MN-02 : Kline Eerily Silent After Taxpayer Victory on JSF Engine

It seems that John Kline (R-MN-02) takes every opportunity to alert voters to Washington’s Reckless Spending … but not this week when the Department of Defense issued a stop-work order

DOD Issues Stop Work Order on the JSF F136 Extra Engine Program

The Department of Defense (DoD) today issued a stop work order in connection with the Joint Strike Fighter extra engine program.
The administration and the DoD strongly oppose the extra engine program, as reflected in the President’s fiscal 2012 budget proposal that was recently submitted to Congress, which does not include funding for the program. In our view it is a waste of taxpayer money that can be used to fund higher Departmental priorities, and should be ended now.
The House of Representatives has recently expressed its own opposition to the extra engine in its passage of H.R. 1 including the adoption of the Rooney Amendment which removed all fiscal 2011 funding for this program. In addition, funding for the extra engine was not authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2011, enacted in January. In light of these recent events, Congressional prerogatives, and the administration’s view of the program, we have concluded that a stop work order is now the correct course. The stop work order will remain in place pending final resolution of the program’s future, for a period not to exceed 90 days, unless extended by agreement of the government and the contractor.

Some considered this to be a victory for the TaxEnoughAlready movement that advocate Fiscal Responsible operation of OUR government.

Yes, some did issue press releases …
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) :
I have long called for the elimination of funding for a second F-35 jet engine which is a wasteful use of taxpayer money," said Senator Collins. "As we begin to tackle the mounting debt, we must eliminate programs like this that are duplicative and unnecessary. I applaud the Secretary of Defense's decision to halt further development of the extra engine."

Congressman John Larson (D-CT-01) “I applaud Secretary Gates for following through on his commitment to end the Joint Strike Fighter’s duplicative ‘extra’ engine program,” Congressman Larson said. “This program is the epitome of government waste, one that the Secretary himself referred to as an ‘unnecessary and extravagant expense.’ Today’s decision will save the American people nearly a million dollars a day and bring to close an issue that has been debated in Congress for more than 4 years. I hope that my colleagues will now join me in focusing our attention on more pressing national security matters.

Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) “The termination of the alternate engine program is an essential step toward focusing our scarce defense dollars on the programs that will actually help keep America safer, ” Lieberman said. “As American service members fight to defend our freedoms and safeguard human life across the world, I hope that today’s decision will allow Congress to set this long-debated matter aside and move on to the critical business of the American people.”

That’s correct, Republicans, Democrats and Independent members of Congress laud this ending of another example of Washington’s Reckless Spending.

So, how did this happen.
First, let’s give credit to the man who put the nail in the coffin by corralling 47 freshman House members to score a 233–198 vote on an amendment that scuttled the program … Congressman Tom Rooney (R-FL-16)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment striking funding for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter Jet to immediately save American taxpayers $450 million dollars.
“It is dubious why Congress continues to fund a program that the Air Force, Navy, the Marine Corps and Department of Defense adamantly state they do not want. Just today, Defense Secretary Gates called the program “an unnecessary and extravagant expense” and stated that this money is needed for higher priority defense efforts. As we decide which cuts to make in our defense, ones that won’t hurt our troops today, this should be at the top of the list.
“Mr. Speaker, the American people sent us here to change how Washington works. This amendment is a perfect opportunity to show your constituents that business as usual in Washington is over. I urge my colleagues to follow through with their promises, to listen to the voters on why they sent us here, and vote to strike funding for this expensive and unnecessary program. Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time.”

Normally, Mr. Kline likes to promote these successes …. but on the F136 alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, Mr. Kline was eerily silent.

Why because Mr. Kline voted to keep the funding going … as did potential President Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) and Raymond Cravaack (R-MN-08).

The Pentagon opposed this program … as did the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration, yet Congress kept funding it.

The choice should have been clear … support John Boehner (R-OH-08) whose chief beneficiary, General Electric is a major employer in Ohio … or support Fiscal Responsible spending.

This vote tells voters who are the Faux Fiscal Conservatives that are working for the Washington powerbrokers … who are truly concerned about addressing wasteful spending.

THANKS to Tim Walz (D-MN-01), Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03), Betty McCollum (D-MN-04), Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) and Colin Peterson (D-MN-07) for voting to end this wasteful program.

