Wampum

Nine days ago I wrote Attention Maine Primary Campaigns -- three questions not every candidate or campaign may have thought about yet -- what have you (or your campaign manager) got to say about the next BRAC round, about the pretense that the US "controls events" in Iraq, which is the core assumption in all the "responsible" models, and the economic priority of Iraqi refugees during a recession.

I wrote to Peter Asen (Michael Brennan), Corey Haskell (Ethan Strimling), Lisa Prosienski (Chellie Pingree), Marc Malon (Mark Lawrence), Emily Boyle (Adam Cote), and Valerie Martin (Tom Allen), letting each know I'd posted three questions, and offering all of them a generous "gotcha-free" reading. There were responses from Peter Asen, on behalf of Michael Brennan, and from Marc Malon, on behalf of Mark Lawrence. Peter provided substantive responses on behalf of his candidate, and Marc expressed the hope that he could do so in the near future.

On the BRAC:

Michael is the only candidate to publicly support a 10% reduction in military spending. He believes that the future of the maine economy is more sustainable economic development, and wants to get us out of the cycle of being on pins and needles each BRAC cycle. That said, he does think Maine should be treated fairly and will push for Maine to be treated fairly, but he also thinks we can, should, and must develop new sustainable good jobs that are not contingent on defense spending.

On the question of control:

Michael does not believe we can control the situation in Iraq. Our role is to get our troops out of the country, acknowledge to the world community that we've made a mistake, engage with Iraq's neighbors and the world community on moving forward, and provide economic support to help rebuild the country's infrastructure and economy. That is the best we can do.

On the economic priority of Iraqi refugees during a recession:

Michael believes we must talk about the economic cost of the war to the US; the toll of the war on the US standing in the world; the toll of the war on American servicemen and women and their families; and the impact of the war on Iraqis and other people of the middle east. None of this is an either or proposition. And he doesn't focus on one piece at the expense of the others.

I asked a follow-up question whether the 10% figure is real (inflation-adjusted), and if relative to the 2009 budget, which is 74% over the last Clinton/Gore budget for discretionary defense spending, or more generally, which the Congressional Budget Office projects to be down to 3% in 2017, that is, to 2.7% of GDP. I have the impression that the answer is both. Down 10% off the Bush/Cheney numbers, either on the last Rumsfeld, or the current Gates run rates, and down 10% as a long-term policy, so towards 2.7%. The average since Kennedy is 5% (as high as 12% during the heights of the Vietnam War), and the average since Reagan is 4%.

These were good answers. Like anyone who isn't distracted by actually running a campaign, I could "improve" on each answer, but keeping in mind what it is like to have scores of reasonable, and unreasonable questions and "push messages" come in over the course of a campaign, these were as responsive as they needed to be, and actually quite good, so I opened up my checkbook and contributed $100 to Michael Brennan via the campaign's Act Blue page. If you happen to click on the blue image below, you can reward the Brennan campaign, either for taking a Maine blog seriously, or for having wicked good answers to my best three questions for Mainiacs intending to represent Maine in the Congress -- the body charged by the Constitution with the awful responsibility under Article I, § 8, to declare War, to raise and support Armies, and to provide and maintain a Navy, and ultimately, under Article II, § 2, to make an end to the current Wars, and re-enter into Treaties.