Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schwarzenegger names commission to defend state's military bases (appoints Leon Panetta Co-chairman)
Bakersfield Californian ^ | 11/9/04 | Jim Wasserman - AP

Posted on 11/09/2004 7:47:47 PM PST by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
Members of Schwarzenegger's base retention council

http://www.bakersfield.com/state_wire/story/5062017p-5111911c.html

------

Members of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Council on Base Support and Retention:

- Co-Chair Leon Panetta of Monterey, co-director of the Leon and Sylvia Panetta Institute for Public Affairs, Monterey, former U.S. representative and former chief of staff to President Clinton.

- Co-Chair Donna Tuttle of Los Angeles, chairman and co-owner of Elmore Tuttle Sports Group, and Commerce Department official in the Reagan administration.

- Army Maj. Gen. Edward L. Andrews of Petaluma, consultant to defense contractors.

- Air Force Maj. Gen. Alice Astafan of Carmichael, chief executive officer of the Federal Technology Center.

- Phillip Coyle of Los Angeles, defense consultant and senior adviser to the president of the Center for Defense Information.

- Robert Grady of San Francisco, partner and managing director for The Carlyle Group.

- Marine Gen. Richard Hearney of Ukiah, 35-year corps veteran and former assistant commandant of the corps.

- Vice Adm. Peter M. Hekman, Jr. of San Diego, technology consultant and 40-year veteran of U.S. Navy.

- Army Maj. Gen. Daniel C. Helix of Concord, 41-year veteran.

- Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar of Del Mar, consultant to American companies doing business in the Middle East and Africa and 37-year veteran.

- Elizabeth Ann Inadomi of San Francisco, public policy attorney with background in Congress and NASA.

- Army Maj. Gen. William Jefferds of Folsom, most recently special adviser in the California Office of Military Support and previously director of the state Department of General Services.

- Adm. Henry H. Mauz, Jr. of Pebble Beach, president of the Naval Postgraduate School Foundation.

- Marine Maj. Gen. J. Michael Myatt of San Francisco, president and chief operating officer of the Marines' Memorial Association.

- Roger "Ted" Rains of Camarillo, volunteer member of the Board of Directors of the Regional Defense Partnership-21.

- Andrea Seastrand of Grover Beach, former U.S. representative and executive director of the California Space Authority.

- Marine Maj. Gen. Orlo Keith "O.K." Steele of Grass Valley, consultant for security and military projects.

- Adm. John Weaver of Manhattan Beach, retired, past chairman of Naval Institute Foundation.

1 posted on 11/09/2004 7:47:49 PM PST by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Good for you Arnie...but the decision isn't yours or California's.
2 posted on 11/09/2004 7:50:42 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

Trying to get back in Maria's good graces?


3 posted on 11/09/2004 7:57:17 PM PST by elizabetty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Tiresome, in my opinion. I guess you can't blame a governor for trying to help his state by hook or by crook. But the guiding criterion should be military need, not political expediency or who has the most political clout.

Which bases are needed and which are not? It's generally agreed that there is an excess.


4 posted on 11/09/2004 7:58:36 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elizabetty

I irony is the Long Beach Naval Shipyard, which had recently gone through a very expensive upgrade and was NEEDED, was decommission by Clinton DESPITE the best efforts of the military to keep it open.


5 posted on 11/09/2004 8:04:36 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Sorry, no more bases in blue states that are likely to secede from the Union. Besides, the Canadians aren't very big on military infrastructure.
6 posted on 11/09/2004 8:37:20 PM PST by NonValueAdded (Now that you are engaged in the political process, stay engaged!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; SierraWasp; Carry_Okie; Amerigomag
Schwarzenegger also signed bills to add $300,000 to the state's Office of Military and Aerospace Support, which coordinates the state's base retention strategy. That brings its budget to $500,000, said Schwarzenegger spokesman Vince Sollitto. The bill also allows the office to seek grants and private funding. More signed legislation aims to reduce construction costs for base housing.

Somebody help me out, please. Why would a state office receive grants and private funding?

7 posted on 11/09/2004 8:38:57 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

It's lobbying money to get fedgov to spend its money here.


8 posted on 11/09/2004 8:43:56 PM PST by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are really stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

but appointing him????????!!!?!?!?!?!?!?


9 posted on 11/09/2004 8:45:11 PM PST by RightWingBev
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

All bases in red areas of California are safe, those in blue areas are not :o)


10 posted on 11/09/2004 8:48:23 PM PST by McGavin999 (George Soros just learned a very expensive lesson-America can't be bought.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
It's generally agreed that there is an excess.

By who??? A bunch of politicians in cahoots with greedy developers who are always ready to jeopardize national security in order to make a fast buck.

11 posted on 11/09/2004 8:51:16 PM PST by kimosabe31
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kimosabe31

You would be surprised at some military installations that have continued to exist far beyond any military value whatsoever, kept alive by politicians.


12 posted on 11/09/2004 8:52:28 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

>>It's lobbying money to get fedgov to spend its money here.

Is that a usual practice? To me, it seems to create more conflict of interest.


13 posted on 11/09/2004 9:01:14 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
To me, it seems to create more conflict of interest.

Since when has that been a constraint where profit by political influence is involved?

14 posted on 11/09/2004 9:29:43 PM PST by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are really stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
SACRAMENTO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, aiming to defend California's 62 military bases...

Sixty two military bases and not one of them where a base is needed most - guarding the U.S. Mexico border.

15 posted on 11/09/2004 9:35:15 PM PST by BJungNan (Stop Spam - Do NOT buy from junk email.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

I don't think any Border Patrol facilities are being axed.


16 posted on 11/09/2004 9:37:44 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
I don't think any Border Patrol facilities are being axed.

You mean the ones that are already 50 + miles inside the U.S. border? Why should they close those? (sarcasm).

I'm talking about a military base being needed on the border. I'm was not talking about border patrol facilities.

17 posted on 11/09/2004 9:41:07 PM PST by BJungNan (Stop Spam - Do NOT buy from junk email.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan

We don't need any "military" bases on the border.


18 posted on 11/09/2004 9:42:54 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
We don't need any "military" bases on the border.

Yes, we do! But if you have a problem with that, let's call them training facilities where our troops can practice their skills preventing insurgent border crossing.

19 posted on 11/09/2004 9:50:13 PM PST by BJungNan (Stop Spam - Do NOT buy from junk email.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
"Yes, we do!"

Strange, I haven't seen where a single member of the joint chiefs thinks it's necessary given the militarys mission. I guess I'll have to default to their opinion.

20 posted on 11/09/2004 9:52:41 PM PST by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson