Michigan for Hagel 2008

Senator Hagel on The Daily Show

2008-04-01T21:20:00.002-05:00

I just quickly wanted to show the video of Senator Hagel discussing Iraq, his book, and the 2008 elections on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart:

It's a great video, enjoy!

Senator Hagel's Book Now for Sale

2008-03-28T03:19:00.002-05:00

Senator Hagel's book America: Our Next Chapter: Tough Questions, Straight Answers came out on Tuesday. I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but I have heard great reviews about it and would encourage everyone to buy a copy.

Hagel Will Not Run for President or Senator in 2008

2007-09-10T11:08:00.000-05:00

Hagel Announces He Will Not Seek A Third Term In Senate

OMAHA, NE – United States Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) announced this morning that he will not seek a third term in the United States Senate and does not intend to be a candidate for any office in 2008. Below is a text of Hagel’s remarks delivered at the Omaha Press Club:
“I will not seek a third term in the United States Senate, nor do I intend to be a candidate for any office in 2008. It has been my greatest honor and privilege to serve my country and represent my fellow Nebraskans in the U.S. Senate. My family and I will be forever grateful for this opportunity and the trust placed in me by the people of Nebraska. It has enriched all of us.
I have always tried to live up to the promise I made to the people of Nebraska the day I announced my intention to seek this Senate seat. On March 30, 1995 I said, “I intend to be a Senator all Nebraskans can be proud of.” I hope I’ve done that, and made some contributions to our state and country along the way. History will sort that out.
I am proud of my Senate record and deeply grateful to all those who helped get me there and keep me there, and those who have worked so hard for the people of Nebraska—my staff. I would like to particularly thank Mike McCarthy, Ken Stinson and Lou Ann Linehan. I owe a great deal to these three individuals.
I would have been unable to do my job without the love, wise perspective and constant encouragement of my wife Lilibet, my daughter Allyn and my son Ziller. My appreciation for their support is immeasurable. I would also like to thank my brothers, Tom and Mike, for their constant support and occasional brotherly constructive evaluations.
I said after I was elected in 1996 that 12 years in the Senate would probably be enough. It is. I have always believed that democracies work best when there is a constant cycle of new energy and ideas, and fresh leadership.
I will leave the Senate with the same enthusiasm, sense of purpose and love of my country that I started with. I leave maybe a little wiser, surely a little more experienced and with a very respectable amount of humility.
Public service has always been a big part of my life, and I hope to have another opportunity to serve my country in some new capacity down the road.
This afternoon, my family and I will return to Washington, and I will go back to work. I look forward to working as hard in the remaining 16 months of my Senate term for the people of Nebraska as I have over the last 11 years.
Thank you.”

It is with a heavy heart that I post this last post on this blog. It's been a good run, and I am proud that I was able to be involved in this grassroots movement.

I'd like to take this time to thank Charlie Hinderliter for getting me involved in the movement.

I'd like to thank Jeremy Mullen for his hard work on the Draft Hagel website.

I'd like to thank all of you, for reading my posts here.

And I would like to thank Senator Hagel for his phenomenal service to this country - Senator Hagel, you are truly a great American.

I hope that you will run for office someday, and that I will be able to create another grassroots blog for you.

I know it doesn't apply, but I have to end my last post with my favorite quote, "Good night, and good luck."

~~Nathan Inks

Monday's Announcement

2007-09-08T13:05:00.000-05:00

Alright, I know I haven't been posting that often, but here's something worth posting about:

Monday at 10:00 A.M., Senator Hagel will announce his Official Plans for 2008! Let's all hope and pray for the best!

Hagel, Dodd Introduce Bill to Revitalize America’s Infrastructure

2007-08-13T22:47:00.000-05:00

My apologies for not posting - I got really busy, it's not a good excuse, but I'm gonna use it!

Hagel, Dodd Introduce Bill to Revitalize America’s Infrastructure
Bill Would Help Make Roads, Bridges, Transit Systems, and Water Safer and Spur Economic Growth

August 1st, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - Responding to a looming crisis that jeopardizes the prosperity and quality of life of all Americans, Senators Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., and Chris Dodd, D-Conn., Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, today introduced a measure to revitalize, repair, and replace America’s aging and crumbling roads, bridges, transit systems, and water treatment facilities. Two dramatic headlines in recent weeks have highlighted the escalating problem. Two weeks ago, an 83-year-old steam pipe burst in midtown Manhattan, releasing asbestos laden particles and causing widespread damage. Media reports have also recently questioned whether contaminated drinking water near Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, may have exposed families in the area to high levels of dangerous chemicals.

“The current infrastructure in our country is wholly inadequate to handle the demands of a 21st Century economy. We see our ports backed-up by expanding international trade, our rails overloaded by our increasing energy demands and our highways hopelessly clogged by traffic. We run the risk of being left behind by our international competitors if we do not begin to modernize our national infrastructure. It will require a huge financial commitment to modernize our national infrastructure. The legislation we are introducing establishes a new system through which the federal government can finance infrastructure projects by leveraging private and public capital to fund large projects that are vital to our country. This legislation provides a new model for prioritizing the building and maintenance of our national infrastructure,” Hagel said.

“The 21st century holds great promise for our nation. But you can’t journey to a brighter tomorrow by relying on yesterday’s infrastructure,” said Dodd. “This measure can help rebuild our roads, bridges, transit and water systems, improve our quality of life, and spur jobs and economic growth. By investing today, we can minimize costs down the road and provide a brighter, more secure future for all Americans.”

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, the current condition of our nation’s major infrastructure system earns a grade point average of D. The average age of drinking water and wastewater systems range in age from 50 to 100 years in age. According to the Texas Transportation Institute, the average traveler is delayed 51.5 hours in the nation’s 20 largest metropolitan areas. The delays range from 93 hours in Los Angeles to 14 hours in Pittsburgh. Combined these delays waste 1.78 billion gallons of fuel each year and waste almost $50.3 billion in congestion costs.

The bill, the National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2007, would streamline the process by which national infrastructure projects are targeted. It would create an independent national bank that would identify, evaluate and help finance infrastructure projects of substantial regional and national significance. Infrastructure projects under the Bank’s jurisdiction would include publicly-owned mass transit systems, roads, bridges, drinking water and wastewater systems, and housing properties.

The Dodd-Hagel legislation follows two reports released by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in 2005 and 2006 that highlighted the urgent need for a national plan and investments to improve infrastructure needs across the nation. Felix G. Rohatyn and Senator Warren Rudman were Co-Chairmen of the CSIS Commission on Public Infrastructure.

“Senators Dodd and Hagel do a great service to our country by introducing the National Infrastructure Bank Act,” said Rohatyn and Rudman. “This bipartisan legislation can reverse decades of shortchanging our public infrastructure. By investing in our future, it will increase our national productivity and improve our standard of living.”

"Last year, Senators Dodd and Hagel signed on to a set of 'Guiding Principles for Strengthening America’s Infrastructure' developed by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Commission on Public Infrastructure," said CSIS President and CEO John Hamre. "These principles were established to recommend changes to rebuild America's decaying infrastructure. CSIS is proud to have helped stimulate this important initiative. The leadership of Senators Dodd and Hagel on this crucial issue will now will help the nation ensure future productivity and growth for our economy."

Possible Nebraska Projects that would qualify:

• Construction of the Heartland Expressway in South Dakota and Western Nebraska (~$664 million).

• Lincoln South Beltway (~$135 million)

• Antelope Valley (in Lincoln) Waterway relocation and revitalization (~$175 million).

• Construction of the Nebraska Highway 35 project between Norfolk and Sioux City, IA (~$300 million).

• A full expansion of I-80 to six lanes from Lincoln to Kearney (~$100 million).

• Construction of the new US-34 four-lane bridge over the Missouri river between Bellevue, NE and Mills County, IA (~$80 million).

A summary of the legislation and a list of supporters is below:

NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE BANK ACT OF 2007
Senator Christopher J. Dodd and Senator Chuck Hagel

OVERVIEW

The Dodd-Hagel National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2007 is a bipartisan measure that addresses the critical needs of our nation’s major infrastructure systems. The legislation establishes a new method through which the Federal government can finance infrastructure projects of substantial regional or national significance more effectively with public and private capital.

THE PROBLEM

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, the current condition of our nation’s major infrastructure systems earns a grade point average of D and jeopardizes the prosperity and quality of life of all Americans.

According to the Federal Transit Administration, $21.8 billion is needed annually over the next 20 years to maintain and improve the operational capacity of transit systems.

According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, there are
1.2 million units of public housing with critical capital needs totaling $18 billion.

According to the Texas Transportation Institute, the average traveler is delayed 51.5 hours annually due to traffic and infrastructure-related congestion in the nation’s 20 largest metropolitan areas. The delays range from 93 hours in Los Angeles to 14 hours in Pittsburgh. Combined, these delays waste 1.78 billion gallons of fuel each year and waste almost $50.3 billion in congestion costs. Furthermore, the average delay in these metropolitan areas has increased by almost 35.3 hours since 1982.

According to the Federal Highway Administration, $131.7 billion and
$9.4 billion is needed respectively every year over the next 20 years to repair
deficient roads and bridges. The average age of bridges is 40 years.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, $151 billion and $390 billion is needed respectively every year over the next 20 years to repair obsolete drinking water and wastewater systems. Drinking water and wastewater systems range in age from 50 to 100 years in age.

Current Federal financing methods do not adequately distribute funding
based on an infrastructure project’s size, location, cost, usage, or economic
benefit to a region or the entire nation.

THE DODD-HAGEL SOLUTION

The Dodd-Hagel legislation establishes the National Infrastructure Bank, which as an independent entity of the government is tasked with evaluating and financing capacity-building infrastructure projects of substantial regional and national significance. Infrastructure projects that come under the Bank’s consideration are publicly-owned mass transit systems, housing properties, roads, bridges, drinking water systems, and wastewater systems.

Modeled after the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Bank is led by a five member Board of Directors, each whom are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The Bank’s Board has flexibility to develop an organization of professional civil service staff to carry out the Bank’s authorized activities. An Inspector General oversees the Bank’s daily operations and reports on those operations to Congress.

Infrastructure projects with a potential Federal investment of at least $75 million are brought to the Bank’s attention by a project sponsor (state, locality, tribe, infrastructure agency (e.g. transit agency), or a consortium of these entities.

To determine a level of Federal investment, the Bank uses a sliding scale method that incorporates conditions such as the type of infrastructure system or systems, project location, project cost, current and projected usage, non-Federal revenue, regional or national significance, promotion of economic growth and community development, reduction in traffic congestion, environmental benefits, land use policies that promote smart growth, and mobility improvements.

Once a level of investment is determined for a project, the Bank develops a financing package with full faith and credit from the government. The
financing package could include direct subsidies, direct loan guarantees, long-term tax-credit general purpose bonds, and long-term tax-credit infrastructure project specific bonds. The initial ceiling to issue bonds is $60 billion.

The Bank is tasked to report annually to Congress on the projects it reviews and finances. A public database is created to catalog what projects were funded and what financing packages were provided. The Bank is also tasked to report every three years on the economic efficacy and transparency of all current Federal infrastructure financing methods, and how those methods could be improved. After five years, the Government Accountability Office would be tasked with evaluating the Bank’s operations and efficacy.

The Bank does not displace existing formula grants and earmarks for infrastructure. It targets specifically large capacity-building projects that are not adequately served by current financing mechanisms.

Update on Webb/Hagel Amendment

2007-07-11T13:28:00.000-05:00

Do Chuck Hagel and Jim Webb care about our troops? Most definitely. Disgustingly, this country doesn't have 52 other Senators who feel the same. If you are in Iraq or know someone who is, realize that this amendment looked out for our soldiers without commenting on the war. It was designed to protect our men, women, children, and national security, yet 41 Senators decided it wasn't worthwhile, of course, including Joe Lieberman. D-i-s-g-u-s-t-i-n-g!

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Iraq War Policy Amendment

2007-07-10T16:51:00.000-05:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Amendment on U.S. Iraq War Policy

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced an amendment today to the FY2008 Department of Defense Authorization bill that would implement a comprehensive change in U.S. Iraq War policy. Hagel’s amendment establishes a goal for the phased redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq and encompasses the diplomatic, political, economic and military components necessary in order to protect and advance America’s interests in the Middle East.

“This amendment recognizes the broader military, regional, economic and diplomatic context in which the debate over our nation’s war policy must take place. This debate is about more than simply when we withdraw U.S. troops. It is about how we give our troops a policy that is worthy of their sacrifice, while protecting U.S. interests in the Middle East. This amendment offers a responsible way forward in Iraq,” Hagel said.

The Hagel amendment:

• directs the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (UN) to propose the appointment of an international mediator in Iraq, under the auspices of the UN Security Council;

• states the U.S. should engage the nations of the Middle East to develop a sustainable and constructive comprehensive regional security framework and a renewed U.S. commitment to address the Arab-Israeli conflict;

• transitions the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq to focus on protecting Americans in Iraq, protecting the territorial integrity of Iraq, training and equipping Iraqi Security Forces, and engaging in targeted actions against members of al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Iraq; and

• establishes a goal of redeploying all U.S. combat forces from Iraq who are not essential to meeting the new limited mission by March 31, 2008.

Hagel joins Webb in Offering Readiness Amendment

2007-07-10T14:22:00.000-05:00

Received this message in an email from VoteVets, and just wanted to pass it along.

This week, the Senate will consider an amendment offered by military veterans Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) that puts on paper one of the greatest things we can do to support the troops and the military -- guaranteeing them proper time on the homefront, to improve our readiness.

Call your Senator at 202-224-3121 and tell them to support the Webb-Hagel Readiness Amendment.

Their amendment simply says that active duty troops should have as much time home as they had on deployment, and that National Guard and Reserve troops should have three years at home after their one-year deployment. Besides being a just and fair thing to do for those who are making tremendous sacrifices for all of us, it is just good military policy.

The war in Iraq is breaking our fine Army and Marine Corps. You've heard the stories about deployments being extended again and again, and troops coming home only to turn around and head right back. It has led to our troops being depleted and exhausted. Not only that, but it has seriously damaged our ability to defend this nation. Many units are simply not combat ready, and God forbid an attack by a rogue nation necessitates opening up a new war front, our forces would be unable to respond. Further, extended and frequent deployments of our National Guard has left us much more vulnerable at home.

As Major General Batiste, a former commanding general in Iraq said, "In addition to our country's lack of strategic focus and failure to mobilize the country, our military is at a breaking point. The Webb-Hagel Amendment is a step in the right direction to force our leadership to come to grips with the gross mismatch between capability and requirements."

Tomorrow, we're going to be on Capitol Hill, to speak out in strong support of this bill. But we need you to back up our efforts.

Call your Senator's office at 202-224-3121 and tell them to support the Webb-Hagel Readiness Amendment.

Happy Fourth of July!

2007-07-04T12:16:00.000-05:00

I'd just like to take this time to say, Happy Fourth of July, and God Bless America!

Hagel’s Statement on the Retirement of Major General Roger Lempke

2007-06-28T12:00:00.000-05:00

Hagel’s Statement on the Retirement of Major General Roger Lempke

June 22nd, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) issued the following statement today on the retirement of Major General Roger Lempke. Major General Lempke is the current Adjutant General of the Nebraska National Guard, and current President of the Adjutants General Association of the United States.

“Major General Roger Lempke served his country with honor and commitment throughout his distinguished military career. He has been one of America’s most effective Adjutant’s General.

“Following September 11, 2001, and with the onset of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, the National Guard was thrust into a new period of demanding challenges. While the Guard’s overseas deployments increased, General Lempke bolstered the Guard’s traditional homeland missions, with Nebraska’s Guard serving the state in times of emergency; members deployed along the U.S.-Mexico border as part of Operation Jump Start; as well as the Nebraska Guard’s mobilization to support gulf coast states in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Throughout this difficult time, General Lempke has been a courageous leader and vocal advocate for the National Guard. As President of the Adjutants General Association of the United States, General Lempke built consensus among the 54 Adjutants General that has guided the Guard into the relevant force it is today.

“All of Nebraska appreciates the service of General Lempke at this very demanding and challenging time for the Guard. All of Nebraska congratulates him and wishes him much success, but we will miss him,” said Hagel.

Hagel Introduces Bipartisan Bill to Improve VA Services for Blind Veterans

2007-06-28T11:56:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Bipartisan Bill to Improve VA Services for Blind Veterans
Authorizes Scholarship Program for Students Seeking Training in Blind Rehabilitation

June 21st, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced legislation today that would help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) meet the increasing demands of today’s blind veteran population. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH), both members of the Senate Veteran Affairs Committee, joined Hagel as original cosponsors of the legislation. The legislation directs the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a scholarship program for students seeking a degree or training in the area of blind rehabilitation. Recipients of the scholarship would be required to work at least three years in the VA system.

“Service members sacrificing for our country in a time of war should be assured that they will receive the best medical treatment and rehabilitation available, without having to wait months or years due to staff shortages. Rehabilitation training for those who have lost their eyesight enables them to function in their surroundings and live more independently. This legislation would encourage students to enter employment in an under-populated medical field, while also serving our nation’s veterans,” Hagel said.

Between March 2003 and April 2005, sixteen percent of all casualties evacuated from Iraq had associated eye injuries. In the coming years, the blind and low-vision veterans’ population is expected to grow by forty percent.

In 2006, a provision in the annual veterans benefits bill expanded the pool of individuals serving our veterans as Blind Rehab Outpatient Specialists (BROS). Today, the VA employs 30 BROS. Unfortunately, there are not enough counselors certified in blind rehabilitation to provide the growing number of blind or low-vision veterans. This has caused a long waiting list for admission at the ten VA Blind Rehabilitation Centers.

Draft Hagel 08 e-mail update

2007-06-18T22:29:00.000-05:00

Draft Hagel 08 Supporter:

What are you doing to bring in new individuals to the movement? Is
there something that seems to work better than anything else? Let us
know so we can share it with fellow Hagel supporters!

Now, we know that it is easier to do when Senator Hagel is visible in
the national media than when he is not, but that is why your
involvement is so important! Establishing ourselves as a movement is
necessary in order to provide support for the Senator in the future!

So, if you are talking to someone and they say, "I don't know too much
about him," then just hand them a flier and say, "Here's a little
information on the Senator. Give it a look.". It really is that
simple!

The Draft Hagel 08 movement was started because after looking at the
current field of candidates, there was something missing. That has
not changed. The future of our country is far too important to allow
it to continue on its current path. As supporters of Senator Hagel,
we know he has the vision, common sense, and integrity that this
nation needs at this critical point it time. We need to do everything
we can to try and make his candidacy for president a reality. Let's
get to work!!!

The Draft Hagel 08 Team
www.drafthagel08.com
Info@drafthagel08.com

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Energy Reform Legislation

2007-06-13T22:03:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Comprehensive Energy Reform Legislation

June 12th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced legislation today to provide a comprehensive approach to the issues of U.S. energy security and climate policy. Hagel’s legislative package consists of four bills which address research and development, regulatory reform, tax policy, and energy security policy. It focuses on the role of private-public partnerships, technology, and removing existing barriers to national energy security.

“For decades our country has drifted without a coherent national energy policy. This policy must incorporate our economic, environmental and national security priorities. My comprehensive energy reform legislation will help empower America to develop the resources required to meet our 21st century energy needs and compete in a new competitive world,” said Hagel.

“This legislation will address four integral components for an effective U.S. national energy policy – a fundamental shift in the way energy research and development is approached; regulatory reform; energy infrastructure investment; and energy security policy.

“We can no longer defer the tough choices necessary to ensure that the next generation of Americans have the opportunities, freedoms and quality of life that Americans before us worked hard to build,” concluded Hagel.

~Below are fact sheets on the four pieces of legislation~

The Energy Research and Development Prioritization Act of 2007

This bill reforms the way in which energy research and development priorities are determined by:

- requiring the Secretary of Energy to conduct a survey of all interested parties within government, academia, and private industry, to determine the top ten energy “problems to be solved” that are required to achieve energy security in the future;

- authorizing the Secretary to identify two additional research and development priorities;

- refocusing all research and development funding towards resolving those top energy “problems to be solved”;

- establishing an Energy Technology Information Network which contains a database of all current Federal research and development efforts and allows private industry to contribute to the database; and

- encouraging collaboration among scientists from public and private institutions to develop energy solutions while protecting intellectual property rights.

The Energy Regulatory Reform Act of 2007

This bill promotes the use of innovative energy technologies and removes regulatory barriers by:

- establishing an outside commission in each appropriate federal department and agency to review existing regulations that have had a significant impact on energy security;

- requiring the commission to make recommendations to each agency head on how to reform regulations to increase energy security;

- requiring a Regulatory Impact Analysis be completed before completion of an agency/department’s final rule for every new major energy regulation that could have an adverse effect on energy security;

- reforming the “permitting process” for new energy facilities by requiring the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to be the lead agency. The EPA shall establish a time line in which all local, state and federal permitting processes must be completed; and

- amending the National Environmental Protection Act to require an assessment of a proposed project’s impact on the energy security of the United States.