MN-02 : Kline Needs to Listen To The Neighbors

We hear it all the time, Minnesota is not competitive … our neighbors have it better.
Maybe because they have elected officials that represent their constituents.

Case in point, the so called “stimulus” … it had a number of aspects. Some we feel directly … some indirectly … and some maybe not at all.

As President Obama stated in the State of the Union address, his administration’s economic recovery plan includes 25 different tax cuts. "Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes," he said. "We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college."

The “stimulus” also included monies for the states … which helped Minnesota’s budget signficantly. Beyond the immediate action, there are other programs that require application, evaluation and approval.

So the question is how is this being handled by Minnesota’s competitors?

"If the funds are there, Senator Grassley’s going to help Iowa, rather than some other state, get its share" was the comment as the Iowa Republican Senator submitted his “requests”.

"I strongly opposed the stimulus, but the only thing that could make it worse would be if none of it returned to the taxpayers of Missouri," said Kit Bond (R-MO).

"The proposed project would create 38 new jobs and bring broadband to eight hospitals, five colleges, 16 libraries and 161 K-12 schools," wrote Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE) in his request.

These are not unique, as the Washington Times reported of a number of Republicans who voted against the legislation, but then recognized that they need to represent their constituents. "We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) wrote Agriculuture Secretary Vilsack in a Aug. 26, 2009, letter in support of a funding request. "I believe the addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy," Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-UT) wrote on Feb. 11, 2009 in his justification for funding.

So where is John Kline’s requests … or does he believe that his constituents need to be represented only during votes and not in services ?

Heck, he doesn’t even have to look outside the Minnesota delegation to see how it’s done.

Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03) wrote concerning transportation projects “I worked hard to secure this funding in order to reduce congestion, improve economic opportunities and increase safety. I’m pleased these critical projects were passed by the House”
The projects :
- Interstate 94/Brockton Lane Interchange : $700,000 for the Brockton Interchange project includes preliminary design, environmental reviews, right-of-way acquisition and final design to construct an interchange at the location of Interstate 94 and Brockton Lane
- Highway 169/Interstate 494 Interchange : $400,000 for the project involves a segment of US Hwy 169 from 4,600 feet south and 13,600 feet north of the 169/494 interchange; and a segment of I-494 from 7,300 feet west and 3,400 feet east of the 169/494 interchange. The project provides all of the US Hwy 169 to I-494 (system-to-system) moves, as well as providing local access to the principal arterials of US Hwy 169 and I-494.
- Highway 610 Construction : $ 400,000 - Design and construction of Trunk Highway 610 in Maple Grove from County State Aid Highway 81 to the final terminus of Interstate 94, thus completing the corridor from I-35W to I-94. The project would include planning, design, update of environmental review, right-of-way acquisition, construction and the realignment of several local roadways and utilities.
Oh, and for the record, just like those Republicans that voted against the stimulus, Andrew Foxwell, spokesperson for the Representative explained his vote : "While Congressman Paulsen has worked for months to get these projects approved, he voted no on the overall bill due to many problems with this massive and expensive piece of legislation."
That’s right Mr. Kline (cannot call you Representative until you tell us who you represent), you can actually oppose legislation and still work to make sure that Minnesota gets a fair return on its money. This is not a new concept … since it was addressed previously noting that Bob Hofstad of MnDOT said that the state receives about 92 cents for every dollar that its residents send to Washington.

The stimulus is a great opportunity to address Minnesota’s lagging broadband capacity ... just as Representatives are requesting for their states. Governor Pawlenty is opposing bonding for higher education facilities as he believes that in the future, class will be taught over the Internet. Sadly, Minnesota is not equipped for the Internet speeds required. The Ultra-High Speed Task Force released its report in November on Minnesota’s broadband needs. Currently only one county meets the currently accepted standards while some are extremely behind (Cook at 37%) … Minnesota's broadband adoption in the metro area is 57% while rural broadband is at 39.4% according to a Pew Internet project. This is a great opportunity for jobs in a public-private partnership especially since the federal Recovery Act Broadband Program is now starting to approve projects … South Dakota just got $20.6 million to add 140 miles of middle mile spurs… thus South Dakota will not only have a tax advantage over Minnesota but also a broadband advantage to attract new business. For example, state economic development officials were helping a company look for up to 500 acres of land within 30 minutes of a major airport and close to a railroad. Lake County could provide both but it lost out because it did not have one other requirement: A high-speed Internet fiber connection. The lost opportunity meant 150 jobs were lost.

