A Bonner for Governor in 2010?
WASHINGTON—Since Rep. Jo Bonner recently won a spot on the powerful House Appropriations committee and his re-election in November pretty much a foregone conclusion, there have been some rumblings about Bonner making a bid for the governor’s seat in 2010.
However, the third-term congressman wasn’t willing to say - at least publicly - he was entertaining the idea of being Gov. Bob Riley’s successor.
“Look, I love my job,” Bonner said to Lagniappe. “I feel like this new committee assignment will give me a chance to - and I don’t mean in terms of bringing more projects back to Alabama - but I think this is a good fit, even though the environment is different and we’re going to have to make some tough decisions.”
After Mobile shocked the world by winning the Northrop Grumman/EADS KC-30 $40-billion aircraft contract, Bonner could be riding a wave of popularity that would make him a viable candidate. But, Bonner told Lagniappe he wasn’t sure if he wanted to dedicate his focus toward a run at the governor’s mansion in Montgomery.
“I like what I’m doing, and I’m confident we’ve got a good list of qualified men and women that are out there that would be able to focus the time and resources in the tune of $15 million to run for governor.”
However, he didn’t rule out an eventual run completely.
“I’m not going to tell you that I one day won’t consider looking down the road, but right now the road I’m looking down is being the best Congressman I can be for southwest Alabama.”
The P-R’s Curran versus ‘60 Minutes’
After a segment that aired on CBS’s “60 Minutes” last month (except in the Huntsville market) suggesting former Gov. Don Siegelman was selectively prosecuted for bribery charges because he’s a Democrat, the Press-Register’s Eddie Curran sent “60 Minutes” a ballsy response that’s been making its rounds in the blogosphere.
Curran was the reporter of the Register’s series, which eventually led to the investigation of Siegelman. But, the “60 Minutes” segment that aired by Scott Pelley suggested the prosecution of Siegelman was nothing but an attempt by former Bush political advisor Karl Rove. Pelly’s report was based an interview with Dana Jill Simpson, who told “60 Minutes” Rove instructed her to obtain sexually compromising photos of Siegelman.
Curran questioned the credibility of Simpson in his letter.
“I assume you are aware of her constantly expanding and evolving stories,” Curran wrote. “That you even put her on television after reviewing these ever-evolving tales is incredible. Furthermore, you absolutely had to know of her association with the Siegelman and [indicted former HealthSouth CEO Richard] Scrushy legal teams that began, at the latest, in February of last year. Among other things, she has testified to doing what would appear to be an illegal credit check report on the judge who presided over the case.”
“We reporters in Alabama, no doubt because we’re dumb rednecks or being paid off by Republicans, have from the beginning seen Simpson for what she is: a very lonely person with a very - and this is your word - vivid imagination,” Curran charged.
If dumb reporters in Alabama, or at least from Alabama, are being paid off, when will I get my cut?
Sessions Dismisses Northrop Grumman/EADS Security Fears
After the Air Force stunningly awarded the refueling contractor to the Northrop Grumman/EADS partnership, there’s been a lot of head scratching and even some outrage in Washington by the Boeing lobby and some members of Congress.
The spin has been that we’re giving away jobs to the French, although naturally there’s been little mention of Mobile or that the engines would be built in Ohio. Sen. Richard Shelby has made the rounds on the cable TV networks and has adamantly defended the decision.
But even the free market pundits on Wall Street questioned the decision—not because the bid with the best product for the best price won, but since this contract involves national security, it might have been in the country’s best interests to have awarded it to Boeing. Sen. Jeff Sessions rebutted such claims.
“I don’t believe that’s a valid concern,” Sessions said to Lagniappe. “For example, the Boeing aircraft that they put up for the competition has Japanese fuselage and wings made in another country—so it is not a wholly American aircraft either. Very few things are wholly produced in this country. That’s just a fact. You can try to deny it if you want to.”
The some Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee, including Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the committee, are threatening to pull funding for the project due to the fact they didn’t award it to U.S.-based Boeing. However, Sessions said he didn’t think that was likely to occur.
“I don’t think that’s a legitimate complaint and I think likewise you could have a difficulty for Boeing under that theory because they don’t utilize 100 percent American components either.”
ThyssenKrupp in Mobile Because of Global Warming?
Here’s some interesting background on a recent major headline on Mobile’s economic growth.
Last week in New York City, a few hundred global warming skeptics attended a global warming convention held in Times Square. (Sounds like a wild party, huh?) And while there’s debate going back and forth about climate change, one of those “skeptics” contends that Mobile benefited because of aggressive European carbon-cutting regulation.
Chris Horner of the libertarian think-tank, the Competitive Enterprises Institute, maintained that ThyssenKrupp was forced to relocate it manufacturing facility to the United States, and eventually Mobile, for that reason.
“In spring last year ThyssenKrupp (Germany) announced it chose Alabama for approximately 32,000 construction jobs and 3,200 permanent jobs for a new plant that will export steel,” Horner said.
Contact Jeff Poor at jeffreypoor@yahoo.com.
Archives
Beltway Beat
