Ohh Magod (read with all the 11th grade, stilted, befuddled cheerleader inflection you can muster.) “Like ohmagod.” I am sOO excited!

The answer to all the Republican woes as finally arrived. California Congressman Kevin McCarthy is developing his “Commitment to America.” It’s a lot like Gingrich’s “Contract with America,” which as we all know was the greatest political achievement put on paper since the Bill of Rights.

I can’t tell you how many nights I’ve slipped into bed filled with angst over the state of politics in America, only to soothe myself to sleep with dreams of another 10-Point Plan. I mean, haven’t you?   Wouldn’t it be great to know that our representatives were working on a PLAN--a document that tells us what they believe in?  I, for one, am just tickled pink.

I know what the cynics will say. They’ll say that our Representatives told us what they believed in when they campaigned for office. They’ll say that “action speaks louder than words.” Pish posh! What impresses me most is a couple of pages of well thought out slogans and clichés in a historical font with roman numerals. If they have it bound with a full color glossy cover all the better.

Putting together a document stating their beliefs gives them an excuse to avoid working with those pesky Democrats. They can now avoid the same kind of frustration that has driven Illinois Senator Evan Bayh to not seek re-election. They can avoid the late nights and long hours that consensus building and compromise demand.

Look what long range planning, innovation and sticking to your principles is getting Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan.  Ryan is working on—I know this will hard to swallow—actual legislation to fix the country’s fiscal problem. His proposal would zero out the deficit, balance the budget by 2063, reduce Medicare’s share of the economy to 4% of GDP by 2080 (it’s over 14% today), simplify the tax code, and replace the current corporate tax structure with an 8.5% consumption tax.  All this adherence to basic conservative principles has done is draw the ire of his GOP colleagues.  The Instruments of Inertia remain tethered to the short leash of immediate gratification for their constituents.  Passing that kind of legislation would require hard truths to be told the folks back home and who needs that hassle?

The real irony is that the Commitment to America stems from House Minority Leader John Boehner tasking Congressman McCarthy to develop a plan to help the Republican Party overcome its reputation as the “party of no.”  It is precisely “no” that needs to be said more often. Not "No" to the Democrats, but to Americans.  As in, “No, we can’t expand government programs and reduce taxes simultaneously.”

But golly, who wants to hear that? I’d rather hold in my ideological grip a pretty document outlining what the GOP believes in--what they’d do if they were in charge (not like 1996-2004. These Republicans are different.)  With the recent over-achieving history of these Republicans in my rear view mirror I can only hope that in short order we will have 535 Republicans working for us.

I bet 535 of these forward thinkers would come up with the coolest font ever.

Ask around, take a small poll of friends. Intrude on people in the elevators, on the bus, in the waiting room. When you are with a stranger for even a brief time, or when you are with friends, ask them this: do you believe that the American political system represents you and your beliefs?

It’s a cliché to say that the American political system is broken. It’s not broken; it’s simply evolved into something no one would have chosen.  But identifying problems is easy.  Anyone can offer a criticism of the status quo.  Complaining is the primary manifestation of the first amendment in this country, from toddlers, to teens; citizens to corporations.

This is, in fact, my primary critique of politics today: both parties are more interested in proving the other party wrong than in developing effective national strategies to improve the lives of citizens. Republicans seem more interested in killing the Democrat’s bills rather than working with the Democrats to create legislation that includes compromises from both parties but which places the interests of the people above all else.

Politics has become the focus of politics.  A Republican compromise that leads to health care reform would be a feather in the cap of the Democrat in office and thus improve the public perception of both the President and his party, likely at the expense of Republican congressional seats and/or Presidential hopefuls. Serving the people seldom seems like the foremost thought in the minds of our elected officials.

Republicans today (and Democrats from 2001-2008) won’t pay the price at the polls to affect a system of good federal governance. But who will pay the price for better government?

Last week the Supreme Court removed restrictions on how much corporations can contribute to campaign elections.  The basis for the 5-4 decision was that limits on spending represent government restrictions on first amendment, free speech rights of Americans.