The Energy Infrastructure Tax Reform and Incentives Act of 2007

This bill reforms the tax code by:

- reducing the recovery period for investment in electricity transmission lines from 20 years to 15 years
- reducing the recovery period for investment in smart-grid computer devices from 20 years to 5 years;
- providing accelerated depreciation for qualified cellulosic ethanol plants, coal-to-liquid facilities, and dedicated ethanol pipelines; and
- providing a tax credit for voluntary installation of pollution control technology on energy facilities and small businesses.

This bill encourages investment in clean energy technologies by:

- modifying and expanding the clean renewable energy bonds for public power facilities;
- extends tax credits for investment and installation of residential and commercial wind, solar and geothermal projects;
- provides tax credits for investment in best available transmission technologies for investor owned utilities;
- extends the Production Tax Credit for renewable electricity generation for an additional 5 years; and
- provides incentives for green building energy efficient technologies.

Clean, Reliable, Efficient and Secure Energy Act of 2007

Title I - Electricity Sector
This title encourages the use of clean and efficient energy technologies in the electricity sector by:

- establishing a public-private commission to set energy efficiency standards for appliances to accelerate achievements in energy efficiency;
- encouraging the use of Smart Grid technology for new and replacement electricity transmission;
- creating a Clean Energy Portfolio Standard to require that an additional 20% of national electricity generation by 2030 comes from clean technologies (e.g., renewable sources, nuclear power, and clean coal with carbon capture);
- resolving outstanding issues to allow Yucca Mountain to begin receiving spent nuclear waste (e.g., securing the surrounding lands, building a rail line for transport of the waste into the site, and allowing greater access to the Nuclear Waste Fund); and
- providing loan guarantees and regulatory incentives to encourage the use of advanced coal-fired electricity generation technologies.

Title II - Transportation Sector
This title enhances energy security in the transportation sector by:

- amending the current laws governing Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), and increasing the CAFE standard by 4% per year only if the increase is technologically feasible and would not compromise safety;
- requiring the federal government to report on the average fuel economy of the federal fleet to better assess the government’s energy efficiency;
- providing States and local governments grants and regulatory incentives to encourage investment in transportation energy efficiency measures (e.g., traffic signal coordination and minimizing vehicle idling times);

- creating a separate Renewable Fuel Standard for renewable or alternative diesel fuel;
- encouraging the growth of the coal-to-liquid industry by allowing loan guarantees and by requiring the phased reduction of traditional fossil fuel use in the Department of Defense aircraft fleet; and
- lifting the moratorium on the Outer Continental Shelf, for those States who request it, to allow oil and natural gas exploration and production.

Title III - Buildings and Manufacturing Sectors

This title requires the increased efficiency of Federal facilities and encourages increased efficiency in the manufacturing sector by:
- establishing an Office of High-Performance Green Buildings in the General Services Administration, that would develop and enforce energy efficiency requirements for all newly acquired or renovated Federal buildings;
- stimulating the commercialization of new, energy efficient building technologies by requiring that energy efficiency technologies are used in federal buildings;
- providing grants to states and local governments to make energy efficiency improvements in public schools; and
- establishing a public-private commission to study and develop new manufacturing processes and materials that are able to use a diverse array of energy sources to provide enhanced security, flexibility and competitive edge to the manufacturing industry.

Title IV - National Carbon Policy

This title establishes the groundwork of a national carbon policy that is necessary for any future action on carbon emissions by:
- establishing a National Greenhouse Gas Emissions Registry;
- requiring a National Academy of Sciences report to study any commercial or industrial uses of captured carbon dioxide other than sequestration;
- requiring the Secretary of Energy to conduct a carbon dioxide storage assessment in the contiguous 48 states;
- creating a Regulatory Reform for Carbon Sequestration commission to determine the regulatory barriers to siting manufacturing, power plants and other necessary infrastructure near sites identified by the carbon dioxide storage assessment;
- assigning liability of full carbon dioxide sequestration locations to the federal government; and
- stipulating that if 75% of the authorized funding for this section is not appropriated, all requirements on the private sector regarding investment in carbon capture and sequestration are terminated.

Title V - Studies, Energy Education and Office of Technological Assessment
This title provides information for Congress and the public to make future energy decisions by:

- Requiring studies to look at:
- requiring replacement of Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment that do not meet minimum efficiency standards at time of sale of residential homes;
- the energy security benefits and costs of instituting a CAFÉ standard for heavy trucks;
- the use of synthetic fuel in commercial aircraft;
- infrastructure needs for an expanded Renewable Fuel Standard; and
- the necessity of building a Strategic Natural Gas Reserve similar to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve;

- Establishing a national Energy Day that would coordinate public outreach and educational activities for primary and secondary schools; and
- Reestablishing the Office of Technological Assessment to provide objective assessments to Congress regarding technologies, scientific needs and foreign science and technological capabilities.

Press Release Update

2007-06-13T21:49:00.000-05:00

Hehehe! The Senator's office kinda died down on press releases, and I had exams and college orientation, so it's been a while since the last update.

Here's a somewhat outdated press release though:

Statement by Senator Hagel on the Death of Senator Craig Thomas

June 5th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement this morning regarding the death of U.S. Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY):

“This is a sad day for all of us. Craig Thomas was a neighbor and a friend who committed his remarkable life to his country and his state. I will be forever grateful to him for being one of the first U.S. Senators to campaign for me in my 1996 race for the Senate, when few thought I had a chance to win. I had an opportunity to work closely with Craig Thomas on the Senate Foreign Relations and Energy Committees. He worked hard, was always prepared and was the kind of Senator the people of Wyoming could be proud of every day.

“If service is the highest American value, then Craig Thomas leaves a legacy that speaks volumes. He leaves his country and his state better because of his service. Craig Thomas was a straight-shooter. Being a Marine and having been raised on a ranch in Wyoming...what else could he be?

“Lilibet and I offer our prayers to Susan Thomas and the Thomas family.”

Hagel Offers Congratulations to Nebraska Astronaut Clayton Anderson on Eve of Launch

June 8th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - Nebraska’s U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel called Astronaut Clayton Anderson, of Ashland, last night to offer congratulations and to tell him how proud Nebraskans are of him. Today at 6:38 p.m. CDT, Clayton is scheduled to lift off on the Space Shuttle Atlantis. He will be the first native Nebraskan to travel into outer space.

“All Nebraskans are proud to have Astronaut Clayton Anderson as a native son. He has represented Nebraska with distinction and honor. We all anxiously await tonight’s lift off, and it was wonderful to hear that Clayton invited his family, friends and even a few former Hastings college professors to watch the launch from the launch pad,” Hagel said.

“He told me that he would put two Big Red N’s in the Space Station. We are proud of Clayton and keep him in our thoughts and prayers.”

Anderson will depart today from the Kennedy Space Center near Cape Canaveral, Florida on board Space Shuttle Atlantis for a shuttle mission to the International Space Station. Anderson will be a flight engineer and NASA science officer on the mission and will remain on the Space Station for about five months.

Clayton is a 1981 graduate of Hastings College. Hagel is a member of Hastings College’s Board of Trustees.

Hagel's Iraq Plan Would've Worked Today

2007-06-06T22:19:00.000-05:00

Today, the Turks came into Iraq with tanks to chase Kurdish Guerrillas. Had we have implemented Senator Hagel's plan of moving U.S. troops to the border and let Iraq forces deal with civil unrest, this wouldn't have happened. This just shows you that the path we are on currently in Iraq is a wrong one, and we need to switch what we're doing.

Happy Memorial Day

2007-05-29T21:50:00.000-05:00

I know it's a day late - I couldn't get on the computer to put this up yesterday - but I just wanted to thank all of our men and women who are serving in the armed forces, and honor those who have died fighting to protect our freedom.

Mission: Memorial Day - We're Almost There!

2007-05-27T01:09:00.002-05:00

My apologies for the long gap in posts - I have been VERY busy with exams for school, but I am all done now, and graduate this upcoming Thursday.

Anyway, here's an e-mail from Jeremy:

Draft Hagel 08 Supporter:

"Mission: Memorial Day" is almost over! What have you been doing to try to sign up more people? Is there something that works better than something else? Let us know so that we can pass it along!

Also, there is a very simple way to double our numbers every week: sign up 1 person a week! Place a poster in a public place! We have received comments about the poster from people who have seen it and signed on after checking it out! If you are comfortable talking to people, sign them up on the spot!

There will be people who tell you it is too early to think about these things, but do not let that stop you from trying! Much sooner than later, things will be in full swing, and the larger number of supporters we have to push for a Hagel 08 Presidential campaign, the better!

Thank you for your support, and have a safe and enjoyable Memorial Day weekend!

The Draft Hagel 08 Team
www.drafthagel08.com

A few of the facts about Iraq

2007-05-19T08:47:00.000-05:00

A few of the facts about Iraq
Lincoln Journal Star by Senator Chuck Hagel

May 9th, 2007 - The May 6 Lincoln Journal Star editorial headlined “Visitors see what they believe in Iraq” quoted my friend and former colleague the late Sen. Patrick Moynihan saying, “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.” The editorial highlighted differing views that my Nebraska colleagues and I hold regard to progress in Iraq.

As Gen. Petraeus and Secretary Gates have said, the solution to Iraq will be a political, not a military solution. We have done much for the Iraqis at a cost of 3,400 American casualties, 25,000 wounded and almost $500 billion, but we cannot do it for them. The Iraqis are going to have to achieve a political reconciliation. We can’t do it for them. In our fifth year in Iraq, things are not getting better. These are the facts:

* Last month, we lost 104 U.S. troops — the deadliest month for the United States so far in 2007 and one of the highest death toll months in the more than four years we’ve been in Iraq. So far in the first seven days of May, 25 U.S. troops have been killed.

* The death toll of Iraqi security forces and civilian population remains well over 1,500 per month and reached 3,014 deaths in February — the start of the U.S. “surge.”

* Attacks on the once secure Green Zone have increased dramatically this year, killing Americans. Last month, a suicide bomber breached the security of the Green Zone for the first time, killing one lawmaker and wounding many others in the Iraqi parliament building’s dining hall.

* The number of attacks against U.S. forces using explosively formed projectile bombs, capable of piercing an Abrams tank, hit a record high of 65 last month.

* Overall attacks using roadside bombs doubled from 2006 to 2007 and currently number about 1,200 a month.

* The Iraqi government is in danger of collapse. Last month, six Shia ministers, members of the prime minister’s own party, withdrew from the government demanding that U.S. troops leave Iraq; this week, key Sunni leaders are threatening to leave the government to protest their treatment by the Shia-led government.

* De-Baathification reform and national oil law legislation have not been passed by the Parliament with no sign of progress. No new provincial elections have been approved by the Parliament.

* A month ago, one of our strongest allies in the Middle East, the king of Saudi Arabia, called U.S. involvement in Iraq an “illegitimate foreign occupation.”

* Of the 34,000 registered physicians in Iraq before the U.S. invasion, it is estimated that 12,000 have fled and 2,250 have been killed or kidnapped.

* According to the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, the war in Iraq has already produced 4 million refugees.

* Crime is rampant in Iraq, and the police force has been devastated by corruption.

* Electricity availability averages less than 12 hours daily nationwide and 5.6 hours daily in Baghdad, well below what Iraqis had before the United States invaded Iraq.

* Oil production is at 2.1 million barrels per day. Prior to the war, oil production averaged 2.6 million barrels per day.

* The U.S. inspector general for Iraq reconstruction’s most recent report found that “persistent attacks on U.S.-funded infrastructure projects and sustainment challenges could jeopardize the completion of projects by their planned end-dates of mid- to late-2008.“

* The report also found corruption rampant in the Iraqi government. An investigation found that seven of eight reconstruction projects declared by the United States to be successes no longer were operating as designed because of plumbing and electrical failures, lack of maintenance and apparent looting. This is resulting in hundreds of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars that have been unaccounted for, wasted or stolen.

* The United States is doing great damage to its active duty and National Guard force structure, which will take years to repair.

These are but some of the facts that led to my judgment that Iraq is “worse off than it has ever been” following my fifth visit there.

Senate Passes Water Resources Development Act

2007-05-17T21:40:00.000-05:00

Senate Passes Water Resources Development Act

May 16th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - The U.S. Senate passed today by a vote of 91-4 the Water Resources Development Act. This legislation authorizes the Army Corps of Engineers to construct various projects for improvements to U.S. waterways, including improvement and expansion of existing locks on U.S. rivers, environmental restoration projects, and flood damage reduction projects. U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) supported authorization of several Nebraska projects that were included in the bill.

“This legislation addresses needed improvements in waterway infrastructure that will help Nebraska’s agricultural producers bring their goods to market. Additionally, this bill authorizes important projects in Nebraska addressing flood control, environmental restoration and Endangered Species recovery. The targeted programs address significant needs in Nebraska communities,” Hagel said.

The bill includes the following projects for Nebraska:

• Authorizes $12 million for watershed planning, water resources assessments, and environmental restoration and flood damage reduction projects in the Lower Platte River basin;

• Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study on how best to mitigate losses to habitat, recover Endangered Species, and restore the ecosystem in the Missouri River; and

• Authorizes the Secretary of Interior to perform Endangered Species recovery and habitat-loss mitigation activities in the upper basin of the Missouri River.

The Water Resources Development Act will now go to a House-Senate conference.

What is the purpose of a draft movement?

2007-05-17T21:35:00.000-05:00

What is the purpose of a draft movement?

To create a buzz, a groundswell of support, to influence a decision.We do not care which party the candidate desires to represent, onlythat he/she is the right person for the job. This is what we need todo. We cannot wait for a decision, and then jump into action. Weneed to be in action to influence a decision.

At this point in time, Senator Hagel is focused on his job as a USSenator, as he should be. While he thinks about a decision to run, itis the job of Draft Hagel 08 movement supporters to show him that theenergy is out there to ensure that a decision to enter thePresidential race has the potential to be successful.

Looking at the direction and future of our country, it is hard toimagine that doing so could ever be considered a waste. Start a localgroup in your area. Have some type of political experience, or wantto gain some? Contact us to be a regional or state coordinator.Whatever your commitment to the movement can be, make it vocal andlet's go! At no other point in this country's history has it matteredmore!

The Draft Hagel 08 Team
www.drafthagel08.com
info@drafthagel08.com

Hagel Calls for Resignation of Attorney General Gonzales

2007-05-16T14:30:00.000-05:00

Hagel Calls for Resignation of Attorney General Gonzales

May 16th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) today released the following statement calling for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday that, as White House Counsel, Gonzales attempted to undermine Comey’s authority as the acting Attorney General and persuade Attorney General John Ashcroft to re-authorize a domestic surveillance program from his hospital bed.

“The American people deserve an Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of our country, whose honesty and capability are beyond question. Attorney General Gonzales can no longer meet this standard. He has failed this country. He has lost the moral authority to lead. Comey’s testimony yesterday brings to light the latest episode in a series of questionable actions by Attorney General Gonzales. It is another part of a pattern of flawed decision making by the Attorney General.

“America is a nation of laws. In the interest of the American people, Alberto Gonzales should resign now,” said Hagel.

Hagel Calls for Increase in Skilled Workers to Boost U.S. Economy

2007-05-16T14:28:00.000-05:00

Lieberman, Hagel Call for Increase in Skilled Workers to Boost U.S. Economy
Senators introduce the Skilled Worker Immigration and Fairness Act of 2007

May 15th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - Senators Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) and Chuck Hagel (R-NE) today introduced the Skilled Worker Immigration and Fairness Act of 2007 to ensure that America’s innovative industries can hire the workers they need to fuel US economic growth, and to better protect American workers. The bill is also co-sponsored by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and George Voinovich (R-OH).

The bill would increase the annual allotment of H-1B visas, which provide American employers with access to highly educated foreign professionals in “specialty occupations” (those requiring at least a U.S. bachelor's degree or equivalent education and work experience). Despite dramatic changes to the US economy in the past 17 years, the H-1B cap remains at its 1990 limit of 65,000 per year (an additional 20,000 visas are available for foreign nationals holding US graduate degrees). As a result, thousands of U.S. high-tech jobs today remain unfilled.

“To remain competitive, American companies need access to highly educated individuals,” Lieberman said. “But today’s system makes it difficult for innovative employers to recruit and retain highly educated talent, which puts the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage globally. As part of comprehensive immigration reform, we must address this crisis to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation. At the same time, we must strengthen the H-1B program to ensure that American workers are protected.”

“The severe shortage of H-1B visas is a nation-wide problem, and Nebraska is directly affected. The demand in underserved communities throughout Nebraska for these highly qualified individuals, such as doctors and nurses in rural areas, far out number the supply. This legislation is important to helping keep America competitive in the 21st Century workplace,” Hagel said.

“Keeping America’s economy strong depends on having enough skilled workers,” said Cantwell. “That means making sure education and training opportunities are affordable and accessible, but it also means getting help from the world’s best and brightest when there are skill shortages. With so many high-tech companies in the Pacific Northwest, we need an H-1B visa process that meets employer demands as well as prevents fraud and abuse. This proposal strikes a balance on the H-1B visa program, which is key to investing in our future and keeping America competitive.”

The Lieberman-Hagel bill would increase the cap to 115,000 in 2007 and would add a flexible adjustment mechanism that would enable to cap to rise as high as 180,000, depending on market conditions (this ceiling would still be less than the 195,000 limit in 2001-2003). Additionally, the bill would exempt from the cap foreign nationals who hold a US graduate degree; a non-US graduate degree in science, technology, engineering or math; or a US medical specialty certification.

Currently, foreign nationals count for 56% of all engineering master's degrees and 65% of engineering Ph.D. degrees awarded by Connecticut universities. In Nebraska, the percentages are 37% and 72%, respectively.

In raising the H-1B cap, the bill would also create meaningful and reasonable reforms to prevent visa fraud and abuse. The bill includes provisions that would:

• Prohibit employers from advertising jobs as exclusively open to H-1B visa holders.

• Provide that employers with 50 employees cannot have more than half of their workforce on H-1B visas.

• Remove unnecessary restrictions on the Department of Labor’s (DOL) ability to investigate H-1B compliance.

• Authorize DOL to hire an additional 200 employees to administer, oversee, investigate and enforce the H-1B program.

• Raise the H-1B petition fee by $500, to pay for enhanced enforcement and ensure the program pays for itself.

• Authorize reasonable improvements to coordination among DOL, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State (DOS).

The bill also allows the most highly qualified green card applicants to immigrate without being subject to artificial caps. Immediate families of employment based immigrants will no longer count against the worker caps.

The Lieberman-Hagel bill enjoys support from a wide-range of businesses technology groups, including Microsoft Corporation and Compete America, a coalition of corporations, educators, research institutions and trade associations committed to assuring that US employers have the ability to hire and retain the world’s best talent.

“The nation continues to witness a dramatic decline in the number of native born computer science graduates,” said Jack Krumholtz, Managing Director of Federal Government Affairs for Microsoft Corp. “As a result, technology companies like Microsoft rely on the H-1B visa and employment-based green card programs to deliver an adequate supply of highly qualified employees to help maintain our competitive position. That can only be achieved through immediate reform of these programs to ensure they are meeting the needs of our economy. We commend Senators Lieberman, Hagel, Cantwell and Voinovich for their leadership in addressing this critical problem, and urge the Senate to adopt these measures and pass expeditiously comprehensive immigration reform legislation.”

“The Skilled Worker Immigration and Fairness Act would provide crucial reforms to the H-1B visa and EB green card processes that U.S. companies urgently need,” stated Robert Hoffman, Vice President for Government and Public Affairs at Oracle and Co-Chair of Compete America. “Senators Lieberman and Hagel should be commended for taking a leading role on an issue that is so important to America’s continued innovation leadership and economic strength.”

Hagel on Iraq - another supporter's input

2007-05-10T19:17:00.000-05:00

Here's a post from the U.S. Election Atlas forum that I post on (Inks.LWC):

Quote
from: Lt. Governor Inks.LWC on May 08, 2007, 08:32:20 pm
This is not my GO HAGEL rant - but his idea seems smart to me:
1) Send our troops to the Iraqi border to keep terrorists from leaving/coming in.
2) Let the Iraqis settle their civil war - why will the warring factions listen to a 3rd party who doesn't understand their war? The Iraqis understand each other better than we do - let their people help themselves!

I've always respected Chuck Hagel - and I don't understand why he can not seem to get much support from the GOP base. The fact that he is willing to think outside the
box on Iraq should make him a much more appealing candidate than he is polling
at right now. His Iraq plan actually reminds me of a few of the major Democrats
that don't want to "cut and run" but also don't want to "stay the course"- but
he's also a very conservative Senator, unlike the major Democrats. I can not say
I have loved anybodies plan on Iraq (either Dem or GOP) to this point, but the
ones that are thinking outside the confines of "cut and run" and "stay the
course" are certainly much more attracitve than what we have going on right now.

