gas to justify drilling in ANWR, first realize that any oil we are able to suck out of the earth there won’t even reach consumers for a decade or more. How is that going to bring down the price of gas when I have to go fill up my pickup next week?

I think that the charge of intellectual dishonesty is very unhelpful in this kind of discussion.  Its enough to argue that the other side is wrong; do we really need to question one another's motives?  I don't need to know whether Chad honestly believes the argument he is making here, so I am willing to assume that he does.  Its enough for me to point out that its very silly.

Lets assume hes correct about the 10 year time lag between opening ANWR to drilling, and the flow of ANWR oil onto the market.  If, then, we had opened ANWR ten years ago, we'd have the oil now, wouldn't we?  And whose fault was it that we didn't?  I imagine it was folk pretty much like Chad, making the same arguments he is making now.  And if we do open ANWR now, then we will have the oil ten years from now, won't we?  And so we won't have to listen to this argument again.  Does Chad suppose that the world demand for oil will decrease in the next decade?  And then there is this argument:

Second, when the oil finally does end up flowing from ANWR — when my kids are on college — do we really believe that OPEC isn’t going to adjust their production accordingly to keep prices higher? That is exactly what happened in 1978 when oil first started flowing from Prudhoe Bay in Alaska. It had exactly zero impact on the price of gasoline that you and I pay at the corner station — in fact, the prices more than doubled in the three years immediately after we began pumping oil from Prudhoe Bay.

Now if this argument is valid, then we might as well not have any domestic oil.  It does us no good at all.  Does Chad really believe this?  Besides, his narrow focus on the three years after Prudhoe Bay oil began flowing seems at odds with his decade-long focus in the preceding paragraph.  Consider the chart he links to:

Yes, gas prices kept rising immediately after 1978.  But a few years later, gas dropped precipitously.  Rising supplies in the U.S. broke the back of OPEC and gave us decades of breathing room.  Now I doubt that ANWR will provide such a boom, but the reason is not the power of OPEC.  Its the demand created by growing economies in China and India. 

In spite of this, I am not sure that opening ANWR right now is a good idea.  I don't believe that the ecological argument is sound, but I do believe that keeping an untapped source of oil in reserve might be better than trying to lower gas prices in the near future.  We don't really know what is going to happen to the world's energy supply in coming decades, and an untapped ANWR is insurance.  But I concede that this is a more speculative argument than the one for opening the reserve.  And I humbly submit that folk who want to open it now, to make sure that the oil is available at some point in the near future, might be at least as intellectually honest and maybe a bit more intellectually competent than the arguments I have quoted above.

Ellsworth Update

From today's Congressional Quarterly:

BRAC Chairman Says Pentagon Might Be Wrong About Some Base Closures

By John M. Donnelly, CQ Staff

With an independent commission poised to vote this week on the list of military bases it will recommend for closure, the chairman of the panel strongly suggested Monday that he remained unconvinced by the Pentagon’s reasons for shuttering several of the facilities.

Speaking just two days before the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) begins its final votes, chairman Anthony J. Principi sounded favorably disposed to the arguments against closing the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Maine, the Naval Submarine Base New London in Connecticut and Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota.

In an interview Monday with Congressional Quarterly, Military Times and C-SPAN to be aired Tuesday evening, Principi acknowledged that the administration has made strong arguments in favor of closing the bases on the list that it submitted to the BRAC commission in May. And Principi said he did not know how the commission would vote in every instance when it begins its final voting on Aug. 24.

Still, he was critical of the Pentagon’s rationale for closing several facilities, including its estimate that it could save some $49 billion over 20 years by closing 33 major bases and many smaller ones.

“The cost savings that we find are significantly lower than the Pentagon has reported,” Principi said.

The purported savings from closing Ellsworth Air Force Base exemplified the Pentagon’s overstatements, he said. The Pentagon wants to move the base’s B-1 bombers to Dyess Air Force Base in Texas.

“A significant percentage of the savings at Ellsworth is linked to military personnel,” Principi said. “Those military personnel are not coming off the end strength but they’re being moved. . . . From our accounting perspective, it’s really not a cost savings.”

“If you back out the military personnel from the savings the Defense Department has indicated, it costs you money. . . to move those B-1 bombers to Dyess,” Principi said.

The Pentagon says those resources could be applied to other missions and therefore should be considered savings.

“We don’t see it that way,” Principi said, “and neither does the Government Accountability Office.”

