The dangers of sequestration. Not enough ships. The rise of China. The efficacy of using alternative fuels in ships and aircraft.

Most of the topics brought up for discussion Thursday at the first congressional hearing on the U.S. Navy’s 2013 budget sounded a lot like last year, with the warning calls of drastic budget cuts in January thrown in.

The Office of Management and Budget at the White House “has directed the department not to plan for sequestration,” said Adm. Jonathan Greenert, chief of naval operations.

“Sometime late this summer, if there is no other action, step one for us is to think about that strategy,” Greenert said. “But our direction has been not to plan for such an occurrence.”

“I think it is totally irresponsible to put you in position to not even think about it,” McKeon said. “It doesn’t look good that we will fix this.”

Rep. Todd Akin, R-Mo., chairman of the seapower subcommittee, almost sounded sympathetic to the problems of planning for mandatory, across-the-board cuts.

“I guess there isn’t really a way to plan for sequestration. You can’t plan for it administratively,” he said. “But I don’t sense a sense of urgency on The Hill to do something about it. Let’s make it clear for the records that this is intolerable.”

Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., chairman of the readiness subcommittee, was more colorful in his call for more ships. “Why aren’t you pounding the table asking for more ships?” asked Forbes, pounding the table.

Looking directly at Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, Forbes noted that of four recent policy speeches, three were on alternative energy.

“I understand that alternative fuels might help our troops in the field,” Forbes said. “But shouldn’t we refocus our priorities?”

“I have made it the priority of this administration to build the fleet,” Mabus said. “We have 36 ships under contract, all under fixed-price contracts.” The number of ships in the fleet has been growing under the Obama administration, he pointed out.

“But I’m comparing them to what the Chinese are building,” Forbes said.

Several Republican members took Mabus to task for his efforts to introduce alternative fuels into Navy and Marine Corps ships, aircraft and vehicles. Rep. Mike Conway, R-Texas, was particularly disdainful.

Alternative fuels will be “twice as expensive” as regular fuels, Conway said. “So $600 million for this initiative — you don’t have a better place to spend that?”

“I don’t know where you’re getting that figure,” Mabus responded. “I know what we are doing is making us a better military.”

“Biofuel is an important part, but it’s certainly not the only part,” Mabus said. “Things like solar and thermal are competitive today.”

“No, they’re not,” Conway said. “So you’re arguing before this committee that we’re better off paying four times more for fuel?”

“We would be irresponsible if we didn’t reduce our dependence on foreign fuel,” Mabus responded.

The Navy’s plan to decommission two amphibious ships, delay new replacements and plan for a fleet of 30 ships to carry Marines also came under fire, with Republican Reps. Rob Wittman of Virginia, Mike Coffman of Colorado and Steven Palazzo of Mississippi spending their question time on the issue.

“Hard choices were made inside this budget,” said Gen. James Amos, commandant of the Marine Corps. Overall, he said, “I’m very pleased. But I’d like 50 ships.”

On Tuesday, Rep. Rob Wittman hit 300,000 miles in his beloved Corolla, and he says he hopes to drive 300,000 more.

“I pulled over to the side of the road to take a picture of the odometer [with] 299,999 miles,” Wittman tells HOH of the big moment.

“I went a mile and then two miles,” he remembers. “The odometer never tripped over!”

So Wittman did what anyone would do, he took it into the shop because — blast it! — he had earned the satisfaction of seeing “300,000” on the dashboard.

The mechanic told Wittman that he had outdriven the car’s microchip memory. “So they switched it back to zero,” the lawmaker tells us.

Wittman also says he is responsible for every mile that has been put on his tan 2005 Toyota Corolla.

It has collided with a deer, he says, and last summer a woman slammed into it. The insurance company declared Wittman’s ride totaled, but the Congressman wasn’t ready to give up.

He bought it back from the insurance company and got it all fixed up.

“It’s just my little car,” he tells HOH.

Strangely, for someone so in love with his automobile, he hasn’t given the little one a name. After 300,000 miles, however, the Congressman agrees the poor thing has finally earned a name.

His office will hold a naming contest soon.

WASHINGTON

The Navy has ended, for now, its attempt move a Norfolk-based aircraft carrier to Mayport, Fla., but three other ships - possibly from Hampton Roads - might be headed for the Florida base soon.

The ship movement plans were announced Monday as the Obama administration presented a proposed 2013 defense budget that calls for two new rounds of military base closings over three years and a handful of construction projects in southeast Virginia. The spending plan also includes a small pay raise and a boost in the housing allowance for military personnel but increases out-of-pocket medical expenses for military retirees.

Navy officials said during a budget briefing at the Pentagon on Monday that they are still committed to strategic dispersal of ships - a key argument for moving a carrier out of Norfolk, which is the only East Coast carrier base - but fiscal pressures forced them to defer the Mayport relocation.

Instead, the Navy is making plans to move other ships to Florida.

"The Navy will demonstrate its continued commitment to strategic dispersal by moving a three-ship amphibious ready group to Mayport in 2015," said Lt. Courtney Hillson, a Navy spokeswoman.

The ready groups, which are located in Hampton Roads, San Diego and Japan, are made up of an amphibious assault ship and two smaller amphibious ships.

Hampton Roads also will lose a cruiser, a fast-attack submarine, and a dock landing ship to decommissioning, she said, and Navy Expeditionary Combat Command in Virginia Beach will be restructured.

U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw, R-Fla, whose district includes Mayport and who has been fighting with Virginia legislators over the carrier relocation, said the ready group could be moving to Florida as early as this fall.

"That means 2,000 sailors and their families will call Mayport home," Crenshaw said in a statement.

Hampton Roads' congressional delegation praised the Navy's decision to indefinitely halt plans to move a carrier in 2019 as a victory for the region.

U.S. Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Chesapeake, said the prospect of large defense cuts outweighed the Navy's desire to have a second East Coast carrier homeport. The service has argued that a second port is necessary to disperse the carrier fleet because of the risks of terrorist attacks and hurricane-related damage.

Losing a carrier would have cost the region about 6,000 jobs and $425 million in annual revenue, according to economists.

"Today's announcement to call off these plans is a tremendous victory for the citizens of Hampton Roads, who proudly provide vital industrial services to our nation's armed forces," Forbes said in a statement.

However, U.S. Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia noted that "there will be some modest shifts in personnel and in the total number of ships" at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek-Fort Story as part of the budget proposal. Through 2020, he said, there will be 111,000 sailors and Marines in Hampton Roads, about 3,000 fewer than at present.

The defense budget proposal also includes tens of millions of dollars in construction projects at facilities in southeastern Virginia, including $39 million for training barracks at Oceana Naval Air Station.

However, as defense officials look for ways to pare spending, they're asking Congress for two rounds of military base closings - known by the acronym BRAC - first in 2013 and again in 2015.

The most recent Base Realignment and Closure commission, in 2005, led to the closing of Fort Monroe in Hampton as well as a recommendation that Oceana Naval Air Station in Virginia Beach be shut down. State and local officials managed to keep Oceana open with pledges to more strongly address the Navy's concerns about development encroaching on the base.

Individual service members' personal finances probably will break even despite pay raises and larger housing allowances, a top Navy official said Monday, because of increased health care expenses.

"The bottom line is no one is losing a dollar. There is a not a sailor or Marine who is losing a dollar from their current paycheck," said Rear Adm. Joseph Mulloy, the Navy' top budget officer. "This is merely an adjustment of what is the ramp up over time."

The budget calls for pay raises of 1.7 percent a year in 2013 and 2014, followed by smaller raises of 0.5 percent in 2015, 1 percent in 2016 and 1.5 percent in 2017.

Robert Hale, the Pentagon's chief financial officer, said any pay raise after 2014 is open to adjustment if defense officials find that the compensation isn't competitive and hinders recruitment.

At the same time, housing allowances for active-duty personnel will increase $2.3 billion compared with this year's $7.3 billion budget.

But the cost of health care for retired veterans and their families - particularly those who are retired but still of working age - would rise steadily over the next five years.

Prompted by rapidly rising health care cost, the budget proposes that Tricare Prime family enrollment fee for working-age retirees follow a three-tier payment system keyed to the retiree's income. The annual enrollment fees, which this year range from $460 to $520, would increase next year to $600, $720 or $820. In five years, the fees would be $893, $1,523 and $2,048, respectively.

Prescription co-payments for retirees and military family member will rise slightly under the budget plan. But co-payments will be smaller for generic drugs and mail-order purchases.

Bill Bartel, 757-446-2398, bill.bartel@pilotonline.com

A report released Thursday that claims 27 percent of detainees released from Guantanamo Bay could be reengaging in terrorist activities has sparked a rare partisan fight on the House Armed Services Committee.

The study from the panel’s Oversight and Investigations subcommittee found that both the Bush and Obama administrations struggled to assess the risk of releasing the detainees and ensuring that the countries that took them in would prevent them from returning to terrorist activities.

“Despite earnest and well-meaning efforts by officials in both administrations, the reengagement rate suggests failures in one or both aspects of the process,” the report said.

“The Armed Services Committee is not accustomed, and should not lower itself, to wearing blinders, dumbing down information, and hinting darkly, all in order to attempt a partisan advantage,” Cooper said in a statement. “Much of the failure is due to the majority’s insistence on releasing a public report during an election year.”

Republicans said they worked with Democrats and their staff to produce the report, and that they attempted to accommodate all Democratic concerns.

“It’s a nonpartisan report,” Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), the subcommittee chairman, told The Hill. “We looked at both administrations. Their staff was involved from day one, and every element of the evaluation here involved the minority.”

The division is rare for the Armed Services Committee, which prides itself on being the most bipartisan committee in Congress.

