7-21 Tracking Terrorist Transfers

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- So what's the big deal about revealing that our government is tracking international financial transactions of suspected terrorists?
My guess is that any terrorist network big enough to be transferring money internationally knows that if it does it through a financial institution it can be, and will be, tracked.
And it also seems that the big newspapers that broke the story would have someone on staff who knows that a Belgian company routes financial transactions throughout the world. And, of course, that company maintains a vast database of all those transactions -- 11 million a day.
So by going to one source, the government can track the financial dealings of suspected terrorists and terrorist organizations. The only problem with that is that the government can put anyone it wants on the suspected terrorist list.
From press reports, it appears to not be quite that easy. The government has to subpoena the records from the Belgian firm, which probably could refuse to cooperate. But it is doing so, reportedly to help out with the war on terror.
This sounds suspiciously like the government efforts to track personal telephone and e-mails. Since practically everyone uses the telephone and many of us now have e-mail, that places a lot more people's privacy in jeopardy.
Most of us don't make international transactions. The Treasury Department says that is all it is tracking. But some of us get caught in the web anyway.
I'm fairly certain that I am caught in it. Several years ago, when returning from a foreign trip, I was asked by an immigration agent if I had been transferring large sums of money internationally.
When he entered my name into his computer, evidently it indicated that a John Miller had been doing such a thing, maybe in a suspicious manner. Yes, John is my real name.
A simple "no" allowed me to proceed. I thought it odd that I got through so easily after a question like that. It must have been that I looked absolutely harmless.
A crack investigative reporter might have asked the agent that question, but I had a connecting flight to catch and wasn't going to risk having him decide maybe he had been too easy on me.
The incident took place prior to 9/11 and prior to the George W. Bush administration. That strongly suggests to me that the government has been checking international money transfers for some time.
I can't be the only person ever to be asked that question, which suggests to me that the word must have gotten around long ago among terrorists and at least a few people in the media must have been aware that the feds are following the money.
So both sides of the issue are overplaying their hand. The surveillance wasn't that big a secret and announcing it did not constitute treason, as some have suggested. The New York Times took most of the heat for releasing the info, however reports indicate the Wall Street Journal and other papers also released it.
But it's an election year, so Democrats will condemn the surveillance and the Bush administration will make a big deal about catching seven terrorists in Miami who were planning to bring down the Sears Tower. They didn't even have the money for a bus ticket to Chicago.
Meanwhile, I've been delayed at airports the past two years while they double check my identity. I was given a letter telling me I am on the watch list.
I've filled out the requested form from the Transportation Security Administration and submitted notarized copies of every document I possess, including my plastic voter identification card from Rebecca Vigil-Giron.
I still get delayed and can't check in by computer or at curbside, but at least I know I'm not likely to be detained like some of the horror stories I've heard.
But now the TSA doesn't tell me why I'm on their list.
WED, 7-21-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

8-2 Manny Needs a job

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- What's next for Manny Aragon, the recently deposed president of New Mexico Highlands University?
No doubt about it. He's sure to land somewhere in the public eye. Will it be as a lawyer, lobbyist, administrator, consultant, professor, legislator or something we'd never guess?
At 59, Aragon still is full of energy, ideas and attitude. Who will want him? Friends say he can take his pick of offers. But along with Manny's many talents comes a sure fire ability to generate controversy.
Aragon could reopen his law practice. But he already had closed that several years before he assumed the Highlands presidency. Apparently there wasn't enough to excite him.
Many former legislators become lobbyists. No one has a better background and persuasive abilities than Aragon. But can he make the switch from a powerful lawmaker to a lobbyist who must be sensitive to the whims of legislative powerhouses such as he was?
Might he be selected to administer a government, non-profit or even private sector program. Many former politicians end up in such jobs but Aragon's difficulty working with bosses in his last job make that option seem less likely. A position with the state seems out of the question because Gov. Bill Richardson knows that would become a campaign issue.
Could he be a consultant? He certainly has the analytical ability to think through problems and communicate his advice. He could combine that with a law practice and lobbying.
Former Gov. Garrey Carruthers says Aragon would make a great teacher. In an Albuquerque Journal story, Carruthers says Manny would be "dynamite in the classroom." Carruthers envisions him at the graduate school level where students could challenge him in what he expects would be fiery debates.
Carruthers knows whereof he speaks. He is a former agricultural economics professor at New Mexico State University and now is dean of business administration and economics at NMSU. Last year, he enticed Gov. Bill Richardson to help him teach a course, which proved to be extremely popular.
Any course Aragon would teach could be expected to be equally well-liked. But Aragon would have to stick to a visiting lecturer type of status. He'd be too controversial to survive university politics.
My guess is Aragon will go back to his first love -- politics. A seat on the Albuquerque City Council or Bernalillo County Commission is a possibility. He'd love the Public Regulation Commission, with its high salary, but the seat that includes the Albuquerque South Valley extends up into northwest New Mexico where people from Indian Country have the best shot. And statewide office would be out of the question.
Aragon's most likely spot is right where he left off. It is very possible that he could win his old Senate seat back again. Some pundits predict he won't do that because he would have to run against a fellow Democrat.
Those are people with short memories. Aragon initially won his president pro tem position by challenging incumbent Democrat pro tem Ike Smalley, of Deming, in 1988.
In 2002, after being beaten by a fellow Democrat for his pro tem post, Aragon took on another Democrat, Senate Floor Leader Tim Jennings, of Roswell, and beat him.
Aragon has not had a problem in the past with challenging Democrats and shouldn't be expected to shy away from taking on incumbent James Taylor, who holds Aragon's former seat. The next opportunity will be in 2008.
Meanwhile, Aragon can investigate other opportunities. With $200,000 in his pocket, he won't be destitute. But he won't be rich either.
Had he been able to last five years at Highlands, he could have retired with close to $30,000 a year, but now all he will have is the minimal retirement lawmakers voted themselves, and the court surprisingly approved, several years ago.
But one thing is sure. Aragon will land on his feet.
WED, 8-02-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

