by Karoun Demirgian | Washington Post | October 14, 2016

The Obama administration last month warned Congress there could be serious national security consequences for overriding the president’s veto to enact a law giving families of 9/11 victims a chance to sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly supporting the terrorists who carried out the attacks.

The law allows courts to waive claims to foreign sovereign immunity in situations involving acts of terrorism on U.S. soil — a change the president, along with senior defense and intelligence officials, said undermines the long-time practice of exempting foreign governments from lawsuits. As a result, they argued, other nations may change their laws, exposing American officials and members of the military to legal threats abroad over U.S. diplomatic and military decisions.

Despite the warnings, Congress overwhelmingly voted to override Obama’s veto last month, although congressional leaders have since expressed uneasiness with the law and may try to amend it during the post-election “lame duck” session.

“They voted for a bill that they knew had negative consequences for America’s national security,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said last month, accusing Congress of “buyer’s remorse.”

What follows is a breakdown of the biggest concerns and issues that will weigh on lawmakers’ minds as they consider whether to change the law in the weeks following the election.

Will U.S. officials and members of the military really be sued abroad?

The administration’s main argument against the bill as it moved through Congress was that it could cause other countries to enact similar laws.

The administration’s concerns were echoed by foreign officials, including from France, Turkey and China, who warned that countries putting domestic concerns over established international principles like sovereign immunity puts the world on a dangerous course.

So far, no foreign official has publicly threatened to change its country’s laws or file a retaliatory lawsuit.

“International law is created by state practice,” said John B. Bellinger, the State Department’s legal adviser during the Bush adminsitration, noting that no matter how narrow the 9/11 law is, it encourages a “gradual chipping away” of international norms that contributes “to state practice about the erosion of sovereign immunity.”

The U.S. engages in controversial, deadly operations all over the world, through drone strikes, combat operations and providing tactical support to allies that could be fodder for legal actions. If, for example, a Saudi national were killed in an American drone strike in Yemen, Bellinger said, bringing a tit-for-tat lawsuit against the United States would be relatively straightforward.

Lawmakers are particularly concerned members of the military could be targeted in foreign courts — a major reason why the House Armed Services Committee’s chairman and ranking member warned the law would “increase the risk to our military and other personnel around the world.”

But the potential consequences could go beyond threats to American government officials and spread to U.S. corporations, according to Bellinger.

“If this ripple effect continues… then we may begin to see other countries lifting not just the defense of sovereign immunity for governments, but defenses that companies have,” Bellinger said, noting, as an example, how Ecuador changed its environmental laws in 1999, enabling a lawsuit over pollution charges to be brought against Chevron.

“Right now, we’re talking about sovereign immunity,” Bellinger said. “But we’re contributing to the opening up of courts around the world.”

How could this impact U.S.-Saudi relations?

Officials have also warned the law could compromise the military’s mission in critical foreign campaigns, such as in Syria, where Saudi Arabia is a key player in the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State. Though the two countries have disagreed about whether the Kingdom is providing enough support to the effort, American officials don’t want to give Saudi Arabia an incentive to reduce its role.

The law “puts a big cloud over U.S.-Saudi relations on the eve of the new president coming into office,” said Bruce Riedel, an expert on Saudi relations at the Brookings Institution. “Certainly you may find them to be less cooperative on things like Syria.”

Syria isn’t the only concern. U.S. officials worry the 9/11 bill could harm intelligence sharing with Saudi Arabia that is critical to counter-terrorism planning. And in war-torn Yemen, where human rights groups have charged Saudi Arabia’s bombing of civilians constitute war crimes, Riedel said the 9/11 bill “has made using American leverage harder at this critical juncture.”

Some experts also said they worry tensions over the new law could cause the Saudi monarchy to be less sympathetic to U.S. entreaties to improve human rights in the country, where dissidents and activists are routinely jailed and women can’t legally drive.

Whether and how Saudi Arabia will challenge the United States to express its anger over the law is unclear. Riedel said the Saudis have been too “humiliated” by Congress’ vote not to retaliate in someway, but they are likely to “more look for diplomatic theater than anything else.”

Will Saudi Arabia really liquidate its U.S. assets?

Saudi officials warned earlier this year that if Congress passed the bill into law, the Kingdom would pull assets from the United States. But experts say Riyadh may not make good on its $750 billion dollar threat.

“I don’t think they’re going to withdraw hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury,” Riedel said. “They’re having severe economic problems of their own; they’re not in any position to do something like that.”

The Treasury Department unveiled information for the first time this year showing how much U.S. debt Saudi Arabia holds. As of July, the Kingdom held $96.5 billion in Treasury securities, down from a peak of $123.6 billion in January. Saudi Arabia has other U.S.-based assets as well, including buildings, farmland and a stake in an oil refinery.

The law didn’t change property protections in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which means courts cannot freeze Saudi Arabia’s U.S.-based assets unless a judgement is rendered against the Kingdom, Bellinger said.

Why is the defense industry worried?

Saudi Arabia is currently the top buyer of U.S. military equipment, spending hundreds of billions critical to keeping the U.S. defense industry afloat. “Our military doesn’t buy enough to keep many of our production lines open anymore,” said Michael Herson, a prominent defense lobbyist.

Recently, members of Congress have raised objections to U.S.’s military sales to Saudi Arabia over concerns they help fuel attacks against civilians in Yemen’s brutal war. But economic and geostrategic concerns keep the vast majority of members from supporting proposals to block arms sales.

If Saudi Arabia stops making mega-purchases of U.S. military products in response to this law, it jeopardizes American jobs — while likely strengthening U.S. rivals, Herson argued.

“The problem is that if they don’t buy from us… they’ll turn and buy Chinese and Russian equipment,” Herson said. “It’s a concern not only as a threat to our industrial base, but from a foreign policy standpoint, we start to push them into their orbit and out of our orbit.”

What countries other than Saudi Arabia might get sued in U.S. courts?