Guantanamo Bay has been a thorny issue for President Obama, who signed an executive order the day he took office aimed at closing the facility. Republicans have placed restrictions on transferring detainees or building replacement facilities in Defense Authorization legislation since then, and the president has restarted military trials at the prison, conceding it will remain open. 

Thursday’s report cites U.S. officials who said in September that 27 percent of Guantanamo detainees are confirmed or suspected to have reengaged in terror activities. The report found that five of 66 detainees who left between February 2009 and October 2010 were confirmed or suspected to be involved with terror activities.

The report found that “the Bush and Obama administrations, in reaction to domestic political pressures, a desire to earn goodwill abroad, and in an attempt to advance strategic national security goals, sought to ‘release’ or ‘transfer’ GITMO detainees elsewhere.”

“The key is making sure we don’t allow detainees to areas where they rejoin the battle,” Wittman said. “The analysis of the policy cuts across both administrations, making sure the process is such that these detainees are not returning to the battlefield and seeking to harm Americans, seeking to kill Americans.”

Democrats said the GOP’s report ignored the national security value of closing Guantanamo down.

The prison “is a black eye for our on nation abroad, serving as a powerful recruiting tool for terrorists,” said Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the House Armed Services panel.

“We have the ability to close the facility, and we should be working toward that end,” he said.

In their dissent, Democrats said the recidivism rate for released detainees during the Obama administration is “closer to 3 percent,” rather than the 27 percent figure cited in the report. They said the study backed by Republicans “presents an unbalanced, one-sided view of the consequences of current transfer policy.”

House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said in a statement that the report found “our detainee release policy could be unnecessarily risky and potentially harmful to U.S. national security.”

Smith, who took a much softer tone than Cooper in explaining why Democrats didn’t sign on, said Thursday that the two parties “worked together in good faith.”

“There were attempts on both sides to reconcile the differences, but they fell short,” he said.

Rep. Rob Wittman on defense cuts and an alternative tax system

In this interview with Scott Lee, Rep. Rob Wittman addresses the concerns arising out of the Obama administration’s proposed cuts in defense spending. These reductions — which will hit Virginia particularly hard — have conservatives deeply concerned that the administration is eager to shrink the military in the face of growing international security threats. Wittman is open to making sure the armed forces are properly structured to meet these threats, but is very worried that the administration is more concerned about cutting overhead than much else.

Wheeling 180 degrees, Scott and Rep. Wittman talk about the nation’s byzantine tax system. Wittman favors scrapping the current code and replacing it with the Fair Tax to encourage economic growth. That’s sure to stir a debate with fans of the flat tax…

“The Score” is Bearing Drift radio, and can be heard on these broadcast stations and online talk networks, in addition to being available right here, on demand, at Bearing Drift.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are questioning why nobody has been charged in connection with a criminal investigation into the mismanagement of Arlington National Cemetery.  A hearing on the matter was held Friday.

Reports of incorrectly marked grave sites first surfaced in 2009.  After a scathing army audit in 2010, the cemetery's two top officials, Superintendent John Metzler and deputy Thurman Higginbotham, were forced out.

The new management team is inspecting each of the 260,000 graves to make sure that all the deceased are properly accounted for.

The Army's inspector general, Lt. Gen. Peter Vangjel, said the Army's Criminal Investigations Division has completed its probe of the Cemetery mismanagement, but a spokesman for CID said Friday evening that the agency's investigation remains "open and ongoing.''

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are questioning why no criminal charges have been filed.

"We are years into this and to my knowledge not a single person has been punished in any way'' for one of the worst scandals in the nearly 150-year history of the cemetery, said Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., at Friday's hearing.

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., called the lack of any prosecution thus far "difficult to believe and unacceptable.''

"All of us feel like a significant amount of time has passed where these investigations should have reached their conclusions,'' he said.

Posted Saturday, Feb 4, 2012 - 8:57 AM EST

"We are years into this and to my knowledge not a single person has been punished in any way" for one of the worst scandals in the nearly 150-year history of the cemetery, said Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., at Friday's hearing.

Following published reports in 2009 of misidentified graves and a scathing Army audit in 2010, the cemetery's two top officials, Superintendent John Metzler and deputy Thurman Higginbotham, were forced out. The new management team, under Executive Director Kathryn Condon and Superintendent Patrick Hallinan, is in the midst of a painstaking, grave-by-grave review of the nearly 260,000 sites and markers to ensure that the dead are properly accounted for.

Thus far, the review has turned up no further problems of misidentified graves. But it has identified potentially thousands of relatively minor problems, like misspelled names or spouses who were not properly recognized on grave stones because of historical peculiarities in how the cemetery accounted for people over its long history.

The Army's inspector general, Lt. Gen. Peter Vangjel, said the Army's Criminal Investigations Division has completed its probe of the mismanagement at Arlington, and said a decision now rests with the Department of Justice on whether anyone should be prosecuted.

A spokesman for CID, though, said Friday evening that the agency's investigation remains "open and ongoing."

Peter Carr, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, which has jurisdiction over Arlington, declined to comment Friday. It is not uncommon for federal grand jury investigations to take multiple years.

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., called the lack of any prosecution thus far "difficult to believe and unacceptable."

"All of us feel like a significant amount of time has passed where these investigations should have reached their conclusions," he said.

A call to Higginbotham's home went unanswered. Metzler referred calls to his attorney, who declined comment.

NORFOLK

Now that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has proposed a new defense strategy that involves reducing military spending, Hampton Roads' four congressmen want him to abandon plans to move a Norfolk-based aircraft carrier to Mayport, Fla.

In a letter to Panetta on Wednesday, the lawmakers said the secretary's recent announcement that he wants to retire several Navy ships and delay delivery of others in part because of budget concerns should also lead him to question the need for the Mayport relocation. The Navy wants to move the carrier in 2019.

"Given the breadth of defense budget reductions now being applied across the department, and specifically to the U.S. Navy, we remain convinced that allocating an estimated $500 million to $1 billion to this project would not be in the strategic interests of the Department of the Navy or in the fiscal interests of the nation," they wrote.

The letter is signed by U.S. Reps. Randy Forbes, R-Chesapeake; Scott Rigell, R-Virginia Beach; Bobby Scott, D-Newport News; and Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland County.

They also reminded Panetta that Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert promised the region's congressional delegation in November that the Navy would re-examine the Mayport move as a part of an overall review of defense strategy and budgeting.

Hampton Roads leaders worry about the economic downside of the relocation. Losing a carrier would cost the region 6,000 jobs and $425 million in annual revenue, according to estimates by economists.

Members of Congress from Florida have been pushing hard for the carrier move, arguing that two East Coast bases are needed but also acknowledging the economic benefit to their state.

"Leaders at the highest levels of the Pentagon have stated from day one that they stand behind the strategic imperative of two nuclear-capable homeports on the East Coast - one in Norfolk, one in Mayport," U.S. Rep. Ander Crenshaw, a Republican whose district includes the Florida naval port, said Thursday in a statement responding to the Virginia delegation's letter.

Bill Bartel, 757-446-2398, bill.bartel@pilotonline.com

The Pentagon on Thursday released details of its plan to shrink the defense budget, and it includes another round of military base closings and realignments that last hit Hampton Roads in 2005.

Another potential concern for the region and Virginia as a whole: Military leaders want a smaller Army — from 547,000 active-duty soldiers to 490,000.

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama is taking his State of the Union goals on the road.

He's on a three-day trip that includes stops in politically important states, trying to sell his economic policy goals while drumming up support for his reelection bid.

Republican Congressman Rob Wittman from Virginia’s first district joined FOX 5 from the Capitol to discuss his reaction to President Obama’s proposals in the State of the Union address.

By JR Hoeft | Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 | Podcasts, Policy 

Wittman specifically acknowledged the restoration of manufacturing industry and the “all of the above” approach to domestic energy production that the president seemed to advocate in his speech. However, Wittman remained concerned about the level of defense spending.

Wittman also went into greater detail regarding two the president’s Department of Defense proposals regarding green energy and a jobs program for veterans. We concluded with a look as to whether this speech was the beginning of campaign 2012 or not and whether he saw this speech as hopeful or just politics as usual.

He also made the case regarding reining in spending amidst the president’s grandiose promises.

“The devil is in the details,” he said. “How are we going to do all these additional things that the president proposes. while at the same time reducing deficits, paying down debt, and making sure that our budget is on a sustainable path.”

BY AMY FLOWERS UMBLE

On his first day of high school, Roland Moore calmly walked over the words “Nigger, go home,” scrawled on the sidewalk in front of James Monroe High School.
On Sept. 4, 1962, Moore was a 14-year-old freshman and the first black student at the Fredericksburg high school.
Yesterday, Moore addressed a crowd gathered at the James Monroe auditorium to mark Martin Luther King Jr. Day.
Moore told the nearly 400 people in attendance that courage and tolerance were important to effect change. He was one of seven speakers who focused on King’s record of community service and helping others.
“As you leave here today, I need you to commit one hour of your time, a week, a day, a month, just one hour of your time assisting a child in need,” Moore said.
He wasn’t the only speaker to challenge the audience.
Philanthropist Doris Buffett spoke about the power of education to lift people out of poverty, crime and abuse.
She told the audience that her brother, billionaire investor Warren Buffett, ends his speeches by asking people to take a piece of paper and write the name of a person they admire and list that person’s characteristics.
“On the other side of the paper, you start working toward those for yourself,” Doris Buffett said. “And pretty soon, you become the person you admire.”
And those who honored King thought the slain civil rights hero could be the perfect model.
U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R–1st District, said that the words and actions of King “are as critical today” as they were during the tumultuous struggle for civil rights.
Jeffrey Scott, son of the late Fredericksburg Circuit Court Judge John Scott, said that King inspired his parents to lead the city Head Start program, tutor young women and head the local chapter of the NAACP. “Dr. King’s commitment was to a community of human beings,” Scott said. “The importance of giving back is to do so without prejudice.”
Repeatedly, speakers quoted King as saying, “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is: What are you doing for others?”
In between rousing musical numbers that often drew the crowd to its feet, area youths recited some of King’s more famous words.
And that underscored the significance of King’s legacy, said Caroline County resident Vernell Jackson.
“It’s important to honor Dr. King so the young people will learn about all the good things he did,” she said after the event. “I think it’s a great inspiration for them.”