7-31 Old Lincoln Days

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Lincoln, New Mexico, perhaps the most authentic Wild West town in the nation, holds its annual celebration this weekend, August 5 and 6.
Unlike most historic towns, which have been restored, Lincoln has been preserved, just as it was 130 years ago, during the Lincoln County War and the days of Billy the Kid. It has never changed.
If Billy the Kid returned today, he'd feel right at home -- as long as he stayed away from descendents of any of the sheriffs he killed.
No new structures have gone up and nothing has been torn down to make way for a gas station or convenience store. Lincoln is unspoiled.
The village is now almost totally owned by the state. Eleven buildings comprise the Lincoln State Monument, administered by the state's Department of Cultural Affairs.
Old Lincoln Days gets started Friday evening, August 4, with folkloric dancers at 6:30, followed by a reenactment of Billy the Kid's Last Escape at 8:30 p.m.
On Saturday, the action begins at 11 a.m. with the BTK Invitational Fast Draw Shooting contest and a performance by Ron Grimes as Pat Garrett.
Saturday afternoon at 5 p.m. Robert Utley, the nation's leading authority on Billy the Kid and Lincoln, will lecture, followed by another reenactment of the Last Escape of Billy the Kid at 8:30 p.m.
On Sunday, at 10 a.m., the Fast Draw Shooting Competition concludes. At 11 a.m., Pony Express riders coming from White Oaks will arrive at the Post Office, followed by the big parade.
At noon, local historian Drew Gomber will speak on the life and death of Billy the Kid. Drew is a colorful character, who is very enjoyable to watch. The celebration ends at 3 p.m. with a final reenactment of Billy the Kid's Last Escape.
Throughout the weekend, there will be living history demonstrations and musical entertainment. Arts, crafts and food vendors will be located throughout the town. Events and lectures are free. The museum and pageant are $5 apiece. The town of Lincoln is 12 miles east of Capitan on U.S. 380. Call 505-653-4372 for more information.
A visit to Lincoln is well worth the trip and there is no better time than Old Lincoln Days to visit the capital of Billy the Kid Country.
You can walk down the street, once known as the most dangerous street in America, in the footsteps of Billy the Kid, Pat Garrett and other infamous characters involved in the 1878-1881 Lincoln County War.
Visit the old Lincoln County Courthouse, where Billy killed two deputies in his daring escape. The bullet holes are still there. Up the street is the Tunstall store, behind which are the graves of Alexander McSween and John Tunstall.
Stick around the area and enjoy the Lincoln County Fair, August 8-12, in Capitan, the home of Smokey Bear. On August 12 and 13, nearby Fort Stanton celebrates the 151st anniversary of its establishment. Troops from Fort Stanton played a key role in the Lincoln County War.
Then head up to Fort Sumner for the DeBaca County Fair, August 12-14. See Billy the Kid's grave and the Bosque Redondo Memorial, where over 9,000 Navajo and Mescalero people were held in captivity from 1863-1868.
Also next week, a film crew from the British Broadcasting Corporation will be in the state filming scenes for a coming BBC Billy the Kid special. The focus will be on whether territorial Gov. Lew Wallace should have pardoned Billy as he promised and whether Gov. Bill Richardson should make good that promise.
The state Tourism Department is participating in Billy the Kid related events this year as part of a legislative appropriation to commemorate the 125th anniversary of Billy the Kid's death.
I understand that the final chapter of historian Marc Simmons compilation of columns on Billy the Kid will give a perspective on everything that has happened since Billy was laid to rest in 1881. That will be a good read.
MON, 7-31-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

7-28 A generous Buyout?