The intent of the law is to aid 9/11 victims’ families who have now taken advantage of the legal changes and filed lawsuits against Saudi Arabia in federal courts in Washington, D.C. and New York. Their claims likely rest on proving what a congressional inquiry couldn’t: that alleged links between Saudi officials and the 9/11 terrorists mean the Saudi government bears some responsibility for the attacks.

But could other countries find themselves sued under this law? Not likely, experts say.

U.S. courts can already waive sovereign immunity claims when the accused government is designated a state sponsor of terror. And while other countries might worry they could be sued in situations where officials were privy to information about a terrorist attack even if they had no role in the event, the relatively low number of terror attacks on U.S. soil means there simply aren’t a lot of accusations to make.

“It would be exceedingly rare that some other country could be alleged to be responsible for some other act of terrorism in the United States,” Bellinger said.

What will Congress do?

Since it first emerged in 2009, the 9/11 bill went through several changes to pare back its scope. If Congress decides to try to amend the law further, it will have limited options.

Champions of the law already dismissed proposals to limit it to only the Sept. 11 attacks, arguing that would give “every country, including Saudi Arabia, a green light to [support terrorist attacks in the U.S.] in the future,” as Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. There is also a proposal to set up a special legal tribunal to handle claims, but that involves procedural and financial considerations Congress might find hard to tackle in a jam-packed lame duck session.

The simplest approach may be to expand the administration’s waiver power under the law, which is now limited to circumstances where the administration is engaging in “good faith” negotiations with the accused country to settle claims.

For the law to be changed in the coming weeks, sentiments in Congress will have to shift. Schumer and other supporters are reluctant to make changes and, so far, only about 28 senators have called for revisiting the issue before the end of the year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/10/14/examining-the-potential-consequences-of-the-911-bill/

By The Hill Staff | The Hill | October 26, 2016

Lobbying runs deep in Washington.

Every day, thousands of law firms, associations and advocacy groups seek to exert influence over policymaking away from the glare of presidential and congressional politics.

In such a crowded field, a select few have shown an ability to get things done — and it’s those movers and shakers who are among The Hill’s Top Lobbyists.

From the “hired guns” who populate K Street, to the lobbyists who derive strength from grassroots organizing, to the trade associations harnessing industry might, to the professionals representing America’s biggest companies, influence comes in many forms.

Many of the people on The Hill’s list are not formally registered to lobby. We use the term broadly here to encompass Washington’s influence arena and those who do battle within it.

Josh Ackil and Matt Tanielian, Franklin Square Group 

From Apple to Uber, the hottest names in the tech world trust this bipartisan firm with their advocacy efforts.

Andy Barbour, Smith-Free Group 

Barbour, a former Clinton administration official, is among the top Democrats on K Street when it comes to financial issues.

Haley Barbour, Lanny Griffith, Ed Rogers and Loren Monroe, BGR Group 

This GOP-run powerhouse has made strategic Democratic hires in recent years, giving it more range when representing its stacked client roster.

Doyle Bartlett, Eris Group 

The firm is well established in the financial services landscape, counting everyone from angel investors to hedge funds to payday lenders as clients.

Hunter Bates and Geoff Davis, Republic Consulting LLC 

Bates, a former top staffer for Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and Davis, a former congressman from Kentucky, have a small but mighty advocacy team.

Kirk Blalock, Fierce Government Relations

A veteran of the George W. Bush administration, Blalock helps keep business booming at this all-Republican firm.

Dan Boston, Health Policy Source Inc. 

Boston runs this health-centric shop, which has been busy working on Medicare-related issues for clients like the American Medical Group Association, the Alliance for America’s Hospitals and Centene Corporation.

Chuck Brain, Capitol Hill Strategies LLC 

Brain, a fixture of the lobbying business, has been representing top-flight clients like Altria Client Services, the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America and Ally Financial.

Robert Chamberlin and Sam Whitehorn, Signal Group

The pioneering lobbying and PR shop is reinventing itself for a new era after the departure of founder Steve McBee.

Rob Collins and Mike Ference, S-3 Group

The firm’s ties to GOP leadership and the appropriations committees are an asset when working for Fortune 500 companies on budget and regulatory issues.

Justin Daly, Daly Consulting Group 

After stints at the House and Senate banking panels and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Daly has built a firm that is trusted by heavyweights in the financial world.

Linda Daschle, LHD & Associates Inc. 

Daschle, a former acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, continues to dominate the aviation space at the firm she founded in 2008.

Licy Do Canto, The Do Canto Group

Do Canto brings two decades of Washington experience to the table when fighting for public health initiatives.

Ken Duberstein and David Schiappa,The Duberstein Group Inc. 

A former chief of staff to President Ronald Reagan, Duberstein commands one of K Street’s most enviable books of business.

Missy Edwards, Missy Edwards Strategies

As the former director of development and finance at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Edwards has an insider’s perspective on process and politics.

Steve Eichenauer, Public Strategies Washington

Eichenauer, a former aide to Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), runs the lobby shop that juggles advocacy and coalition management for clients.

Steve Elmendorf and Jimmy Ryan, Subject Matter

The Democratic duo is as connected as they come, powering a lobbying and PR venture that has shown an ability to maneuver around the gridlock on Capitol Hill.

John Feehery, QGA Public Affairs

Feehery, the savvy leader of the firm’s communications and government affairs shops, formerly worked for former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and former Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas). He is a columnist for The Hill.

Mitchell Feuer and John Anderson, Rich Feuer Anderson

The firm nurtured by Feuer and Anderson specializes in financial policy, with success for 13 years and running.

Jeff Forbes and Dan Tate Jr., Forbes-Tate 

The bipartisan firm offers clients a spate of communications services, in addition to its federal and grassroots advocacy, and is on pace for its highest lobbying revenues ever.

Elizabeth Frazee and Sharon Ringley, TwinLogic Strategies 

It’s been a banner year for TwinLogic, with lobbying work for the music streaming service Pandora Media, the Competitive Carriers Association and the Consumer Technology Association.