Meet Chuck Hagel, the 2008 GOP Presidential Nominee

2007-05-09T11:22:00.000-05:00

Meet Chuck Hagel, the 2008 GOP Presidential Nominee

I know it’s a bit early to call the GOP presidential primaries, especially in favor of someone who hasn’t officially announced, but Chuck Hagel’s the guy.

Here’s why: Hagel is the only candidate with both impeccable social reactionary credentials and a credible basis for supporting a withdrawal from Iraq by the time the actual presidential campaign begins. Although he supports the occupation, he’s been a harsh critic of the administration’s conduct of it; the other leading contenders have been falling all over themselves to support it and, for the moment, the president. He can win the primaries because he hasn’t done anything to alienate the base and because he’ll be seen as electable by Republican party heavyweights who recognize that as things now stand, Iraq will dominate the campaign. Take Iraq off the table, which a Hagel candidacy might do, and suddenly Democrats are confronted with a whole new landscape.

Read the rest at... http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1645.

Hagel Cosponsors Legislation to Restore Nebraska Judgeship

2007-05-09T11:11:00.000-05:00

Hagel Cosponsors Legislation to Restore Nebraska Judgeship

May 8th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) joined Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) today in introducing legislation to extend five temporary federal district judgeships. This legislation would restore the temporary judgeship that the District of Nebraska lost in 2004 with the retirement of Judge Thomas Shanahan. Senator Hagel has worked closely with Chairman Leahy in introducing this legislation. Since 2000, Senator Hagel has worked to save the temporary Nebraska federal judgeship and convert it to permanent.

“With Judge Shanahan’s retirement in 2004, Nebraska lost a judgeship it urgently needs. Nebraska’s three remaining permanent federal judges now carry the sixth highest caseload in the country. The criminal caseload has increased 97% over the last five years. I will work with my colleagues to ensure that this critical fourth federal judgeship for Nebraska is enacted as soon as possible,” said Hagel.

Currently, Nebraska has three federal district court judges who handle the entire federal caseload for the State. The Judicial Conference, which makes recommendations to Congress regarding the need for judgeships, consistently recommends that a new permanent judgeship be established in Nebraska. The Senate passed legislation cosponsored by Senator Hagel in the 108th Congress which would have made Nebraska’s temporary judgeship permanent. The House failed to act on the measure.

This legislation will now be sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration.

Hagel Says Independent Bid For Prez Is Possible

2007-05-06T01:07:00.000-05:00

Hagel Says Independent Bid For Prez Is Possible
May 04, 2007

The Leavenworth Street political blog took note today of a story by Bloomberg News, reporting that Senator Chuck Hagel declined to rule out a bid for president as an Independent candidate, and even said such a bid ?is possible.?

Interesting story.

Hagel didn?t say he would make such a bid, just that (like almost everything else) he would not rule it out.

Here is the story, as reported by Leavenworth Street.

According to a Bloomberg News article, Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel said he would consider running for President as an Independent:

An independent bid "is possible," Hagel, 60, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television's Political Capital with Al Hunt. "I don't ever foreclose any options."

This is contrary to what Hagel said at his non-announcement announcement in March:

?I am a Republican. I believe I will continue to be a Republican.?

Regarding the issue of his footsy-ish dinner at The Palm in Washington, D.C. with New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the article said,

?they talked about their families, politics and Iraq, and there was no discussion about teaming up for a presidential campaign. "We have a lot of common interests," he said. "But no, there was no talk of any ticket."

Having a major fund-raiser for his re-election campaign.
Meeting for a high-profile dinner with another proposed Presidential candidate.
Changing his position on whether he?d run as an Independent.

Well, we guess he?s leaving his options open?

Meanwhile, Republican hopeful Jon Bruning says he ain't afraid of Hagel's abilty to raise campaign funds. The attorney general has all but declared that he will challenge Hagel for the GOP senatorial nomination - if Hagel seek a third term.

Mission: Memorial Day update

2007-05-05T23:59:00.000-05:00

Here's an e-mail from Jeremy:

Now that "Mission: Memorial Day" is under way, think of it like this:sign-up 1 person a day, or possibly spend a few hrs over a weekend at a large public space, and we will meet our goal of every supportersigning up 25 new individuals who would like to see Chuck Hagel in the2008 Presidential race by May 28th!

How would you do this?
Like this...."Would you like to see Chuck Hagel run for President? Let him know!" "Well, I don't really know who he is." "Here you go, take a look!"Then hand out a flier. It's that simple! Aim to hand out 50-100 fliers a week.Black and white instead of color? Don't worry about it!

Now, I know that some are saying, "That sounds like a great idea! I'msure others will do it, so I won't have to try and get 25.". If you're happy with the way things are now, then that's fine. If you would like to right the direction America is headed and restore its greatness, then let's go!Running for President is a momentous decision, and we want to show Senator Hagelhow many people out there believe that he should!

Thanks, and let's get moving!
The Draft Hagel 08 Team
www.drafthagel08.com
info@drafthagel08.com

Hagel Introduces Veterans and Survivors Employment and Training Act

2007-05-05T23:47:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Veterans and Survivors Employment and Training Act

May 3rd, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Jack Reed (D-RI) today introduced the “Veterans and Survivors Employment and Training Act of 2007.” This legislation would make school more affordable to veterans, survivors, and dependents pursuing an education in high tech fields. The bill would expand the education programs that are eligible for accelerated payments under the Montgomery GI Bill, and provide the benefit to recipients of the Survivors’ and Dependents Educational Assistance Program (SDEAP).

“America’s service men and women make tremendous sacrifices in service to our country. As policymakers, we have an obligation to ensure they have the resources they need to pursue their education. This legislation will make it easier for veterans, and the families of veterans killed or permanently disabled in service to our country, to afford higher education and expand the much needed high tech workforce in our country,” Hagel said.

Under current law, individuals eligible for the Montgomery GI Bill qualify for accelerated payments of their education benefit if they are pursuing two or four year programs in life or physical sciences, engineering, mathematics, science technology, computer specialties and management. The accelerated payment option is currently not available to individuals eligible under SDEAP.

This bill would provide 60% of the benefit for each semester in a single lump sum at the beginning of that eligible semester for veterans, survivors, and dependents pursuing an education in approved fields. Further, this bill would:

· Expand the programs eligible for accelerated payments; and,

· Extend the same eligibility for the accelerated payments to recipients of SDEAP as recipients of the GI bill.

Hagel On Iraq

2007-05-02T21:11:00.000-05:00

Novak does a great job here - showing what I tell people all the time. Hagel doesn't want to recklessly withdraw from Iraq like the Democrats - he wants a controlled draw - something that won't kill what we've already done there.

Hagel on Iraq
Republican Senator Votes to Withdraw from Iraq

By Robert Novak

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., returned from his fifth visit to Iraq to join Senate Democrats last Thursday as one of two Republicans voting to begin withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. It was not an easy vote for a conservative party regular and faithful supporter of President Bush’s non-Iraq policies. A few days earlier, Hagel sat down with me to paint a bleak picture of the war and U.S. policy.

Over a dozen years, I have had many such conversations with Hagel not for quotation. This time, I asked him to go on the record about his assessment of what the “surge” has accomplished. In language more blunt than his prepared speeches and articles, he described Iraq as “coming undone,” with its regime “weaker by the day.” He deplored the Bush administration’s failure to craft a coherent Middle East policy, blaming the influence of Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams.

Hagel faces a political paradox as he ponders a career decision — to run for president, seek re-election next year or get out of elective politics. His harsh assessment resonates with many Republicans who believe Bush’s war policy has led the party to disaster. Yet, this message faces rejection by GOP primary voters, and he is under attack from the right at home in Nebraska (with 38-year-old state Attorney General Jon Bruning threatening to run against him).

After his latest visit to Baghdad, Fallujah, Ramadi and Anbar Province, Hagel told me: “This thing is really coming undone quickly, and [Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki’s government is weaker by the day. The police are corrupt, top to bottom. The oil problem is a huge problem. They still can’t get anything through the parliament — no hydrocarbon law, no de-Baathification law, no provincial elections [needed to bring Sunnis into the governing process].”

The regional problem, as described by Hagel, is a U.S. policy breakdown with a failure to engage Iran and Syria. “I do know that there are a number of Israelis who would like to engage Syria,” said Hagel. “They have said that Elliott Abrams keeps pushing them back.” He quoted foreign ministers, ambassadors and former U.S. officials as saying they believe Abrams “is making policy in the Middle East.”

Hagel certainly is no peace-now zealot. “We’re not going to precipitously pull out,” he told me. “We have [national] interests in Iraq.” While he asserted “we can’t get out by the end of the year,” he called for “pulling some of our guys out — not all of them, but you’ve got to get them out of [Baghdad] at least, get them out of the middle of civil war.” If not, Hagel said, “then the prospects of the Republican Party are very dim next year.”

What about claims by proponents of the Iraqi intervention that failure to stop the terrorists in Iraq will open the door to them in the American homeland?

“That’s nonsense,” Hagel replied. “I’ve never believed that. That’s the same kind of rhetoric and thinking that neo-cons used to get us into this mess, and everything that [Donald] Rumsfeld, [Paul] Wolfowitz, [Richard] Perle, [Douglas] Feith and the vice president all said. Nothing turned out the way they said it would.”

It is “nonsense,” Hagel said, because “Iraq is not embroiled in a terrorist war today.” A member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, he cited “national intelligence” attributing “maybe 10 percent of the insurgency and violence” to al Qaeda. Indeed, he described Shias, Sunnis and Kurds as opposed to al Qaeda: “They don’t like the terrorists. What’s happened in Anbar Province is the tribes are finally starting to connect with us because al Qaeda started killing some of their leadership and threatening their people. So the tribes now are at war with al Qaeda.”

“So,” said Hagel, “when I hear people say, ‘Well, if we leave them to that, it will be chaos.’ What do you think is going on now? Scaring the American people into this blind alley is so dangerous.”

These judgments come from someone credited with rebuilding Nebraska’s Republican Party who has a lifetime American Conservative Union record of 85.2 percent. Hagel represents millions of Republicans who are repelled by the Democratic personal assault on President Bush but deeply unhappy about his course in Iraq.

Hagel Applauds President Bush’s Nomination of Joe Stecher for U.S. Attorney

2007-05-01T22:26:00.000-05:00

Hagel Applauds President Bush’s Nomination of Joe Stecher for U.S. Attorney

April 30th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released this statement today following notification from the Department of Justice that President Bush will nominate Mr. Joe Stecher for the position of U.S. Attorney for the District of Nebraska. Mr. Stecher currently serves as acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Nebraska. In December, Senator Hagel – in consultation with Nebraska’s Congressional Delegation – recommended to President Bush that Mr. Stecher be nominated for the position:

“This is important news for the federal justice system in Nebraska. Joe Stecher brings enormous commitment and integrity to the U.S. Attorney’s office. He has done an exceptional job over the last few months as acting U.S. Attorney and enjoys widespread support in Nebraska for his nomination to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Nebraska. I will work with my colleagues to ensure that Joe Stecher is confirmed by the Senate as soon as possible.”

Mr. Stecher’s nomination will now be considered in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Hagel Statement on Vote in Favor of War Supplemental Spending Bill

2007-04-26T21:33:00.001-05:00

Hagel Statement on Vote in Favor of War Supplemental Spending Bill

April 26th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding his vote in favor of the Iraq War Supplemental spending bill:

“I do not believe the current policy we have in Iraq is worthy of the sacrifices our troops are making and I will not continue to support it. Given a choice between the two options of voting for this bill or supporting the current course we are on in Iraq, I chose to vote for this bill. We need a change of policy.

“The President will veto this legislation and we will find ourselves at a crossroads. The Administration and Congress must find a responsible common ground on a new Iraq policy that funds our troops, strips the unnecessary spending out of this bill, addresses our national interests in Iraq and the Middle East, and presses the Iraqi government to find a political accommodation and make the tough choices they need to make in order to govern and defend their country. This is a time for responsible government and far-sighted leadership. We cannot and will not continue to be an occupying presence in Iraq,” Hagel said.

Hagel Introduces Legislation to Deal with Illegal Immigrants Living in the U.S.

2007-04-26T21:19:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Legislation to Deal with Illegal Immigrants Living in the U.S.

April 26th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) today introduced “The Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007.” The legislation would create a merit-based point system to deal with those living in the country illegally. Those who receive enough points would be put on a pathway to earn citizenship after 13 years. Under Hagel’s bill, no person here illegally would be able to jump in line ahead of someone who has applied for citizenship legally.

Hagel’s legislation is a compromise intended to be incorporated into the comprehensive immigration reform legislation the Senate will consider in May. The legislation builds on previous immigration reform legislation introduced by Hagel in the last two Congresses.

“It is not in our interest to have 12 million people living here illegally. We must create a system in which those who are contributing to our country, speaking English, and helping build a better America are given a pathway toward earned citizenship, while those who are not contributing to our country can be identified and deported. This legislation creates that kind of responsible system. This is an issue of national security as well as an economic issue. We cannot afford to continue to ignore it,” Hagel said.

To be eligible for the point system under Hagel’s legislation, an illegal immigrant must have been in the country since before January 7, 2004; pass a criminal or national security background check; pay back state and federal income taxes; demonstrate a proficiency in English and U.S. history; register for selective service; and pay a $2000 fine and additional fees. The system is modeled after those used by Canada and Australia.

Attached is a summary of the Immigrant Accountability Act of 2007

This legislation builds on the Hagel/Daschle legislation introduced in January 2004, the Hagel Immigrant Accountability Act of 2005, and the Hagel/Martinez compromise that made passage of the Senate Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act possible in 2006. This legislation embraces the concept from the Hagel/Martinez compromise allowing long-term, employed illegal aliens to stay in the United States if they prove that they are invested and contributing to the United States. Illegal aliens who arrived after January 7, 2004 would have to leave the U.S. or be deported.

Under the Hagel Immigrant Accountability Act, illegal aliens applying for earned adjustment would have to pass criminal and national security background checks; pay back state and federal income taxes; demonstrate English proficiency and knowledge of U.S. history and government; register for the military selective service; and pay a $2,000 fine and additional fees. They would have to wait in the back of the line behind those who have already applied before earning a greencard.

New provisions under the Hagel legislation require illegal aliens to demonstrate they are contributing to the United States to be eligible to earn an eventual path (after 13 years) to American Citizenship. To qualify for a greencard, an individual here illegally must earn points in categories that show specific characteristics that demonstrate investment, contribution and assimilation into the United States. The individual would be required to receive 65% of the available points to qualify for a greencard. (Point table attached.) After the initial application, if at anytime DHS determines that the alien cannot qualify for the program, the alien would have to leave the U.S. or would be deported.

The bill establishes the following point categories:

• Military Service (after meeting initial qualifications for adjustment)

• Advanced English proficiency

• Civic Engagement – significant community service work (religious or secular), a clean criminal record, and on time payment of income taxes for past work

• Business ownership (which employs at least 2 unrelated “legal” workers)

• Home ownership

• Work History (points for each year of work an alien can prove) (Like Hagel/Martinez)

• Education (additional points for all levels of education)

• U.S. Presence (points for length of time in the U.S.) (Like Hagel/Martinez)

· U.S. Citizen/Permanent Resident Spouse or minor child

Basic Points

FACTOR
POSSIBLE POINTS

Work

The range of points is based on the number of years a person has worked in the U.S. (Up to 5 points per year possible.)
15-30

Education

An alien may earn minimal points for primary school, additional points for high school or obtaining a GED, or skilled trade license.
15-30

Family

A person may earn points for having a U.S. citizen child; additional points may be awarded for a U.S. citizen/legal resident spouse.
10-20

English

The range of points is based on level of proficiency - the more fluent, the more points.
5-15

Civic Engagement

Points may be earned for community service, having no criminal or civil infractions, and on time payment of taxes.
5-20

U.S. Presence

The range of points is based on the number of years a person has lived in the U.S.

(Up to 5 points per year possible.)
10-12

Total Possible Points

Specific point values will be determined by regulation.
60-127

An alien must earn 65% of available Basic Points to eventually qualify for a green card and citizenship.

Extra Credit Points

Extra points may be awarded to those immigrants who have made exceptional contributions.

FACTOR
POINTS

U.S. Military Service

Points for being eligible for honorable discharge.
Up to 20

Business Ownership

Points awarded if business is sustained for 18 months and alien employs at least 2 non-relative employees.
Up to 10

Advanced Education

Points for college degree or advanced degree.
Up to 15

Home Ownership
Up to 5

Other Circumstances: There will be factors that we are unable to anticipate at this time. These factors, and the points to assign to them, are at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security
Up to 20

Hagel, Tanner, Webb and Castle Reintroduce Bicameral and Bipartisan Legislation to Create Comprehensive Entitlement Reform Commission

2007-04-26T21:02:00.000-05:00

Hagel, Tanner, Webb and Castle Reintroduce Bicameral and Bipartisan Legislation to Create Comprehensive Entitlement Reform Commission

April 24th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE), Jim Webb (D-VA), and Representatives John Tanner (D-TN) and Mike Castle (R-DE) reintroduced legislation in the Senate and House today to create a Comprehensive Entitlement Reform Commission. The commission would review Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and make recommendations to Congress that would sustain the solvency and stability of these three programs for future generations. Hagel and Tanner both introduced the legislation in the last Congress.

“Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have played a vital role for millions of Americans to cope with the financial burdens of retirement and health care costs. However, over the next 75 years these three programs represent a $47 trillion unfunded commitment and are on a trajectory that cannot be sustained. The Commission will review America’s three major entitlement programs and make comprehensive recommendations to sustain the solvency and stability of these programs for future generations. Confronting the financial challenges that exist with these entitlement programs now means facing less dramatic and difficult choices down the road,” Hagel said.

“Millions of Americans depend on Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid everyday, but the programs are not financially sustainable over time if we do not take a comprehensive look at potential reforms. We have a responsibility to strengthen these programs for the Baby Boomers who are retiring now and also for future generations who deserve the assistance they have helped support for those before them,” Tanner said.

“For decades, hard-working Americans have counted on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as a safety net to protect their basic needs,” Webb said. “The intentions of these programs are unquestionable. They foster a level of fairness and government responsibility that Americans deserve. But with nearly 80 million baby boomers retiring in the next few years and the costs of medical care continually rising, we need to take the responsible steps to ensure the solvency of these programs in the years ahead.

“For too long, Congressional debate on these programs has been mired in partisan politics. As the latest trustees’ report makes all too clear, we need leadership to ensure the long-term financial health of these programs. That’s why it is time for a neutral commission to recommend solutions to Congress within one year of the bill’s passage,” continued Webb.

“With the Trustees Report yesterday reconfirming for all of us, the urgent need to address the solvency of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security sooner rather than later, this Commission can play a vital role in making specific recommendations on how to do so. With these three entitlement programs comprising such a large chunk of our federal budget every year, there is no question that in order to be fiscally responsible we can no longer wait to make changes. Facing the tough choices now, will ensure a healthier economy in the long run,” Castle said.

The bipartisan Commission would be comprised of eight members appointed by bipartisan leaders of the House and Senate. Its work would fall under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires Government Accountability Office oversight and full public access. The Commission would be required to submit a final report to the President and Congress one year after the appointment of all Commission members and staff, and Congress would be required to hold committee hearings to review the Commission’s recommendations.

Attached below is a fact sheet detailing the proposed Commission.

Comprehensive Entitlement Reform Commission Act of 2007
Purpose:

• The Entitlement Reform Commission will review Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and make comprehensive recommendations to sustain the solvency and stability of these three programs for future generations.

Facts:

• Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid face a $47 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Government Accountability Office; Social Security Administration; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Congressional Research Service)

• The Social Security Trust Fund will pay out more money than it takes in beginning in 2017 and will be exhausted in 2041. Social Security faces a $4.7 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Social Security Administration)

• The Medicare Part A Trust Fund (hospital insurance) will be exhausted in 2019 and faces an $11.6 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Government Accountability Office; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services)

• The Medicare Part B (supplementary medical insurance) faces a $13.9 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Government Accountability Office; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services)

• The Medicare Part D (prescription drugs) faces an $8.4 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Government Accountability Office; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services)

• Medicaid faces an $8.4 trillion unfunded commitment over the next 75 years. (Source: Congressional Research Service report – August 2005)

• Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid represent America’s three major entitlement programs. Together, these programs make up 78% of total mandatory spending. (Source: Office of Management and Budget)

• Spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is projected to increase from 8.7% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2006 to 16% of GDP in 2080. (Source: Congressional Research Service report – February 2007)

• In March 2005, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan urged Congress to act on modernizing entitlement programs, “sooner rather than later.” He warned that unless we act now to meet the huge unfunded commitments of our entitlement programs, there will be significant economic consequences for our nation.

• We need to comprehensively reform these programs so they are sustainable for future generations.

Commission Overview:

• The Commission will be comprised of 8 total members. The House Speaker, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority Leader and Senate Minority Leader will each appoint two members.

• The Commission shall select two Co-Chairmen from among its members.

• All appointments must be made 30 days after enactment of the Act.