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Did Manny Aragon receive an overly-generous buyout from New Mexico Highlands University? That is the prevailing sentiment. But it may not be accurate.
Aragon had two years left on a four-year contract at Highlands. His base pay was $165,000 a year, plus benefits. His golden parachute, as many call it, was $200,000 plus 18 months of health insurance.
It takes a long time for most of us to make that kind of money. I happen to think that executives in higher education and industry are overpaid. But that isn't the point. We're talking contract law here.
When a coach is fired for one or more losing seasons, the common practice is to buy out the remaining years on his contract. When it happens to an executive, it usually involves health, retirement and other benefits added in.
Aragon's buyout is considerably less than that. But couldn't he have been fired for cause and save the public forking over any money for a buyout? It's possible, but the attorney fees would be substantial and a loss in court could greatly increase the taxpayer cost.
How likely was NMHU to win its case? The regents' biggest beef against Aragon was an insubordinate attitude. Insubordination is the easiest cause for firing. The problem with Aragon's insubordination was that it was an attitude, not an act. Acts are easy to prove. Attitude is tricky.
The deterioration of the relationship between Aragon and the board began when Aragon bullied the regents into giving him a performance bonus when they didn't think he deserved it. You can't fire a guy for that.
Incompatibility is grounds for divorce, but it won't uphold a firing in court. The board would have had to start reining in Aragon with an increasing number of directives until he clearly broke one.
The board expressed problems with Aragon's use of the "president's fund," for which he solicited donations and made expenditures without informing the regents.
Aragon transferred some $50,000 of his unused political campaign contributions into the fund and used it mostly to fund expenditures for needy students. He said all the regents needed to do to get information about the fund was to ask.
Nevertheless, board chairman Javier Gonzales said the school was looking into whether the fund complied with state law. Aragon funneled the money into a university account as required by state law.
As far as the necessity of accounting for the expenditure of those funds is concerned, governors receive an expense account from state funds, for which there is no requirement to report. Some governors have reported, some haven't. It doesn't appear Aragon is in much trouble there.
The use of private money for public purposes is a very gray area. I was concerned about that when the sheriffs reinvestigating the Billy the Kid case used private funds to conduct an official criminal investigation.
They didn't report receipts or expenditures or run them through the county budget. But I couldn't get any public officials, including the attorney general, interested in looking at it.
The major disappointment of the board with Aragon was that he wasn't accomplishing goals of the regents, such as increased fundraising, increased student enrollment in key program areas, and generation of new policies and long-range plans.
That's not insubordination. It's unsatisfactory work performance, similar to a coach's losing season. Such acts usually result in contract buyouts rather than firings because of the necessity to prove to a court that the unsatisfactory work performance was uncorrectable.
And that involves documenting clear directions from the board and efforts to help correct the unsatisfactory performance.
If the regents had voted to fire Aragon, would he have fought it? Though Manny is an attorney and influential in politics, he hasn't gotten rich in life so far. He probably could have found an attorney to represent him on a contingency basis. But as a former legislator, Aragon was much more attuned to working something out.
FRI, 7-28-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

7-26-06 Manny Goes

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Manny's gone. And we finally know why. For awhile it appeared the New Mexico Highlands University Board of Regents would keep quiet about its reasons for ousting the president.
That's the way firings often are settled. Both sides agree to step away from the underlying reason and say nothing. That's what Aragon did. But the regents had a lot of explaining to do about why they were getting rid of a guy with such strong support from students and the community.
After all, regents voted Aragon a $15,000 bonus just last fall. So the logical assumption was that the driving force was external, maybe a meddling governor or a coming indictment.
But then came the big surprise. The problem was the $15,000 bonus. It was coerced. The employee had browbeat his bosses into giving him a performance bonus they felt he didn't deserve.
Aragon won that battle, but in doing so, he destroyed his relationship with his board. Aragon's biggest critic on the board, John Loehr, was the one to reveal the genesis of the split. Regents' chairman, Javier Gonzales, soon confirmed that the relationship started downhill soon after the bonus action.
At the board meeting where the final decision was made on Aragon's employment, regents stood before the public and explained their vote. The development of an incompatible, unhealthy relationship wound through all of the explanations.
For those familiar with Aragon's tumultuous 29 years in the Senate, it was no surprise to learn that he had carried his bullying tactics to his next job. Aragon used them whenever he encountered resistance, and there were few consequences in the Senate because Manny was boss.
But working for five bosses is a different story. Loehr, who had voted for Aragon's original initial employment, said the bonus vote was the final straw. He immediately became a vocal critic. For the others, it was a process of witnessing increasing instances in which Aragon acted as though he had no bosses.
Aragon obviously felt he had good reasons for demanding a performance bonus. He had accomplished many of his objectives. He had instilled a new spirit among students and the community. He spruced up the campus. He listened to students and helped them with their problems. He interacted with the community and brought it a newfound pride in its college.
But those were not the regents' objectives. Sure, the new spirit and pride were important, but when Aragon was selected president, the talk was all about his outside connections that would enable him to bring in money and programs to the university from industries across the nation, with which Aragon had worked during his legislative career.
That may have sounded overly ambitious, but there were role models. The first was Gov. Bill Richardson, who immediately stepped onto the world stage upon his election and began strong-arming companies to invest in New Mexico.
The second was Dan Lopez, president of New Mexico Tech in Socorro. The Tech regents took an even bigger gamble when they hired Dr. Dan than when Highlands hired Manny.
Tech is one of New Mexico's three research institutions. Lopez had no background in science or university administration. He did have a doctorate and very successful experience in public school administration, so Tech took a chance -- and hit it big.
Dan Lopez is a success story of the highest degree. His name was often invoked when Aragon was hired at NMHU. And Lopez was encouraged by many to mentor his old friend Manny.
But Aragon had other ideas. Instead of letting his vice presidents and deans handle academic matters, as Lopez does, Aragon jumped in the middle of faculty politics. -- and the university got burned.
Aragon just never got into the external role that the regents, governor and political observers had envisioned. Maybe the regents didn't make it clear enough.
Or maybe it just wasn't Manny.
WED, 7-26-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