Sam Geduldig and Steve Clark, CGCN Group

The trendsetting Republican firm continues to innovate, adding former reporter Patrick O’Connor to its ranks and opening up a strategic communications arm.

Chris Giblin and Moses Mercado, Ogilvy Government Relations

Lobbyists at Ogilvy had a hand in several legislative initiatives this year, including the successful overhaul of toxic chemical regulations.

Nick Giordano, Washington Council Ernst & Young 

The fiscal-focused shop is shifting into overdrive as corporate clients such as General Electric, American Express and Mars Inc. lay the groundwork for tax
reform; it’s also the sole lobbying firm for the Newman’s Own Foundation.

Rich Gold, Kathryn Lehman and Gerry Sikorski, Holland & Knight 

Bringing a collaborative approach to its municipal, industry, foreign and nonprofit clients, lobbyists at Holland & Knight have amassed a business sheet that speaks to results.

Micah Green and Jason Abel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP

The firm boasts a strong advocacy roster with Green, a longtime financial services policy expert, and Abel, a former aide to Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) who specializes in government ethics.

Ilisa Halpern Paul, District Policy Group

Serving as the advocacy offshoot of the law firm Drinker, Biddle & Reath, the firm made its mark in the world of healthcare policy.

J. Steven Hart and Susan Hirschmann, Williams & Jensen PLLC

Hart, a former Reagan administration official, and Hirschmann, who comes armed with House Republican leadership experience, run one of the oldest independent firms in Washington.

Ralph Hellmann and David Lugar, Lugar Hellmann Group LLC 

Republican operatives Hellmann and Lugar are the only lobbyists at the shop, but the pairing has attracted businesses from some of the nation’s largest companies.

Michael Herson, American Defense International Inc. 

Herson, a longtime lobbyist and former Defense Department official, is an institution in the intelligence and defense communities.

Mike House, Hogan Lovells

An industry veteran, House brings invaluable experience to the table for clients like the insurance company Aflac, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Airbus.

Joel Jankowsky, Scott Parven, Arshi Siddiqui and Michael Drobac, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Business is reaching stratospheric heights at K Street’s No. 1 firm, with action this year on everything from drones to Cuba to healthcare policy.

Joel Johnson, The Glover Park Group 

Clients have a trusted guide in Johnson, a former Clinton administration official who leads the advocacy efforts of the public relations powerhouse.

Matt Keelen, The Keelen Group LLC

Keelen’s boutique firm, which represents clients including Las Vegas Sands, the Humane Society of the United States and the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, has been taking its revenue numbers to new heights.

Ken Kies, Federal Policy Group 

The tax policy guru has been in the trenches during a more than three-decade career in Washington; he’s likely to be in high demand as Congress eyes action on tax reform.

Lisa Kountoupes, Kountoupes | Denham 

A Clinton administration veteran, Kountoupes has been working on everything from drug approval reform to cybersecurity and recently appeared on the first lobbying contract for the messaging app Slack Communications.

Jon Kyl, Howard Berman, Holly Fechner and Bill Wichterman, Covington & Burling LLP

The law and lobby firm has been boosting its revenues over the last year and a half since Kyl, a former GOP senator, became free to lobby.

Marc Lampkin and Al Mottur, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck 

Lampkin, a former aide to former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), and Mottur, a top bundler on K Street for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, are riding high at what is now the second-highest-grossing lobby shop in Washington.

Blanche Lincoln, Lincoln Policy Group 

The former Democratic senator from Arkansas helped Monsanto tackle the labeling of genetically modified foods; she also manages policy advocacy for the environmental charity Ocean Conservancy.

Bob Livingston, The Livingston Group LLC

Livingston, a former congressman whose firm has long held sway on K Street, was among the first lobbyists to get behind GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.

Trent Lott and John Breaux, Squire Patton Boggs

Former lawmakers Lott and Breaux are the engine of the firm’s lobbying machine, which represents clients like Amazon and Saudi Arabia.

Sander Lurie, Dentons

A former Senate aide, Lurie guides clients through thickets of legislative and regulatory issues at what is now the largest law firm in the world.

Bruce Mehlman and David Castagnetti, Mehlman Castagnetti Rosen & Thomas 

This bipartisan firm knows how to get things done in every political climate, a big selling point in an era of congressional gridlock.

Larry O’Brien, The OB-C Group LLC

Since forming the bipartisan firm in 1993, O’Brien, a prominent Democrat, has done policy work all across the spectrum.

Tom O’Donnell, Gephardt Group Government Affairs

O’Donnell has been a force in the lobbying world since he co-founded the firm with former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) almost a decade ago.

Kevin O’Neill and Eugenia Pierson, Arnold & Porter LLP

O’Neill and Pierson joined the firm from Squire Patton Boggs and are building out the law firm’s lobbying capabilities with gusto.

John O’Neill and Manny Rossman, Harbinger Strategies

With years of combined experience working in leadership and on influential committees, the GOP operatives of this four-person firm can reach Capitol Hill’s most powerful Republicans.

Manny Ortiz, VantageKnight, Inc.

Ortiz, a Democratic Party powerbroker, left Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck this year to form his own venture.

R. Scott Pastrick and Charlie Black, Prime Policy Group 

Pastrick, a former Democratic National Committee official, and Black, a former adviser to the White House runs of George W. Bush and John McCain, have spent time at the highest levels of political campaigns.

Jeff Peck, Peck Madigan Jones 

Peck has shown a knack for breaking through on tough financial services issues.

Steven Phillips, DLA Piper 

Whether it’s dealing with federal agencies or Capitol Hill, Phillips has it covered for his robust client sheet.

Jim Pitts and Chris Cox, Navigators Global 

Pitts, a George H.W. Bush alum, and Cox, a veteran of the George W. Bush White House, have wielded influence on several big-ticket issues, including a funding increase for the National Institutes of Health and the continuation of the wind energy tax credit.