Today, Minnesota may be competing with neighboring states for business, but tomorrow, the competition will be world-wide … and Minnesota (and the United States) are already behind.

The question for Mr. Kline is : Will you listen ? Minnesota is hurting and you're not helping.

MN-03 : Paulsen Failing Middle Class Grade

"Congress is broken, and I want to help fix it," said Republican Erik Paulsen in his campaign to replace Republican Jim Ramstad.
Voters in Minnesota’s Third District had been accustomed to a Republican that was generally considered to be supportive of the Middle Class, so there was great hope that Paulsen’s words would expand programs that would benefit them.
Sadly, Paulsen’s first Middle Class Report Card grade is 28%. Whereas Ramstad ranked a solid “B” in the previous ranking, Paulsen is looking at a failing grade.

Paulsen’s 28% grade ties him for 65th among House Republicans … that’s right, 64 other Republicans performed better. For the record, Paulsen did grade higher than his fellow Minnesota Republicans … Michele Bachmann (Sixth District) at 13% and John Kline (Second District) at 12% ... but a far cry from Jim Ramstad's ranking that supported Middle Class programs.

Obviously, there are some “hot button” issues like Healthcare Insurance Reform where all the Republicans would vote in lockstep … but that is not the only issue that affects the Middle Class.

One issue that candidate Paulsen addressed during the campaign was Education stating : “Our nation’s continued ability to be the leader of an increasingly competitive global economy depends upon a strong education system. …
College costs are also rising out of control and are a major strain on family budgets. The student loan program is an essential tool for families, as is the Pell Grant program.”

On this issue, Paulsen failed in his vote on the HR 3221 Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act which included increases in Pell Grants while also ending the subsidization program that would save the government $87 BILLON over ten years. The massive $87 BILLON subsidy to private companies that make student loans, did little to promote affordability.

It would be easy to fault Paulsen for failing to achieve other areas cited in his Paulsen Plan for Third District Families such as “more cops on our streets”, “pro-growth policies like lower taxes”, and “new job-creating industry of innovation and technology for the future” if he had supported HR 1 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 … but all House Republicans opposed that legislation even though it did include tax breaks for individuals and businesses while providing funds to Minnesota and other states for police and other essential services … plus promoting renewal energy programs.

What makes Paulsen stand out from his other Republicans is his votes on HR 1664 Pay for Performance Act which addressed the payment of “unreasonable or excessive” compensation for groups that received taxpayer bailouts;
HR 1586 Tax On Bonuses Received From TARP Recipients ; HR 1728 Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act which end the abusive lending practices at the root of the financial crisis, such as ensuring a borrower’s ability to repay a loan and a ban on “steering” high-cost mortgages to minorities; etc.

While "Congress may still be broken,”, Representative Paulsen has done little “to help fix it," … his fix seems to help Wall Street more than the Middle Class families. Looking at these key votes, it begs question : why do 64 other Republicans find ways to help out Middle Class families than Representative Paulsen ?

MN-03 : Paulsen Loud and Silent on who should get H1N1 Vaccine

Erik Paulen (R-MN-03) update his blog on Tuesday, November 3rd, to protest that it was “Entirely Unacceptable” to provide vaccines to Guantanamo Detainees.

By making this a post on his blog, it is a statement of political outrage that many may feel. But the protest must be put in context. Why this emotional knee jerk reaction to GITMO detainees and not to Wall Street bankers ?

Just the previous day, Business Week reported that “Citigroup has been supplied with 1,200 units” plus an additional 12 large employers have received vaccines while 16 more are in the pipeline to get vaccines.

Why does Big Business get vaccines ? Well, companies like Goldman Sachs have onsite health clinics (and have received vaccines already) as part of their employee-provided benefit package. Goldman’s 400 or so managing directors and its top executive officers participate in the bank’s executive medical and dental program as part of their benefits at an annual cost of $40,543 which is substantially above the national average (which is about $13,000 for a family of four).