• Following the appointment of all Commission members, the Commission will have an initial organization period of two months to establish an outline for work. The Commission work will fall under the Federal Advisory Committee Act requiring Government Accountability Office oversight and full public access.

• The Commission shall appoint an Executive Director. The Executive Director will hire additional staff with approval of the Commission Co-Chairmen.

• The Commission is required to submit the final report to the President and Congress one year after the selection of the two Co-Chairmen of the Commission and the Executive Director.

• Congress is required to hold Committee hearings to review the Commission’s recommendations.

• The legislation authorizes $1.5 million to carry out the necessary tasks of the Commission, such as salary for the Executive Director and staff and travel expenses for the members. Members will not be compensated with salary.

Memorial Day Mission

2007-04-25T20:48:00.000-05:00

Here's an e-mail from Jeremy:

We have a mission to accomplish by Memorial Day if we want to see Chuck Hagel's views presented to the American people in the 2008 Presidential election!

We are asking that, by May 28, you try and find 25 new supporters to sign the online petition! How? Talk to people you know, talk to people they know, let them know that we need their help in making sure that America does not have to suffer through the 2008 election, that signing the online petition shows Senator Hagel that we need his views expressed through the Presidential election! If you and a friend were to stand on a busy corner over a weekend, that's all it would take to accomplish the 25!

If you hear someone say, "It's too early to make that decision," tell them you're not asking them who they will support in 2008, but rather that you would like their help in making sure a true American is one of their choices!

Are you a doctor, nurse, teacher, lawyer, scientist, housewife, househusband,etc? Start a local coalition of like individuals in your area!

Wondering how to go about any of this? Don't be afraid to ask us for help - info@drafthagel08.com !

Let's get to work! We've got a mission to right the direction of our country!

Thanks!

Jeremy Mullen
www.drafthagel08.com
info@drafthagel08.com

In Iraq, All Terribly Familiar

2007-04-22T22:17:00.000-05:00

Senator Hagel wrote an op-ed that is in today's Washington Post. This was in response to his recent trip to Iraq.

In Iraq, All Terribly Familiar
By Chuck HagelSunday, April 22, 2007; Page B01
Last weekend, along with Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), I completed my fifth trip to Iraq, and I am frustrated and worried. We are still risking the lives of our troops without giving them a realistic policy worthy of their sacrifices. To me, as a Vietnam veteran, that feels terribly familiar.
If success were simply a matter of the determination and ability of U.S. troops and civil servants, we would have already created a secure and stable Iraq. But unfortunately, the reality is that after more than four years, America remains the country's occupying power. Iraq's future will be determined by Iraqis, who, I hope, will reach a political accommodation -- but America is still making the major decisions and taking the lead militarily in most critical areas of the country. We can continue to help buy time for the Iraqi government -- but that time is running out.
The signs are everywhere. Key Shiite leaders told me that they remain deeply skeptical of Sunni intentions. They derided as "appeasement" constructive attempts to reintegrate select ex-Baath Party officials into public life and the government. Shiite and Kurdish leaders openly suggested that Iraq simply pursue what's known as "the 80/20 solution" -- meaning that the Kurds and Shiites, who make up some 80 percent of the population, would run the country without regard for the minority Sunnis, who had grown accustomed to dominating Iraq. Almost no one in Baghdad was talking about using new provincial elections this year to help bring the Sunnis into the national government. The governor of Anbar province, al-Qaeda's base in Iraq, agreed that security had improved recently but raised concerns that his province still gets almost no assistance from the central government in Baghdad. That has left citizens in his province without jobs, electricity and potable water, even as open sewers spill filth into the streets.
There are important areas of progress in Iraq, and we should recognize them. In Anbar province, for example, U.S. military leaders highlighted the significant success they have had in lowering the number of attacks by al-Qaeda. The military has successfully engaged tribal leaders who have provided informal governance there for hundreds of years. The U.S. military has also succeeded in helping double the size of the Iraqi forces in the province. Whether this progress can be sustained or is temporary will be up to the Iraqis.
If the good news is mixed, the bad news is downright troubling. Within the past two weeks, hundreds of Iraqis were slaughtered in Baghdad, the Iraqi Parliament's cafeteria was hit by a suicide bomber, and a historic Baghdad bridge over the Tigris River was destroyed. Ominously, these increased acts of violence occurred in the area where the United States and Iraq have deployed 80,000 security forces.
So what do we do?
We must start by understanding what's really happening in Iraq. According to the National Intelligence Estimate released in February, the conflict has become a "self-sustaining inter-sectarian struggle between Shia and Sunnis" and also includes "extensive Shia-on-Shia violence." This means that Iraq is being consumed by sectarian warfare, much of it driven by Shiite or Sunni militias -- not al-Qaeda terrorists. Yes, there are admirers of Osama bin Laden in the country, including a full-blown al-Qaeda branch. But terrorists are not the core problem; Sunni-Shiite violence is. The Bush administration's rhetoric has not been nearly clear enough on this key point.
American occupation cannot stop a civil war in Iraq. Our military, superb as it is, can only do so much. The only lasting answer to Iraq's anguish will come from a political resolution. There will be no military solution in Iraq.
So how can America influence the Iraqis to reconcile their differences -- at least enough to form some kind of responsible government?
First, we must recognize that we have few good options in Iraq and that we are dealing with dynamics that lie mostly beyond our control.
Second, we must do all we can to encourage a comprehensive regional security framework, which includes engaging Syria and Iran. The regional security conference next month in Egypt is an opportunity we must not miss. We cannot solve the problems in Iraq by ourselves. We will have to work more closely with our Middle East allies than ever before, and that means addressing the nearly universal perception in the Middle East that we are imposing our will on the region for our own purposes.
To get more help from our regional friends, we must also have Middle Eastern countries see the Iraqi government as credible, not a U.S. puppet. And to get our regional strategy right, we must clearly recognize the depth of the Sunni-Shiite split and factor it into our Middle East policy and relationships. If we do not, the region could explode into ethnic and religious conflict.
Third, and closer to home, the administration and Congress must untangle themselves from the debate over funding our continued involvement in Iraq. The Iraqis must be jolted into understanding that America's continued commitment of troops and money is not open-ended. Significantly, American leaders in Iraq told me that they believed the debate on this issue in Congress had actually helped them get Iraqi leaders to grasp this point.
I do not like restricting our war policy with conditions or timelines. They are blunt instruments in an area of policy that requires flexibility. But they are some of the few levers Congress has when the majority of Congress and the American people have lost confidence in the president's policy.
We are at a crossroads at home. One option is that Congress can pass and the president can sign a war-funding bill that gives our troops the resources they need and places responsible conditions on that funding that will press the Iraqi government to perform and make the tough choices. President Bush should not see this as a threat from Congress but as a reasonable progression of events after four bloody and costly years.
The other option is that the president can veto the funding bill, Congress can overplay its hand, and both sides can get locked into a political standoff -- with U.S. troops caught in the middle. This would not produce constructive pressure on the Iraqi government to reconcile its differences, and it would ensure that the United States would remain trapped in Iraq, doing ever-greater damage to our force structure and military capabilities. The longer we are bogged down in Iraq, the more difficult and painful it will be to get out. And the deeper we are bogged down in Iraq, the fewer resources we have to devote to the many other important challenges facing America, especially in Afghanistan but also elsewhere around the globe and here at home.
If the war continues to lose support from the American people, the limited options we have today will vanish. The president will be left with a bitter few allies in our party, and we will be forced to withdraw from Iraq in a way that greatly damages U.S. interests in the Middle East and leaves the world far more dangerous than it is today. Forging a bipartisan consensus now that places responsible conditions on U.S. war funding could forestall a time when we have no options. The Baker-Hamilton report could have been the base for that bipartisan consensus.
I came home from my fifth trip to Iraq with one enduring impression. The Iraqi government must make the tough choices now to produce political reconciliation. If there is no such reconciliation in Iraq, there will be no progress -- no matter how many American lives we lose and how much American money we give. We will have squandered our resources and efforts, undermined our interests in the Middle East and, however unintentionally, produced a more dangerous world.
Chuck Hagel, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Nebraska.

Read more at... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/20/AR2007042002007.html

Draft Hagel 08

2007-04-22T22:05:00.000-05:00

Here are a couple of e-mails I received from Jeremy - webmaster for our Draft Hagel 08 site and store:

The Draft Hagel 08 store now has T-Shirts available! Be sure to
visitthe site and check them out, and, if you haven't ordered some
bumperstickers or buttons yet, what are you waiting
for!?!http://officialdrafthagel08store.com/

VIDEOSMany of you have asked that we include videos on our site, and now, we do!http://www.drafthagel08.com/video.html Check them out and let us know what you think! Special thanks to Mike Wallach for setting them all up!As always, it's all about numbers. Know 10 people? Have them sign the petition! America deserves the choice!

So...chekc out www.drafthagel08.com today! What are you waiting for?

Hagel-Harkin Reintroduce Bill to Fund Federal Commitment to IDEA

2007-04-19T20:44:00.000-05:00

Hagel-Harkin Reintroduce Bill to Fund Federal Commitment to IDEA

April 19th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Tom Harkin (D-IA) reintroduced legislation today to meet the federal government’s commitment to fund 40 percent of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Hagel and Harkin first introduced this legislation in 2001. Cosponsors of the Hagel-Harkin bill include Senators Coleman (R-MN), Collins (R-ME), Dodd (D-CT), Kennedy (D-MA), Lieberman (I-CT), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Roberts (R-KS), Schumer (D-NY), Snowe (R-ME), and Warner (R-VA).

“When the federal government created IDEA it committed to funding 40 percent of the costs. For over 30 years, it has failed to meet its obligation and pushed the costs down to states and local governments. This is wrong and it takes resources away from education needs in each state. While we have made progress in increasing IDEA funding over the last 10 years, the federal government is still not close to meeting its commitment. This bipartisan legislation takes a responsible approach to fixing this problem and freeing up critical education funds in states like Nebraska,” Hagel said.

IDEA guarantees a free and appropriate public education to students with special needs. When Congress passed IDEA in 1975 it pledged to provide states and local school districts with 40 percent of the funding needed to support this mandate. Sen. Hagel has worked to fully fund IDEA since arriving in the Senate in 1997, and under his leadership federal funding for IDEA has increased by $6.9 billion. In Fiscal Year 1998, federal funding for IDEA was $3.8 billion, or 10.5 percent of the authorized level. In Fiscal Year 2007 federal funding for IDEA was $10.7 billion, or 17.2 percent of the authorized level.

Despite efforts from Hagel and Harkin to fully fund IDEA over the last 10 years, federal funds for IDEA have not exceeded 19 percent of the authorized level. This leaves state governments and local school districts to pick up the tab for this federally mandated program, taking away funds for other local education needs.

The Hagel-Harkin bill would fully-fund IDEA in seven years through mandatory annual phased-in spending increases, until federal funding reaches $30.8 billion in Fiscal Year 2015. The bill would free up local and state funds that had previously been used to meet IDEA requirements for other important education priorities. Therefore, as the federal IDEA share grows, local school districts will have increased flexibility for all their education programs.

The Hagel-Harkin bill is supported by the following groups: American Art Therapy Association; American Association of School Administrators; American Association of University Women; American Counseling Association; American Dance Therapy Association; American Federation of Teachers; American Music Therapy Association; American Occupational Therapy Association; American School Counselor Association; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; Association for Career and Technical Education; Association of University Centers on Disabilities; Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders; Council of Great City Schools; Easter Seals; Higher Education Consortium for Special Education; International Reading Association; Learning Disabilities Association of America; National Alliance of Black School Educators; National Association of Elementary School Principals; National Association of Federally Impacted Schools; National Association of Pupil Services Administrators; National Association of School Psychologists; National Association of Secondary School Principals; National Association of State Directors of Special Education; National Down Syndrome Society; National Education Association; National Parent Teacher Association; National Rural Education Advocacy Coalition; National School Boards Association; People for the American Way; School Social Work Association of America; Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children; The Advocacy Institute.

Official Draft Hagel 08 Store

2007-04-19T20:34:00.000-05:00

Have you checked out the Draft Hagel 08 store?

If not - head over there right now to buy some awesome Hagel merchandise!

Hagel’s Dilemma

2007-04-17T21:41:00.000-05:00

Hagel’s Dilemma
The senator is vague about his political future but clear in his opposition to the Iraq War.
by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

Something happened to Sen. Charles T. “Chuck” Hagel on the way to the press conference. The man of seemingly impenetrable defenses and unshakable disposition took the curious step of announcing on March 12 that he had nothing to announce about his much-anticipated run for president, making himself vulnerable to spurned reporters and snarky bloggers for days afterward.

The 60-year-old Nebraska Republican is known for playing it close to the vest but seemed to surprise even his staff with his non-announcement. Deflated supporters did not know what to think when he told reporters at the University of Nebraska event, planned days before, that he was still mulling his options.

Hagel: Time for Iraqis to Step Up

2007-04-16T21:46:00.000-05:00

Hagel: Time for Iraqis to Step Up

OMAHA, Neb. -- Nebraska U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel is expected back on Monday from a trip to Iraq.

The Republican said that America's support for the war in Iraq has limits.

"We, the U.S., has invested heavily in this country on behalf of the Iraqi people ," Hagel said from Iraq. "And I think it is up to the Iraqi people now to determine their future and money would be forthcoming with some conditions."

Hagel, Sununu, Dole and Martinez Re-Introduce Legislation to Reform Oversight of Government Sponsored Enterprises

2007-04-12T16:55:00.000-05:00

Hagel, Sununu, Dole and Martinez Re-Introduce Legislation to Reform Oversight of Government Sponsored Enterprises

April 12th, 2007 - Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE), John Sununu (R-NH), Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) and Mel Martinez (R-FL) re-introduced legislation today to improve oversight of Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE). Similar legislation was introduced in 2003 and 2005. The Senate Banking Committee passed this legislation in both the 108th and 109th Congresses.

“Fannie and Freddie have experienced multi billion dollar accounting restatements, paid millions in bonuses and salaries to their executives, paid millions of dollars in fines to their regulators, and spent over a billion dollars in consulting fees to clean up their financial mess which is still not cleaned up. We need a world class GSE regulator with the authority and resources to responsibly regulate these unaccountable GSEs. Our legislation re-focuses the GSEs on their Congressionally chartered housing mission. Congress must address this issue now,” Hagel said.

“The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s annual report to Congress makes clear that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue to raise significant oversight concerns. With taxpayers on the line if either of these businesses fail, this news highlights the need for improved regulation of the GSEs. Fannie and Freddie hold nearly $1.5 trillion in debt; an independent regulator is essential to protect taxpayers and align the GSEs with their core mission. This bill would refocus the GSEs’ practices and investments on affordable housing, thereby reducing overall systemic risk,” Sununu said.

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must be run properly and with adequate transparency and oversight. We will not tolerate an intentionally weak regulator, especially when the stakes are so high for American taxpayers, the housing sector and the economy as a whole,” Dole said.

“The actions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose a serious threat to our nation’s financial system. It’s clear our action is required,” said Martinez. “Congress must act to protect taxpayers and focus the GSEs back on their affordable housing mission. The reforms we propose take bold steps toward strengthening the regulation and supervision of the GSEs.”

The legislation would:

• Create an independent world class regulator to oversee the safety and soundness of the housing enterprises;

• Focus Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s $1.4 trillion portfolios back on their housing mission: to promote affordable housing;

• Give the new regulator the authority to close down a failing GSE and protect against a taxpayer bailout;

• Give the new regulator greater discretion in raising capital standards to protect against insolvency;

• Give the new regulator approval power over new programs and activities proposed by a GSE to hold GSEs to their Congressionally chartered mission;

• Gives the regulator greater authority to limit lucrative severance packages or “golden parachutes” of executives who are removed for cause;

• Require the annual audits of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s affordable housing programs to ensure that these programs support and strengthen the enterprises’ affordable housing mission;
• Strengthens Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s affordable housing goals;

• Require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to improve their financial disclosure;

• Not raise the conforming loan limits; and

• End presidential appointments to the board of directors of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and require all Federal Home Loan Bank directors to be elected by Federal Home Loan Bank members.

Hagel, Clinton Introduce Resolution Marking 75th Anniversary of the Military Order of the Purple Heart

2007-04-12T16:51:00.000-05:00

HAGEL, CLINTON INTRODUCE RESOLUTION MARKING 75TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE MILITARY ORDER OF THE PURPLE HEART
Senators also reintroduce legislation to support National Purple Heart Recognition Day

April 12th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, DC - Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) today are introducing a resolution to recognize the 75th Anniversary of the Military Order of the Purple Heart and to commend all recipients of the Purple Heart for their demonstration of heroism on behalf of the United States. Also today, the Senators reintroduced legislation to support “National Purple Heart Recognition Day,” which honors all of those brave service members who were severely injured while serving their country and who were awarded a Purple Heart.

“The men and women of our armed forces who have received the Purple Heart have gone above and beyond the call of duty in order to help preserve America’s freedom. The sacrifices made by these men and women have helped create and strengthen the nation we live in today. ‘National Purple Heart Recognition Day’ is an appropriate way to honor their enormous sacrifices,” Senator Hagel said.

‘National Purple Heart Recognition Day’ reminds all Americans of the tremendous sacrifices our brave men and women in uniform have made in the defense of our nation and also reminds us of the valor and service of all our veterans. I am proud to once again support this honor and to recognize the efforts of the Military Order of the Purple Heart and all that it has done to sustain and encourage support for Purple Heart recipients,” said Senator Clinton.

The Purple Heart was established on August 7, 1782 in Newburgh, NY, during the Revolutionary War, when General George Washington issued an order establishing the Honorary Badge of Distinction, otherwise known as the Badge of Military Merit, or the Decoration of the Purple Heart. The legislation supporting a “National Purple Heart Recognition Day” requests that the President issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to conduct appropriate ceremonies, activities and programs to demonstrate support for people who have been awarded the Purple Heart medal.

The Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH) was founded in 1932 to protect and promote the mutual interests of Purple Heart recipients. MOPH is made up exclusively of Purple Heart recipients and is the only veterans’ service organization that is comprised strictly of combat veterans. The resolution both honors the courageous veterans who have been awarded the Purple Heart and encourages the American people to learn more about the Purple Heart and the duty, honor and courage that it symbolizes.

The Order of the Purple Heart for Military Merit, commonly known as the Purple Heart, is the oldest military decoration in the world in present use. The Purple Heart is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to members of the Armed Forces who are wounded in conflict with an enemy force, or while held by an enemy force as a prisoner of war, and posthumously to the next of kin of members of the Armed Forces who are killed in conflict with an enemy force, or who die of a wound received in conflict with an enemy force. There are over 1,535,000 recipients of the Purple Heart Medal approximately 550,000 of whom are still living.

Hagel, Sestak to Travel to Iraq

2007-04-12T16:47:00.000-05:00

Hagel, Sestak to Travel to Iraq

April 12th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Congressman Joe Sestak (D-PA) will travel to Iraq this week to examine security, political and economic conditions during a 2-day tour of the country. Senator Hagel and Congressman Sestak will leave on Thursday, April 12th and return on Monday, April 16th. Hagel, a Vietnam War veteran, serves on the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees. Sestak, a retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral, serves on the House Armed Services Committee.

“This trip will allow us an opportunity to assess our progress in Iraq and the Middle East and meet with the key leaders of this region. I also look forward to meeting with Nebraska troops serving in Iraq,” Hagel said.

“I appreciate the opportunity to talk with our commanders and the troops that are forward in a continuing assessment of our involvement in Iraq," stated Congressman Joe Sestak. “I am confident that I will be able to use this experience in my work on the House Armed Services Committee and in Congress.”

Hagel and Sestak are scheduled to meet with top U.S. and Iraqi military, government, and diplomatic officials. Hagel will also meet with Nebraska troops serving in the country.

Hagel last traveled to Iraq and the Middle East in December 2005. This will be his fifth visit to Iraq.

Hagel Statement on Secretary Gates’ Announcement Extending Army Deployments from 12 to 15 Months

2007-04-12T16:35:00.000-05:00

Hagel Statement on Secretary Gates’ Announcement Extending Army Deployments from 12 to 15 Months

April 11th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ announcement that U.S. Army deployments will be extended from 12 to 15 months:

“Secretary Gates is right to bring greater predictability and clarity regarding the deployment of our military overseas rather than allowing creeping deployment extensions. However, the Secretary’s announcement extending the deployments of active duty Army units is a stark admission that the Administration’s policies in Iraq are doing permanent damage to our military and a clear acknowledgment that the U.S. military is being forced to ignore its own deployment standards. Maintaining this tempo of operations will have drastic and lasting consequences for our nation’s military readiness and unnecessarily endangers our ability to react to any other crisis in the world. We are on a very dangerous course. That is why Senator Webb and I have called for legislatively-mandated readiness and deployment standards to protect our U.S. military.”

Comments about the Blog

2007-04-08T14:36:00.000-05:00

So, are there any question that anybody has for me? Comments about the blog's set-up? Is the appearance all good? Can everybody see everything OK? (I'm always logged in as an Administrator - so I want to know what the average person thinks).