Making It Simple, For Seth's Sake

Seth at CCK says I am defending Pat Robertson.  If calling Pat Robertson dumb is defending him, what would it take to attack him?  Let's see if we can hold more than one thought at a time in our heads.  I'll try to make it simple and use small words so everyone can understand:
1. I think Hugo Chavez is a bad man.   
2. I think Pat Robertson is a dumb man.  Not just dumb in this case, but dumb in general.  Sorry if I didn't call him more names to get the point across.  He's a jerk.  A rat fink.  A poopy head.  There!  Are we happy now? 
3. I think Charlie Rangel's career long defense of Castro is unconscionable (sorry for the five syllables).  If Joe Biden, whom I respect, attacks Pat Robertson, ok.  But when a creep like Rangel lectures us on decency in foreign policy, it's a bit tough to take. 

Was the whole "dumb" versus "bad" distinction too nuanced?  If I had a kid and the gods told me the kid must be very dumb but good or very bad but brilliant, I would choose very dumb but good.  I'd rather have my kid be Forrest Gump than Hannibal Lecter. I am not claiming Pat Robertson is Forrest Gump good.  I have no evidence either way, and neither does Seth.  But Seth knows Robertson is a conservative Christian with some dumb ideas, and to Seth that's the same as being evil.  So I guess I don't hold Robertson to the same level of contempt as Hugo Chavez, but that doesn't mean I don't have contempt for both.  Another example: If someone advocates killing, say, Mother Teresa (pretend she's still alive) we'd say that person is really dumb.  If someone advocates killing a bad man like Hugo Chavez, then they are just garden variety dumb in my book.  But, you see, that still makes them dumb Seth.  And that's not a compliment.   I guess if you don't say Pat Robertson is evil you are now defending him.  OK, now sound it out if you must: I D-O N-O-T D-E-F-E-N-D P-A-T R-O-B-E-R-T-S-O-N.  I T-H-I-N-K H-E I-S A-N I-D-I-O-T.  I can't believe I had to actually take a paragraph to explain to someone that calling a person "dumb" is an insult. 

By the way Seth, when John Kennedy actually attempted to assassinate Castro and actually had President Diem of South Vietnam assassinated, was he as evil as Pat Robertson is for suggesting assassinating Hugo Chavez?  Or was Kennedy just dumb?  Are people who condone assassination always evil, or just when they are Republicans you don't like?    Or maybe Republicans you don't like are by definition "evil". 

For the record, I think assassination is almost always wrong both as policy and morally. I say "almost" only because there's that part of me that says if we had a chance to assassinate Hitler or Stalin it would have been just to do so.  I guess we can call it the "If You Kill Over Six Million Of Your Own Citizens" exception.

Update: At first I attributed the CCK post to Chad Schuldt. Now I see it was Seth, and thus changed my post.  See, it always pays to read Prof. Blanchard at SDP. 

Problems With Gas?

Here's some Lawrence Kudlow, via Instapundit:

Permit me to take a contrarian view on the oil price shock. I say three cheers for higher energy prices. Why? Because I believe in markets. When the price of something goes up, demand falls off (call it conservation) and supply increases (call it new production). We're seeing a tectonic shift.

This take on gas reminded me of when the left wanted high gas prices.  The idea was if the government will raise the price of gas then we will use less of it, thus making our air cleaner.  This was part of the rational for Bill Clinton's ill fated BTU energy tax in the 1993 budget proposal that eventually included a hefty raise in the gas tax instead.  Or, if I look at page 173 of Al Gore's dreadful Earth in the Balance (and I am so looking right now), he writes:

In fact, almost every poll shows Americans decisively rejecting higher taxes on fossil fuels, even though that proposal is one of the first steps in changing our policies in a manner more consistent with a more responsible approach to the environment [emphasis added]

Gore is trying to say in this passage that even though people oppose higher fossil fuel taxes, it should be our policy.  He then notes that when Harry Truman first introduced the Marshall Plan his popularity went down.  You see, good ideas, such as higher fuel taxes, aren't always recognized at first blush. Bottom of 173:

Similarly, there is no doubt that several measures that would be necessary here in the United States in order to meet these threats would be unpopular and carry enormous political risk.  But the American people are, nevertheless, beginning to give their leaders permission to challenge the nation to take bold, visionary, and even difficult steps to confront the environmental crisis forthrightly and responsibly. 

This book was written during the term of Bush I.  Just so we are all together on this, when a Bush is in the White House and gas prices are low, high gas prices are good and Bush I lacks vision in not raising taxes.  When Bush II is in the White House suddenly high gas prices are bad and George Bush should release the strategic oil reserves (remember when Bill Clinton did this in 2000, ironically to help Mr. High Gas Price himself, Al Gore, releasing the oil from the strategic reserves had the effect of lowering the national price of gas by one whole cent).  Perhaps Democrats should be cheering high gas prices as it makes Americans more aware of conservation and drives us away from evil SUVs and into the arms of hybrid vehicles.  That's what they were saying before it became politically expedient to say the opposite.

Here's Steve Chapman's take on why gas prices will come down by year's end and a nice piece by James Glassman on the effect of oil prices on the economy.