While we wait for Blogger Paulsen to comment on the BW article, let’s evaluate the knee jerk reaction to the GITMO detainee vaccine situation.
A responsible Congressman should review the situtation carefully, put the situtation in context and consider the ramifications. The current number of detainees in GITMO is approxiamately 215 – a relatively low number. As Blogger Paulsen complains “it is entirely unacceptable to make this vaccine available to detainees”, the key word is “available” … unlike in 2003 when the Bush Administration reaction to a potential flu outbreak when detainees were tackled and shackled so prison camp staff could "forcefully" administer the shots -- today these detainees can refuse the vaccines. Will they ? Maybe, they will decline as many will probably be concerned of being experimented on with some sort of truth serum or other drugs. This leads to other problem, if they detainees die without the US Government providing the “availability” of the vaccine, which could be a cause for outrage and complaints of prisoner negligence.
The other obvious question is : do these detainees possess information that if they died would be detrimental to our intelligence efforts ?
Considering this, the outrage is “Entirely Unacceptable” as it is entirely possible that no vaccines may actually be given to GITMO detainees.

Representative Paulsen may have a better case for his district in getting vaccines, if he was more supportive before. In his blog, he acknowledges “vaccine shortages widespread in Minnesota and throughout the nation” yet fails to acknowledge that he voted against HR 2346 which provided $1.85 billion for the Public Health and Social Services Emergency fund to prepare for an influenza pandemic H1N1 influenza (swine flu) which included $350 million earmarked for state and local government preparation.

MN-03 : Guest Blogger Erik Paulsen Misses Free Trade Opportunity

Using old data, Representative Erik Paulsen becomes a guest blogger on The Heritage Foundation website to advocate for free trade agreements.
Why, he didn’t included a copy on his personal blog is for others to question (but my guess would be that your collection basket will grow when you preach to the choir.)

Reading his piece, there are three immediate observations.

First, he cites “a Peterson Institute study, the average American household is about $9,000 per year richer as a result of the country’s integration with the world economy since World War II."
Call me skeptical, but why does Paulsen go back to WWII as his starting point ? First, Representative Paulsen fails to mention that the report was written in 2004 … which begs the question, is that comment still current today. The report was criticized for its selective use of data … and if the time frame was from ”1982 to the present (a time that saw the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the passage of permanent normal trading relations with China) added only $9 per U.S. household, not $9,000.” Reading the study cited, speaks significantly about the impact of China … somewhat making the WWII reference point inappropriate when the focus should be on the future and not the past. Also, Paulsen fails to acknowledge other comments cited in the Peterson study related to job and/or wage losses : “Manufacturing workers dislocated in trade-impacted industries also experience average wage declines of about 13 percent in their new jobs, losses that may be offset only partially by the lower prices they pay for imports.”
Representative Paulsen should be embarrassed for using a report that misleads the reader.

Second, Representative Paulsen promotes the benefits of free trade on “countless businesses, small and large, ” mentioning ONLY one company in his district -- ”Bloomington-based Donaldson Incorporated, a leading manufacturer of air filtration systems and other industrial products.” No doubt that Donaldson is a great company … as testified by its global reach with 40 manufacturing facilities worldwide and an employee base in the 10,000 range …. hardly a small business. Paulsen fails to mention that one of business segments of Donaldson that was hit hard … “Sales decreased in the United States by 56.6 percent primarily as a result of a 50 percent decrease in Class 8 truck build rates and a 53 percent decrease in medium duty truck build rates by the Company's Customers over the prior year quarter.” … somehow the necessity to stabilize the automotive industry was not deemed appropriate to be acknowledged.

Third, Representative Paulsen calls for “Opening the South Korean market.” It’s not open ? --- Look around your house for items that are currently imported into America and no doubt you find some Korean built products. Year to date, South Korea has exported $25,747 million while American producers have sent $17,700 million to South Korea … repeatedly over time, America has been on the unfavorable side of the trade balance.

Summing it up, free trade is not necessarily fair trade.

All that stated, Representative Paulsen goal of generating jobs through foreign trade makes sense … but he has not identified a clear opportunity that would directly benefit Minnesota --- Cuba !