Heather Podesta, Heather Podesta + Partners 

Podesta has been a trailblazer on the fundraising and advocacy scene; the Democrat has promised with her Republican colleagues to “Make Lobbying Great Again.”

Tony Podesta, Kimberley Fritts, Paul Brathwaite and Josh Holly,
Podesta Group 

The firm’s prowess in advocacy, digital campaigns and international lobbying has kept it at the front of the pack.

Thomas Quinn and Robert Smith, Venable LLP 

Quinn and Smith, a Democrat and Republican, respectively, made their reputations by winning big for clients.

Robert Raben, The Raben Group 

Raben, a former Justice Department official, has stayed true to his progressive values with his firm, showing there’s more than one way to make it on K Street.

John Raffaelli, Jim McCrery and Shannon Finley, Capitol Counsel LLC 

No policy battle is too challenging for this bipartisan firm, which is packed with Republican and Democratic power players.

Barry Rhoads and Kai Anderson, Cassidy & Associates

Cassidy has expanded aggressively in the defense, healthcare and energy spaces, building upon the budget and appropriations work that has long been its hallmark.

Emanuel Rouvelas, Bart Gordon and Jim Walsh, K&L Gates 

Whether it’s drones, space exploration or self-driving cars, the firm moves nimbly at the intersection of technology and regulatory policy.

Tom Scully and Mark Rayder, Alston & Bird LLP

Scully and Rayder are shaping healthcare policy for the American Orthotic & Prosthetic Association, the National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Humacyte, a biotechnology and regenerative medicine company.

Scott Segal, Bracewell & Giuliani 

Segal is one of the most sought-after names in environmental policy, with expertise few can match.

Rhod Shaw, Alpine Group 

Shaw has taken a leading role for the high-tech industry on spectrum policy, heading up a coalition that includes Cisco, Qualcomm and Intel.

Tom Sheridan, The Sheridan Group 

Sheridan, a longtime political operative, uses his influence to push for causes like the Children’s Aid Society and One Action, an international anti-poverty group.

Michaela Sims and Jennifer Bell, Chamber Hill Strategies

Sims and Bell took a risk to found their own firm and now are reaping the benefits of what is rapidly becoming one of the most successful healthcare-focused shops on K Street.

Mike Smith and Jim Richards, Cornerstone Government Affairs 

Smith and Richards help the firm leverage its expertise in policy, appropriations and state-level connections to get things done.

Tracy Spicer, Avenue Solutions

Spicer and her team stay at the center of healthcare policy, which is no small feat when debates are raging about drug policy, the Affordable Care Act and entitlement programs.

Alexander Sternhell, Sternhell Group

A former Senate Banking Committee aide, Sternhell is deeply versed in the complexities of financial services policy.

Linda Tarplin, Tarplin, Downs & Young LLC 

Tarplin co-founded the women-run firm a decade ago, and it has become a healthcare shop to be reckoned with.

Carl Thorsen and Alec French, Thorsen French Advocacy

Thorsen, a Republican, and French, a Democrat, are an effective one-two punch for their clients.

David Urban and Manus Cooney, American Continental Group 

Urban, a GOP chief of staff to the late Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), and Cooney, a policy maven who once built out Napster’s Washington office, are on the front lines of several legislative and regulatory battles.

Robert Van Heuvelen, VH Strategies

As a chief of staff to former Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Van Heuvelen knows how to work the levers of the Senate.

Stu Van Scoyoc, Van Scoyoc Associates 

The budget and appropriations process is an intimidating landscape; Van Scoyoc knows his way around every inch of it.

Stewart Verdery, Monument Policy Group 

The bipartisan lobbying firm, founded by Bush administration alum Verdery, helped the U.S. Olympic Committee convince Congress to nix the tax on Olympic medals.

Jack Victory and Rick Shelby, Capitol Hill Consulting Group 

Victory, a former aide to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), brings budget and energy know-how to Capitol Hill battles.

Vin Weber, Mercury

The former Republican congressman from Minnesota remains close to GOP policymakers and operatives, giving him power behind the scenes.

Jonathan Yarowsky, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 

He draws on decades of expertise to score for clients such as the American Association for Justice, Walgreen Co., the Beer Institute and Charter Communications.

By Jonathan D. Salant | NJ.com | November 9, 2016

New Jersey’s congressional delegation, which has been a 98-pound weakling on Capitol Hill, soon may bulk up.

When the 115th Congress convenes in January, Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-11th Dist.) elected to his 12th term Tuesday, will be in line to chair the House Appropriations Committee, one of the Big 3 House panels and the one that writes the annual federal spending bills.

“It’s a game changer for the state,” defense lobbyist Michael Herson said.

Frelinghuysen’s ascension singlehandedly would change the reality in Washington of New Jersey being 11th in population but only 23rd in power, as determined by those serving in leadership positions and wielding the gavel at committee and subcommittee meetings.

First elected in 1994 as part Speaker-to-be Newt Gingrich’s Republican revolution that ended 40 years of Democratic control of the House. Frelinghuysen, 70, has been building up seniority and climbing the leadership ladder since.

Frelinghuysen, now chair of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, and Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-2nd Dist.) were the two most powerful members of the state’s delegation, according to the NJ Advance Media study of congressional clout.

“One of the things that gets you power in Congress is how long you’ve been there,” said Matthew Hale, a professor of political science at Seton Hall University. “Hopefully, we won’t be 98-pound weaklings forever.”

With Republicans maintaining control of the U.S. Senate, both of the state’s Democratic senators, Robert Menendez and Cory Booker, will spend at least two more years in the minority.

Continued Republican control of the House keeps LoBiondo and Rep. Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.) as subcommittee chairs.

The state lost a subcommittee chairmanship when Rep. Scott Garrett (R-5th Dist.) lost his re-election bid to Democrat Josh Gottheimer. Garrett also was the only member of the state delegation to sit on the House Financial Services Committee.

That loss will be more than offset by Frelinghuysen’s expected rise to Appropriations chair. The current occupant, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) is term limited.

