For months, President Bush has been touting his agenda of privatization and benefit cuts as a way to strengthening Social Security. He even created a website dedicated to promoting his proposals called strengtheningsocialsecurity.gov. The American people aren’t buying it. From the WSJ this morning:

[O]nly 36% of all adults say Mr. Bush’s comments on saving and strengthening Social Security are his real motives for changing the program, while 49% believe his real agenda is to dismantle it.

Overall, 59 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush’s position on Social Security. Nevertheless, the White House insists their efforts on Social Security have been a “great success.”

Land use – and conservation – is a big issue in the Rocky Mountain region, and a provision in the Bush energy bill is touching a raw nerve in the region. The Casper Star Tribune reports that legislative language “which slipped largely under the radar during the recent energy bill debate” may “undermine public involvement on public lands if it is not changed.” Specifically, a section of the 1,000-plus-page energy bill would limit required environmental reviews and solicitation of public comment under the existing National Environmental Policy Act.

In practice, that means oil companies may be able to evade review when moving onto potential drilling sites, and “wastewater discharge from things such as coal-bed methane drilling would not be subject” to current reviews. One local expert said the bill, if passed by the Senate, “would have devastating effects on ranchers and farmers in the Powder River Basin.”

Much of this stems from the so-called “Peterson amendment” — named for Congressman John Petersen (R-PA), who introduced the language that seeks “to exclude the public from the decision-making process.” Big surprise – oil and gas interests are among Petersen’s top campaign contributors.

It’s just another example of how conservatives’ close ties to corporations are increasingly putting them at odds with their base constituencies in rural America. And it’s not just limited to Wyoming. In Colorado, for instance, a controversy is brewing over the death of a bill to force oil and gas companies to pay more for harming land, and over a proposal to allow drilling on the sacred Rocky Mountain front.

Capt. Melinda Morton is the Air Force Academy chaplain who reported finding “stridently evangelical themes” at academy worship services, and a “systemic and pervasive” problem of religious proselytizing and intolerance throughout the school. Morton said one academy chaplain urged cadets to “try to convert” non-evangelical peers and “remind them of the consequences … (that) those not ‘born again will burn in the fires of hell.’” Morton brought these concerns to the attention of superiors in a two-page memo.

Brig. Gen. Johnny Weida is a top commander at the same Air Force Academy. He’s also a born-again Christian “who has been the subject of complaints that he improperly mixes religion with education.” An analysis of the academy released last month by Americans United for the Separation of Church and State found “a host of reports” about inappropriate, potentially unconstitutional statements by Gen. Weida.

One of these people was just offered a major promotion from the Department of Defense. The other received a pink slip. Who got what? Take a wild guess.

Amid the panic surrounding the White House and Capitol Evacuation, a few startling issues have come to light. Instead of alerting the President immediately, White House officials chose to let him finish out a bike ride in Maryland first. Apparently members of the President’s security detail had decided he need not be informed because there was no danger to him. So the Secret Service agents did not consult with White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card Jr. or other senior administration officials.

The decision has been justified by claiming “the protocols that were in place after September 11th were followed. The President was never considered to be in danger because he was at an off-site location. The President has a tremendous amount of trust in his Secret Service detail.” But one would think that in the event that F-16 fighter jets are deployed in our nation’s capital, our own president should know about it. There is no problem with the President taking a bike-ride after a long European trip, which unfortunately caused him to go to bed past 9:00 pm. There is no problem if the President wants to sneak off to read the racy Tom Wolfe novel I Am Charlotte Simmons. But there should be a system in place to contact him in the event of an emergency.

Fortunately, this incident did not end similarly to Sept 11, but had the threat been real, we now know that the man elected to make crucial decisions would not have been there to do so in a timely and responsive way.

– Jay Heidbrink

Nearly a year ago, Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher was on his way to Washington, D.C., for the funeral of President Ronald Reagan. Though his plane had permission to fly into the area, a failing transponder on the plane left officials thinking the plane was an “unidentified general aviation plane headed toward Washington.” In other words, “officials thought [it] might be heading for the Capitol as part of a possible terrorist attack [which] forced a brief panicked evacuation” and “the diversion of two F-15 aircraft from their normal patrols.”

When it comes to emergency response, let’s take a quick look at how much progress the Bush administration has made since officials came within milliseconds of shooting down the plane of Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher:

Was an off-track civilian plane almost shot down? Yes.
Was the color coded system working? It seems so.
(Does that mean anything? Not necessarily.)
Was the e-mail notification system working? Certainly!
Did D.C. police or city officials know what was going on? No.
Were the offices of the mayor or City Council of D.C. evacuated? No.
Was the RNC evacuated? Don’t be silly…of course!
(How about the DNC? Don’t ask Fox.)
Did the president even know what was going on? No.
(Does anyone see a problem with that? Apparently not.)

Lesson of the day: Never say never again.

The Note reports on the attendees at yesterday’s DeLay tribute:

Celebrity sightings include…Frank Gaffney and James Guckert, heads together in a serious conversation…

Of course James Guckert is the real name of disgraced fake journalist Jeff Gannon.

You know things are getting pretty bad for DeLay when Gannon is part of his effort to shore up political support.

In 1975, an urban development boundary (UDB) line was drawn to separate the Florida Everglades from the growing south Florida metropolitan region. Some residents are arguing that the Miami area’s population growth warrants moving the line and developers have already purchased property on the wrong-side of the line. A movie complex, a mega-mall and 16,000 new homes could soon be in the works. But is this really worth endangering the only flood grasslands in North America? This line protects “the only U.S. national park to hold three international designations as a World Heritage Site, International Biosphere Reserve, and Wetlands of International Importance.”

Miami-Dade mayor, Carlos Alvarez acknowledges the high-voltage politics surrounding the issue: “I can feel the pressure and certainly hear the pressure of the special interests wanting to move it. There’s a lot of money involved.” Fortunately, Alvarez is standing his ground in opposition to the UDB change. Miami-Dade County Commissioner Katy Sorenson and North Miami Council member Scott Galvin have also been vocal in opposition to the UDB change.

After all, the county planners have concluded there is sufficient available land for housing for the next 15 years. And, as Nancy Liebman, president of the Urban Environment League (Miami) wisely notes: “moving the [UDB] line will drain South Florida’s most valuable resource, its water supply.”

Unfortunately, two large developers–Florida-based Lennar Corp. (operated by Leonard Miller and family), and the Georgia/Texas-based Horton family are determined to get on the other side of the UDB and may have the political muscle to get their way. Read more