Opening export opportunities to Cuba is not a subject that Representative Paulsen should be unfamiliar. Prior to being elected to Congress, then State Representative Paulsen had the opportunity to vote on resolution in 2008 to that effect. The opportunity was stated that “under an ideal trade scenario, Minnesota farmers could enjoy at least $45 million in new exports annually; the state's total economic benefit would be nearly $92 million, including 900 new jobs.” These are opportunity dollars …. as “Minnesota is ideally positioned to benefit from the market opportunities that free trade with Cuba would provide, as trade restrictions succeed only in driving sales to competitors in other countries that have no such restrictions”.
When it came down to the vote, it was passed in the House by a vote of 86-9 … but State Representative Paulsen declined to state his opinion and abstained.
It must be noted that not only did Paulsen not want to confront this issue, but Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) vetoed despite having met with representatives of the Cuban government in Minnesota’s state capital and expressing to them that "he supported free trade and friendship with Cuba." …. Ah, that was before Presidential politics came in to Pawlenty’s mindset.

Today, the opportunity is more desperate for Minnesota’s agricultural industry. Minnesota Congressmen John Kline (R), Jim Oberstar(D), Collin Peterson (D) and Tim Walz (D) along with 60 other representatives have requested that the US Trade Representative to open export markets closed to US pork producers.

Additionally, Representative Paulsen has not joined 179 other co-sponsors of Representatives Bill Delahunt (D-MA) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) to support HR 874. The legislation would lift travel restrictions to Cuba for all Americans, restoring our right as citizens of the United States to travel freely.

Representative Paulsen, if you want to create new jobs in Minnesota, start with supporting your fellow Congressmen’s efforts to open Cuba for American business opportunities. Cuba could be a rare opportunity for America to actually have a trade surplus with net job gains.

MN-03 : Paulsen Joins Minority to Oppose Workers

Country First !
That was the message at the Republican National Convention held in Erik Paulsen’s back yard … yet, he seems to have rejected that idea.
The concept was simply expressed as putting the good of the Country ahead of personal ideology, state, or partisan interests.

No doubt that there many stark difference between the political parties and those differences are on display when roll call votes reflect party line votes.
But it’s the measure of “Country First” when a majority of both parties approve legislation.
But what stands out is when somebody stays in the minority to their party.
Increasingly, that is where voters will find Erik Paulsen.

Case in point … on Roll Call Vote 722 : Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009 a majority of Republicans (104) voted in favor of the legislation while sitting in the minority was Erik Paulsen.
A year earlier, when similar legislation was being considered (Roll Call 683 :Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2008) , Minnesota’s Third District was represented by someone else … Republican Jim Ramstad … who joined with 141 other Republicans to approve it.

Representative Paulsen is well aware of the national employment situation as he wrote on his 10/2/09 blog entry : “U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics report of an increase in the unemployment rate to 9.8 percent – a 26-year high – is bad news for American workers and their families. The U.S. lost another 263,000 jobs in September and 5.4 million workers have now been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer.”

Looking at our state, about 120,300 Minnesotans lost jobs and went on unemployment from Jan. 1 to Aug. 31 while an estimated 1,000 people currently exhaust unemployment benefits each week, said Dan McElroy, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). State figures show that for every job vacancy, there are 7.7 people looking for work.

Representative Paulsen knows the problem exists.
Representative Paulsen believes that jobs must be created.
Representative Paulsen misses the point that to create jobs, demand … customer demand must be there … but too many people are curtailing demands because they are working less hours, are in fear of losing their jobs, or do not have jobs. The simple fact is that businesses want customers ... and after they get customers, then they will rehire.
The need is now … people want to work … but if there is an oversupply of workers, does the Country want to encourage more foreclosures, more people scrimping on healthcare needs, and draining food shelves ?


When the question of extended unemployment benefits was being voted on in 2008, it was cited that “Extending unemployment benefits has the potential to help the entire American economy. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it is one of the most cost-effective and fast-acting ways to stimulate the economy because the money is spent quickly. For every $1 spent on unemployment benefits generates $1.64 in new economic demand.”
Denying extension of benefits actually hurts the country.
At that time, the complaint was about Republicans John Kline (MN-02) and Michelle Bachmann (MN-06)] and their failure to support this increase … now Erik Paulsen has joined the minority.
As pointed out in that commentary, the Federal Unemployment Tax Trust Fund is over-funded … these funds were saved for this rainy day. Business paid into the fund, so that if there would be a downturn, that their workers could get some money to pay for basic needs … and keep local businesses going.

In the past, Representative John Kline has said federal unemployment benefits are needed only when there are desperate economic conditions … well, Represenative Kline acknowledged on February 13, 2009 that “our nation facing economic distress” as evident by Le Sueur County unemployment rising to 10.1 percent. Yep, in case you were wondering, Representatives Kline and Bachmann voted again against this extension.