“That’s really where the action is,” said Krista Jenkins, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University. “To have somebody heading it up who’s from New Jersey is a shot in the arm for people who usually look at New Jersey with some derision.”

Frelinghuysen spokesman Steve Wilson did not return repeated phone calls and emails.

The formal decision won’t be made until the incoming House Republican conference convenes this fall and selects the committee chairs for the next Congress.

Still, lobbyists and lawmakers indicated that that the post was Frelinghuysen’s for the asking.

“Everything that I’ve heard is that he has put his deck chairs in a row,” said Doc Syres, vice president for legislative affairs at Aerospace Industries Association, a trade group for aerospace and defense companies.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a fellow member of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, said Frelinghuysen has made his interest in the position known to his colleagues.

“Rodney has a lot of friends who would like to see him succeed,” Cole said. “He’s an exceptionally strong candidate with a wide basis of support. He’s the favorite to become the next chairman.”

Frelinghuysen has helped his fellow House Republicans. His campaign committee transferred $425,825 to the House GOP’s fundraising arm and his leadership political action committee contributed $179,000 to Republican candidates.

As the Appropriations defense chairman, Frelinghuysen has filled his campaign coffers with donations from the industry he oversees. Six of his seven biggest sources of contributions were employees of defense contractors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group.

Not only is he next in line by seniority, but he has a reputation for being able to work across party lines, an important trait at a time when House Republican leaders have had to rely on Democratic votes to pass the spending bills needed to keep the government open.

“He’s someone you can sit down with and reason together,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), a fellow member of the House Appropriations Committee.

At the end of the week, DeLauro joins Frelinghuysen and another Appropriations member, Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) on the Acela to return to their homes. They’ll talk politics, baseball or other topics, Serrano said.

“He’s just an easy guy to get along with,” he said.

Frelinghuysen’s skills were on display in when he successfully obtained $33 million in Hurricane Sandy recovery funds in January 2003, bringing the total package to $60 million. The New Jersey and New York delegations lobbied their colleagues, reminding them that their states also could be hit by devastating storms. Frelinghuysen at the time said he personally talked to more than 100 lawmakers. The Hurricane Sandy Emergency Relief Appropriations became law at the end of the month.

“‘You just give me my shot on the floor,'” Syers recalled Frelinghuysen telling then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). “‘I’m going to pass this amendment if you give me the chance to bring it up.'”

Jonathan D. Salant may be reached at jsalant@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @JDSalant. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook

BY VAGO MURADIAN | Defense & Aerospace Report | November 10, 2016

Michael Herson, the president of American Defense International and one of Washington’s top defense lobbyists, discusses who will populate the Trump administration and Republican congressional leadership with Defense & Aerospace Report Editor Vago Muradian.

By Karoun Demirjian | The Washington Post | November 14, 2016

Defense hawks are quietly celebrating the election of Donald Trump  — now, they might just get more than they ever dreamed possible.

That’s because Washington Republicans and the president elect have more in common on defense spending and priorities than it might seem given Trump’s hardline foreign policy stance against immigration, his questioning of longstanding strategic alliances like NATO and support for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump ally Rudy Giuliani, a contender for a cabinet position, said on CNN Sunday that strengthening the military is a major priority of the president-elect.

“He’s going  to be facing Putin with a country that is not diminishing it’s military but a country that is dramatically increasing it to Reagan like levels,” Giuliani said, invoking the Reagan mantra of “peace through strength.”

Trump and congressional Republicans are actually on the same page on a host of defense priorities, including increasing the number of active duty troops in the Army and size of the Navy, large-scale modernization of military facilities, weapons and the nuclear arsenal; and a dramatic spike in missile defense. And Trump — despite benefiting politically during the campaign from hacks of Democratic political groups — also touts the need for improved cyber security, which is already under discussion on Capitol Hill.

“This is all music to the ears of not only Republican leaders in defense, but many Democrats too,” said Michael Herson, a prominent defense lobbyist.

Trump’s team hasn’t laid out all the specifics yet on defense policy, which will be largely implemented by his defense secretary . A figure like Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) or Gen. Michael Flynn – both Trump campaign surrogates – could mean a different Pentagon than if the military establishment was headed by former Bush administration adviser Stephen Hadley, or an establishment hawk who has criticized Trump like Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

The biggest obstacle to enacting a wide-ranging host of GOP defense priorities is the cost — according to an estimate from the American Enterprise Institute’s Mackenzie Eaglen and Rick Berger, anywhere from about $100 billion to $300 billion more over the next four years than President Obama’s current plan.

Congress can’t legally spend that money until it gets rid of budget caps as part of the sequester holding spending check since the start of fiscal 2013. Trump called for the end of those budget caps on the campaign trail, promising he would “ask Congress to fully eliminate the defense sequester and will submit a new budget to rebuild our military,” during a September speech in Pennsylvania.

House Armed Services Committee Chair Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.) “is encouraged by the president elect’s determination to rebuild America’s military, a priority that Chairman Thornberry shares,” his spokesman Claude Chafin said.

So, apparently, are the markets: defense stocks spiked considerably the day after Trump’s election — with the stock value of some of the biggest defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Lockheed jumping between more than 5 to 7.5 percent at the news.

But there is still resistance in Congress to Trump’s plans — potentially from the more fiscally conservative Republicans and Democrats.

“There is considerably more demand for defense spending than there is money to meet that demand,” House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said the morning of the election. “Look at all the programs that are out there, from the B-21 (bomber) to upgrades to our submarines, upgrades to our arsenal, to rising personnel costs – add it all up and it is vastly more money than we’re going to have. How do you deal with that?”

Under a Trump administration, finding a way to lift budget caps depends on whether lawmakers and the president-elect can agree on a series of tax reforms and entitlement cuts, both of which could spark intraparty conflict. For example: Trump the populist promised not to touch Social Security benefits, which are limited under House Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) fiscal plan.

Progress is more likely on defense priorities because Republicans believe Trump is unlikely to adopt the Obama administration’s stance that every dollar of discretionary defense spending be matched by a dollar of discretionary domestic spending, which covers  such programs as food stamps, community development and education programs, and transportation and infrastructure.