7-24 Blue Book Answers All Questions

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE � How do you ever find time to research all your columns? It's the most frequently asked question I receive about my journalistic endeavor.
If my wife is around, she usually jokes that I just make it up, but that's not true. I have plenty of readers who call me on any incorrect information. Over 40 years of working in various capacities at the Capitol, plus another 20 years of being aware of what was going on in Santa Fe give me a deep background from which to draw.
But a guy can't remember everything. So when I need to check a fact, I have a handy little book within reach that tells me nearly everything I need to know about our state. It is called the New Mexico Blue Book, a treasury of information about state and local government, past and present.
And since it's not fair for me to have all this information and not you, the Secretary of State's Office, which publishes the book every two years, makes it available free of charge to any New Mexico resident. And you don't have to come to Santa Fe to pick it up. She'll mail it to you � free of charge. Just call the Secretary of State's Office at 800-477-3632. They'll also mail it out of state, but may add a shipping charge for those requests.
So why would you want this book? It gives you a very good condensed history of our state, its fascinating geology and its economic statistics. Also included is voter information and tourist information.
It tells you about New Mexico's state seal, flag, songs, flower, tree, grass, bird, fish, animal, vegetables, gem, fossil, insect, slogan, cookie, poem, question, nickname, and the two newest additions -- the state train and the state aircraft.
The Blue Book covers the state's attractions and gives the addresses of local chambers of commerce and visitors bureaus to contact for information. It also gives addresses of media contacts throughout the state in case you want to give them information.
In addition, the Blue Book provides the information that blue books have been designed to do ever since the first annual government report was published in 17th century England. It was printed on blue paper, thus its name, and it contained a registry of all public officials, information about government agencies and how to use them. There also is a state telephone directory in case you want to contact a state agency.
Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron is especially proud of her newest edition, which will be the last of her tenure. Being the longest-serving secretary of state in New Mexico's history, Vigil-Giron has published six Blue books during her 12 years in office.
She adds new information every year at the request of people who use the book. This year's edition is the biggest yet -- 360 pages of just about everything you'd want to know about New Mexico.
At the end of the book are more than 200 questions and answers about the state. Vigil-Giron says the publication can be used as a history book�with a pop quiz at the end.
Each edition of the Blue Book contains interesting pictures, collected by editor Kathy Flynn, to separate the sections. This year's pictures are of early New Mexico pioneer families. That doesn't include Native Americans, who have their own section.
In one of my favorite features, Dr. Dan Chavez, a professor emeritus at the University of New Mexico, provides the historical lineage of New Mexico's congressional seats and of state elected offices. Chavez goes far beyond simply listing previous office holders and the dates they served. He lets us in on deaths in office, how successors were named and oddities about elections and appointments.
Think seriously about ordering this book. The new edition is hot off the press and good reading for any New Mexican.
MON, 7-24-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) millerjay@qwest.net

 

721Gates and Buffett

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Could you do a better job of spending your "death taxes" than the government does? Bill Gates thinks he can. Warren Buffett agrees.
When the two richest men in America make announcements within a couple of weeks about giving a major portion of their estates to charity, rather than to the federal government and their children, do you suppose they might start a trend?
Who knows? Many folks, especially the rich, complain about the debilitating effects of welfare. Warren Buffett says he hears it all the time at the country club in his hometown of Omaha.
But, says Buffett, these guys leave their kids a lifetime of food stamps. "Instead of having a welfare officer, they have a trust officer. And instead of food stamps, they have stocks and bonds, Buffett says."
The nation's second wealthiest man says he has left his children enough money so that they can do anything -- but not enough so they can do nothing. Buffett says he has never made his distaste for inherited wealth a secret to anyone.
But those rich enough to have to worry about "death taxes," as they call them, are still working hard to get inheritances repealed in Congress. Those on the other side of the measure call the bill the "Paris Hilton Relief Act." Poor Paris, we'd hate her and those like her to have to change their lifestyles.
If you give your money to charity rather than to the government, you'd be limited to charitable causes rather than some of the other matters on which the government spends its money. But it's the government's charitable contributions that seem to tighten jaws, especially of the rich.
It is the poor about whom both Buffett and Gates are concerned. Buffett contends that with six billion people in the world worse off than he is, he just can't be an enthusiast for dynastic wealth.
It's true that many of Americas rich and poor have an entitlement mentality -- and many in the middle class do also. This column has previously reviewed the recent book, "The World is Flat," by Tom Friedman of the New York Times.
In that book Friedman identifies a new generation of youth, first noted by a magazine in India. They are called zippies and can be recognized by the zip in their stride. They ooze attitude, ambition and aspiration. They are cool, confident and creative. They seek challenges, love risks and shun fear.
And they can come from any socioeconomic background. Friedman explains that with the flattening of the earth, mainly by the Internet, almost any youth, anywhere in the world, has an equal chance to find the good life. All he or she must do is really want it.
How many zippies do you think Friedman found in the United States? Forget about it. Americans aren't hungry enough. Zippies are found in India, millions of them, and China and Russia and in developing countries throughout the world.
And these Zippies are in direct competition with our youth. Anybody who loses a job in the United States isn't likely to lose it to the guy next door. He or she will lose it to someone halfway around the world.
Although we are slipping behind the curve, we're still the envy of much of the rest of the world for our hard work, efficiency and output. On our recent European trip, we heard more than once that Europeans work to live, unlike Americans, who live to work. Americans are interested in success, they told us. Europeans seek the good life.
That's going to put Europeans even farther behind the curve than us. The average American is still willing to work hard., we just want to be paid more for it than do people in emerging nations.
It will cause some economic pain to many in this country until that discrepancy balances out. The secret is to be adaptable and look for jobs that can't be outsourced.
Or be born the great grand daughter of former New Mexican Conrad Hilton.
FRI, 7-21-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