Hagel's Speech: Where We Stand On Iraq

2007-04-07T22:22:00.000-05:00

Where We Stand On Iraq
Senators Chuck Hagel and Ben Nelson

March 29th, 2007 - This week the Senate is engaged in an important and historic debate about America’s policy in Iraq. Today, we will vote to pass a responsible Iraq War Supplemental spending bill that provides our troops with the support they need and presents a clearly defined U.S. policy in Iraq.

Our troops deserve the continued support of the American people and the support from Congress necessary to see they have the right equipment, training and other resources to carry out their mission. We both appreciate and honor the sacrifices made by more than 40 Nebraskans and 3200 American men and women in Iraq.

We believe the status quo in Iraq is unacceptable and this bill, while not perfect, represents a desperately needed adjustment in our policy. Our most important criteria for supporting this legislation is creating an Iraq war policy that is worthy of the sacrifice of the men and women in the U.S. military.

There has been an enormous amount of disinformation, some of it intentional, on all sides about what the bill we will vote on today does. It is important that Nebraskans understand the facts about what the common sense legislation passed by the Senate does and does not do.

First, the legislation does not:

• cut funding for our troops in the field; or
• require a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq or set mandatory withdrawal timelines.

The legislation does the following:

• requires the President to limit the U.S. military mission to protecting U.S. and coalition personnel and infrastructure, training and equipping Iraqi forces, and conducting targeted counterterrorism operations;
• requires, within 120 days of enactment, the beginning of the redeployment of U.S. forces not involved in the military mission;
• establishes the goal that, by March 31, 2008, the redeployment of all U.S. forces not involved in the military mission would be complete;
• sets seven political, economic and military benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet “expeditiously and pursuant to a schedule established by the Government of Iraq”;
• requires a report from the President to Congress on the U.S. military’s plan for Iraq, “including strategic and operational benchmarks and projected redeployment dates of U.S. forces from Iraq”; and
• requires a report from the U.S. military commander in Iraq to Congress on Iraqi progress on meeting the seven benchmarks.

Previously, we had both voted against similar legislation because we felt, while an adjustment in our Iraq policy was needed, there were better ways to adjust our policy. We are voting for this legislation today because, given the choices we have between this legislation and the status quo, we believe this legislation is the most responsible course for the U.S. military and our nation’s security.

In addition, during negotiations over this legislation at the Senate Appropriations Committee last week, Senator Nelson was successful in securing an agreement to include provisions that establish measurable benchmarks for the Iraqis to meet and a requirement that the U.S. Commander in Iraq present regular reports to Congress on the Iraqis progress on those benchmarks. Establishing benchmarks is an approach endorsed by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

Our military is under enormous strain from multiple, extended deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. In February, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, reported to Congress that there is now a “significant” risk that the United States military will not be able to respond to an emerging crisis. Both of us spend an enormous amount of our time as senators on issues related to concerns that have arisen from the damage that is being done to our military. This legislation begins to ease the crushing burden we are placing on our military.

The President has said he will veto this bill. That would be unfortunate. Our troops deserve a policy that is worthy of their sacrifice and the American people deserve a policy they can support. We believe it is possible to create an Iraq war policy that can gain bi-partisan support and this legislation is a responsible starting point.

Ultimately, the future of Iraq will be determined by Iraqis—not Americans. As General Petraeus has said, there will be no military solution in Iraq. That reality must guide our thinking. The status quo is unacceptable. Today, we are voting for change.

Hagel-Webb Introduce Amendment to Protect Readiness of U.S. Troops and Limit Deployments

2007-04-07T22:12:00.000-05:00

Hagel-Webb Introduce Amendment to Protect Readiness of U.S. Troops and Limit Deployments

March 27th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Jim Webb (D-VA) introduced a bipartisan amendment today to the Iraq War supplemental spending bill. The amendment:

• ensures that units and individuals in the Armed Forces be certified as “fully mission capable” 15 days prior to deployment;

• limits the length of overseas deployments of the Army, Marine Corps, and National Guard;

• establishes a minimum time between deployments for the Army, Marine Corps and National Guard;

• provides additional appropriations totaling approximately $3.1 billion to reset Army National Guard and Reserve equipment and to address funding shortfalls for Army National Guard training, operations and maintenance; and to fund the acquisition of additional Mine Resistant Ambush Protection vehicles for the Marine Corps;

• and requires the President to report to Congress on the comprehensive diplomatic, political and economic strategy of the U.S. regarding Iraq.

“This amendment puts the focus where it should be: on the men and women of our military. No American wants to allow a single soldier or Marine to be deployed without meeting the military’s standard of readiness. Yet that is what we are doing. We are breaking our military and this amendment will help put a stop to it. This amendment is about taking care of our troops,” Hagel said.

“I have long advocated that the U.S. strategy in Iraq should embrace concerted regional and international diplomacy,” said Senator Webb. “This bipartisan amendment will advance efforts to achieve that goal. Moreover, we will take critical and necessary steps to strengthen congressional oversight regarding military readiness and the administration’s policies for deploying and redeploying personnel and units to Iraq. The amendment’s increased appropriations for military readiness and force-protection vehicles reflect a determination to assist our ground forces reverse their worrisome decline in readiness–especially the National Guard in both its domestic and federal missions.”

I'm Back

2007-04-06T22:30:00.000-05:00

I arrived back around 9:00 P.M. today. My trip was a LOT of fun. I really hope you enjoyed Jeremy's posts, and I would like to thank him publically for filling in for me. I have a LOT of catching up to do on stuff, so it may be a couple days before I post, but I will try to get one up over the weekend.

Nathan

Last Post

2007-04-04T20:37:00.000-05:00

It has been fun filling in for Nathan this past week, and I hope at least some of you have enjoyed my posts. I believe he will be back on the job on April 7th. Unfortunately, do to a family emergency, I will not be able to post anything new between now and then. Thanks for reading.

Jeremy

Surprising?

2007-04-04T20:30:00.000-05:00

Well, is it a surprise that most people, even Republicans want out of Iraq? Not to any Hagel supporters. These are the results of a recent poll question in Iowa:

Do you favor a withdrawal of all United States military from Iraq within the next six months? (Republicans Only)
Yes 52%
No 39%
Undecided 9%

Now, when you mention "Hagel" and "President" to most people, their response will be that he isn't running. The thing is, this poll makes it pretty obvious that he should. Does anyone else in Washington seem to care as much about the war, it's effect, the soldiers, their families, and the cost? No. He may not be running, but it is our job to change that. Personally, I love my country, as I am sure most others do. Where it is heading is scary, sad, and disappointing. Looking over the field of contenders and potential contenders, there is only one who can bring this great country back to the glory it deserves, and that person is Senator Chuck Hagel. There is no doubt.

Draft Hagel 08 Supporter Comments

2007-04-03T16:07:00.000-05:00

Just thought it be a good idea to share some of the feedback that we get at www.drafthagel08.com. These are just a few of many.

"Senator Hagel is a true American patriot and the right man for the job."

"If the GOP hopes to hang onto the White House in 2008 the party must select a truly conservative nominee who does not approve of President Bush's conduct of the war. I believe Chuck Hagel's military service makes him eminently qualified to lead this nation at this time. Under his leadership the GOP will once again become the peace party."

"Hagel is the one republican I will support."

"As a Republican - I cannot think of a single candidate I would vote for over Sen. Hagel. Above all else, I appreciate his candor and know it is something we desperately need. "

"I strongly urge the good senator from Nebraska to enter the 2008 race. The Republican candidates at this point are not capable of carrying on the Republican message!!!"

If you know someone who supports what Senator Hagel stands for, but has not visited the site to sign the petition yet, what are they waiting for!?! Thanks for your support!

Buttons and Bumper Stickers

2007-04-02T17:57:00.000-05:00

Go to www.drafthagel08.com, click on the "Draft Hagel 08 Store" button, and order you buttons and bumper stickers in support of urging Senator Hagel to run today!

Chuck Hagel and His Positions

2007-04-01T19:53:00.000-05:00

Keep reading things about Chuck Hagel being wrong on his positions, wrong for the R party, wrong for America, so wrong, he may as well switch parties. Why is that? Does anyone outside of politics complain about what he does? Anyone not blinded by what is going on now? Is that why he scares you, because he does what he feels is right? Believing that what is in the interest of the people, this country, and the Constitution that protects it and them, that is the job of a federally elected official. Let's stop crying about Hagel ruining things for people who are not doing the right thing, and let's start holding them accountable. At this point in American history, Chuck Hagel is one of the few elected officials seeing the entire picturing clearly. Just because he's brewing some new Kool Aid doesn't mean you have to drink it, but, realize he's doing it because your's is tainted.

Letter to the Editor

2007-03-30T13:50:00.000-05:00

Received this letter to the editor that a Hagel supporter from Martin County, FL recently submitted to his local paper, and just wanted to share it

"In the not so distant past, Republicans produced a conservative majority and were remaking America in ways profound. Yet, since absolute power corrupts (even Republicans) absolutely; we lost Congress. Now we are set on losing the White House.

Republicans today march like mindless drones behind GWB off the cliff. The GOP front runner is hardly pro-family and believes in publicly funded abortions. Once a Democrat, I fled to the GOP for those very reasons. Now, I'm supposed to support Giuliani? Never.

Bush abandoned the Powell doctrine and let Rumsfeld conduct the war like Jack Rogers cutting employees at GE. Result? We sent in just enough troops to create an insurgency and waited 4 long years to try and fix it. If that weren't bad enough, Bush $pent us into debt like Democrats of old. When the attorney general does something askance, we say: "Well it’s no different that what the Dems did!" We support such convoluted logic with the total absence of integrity like the mindless drones we've become. Our party once used to raise the bar and would never have settled for such "lowest-common-denominator" responses.

So, the Republican Party is dead and adrift with no heroes. Except one. Hagel. He supports small government, fiscal restraint, and is NOT interested in mindless nation-building in a Middle Eastern black hole. But will Hagel stand up and say: I AM THE HEART and soul of The Republican Party? No - not yet, because Republicans are too proud to admit the need to change. And that is exactly what we need to do. Or would we rather wait and watch while closet liberals destroy the GOP and Reagan’s legacy?

I am a conservative and I want a conservative candidate on my party's ticket. Do Martin County conservatives want that? If yes, the answer is: Chuck Hagel."

After reading this, this question came to mind: In the last 6 years, when have you heard the White House speak about historical Republican, conservative policies? Taking a look at the deficit, they don't seem to care too much for some of them.

Too Early?

2007-03-29T21:23:00.000-05:00

Some people know that debates are about to start, and that the candidates will most likely be chosen by Feb 5, 2008. Most people, however, just know that we're coming into April 2007, and think that anything Presidential doesn't happen until the middle of January 2008. Well, by January 2008, the landscape won't look the same.

This may be the most important Presidential election in American history. It can be argued that there has never been so much at stake for future generations of Americans as there will be in this election. If anything, voters will be presented with more choices than they have ever been before. For this reason, it is important to support the candidate you want to run so that he/she knows that the support is there to make it to January 2008, and past Feb 5. Please, show Senator Hagel that you support the idea of a Hagel 2008 Presidential run. Visit Draft Hagel 08 to see what it's all about, if you haven't already. If you have, urge people you know to do the same. It is far from too early to do so.

Grassroots Groups

2007-03-29T19:10:00.000-05:00

If there is a grassroots professional group (lawyers, nurses, doctors, etc) that you would like to start or be a part of, just let the folks over at DraftHagel08.com know!

Impeachment Talk

2007-03-27T16:12:00.000-05:00

Senator Hagel has made it clear that he has not and is not calling for the impeachment of the President (see "This Week"), so why can't people mention "impeachment" and "President" without mentioning Hagel? As I mentioned, take a look at how he described it on "This Week"and try to argue with it.

The hope for 2008 is that the people will matter as much as the parties, if not more, as they should. At this point, the only person who can fulfill that hope is Chuck Hagel.

Supporting Senator Hagel

2007-03-26T15:43:00.000-05:00

The reporting deadline for contributions this quarter is March 30. Show your support for Senator Hagel and show others how much support he has by contributing at www.hagel08.com today. Every donation, no matter the amount, helps.

Vacation

2007-03-25T21:25:00.000-05:00

I'll be on vacation from the 26th-6th. I've asked Jeremy from Draft Hagel 08 to take over for me while I'm gone - so enjoy his posts. And remember - just because I'm gone doesn't mean you can't get involved in the Hagel campaign!

Is Hagel a "Conservative Turned Liberal?"

2007-03-24T23:18:00.000-05:00

Here's a comment I got via e-mail from Mike earlier today:

I'm sure in the beginning Mr. Hagel was a nice man.
But come on, a candidate for REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT.
I see in many polls that Hagel hasn't even reached 1%, now boy that is funny. Sorry, but conservative, turned liberal won't make it with the middle class informed Americans.

OK - so in response to this I'd like to direct you to some statistics that Senator Hagel points out on his website:

Conservative Voting Records . . .

Senator Hagel has one of the most solid conservative voting records in the U.S. Senate. The following are his lifetime ratings from some important organizations:

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) 94% (1997 - 2006)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce 96% (1997 - 2005)
American Conservative Union (ACU) 85.2% (1997 - 2006)
National Taxpayers Union 75% (1997 - 2005)
National Right to Life Committee 96.4% (2000 - 2006)
National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) 100% (1999-2006)
Club for Growth 99% (2005)

Hagel's Support of President Bush's Priorities in the Senate

2006 95.5% (highest of GOP Members in Senate)
2005 89%
2004 94%
2003 98%
2002 98%
2001 96%

Source: Congressional Quarterly, January 2007

So basically - the only liberal part about him is his stance on the Iraq War.

Hagel Statement on Vote Against the Budget

2007-03-23T18:45:00.000-05:00

Hagel Statement on Vote Against the Budget

March 23rd, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding his vote against the budget passed by the Senate:

“This is an irresponsible budget. It increases taxes by more than $700 billion on families and businesses over the next five years and increases the debt by $2.4 trillion over the next five years. The federal government’s problem is not that it has too little money, but that it spends too much money. This budget would put America in a deeper financial hole.”

Hagel to be on This Week (ABC)

2007-03-23T18:15:00.000-05:00

Just to let everybody know, Senator Hagel will be on This Week (on ABC) this Sunday.

Hagel Introduces Resolution Commemorating 25th Anniversary of Vietnam Memorial

2007-03-22T21:02:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Resolution Commemorating 25th Anniversary of Vietnam Memorial

March 22nd, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. – United States Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced a resolution today commemorating March 26th as the 25th anniversary of the construction and dedication of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C. The bill has 53 cosponsors. Hagel, a twice-wounded Vietnam veteran, and former Deputy Administrator of the Veterans Administration, spoke at the 1982 groundbreaking for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. On March 26th, Hagel will speak at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund’s ceremony commemorating the 25th anniversary of the groundbreaking for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

“The creation of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial marked the beginning of a healing process for a nation, and veterans, divided by the war. Now, every year millions of Americans come to this monument to pay their respects to those who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country. While the debate over our involvement in Vietnam and the conduct of the war will continue for years to come, the Memorial demonstrates the appreciation all Americans have for those who serve. It honors the warriors, not the war,” Hagel said.

In 1997, the U.S. Senate passed S. Res. 87, a resolution introduced by Hagel and former Senator and fellow Vietnam veteran Bob Kerrey (D-NE), which commemorated the 15th anniversary of the groundbreaking for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial.

Presidential Primary Debates

2007-03-22T20:22:00.000-05:00

At this point in the 2008 race, as early as it is, should a candidate have to have declared to be invited to participate in a debate?

Hagel Reintroduces Bill to Aid Military Families

2007-03-21T16:50:00.000-05:00

Hagel Reintroduces Bill to Aid Military Families

March 20th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) joined Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) today in reintroducing the “Military Retiree Survivor Benefit Equity Act.” This legislation would allow qualifying surviving spouses of military service members to receive survivor annuities—without being offset—from both the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and the Department of Defense.

“America owes a great debt of gratitude to our professional service members. It is important to remember that years of devoted service also affects not only service members, but their families. This legislation will ensure that surviving military spouses are guaranteed access to the benefits that were earned and purchased by the service of their loved one,” Hagel said.

Currently, when a retired service member passes away from a service-related disability, the surviving spouse may be eligible to receive 1) Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) paid by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs and 2) Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) which is paid by the Department of Defense. Under current law, DIC payments to surviving spouses are deducted from their SBP payments. Therefore, most surviving spouses of disabled military retirees find that their DIC payments cancel out their SBP benefits. This legislation would allow surviving spouses who qualify for both to receive full DIC and SBP payments. Hagel and Bill Nelson introduced similar legislation in the 109th Congress.

Q & A Time

2007-03-19T22:00:00.000-05:00

OK - well there seems to be a lull in postable material, so I am opening this up to a Q & A "time." Ask me what you want to know about Hagel and I will do my best to help answer it.

Hagel Praises Plan to Establish an Immigration Court in Omaha

2007-03-19T21:46:00.000-05:00

Hagel Praises Plan to Establish an Immigration Court in Omaha

March 16th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) plan to establish an Immigration Court in Omaha, Nebraska:

“This is important news for Nebraska. The establishment of this court will provide better access to due process for those who have come to the U.S. legally and improve efficiency in the enforcement of our immigration laws,” Hagel said.

Senator Hagel has strongly supported this effort and worked with the Department of Justice to help establish an immigration court in Omaha.

Editorial: Hagel Will Sell Well In the Heartland

2007-03-17T01:22:00.001-05:00

Editorial: Hagel Will Sell Well In the Heartland

In every presidential primary, Republican or Democrat, each party's dominant wing (right for Republicans, left for Democrats) are courted heavily.

Take the Republicans. Even if the vast majority of Republican voters are not strongly conservative in the Republican primaries, those conservatives are highly prized because they always vote and are passionate enough to get others to vote.

So every Republican who wants to have a chance of victory is talking conservatives' language on social issues and foreign policy in anticipation of next year's primary contests. Even former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is trying to convince wary conservatives that his liberal advocacy on issues ranging from abortion to gun control to gay rights is behind him now.

What a relief for supporters of U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) that their man doesn't have to try so hard to convince conservatives that he is one of them. On abortion issues, Hagel has a sterling pro-life record in the U.S. Senate. The same is true on issues involving family values like marriage to a defense of the Second Amendment.

Moreover, Hagel is a strong anti-tax Republican who wants a balanced budget. And as for his stand against some of the strategy leading up to the Iraq war and the blunders caused in it, Hagel always comes in the name of the soldiers themselves--and a more sensible, effective foreign policy to fight terrorism worldwide.

This is the kind of common-sense conservatism that appeals to both the social conservatives and the traditional, anti-tax conservatives in the Republican Party. More importantly for the GOP as it looks for a winner nationally in what will be a very close election in 2008, Hagel's common sense will resonate with the general voting public in both parties.

Rural states similar to Nebraska, like West Virginia, are as much traditional as they are conservative. Their voters want someone who understands rural issues. Given West Virginia's rise to prominence in the electoral college tally in 2000, putting George W. Bush over the top, look for candidates like Hagel to put in some time in states like West Virginia where they have natural common ground.

Hagel can do well nationally, both in the primaries and the general election, in rural states like West Virginia. Hagel's straight-talking yet always-respectful style will be appreciated here.

The American people may be ready for a "Steady Eddie," a fresh face with a solid record of achievement in the U.S. Senate, and a seasoned leader with an intimate understanding of our nation's military, foreign policy, and what makes the private sector hum. If so, the Republicans would be wise to put forward a midwestern statesman this time around for President: U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel.

Why not Hagel, GOP needs something new

2007-03-17T01:16:00.000-05:00

Why not Hagel or Thompson, GOP needs something new
By E.J. Dionne Jr

WHY NOT Chuck Hagel? For that matter, why not Fred Thompson? For Republicans, 2008 promises to be a disconcerting if exciting year because for the first time since the 1964 Goldwater insurgency, the party is struggling over its philosophical direction.

The old conservatism is in crisis, Bush Republicanism (of the son's variety but not the father's) is a tainted brand, and no candidate has emerged as the Next New Thing that the party wants or needs.

That's why Hagel, the Nebraska senator and Iraq war critic, suggested Monday that he might seek the presidency.

Read the rest at... http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/local/states/california/16908022.htm

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing Statement

2007-03-16T21:39:00.000-05:00

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing Statement by U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel on the Nomination of Ambassador Zalmay Kahlizad to be the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations

March 15th, 2007 -
“Mr. Chairman, it is my privilege today to introduce Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad for a third time to this Committee. In October 2003, I introduced Ambassador Khalilzad as the President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan. In June 2005, I introduced him as the President's nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq. Today, following his distinguished service in Kabul and Baghdad, Ambassador Khalilzad returns to this Committee as the President's nominee to be the next U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations.