Amy Flowers Umble: 540/735-1973
aumble@freelancestar.com

Wednesday, 21 December 2011 01:00 

AFMAO were confirmed in the investigation.

When the report was made public instances of lost body parts from an aircraft incident, intentional dismemberment of a body to fit a casket, and mishandling and mis-tracking of remains came to light.

It was further disclosed that earlier this year Gari-Lynn Smith, the widow of Ft. Belvoir EOD technician Sgt. Scott R. Smith had been notified that her husband’s partial remains were incinerated as medical waste and disposed of in the King George Landfill.

Since that time, Air Force officials have scrambled to respond to Congressional inquires and during a press conference following the release of the OSC findings Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called for full accountability.

A public outcry followed the revelations and many elected officials are carefully following the ongoing investigations.

Virginia’s first district Rep. Rob Wittman (R) who chairs the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations said any official subcommittee action would be determined pending results from ongoing investigations.

Delaware Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D) in whose district the Dover AFMAO is located found the reports deeply disturbing.

In a statement released following the investigation Carper stated, “As a 23 year veteran and a Delawarean, I find the reports of disposing of the remains of our brave service members in a landfill deeply disturbing.”

On Dec. 19, an aide indicated Carper’s office had only received a couple of calls from constituents regarding these disturbing reports about the disposal of the remains of our service members.

However the aide said the Senator continues to monitor this situation and the multiple investigations of the Air Force Mortuary Affairs Operations Center that are still ongoing and once those investigations have been completed he will determine what next steps are necessary.

The aide stated, “Carper is committed to working with his colleagues in Congress, the Administration, our military leadership, and the military community in Dover and throughout the United States so we can be absolutely confident in the integrity of the hallowed work done by the men and women who serve at the Air Force Mortuary Affairs Operations Center.”

By: ROB WITTMAN | Richmond Times Dispatch
Published: December 18, 2011 

The Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction is becoming but a memory of another failed initiative in Washington. The effects of its failure, however, are enormous and won't soon be forgotten. The lack of urgency in Congress is bitterly disappointing and, quite frankly, endangers the security of this nation.

Testifying before the House Armed Services Committee in November, one of our nation's highest military leaders, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, said "sequestration" would cause "irreversible damage" to our nation's naval forces.

The House of Representatives has passed a bipartisan government funding bill that will keep our federal government operational until Sept. 30, 2012.

H.R. 2055, “The Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act” passed 296-121, but ranks were broken with nay votes from Republicans Rob Wittman, Robert Hurt, and Morgan Griffith. (all the Democrats and Leader Cantor, Congressmen Forbes, Rigell, and Wolf voted in favor of the bill)

The bill “reduces the size and scope of our government, cuts discretionary spending for the second year in a row, provides for a strong national defense, and abides by the House Republicans’ pledge to ban earmarks,” touted Cantor. “Despite threats from Senate Democrats and the President to shut down the government, sensibility prevailed and both parties came together to responsibly finish our end of the year work as the people deserve.”

This vote was on the bill following the conference report and was not amended, so it should pass the Senate with equal ease and be en route shortly to the president for signature.

Joe Hack, Forbes spokesperson explained Forbes’ vote via email:

“Congressman Forbes supported the funding measure to avert the government shutdown. As leadership noted, House Republicans have cut discretionary spending for the second year in a row for the first time since World War II and rolled back non-defense spending to levels near those of 2008. Congressman Forbes recognizes that this is a step in the right direction, but we still have a long way to go. He continues to support a Balanced Budget Amendment as the key to reining in spending and will continue to work with his colleagues to cut wasteful spending and roll back regulations that stifle an environment for job growth.”

But Rob Wittman, who voted against the bill, said this afternoon on Facebook:

“I voted against this bill because I believe that making federal budget decisions should include the ability to openly debate and examine each of the areas of the budget in detail, not in a massive, quickly put-together bill. Also, the bill should’ve done more to reduce spending.”

Wittman later added in a statement:

“This bill is an unfortunate example of the broken budgeting process and lack of transparency in Washington,” Wittman said. “I voted against this bill because there was no opportunity for open debate and examination of each spending measure. While the bill contained worthy provisions that I whole-heartedly support such as military construction, defense, and veterans funding, I could not support this legislation that breaks promises of transparency and fiscal responsibility.”

Smaller budgets calls for more creative means and smart contracting.

This was the topic at a recent discussion in Washington, where some called for the acquisition workforce to take the necessary risks to enable innovation, according to a Government Executive report.

The discussion, co-chaired by Reps. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), and Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) and entitled “Innovation in a Budget-Constrained Environment,” included the Congressional Smart Contracting Caucus, acquisition officials and private sectors spokespeople.

With new budget difficulties, David McClure, associate administrator at the Office of Citizen Services and Innovative Technologies at the General Services Administration, indicated that this raises the bar for agency contractors and also presents “opportunity to use technology to get more bang for the buck,” according to the report.

McClure sees a shortage of contract officers as well as a lack of skill in those that are in position. A time with new innovation opportunity and increased dialogue is also a time to increase mentoring and training.

McClure also said pre-contract dialogue would allow industry to partake in discussing best practices and ideas could be eligible for specific prizes.

Stan Soloway, president and chief executive officer of the Professional Services Council, indicated there is an obvious shortage of contracting officials as well. He said that this is an area where funding and personnel should be increasing, according to the report.

He furthered McClure’s claim that there should be an increase of focus on training personnel by saying that good acquisition calls for additional personnel such as pricing specialists and program officers that have an understanding of, “mutually strong business relationships.”

"We are at a pressure point and we need to look to technology to provide efficiencies, high quality services and save money," said Dave McClure, associate administrator in the office of citizen services and IT for the General Services Administration. "We are entering an opportunistic period for technology to shine bright and get more bang for the buck."

McClure, who spoke Thursday during a panel discussion hosted by the Congressional Smart Contracting Caucus, said the tight budgets will force agencies to consider how to be innovative, and therefore take more risks.

He said the federal government can look toward state and local governments for a lesson or two.

"They have gotten very creative in shared services, and in innovative contracting vehicles because you have to come up with an alternative," he said. "That is what I mean by the positive piece of the pressure point on agencies."

Taking risk and managing risk

State and local governments have experienced tight budgets for the last 5-to-7 years, and have found ways to improve how they deliver services.

"We are in a difficult period and have to ask tough questions about how we can save money and meet the needs of citizens," he said.

By Richard Gaines Staff Writer

The U.S. House Natural Resources Committee heard more than three hours of testimony Thursday on eight bills to reform federal fishery laws, with the chairman asserting his intention to modify the Magnuson-Stevens Act, a move sought by fishing industry leaders throughout the East and Gulf Coasts.

The plethora of bills to amend Magnuson — it does not require reauthorization for another five years — and a brief exchange between a Democratic member of the committee from New Jersey and the Republican chairman from Washington State demonstrated a shift toward action, at least in the House.

"We should schedule a vote," said Congressman Frank Pallone, the New Jersey Democrat who has been at the vanguard of the movement to instill some statutory language in Magnuson that allows flexibility in rebuilding time lines. "I hope we can mark up these bills," he added.

"My intentions are to deal with these bills," was the response from Doc Hastings, the chairman.

The bills — including legislation by Reps. Barney Frank and William Keating, Massachusetts Democrats, Pallone and Republicans Walter Jones of North Carolina, Jon Runyon of New Jersey, Rob Wittman of Virginia — all "provide fertile ground for moving forward," noted Rick Marks, a fishery scientist, industry lobbyist and former member of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council.

Marks described the shared concern of flexibility advocates — that the 2006 reauthorization brought the nation "the Alaska model," where the scale of the industry produces enough revenue to support stock surveys, acute technological monitoring, and scientifically based findings allowing confident calibrations of conservation and fishery yields.

The approach is "a good idea," Marks testified, "provided the scientific capabilities of the Alaska region also applied.

"We all know they don't," he continued. "Instead, we ended up with a rigid implementation model resulting in precautionary buffers and lower yields at the expense of our industry and our nation."

That problem was the rallying cry for the February 2010 outdoor gathering of up to 5,000 fishermen at the U.S. Capitol, which was organized by the New Jersey based Recreational Fishing Alliance.

The pending bills and Thursday's hearing were seen as among the first tangible results from the 2010 rally — and they come with plans already afoot for a second "United We Fish" rally sometime next spring.

In his opening remarks Thursday, Hastings provided a similar analysis to Marks'.

But skepticism about rewriting or modifying the underlying fisheries conservation and management act within its year cycle was expressed by Massachusetts Congressman Edward Markey, the Malden Democrat, and Peter Shelley of the Conservation Law Foundation, among others.

NOAA Fisheries Administrator Eric Schwaab demurred on putting the Obama administration's opinion about any of the bills on record, including those that would constrain the rapid expansion of catch share programs that have become the signature fisheries policy for the administration.

Markey echoed the administration view that Congress already wrote flexibility into Magnuson.