7-21

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- So what's the big deal about revealing that our government is tracking international financial transactions of suspected terrorists?
My guess is that any terrorist network big enough to be transferring money internationally knows that if it does it through a financial institution it can be, and will be, tracked.
And it also seems that the big newspapers that broke the story would have someone on staff who knows that a Belgian company routes financial transactions throughout the world. And, of course, that company maintains a vast database of all those transactions -- 11 million a day.
So by going to one source, the government can track the financial dealings of suspected terrorists and terrorist organizations. The only problem with that is that the government can put anyone it wants on the suspected terrorist list.
From press reports, it appears to not be quite that easy. The government has to subpoena the records from the Belgian firm, which probably could refuse to cooperate. But it is doing so, reportedly to help out with the war on terror.
This sounds suspiciously like the government efforts to track personal telephone and e-mails. Since practically everyone uses the telephone and many of us now have e-mail, that places a lot more people's privacy in jeopardy.
Most of us don't make international transactions. The Treasury Department says that is all it is tracking. But some of us get caught in the web anyway.
I'm fairly certain that I am caught in it. Several years ago, when returning from a foreign trip, I was asked by an immigration agent if I had been transferring large sums of money internationally.
When he entered my name into his computer, evidently it indicated that a John Miller had been doing such a thing, maybe in a suspicious manner. Yes, John is my real name.
A simple "no" allowed me to proceed. I thought it odd that I got through so easily after a question like that. It must have been that I looked absolutely harmless.
A crack investigative reporter might have asked the agent that question, but I had a connecting flight to catch and wasn't going to risk having him decide maybe he had been too easy on me.
The incident took place prior to 9/11 and prior to the George W. Bush administration. That strongly suggests to me that the government has been checking international money transfers for some time.
I can't be the only person ever to be asked that question, which suggests to me that the word must have gotten around long ago among terrorists and at least a few people in the media must have been aware that the feds are following the money.
So both sides of the issue are overplaying their hand. The surveillance wasn't that big a secret and announcing it did not constitute treason, as some have suggested. The New York Times took most of the heat for releasing the info, however reports indicate the Wall Street Journal and other papers also released it.
But it's an election year, so Democrats will condemn the surveillance and the Bush administration will make a big deal about catching seven terrorists in Miami who were planning to bring down the Sears Tower. They didn't even have the money for a bus ticket to Chicago.
Meanwhile, I've been delayed at airports the past two years while they double check my identity. I was given a letter telling me I am on the watch list.
I've filled out the requested form from the Transportation Security Administration and submitted notarized copies of every document I possess, including my plastic voter identification card from Rebecca Vigil-Giron.
I still get delayed and can't check in by computer or at curbside, but at least I know I'm not likely to be detained like some of the horror stories I've heard.
But now the TSA doesn't tell me why I'm on their list.
WED, 7-21-06

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

no column 7/17

We'll be traveling back, so no column until Wed, 7/19.

7-14 Is Bush Really Turning Green?

