Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano disrespected Federal Flight Deck Officers (armed pilots) during a hearing yesterday in testimony presented to the House Homeland Security Committee.  Sec. Napolitano showed a lack of knowledge about the program in addition to an intent to kill it over the next few years.  The testimony yesterday provides further evidence of “President Obama’s Plan to Kill Armed Pilots Program.”

Representative Chip Cravaack (R-MN) a former commercial airline pilot and Federal Flight Deck Officer, asked Napolitano some tough questions at the hearing.  If you look at the evidence of the Obama Aministration’s proposed 50% cut in funding for the program and the comments of Secretary Napolitano yesterday, one can only conclude that this administration has marked the armed pilots program for elimination over the next few years.  Expect no armed pilots if President Obama is allowed a second term.

Rep. Cravaack estimated that it costs the American public about $15 dollars to cover each flight with an armed pilot. That is a cost effective means to provide national security.  The Congressman also argue that armed pilots pay more out of pocket than they receive in the value of training.  FFDOs are patriotic Americans who are volunteering their own time to protect our skies.  And the DHS thanks them with a massive cut to the FFDO’s budget. 

Napolitano argued that the FFDOs are not “risk based.”  What does the Secretary consider risk based? 

Maybe a pat down of 3 year olds as reported by Fox in Tampa Bay, Florida?

The cell phone video, taken by a Houston television reporter, shows his 3-year-old daughter crying and screaming as an official from the Transportation Security Administration tries to conduct a pat-down at the airport in Chattanooga, Tenn.

Or maybe it is risk based to ask 90 year olds to take off adult diapers according to Time’s NewsFeed?

The reduction for the Federal Flight Officer Program is predicate on the fact that it is not risk based.  And to have an FFDO just, you know, whether somebody is on a flight or not and we are moving in the TSA to risk based systems and those are the ones we are going to put money into.

Rep. Cravaack then asked again if an FFDO was the last line of defense against terrorism.  Sec. Napolitano tried to dodged the question again then responded that there are “many layers of defense before people even get a ticket and one of the things I continue to emphasise is the checkpoint at the gate that has caused some concern is only one of many other layers.”  Then came the zinger from the Secretary to armed pilots.

Rep. Cravaack – Is a Federal Flight Deck Officer the last line of defense for our travelling public?

Sec. Napolitano – I think the armed cockpit door actually is.

There is no such thing as an “armed cockpit door.”  The Secretary must mean a reinforce cockpit door, but to say that an armed pilot is not a last line of defense is disrespectful to all the commercial airline pilots who are volunteering their time today to protect the cockpit from attack.

When further asked if it was Sec. Napolitano’s intention to phase out armed pilots, the Secretary said “I think as the budget request shows, it is our intention to reduce it.  Yes.”  The Secretary admitted that they want to reduce it and wind down the program. 

The FFDO program is under attack by the Obama Administration.  Hopefully, Rep. Cravaack and other allies of the program can save the program from attack by the Secretary of Homeland Security.  Congress has the ultimate authority to either fund or not fund the program.  The flying public is not served well by an administration driven more by an animus to guns than a concern about aviation security.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano disrespected Federal Flight Deck Officers (armed pilots) during a hearing yesterday in testimony presented to the House Homeland Security Committee.  Sec. Napolitano showed a lack of knowledge about the program in addition to an intent to kill it over the next few years.  The testimony yesterday provides further evidence of “President Obama’s Plan to Kill Armed Pilots Program.”

Representative Chip Cravaack (R-MN) a former commercial airline pilot and Federal Flight Deck Officer, asked Napolitano some tough questions at the hearing.  If you look at the evidence of the Obama Aministration’s proposed 50% cut in funding for the program and the comments of Secretary Napolitano yesterday, one can only conclude that this administration has marked the armed pilots program for elimination over the next few years.  Expect no armed pilots if President Obama is allowed a second term.

Rep. Cravaack estimated that it costs the American public about $15 dollars to cover each flight with an armed pilot. That is a cost effective means to provide national security.  The Congressman also argue that armed pilots pay more out of pocket than they receive in the value of training.  FFDOs are patriotic Americans who are volunteering their own time to protect our skies.  And the DHS thanks them with a massive cut to the FFDO’s budget. 