It is not surprising that the President has chosen Ambassador Khalilzad to lead our efforts at the United Nations at this critical time. In recent years, he has filled two of the most difficult diplomatic posts in our nation's history. As Ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan, Khalilzad served under conditions that could have easily overwhelmed even the most gifted diplomat. Instead, he has earned a reputation as an agile and credible mediator in a region complicated by tribal, religious, and sectarian divisions. His deep understanding of the Middle East has been a vital asset, and we are grateful for his service.

Though the challenges of Iraq today are daunting and its future still deeply uncertain, Ambassador Khalilzad’s tenure in Iraq was marked by important milestones. After arriving in Baghdad in June 2005, Ambassador Khalilzad led our efforts to help the fledgling Iraqi government move forward in the political reconciliation process. He was central in facilitating the tough compromises that led to the ratification of Iraq’s Constitution in October 2005 and a successful national election in December 2005. At the end of his tenure, Iraq’s Council of Ministers approved a national oil law that, if adopted by the Iraqi Council of Representatives, will play a key role for Iraq’s future. Ambassador Khalilzad’s accomplishments in Afghanistan were equally impressive. During his tenure, Afghanistan held its first national free and fair elections in the nation's history and established a new government. He led U.S. efforts to help establish Afghan security forces and oversaw U.S. reconstruction assistance, allowing the Afghan people hope for new economic opportunities.

Ambassador Khalilzad will now fill a critical role as Ambassador to the United Nations. As members of this Committee are aware, the United Nations has its limitations and is imperfect. Over the past year, some improvements, such as stronger internal oversight capacity and the establishment of a UN ethics office, have been made... but further reform is needed. Institutional reform – with the goal of making the UN more effective and credible – should be one of the top priorities of our new Ambassador. It will require building durable consensus among member states. This is difficult and takes time. But it will not be accomplished without strong, wise and respected U.S. leadership.

Ambassador Khalilzad will find a partner in this effort in the new Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, who has already signaled his commitment to greater transparency, accountability, and effectiveness at the United Nations. The world needs an effective and engaged UN today as much as any time since its creation.

I want to also recognize Ambassador Khalilzad's son, Alexander. Alexander was an intern in my office a few years ago, and now attends Stanford Law School. Ambassador Khalilzad's wife, Cheryl Benard, and their other son, Maximilian, are unfortunately not able to join us today.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly endorse Ambassador Khalilzad's nomination to be the next U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and enthusiastically recommend him to this Committee.

Thank you.”

Comment Rules

2007-03-16T14:16:00.000-05:00

I had opened up comments to be posted freely - because so far the comments had been productive and appropriate; however, earlier today this privilege was abused, so I have now put comments to a setting that they must be approved by me first. I would now like to set down some ground rules:

Please refrain from swearing
Please do not advertise for unrelated websites.
Please do not advertise for other politicians not relevant to the present topic.
Please respect other posters.
I will delete any comments that violate these rules. If the comment is productive, I will repost it under my name, with the inappropriate material censored out.

Wineke: Hagel would make the best president

2007-03-15T20:15:00.000-05:00

Wineke: Hagel would make the best president
BILL WINEKE

Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel may announce his candidacy for president today, and I hope he's successful.

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that Hagel is the best person to run this country for the next few years.

Read more at... http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/column/index.php?ntid=122930&ntpid=2.

Senator Hagel's Brother, Tom, says, "I would expect him...to throw his hat in the ring"

2007-03-15T20:11:00.000-05:00

Sen. Hagel’s brother: ‘It’s just a matter of time’
Tom Hagel served with his brother in Vietnam; says Chuck will likely run

Earlier Monday, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) announced that he would make a decision about his political future later in the year. Later, Tom Hagel, who served in Vietnam with his brother, told Hardball whether he thinks his brother will end up running for president.

Read more at... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17584840/.

Hagel Cosponsors Bill to Exempt Manure from EPA Regulation

2007-03-13T20:21:00.000-05:00

I debated whether to post this, but figured that it affects Michigan enough, so...

Hagel Cosponsors Bill to Exempt Manure from EPA Regulation

March 8th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) will join a bipartisan group of Senators today in reintroducing legislation that would exempt animal manure from being subject to regulations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund. The Superfund regulations are administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This legislation would exempt animal manure from being subject to regulations under CERCLA, and ensure that Superfund regulations are not applied to animal feeding, farming and ranching operations.

“Animal manure is rich in nutrients and valuable for crop production. It is not responsible to subject producers to this burdensome regulation. This is common-sense legislation that will benefit Nebraska’s agricultural producers while maintaining the necessary environmental safeguards,” Hagel said.

There have been recent attempts, through litigation, to place farms under EPA cleanup and liability provisions, which would restrict the use of manure in agricultural operations. Manure has been used as a fertilizer by Nebraska’s agriculture producers for generations. Additionally, the agriculture industry already operates under strict federal and state guidelines regulating water, soil and air quality.

Hagel cosponsored similar legislation in the 109th Congress.

Hagel's Speech: "I will make a decision on my political future later this year"

2007-03-12T19:36:00.000-05:00

As you all know, Hagel had a press conference earlier today. He was expected to make an announcement regarding his decision about 2008; however, he decided that he was going to hold off on announcing for now. This came as a shock to many, but he is keeping his options open, and has launched his official website: www.hagel08.com. Check it out!

Here's Hagel's speech from earlier today:

"America stands at an historic crossroads in its history. It is against this backdrop that I find myself at my own crossroads on my political future. Burdened by two wars, faced with dangerous new threats and global uncertainty, beset by serious long-term domestic problems and divided by raw political partisanship—America now reaches for a national consensus of purpose. America’s response to the challenges and opportunities that confront us today will define our future. Finding solutions to these challenges and capitalizing on these opportunities will not wait until the next election.

I have worked hard over the last ten years on foreign policy and national security issues, climate change and energy, education, entitlement reform, especially Social Security reform, health care, veterans benefits, GSE reform, and immigration reform. This year will be an important year for these critical issues– and I intend to offer new initiatives on each of them. I want to give these and other subjects my full attention over the next few months. I believe it is in the interests of my Nebraska constituents and this country that I continue to work full time on these challenges.
America is facing its most divisive and difficult issue since Vietnam—the war in Iraq, an issue that I have been deeply involved in. I want to keep my focus on helping find a responsible way out of this tragedy, and not divert my energy, efforts and judgment with competing political considerations.

I am here today to announce that my family and I will make a decision on my political future later this year.

In making this announcement, I believe there will still be political options open to me at a later date. But that will depend on the people of Nebraska and this country. I cannot control that and I do not worry about it. I will continue to participate in events across this country, raising money for my Political Action Committee to assist Republican candidates, and raising funds for a Senate re-election campaign.

In conclusion, I would first like to commend my colleagues who are currently seeking their Party’s presidential nomination. I admire each of them for their willingness to put themselves on the line and pursue their strong beliefs and ideals.

I believe the political currents in America are more unpredictable today than at any time in modern history. We are experiencing a political re-orientation, a redefining and moving toward a new political center of gravity. This movement is bigger than both parties. The need to solve problems and meet challenges is overtaking the ideological debates of the last three decades—as it should. America is demanding honest, competent and accountable governance.

A global political readjustment is also in play today...and will respond to America’s leadership. What is at stake for the future of America is larger than just American politics. Politics is simply the mechanism democracies use to affect responsible change. The world is not static, it is dynamic.

At the beginning of my remarks I said that America is reaching for a national consensus of purpose. We will find it because Americans expect it and will demand it. I do not believe America’s greatness is lost to the 20th Century. There are chapters of America’s greatness yet to be written. I intend to continue being part of America’s story."

A video of the speech is available at: www.pagingpower.blogspot.com.

Here's an article from Huntington News:
EDITORIAL: Hagel Will Make 2008 an Adventure

U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) has led what some would call an adventuresome life: helping to fight the Vietnam War, some serious success as a businessman and entrepreneur, and one of the most respected, independent political voices at the nation's capitol.

He could cash in his chips right now and leave a hero. Or perhaps opt for a significant appointment in the next administration like Colin Powell chose to do, perhaps to his regret.

But increasingly, Senator Hagel sounds like a Republican Presidential candidate, and when one surveys the field of likely candidates in parties, no one else has the blend of experience, the understanding of war, and the pulse of the American people like Senator Hagel does.

Nobody.

Hagel was the first Republican to question whether the Iraq War was heading in the right track. He courageously asked questions nobody else would ask -- in either party -- of this administration's key foreign policy decision. Having seen war up close, Hagel is neither afraid to prosecute a just war, nor is he patient with bland excuses for warfare that seems to be listless and meaningful only in the number of casualties.

The man who is both comfortable with power but responsible and judicious in its use is who American needs now. Like George Washington, who always returned his power back to the people who gave it to him, Senator Hagel appears to have the integrity to be trusted with power in next year's election and beyond.

We hope he runs--for the sake of our country and the world. Those who have the audacity to question Senator Hagel for merely raising the most obvious of questions about a failed strategy need to get a serious reality check--and to check out the continued drumbeat of the public opinion polls.

Hagel is a man whose time has come -- because he's one of us. He understands the price of war and how to prosecute a necessary military conflict effectively. How?

Because he does his homework and casts a wide net for advice.

An Official Hagel Site Is Now Up!

2007-03-12T18:52:00.000-05:00

Head over to www.hagel08.com and check it out. Perhaps you'd be interested in contributing some $$$ or signing up to volunteer.

Watch Chuck Make His Announcement Live!

2007-03-10T22:57:00.000-05:00

The Leavenworth Street blog has the details on how to catch Chuck Hagel's annoucement live on Monday:

For those of you who can’t wait for the online news updates to Chuck Hagel’s 10:00 AM CDT Monday “announcement”, three of the local Omaha TV stations will provide streaming video of the event live on their websites.
They are:
WOWT.com
Action3news.com
KETV.com
In addition, you can listen to the announcement on your computer as well
via radio stations KFAB or KKAR’s websites.

Due to my school schedule (and recent network problems at my school), I will not have a post until 12:00 P.M. EDT (I've never said that this early in the year!) or as late as 4:30 P.M. EDT.

Lawmakers: Hagel's Announcement Could Create Ripple

2007-03-09T23:59:00.001-05:00

Lawmakers: Hagel's Announcement Could Create Ripple
State Senators Watching Hagel Closely

LINCOLN, Neb. -- Nebraska U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel's decision whether to run for president is being watched closely in Nebraska's statehouse.

Lawmakers said on Friday that whatever Hagel announces Monday morning, it could send a ripple effect throughout the state's political landscape.

"It will shake things up, because anytime you have an open seat in a high-profile position like that, a lot of people who are ambitious are going to look at it," said state Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln.

Read the rest at...http://www.ketv.com/news/11215808/detail.html

Hagel's Future...America Waits to Find Out

2007-03-08T20:42:00.000-05:00

Speculation About Hagel Announcement Begins

Speculation ran rampant today about just what Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) will announce during a planned news conference early next week.

Hagel's options include a bid for the 2008 presidential nomination as either a Republican or an independent, a re-election race to the seat he has held since 1996 or retirement from elected office.

Most Republican observers believe that Hagel will announce a bid for the Republican presidential nomination on Monday in Omaha, but warn that he largely keeps his own counsel, making it difficult to predict his plans.

Read more at...http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/08/AR2007030801479.html

Could Hagel Run As An Independent?
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) -- U-S Senator Chuck Hagel's anti-war stance and other issues could point to the possibility that he might run for president as an independent.

That's the word from Ross Baker, a congressional scholar at Rutgers University who served as a senior adviser to Hagel in 2000.

Read more at...http://www.ktiv.com/News/index.php?ID=10892

Hagel to announce political plans Monday

2007-03-07T18:36:00.000-05:00

Hagel to announce political plans Monday
BY JAKE THOMPSON AND ROBYNN TYSVER
WORLD-HERALD STAFF WRITERS

WASHINGTON - Sen. Chuck Hagel, who's long been considering whether to run for the White House, will announce his political plans in Omaha on Monday, his office announced Wednesday.

Nebraska Sen. Chuck HagelThe Nebraska Republican will hold a 10 a.m. press conference at the University of Nebraska at Omaha.

He will speak in Bootstrapper Memorial Hall at UNO's William H. and Dorothy Thompson Alumni Center, his office said.

Hagel's spokesman, Mike Buttry, declined to offer any details about what Hagel will announce. He said only that it would be "a news conference regarding his future plans."

Hagel has a number of options.

He could launch a presidential campaign; he could file paperwork for an exploratory presidential committee; he could set up that committee without making a full commitment to a 2008 presidential bid; he could take a step toward the race but delay a formal decision until later; or he could decide not to run.

He also might discuss whether he will seek re-election to a third term in the Senate next year when his current term expires.

Several key Republicans, speaking on the condition of anonymity, speculated this week that Hagel may defer making a final decision on a presidential bid until September. In the meantime, he could leave open the possibility of seeking a third Senate term.

Under that scenario, Hagel could see how the current field of presidential candidates fares on the campaign trail before he makes a final decision.

That would be similar to what Newt Gingrich is doing. The former U.S. House speaker from Georgia has said he will wait until the fall to decide whether to enter the presidential race.

Already, 18 Republicans and Democrats are running for president in what is shaping up to be a lengthy and hotly contested showdown.

They include Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Republican; Sen. Hillary Clinton, the former first lady and now Democratic senator from New York, and Sen. Barak Obama, D-Ill.

Other Republican hopefuls include former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado, former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson, former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore, Texas Rep. Ron Paul and Rep. Duncan Hunter of California.

Other Democrats include New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and former Sen. Mike Gravel of Washington.

After Monday's announcement, Hagel is scheduled to appear at a Nebraska GOP fundraiser in Washington on Tuesday. On Wednesday, he will speak at a presidential forum hosted by the International Association of Fire Fighters in Washington.

That forum included 10 politicians from both parties an opportunity to speak for 30 minutes to an influential and bipartisan labor union. At this point, Hagel is the only one of the 10 who hasn't launched a full-fledged presidential campaign.

He also plans to speak March 28 to the Building and Construction Trades Department, an alliance of craft unions.

Is Hagel The Credible Conservative Candidate?

2007-03-06T22:41:00.000-05:00

Here is a GREAT article from the Cyclone Conservatives:
Is Hagel The Credible Conservative Candidate?

There seems to be a lot of media discussion lately claiming that the GOP has not yet found a top tier conservative candidate to rally around yet. Personally, I think that discussion would fold away if Newt Gingrich got into the race, but that is either unlikely to happen until this fall or not at all ever.

The candidate that everyone thought would have that mantle was George Allen from Virginia. But the now former Senator nearly completely killed his political career by making one major gaffe last summer.

Now, we've got Mayor Rudy Giuliani who seems to have a tough hawkish stance on foreign policy which many red blooded conservatives really like but he's got a plethora of social issue problems which red blooded conservatives really don't like.

John McCain actually has a pretty conservative record on social and fiscal issues, but it is his tendency towards being a maverick and his 'moderate' media created tag that has scared off many. Joining with Ted Kennedy on immigration, Russ Feingold on campaign finance reform, and leading judicially comprimising 'Gang of 14' has a lot of conservatives uneasy. However, he's also probably the toughest hawk on terrorism in the race and that is where he is gaining a lot of traction.

Mitt Romney could be the guy and then again many conservatives still don't know who he is and if the Mitt from the debate footage from 1994 and 2002 is still the Mitt of 2007. He claims that he was wrong then, but that hasn't settled a lot of fears and for right now, his campaign hasn't been picking up as much momentum as it could be as a result. Additionally, the Mormonism is likely to still be dogging him.

Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Sam Brownback of Kansas are still relatively unknown to a lot of people nationwide and therefore they just have not been getting the kind of media coverage that the others have been. Brownback tends to be one of the more conservative members of the United States Senate, though he has now become a lot more of a dove on foreign policy and that is causing him problems. Huckabee could by dynamic but he's got some immigration problems and there are plenty of questions about whether or not he'll be able to raise the kind of money it takes to win.

Tommy Thompson is perhaps as thorough of a campaigner as anybody but he just hasn't gotten that 'buzz' yet. There's no doubt that Thompson could be the most all around conservative candidate in the race but he, like Brownback and Huckabee, has not yet captured the national attention. I am convinced that Thompson is going to do well in Iowa because he's very folksy, looks like a common Iowan, and is extraordinarily intelligent. Thompson is still just 2nd tier for right now though he is moving up the ranks faster than anyone.

Tom Tancredo is definitely conservative but he has yet to fully introduce himself to Iowans and there are many who wonder if he is just getting into the race in order to force a more aggressive debate about our immigration policies.

Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul are both well respected members of Congress but are they just don't have the buzz nor have they been to Iowa much. For now, they are back in the pack a little bit.

John Cox and Jim Gilmore are definitely very conservative guys but they are constantly surrounded by question marks as to whether they have the name recognition to win.

So, there is definitely no ideal candidate out there...YET.

And so that brings into the equation Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. If conservatives can be calmed about his dovish tendencies toward Iraq, then Hagel might be the most well-known conservative in the race.

Recently, the National Journal released their 2006 liberal/conservative scores for Senators and Congressmen. After taking into account votes based on economic, social, and foreign policy; a formula is created and the votes are plugged in.

The Result? Of the 2008 Presidential aspirants already in the race or names that are floated, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is the most conservative U.S. Senator. He just outflanks Brownback by a little bit.

Sure, Hagel bucks the President on foreign policy; but on most other issues, he totes the party line better than any of the other Senators in the race.

I, for one, would like to see Hagel get into the race. I've met Senator Hagel and heard him lecture at Iowa State in 2005. He's a very intelligent man who would bring a lot to the foreign policy debate and future of the party.

Back in December, I wrote about the Nebraska Senate Race should Hagel retire or run for President and I am confident that seat would be very safe for the GOP no matter who is running on the Republican ticket so that is not a worry for the Republicans.

I hope Hagel makes a decision soon because he quite possibly could be the credible credentialed conservative candidate to watch.
Publisher's Note: Check out those lists and see where members of the Iowa Delegation fall.

2007-03-06T16:56:00.000-05:00

Here's a recent article from Esquire:
"Before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment."
Chuck Hagel's historic moment, and what it means for a declining presidency.

And here's a recent match-up from Rasmussen Reports:
Hagel (40%) Clinton (48%)
Hagel (34%) Obama (50%)

Pretty good for not even declaring yet.

Hagel Visits Walter Reed Army Medical Center

March 5th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), former Deputy Administrator of the Veterans Administration, again visited service members recovering from war injuries this morning at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Hagel has spoken several times in the last two weeks to Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Veterans Secretary Jim Nicholson regarding Washington Post reports of dismal living conditions and Army bureaucratic entanglements hampering the recovery of soldiers at Walter Reed.

“What I saw today, as I have seen every time I have visited Walter Reed over the last four years, were injured soldiers whose spirit and commitment represents the best of America. I also saw service personnel at Walter Reed who are dedicated to helping these soldiers rebuild their lives and fixing the problems at their facility. Secretary Gates has acted with appropriate urgency and leadership to fix the problems at Walter Reed and hold those at the highest levels of military and civilian leadership accountable for the problems there. Important Congressional hearings regarding the situation at Walter Reed begin this week.

“The American people are justifiably outraged by the problems experienced at Walter Reed. The system is being overburdened by more patients than it was prepared to help. This situation will be fixed,” Hagel said.

Hagel Releases Two New Statements

2007-03-04T22:11:00.000-05:00

Hagel Statement on Announcement that the U.S., Iran and Syria will Attend Talks in Baghdad

February 27th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Iraqi Foreign Minister announced today that Iran and Syria will join U.S. and British envoys at a meeting in Baghdad next month to seek ways to stabilize Iraq. U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) has repeatedly called for regional talks to address the situation in Iraq. Hagel released the following statement today in reaction to the announcement:

“This is an important diplomatic initiative taken by the Iraqi government. We will not achieve peace and stability in Iraq without a regional framework that includes Iran and Syria. This conference can be an important first step towards creating that framework,” Hagel said.

Hagel Statement on Congressional Commission on National Guard and Reserve’s Report that 90 Percent of Army National Guard Units are rated “not ready”

March 1st, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) released the following statement today regarding a report published by the Congressional Commission on the National Guard and Reserve’s Report that concluded 90 percent of Army National Guard Units are rated “not ready.” The report details the Guard’s struggles with equipment, recruitment and retention, training and funding. The Commission estimates that the National Guard would require $38 billion for equipment to restore domestic Army and Air units to full readiness:

“This report serves as a clear indication of the damage we have done to the National Guard over the last four years. As I have said, we are stretching the National Guard beyond the breaking point. It is unacceptable to ask the National Guard to take on missions for which we have not prepared or equipped them. The report’s recommendations should be seriously considered and the Administration and Congress must act now to fix these problems,” Hagel said.

Hagel's Introduction of Two New Resolutions

2007-03-04T22:05:00.000-05:00

Senators Hagel and Clinton Re-Introduce Lung Cancer Resolution

February 27th, 2007 - WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) re-introduced a resolution today calling on the President to declare lung cancer a national public health priority by increasing funding for lung cancer research, developing early detection lung cancer screening programs and appointing an advisory committee to oversee and coordinate efforts to reduce lung cancer mortality rates. Hagel and Clinton introduced a similar resolution in the 109th Congress.