FRI, 7-14-06

SANTA FE -- All may not be as it appears. A few weeks ago, this column marveled at President George Bush's newly-discovered environmental concerns.
Our suddenly green president had declared the Northwest Hawaii archipelago a national monument. Newspapers hailed it as the largest act of conservation in history, the marine equivalent of Yellowstone National Park, a landmark conservation event, the largest marine protected area in the world, surpassing even Australia's Great Barrier Reef.
It doesn't get more revolutionary than that. But some National Park Service retirees, who say they are the only people connected with the park service who aren't afraid to talk, say that's not all there is to the story. Now some national newspaper columnists are beginning to fill in the rest of the picture.
Evidently, 90 percent of the Hawaiian area already was well protected and the national monument idea had been under study for many years. It wasn't as we originally were told that the president invited filmmaker Jean-Michel Cousteau over to his house one evening for movie night and one of the films was Cousteau's PBS documentary on the damage being done to the islands.
We're now hearing suggestions that it was a smokescreen for a number of exploitative fisheries bills and collateral moves to weaken protection of oceanic resources orchestrated by the notorious U.S. Rep. Richard Pombo. There also is conjecture that Bush's move was calculated to appeal to suburban congressional districts where Republicans are vulnerable and voters care about the environment.
But the set-aside of the 1,400-mile string of Hawaiian Islands wasn't the only favorable environmental action taken by the Bush administration lately. New Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne recently announced 800 miles of new hiking, biking, boat and historical trails. The following day, Kempthorne announced projects to restore more than 87,000 acres of wetlands.
Kempthorne also announced that he is ditching plans by former Interior Secretary Gale Norton to open national parks to commercial development, advertising, snowmobiling and off-road vehicles.
His accompanying statements made environmentalists even happier. "When there is a conflict between conserving resources unimpaired for future generations and the use of those resources, conservation will be predominant," Kempthorne said.
"That is the heart of these policies and the lifeblood of our nation's commitment to care for these special places and provide for their enjoyment. Park resources should be passed on to future generations in a better condition than currently exists."
That's all very impressive, but the next day environmentalists realized that this is no more than a return to the status quo. Kempthorne merely reaffirmed policies that have existed since the days of Teddy Roosevelt. Should that get the Bush administration credit for being environmentally friendly?
The answers will come in what happens next. At present, national parks are withering away. Park budgets have been reduced every year of the Bush administration. The 2007 administration budget proposal will cover only 70 percent of anticipated park payrolls. The federal government's General Accounting Office estimates a $5 billion maintenance backlog.
A good chunk of this is at our own Carlsbad Caverns. National Park Service retirees living in the area worry that Rep. Steve Pearce, their member of Congress is not going to bat for his national park. He could do much as the chairman of Pombo's subcommittee on national parks, but his big worry seems to be that preservationists have been infiltrating the NPS the past 40 years.
Park officials, who are willing to talk, say they continue to put up a good front by trying to keep high visitor-use areas clean and neat. We'll see how much longer that can continue or if the president and Congress step up park funding.
Meanwhile there is a move in Congress to sell off some national parks in order to fund the rest. And, as usual, some members of Congress are trying to get areas in their states declared national parks, which will further stretch the national park budget.

 

7-12 Fort Sumner Commemorates 125th Anniv of Billy's Death

FRI, 7-12-06

SANTA FE -- Attention all Billy the Kid fans. Fort Sumner is hosting a 125th anniversary commemoration of Billy's death at the hands of Sheriff Pat Garrett the night of July 14, 1881.
The observance will be held on the afternoon and evening of Friday, July 14, 2006 in the same locales where the action took place 125 years ago. Festivities will begin at 4 p.m. with speeches by dignitaries, followed by a Chautauqua presentation by Ron Grimes from the New Mexico Endowment of Humanities, playing Pat Garrett.
That will be followed by a Shootout and Burial Reenactment by the New Mexico Gunfighters. The following evening, from 8 until midnight, there will be a dance at the fairgrounds. Call 505-355-2573 for more information.
The events are being presented by the Fort Sumner State Monument and the Fort Sumner Community Development Corporation, under a grant from the state Department of Tourism. Fort Sumner has motels and cafes you will thoroughly enjoy, so plan to spend a night or two.
After three years of controversy about whether Garrett shot the Kid, or shot someone else and let the Kid escape, come see and hear the evidence. Decide whether Billy lay on a carpenter's bench all night on public display, bleeding profusely from a massive chest wound and then got up and high-tailed it for Arizona, Mexico or Texas.
The funding for this observance and many more to come is a result of
Gov. Bill Richardson reading "Billy the Kid Rides Again," telling of the intriguing story to dig up Billy and his mother to help determine whether it's really Billy there beneath his tombstone.
In writing the book, I took a strong position that the historians who painstakingly researched the life and death of Billy got it right and that modern police methods can't add enough evidence 125 years later to prove anything else -- despite forensic TV shows to the contrary.
My opinion came not just from the preeminent Billy historians of the day, but also from talking with some of the nation's top forensic scientists. They all supported the historians and say no one can do better.
But since my viewpoint was characterized as negative by the lawmen who wished to investigate further, I devoted a chapter of my book to positive actions that could be taken to promote Billy's story in New Mexico. And another chapter covered additional ideas submitted by readers.
It was those two chapters of ideas that interested the governor. He requested a big appropriation from the Legislature to fund a year of 125th anniversary events throughout Billy the Kid Country. The Legislature, as it must do with its many special funding requests, cut the allotment to $200,000.
But that will help the state Tourism Department immeasurably in working with local communities that already are trying to promote Billy. Very helpful in the early stages of this effort were historian Dave Clary of Roswell, who submitted a comprehensive plan for promoting Billy, and filmmaker Joe Micalizzi of Hollywood, who spent as much time in New Mexico as he did in California trying to create excitement about promoting Billy.
Coordinating the Billy promotional activities for the state Tourism Department is former tourism staffer and longtime Billy authority Mike Pitel, who is traveling Billy the Kid Country, working with local communities, while producing brochures for the public interpreting Old Fort Sumner, Lincoln County and the roads in between.
Coming soon will be a new book by New Mexico historian Marc Simmons, compiling the columns he has written over the years about Billy. Both Simmons' book and mine are published by Sunstone Press in Santa Fe. Ask at your local bookstore or order through www.SunstonePress.com.
Keep watching this column for more Billy news. Recent controversies are spurring numerous private sector initiatives, not only in New Mexico, but in support of pretenders in Arizona and Texas as well.