Thornberry has frequently complained that Democrats’ insistence on parity between domestic and defense spending effectively means defense budgets are “held hostage” to non-defense spending.

The GOP argues that means the military must choose between rehabilitating planes so old they are running on scraped-together “museum piece” replacement parts and a credible missile defense; or between giving over-taxed and under-equipped soldiers a reasonable number of training hours and funding operations against the Islamic State.

Republicans have sought to get around this by demanding emergency war funds – which are not subject to budget caps — to cover certain defense spending. Democrats have repeatedly decried the tactic as a sneak attack to let the GOP avoid tough budget negotiations to end sequestration.

If the sequestration hurdle is cleared, Washington’s leading defense hawks are betting they start to see defense get a long-needed influx of cash.

“Nobody gets a blank check,” Herson said. “But I think we get the infusion we need to restore our strength.”

The first targets for an increase would be infrastructure and materiel upgrades, replacing legacy systems, and boosting the military’s recruitment program, which are already Republican priorities. Then could come some of the priorities Trump has identified — such as ramping up thew Army up to 540,000 soldiers and increasing the Navy’s fleet to 350 ships — and, Republicans hope, increasing procurement dollars for next-generation bombers and missile defense.

Trump has proposed cutting non-defense spending by about one percent a year, which could make way for more military investment. A recent estimate from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that under Trump’s plan, by 2026, spending on non-defense programs would drop by anywhere from 29 to 37 percent.

The Hill | November 17, 2015 | By Kristina Wong |

Michael Herson may be one of Washington’s top defense lobbyists today, but in the past he’s worked at drive-ins, warehouses and kitchens.

He’s even worn a chicken suit.

It’s that strong work ethic, Herson said in a recent interview with The Hill, that’s allowed him to build a company from scratch into one of the most powerful defense firms in D.C. — American Defense International (ADI), where he is president and chief executive officer.

Herson grew up in New Jersey. His father, a World War II veteran, was very poor as a boy and credits his stay at a camp for disadvantaged youth for turning his life around. Using the GI Bill to earn a college degree, his father went to law school and on to a career in entertainment law during the golden era of Broadway.
Herson started working when he was 11, painting poles and picking up garbage at drive-in movie theaters and packing candy at warehouses. He also stood in front of a fried-chicken restaurant in a chicken suit to attract customers.

He said those skills came in handy when he first came to Washington, D.C., and started from the ground up.

As an undergrad at Georgetown University, he began interning on Capitol Hill with then-Rep. Jim Courter (R-N.J.). In an era before the Internet and personal computers, Herson did a lot of photocopying.

He was selected as an intern for the White House during the Reagan administration. There, interns rotated between different departments, including the executive office, the National Security Council, the Office of Public Affairs and the Office of the First Lady.

By the end of his internship, at 21, Herson was working in the speech writing office for then-Vice President George H.W. Bush.

Herson remembers being invited to Bush’s Christmas party at the Naval Observatory. The former vice president and later president spoke to the interns, before talking to anyone else, Herson said. He also took time to mentor them.

“He was a super, super nice guy,” Herson recalled.

Herson then took a class in campaign management, went to law school in New Jersey and worked on several state campaign races.

When Bush was elected president in 1988, Herson accepted a political appointment as a special assistant to the assistant Defense secretary of force management and personnel, which Herson said introduced him to the world of defense policy.

It was there he became steeped in military recruitment, readiness, training and mobilizing. He also traveled to military bases and obtained a master’s degree in national security studies from Georgetown University.

After Bush lost reelection to then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in 1992, Herson worked to represent the Naval Station Great Lakes as the Pentagon was going through a round of military base closures. He also worked at a think tank, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.

In 1993, at 28, his county chairman in New Jersey contacted him to run for the state legislature. He moved to New Jersey and took a job at a healthcare company.

Herson won the Republican primary but lost the campaign to longtime New Jersey Democratic congressman Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. Nonetheless, he received national attention for the campaign. Notables, from then-House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) to action movie star Chuck Norris, stumped for him.

It was then Herson decided to create his own lobbying firm. His goal was a company that would do more than lobby Congress — it would build bridges to the Pentagon and the military services, too.

He began with a meager budget. He attended auctions to snag phone systems and office furniture. He found cheap office space by subleasing temporary space.

“We moved a lot in the initial years,” Herson admitted.

His mother — a former print and broadcast journalist who at one time wrote profiles for The Hill — helped write his first press releases.

Now, the company, which has been operating since 1995, has 70 client bases in eight
countries.

ADI is different from other firms, Herson said, because “we combine the political with the military.”

ADI represents companies of all sizes, on issues as diverse as weapons systems, space launches, information technology and communications, defense health services and telemedicine — even bingo services at military bases.

Herson compared his business to the reality television series “Pawn Stars.”

“You never know what’s going to walk in that door,” he said.

Herson said he’s lucky to live in the Washington, D.C.-metro area, which gives his children exposure to an international community of all “shapes, sizes and colors.”

His daughter, who is 14 and a high school freshman, is singing the national anthem at a Wizards NBA game in a few weeks.

In his spare time, Herson’s hobby is winemaking, and he is launching a wine label early next year under the name Herson Family Vineyards. His first wine will be a cabernet sauvignon grown from grapes in Napa, Calif.

Herson is also actively involved in volunteer work, including serving the military.

He is organizing this year’s Thanksgiving dinner at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Maryland for recovering troops. His two teenage children will be volunteering as well.

He has hosted the Little Heroes Ball for children of wounded veterans.

Herson also sits on the board of Surprise Lake Camp, which his father attended as a child. He said he hopes to carry on the legacy.

“[Dad] never forgot the people who helped him get to where he was,” Herson said.

The post A CAPITAL SUCCESS, FROM THE GROUND UP appeared first on American Defense International.