Napolitano argued that the FFDOs are not “risk based.”  What does the Secretary consider risk based? 

Maybe a pat down of 3 year olds as reported by Fox in Tampa Bay, Florida?

The cell phone video, taken by a Houston television reporter, shows his 3-year-old daughter crying and screaming as an official from the Transportation Security Administration tries to conduct a pat-down at the airport in Chattanooga, Tenn.

Or maybe it is risk based to ask 90 year olds to take off adult diapers according to Time’s NewsFeed?

The reduction for the Federal Flight Officer Program is predicate on the fact that it is not risk based.  And to have an FFDO just, you know, whether somebody is on a flight or not and we are moving in the TSA to risk based systems and those are the ones we are going to put money into.

Rep. Cravaack then asked again if an FFDO was the last line of defense against terrorism.  Sec. Napolitano tried to dodged the question again then responded that there are “many layers of defense before people even get a ticket and one of the things I continue to emphasise is the checkpoint at the gate that has caused some concern is only one of many other layers.”  Then came the zinger from the Secretary to armed pilots.

Rep. Cravaack – Is a Federal Flight Deck Officer the last line of defense for our travelling public?

Sec. Napolitano – I think the armed cockpit door actually is.

There is no such thing as an “armed cockpit door.”  The Secretary must mean a reinforce cockpit door, but to say that an armed pilot is not a last line of defense is disrespectful to all the commercial airline pilots who are volunteering their time today to protect the cockpit from attack.

When further asked if it was Sec. Napolitano’s intention to phase out armed pilots, the Secretary said “I think as the budget request shows, it is our intention to reduce it.  Yes.”  The Secretary admitted that they want to reduce it and wind down the program. 

The FFDO program is under attack by the Obama Administration.  Hopefully, Rep. Cravaack and other allies of the program can save the program from attack by the Secretary of Homeland Security.  Congress has the ultimate authority to either fund or not fund the program.  The flying public is not served well by an administration driven more by an animus to guns than a concern about aviation security.

Our voices are finally being heard – sort of.  When we started voicing opposition to the highway bill there were few conservatives speaking out against it, and even fewer members of the House who were willing to oppose it.  Now, there is so much opposition to the bill that John Boehner was forced to delay the vote on the highway bill, which was previously scheduled for today:

Boehner (R-Ohio) told his conference Wednesday morning that it was “more important that we do it right than that we do it fast” in explaining his decision, a clear signal GOP leaders lack the votes to win approval of the package.

“Given the volume of amendments and the need for a full, fair, open and transparent process, we may not finish energy/infrastructure this week,” Boehner told his conference, according to a source in the room. “If we need more time to debate and consider amendments, that’s perfectly fine with me. It’s more important that we do it right than that we do it fast.”

The bottom line is that Boehner and McCarthy are lacking the votes.  They plan to suspend consideration of the bill until after next week’s President’s Day recess.

But there is another issue regarding the offsets of the bill.  CQ is reporting that “lawmakers needed time to examine their options for offsetting the bill’s cost, because a proposal involving federal employee pensions is also being used in a package (HR 3630) that would extend a Social Security payroll tax cut and other expiring provisions.”  According to media reports of the tentative ‘extenders’ deal, $15 billion in savings from pension reform will go towards the $50 billion deficit created by a 10-month extension of unemployment benefits and Medicare doc fix.  It’s sad that there is such a dearth of items they are willing to cut that they need to recycle the same offsets for multiple bills.

It’s also sad that they plan to pay for a new 10-month deficit with offsets over 10 years.  Additionally they will use $15 billion in proceeds from actions of radio spectrum licenses to wireless carriers.  Part of our opposition to the highway bill was that the proposed offsets would be used to create new deficits instead of paying for existing ones.  If there is a way for the government to receive more revenue from spectrum sales, then why are they waiting for the extenders package to do so?  They should already be using that revenue to pay off existing debt.  Also, using offsetting revenues for deficits violates the GOP CUTGO rule that requires all increases in spending to be offset by other spending cuts.

The entire rationale for cutting the payroll tax cut lose and passing a clean extension was so Republicans could negotiate hard on the spending part of the package.  It appears that they plan to offset the costs with weak payfors, while doing very little to reform the fundamental problems with unemployment benefits and Medicare.  We need to watch this carefully as the day progresses.