"I'm concerned that (Congress) will legislate flexibility that already exists," Markey said.

Shelley cited a letter from 109 New England fishermen earlier this month as evidence of a regional desire for the status quo — even though the roughly 120 signers represent between a quarter and a fifth of the active groundfish permit holders.

Shelley also argued that Gov. Deval Patrick's recent filing of socio-economic research with Secretary of Commerce John Bryson to support a renewed application for a declaration that the catch share system in the New England groundfishery has forged an economic disaster for the Massachusetts fleet actually serves as a validation of keeping catch shares as an option.

Among the pending legislation are a number of bills aimed at controlling the spread of catch shares, including one by Runyon, Jones and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican, which would shut down catch share programs should the consolidation and concentration of capacity put 15 percent of fleet out of the fishery.

The Saving Fishery Jobs Act has a Senate analog filed by Republicans Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire.

"These (catch share) programs have been a favorite of NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco and she has chosen to force them upon Atlantic and Gulf fishermen, even going as far as calling catch share programs by a different name to avoid a referendum vote, as required by law, in New England," said Runyon. "Ms. Lubchenco has a previously stated goal of seeing, 'a sizable fraction of the (fishing) fleet eliminated,'" he added. "Catch share programs are the means to her end goal of putting fishermen out of business."

Congressman John Tierney, who has worked side-by-side with Frank and other coastal lawmakers on fisheries issues, was not at the hearing. But, in a statement to the Times, he said he was in "another hearing at the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which I serve."

"I am pleased that my colleagues were there in support of our efforts," Tierney said. "The chairman's engagement on this issue is critical, and I hope today's hearing will soon lead to legislative action that helps local fishermen and puts an end to the hardships they have been confronting."

Richard Gaines can be reached at 978-28-7000, x3464, or at rgaines@gloucestertimes.com.

It's a figure that's hard to even imagine: $15,000,000,000,000.

In one-dollar bills, 15 trillion wraps around the earth's equator 58,000 times. It's also 100 percent of our annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

By Craig Whitlock and Jason Ukman, Published: November 10

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta on Thursday ordered the Air Force to review whether it had been tough enough in disciplining — but not firing — three supervisors at the Dover Air Force Base mortuary, saying: “Full accountability is what we intend to deliver.”

Panetta also said he had faith in Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley, despite harsh criticism from lawmakers and an independent federal agency about the credibility of the Air Force’s 18-month investigation into missing body parts and mishandled remains at the Dover mortuary, which handles the remains of American troops killed overseas.

“I trust Mike Donley,” Panetta said during a news conference. “I think he tried to deal with this matter, to go after with the issues involved here, to correct them and to do whatever was necessary to deal with it.”

Panetta’s instructions came two days after he commended the Air Force for conducting a “thorough” investigation and said he agreed with the disciplinary actions it imposed. Asked what had changed, he cited a report issued by an independent federal watchdog, the Office of Special Counsel, which criticized the Air Force for being too lenient and not taking full responsibility.

Donley promised that his disciplinary review would be “exceedingly thorough and rigorous, as our fallen and the families they leave behind deserve nothing less.”

For the first time since the mortuary scandal erupted on Tuesday, Donley publicly expressed remorse for the problems.

“The lapses in our standards at Dover, which we sincerely regret, are our responsibility to fix,” he said in a statement. “I want to reassure our military family that our fallen are being treated, and will continue to be treated, with the utmost reverence, dignity and respect.”

Members of Congress, however, said they were appalled to learn that, in addition to losing body parts, the Dover mortuary had disposed of cremated portions in a Virginia landfill for several years.

“We must have an in-depth and detailed accounting of what happened,” said Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.), chairman of the investigative arm of the House Armed Services Committee. “Most importantly, we must ensure that this never happens again.”

Panetta said he was unaware of the landfill-dumping practice and hoped an independent panel of medical experts he has appointed to review the Dover mortuary operations would examine the issue.

Seated next to Panetta at a news conference, Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, noted that the mortuary stopped disposing of ashes in the landfill in 2008 and asserted that the practice was “not uncommon” outside the military.

“If you look into how it’s handled routinely in civilian life, there are procedures exactly that way,” he said.

Asked if it was morally objectionable or wrong to dispose of portions of troops’ remains in that manner, Dempsey replied: “I don’t know what right looks like in that regard now that this has manifested itself.”

An association of funeral directors, however, called the Dover mortuary’s landfill-dumping “horrific.”

“The disposition of the remains at a landfill violates every formal and informal professional standard for the respectful and dignified interment of the deceased,” the International Cemetery, Cremation and Funeral Association, which represents more than 7,500 funeral homes, cemeteries and crematories, said in a statement.

Military officials have defended the practice, saying it is similar to how hospitals dispose of medical waste. But Kenneth E. Varner, the president of the funeral association, said there was a big difference between how hospitals handle blood or amputated limbs from living patients and how they handle ashes from the dead.

“Of course, the difference is that hospitals are working to save lives, and the distinction should be obvious,” said Varner, who is also the chief executive of Cypress Lawn, a large cemetery and funeral home near San Francisco.

Also Thursday, Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, asked the Air Force to review the independence of its inspector general, the agency that conducted the 18-month investigation into the Dover mortuary.

“The Air Force cannot address major failings in leadership and management with half-hearted corrective action and the assignment of limited individual responsibility,” she said.

McCaskill pressed her request at a hearing of the military’s service chiefs on Thursday. Addressing Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, the Air Force’s chief of staff, she said she was concerned that the assignment of responsibility had been limited.

Schwartz challenged McCaskill’s suggestion that the Air Force had not sought to hold people to account.

“There clearly were unacceptable mistakes made,” he said. “Whether they constitute wrongdoing is another matter entirely. And when you look at a situation like this, you look at the facts of the case, as an attorney might, you look at the context in which the mistakes occurred.”

He noted that the senior military officer at the mortuary had received a letter of reprimand — usually a career-ending punishment for an officer.

“This,” Schwartz said, “is not a trivial sanction.”

Two civilian supervisors at the mortuary have received a demotion in their pay grades and have been reassigned to other jobs.

Sunday - 11/13/2011, 2:30pm  ET

Kathy Stewart, wtop.com

WASHINGTON - A local congressman is calling for immediate action into the gross mishandling of military remains at Dover Air Force Base.

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va. is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, and chairs the panel that investigated the misidentified graves at Arlington National Cemetery.

He now has the problems at Dover under his microscope. An aide tells the Daily Press that Wittman will be launching information gathering briefings this week.

The scandal also hits close to home for Wittman. The Washington Post reports that during a five year period military remains were being dumped in a landfill in the district he serves.

He wants an in-depth and detailed accounting of what happened and that appropriate action is taken.

In a press release he says, "Most importantly, we must ensure that this never happens again."

Follow WTOP on Twitter.

(Copyright 2011 by WTOP. All Rights Reserved.)

NORFOLK

It makes sense that a ship that will spend a good part of every year traveling to the Arctic and the Antarctic bears the name of the man who discovered the North Pole in 1909.

On Friday, Maersk Line Ltd. celebrated naming a recently acquired tanker the Maersk Peary for Rear Adm. Robert E. Peary at Half Moone Cruise and Celebration Center in Norfolk.

"We chose the name Admiral Peary because he was a Navy man, he was an explorer and he was somebody to be reckoned with," said John Reinhart, president and CEO of Norfolk-based Maersk Line Ltd. "We're really pleased to have the family here with us today."

Seated in a front row were six direct descendants of Peary, including two great-grandsons.

It was the company's first such ceremony in 10 years. About 380 people attended, including U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, Virginia Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton, Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim, Portsmouth Mayor Kenny Wright and other officials.

"Norfolk is the home port of the Maersk Peary, and it is proudly displayed on her stern," said Mary Reinhart, wife of the company's CEO and the ship's godmother, moments before she christened the vessel with a swing of a champagne bottle against the light-blue bow, unleashing a blizzard of confetti.

"In a sense, when this vessel departs, it will connect all of us here in Norfolk with parts of the world rarely seen or visited, except by courageous explorers like Admiral Peary," she said.

The 591-foot-long tanker can carry 11.4 million gallons of fuel. It is one of about 50 vessels operated by Maersk Line Ltd., whose business consists largely of transporting goods around the world for the U.S. military, under charter with the Military Sealift Command.

The ship was scheduled to leave early this morning for Greece.

The next stop for the "ice-strengthened," double-hulled tanker will be the South Pole, where it will deliver fuel to McMurdo Station, a U.S. research facility in Antarctica.

In the summer, it will head for Thule Air Force Base in Greenland.

The ship will make fuel deliveries to both facilities, at opposite poles, once a year, spending the rest of the year on other missions for the Military Sealift Command, said Kevin Speers, a Maersk spokesman.

While the Maersk Peary is technically homeported in Norfolk, as are all of Maersk Line Ltd.'s ships, the odds are it won't be back any time soon, and might never return here, Reinhart said.

"These ships move constantly," he said.

The company, which has about 220 employees, 200 of them in Norfolk, has been the largest single carrier of supplies to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade, Reinhart said. Its annual revenues are "north of $1 billion," he said, all of it in one way or another from government contracts.

Maersk Line Ltd. is a unit of A.P. Moller-Maersk Group of Denmark, which operates Maersk Line, the world's largest cargo-shipping line.

The Maersk Peary will create about 45 jobs, at sea and on shore, Speers said. The ship has a crew of 20, plus two cadets, who rotate with other crew members about every three months.

Robert E. Peary IV, a stockbroker in Gilbert, Ariz., and one of the Peary descendants at the event, said it was gratifying to see people pay homage to his great-grandfather.