Fort Sumner just sent me this news, but I'm sure they would appreciate it being run as soon as possible.

 

As my old buddy Ernie Mills used to say in this sitution, poor planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergecy on my part.

7-10 The Great Debate Debate

MON, 7-10-06

SANTA FE -- It's the great debate debate. Nearly every campaign has them.
Seldom have we had a campaign for any office in which two equally matched candidates, both with superior debating skills, were eager to debate the issues anytime, anywhere.
Incumbents normally don't welcome debates. They may have the edge in command of issues and debating skills, but they also have an edge in the polls. So why go before the public in a forum that gives your opponent an equal chance?
Incumbents normally also have the edge in fundraising. Debates usually are put together by organizations or media outlets that foot the bill. That makes them free publicity for underfunded challengers.
So, incumbents usually run as hard as they can from debates. Normally, they end up having to agree to a few debates to keep from looking arrogant. Challengers keep the pressure on and so do television outlets, because it's good for viewer ratings.
But occasionally you will find the incumbent who can stay away from debates -- forever. Such a candidate was former U.S. Rep. Joe Skeen. For 20 years, Skeen's 2nd Congressional District challengers hounded him for debates.
Skeen's answer always was the same. Why should I give my challenger free publicity? And his opponents' response was always the same. It's only fair that you explain your record. Oh, everybody knows my record, Skeen would say.
And that was that. If voters were upset with the congressman for not debating, they never appeared to show it at the polls. He nearly always scored over 60 percent of the vote against retiring state Supreme Court justices, a retiring lieutenant governor and various other Democrat public officials. The southern New Mexico media seldom got after Skeen about not debating either.
But Gov. Bill Richardson won't be able to escape challenger John Dendahl forever. The governor may be an 800-pound gorilla, but Dendahl is at least a pit bull, although he denies it, and voters are spoiling to see some gorilla flesh fly, even if they end up voting for Richardson.
Dendahl has started his debate demands early, but don't expect to see a large number of debates. And don't expect to see them confined to one topic, as Dendahl is suggesting with the subject of eminent domain.
Although eminent domain is an important issue to major landowners, such as farmers and ranchers, it doesn't register on the radar screens of most Americans. Public officials also know about eminent domain because they use it occasionally to purchase private land for public purposes when the owners don't want to sell.
The current flap over eminent domain began with a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that leaned heavily in the direction of the government's right to take private land. Many state legislatures reexamined their policies after the Supreme Court spoke.
The New Mexico Legislature's action evidently bothered some counties and municipalities, which felt lawmakers acted without sufficient information. They asked the governor to veto the unanimously-passed bill and appoint a task force to draft something all could live with.
As this is being written, Gov. Richardson is completely ignoring Dendahl's debate demand, contending that he doesn't have to talk about Dendahl and that he doesn't worry about him.
That sounds suspiciously like what Dendahl said about state Democratic Chairman John Wertheim, a Richardson appointee, essentially. Either it is payback time for the governor or else we can expect very little communication among the candidates and political parties in the coming months, or both.
It is possible that Richardson, with a lead that appears insurmountable, may choose to completely ignore Dendahl, personally, at least until after the traditional Labor Day opening of general election campaigns. And then, the communication may be only through Democratic Party officials.
Dendahl may come to regret ever saying that he doesn't have to answer charges from Wertheim, whom he called "that boy."

Please excuse my transmission of the previous column twice. The second version, mentioning Hawking in the title, was cleaned and shortened a little.