We must also watch the Senate action on their version of the highway bill, S. 1813, which is even worse than the House bill.  Rand Paul is blocking Reid’s unanimous consent to proceed with the bill.  Senator Paul is demanding that we stop sending foreign aid to Egypt, a country that is illegally detaining American citizens. Please call your senators and request that they stand with Rand Paul in blocking the highway bill, along with aid to Egypt.

Cross-posted from The Madison Project

Our voices are finally being heard – sort of.  When we started voicing opposition to the highway bill there were few conservatives speaking out against it, and even fewer members of the House who were willing to oppose it.  Now, there is so much opposition to the bill that John Boehner was forced to delay the vote on the highway bill, which was previously scheduled for today:

Boehner (R-Ohio) told his conference Wednesday morning that it was “more important that we do it right than that we do it fast” in explaining his decision, a clear signal GOP leaders lack the votes to win approval of the package.

“Given the volume of amendments and the need for a full, fair, open and transparent process, we may not finish energy/infrastructure this week,” Boehner told his conference, according to a source in the room. “If we need more time to debate and consider amendments, that’s perfectly fine with me. It’s more important that we do it right than that we do it fast.”

The bottom line is that Boehner and McCarthy are lacking the votes.  They plan to suspend consideration of the bill until after next week’s President’s Day recess.

But there is another issue regarding the offsets of the bill.  CQ is reporting that “lawmakers needed time to examine their options for offsetting the bill’s cost, because a proposal involving federal employee pensions is also being used in a package (HR 3630) that would extend a Social Security payroll tax cut and other expiring provisions.”  According to media reports of the tentative ‘extenders’ deal, $15 billion in savings from pension reform will go towards the $50 billion deficit created by a 10-month extension of unemployment benefits and Medicare doc fix.  It’s sad that there is such a dearth of items they are willing to cut that they need to recycle the same offsets for multiple bills.

It’s also sad that they plan to pay for a new 10-month deficit with offsets over 10 years.  Additionally they will use $15 billion in proceeds from actions of radio spectrum licenses to wireless carriers.  Part of our opposition to the highway bill was that the proposed offsets would be used to create new deficits instead of paying for existing ones.  If there is a way for the government to receive more revenue from spectrum sales, then why are they waiting for the extenders package to do so?  They should already be using that revenue to pay off existing debt.  Also, using offsetting revenues for deficits violates the GOP CUTGO rule that requires all increases in spending to be offset by other spending cuts.

The entire rationale for cutting the payroll tax cut lose and passing a clean extension was so Republicans could negotiate hard on the spending part of the package.  It appears that they plan to offset the costs with weak payfors, while doing very little to reform the fundamental problems with unemployment benefits and Medicare.  We need to watch this carefully as the day progresses.

We must also watch the Senate action on their version of the highway bill, S. 1813, which is even worse than the House bill.  Rand Paul is blocking Reid’s unanimous consent to proceed with the bill.  Senator Paul is demanding that we stop sending foreign aid to Egypt, a country that is illegally detaining American citizens. Please call your senators and request that they stand with Rand Paul in blocking the highway bill, along with aid to Egypt.

Cross-posted from The Madison Project

The Daily Caller reports: the short version is, the TSA in Nashville detained Senator Rand Paul (R, KY) after their body scanner went on the fritz and the Senator refused to submit to a full-body pat-down. Senator Paul was scheduled to speak to March for Life this morning as part of their anniversary rally against Roe v. Wade: it’s now an open question whether he’s going to be able to, now.  As somebody noted to me privately: if this was any other Senator you could reasonably expect grandstanding, but Senator Paul is precisely the sort of person who will stubbornly force the TSA to embarrass itself by detaining a Senator on a matter of personal liberty.  Particularly since Senator Paul’s ongoing opposition to full-body pat-downs is quite well known.

In other words: this is what civil disobedience looks like.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: By the way?  As ABC News is actually pointing out, Senators have the following Constitutionally enumerated right: “They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same;”(Article I, Section 6).  Senate’s in session today; so let’s see, once and for all, whether Harry Reid’s a true Senator, or just this administration’s lap dog…