The Hill | November 17, 2015 | By Kristina Wong |

Michael Herson may be one of Washington’s top defense lobbyists today, but in the past he’s worked at drive-ins, warehouses and kitchens.

He’s even worn a chicken suit.

It’s that strong work ethic, Herson said in a recent interview with The Hill, that’s allowed him to build a company from scratch into one of the most powerful defense firms in D.C. — American Defense International (ADI), where he is president and chief executive officer.

Herson grew up in New Jersey. His father, a World War II veteran, was very poor as a boy and credits his stay at a camp for disadvantaged youth for turning his life around. Using the GI Bill to earn a college degree, his father went to law school and on to a career in entertainment law during the golden era of Broadway.
Herson started working when he was 11, painting poles and picking up garbage at drive-in movie theaters and packing candy at warehouses. He also stood in front of a fried-chicken restaurant in a chicken suit to attract customers.

He said those skills came in handy when he first came to Washington, D.C., and started from the ground up.

As an undergrad at Georgetown University, he began interning on Capitol Hill with then-Rep. Jim Courter (R-N.J.). In an era before the Internet and personal computers, Herson did a lot of photocopying.

He was selected as an intern for the White House during the Reagan administration. There, interns rotated between different departments, including the executive office, the National Security Council, the Office of Public Affairs and the Office of the First Lady.

By the end of his internship, at 21, Herson was working in the speech writing office for then-Vice President George H.W. Bush.

Herson remembers being invited to Bush’s Christmas party at the Naval Observatory. The former vice president and later president spoke to the interns, before talking to anyone else, Herson said. He also took time to mentor them.

“He was a super, super nice guy,” Herson recalled.

Herson then took a class in campaign management, went to law school in New Jersey and worked on several state campaign races.

When Bush was elected president in 1988, Herson accepted a political appointment as a special assistant to the assistant Defense secretary of force management and personnel, which Herson said introduced him to the world of defense policy.

It was there he became steeped in military recruitment, readiness, training and mobilizing. He also traveled to military bases and obtained a master’s degree in national security studies from Georgetown University.

After Bush lost reelection to then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in 1992, Herson worked to represent the Naval Station Great Lakes as the Pentagon was going through a round of military base closures. He also worked at a think tank, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution.

In 1993, at 28, his county chairman in New Jersey contacted him to run for the state legislature. He moved to New Jersey and took a job at a healthcare company.

Herson won the Republican primary but lost the campaign to longtime New Jersey Democratic congressman Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. Nonetheless, he received national attention for the campaign. Notables, from then-House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) to action movie star Chuck Norris, stumped for him.

It was then Herson decided to create his own lobbying firm. His goal was a company that would do more than lobby Congress — it would build bridges to the Pentagon and the military services, too.

He began with a meager budget. He attended auctions to snag phone systems and office furniture. He found cheap office space by subleasing temporary space.

“We moved a lot in the initial years,” Herson admitted.

His mother — a former print and broadcast journalist who at one time wrote profiles for The Hill — helped write his first press releases.

Now, the company, which has been operating since 1995, has 70 client bases in eight
countries.

ADI is different from other firms, Herson said, because “we combine the political with the military.”

ADI represents companies of all sizes, on issues as diverse as weapons systems, space launches, information technology and communications, defense health services and telemedicine — even bingo services at military bases.

Herson compared his business to the reality television series “Pawn Stars.”

“You never know what’s going to walk in that door,” he said.

Herson said he’s lucky to live in the Washington, D.C.-metro area, which gives his children exposure to an international community of all “shapes, sizes and colors.”

His daughter, who is 14 and a high school freshman, is singing the national anthem at a Wizards NBA game in a few weeks.

In his spare time, Herson’s hobby is winemaking, and he is launching a wine label early next year under the name Herson Family Vineyards. His first wine will be a cabernet sauvignon grown from grapes in Napa, Calif.

Herson is also actively involved in volunteer work, including serving the military.

He is organizing this year’s Thanksgiving dinner at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Maryland for recovering troops. His two teenage children will be volunteering as well.

He has hosted the Little Heroes Ball for children of wounded veterans.

Herson also sits on the board of Surprise Lake Camp, which his father attended as a child. He said he hopes to carry on the legacy.

“[Dad] never forgot the people who helped him get to where he was,” Herson said.

The post A CAPITAL SUCCESS, FROM THE GROUND UP appeared first on American Defense International.

August 15, 2016 | By Van Hipp |

Today, as in years past, U.S. military doctors are on the front line treating U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force personnel and developing breakthroughs in a wide variety of medical areas that will have long-range implications for civilian healthcare.

In recent years, it is U.S. military medicine that has led the way in wound care, brain health, telemedicine, and rehabilitative care. While other agencies and departments of the federal government are focused on basic medical research, U.S. military physicians are focused more on applied research and saving lives today.

From a taxpayer standpoint, military medicine provides real value to the American taxpayer.

This week, U.S. military doctors will come together once again for their annual Military Health System Research Symposium (MHSRS). The event will take place in Kissimmee, Fla. and will allow military doctors to share the latest medical breakthroughs and technologies for treating America’s finest.

What began years ago as a combat casualty care conference with a few military physicians participating, has grown into the most authoritative and respected medical conference in the world dedicated to treating the military both on and off the battlefield.

In addition to U.S. Military medical personnel, MHSRS will include NATO and other allied nation medical officials, as well as civilian medical doctors, scientists, health experts, and technology developers. By charging a fee to our allies and the civilians who are participating, America’s military doctors insure that the conference pays for itself at no cost to the American taxpayer.

The rest of the federal government could sure learn from this example.

Over the years, MHSRS and its predecessor combat casualty care conference, has led to many medical advancements. These include the inception of the Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine (AFIRM) to help those who have lost limbs on the battlefield, the discovery of blood biomarkers for traumatic brain injury (TBI), hemorrhage control technologies, wound care innovations and many more.

Recently, civilian health authorities hailed a telemedicine platform that has its roots with the U.S. Army’s Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research Center (TATRC), as the most cost effective telemedicine platform in America today. In fact, it is TATRC that really paved the way many years ago for the use of telemedicine in the United States.