I got it; and on its face, I agree. However, while the decision removes limits on the right to free speech, it further restricts the ability of regular Americans to be heard. Those of us who contribute little or nothing to the campaigns of politicians already have limited access to our elected officials. Those officials, elected one vote at a time, are beholden to the major benefactors who made the acquisition of those votes possible. It is not the votes themselves that matter to politicians, but the ability to GET the votes that matters.

What is it that we want as citizens? Is it a literal interpretation of the First Amendment that may be technically correct, or a system in which we have access to the Representatives who supposedly represent us?  There is no longer any volume control on free speech and while that removes government intrusions, it further limits access of regular people, like you and me. I don’t believe our country is better for this decision. Our government was founded as one “of the people and by the people.” Voting being our primary method of participating in the political system and as much a representation of our right to free speech as anything, the twenty-fourth amendment prohibits poll taxes so that no citizen is excluded from the political process. The Supreme Court’s defense of the First Amendment has done more to limit access than any 24th Amendment infringement ever could.

Are we willing to pay the price for the ability to be heard? Will we limit our right to unrestricted free speech so that all citizens have equal access and the influence of corporations and big money contributors is minimized?

Politicians from both parties laud the concept of smaller government. Americans pine for the shrinking of ever-growing federal infrastructure and programs.  Yet I have not heard a public willingness to forego the very provisions that make up an engorged federal government.  If we petition for smaller government, are we prepared to do without?

The root of the word government means to “bring into conformity with rules or principles or usage; impose regulations.”  Do we really want to be “governed?” Or would we prefer to be led?  If government backs away, are we prepared to step in to do those things for ourselves that a smaller government no longer provides us?  Many of us already are doing those things at home.

No government program can erase the $70,000 of debt I carried out of a failed marriage. No government program can erase the $5000 of negative equity I have in a 2004 SUV that costs me $1000 a month to drive in payments, gas and insurance. No government program can add 60 points to my credit score (driven down by a lousy debt to income ratio because I still own a house I can’t sell in this depressed real estate market) so that I can buy a house and benefit from the tax advantages of homeownership.  Yet, as I write this, I am living with my two children in the basement of a friends’ townhouse.  We live like Harry Potter in the cupboard under the stairs because it’s all that we can do.  Crunched by an income limited by salary and the usual budgetary demands of suburban life and ongoing payments to previous excess, something has to give. Unable to borrow a trillion dollars from the Chinese (though, to be honest, I haven’t called to ask) we make sacrifices to cope.

America as a society has payments to make. We owe on debts accumulated over the last century. We owe on wars we couldn’t afford. We owe money to entitlement programs from which we borrowed. We need to make investments in improving our access to our legislators. We need congressmen who will sacrifice what’s best for them in order to provide what’s best for us.

We can complain or we can participate. I’m already paying on my debts and so are you. Now let’s communicate to Washington that we are willing to pay the many and varied fees called for in improving the American political process.

Last week I wrote that Americans should get comfortable with the fact that we only live under the illusion of security.  It doesn’t help, though, when TSA personnel are lazy and incompetent. Case in point, my last trip through BWI.

Two of my children were flying to Baltimore from San Antonio.  I was to meet them at the gate. (If you’re not aware, it is normal and easy for an un-ticketed parent to get a gate pass that will allow them through security in order to meet unaccompanied minors at the gate.)

I proceeded to the Southwest ticket counter to get my gate pass but as fortune would have it the computer system wasn’t cooperating so they were unable to print out my gate pass.  Too often these days computer trouble like this would have been the end of my quest to get out to the gate, but the crack staff at SWA wrote me out a pass the old fashioned way—on a blank form with a ball point pen. They told me this might fluster the TSA ID –checker and he might decide to call a supervisor to verify the authenticity of my document.  Fair enough. I was I no real rush.

As I approached the TSA staff I went to pull out my driver’s license.  Lo and behold, I didn’t have it. I had left it in my gym bag earlier that morning. Uh oh. I did, though, have a government issued ID card for my work with the Department of Defense.  However, it had expired December 27.  Today was January 4. This could get interesting.