“Lung cancer is the most lethal form of cancer for men and women in the United States. The American Cancer Society estimates that over 900 Nebraskans will die of lung cancer in 2007. We have made great advancements in prostate and breast cancer survival rates; we must commit ourselves to making the same progress in lung cancer survival rates,” Hagel said.

Nebraska last year was the first state in the nation to initiate a state-wide screening program for lung cancer through the Nebraska Early Detection and Information Technology [NEED-IT] program at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC).

“Lung cancer touches millions of families across America and more than 12,000 new cases are diagnosed in New York State every year. We must do our part to increase awareness of this disease and support ongoing early detection and treatment research,” Senator Clinton said.

The Hagel-Clinton legislation lays out a multi-agency action blueprint for reducing lung cancer’s high mortality rate by at least 50 percent by 2015. Both senators’ emphasized the need for a carefully coordinated approach among the federal agencies, including the Department of Health and Human Services as well as the Department of Veterans Affairs, in focusing on earlier detection and more effective treatments.

“Research in the prevention, early detection, and treatment of lung cancer is critically important in order to improve the survival from lung cancer. The Lung Cancer Resolution introduced today will help to make lung cancer research a priority and provide hope for patients who develop this disease,” said Ken Cowan, M.D., Ph.D., director of the UNMC Eppley Cancer Center.

Hagel Re-Introduces GI Enhancement Legislation

March 1st, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) today re-introduced legislation that would eliminate the current Montgomery GI Bill’s $1,200 enrollment fee for active duty members of the military, including Reserve and National Guard members. Hagel introduced similar legislation in the 108th and 109th Congresses.

“The demands on America’s service members and their families have been significantly increased with the threats of the 21st century. The Montgomery GI Bill must be updated to ensure that it is relevant to the sacrifices our service members are making. There can be no higher priority for America than our soldiers and their families,” Hagel said.

The Montgomery GI Bill Enhancement Act of 2007 covers any member of the United States military, including Reserve and National Guard members, serving on active duty during the period after President Bush’s November 2001 Executive Order that placed the military on a wartime footing. Hagel’s bill would:

• Waive the GI Bill enrollment fee until President Bush’s November 2001 Executive Order is rescinded;

• Allow all servicemen and women who have served or are serving on active duty since November 2001 to opt into the GI Bill with no penalty or enrollment fee; and

• Reimburse those servicemen and women who entered service after President Bush’s November 2001 Executive Order and paid the $1,200 enrollment fee.

2007-03-02T17:18:00.000-05:00

Hagel’s the only real right stuff
By Brett Arends
Boston Herald Business Columnist

Conservatives should stop complaining about their choices for president. They already have a serious candidate who is to the right of Ronald Reagan - and who could actually win a general election.

If they don’t want to nominate him, that’s their problem.

Read more...http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=185687

Long-Shot Hagel May Be Republicans' Best Bet: Margaret Carlson

I don't have a quote for this one, because this editorial has to be read as a whole. Please check it out at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_carlson&sid=aWwSN1OtsBh8

Will Hagel Run as an Independent?

2007-03-02T17:03:00.000-05:00

The Real Clear Politics Blog has posted the following quote from Senator Hagel:

Q: Would you give any consideration to running as an Independent?
HAGEL:
Well, if I seek the Presidency, I would seek it as a Republican. Where all this
is going to go and how it ends up next year, whether that's possible for an
Independent to be elected President, maybe. Maybe it would be. But, right now,
I'd be focused on seeking the Republican nomination.

Hagel Talks Up Third-Party '08 Bid

Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is keeping his options open as he considers a run for the presidency.

As a Republican, he would be primarily interested in the GOP nomination. But if that isn't a realistic possibility, he'd be open to running on a hybrid ticket with a Democrat.

"If I decide to get into this, I would run not just to make a statement," Hagel, 60, said in a recent interview, according to USA Today.

The third-party option is known as Unity08, in which bipartisan political operatives use the Internet to craft a Republican-Democratic presidential ticket.

"I think it's a very intriguing enterprise," Hagel told USA Today, adding that he thinks most Americans are unhappy with the GOP and Democrats.

Hagel has become a critic of President Bush's foreign policy, although he voted in October 2002 for the authorization to go to war in Iraq.

Hagel says a troop surge in Iraq will result in "a vat of chaos." He also says America is letting its chance of winning over a "pro-American generation" of young Iranians slip away.

Such outspokenness has angered the administration. Vice President Dick Cheney told Newsweek magazine: "I believe firmly in Ronald Reagan's '11th Commandment': Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican. But it's very hard sometimes to adhere to that where Chuck Hagel is involved."

© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.

Putting off getting into the '08 race could pay off for Hagel

2007-02-28T22:31:00.000-05:00

Putting off getting into the '08 race could pay off for Hagel
BY JAKE THOMPSON AND TIM ELFRINK
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU

WASHINGTON - While Chuck Hagel has been contemplating whether to seek the presidency, 18 other politicians started running.

Two opted out of the race.

Two launched campaign efforts, then quit.

Still, Hagel ponders.

Last week, on a four-day swing through Nebraska, the Republican senator put it off again.

"We'll make that decision one of these days," he said. "And I'll let you know."

Among established politicians flirting with the 2008 race, Hagel and former New York Gov. George Pataki are the most notable prospects who have yet to reveal their plans.

Political analysts say the delay could hurt - or help.

Starting late puts Hagel at a disadvantage in raising funds, identifying supporters and putting forth a campaign message, said Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the Washington-based Rothenberg Political Report.

But if Hagel were to run, he could occupy an unusual niche, such as the anti-Iraq war Republican, Rothenberg said.

"It's getting too late, but he's a quirky candidate, so they are allowed to run quirkier campaigns," Rothenberg said.

Republican consultant Scott Reed, who was campaign manager for former Sen. Bob Dole's 1996 presidential bid, agreed that if Hagel runs, it will be a different kind of campaign.

Hagel's views on the Iraq war - he supports beginning to withdraw U.S. forces this year - puts him in line with 66 percent of Americans who, polls show, oppose the war. That could be potent fuel for a campaign, Reed said.

"He'll have a lone voice on a hot issue, and that'll be the strategy," Reed said.

Hagel has waited so long now, he's reaching a point where it might make sense to hold off, perhaps until fall, said Chuck Todd, editor of the Hotline, an electronic newsletter that tracks American politics.

That would let the other candidates spend their money, knock one another around and, perhaps, wear out their welcome, Todd suggested.

"If he waits, he becomes the new flavor."

That's the strategy adopted by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., said University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato.

"Hagel could say, 'My friend Newt Gingrich has the right idea. Let's see what this thing looks like in September,'" Sabato said.

Hagel seems to be genuinely wrestling with the decision.

Those who have spoken with him say a big concern is the potential impact a presidential campaign would have on his wife, Lilibet, and their two teenage children.

Meanwhile, rumors in Nebraska and Washington have run wild: Hagel's about to announce; he's setting up an exploratory committee; he's setting up a committee and quitting the Senate; he's sidestepping the presidential race; he's running for re-election to the Senate.

Often people ask him directly, but they don't get far. Even kids are getting into the act.

Speaking to about 90 fourth- and fifth-graders at a Kearney elementary school on Thursday, Hagel tested the waters for his presidential bid.

"Should I run?" he asked.

"Yes!" the kids screamed in unison.

"Well, maybe I'll just announce right now," he said.

"We'd like that," a teacher said.

But Hagel declined their invitation, just as he has during persistent questioning from reporters.

On a flight from Kearney to Omaha, Hagel acknowledged that his family is the biggest consideration. Specifically, he worries about a loss of privacy for his daughter, 16-year-old Allyn, and his son, Ziller, 14.

"When you commit yourself to something this big and throw yourself onto the national stage, that strips them of all privacy. I would never do this unless I had the full support of my family," he said.

He expressed confidence they could handle the challenge because, for most of their lives, he's been in politics.

"But I have to consider what this does to them as individuals. . . . Suddenly they're not Allyn and Ziller, they're just the presidential candidate's kids."

He's working through other issues, too, such as weighing his ability to raise enough money for a campaign. He says he has been encouraged by what he's heard so far.

He said he won't run unless he's confident he could win, but it's even more important to him that he feels passionately about the race.

"You have to believe in something strongly enough to commit yourself to it," he said.

As for when he'll make a move, Hagel said he's done his best not to set a specific deadline.

"I've said I'll make a decision in the next few weeks, and that's still the case."

After he first disclosed an interest in the presidential contest in August 2004, Hagel said he would decide after the 2006 elections. He repeated that through 2005 and 2006.

Interviewed the day after the Nov. 7 election, Hagel pushed the timetable back, saying: "I will announce what I intend to do regarding my political future sometime early next year."

In a Nov. 29, 2006, column, Washington Post writer David Ignatius said Hagel had indicated a formal decision would be made within two months.

After the first of the year, Hagel and his spokesman, Mike Buttry, began repeatedly saying it would come within "the next couple of weeks."

That's now seven weeks and counting.

Last Sunday, on NBC's "Meet the Press," Hagel told host Tim Russert, "I'll make a decision within a couple of weeks and make it public."

And asked Thursday whether an announcement would come before or after a trip he's planning to Iraq next month, he said it depends on when exactly the trip is scheduled.

Some Recent Articles

2007-02-28T17:11:00.000-05:00

Here are a couple recent articles that would be good to check out:

1) No False Choices: Chuck Hagel's Foreign Policy Road Map
This one's a great article to read - so make sure you get through the whole thing.

2) Hagel visits North Platte

While U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel is still undecided on whether he wants to
run for president in 2008, he remains outspoken in his opposition to the current
administration’s policy on military involvement in Iraq.

“I’ve probably been more consistent and clear and predictable on the Iraq
war than any member of Congress in the last four years,” Hagel said during a
visit to North Platte on Friday.

3) War Critic Speaks from Heart of Bush Country

KEARNEY, Neb. — Jeff Strong, a recently retired National Guardsman and
"rock-ribbed Republican," churned with conflicting emotions as he sat in an
auditorium at the University of Nebraska at Kearney, waiting for Sen. Chuck
Hagel.

Strong personifies the dilemma for many residents in this state, where
President Bush captured two-thirds of the vote in 2004. Strong is uncomfortable
with the role Hagel, the state's Republican senior senator, has taken in
criticizing Bush's war plans. "I just don't understand how his anti-war rhetoric
is helping to stabilize Iraq," said Strong, a postal worker.

TIME Magazine: 10 Questions for Chuck Hagel

2007-02-28T17:00:00.000-05:00

Here's an excerpt from a great Time Magazine article:

10 Questions for Chuck Hagel
Thursday, Feb. 22, 2007

Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), a member of the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees.
Jay L. Clendenin / Polaris

There's no less likely a hero to liberals than Nebraska's Republican Senator, who toes the party line 90% of the time. But Chuck Hagel, 60, a highly decorated Vietnam veteran, has become one of the most vocal critics in Congress of the Iraq war. He spoke with TIME's Perry Bacon Jr. about opposing President Bush's plan to send 20,000 more troops to Iraq, about whether Iraq will become another Vietnam and about presidential "wannabes."

Hagel may squeeze into field

2007-02-24T17:49:00.000-05:00

Hagel may squeeze into field

Nebraska senator opposes Iraq increase

By MEG HECKMANMonitor staff

State Sen. Bob Odell averages a phone call a day from someone curious about his old friend Chuck Hagel. Maybe they saw him on the Sunday morning talk shows, decrying President Bush's latest plan for Iraq, or perhaps they like his ideas about reducing the federal deficit.

Whatever spurs them to call, their question is usually the same: Is Hagel running for president?

As of Tuesday, Hagel, a Republican senator from Nebraska, remained undecided, telling the Monitor in a phone interview that he's a few weeks away from making a decision....

Read more of this Concord Monitor article at: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070222/REPOSITORY/702220322

Hagel Stays Mum On His 2008 Plans

2007-02-24T17:43:00.000-05:00

Hagel Stays Mum On His 2008 Plans

By: OSKAR GARCIA

Associated Press Writer

BELLEVUE, Neb. -- Sen. Chuck Hagel acknowledged Wednesday that many people already seem to assume he is intent on running for president in 2008.

"I get that reaction," Hagel said after making brief remarks and answering audience questions at Bellevue University. "I just take it as a compliment, appreciate that they would have that much confidence in me to kind of assume that."

The Nebraska Republican talked to reporters before addressing the audience of roughly 200, but did not hint at when he would make any announcement, saying only it would not come while he's in Nebraska this week.

"We'll make that decision one of these days, and I'll let you know," Hagel said.

...

Check out the full Yankton Press article at: http://www.yankton.net/stories/022207/news_5568022207.shtml

Here's an Omaha World-Herald article:

Hagel still won't say whether he's a presidential candidate

BELLEVUE, Neb. (AP) - Sen. Chuck Hagel acknowledged today that many people already seem to assume he is intent on running for president in 2008."

I get that reaction," Hagel said after making brief remarks and answering audience questions at Bellevue University. "I just take it as a compliment, appreciate that they would have that much confidence in me to kind of assume that."

The Nebraska Republican talked to reporters before addressing the audience of roughly 200, but did not hint at when he would make any announcement, saying only it would not come while he's in Nebraska this week."

We'll make that decision one of these days, and I'll let you know," Hagel said.

The senator said he will meet with Gov. Dave Heineman, state senators and others this week while the U.S. Senate is on a break that started with Presidents Day.

Hagel did answer questions about Iraq, Iran, global warming and the United States' current place in the world.

Hagel Speech on U.S.-Iran Relations at the University of Nebraska at Kearney’s Conference on World Affairs

2007-02-22T20:15:00.001-05:00

Hagel Speech on U.S.-Iran Relations at the University of Nebraska at Kearney’s Conference on World Affairs

February 22nd, 2007 - KEARNEY, NE - Below is the text of the speech United States Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) delivered today on U.S. - Iran relations at the University of Nebraska at Kearney’s James E. Smith Conference on World Affairs.

“It is an honor for me to be here today at one of Nebraska’s most important and prestigious institutions. For over 100 years, UNK has provided opportunities for Nebraska’s young people and prepared them to be successful and productive citizens. I attended Kearney State in 1965 and my nephew, Josh Hagel, is currently a student at UNK, although Josh’s grade point average is much better than mine.

In my eleven years in the Senate, I’ve had several UNK graduates on my staff and serve as interns in my offices. In fact, my State Director, Todd Wiltgen...the Director of my Kearney office, Julie Brooker...and Jared Blanton in my press office in Washington, DC...are all Kearney natives and UNK graduates. All have served Nebraska with commitment and distinction and I am grateful for their good work.

Thank you for inviting me to the James E. Smith Conference on World Affairs. This Conference has been a source of pride for UNK and Nebraska since it was initiated in 1964. The three goals of the Conference: to introduce important global issues to the students and local community; to expose conference participants to a variety of viewpoints from other countries; and to promote international education...are more important today than at any time in our history. When I attended Kearney State in 1965, the world was far less complicated than it is today. But the world’s new challenges offer us historic new opportunities. If the world is to successfully meet these new challenges, it will require a deep and clear understanding of the world in which we are all competing. That is the value of this conference. Information and shared understanding enhance our understanding and prepare us to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.

I want to speak today about a subject that I know is very much on the minds of Americans...and the world...America’s relationship with the Middle East and in particular Iran. This relationship is at the center of some of the most important strategic challenges that America faces today and in the future...energy security...America’s relationship with the Islamic world...and the future of the greater Middle East. Many of the world’s historic and vital interests intersect in the Middle East.

Today, the Middle East is more combustible and dangerous than any time in modern history. It is experiencing political upheaval driven by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, religious and ethnic differences, radical Islamic fundamentalism, terrorism, despair and the war in Iraq.

Forces and events in the Middle East cannot be neatly categorized. The swirl of Middle East history creates layers upon layers of complexity. There is little transparency in the Middle East. That is a reality that is inescapable and cannot be assumed away. To ignore this reality is to risk being trapped by false choices....false choices such as the question, “which is worse – Iran with nuclear weapons or war with Iran?”

These are not our only choices in dealing with the Middle East and Iran. Diplomatic initiatives, UN mandates, regional cooperation, security frameworks, and economic incentives are part of the mix of international possibilities that must be employed to comprehensively address the challenges of the Middle East.

We will fail to protect and advance America’s interests – in the Middle East and around the world – if we allow ourselves to be trapped in a self-constructed world based not on reality but on flawed assumptions and flawed judgment leading to flawed policy and dangerous miscalculations.

The United States must approach the Middle East with a clear understanding of the complexities of the region. Our strategic policies must be regional in scope…integrating Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, violent Islamic extremism, access to energy supplies, and political reform into a comprehensive policy equation. This should be developed through consultation, cooperation, and coordination with our regional allies Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and Israel. This will require a new regional diplomatic and economic framework to work within...a new Middle East frame of reference.

Secretary Rice’s recent trip to the Middle East...her fourth trip in five months...is encouraging. However, the focus of the United States on the Middle East must be comprehensive, sustained, and at the highest levels of all the governments involved. This will require a new disciplined follow-through from the Bush Administration that we have not yet seen. I have suggested a Presidential Envoy be appointed to represent the President in the day-to-day bolting together of a Middle East peace process that can win the support of all parties involved.

In the Middle East of the 21st Century, Iran will be a key center of gravity...a significant regional power. The United States cannot change that reality. America’s strategic 21st century regional policy for the Middle East must acknowledge the role of Iran today and over the next 25 years.

To acknowledge that reality in no way confuses Iran’s dangerous, destabilizing and threatening behavior in the region. Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism and provides material support to Hezbollah, Hamas and other terrorist groups. Iran publicly threatens Israel and is developing the capacity to produce nuclear weapons. Iran has not helped stabilize the current chaos in Iraq and is responsible for weapons and explosives being used against U.S. and Iraqi military forces in Iraq.

Iran must be held accountable for its actions. These actions by Iran are one part of a complicated picture of a country with a three thousand year history, governed by a complex and opaque political structure, burdened by a stagnating economy, and located in a geostrategically unstable region.

As Tom Friedman described in his New York Times column last month, Iran is a country that “regularly holds sort-of-free elections”...where “women vote, hold office, are the majority of its university students, and are fully integrated in the work force”...and whose residents “were among the very few in the Muslim world to hold spontaneous pro-U.S. demonstrations” on September 11, 2001. Friedman is correct in his observation that, “the hostility between Iran and the United States since the overthrow of the shah in 1979 is not organic. By dint of culture, history and geography, we actually have a lot of interests in common with Iran’s people.”

Iran has cooperated with the United States on Afghanistan to help the Afghans establish a new government after the Taliban was ousted. Iran continues to invest heavily in the reconstruction of western Afghanistan.

On Afghanistan, the United States and Iran found common interests – defeating the Taliban and Islamic radicals, stabilizing Afghanistan, stopping the opium production and flow of opium coming into Iran. From these common interests emerged common actions working toward a common purpose. It was in the interests of Iran to work with the U.S. in Afghanistan. It was not a matter of helping America or strengthening America’s presence in Central Asia. It was a clear-eyed and self-serving action for Iran.

Complex sets of factors drive the dynamics inside Iran as well as Iran’s actions in the Middle East.

Iran is not monolithic. Iran is governed by competing centers of power. The President and the parliament – known as the Majles – are elected. But it is the Supreme Council, lead by the Supreme Leader...currently Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei...who serves as the Commander in Chief and has formal authority over Iran’s armed forces and foreign policy. Ayatollah Khamenei has the power to dismiss Iran’s President. A separate elected body – the Assembly of Experts – selects...and has the power to dismiss...the Supreme Leader. Yet another body – the Council of Guardians – screens presidential and parliamentary candidates, and reviews laws passed by the Majles. A third body – the Expediency Council – arbitrates disputes between the Council of Guardians and the Majles. Finally, the principal government and clerical officials from all of these entities have a seat on the Supreme National Security Council.

Power and influence in Iran evolve and shift...and are difficult to understand. Supreme Leader Khamenei did not support President Ahmadinejad’s presidential bid. In December 2006, Ahmadinejad’s supporters suffered major defeats in elections for municipal councils and the Assembly of Experts. Last month, an Iranian newspaper owned by Ayatollah Khamenei admonished Ahmadinejad to remove himself from the nuclear issue.

Two-thirds of Iran’s population is under the age of 30. Iran is undergoing a generational shift that will shape Iran’s outlook...and its opinions of the United States...for decades to come. Iran’s young people use the internet in large numbers, wear American jeans, listen to American music and are positive about America and the West. We do not want to lose this pro-American generation by turning them away from us. They are the hope of Iran. They bristle under the heavy yoke of the Ayatollahs’ strident limitations of personal freedom.

Our understanding of Iran is limited and incomplete. We have not had formal diplomatic relations with Iran for nearly three decades. Diplomatic contact at all levels is severely limited. We have no constructive military contact. Economic ties remain essentially severed as well. There is deep distrust and suspicion on both sides regarding intentions and motivations.