"He was quite amazing for his time," he said. "He persevered; he planned; he was organized; he was determined. In fact, he lost eight toes over his time traveling north in pursuit of his ultimate goal on behalf of the nation. He had to teach himself how to walk afterwards. It's tough to do that. So the fact that he's honored, it just makes us all feel real good."

Robert McCabe, (757) 446-2327, robert.mccabe@pilotonline.com

By MATTHEW BARAKAT, Associated Press – Sep 23, 2011 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Army's acting inspector general told a House subcommittee Friday that there has been a dramatic turnaround in the operation of Arlington National Cemetery, just one year after his office issued a harsh assessment that cited misplaced remains among dozens of problems caused by mismanagement.

Maj. Gen. William McCoy testified that the cemetery's new leaders, including Executive Director Kathryn Condon and Superintendent Patrick Hallinan, have essentially fixed dozens of deficiencies identified in last year's report.

"Simply put, the mismanagement we found last year does not exist," McCoy told a joint subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee. "I am confident Arlington National Cemetery is being run as well as possible."

In 2009, press reports documented extensive troubles at the cemetery, the final resting place for hundreds of thousands of veterans and a tourist site that draws 4 million visitors a year. Those reports, as well as an internal Army investigation, ultimately uncovered as many as 211 graves that were either unmarked or misidentified. In one instance, eight urns containing cremated remains were found in a single unmarked grave.

Federal prosecutors have launched a criminal probe.

McCoy also credited the cemetery with rapidly and compassionately addressing family members' concerns about whether their loved ones' remains were properly buried. He said the cemetery received 1,300 inquiries in the last year, and in all but 13 cases the cemetery was able to check and reassure the families that no problem exists. Of the remaining 13, eight were related to the urns found in the unmarked grave.

The cemetery's new executive director, Kathryn Condon, testified that the cemetery has made significant changes in its procedures, modernizing a database that previously consisted of typewritten cards and implementing a call center that fields hundreds of inquiries a day from the public. Until recently, dozens of calls every day to the cemetery from the public simply rang unanswered.

The increased efficiency in dealing with the public has created its own problems, though: More people are requesting burial at the cemetery, and the wait time for a burial with full military honors increased dramatically, from 74 days in June 2010 to 87 days in June 2011.

"We're almost the victim of our own success," Condon told the panel, noting that calls have risen from 47 a day to 230 a day since the call center was implemented and staffed at Fort Detrick, Md.

"We do not know how many tried to call in, did not get through and decided to bury elsewhere" under the old regime, said Hallinan, who was hired by Condon.

The cemetery is trying to alleviate the backlog by offering Saturday burials for the first time for families that do not request burial with full honors, including a caisson.

Another change is that the Secretary of the Army has direct oversight of the cemetery. Previously, the cemetery operated as a somewhat autonomous unit under Superintendent John Metzler and deputy Thurman Higginbotham, who did not get along.

Despite the improvements, some committee members questioned whether the Army should be stripped of its management role over the cemetery and replaced by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., a ranking minority member on one of the two subcommittees that held the hearing, saying he was persuaded by veterans' groups, including the American Legion, that the cemetery would fare better in the long run under the Department of Veterans Affairs, which operates more than 130 cemeteries across the country.

"This is a scandal that never should have happened," Cooper said. "The Army is always going to be distracted by more important duties."

McCoy acknowledged that the Army "took our eye off the ball" in running the cemetery but has since fixed its mistakes and said the Army is committed to the job and capable of fulfilling it.

Rep. Robert Wittman, R-Va., one of the subcommittee chairmen, asked whether the Army had fully explored partnerships with Veterans affairs and was utilizing its expertise. Condon replied that the cemetery did so in a significant way by hiring Hallinan, who previously worked at for the National Cemetery Administration, a part of veterans' affairs.

Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Ceremonies across Hampton Roads mark 10th anniversary of 9/11 terrorist attacks

A bright blue Sunday sky was a fitting backdrop for the hopeful and optimistic tone of ceremonies marking the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Throughout Hampton Roads — in varied venues like church services, airports and festivals — the community remembered the most deadly terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.

In my three short years traveling back and forth from Montross to Washington, D.C., in my 2005 tan Toyota Corolla, I have learned that change is a tough goal inside the Beltway. Keeping the status quo or kicking the can down the road is the easy way out but is unacceptable. With almost 280,000 miles on my odometer, sometimes I think the only thing going up at a faster pace is our nation's debt.

Congressman Rob Wittman (VA-1) today voted in favor of final passage of the Budget Control Act, as amended. Wittman released the following statement:

As the surface fleet’s material readiness languishes for the third straight year, ship repairs “came out short a few hundred million dollars,” a Navy logistics official said in testimony before Congress on July 12.

At that hearing, data showed that the number of ships receiving a grade of “degraded” during material inspections has doubled, from four in 2009 to eight in 2010.

Only halfway into this calendar year, the fleet has seen two failing grades from the Board of Inspection and Survey — the same number of failures the Navy had in all of 2010.

Given these results, lawmakers asked two Navy three-stars to explain why the service had not fully funded ship maintenance in its 2012 budget request, which projected significant gaps.

“When you take that five-year stretch from 2007 to 2011 and we see the curve of failures going up, not down, that has to be concerning,” said Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee’s readiness subcommittee, in a July 13 interview.

“As we put off our maintenance more and more, we’re going to have more and more failures take place.”

The House recommended the $367 million maintenance shortfall be fully funded in the House defense appropriations bill. The bill has passed the chamber, but it must go through several more steps before becoming law.

Overall, data show that INSURV results are better than in 2008, when four ships failed, but this upswing is at least partially due to increased funding for pre-inspection preparations such as assistance work and training, Navy leaders have said.

The additional funding is unsustainable, leaders said.

“What we’re seeing is that we have steadily in many areas — not all areas — we’ve improved the performance and part of it is due, quite honestly, to how we’re preparing for it,” Rear Adm. James McManamon, deputy commander of surface warfare at Naval Sea Systems Command, said in a July 1 interview.

“Now that raises the next question: Can I afford to keep spiking, in a sense, for INSURV ships? And I think the answer is no.”

McManamon said additional funding for inspection preps could be needed for as long as the next three years.

Over the past two years, as fleet officials were heralding a renewed focus on ship maintenance, the amount of money they requested for upkeep was dropping. As part of the fiscal 2012 budget request, the service asked for $7.3 billion for ship maintenance, roughly $100 million less than last year despite a rise in the operational pace. At that level, nearly 6 percent of scheduled maintenance would go unfunded.

At the subcommittee hearing, Forbes asked why the Navy would try to put off $367 million in ship maintenance if it was still struggling with INSURV failures.

“I’m not happy about the $367 million,” said Vice Adm. William Burke, deputy chief of naval operations for fleet readiness and logistics. “However, it was a decision that was made on a bunch of other priorities and ship maintenance came out short a few hundred million dollars. The impact of that is significant. The impact is that we will go without approximately 40 availabilities.”

Despite admitting that “there’s not a good justification for these shortfalls,” Burke continued to assert that the Navy was meeting the operational demands of the combatant commanders.

Forbes and some other lawmakers weren’t persuaded.

In an interview, Forbes pointed to the rising number of INSURV failures in the past five years.

“How in the world do you say, ‘We’ve got 22 percent failures in our INSURV inspections but we’re going to have a $367 million shortfall in the maintenance we do?’ The average person looking at those just says, ‘These two just don’t add up,‘” he said.

INSURV failures aren’t the only problem, Forbes said. Parts are being transferred from ship to ship at an alarming rate to allow for deployments and to pass inspections — a statistic the Navy refers to as a “cannibalization rate.” In the first quarter of fiscal 2011, according to data the Navy provided to Congress, each attack submarine had an average of slightly less than one “cannibalization incident” each quarter. On surface combatants, 0.31 incidents are happening each quarter; the maximum accepted level is 0.28.

Classification

The INSURV totals presented at the hearing had not previously been released, partly because Adm. Jon Greenert — the vice chief of naval operations and the nominee to succeed CNO Adm. Gary Roughead — classified INSURV results in late 2008.

At the time, his spokesman argued that these detailed reports on a ship’s material condition could aid the enemy. While the reports can be requested by the public, they are almost completely blacked out, preventing an independent assessment of the fleet’s readiness.

Forbes stopped short of calling on all of the inspection reports to be unclassified, but he said he was working to see whether sections of the individual reports could be publicly released.

The timing of the classification was questionable, he added.

“If you look at the time period of when they classified them, it’s kind of interesting. It’s because there was this big jump in the percentage of failures that were taking place,” Forbes said. “That’s a concern for me.”

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., also contends that portions of the Navy’s INSURV results should be publicly released.

“I know the Navy may look at it and say, ‘Oh well, it represents a weakness if somehow we’re showing the failure rates,’” Wittman said in a July 14 interview. But, he added, “If we don’t know where the problems are, then there’s no way we can anticipate what to do to fix them.”

Wittman, who is co-chair of the Congressional Shipbuilding Caucus, continued: “In the general sense, they need to be putting this out there.”

Held every Friday from May 6 to Aug. 26, the parades are performed at the "Oldest Post of the Corps" and the residence of every Commandant of the Marine Corps since 1806.

The parades are hosted by the most senior Marine leadership, and these leaders, in turn, host individuals who are considered to have made significant contributions to the country, the Defense Department and the Marine Corps.

On Friday, July 22, Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland, was that honored guest.

Wittman is a mmember of the House Armed Services Committee, chairs the Oversight and Investigatons Subcommittee and co-chairs the Congressional Shipbuilding Caucus.

In December 2010, he was appointed to serve as the Chairman of the U.S. Naval Academy's Board of Visitors.