Reaching the checkpoint, I handed my handwritten pass to the TSA employee. His brows furrowed, his lips pursed. And just as promised he called for a supervisor. The manager was nowhere in sight so I was asked to step aside so others could move through security. Still no problem; time was on my side.  When the supervisor arrived he looked knowingly at the tidy penmanship on the form and ruled everything in order.  He handed me back my gate pass, waved me through and as an afterthought, looked at his subordinate and asked if he had checked my ID.   Drum roll please.  He said, “Yup, he’s good,” and I was free to head to the metal detector.

Except, he had never looked at my ID. He never knew I didn’t have a state issued driver’s license or any other state ID card. He never looked at my federal government card to see if it was an acceptable substitute. He never checked the expiration date on that government card to see if it was even current.

Oops.

As I smirked and walked on, I could tell that he had hesitated just a bit. He knew he hadn’t checked my ID. He knew he had just lied. There was a long line of harried holiday travelers who needed his attention. He was distracted. He didn’t want to appear like he hadn’t done his job properly already.  Behavioral scientists would have a field day with his malfeasance.

Bottom line?  In any job where routine is the order of the day, the hardest thing is learning to handle the unexpected and still comply with the routine procedures. Airline pilots face this all the time. So do nurses. It’s human nature.   The best lesson for this TSA employee can  gleaned from  his self assessment that he just messed up--badly.  He should beat himself up. He should lose sleep.  He should vow this will never happen again.  It will be up to him to learn from his failure.

"The System," that nefarious and faceless entity, will never make us safe. Our best hope is the concern of the individuals involved in the process. Sometimes that"s the passengers. Always, it's the TSA agents.  As my kids are sick of hearing me say, “Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment.”   I hope I was the best training that TSA employee gets this year. But that will be up to him.

I work in the energy field.  I am acutely aware of Executive Order 13514 President Obama signed on October 5, 2009, titled FEDERAL LEADERSHIP IN ENVIRONMENTAL, ENERGY,AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE. In summary,  it notes that it is “the policy of the United States that Federal agencies shall increase energy efficiency; measure, report, and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions from direct and indirect activities; conserve and protect water resources through efficiency, reuse, and storm water management; eliminate waste, recycle, and prevent pollution; leverage agency acquisitions to foster markets for sustainable technologies and environmentally preferable materials, products, and services; design, construct, maintain, and operate high performance sustainable buildings in sustainable locations; strengthen the vitality and livability of the communities in which Federal facilities are located; and inform Federal employees about and involve them in the achievement of these goals.”

This EO is in some ways excellent, particularly if you believe that it is better to over reach, and risk ridicule for being unrealistic as opposed to being institutionally inert.  The most severe implications stemming from implementation of EO 13514, though, will be the requirements to track and reduce green house gas emissions.

As you would expect, these requirements will apply to the Department of Defense as well as all other federal agencies.  However, it should be no surprise that the military’s interest in GHG emissions only stems from policy mandates and not any anticipated improvements in its ability to carry out its mission. There is no first order effect on DOD from  GHG emissions, whether increasing or decreasing.(There might be several 2nd order effects, such as climate change causing potential migration and demographic shifts which could result in geopolitical  tensions to  which our military will have to respond, but those are ancillary to  this discussion.) DOD’’s  heightened attention on improving energy efficiency is rightly focused on what "goes in" not on what "comes out." And what "goes in" is expensive in terms of both human lives and financial resources. Improving DOD’s consumption habits in order to reduce the use and transportation of fossil fuels on the battlefield has mission critical implications.

It is the nation’s and the department’s best interest  to  develop domestic supplies of battlefield energy sources--domestic oil, coal to liquids, or natural gas to name a few--so that DOD’s missions are not vulnerable to external stressors. It is virtually impossible to imagine a modern military using anything other fossil fuels to power its war machines for the next century or so and GHG emissions will be an unfortunate consequence of whatever fuel is in vogue. Our commanders must never consider carbon when soldiers’ lives and military success is on the line.