7-7 Hawking's Exit Strategy

FRI, 7-07-06

SANTA FE -- It is said that disasters come in threes. Maybe the same can be said about planning for them. We're talking major disasters, here, ones that wipe out civilizations or even the entire planet.
Recently this column poked fun at efforts of a Waste Isolation Pilot Project team to declare the WIPP site off limits to future generations. The scenarios developed all involved a major disaster, which I dismissed as a product of watching too many horror movies.
But then came a report from another scientific panel making similar predictions for a special produced by a major television network. And now Dr. Stephen Hawking, the preeminent scientist on the planet wants us to hurry and develop colonies on other planets in order to prepare for the same kinds of disasters envisioned by the two panels.
Are we witnessing group hysteria, kicked off by the WIPP panel's dire predictions? Or is our fate so real that these were independent events?
Hawking is a very serious scientist, with the striking ability to consider the most complex notions of our physical universe and bring some sense to them. He has attained rock star status among his colleagues, who will follow him anywhere on the globe to see and hear him pass on his knowledge.
Thus, it is significant that Hawking chose his most recent appearance, at a Hong Kong seminar, to advocate colonizing space as soon as possible. He wants a permanent base on the moon in 20 years, a self-sustaining colony on Mars in 40 years and, if we can avoid killing ourselves in the next 100 years, space settlements in another star system.
All this is for the survival of our species, Hawking says. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."
Now that the War in Iraq has made all of us geniuses for knowing that from the beginning we should have had an exit strategy, Hawking is pointing out that our species has no exit strategy in case we foul our nest so badly we can't survive here anymore.
Although Hawking's colleagues tend to hang on his every word, there hasn't been a rush from the astrophysics community to lend support. Hawking is swimming upstream on this one. Most physicists downplay the role of man in space.
Former U.S. Sen. Joe Montoya made a fateful, although perhaps accurate, campaign statement during his 1976 challenge by former astronaut Harrison Schmitt. Speaking in Spanish to a northern New Mexico rally, Montoya observed that NASA had sent a monkey into space. "That worked, so they sent my opponent," Montoya chortled.
Montoya got a big laugh out of that one, but the "chango joke" helped paint the senator as an outdated politician. The nation was big on manned exploration in those days. Astronauts were heroes and everyone knew their names.
But scientists knew all along that it doesn't even take monkeys to explore space. Humans just get in the way. If the money spent on sending humans into space could be saved, we'd be a lot further with space exploration, most scientists say.
That may or may not be true. Humans sex up space travel and in the process, likely get more money out of Congress than would unmanned exploration.
Nevertheless, it is revealing that if the space shuttle has to be left at the International Space Station, it can fly back by itself. Astronauts just go along for the publicity pictures.
So Hawking has the second biggest battle of his life to get the scientific community behind his effort to focus on human space colonies.
Physics newsletter editor Bob Park suggests that some of the projected catastrophes, such as massive solar flares or gamma ray bursts from collapsing or colliding stars, would wipe out our solar system and some of its neighbors, so Hawking's solutions wouldn't help.
Park suggests we work on those possibilities we can prevent, such as nuclear war, global warming and global pandemics.

 

7-7 Our Species Needs an Exit Strategy

FRI, 7-07-06

SANTA FE -- It is said that disasters come in threes. Maybe the same can be said about planning for disasters. We're not talking about life's little disasters here. We're talking major disasters that wipe out civilizations or even the entire planet.
Recently this column poked fun at efforts of a Waste Isolation Pilot Project team to declare the WIPP site off limits to future generations 10,000 years from now. The scenarios developed all involved a major disaster, which I dismissed as a product of watching too many horror movies.
But then came a report from another scientific panel making similar predictions for a special produced by a major television network. And now Dr. Stephen Hawking, the most famous scientist on the planet wants us to hurry and develop colonies on other planets in order to prepare for the same kinds of disasters envisioned by the two panels.
Are we witnessing group hysteria, kicked off by the WIPP panel's dire predictions? Or is our fate so real that these were independent events?
Hawking is a very serious scientist, with the striking ability to consider the most complex notions of our physical universe and bring some sense to them. He has attained rock star status among his colleagues, who will follow him anywhere on the globe to see and hear him pass on his knowledge.
Thus, it is significant that Hawking chose his most recent appearance, at a Hong Kong seminar, to advocate colonizing space as soon as possible. He wants a permanent base on the moon in 20 years, a self-sustaining colony on Mars in 40 years and, if we can avoid killing ourselves in the next 100 years, space settlements in another star system.
All this is for the survival of our species, Hawking says. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."
Now that the War in Iraq has made all of us geniuses for knowing that from the beginning we should have had an exit strategy, Hawking is pointing out that our species has no exit strategy in case we foul our nest so badly we can't survive here anymore.
Although Hawking's colleagues tend to hang on his every word, there hasn't been a rush from the astrophysics community to lend support. Hawking is swimming upstream on this one. Most physicists downplay the role of man in space.
Former U.S. Sen. Joe Montoya made a fateful, although perhaps accurate, campaign statement during his 1976 challenge by former astronaut Harrison Schmitt. Speaking in Spanish to a northern New Mexico rally, Montoya observed that NASA had sent a monkey into space. "That worked, so they sent my opponent," Montoya chortled.
Montoya got a big laugh out of that one, but the "chango joke" helped paint the senator as an outdated politician. The nation was big on manned exploration in those days. Astronauts were heroes and everyone knew their names.
But scientists knew all along that it doesn't even take monkeys to explore space. Humans just get in the way. If the money spent on sending humans into space could be saved, we'd be a lot further with space exploration, most scientists say.
That may or may not be true. Humans sex up space travel and in the process, likely get more money out of Congress than would unmanned exploration.
Nevertheless, it is revealing that if the space shuttle has to be left at the International Space Station, it can fly back by itself. Astronauts just go along for the publicity pictures.
So Hawking has the second biggest battle of his life to get the scientific community behind his effort to focus on human space colonies.
Physics newsletter editor Bob Park suggests that some of the projected catastrophes, such as massive solar flares or gamma ray bursts from collapsing or colliding stars, would wipe out our solar system and some of its neighbors, so Hawking's solutions wouldn't help.
Park suggests we work on those possibilities we can prevent, such as nuclear war, global warming and global pandemics.