The man to your left on the Metro this morning, the one reading a spy novel? 

That could’ve been Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Wash.), who rides the red and blue or orange lines every morning that Congress is in session.

The man balancing against the car doors, his Express opened to the sports page?

That might’ve been Rep. Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.), taking the orange line from his home in Eastern Market.

And you may have seen Rep. Rob Wittman (R-Va.) on his way in from a meeting in his district, answering emails on his BlackBerry.

These three Members of Congress aren’t the only lawmakers who ride the Metro frequently, but they’re part of a fairly small caucus. Although Congress is in charge of allocating funds to D.C.’s Metro system, few Members hop on the blue or orange lines at Capitol South Metro Station at the end of the day, opting instead to drive — sometimes hundreds of miles — home.

Those who do ride are loyal to the system, despite its many service hiccups and never-ending track maintenance.

“I’ve been here for 20 years, and I’ve been riding the Metro for 20 years,” Pastor said. He’ll often explore the city on the Metro if Congress gets out early, taking the train to restaurants in Adams Morgan and Bethesda, Md. Pastor also takes the Circulator, when it’s available, and he tends to hop on a bus or train if he’s home and a vote is called at the Capitol. Pastor said he’d recommend the Metro to visitors to the District and Members of Congress alike.

“It’s very safe accommodations,” he said. “If you want to know what the city is really like, ride the Metro or a public bus.”

Larsen said there’s no question for him about whether to Metro or drive from his home each morning. His wife usually needs the family car, but even if he had access to a car, he’d still ride the red line.

“Being honked at, screamed at, yelled at while driving in D.C. is not something I miss,” he said.

But Metro, and public transportation systems nationwide, often experiences a disconnect between the funding that it needs and the funding offered by the federal government. Federal funding for public transit has steadily increased since the mid-1980s, when a portion of the Highway Trust Fund was set aside for transit nationwide. 

But as ridership increases and old systems decay, more funding than ever before will be required in upcoming years to support public transit.

“All the trends we see in the future point to a large growth in demand for public transportation,” explained Paul Dean, director of government relations for the American Public Transportation Association. Population growth in urban areas and rising gas prices, he said, coupled with an increasing national interest in greener forms of transportation, are likely to increase the burden on public transit in the upcoming decades.

With an average weekly ridership of more than 727,000 people on the Metro alone, the need for improved infrastructure has become increasingly pressing. Pastor said he’s seen evidence of age and increased use on the D.C. Metro over the two decades that he’s been riding the train.

“The infrastructure is getting older, the escalators are breaking down more often,” he said. “Obviously they’ve had problems with some of the equipment, but overall it’s a very efficient system for me. It just needs continual support.”

Pastor added that Metro particularly needs support because it transports so many federal workers to and from their jobs. 

The need for infrastructure improvements in public transit systems nationwide is part of the reason the APTA has recommended that the federal government increase the current Highway Trust Fund from $53 billion to $123 billion over the next six-year authorization period. 

Many Members of Congress support the increase in funding for public transit generally and for Metro specifically. Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-Md.), who rides Metro infrequently but is a supporter of public transit, said the United States would be worse off without it. 

“We would literally have gridlock. We’d be spending a lot more money because we’d have to have a lot more roads and bridges, and they’d be falling down a lot more quickly,” he said. 

Despite consistent increases in federal funding of public transit over the years, part of the disconnect between funding needed and funding allocated results from the fact that Members of Congress focus mainly on their constituents’ needs. According to the APTA, 46 percent of American households do not have access to public transit. And Larsen said it’s easy to understand why many Members don’t support funding systems that most of their constituents can’t access.

“You can usually tell where people are on issues by looking at where they’re from,” he said. 

Larsen added that he feels more informed about the issues facing public transit because he is a frequent rider and because he’s had experience on his local transit board back in Washington state.

Cardin also believes that it’s difficult to find funding for public transit because of the high prices attached to transit projects.

“You can have a sticker shock on [public transit projects],” he said. “You can build a road a lot of times cheaper than you can build a transit system, obviously, but transit systems accommodate a lot more people and keep our roads safer.”

Wittman said this is one of the aspects of public transit that needs to be highlighted in the funding debate — the bang for the government’s bucks.

“At the end of the day, it’s still a situation to look at getting the maximum utility out of the dollars that we spend and move people around in the most efficient way possible,” he said.

Still, it’s a tough sell in a Congressional environment focused on spending cuts. 

“Congress is, unfortunately, stepping away from a robust federal investment in our public transit system, to our detriment,” Larsen said.

But it’s not just Metro that’s hurting for funds — the likelihood of Congress passing the APTA’s proposed reauthorization at a time when government is aiming to cut spending is slim. The chasm between what’s needed and what will likely be spent, Dean said, harms America’s future.

“Our nation’s infrastructure is crumbling, and for us to remain competitive into the future, we need to take a different look at the ways that we invest in all of our transportation infrastructure,” he said.

Correction: July 22, 2011

The article incorrectly stated the availability of public transit in the United States. Forty-six percent of American households do not have access to public transit.

As pressure grows to reach a deal on increasing the federal debt limit, President Barack Obama has indicated he will seek more cuts in defense spending, a pillar of the Hampton Roads economy.

At a press conference Wednesday, the president praised outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates for finding $400 billion in cuts, but added "we're going to do more."

Two Republican congressman from Hampton Roads with influence over defense spending — but who also favor spending cuts as the only way to reach a debt deal — reacted carefully to that possibility.

ABRUPT CLOSURES of popular ocean fisheries in recent years by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Marine Fisheries Service, some based on allegedly sketchy data, raised the ire of many anglers and conservation groups.

Rob Wittman, Virginia's 1st District representative in Congress, has crafted a widely endorsed bill that requires catch limits to be set based on sound science.

Wittman's Fishery Science Improvement Act, House Resolution 2304, was first briefed to legislators June 14. Now filed and assigned to the Committee on Natural Resources, the bill has 17 co-sponsors in Congress and is endorsed by the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus as well as several conservation, sport fishing and marine industry groups.

Protection against overfishing was a centerpiece of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act as amended in 2006. Annual catch limits and accountability measures are supposed to be in place for every fishery by the end of this year, but data reportedly is lacking for hundreds of fish species.

Sound science was supposed to support decision-making. Stock assessments of fish species and better catch data were needed. The saltwater angler registry, mandatory this year, was designed to help improve catch data, but that program is just getting off the ground. Previous survey methods, used in justifying closures, have many critics.

Wittman's bill has three key components.

If the agency has not assessed a particular stock in the last five years, and there is no indication that overfishing is occurring, an annual catch limit on that stock is not required.

FSIA gives NOAA Fisheries three years to work with the regional councils to figure out how to implement science-based measures appropriate for each region and its fisheries.

To avoid removing fish species from management entirely due to lack of data, NOAA Fisheries is designating a limited number of such stocks as "ecosystem components," allowing continued federal management without implementing an annual catch limit or accountability measure.

Congressional Sportsman's Foundation president Jeff Crane praised the bill, saying: "The sportfishing community is facing an unacceptable situation in which arbitrary deadlines are being allowed to trump the essential need for science-based management of our marine resources."

BILLFISH BLAST

Spotsylvania resident Stewart Heubi wrote recently to share details about a buddy trip to Costa Rica looking for big billfish down around the equator.

Rep. Rob Wittman said he believes Congress should reduce its spending before looking at revenue, including tax credits and subsidies.

Wittman, R-Montross, held a town hall meeting on the federal budget last night at the Central Rappahannock Regional Library at England Run.

When some attendees asked about eliminating tax credits for wealthy individuals or corporations, Wittman said he thinks that's something that should be addressed separately from the current debate over the national debt and the debt ceiling.

"Until you re-establish people's trust that Congress can be responsible" with money, Wittman said, the government shouldn't be allowed additional revenue. "Let's get back on the road to responsibility, then we can look at the revenue side."

He said he is interested in proposals--which have come from both Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat, and Republican Senate candidate George Allen--to reduce tax rates along with eliminating some tax exemptions. But again, Wittman said, that's a discussion that should be had apart from the debt discussion.

Wittman, who represents most of the Fredericksburg region, said he believes any discussion of the debt ceiling must come as part of a long-term plan to reduce the debt.

"We've got a chance to really make meaningful reforms," he said.

Wittman said he does believe the debt ceiling debate is important; by August, the country will run up against its debt limit, and some have warned that could have devastating consequences.

Wittman said he doesn't think it would be as dire as some say, but he does think Congress needs to move forward soon with a solution.

"It has to be done sooner rather than later," he said. "I don't see the U.S. putting itself in a default position."

Wittman showed a slide presentation about the growing impact of debt on the national budget, which he said is a crisis caused because Washington "spends too much, not because it taxes too little.

"You cannot continue on this path of spending and expect our economy to grow in a healthy way," Wittman added.

He said 76 percent of the federal budget is what he calls "autopilot" spending, on programs like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.

But Wittman also assured the crowd, which was made up primarily of senior citizens, that he will not support changing those benefits in a way that impacts current beneficiaries.

"Seniors cannot change their financial situation," Wittman said.

Instead, he would be interested in making changes for future beneficiaries, he said.

Several audience members urged him to stick to that promise.

Other questions from the audience involved federal money spent on illegal immigrants, bailouts, the president's war powers, and environmental regulations.

The audience applauded when Wittman said he supports a balanced-budget requirement for the federal government, and again when he said he opposes bailout programs and is supporting a bill to freeze or reduce congressional salaries.

Many in the audience also seemed to agree with a debate currently in Congress over ending subsidies to ethanol producers, something Wittman said he also would support.