Why ?

Let’s look at what Country First is supposed to preclude : personal ideology, state, or partisan interests.

First, Representative Paulsen voices a personal ideology of government spending needs to be curtailed … okay, but these funds are coming from an overfunded FUT Trust Fund. Representative Paulson can fall on the old line that “such assistance threatens to stem the economic upturn” if businesses have to pay higher taxes, but since the monies are already in the FUT Trust Fund, that argument is invalid. Representative Paulsen’s opposition may please a segment of the Republican faithful, thus his opposition may be more to ensure that he does not have a primary challenger from within his party.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test putting his personal ideology (and self-interest) over Country First.

Second, it is true that “today”, only 22 states will benefit from this extension and Minnesota is not one. And that is why this is good legislation … there is a high threshold … helping only those states that really need it now … but the forecast is that Minnesota will soon be in that group. Also, when Federal benefits cease, there is an impact on state resources.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test putting his state over Country First.

Third, partisan interests does not apply as a majority of Republicans supported these extensions.
Representative Paulsen fails on this test.


In my view, Representative Paulsen is not putting Country First … much less his constituents and makes me appreciate more how great a Congressman Jim Ramstad was.

Paulsen should seek Gutknecht’s seat

This is a big week that will decide whether Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03 Elect) has an impact for Minnesota in the 111th Congress. Paulsen will make his first votes on the leadership of his caucus and press his case for which committees he would like to serve.

When Tim Walz (D-MN-01) was faced with the same opportunity, he saw the openings left by Gil Gutknecht and Mark Kennedy who would not be returning to be part of the 110th Congress. Walz hit a home run on committee assignments … taking Gutknecht’s spot on Agriculture and Kennedy’s spot on Transportation … plus Veterans Affairs and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China. His resounding re-election proved that the District approved of his work on those committees.

Paulsen has expressed a desire to assume Jim Ramstad’s seat on the Ways and Means Committee. Arguably that is one of the most powerful committees in the House, and as such many other experienced legislators will be vying for that assignment.

Unfortunately, one of Gutknecht’s committees no longer has a Minnesotan assigned. In fact there has been a vacancy that the Republicans did not fill during the 110th session. Interestingly, the ranking Republican, Ralph Hall (TX-04) was elected as a Democrat in 1980 and did not switch parties until 2004.

If Paulsen wants to serve Minnesota’s interests, he should aggressively seek an assignment to the Committee on Science and Technology.
By now the chants of “Drill, Baby Drill” have died down, but the energy crisis has not … even as the credit crisis has expanded.
The Science and Technology committee can have a major impact on America’s future … and Minnesota needs to part of it. The future of energy may be created by the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, or ARPA-E. Much like the Defense Department’s DARPA program which developed the Internet as well as GPS, ARPA-E may be the answer to our energy needs.
DOE and private-sector research can easily produce long lists of energy technology projects, but what Congress needs to do is to separate the “wheat from the chaff”. With programs like Automotive and Manufacturing Engineering and Technology (AMET) at Minnesota State University- Mankato, the University of Minnesota’s Department of Forestry’s woody biomass project, or the use of biomass gasifier at the University of Minnesota-Morris, Minnesota has plenty of “ideas” that just need a “champion”.

The Bush Administration requested no funds for ARPA-E in FY2009 while candidate Obama proposed $150 billion in spending on advanced energy technologies. This will be an important assignment that Paulsen should seek out.

While some may say that the private sector should pay for their own research, that “Pollyanna” idea will be seriously challenged as businesses go through their own evaluation of their financial outlook where too often the first things that are cut is Research and Development funding.
There is no doubt that the national debt should cause some serious funding questions be asked … including Bush’s human missions to Mars and other NASA programs. For that matter, I would hope that Congress takes a good hard look at the Bush’s funding of such programs as $13 million for Iraq Cultural Heritage Project (ICHP) which will train new professionals to preserve Iraq's historic treasures and to protect archaeological sites in Iraq … as well as the $300 million for "information/psychological operations" in Iraq (also known as propaganda) ... and $45 million for polls and focus groups to monitor Iraqi attitudes. The Department of State estimates it will spend $5.6 million on public diplomacy in Iraq in fiscal 2008.
A good chunk of that money should be re-assigned to Science and Technology projects.