Put simply, the United States and Iran do not know one another. This unfamiliarity, distrust, and lack of engagement risks producing disastrous consequences. When countries do not engage, the risk of misperception based on faulty judgments spawns uninformed and dangerous decisions.

The United States needs to weigh very carefully its actions regarding Iran. In a hazy, hair-triggered environment, careless rhetoric and military movements that one side may believe are required to demonstrate resolve and strength...can be misinterpreted as preparations for military options. The risk of inadvertent conflict because of miscalculation is great.

The United States must be cautious and wise not to follow the same destructive path on Iran as we did on Iraq. We blundered into Iraq because of flawed intelligence, flawed assumptions, flawed judgments, and questionable intentions.

The United States must find a new regional diplomatic strategy to deal with Iran that integrates our regional allies, military power and economic leverage.

As Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the President’s nominee to be the next U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, responded last week to my question regarding Iran before the Senator Foreign Relations Committee, “Iran should be engaged.” He then went on to condition that engagement.

As the 2006 Baker-Hamilton report on Iraq concluded, “The United States should engage directly with Iran and Syria in order to try to obtain their commitment to constructive policies toward Iraq and other regional issues.”

As the 2004 Council on Foreign Relations report on Iran co-chaired by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski concluded, “It is in the interests of the United States to engage selectively with Iran to promote regional stability, dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons, preserve reliable energy supplies, reduce the threat of terror, and address the ‘democracy deficit’ that pervades the Middle East as a whole.”

Our differences with Iran are very real. However, by refusing to engage Iran, we are perpetuating dangerous geo-political unpredictabilities. Our refusal to recognize Iran’s influence does not decrease its influence, but rather increases it. Engagement creates dialogue and opportunities to identify common interests, demonstrate America’s strengths, as well as make clear disagreements. Diplomacy is an essential tool in world affairs using it where possible to ratchet down the pressure of conflict and increase the leverage of strength.

Last December, Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki announced that his government would convene a regional conference to strengthen regional support for the stability and security of Iraq. All of Iraq’s neighbors, including Iran and Syria, as well as other key regional and international states and organizations should be encouraged to actively and constructively participate.

A regional conference led by Iraq would be an opportunity for the United States to engage Iran, with an agenda that is open to all areas of agreement and disagreement.

Last month, Dr. Abbas Milani, the co-Director of the Iran Democracy Project at the Hoover Institute, testified before the House Foreign Relations Committee, saying:

“The US should offer to negotiate with Iran on all the outstanding issues. Comprehensive negotiations are not a "grand bargain." Instead such negotiations can offer [Iran’s leaders] powerful inducements, such as a lifting the economic embargo and even establishing diplomatic ties. But contrary to the "grand bargain" suggestion, central to such negotiations must be the issue of the human rights of the Iranian people. Contrary to the masses of nearly all other Muslim nations, and contrary to the declining popularity of the US in the world, Iranian people are favorably disposed towards the United States. An offer of serious, frank discussions with the regime on all of these issues will, regardless of whether the regime accepts or rejects the offer, be a win-win situation for the United States, for the Iranian democrats and for the existing UN coalition against the regime's adventurism.”

There will be no stability in the Middle East until the broader interests of Iran, the region and the world are addressed.

The United States must be resolute and clear-headed in our dealings with Iran....just as the Administration has been in the latest round of the Six Party Talks regarding North Korea’s nuclear weapons. The agreement that Assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill reached on February 13 with his colleagues from China, North Korea, South Korea, Japan and Russia reflects the power of adept diplomacy, supported through regional coordination, strengthened by financial pressure, and our military presence in South Korea, Japan and across the Asia-Pacific region.

The United States must employ similar, wise statecraft to redirect deepening Middle East tensions toward a higher ground of resolution. We must be clear that the United States does not seek regime change in Iran. We must be clear that our objections are to the actions of the Iranian government...not the Iranian people. Our decisions to deploy a second carrier battlegroup and other military assets into the Persian Gulf as well as the decision to target Iranian military assistance flowing into Iraq should be coupled with a clear and credible commitment to diplomatically engage Iran. America must have a strategic and comprehensive Middle East framework of resolution using all the levers of influence available to the U.S. and its allies.

The United States must be prepared to act boldly and exploit opportunities to re-frame our relationship with Iran. Engagement should not be limited to government-to-government contact...but rather find new and imaginative ways to reach out to the Iranian people. Part of that initiative could be offering to re-open a consulate in Tehran...not formal diplomatic relations...but a Consulate...to help encourage and facilitate people-to-people exchange. All nations of Europe and most of our allies in the Middle East and Asia have diplomatic relations with Iran.

The failure of Iran to comply with yesterday’s UN Security Council deadline to halt its uranium enrichment activities should be an opportunity for the United States to reaffirm and expand the international consensus to address Iran’s nuclear program. The will of the international community gives credibility to its demands of Iran.

As Dr. Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, wrote in the Washington Post last November:

“A diplomacy that excludes adversaries is a contradiction in terms...Diplomacy – especially with an adversary – can succeed only if it brings about a balance of interests...To evoke a more balanced view should be an important goal for U.S. diplomacy. Iran may come to understand sooner or later that, for the foreseeable future, it is a relatively poor developing country in no position to challenge all the industrialized nations. But such an evolution presupposes the development of a precise and concrete strategic and negotiating program by the United States and its associates.”

Without a wise and integrated strategy, we risk drifting into conflict with Iran.

America’s military might alone will not bring stability and security...to the Middle East. That is an enduring fact of international relations that the late President Ronald Reagan understood well.

Throughout his eight years as President, the United States and the Soviet Union were locked in a global struggle, the Cold War. It was a war fought using containment, alliances, and political, diplomatic, economic and military power. Yet, nuclear war was averted and no shot was ever fired between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.

President Reagan was always clear and resolute that the Soviet Union was our foe....that deep, fundamental differences divided the United States and the Soviet Union. He referred to the Soviet Union as the “evil empire.”

In a speech before the National Association of Evangelicals on March 8, 1983, President Reagan said:

“I urge you to beware the temptation of pride - the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault - to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”

Yet it was President Reagan who, in 1986, almost reached an agreement with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to abolish nuclear weapons. President Reagan understood the need for America to engage...to understand our friends and our adversaries...to explore our options...to identify common interests. President Reagan understood that great powers engage because they are secure in their beliefs and purpose but humble and wise in their policies and actions.

The United States must have a policy on Iran...on Iraq...on the broader Middle East...that the American people understand, and will trust and support. Our words and our actions must seek to make America more secure, and the world more peaceful and prosperous. The world must know that, like all sovereign nations, the United States will defend itself and its interests, but that military conflict will always be the last resort.

The American people are deeply concerned about our direction in the Middle East. The American people expect and deserve a strategy that shows prospects for resolution. A U.S. military conflict with Iran would inflame the Middle East and global Muslim populations, crippling U.S. security, political, economic and strategic interests worldwide. I do not believe that the American people will believe that such an outcome improves America’s security, stability and prosperity.

America cannot sustain political, diplomatic, economic or military engagement in the Middle East without the support of the American people. The rising tensions with Iran, the chaos in Iraq, the enduring Israeli-Palestinian conflict present a deepening crisis in the Middle East. America’s policies must help lead the region out of the crisis. The American people increasingly understand this present and future danger.

Today, some of America’s own actions are undermining the very interests that we must protect and advance in the Middle East. A recent poll conducted by Zogby International in the countries of Arab allies...Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates...found that only twelve percent expressed favorable attitudes toward the United States. As David Ignatius wrote earlier this week in the Washington Post from a conference in Doha, Qatar, “It isn’t a tiny handful of people in the Arab world who oppose what America is doing. It’s nearly everyone.”

If we lose our ability to influence outcomes in the Middle East, the consequences and implications for America and the world will be severe. We risk unstable energy supplies...growth in radical Islamic terrorism...increasing threats to Israel...and nuclear proliferation.

We are living today at an historic transformational time in history. The great challenges of the 21st century will require U.S. leadership that is trusted and respected, not feared nor resented. America cannot project only military power. Inspirational leadership and confidence in America's purpose, not imposed power, will be essential for world peace. If we fail, we will lose the next generation in Iran and around the world. This would result in a far more dangerous world than any we have ever known.

For the 21st Century, the U.S.-Iran relationship will frame the structure and dynamics of the Middle East. We must be sure of our actions and wise with our words. The prospects for peace that have eluded all nations of the Middle East for so long may be on the edge of a convergence of historic intersects. America can help shape the outcome with active and focused diplomacy...worthy of our heritage.

Hagel Sends Letter to Defense Secretary Gates About the Conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center

2007-02-21T12:35:00.000-05:00

Hagel Sends Letter to Defense Secretary Gates About the Conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center

February 21st, 2007 - WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) sent a letter today to United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates regarding reports of dismal living conditions and Army bureaucratic entanglement for service members recovering from war injuries at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. In the letter, Hagel urged Gates to immediately begin a review of the living conditions and health services provided at all military medical facilities.

“We are asking our young men and women to fight and die with the promise that, if necessary, we will provide them the best medical care available. Unfortunately - as illustrated by the piles of paperwork we require service members to complete only to be lost by the Army bureaucracy, the condition of facilities like building 18 at Walter Reed, the poor training of civilian care coordinators and case managers, and the sheer lack of respect for the basic human dignity of these men and women - we are not meeting our promises to those who serve our country. The medical care system is broken and the problem must be fixed now. The Department of Defense needs to immediately begin a review of all military medical facilities and fix these problems,” Hagel said.

This weekend, The Washington Post had a series of stories about the current condition of facilities at Walter Reed Medical Center. To view these stories online please go to, http://www.washingtonpost.com.

Attached is the letter Hagel sent to Defense Secretary Gates.

February 20, 2007

Dear Secretary Gates:

Since we first entered Afghanistan and then Iraq, I have visited Walter Reed Army Medical Center and Bethesda National Naval Medical Center many times, spending time with our war wounded and their families and listening to their stories. I was appalled to read the Washington Post series this weekend about the condition of facilities at Walter Reed.

This is a disgraceful reflection of our government’s lack of attention to those wounded in battle and their convalescence and rehabilitation. I’m sure those who read these stories were shocked by them.

We are asking our young men and women to fight and die with the promise that, if necessary, we will provide them the best medical care available. Unfortunately – as illustrated by the piles of paperwork we require service members to complete only to be lost later by the Army bureaucracy, the condition of facilities like building 18 at Walter Reed, the poor training of civilian care coordinators and case managers, and the sheer lack of respect for the basic human dignity of these men and women – we are not meeting our promises to those who serve our country. The medical care system is broken and the problem must be fixed now. The Department of Defense needs to immediately begin a review of all military medical facilities and fix these problems.

Our men and women in uniform and their families deserve the very best that we can give them – be it medical care, housing facilities, or job training. I understand that you are developing a strategy to address facility repairs at military medical facilities.

I would appreciate your answer to these stories and what plans are underway to immediately deal with them.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

[Chuck Hagel]

Chuck Hagel's Future: All Options on the Table

2007-02-20T12:35:00.000-05:00

The following is an excerpt from TPM Cafe's article Chuck Hagel's Future: All Options on the Table:

Hagel made an articulate, compelling call for a new American comprehensive strategy in the Middle East that includes robust diplomacy, coordination with moderate Sunni regimes in the Middle East and new forms of economic engagement.

Hagel said that the White House keeps focusing on a "military approach" to Iraq. But he stated quite firmly, "the US military will not determine the future of Iraq."

Reed was impressive too -- until he began to focus on his and Hagel's early call for increasing the overall size of the US army. He probably meant "military forces in total" rather than just the "army". Hagel said nothing about this, but Reid made it sound like the key to solving the problem of an over-extended military apparatus is just making it larger.

I think -- and I believe that Hagel believes at some level -- that the first step in solving the "military over-reach" problem is getting better management and figuring out why despite more dollars and resources being thrown at the Pentagon that perceived "security deliverables" are declining.

Hagel said that he would make a statement about his intentions to run for the presidency or not in a few weeks. He reminded listeners that despite Vice President Cheney's recent criticism of Hagel that Congressionaly Quarterly found in a recent survey of 30 key votes that Hagel votes with the Bush administration more than any other U.S. Senator.

Hagel is a classic conservative -- but apparently not the kind of Republican that Dick Cheney likes.

"Used with permission from TPMCafe.com, a service of TPM Media LLC."

Hagel cheers word of Middle East diplomatic plans

2007-02-18T23:57:00.001-05:00

Published Sunday February 18, 2007

Hagel cheers word of Middle East diplomatic plans

BY JAKE THOMPSON
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is poised to start new diplomatic initiatives in the Middle East, including encouraging a regional security conference that might include Syria and Iran, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska said Saturday.

If so, the outreach could add a new element of diplomacy to the region and to ongoing military efforts to quell violence in Iraq, Hagel said in an interview.

Hagel said he and Stephen Hadley, President Bush's national security adviser, discussed Iraq, Iran, North Korea and the Middle East on Saturday.

"I believe the administration is moving in a new positive direction to help and start initiating some new diplomatic efforts in the Middle East," Hagel said. "They can count on my support on this if they start to do some things."

A senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hagel said he believes the administration may be thawing a bit in its hard-line stance against Iran and Syria.

"Yes, absolutely," Hagel said.

The administration has argued against reaching out diplomatically to the two countries because of their ties to terrorist organizations.

In addition, Iran has apparently been moving toward possible development of nuclear weapons, despite strong condemnation by the Bush administration and U.S. allies.

Hagel has long advocated a U.S. role in trying to organize a regional security conference to try to bring stability to Iraq and to move the Middle East peace process forward.

If they meet, the various nations could consider playing roles in promoting jobs, security, deterring terrorism and resolution of the ethnic and religious differences now plaguing Iraq, Hagel said.

The United States shouldn't be in charge of the conference but should try orchestrating a meeting among the other nations, he said.

Such a conference might help defuse growing tensions between Sunni and Shiite Muslims in the Middle East outside Iraq, he said.

"It takes a lot of pressure off the administration if they can start some of these initiatives," Hagel said, adding he told Hadley, "Tell the president I'll be right with him on it as I have been on India, as I have on trade and so many of his diplomatic initiatives."

Senator Hagel's book deal is underway

2007-02-18T23:44:00.000-05:00

Senator Hagel's book deal is underway

(2/17/2007)By Corinne Hautala Senator Chuck Hagel has reached an agreement on a book deal. Hagel's spokesman, Mike Buttry, says the senator will write a book this year about the United States' future.

It is expected to hit bookshelves during the 2008 presidential primary season.

But Buttry says the book deal has nothing to do with Hagel's possible presidential campaign.

Hagel has said he will decide early this year whether or not to run. As of now, no decision has been announced.

Hagel Introduces Bill to Aid

2007-02-17T23:11:00.000-05:00

Hagel Introduces Bill to Aid

February 16th, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced legislation today that would amend the eligibility for the military death gratuity paid to the next of kin of military personnel killed while on active duty. By law, the death gratuity benefit goes first to a spouse or a child. This legislation would provide, in cases where a minor child is the next of kin, the ability for the service member to designate the grandparents, siblings, or guardian to receive part or all of the benefit to care for the child.

“As we face the challenges of the 21st Century, servicemen and women sacrificing for their country in a time of war should be assured that their families will be taken care of. The loss of a loved one is a tremendous emotional hardship for families. This is common sense legislation that will ensure that when the next of kin is a child, the death gratuity may be immediately available to the child’s guardian, if so designated,” Hagel said.

Under current law, when the next of kin is a child, the death gratuity is not accessible until the child turns 18, unless a state court decides to allocate the death gratuity to a guardian. Often, if the state probate court does grant access to a guardian, it can take a great deal of time and cost additional money to gain such access.

The military death gratuity is money provided within 72 hours to families of service members who are killed while on active duty. In 2004, Senator Hagel introduced legislation to raise the death gratuity to $100k. This provision was included in the FY05 National Defense Authorization Act, which became law on January 6, 2006.

Hagel Submits Senate Resolution to Designate August 16, 2007 "National Airborne Day"

2007-02-16T12:25:00.000-05:00

Hagel Submits Senate Resolution to Designate August 16, 2007 "National Airborne Day"

February 15th, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) introduced a Senate Resolution today designating August 16, 2007 as “National Airborne Day.” August 16, 2007 will be the 67th Anniversary of the first official jump by the Army Parachute Test Platoon. The resolution was co-sponsored by Senators Reed (D-RI), Clinton (D-NY), Burr (R-NC), Reid (D-NV), Snowe (R-ME), Kerry (D-MA), and Gregg (R-NH). It will be referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for consideration.

“Over the last 67 years, U.S. airborne forces have performed important military and peace-keeping operations throughout the world, including Operation Iraqi Freedom. August 16th is a day to celebrate and thank Airborne veterans and Airborne units for their tireless commitment to our Nation's defense and for the ideals of duty, honor and country they embody,” Hagel said.

On June 25, 1940, the War Department authorized the Parachute Test Platoon to experiment with the potential use of airborne troops. The Parachute Test Platoon, which was composed of 48 volunteers, performed the first official Army parachute jump on August 16th. The success of the Platoon led to the formation of a large and successful airborne contingent that has served from World War II until the present.

Members of the 82nd Airborne Division Association have recognized Hagel for his efforts to designate the date as “National Airborne Day.” Since 2004 Hagel has introduced, and the Senate has passed, a Senate Resolution designating August 16th as “National Airborne Day.”

Hagel Introduces Bill to Cap Healthcare Costs for Military

2007-02-16T12:18:00.000-05:00

Hagel and Lautenberg Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Cap Healthcare Costs for Active Duty Military, Guard, Reserves, Retirees and Their Families

February 15th, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. – United States Senators Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced today the Military Health Care Protection Act, a bill to place reasonable and affordable caps on enrollment fees, deductibles and pharmacy co-payments for more than an estimated six million active duty military personnel, National Guard, Reserves, retirees and their families.

The fiscal year 2007 Pentagon budget would triple health fees for nearly two million military retirees under age 65 and their dependents. The Hagel-Lautenberg bill will block the following proposed increases in military health care costs:

• Raising the $230 single/$460 family TRICARE Prime enrollment fee to as high as $700 and $1,400, respectively.

• Raising the annual $150 single/$300 family TRICARE Standard fees to as high as $560 and $1,120, respectively.

In addition, under the Pentagon’s proposed budget, retail pharmacy co-pays would be raised 67 percent for all active duty military personnel, National Guard, Reserves, retirees and their families.

“America’s career military service members make tremendous sacrifices in service to our country. We cannot burden our military retirees and their families with dramatic increases in out-of-pocket healthcare expenses. It is wrong to increase healthcare fees on the men and women who have already contributed greatly to our nation before addressing current inefficiencies in the TRICARE system,” Senator Chuck Hagel said.

“We need to provide our troops with the best equipment money can buy. But we also must provide them and their families, as well as those who have retired, the best quality healthcare at the most affordable price,” Senator Frank R. Lautenberg said. “If we tell our soldiers and sailors it is their duty to protect America, it is our duty to provide for them when they return and retire.”

The Hagel-Lautenberg legislation also establishes that the percentage of increase in retirees’ health fees in any given year should not exceed the percentage of increase in their compensation.

Vice Admiral Norb Ryan, President of the Military Officers Association of America, and Joe Barnes, National Exec Secretary of the Fleet Reserve Association, joined Hagel and Lautenberg to introduce the Military Health Care Protection Act.

“We’re extremely grateful to Senators Hagel and Lautenberg for sponsoring this legislation to protect military beneficiaries,” said Vice Admiral Norb Ryan, Jr. (USN-Ret), President of the Military Officers Association of America. “Their bill offers an important reminder that active duty, Guard, Reserve, and retired servicemembers have paid far greater premiums for their health coverage than any other segment of our society—and prepaid them up front, through decades of arduous service and sacrifice.”

A coalition of 35 military associations have pledged their support for the bill.

Hagel Re-Introduces Autism Resolution

2007-02-15T12:26:00.001-05:00

Hagel Re-Introduces Autism Resolution

February 13th, 2007 -
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) re-introduced a Senate Resolution today recognizing the importance of increasing awareness of autism spectrum disorders. Autism is a brain disorder that typically affects a person’s ability to communicate effectively and form social relationships. The resolution recognizes the importance of supporting programs for increased research and improved treatment of autism, and lending support to individuals with autism and those who care for them. The resolution also designates April 2007 as “National Autism Awareness Month.”

“This resolution recognizes the importance of autism awareness. The prevalence of autism among children remains high, while the causes of autism are poorly understood and there is no cure. It is critical to support research and improve treatments of autism that will foster the health and well-being of autistic individuals,” Hagel said.

On February 8, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released updated statistics on the prevalence of autism among children. Research reveals that children with autism are more common in the communities studied than previously thought. Estimates now show autism affects an average of 1 child in 150, compared with previous estimates of 1 child in 166.

Hagel introduced this resolution in the 108th and 109th Congresses. Senators Feingold (D-WI) and Stabenow (D-MI) are co-sponsors of this resolution.