Chelyen Davis: 540/368-5028
Email: cdavis@freelancestar.com

Hampton Roads' four congressmen don't think Virginia's two senators are doing enough to block the Navy's plans to move a Norfolk-based aircraft carrier to Mayport, Fla.

The four House members recently sent a letter expressing concern that while the House's approved 2012 defense budget specifically prohibits spending money to prepare the Florida naval station to base a nuclear carrier, a proposed Senate budget does not.

The Senate version, which was approved by the chamber's Armed Services Committee this month and is headed to the full body, includes $15 million for Mayport improvements in advance of the proposed 2019 carrier relocation. The total cost of a carrier move is expected to be hundreds of millions of dollars.

Navy officials, with the support of Florida's congressional delegation, have been working to establish a second East Coast homeport for nuclear-powered carriers at the base near Jacksonville, arguing that dispersing the carrier fleet would protect it from natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

The prospect of losing a carrier has sparked strong objections from state and local leaders. Economists have estimated it would cost Hampton Roads about 6,000 jobs and about $425 million in annual revenue.

Local lawmakers also are concerned that Hampton Roads might eventually lose two carriers to Florida if Mayport is converted to a nuclear base.

The congressmen wrote in a letter dated Friday to Sens. Jim Webb and Mark Warner that they "were surprised to see no attempt to eliminate funds for the Navy's unnecessary and low priority plans for Naval Station Mayport." The document was sent by three Republicans - U.S. Reps. Randy Forbes of Chesapeake, Scott Rigell of Virginia Beach and Rob Wittman of Westmoreland County - and one Democrat, Bobby Scott of Newport News. Warner and Webb are Democrats.

Forbes said Monday he was disappointed that Webb, a member of Senate Armed Services, didn't ask the committee to add the Mayport spending prohibition during its review of the bill.

"The purpose of our letter is to say when this bill comes to full floor, at least do something," Forbes said, adding that it will be more difficult to make the change during the Senate debate.

"The senators missed an opportunity," Rigell said Monday. "It should have been stopped at the earliest possible moment."

Spokespersons for Webb and Warner said the senators have worked hard to block plans to move a carrier.

"This has been an all-hands-on-deck effort over several years by the combined elected leadership of Virginia, and we'll continue working together to prevent the Navy from moving forward on this expensive and redundant construction," said Kevin Hall, Warner's spokesman.

Allison Jaslow, Webb's spokeswoman, said, "Sen. Webb has consistently opposed the Navy's homeporting proposal as both fiscally irresponsible and strategically unnecessary since it was first formalized by the Bush administration in 2008."

The House members' discontent is focused on each chamber's version of similar legislation - the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. In the GOP-controlled House, where Forbes, Rigell and Wittman serve on the Armed Services Committee, the Virginians successfully pushed to include the anti-Mayport language. The House approved the bill on May 26.

The Senate version does include a provision proposed by Webb that requires the comptroller general to complete by February 2012 an analysis of the Navy's Mayport plans to assess, among other things, "the strategic, fiscal and operational risks."

Jaslow said the analysis would be the first independent assessment of the Navy's plans.

Rigell said Webb's addition doesn't go far enough.

"We are well beyond the point of studying this," Rigell said. "I believe that the risks are known. The costs are known. And the argument on both sides is well known.... This is the time to stop the project."

Bill Bartel, (757) 446-2398, bill.bartel@pilotonline.com

(updated w/ video) Virginians React to Obama Afghanistan speech

Several Virginians offered up their thoughts to President Barack Obama’s national address last night on Afghanistan, and I’m glad they did as I missed the speech entirely watching the NHL Awards and spending time with my family.

Here’s a sampling:

“Like many Americans, I anxiously await the day when we can safely welcome our men and women in uniform home from Afghanistan. But after visiting our troops in theatre last month and seeing firsthand the progress that has been made, I am especially interested to know how the troop withdrawal timeline announced tonight will affect recent hard-won gains as well as impact our remaining troops left fighting the Taliban. As Chairman of the House Armed Services Readiness Subcommittee, I will be closely exercising oversight of the Administration’s drawdown plan to ensure that that our strategy in Afghanistan has been and will be determined by facts on the ground and the national security interests of the United States, not by political calculations.” - Congressman Randy Forbes

“I am concerned that our objectives in Afghanistan, especially with regard to troop levels, are being driven by math and politics, not military strategy. I believe we must listen to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that we do not reverse the fragile progress that has been made against those who wish to do us harm. Ultimately, we must act in the best interest of the safety of our troops and the security of this nation.” - Congressman Rob Wittman

“…I’ve long held the view that it is unnecessary and unwise to announce, in advance, changes in troop levels – especially reductions in troop levels.

“As Commander-in-Chief, it is the President’s responsibility to chart a path forward in Afghanistan that, at the earliest point in time, shifts full responsibility for security to the Afghan government.

“Endemic corruption, deep tribal loyalties that often trump national identity, and a continuously porous border with Pakistan make that transition an exceptional challenge.

“What must not be compromised in the days ahead is this strategic imperative: we must continuously disrupt Al Qaeda’s ability to plan, train for, and execute terrorist attacks from Afghanistan.” - Congressman Scott Rigell

 

While I commend the President for honoring his commitment to bring home 10,000 of our troops by year’s end and an additional 33,000 by next summer, I remain concerned about what our nation’s underlying role should be in Afghanistan. Our primary objective since September 11, 2001 was to capture or kill Osama Bin laden and to defeat Al Qaeda. Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan and there are only a few dozen Al Qaeda left in Afghanistan, so it makes very little sense to maintain tens of thousands of our troops in Afghanistan.” - Congressman Bobby Scott

It is time that we recognize that America’s mission in Afghanistan must be laser-focused on killing and capturing terrorists who threaten America and America’s interests and destroy terrorist safe havens. We must pursue, capture and kill terrorists. These terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan directly threaten America, and they also threaten stability in a region that includes a nuclear-armed Pakistan and an Iranian regime that is aggressively pursuing nuclear weapons, all of which pose a threat to our national security. However, we cannot afford – in terms of treasure, or more importantly, in terms of lives – to engage in nation-building.” -Jamie Radtke, U.S. Senate candidate

“Tonight’s announcement marks an important step for the United States in the global war against terrorism – a step that would not have been possible without the strategy employed by President Obama to dismantle al Qaeda’s senior leadership and eliminate the organization’s central command. I commend the President, our military leaders and the troops who carried out those missions, including the extraordinary Virginia Beach-based Navy SEALS responsible for capturing and killing Osama bin Laden, for a job well done.” -Former Governor Tim Kaine, U.S. Senate candidate

 

 

 

Twenty years ago, if you wanted to contact your member of Congress, you mailed them a letter or picked up your home phone and called their office. Today you can send a text from your mobile phone or an email from your iPad. In a little over a decade, the Internet has revolutionized the relationship between elected representatives and their constituents. Now, almost every member has a “digital office” and online presence with virtual office hours to serve constituents around the clock.

The opportunity to listen and engage with constituents has expanded with the ever-growing frontiers of the Internet. For members like us that arrived after the dot-com boom, we’ve never known a time representing our constituents without the benefit of a website, email, and a mobile device.

The U.S. Navy's 30-year shipbuilding plan has become one of the key documents underpinning discussion of how many ships are needed, when they should be built, and how much the fleet is going to cost.

Lawmakers, Navy officials and planners, and shipbuilders continually rely on the plan's documents to warn of shortages or worry about costs.

As such, it has in some ways become something of a political football, kicked around to make this point or that.

The issue at the heart of a Capitol Hill hearing June 1 was whether the plan should be updated and submitted to Congress annually, as it was done from 2003 until 2009, or officially tied to the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The change to a 30-year plan submitted every four years was made in the 2011 defense act.

The somewhat arcane matter can inflame a certain amount of passion. Two of the top congressional naval analysts testified that the document - after the annual budget request and its supporting documents - is one of the key pieces of information they rely on.

"No document is more useful to me in determining issues for Congress than the 30-year shipbuilding plan," declared Ron O'Rourke of the Congressional Research Service.

"The changes in the plan greatly illuminate for Congress" how the Navy is dealing with issues, said Eric Labs of the Congressional Budget Office.

"Aside from budget justification documents, I agree that the Navy's shipbuilding plan is the most important document," Labs added. "The documents can inform the Congress about changes and issues that are about to arise."

The issue also arose of whether to continue with a 30-year outlook or shorten it to something more predictable.

"My instinct is the near years are the most significant input," said Vice Adm. Stephen Stanley, the Pentagon's Principal Deputy Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation. "The longer years are less important."

While agreeing with the decision to tie the plan to the QDR, Stanley proposed shortening the plan's scope to 20 years.

"It's not clear to me the last 10 years does much good," he said.

Stanley also urged the plan be submitted a year after the QDR to incorporate the strategic review into the shipbuilding document.

Marine Corps Lt. Gen. George Flynn, deputy commandant for combat development and integration, agreed "that 20 years is about right."

"You have to have a strategic basis for a plan," he noted.

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., of the House Armed Services Committee, chairing the hearing of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, noted the recently-initiated 30-year aviation plan is submitted annually, and wondered why the two plans shouldn't be put on the same footing.

He asked for written comments from all the witnesses on their thoughts on the matter.

A proposal to return the reporting requirement of the shipbuilding plan to an annual basis is included in the House version of the 2012 defense authorization bill, still awaiting action from the Senate.

Rob Wittman is one of two Congress members spotlighted for their work supporting marine conservation.

Wittman, a Republican who represents voters in Hampton, Newport News, the Middle
Peninsula and other localities, received the Center for Coastal Conservation’s lifetime achievement award. The center is a Louisiana-based coalition of advocates for recreational fishing and boating.