Climate change is a symptom of what ails us NOT the problem itself. The problem is the over-consumption of what I like to call "incendiary" energy--stuff that burns. DOD can be a major player in renewables: as a start, replacing diesel generators on the battlefield and reducing energy consumption at our installations, both steps  that will create an improvement in what "goes out." But improving emissions doesn't appreciably advance our agenda vis-a-vis mission accomplishment.

If DOD comes to value energy for what it is--a critical weapon of war—it will rapidly change its consumption paradigm which will, most importantly, improve its ability to carry out orders. But it will also have the beneficial effect of reducing GHG emissions.

If the discussion within DOD centers on GHG emissions, then one day we may find that the military’s current emphasis in energy was just a fad-- a brief period where GHG emission were important. However, emphasizing results that don’t pertain to DOD’s core missions and capabilities will cause attention to fade, analogous to environmental issues in the 90s, for which there is only cursory interest save the lingering niche bureaucracies that were created to attend to the issue.

However, if the discussion centers on how DOD can improve its ability to carry out its mission and do so within tightening budgetary constraints, then the investments we make today will be the Modus Operandi of tomorrow's war fighter.

I was riding the shuttle bus from long-term parking into the BWI terminal this morning. An elderly traveller sitting across from me on the bus asked me what I thought about the recent events in Detroit, in which a Delta passenger allegedly try to light a bomb on board the plane. My response was the same as always: we only live under the ILLUSION of security. The fact that there aren't more examples of security breaches truly amazes me.

I'm confident anyone who really wanted to could at the very least wreak havoc on board a US airliner. Passengers are permitted to carry on 3 ounce containers of liquid. I carry three when I travel, one of which has contact lens solution in it. What if that was lighter fluid or grain alcohol—anything clear and that burns? Who would know? I haven't even been asked to take my one quart ziploc out of my suitcase in the last year, much less had anyone ask about the contents of those containers. What if I had five of those bottles? What if I had ten friends on board with me that also had five of those bottles. Now all I need is a wooden, strike-anywhere match. I could put ten of those inside an empty chap stick container and stick that in my rectum. Done. Now, on “go” we all jump up, start splashing flammable material around and someone lights the match.

Two weeks ago I was at BWI and I noticed that employees who work on the other side of security—at the Hudson News, or McDonald's or Sun Glass Hut on the B-Concourse—don't have to remove their shoes when going through security. I asked a TSA staff member about this. He responded that  “employees” are not required to remove their shoes. I wonder how big a bribe would it take to get an employee to wear a pair of bomb filled shoes through security to be traded with a terrorist later?

Security is an illusion. We pretend it exists because to acknowledge our vulneribability would be to live in constant fear--like living in the village at the base of the dam. You simply can't think about the consequences all the time. Life is what it is and it involves some assumption of risk. The dam will break or it won't.

Some folks wonder today whether American's will tolerate invasions of privacy that would improve safety. I'm sure some are concerned about such invasions but I think most just don't want the inconvenience of longer security lines. Open a hundred lanes, keep the wait to less that 15 minutes and I'll gladly show up in my robe and slippers at which point TSA can glove up and give me a physical for all I care. I simply don't want to be in line for two hours. I don't want to have to plan to be at the airport today, for my flight tomorrow. If it's inconvenient, America will show little patience. We say we want security, but we don't want to be inconvenienced by it. In the end, the illusion of security is sufficient for most.

I recently enrolled two of my kids in the Loudoun County Public Schools just west of Washington, D.C. On my first visit to the schools I found all the doors locked. There was a buzzer and a note: “Please be prepared to show ID to the camera for verification prior to entry,” it read. I buzzed. The red light came on and I was admitted. They didn't know me. They didn't ask for ID. I could have had been loaded to bear, strapped with dynamite and carrying bucket bombs, yet they let me in. But it sure is nice to know that my kids go to school where the doors are locked all day and no “bad guys” can get it. Too bad the front office staff from the Loudoun County Public Schools doesn't work security in Amsterdam. They would have spotted Delta's terror threat immediately and never let him in the door.