A statement from the center says that Wittman is among the most “avid outdoorsmen” in Congress.

The U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday to begin leasing sites off the coasts of Virginia and the Gulf of Mexico to offshore drilling companies.

The bill would open 2.9 million acres — slightly larger than Delaware — located 50 miles from Virginia's shore to oil and natural gas exploration within a year of its final passage.

That may or may not happen depending how the Senate and President Barack Obama respond.

The bill was pushed through the House by Republicans, who say increasing domestic oil and natural gas production will ease U.S. dependency on foreign oil and slow the rise in gasoline prices.

Virginia's eight GOP congressmen, including Rob Wittman of Westmoreland and Scott Rigell of Virginia Beach, supported the bill. The state's three Democrats, including Robert C. "Bobby" Scott of Newport News, opposed it.

It was approved 266 to 149.

Offshore drilling has been a divisive issue in Virginia and throughout the nation, especially since last year when an oil rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico. The incident killed 11 and sent an estimated 4.9 million barrels of oil into the gulf.

A bill that would track Chesapeake Bay restoration spending is before the U.S. Senate, a critical first step toward its approval, said Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland.

Written by Wittman, the Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act of 2011 seeks to untangle the efforts of 10 federal agencies, six states and thousands of localities.

It requires federal agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to report spending in excess of $100,000. States would report spending of $50,000 or more. The Office of Management and Budget would write an annual report that details who spends what and how.

The legislation has long been a priority of Wittman, who thinks greater accountability will help policymakers determine what programs are most effective at cleaning up the bay. During the past four decades, government has directed hundreds of millions of dollars toward bay restoration with limited success.

“The continuous stream of unconscionable mistakes and cover-ups at Arlington National Cemetery simply cannot stand," said U.S. Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland County, in a news release reacting to a report by Time magazine. "This blatant lack of respect to our fallen American heroes and their families flies in the face of this country’s commitment of unconditional respect and honor for those who have fought and died for our freedom."

Wittman chairs the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

House Republicans introduced legislation on Tuesday that would open Virginia and other East Coast states to offshore drilling.

The bills, co-sponsored by Reps. Rob Wittman, R-Westmoreland, and Scott Rigell, R-Virginia Beach, would end a moratorium put in place after last year's Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

One bill would require the Department of the Interior to hold lease sales for Virginia within one year of the bill becoming law. Essentially, it would allow energy companies to begin probing a 2.9-million acre tract — slightly larger than Delaware — located roughly 50 miles off the coast.

NORFOLK— Recent events in Libya may be grabbing the headlines, but the nation is still at war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Two local congressmen returned from a six-day trip to Afghanistan Monday.

Virginia Republicans Scott Rigell and Rob Wittman visited generals and rank and file troops in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

They were impressed with what they saw, but have questions about whether Afghanistan will be ready for a complete U.S. withdrawal by the Obama administration’s stated objective of 2014.

The United State’s overthrow of the Taliban is going on ten years since 9/11.

U.S. forces are still on the job in Afghanistan, but an end is finally within sight.

Afghanistan forces are scheduled to take over security in four major cities and almost all of three provinces by July. It will be a major step in withdrawing.

American troops are to hand over security for all of Afghanistan by 2014.

Wittman and Rigell expressed cautious optimism about conditions on the ground in Afghanistan. They spent the previous six days on a fact-finding mission in the region... [Read More]

Just a few short weeks ago, Washington, D.C., was brought to a standstill by an ill-timed, quick-hitting snowstorm that blanketed the region in just a few inches of snow, but revealed a mountain of issues in its aftermath. Thousands of commuters in the Washington Metropolitan Area were stranded by a weather event mimicking an emergency evacuation of the Capital city. I myself had a seven-hour commute that night to my home in Montross, Va., (normally an hour-and-a-half drive) giving me plenty of time to think about how things might be different if more folks telecommuted.

Wittman is completing his first full term in Congress and will highlight his legislative accomplishments and record during the event. He will also detail his plans for economic growth and vision for Virginia’s First Congressional District.

Wittman plans to touch on his record of “fiscal restraint” during a time of massive federal spending, according to a press release from the Congressman’s office.

The kickoff in Fredericksburg is planned for 5 p.m. at his campaign office on Butler Road. 

This past week’s events were held in Yorktown and Lancaster County.

Earlier this month, Wittman conducted an organizational meeting for a council that will address issues affecting individuals with disabilities.

The congressman, who has been a staunch supporter of legislation and programs to support individuals with disabilities, initiated the Virginia First District Individuals with Disabilities Advisory Council in response to constituent concerns. The mission of the council is to address issues of concern to people with disabilities and to establish an avenue for continued open dialogue for the development and implementation of policies, programs and services.

Part of the meeting was dedicated to issues of concern from the attendees including community living and services, education and training and employment.

Wittman’s stand on issues can be found at his web site at wittman.house.gov. Information on programs and assistance available from the Virginia DRS can be found at vadrs.org. Resources from the Center for Independent Living available from the disAbility Resource Center in Fredericksburg can be found at cildrc.org.

Marty van Duyne is a contributing writer for the Stafford County Sun. Tracy Bell is managing editor of the Stafford County Sun.

Incumbent Rep. Rob Wittman launched his First District re-election campaign April 19 on the steps of the Lancaster County courthouse. He told the audience of more than 75 supporters that he is committed to changing the way Washington does business

“We cannot spend our way to prosperity,” said Wittman. “We must provide fertile ground for entrepreneurship and pay down the national debt. It is time to get back to fundamentals, basic math.”

To repeated rounds of applause, Wittman stressed his message of reducing government spending, eliminating unwanted government regulation and increasing financial accountability. He said that he felt like the coming election in November will be a referendum on the policy direction of the current administration.

“Collectively we will make a change in Washington,” he said. “I want to make sure the ownership of our government goes back to you.”

Wittman faces a primary challenge from Irvington resident Catherine Crabill. She recently secured the 1,500 signatures necessary to have her name placed on the Republican ballot in June. At a local Tea Party meeting last month she said she is running to replace the “ineffective” leadership in Congress.

Wittman had no comment on her election bid other than to say, “We will be running as hard as we can go.”

The Republican candidate will also face a Democratic challenger in November. Crystal Ball of Stafford County may have secured the party nomination several weeks ago when her opponent, Scott Robinson, dropped out of the race. The Democratic primary convention is May 8.

With two opponents already lined up to take him on, Rep. Rob Wittman is kicking off his re-election campaign this week.

Wittman, the Republican congressman from the 1st Congressional District, is seeking a second full term in Congress.

This campaign season there may be nothing less popular than an incumbent congressman (unless perhaps it's a Democratic incumbent congressman).

Nevertheless, Wittman hopes he's immune to such a "throw the bums out" mentality. His argument is essentially that he has been in Washington long enough to know what needs to be done, but not long enough to be part of the problem.

"I've still got that freshness of attitude, that newness of being there to be part of that change," Wittman said in a telephone interview. "I've just gotten there, still have the passion, desire and get-up-and-go to get things done."

Wittman, of Montross, won his first full term in 2008, after winning a special election in 2007 to finish out the term of the late Jo Ann Davis, who died in office.

Prior to winning the 1st District seat, Wittman served a term in the House of Delegates, representing the Northern Neck. He has also served on the Montross Town Council and the Westmoreland County Board of Supervisors.

Wittman faces a primary challenge on June 8 from Northern Neck Republican Catherine Crabill. On the Democratic side, Krystal Ball is the presumptive nominee.

"I want to have the opportunity to go back and continue some of the things we've been working on there," Wittman said. "There are a variety of things we want to see happen with our economy. I'm well-positioned to be able to do those things, and that's why I'm getting back out there for a job interview to ask folks to send me back."

He serves on the House Armed Services committee and the Committee on Natural Resources, from which he has been active in working on measures to regulate pollution in the Chesapeake Bay.

Wittman said he agrees with concerns about runaway spending in Washington, and that cutting spending and improving the economy are both his top priorities, and the top issues mentioned to him by constituents.

"This spending is absolutely unsustainable," Wittman said. "We have got to make sure we have got this spending under control. I want to make sure we are part of that, and getting those tough decisions made, and that has to stop immediately."

Wittman said now is the time for congressional leaders to talk about a balanced budget and prepare for funding programs, like Social Security, that could run out of money in the future.

Spending issues are tied to economic issues, Wittman said. He believes Washington should help and encourage businesses, not hinder them with tax or regulatory burdens.

When it comes to health care reform, Wittman said he dislikes some aspects of the controversial bill Congress recently passed. He does believe there are some elements of reform that are needed, but said he would lean toward repealing the current bill if that vote came up.

"I want to see the elements of the bill that do not reduce costs, that create a larger, more complicated system of health care, I want to see those go by the wayside," Wittman said.

Spending, deficits, the economy and health care are all issues that Wittman is hearing about from constituents. He's also hearing about voter anger at Washington, something with which he says he can sympathize.

"I think they're very frustrated and that leads to their anger or dissatisfaction, however you wan to term it," Wittman said. "I think it's a very deeply rooted, passionate concern about what's going on."

He said he sees more people being engaged in the process, and that's a positive thing.

But will that passionate dissatisfaction with government lead to a change in power in Congress? Wittman said it's early to predict, but he thinks so.

"I like where we are right now, I think folks are really engaged," he said. "The ideas that Republicans are putting out there are things people want to see happening."

Wittman is kicking off his campaign with three events in the district: one in the Northern Neck last night, one in Yorktown today, and one in Fredericksburg on Saturday.

The Fredericksburg event is at 5 p.m. at Wittman's campaign office at 7 Butler Road.