And how about the first Omega3 wound care product in the world that is now available for American citizens? It was sought out and championed early by the U.S. Navy. And how about the powerful new weapon in the fight against Cytokine Storm?

U.S. Air Force doctors helped make it happen.

Today, the Zika virus has infected well over 40 members of the U.S. Military and the state of Florida has just confirmed 3 new non-travel cases of the Zika virus, bringing the total there to 28. The Zika virus was discovered in Uganda’s Zika Forest in 1947 by the famed Scottish entomologist, Dr. Alexander Haddow. Currently, there is a well-respected researcher at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, M.D. who has long studied Zika and warned of it as a potential widespread threat.

He has been proven right and is now sought out by others for his expertise. His name is Dr. Andrew Haddow and yes, he’s the grandson of the man who discovered the Zika virus.

We should not be surprised that U.S. military medicine is continuing to pave the way with the latest medical advancements in its chief focus on saving American lives today.

U.S. military medicine has a rich and storied history going back to Major Walter Reed’s breakthrough work on yellow fever and Army Surgeon General George Miller Sternberg’s pioneering efforts on bacteriology.

U.S. military medical doctors are not only saving military lives, they are progressing medical research that will continue to benefit all Americans. We live in a dangerous world and these are challenging times. U.S. Military medicine remains on the front line and can be counted on to lead the way to insure our men and women in uniform are cared for on and off the battlefield. We are all fortunate that the nation as a whole will continue to benefit from U.S. Military medical breakthroughs as in years past.

The post U.S. Military Doctors Lead the Fight Against Zika appeared first on American Defense International.

Rep. Tim Huelskamp alienated business lobbyists during his three House terms as he pushed for government shutdowns and an end to the Export-Import Bank. Lobbyists responded by backing the Kansas Republican’s primary opponent.

Huelskamp lost that contest last month to Roger Marshall, an obstetrician-gynecologist, who appears to be a shoo-in for the safe GOP seat.

Marshall isn’t the only primary challenger to woo K Street money this cycle, either. Of the five challengers who have knocked off incumbents so far, four received donations from lobbyists during the first half of 2016, a CQ analysis of congressional lobbying records found. One, Rep. George Holding, R-N.C., faced another incumbent, Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C., in a redrawn district.

Giving political money to challengers in a primary contest can be a risky proposition for lobbyists and those from corporate and trade group political action committees. But with more primaries essentially serving as the general election in districts that are solidly in the camp of one party, K Streeters say they are sometimes willing to take on sitting lawmakers.

“As a general rule, it takes a lot of courage to give to a primary challenger. You’re throwing down the gauntlet,” said Michael Herson, who runs the firm American Defense International and donated money to Marshall. “Obviously the downside, if your guy loses, this is all very public, it’s all disclosed.”

But, he added, there can be a significant upside, beyond just helping give the boot to a nemesis.

“In some cases, you’re doing it because the member is hostile to your issues and you see no way of turning that person around,” Herson said. If the challenger wins, “you’re in on the ground floor,” if you’ve helped that person raise money.

Business groups, after facing policy and political challenges from conservative organizations, have retooled their approach to primaries.

“We think it’s important to elect men and women who are going to come to Congress and govern, and not just talk about shutting down the government,” said Scott Reed, senior political strategist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which spent roughly $400,000 in independent expenditures trying to unseat Huelskamp, who was first elected in 2010 in the tea party wave. Independent expenditures — contributions that are not in coordination with the candidate — are not included in the CQ analysis of campaign donations from lobbyists and PACs.

The chamber, Reed noted, changed its internal policy after the 2012 elections to permit primary involvement. Some of those races have been in support of sitting incumbents, such as backing Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who easily survived a primary challenge last week. But in the Huelskamp vs. Marshall race, it meant taking on a member of Congress — a move that lobbyists say can carry risks of damaging an already frayed connection on the Hill.

In addition to Marshall and Holding, K Street money also went to Dwight Evans, the Pennsylvania Democrat who overtook Rep. Chaka Fattah and Scott Taylor, who beat out Virginia GOPer J. Randy Forbes in June, according to semi-annual contribution disclosures filed with Congress under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. Fattah resigned in June after being convicted of criminal charges.

Lobbyists and their PACs did not report contributions to Al Lawson, who defeated Rep. Corrine Brown in Florida’s 5th District Democratic primary last week.

Several of the K Street donations are more than just minor tokens.

Checks worth more than $1,000 comprised about half of all the contributions reported to these challengers, according to a CQ analysis of the filings. Evans received the highest average donation — about $2,400 per lobbyist — even more than Holding, who was first elected to the House in 2012. Nineteen of the total 61 donations to Evans were for $5,000.

Holding, since he is already in Congress, had the most donations from lobbyists in the first half of 2016: 363 such contributions by the mid-year deadline, totaling about $622,000. Taylor received nine donations — for roughly $16,000 — including one from Jay Timmons, who runs the National Association of Manufacturers. The majority of that came before he won his primary in June.

Still, K Street insiders say that donations to primary challengers are likely to remain something of a rarity, particularly in races where incumbents are expected to stay in office.

“There’s a general assumption that contributions against an incumbent who is re-elected will cause that incumbent to be very unhappy with the contributor,” said Robert Kelner, who chairs the election and political law group at Covington and Burling.

It would likely violate House or Senate rules for a lawmaker to seek retribution in such instances. “But it would be just about impossible to prove,” Kelner said.

The post K Street Money Fuels House Challengers to Victory appeared first on American Defense International.

By Van Hipp | NEWSMAX | Friday, 09 Sep 2016 9:07 AM

As we approach the 15th anniversary of 9/11, we are reminded of our first responders who are always ready to respond to any kind of emergency, be it terrorism, natural disaster, fire, crime, or other life threatening situation. Yes, our police, firefighters, and National Guard are always there during challenging times to risk their lives to save others and keep them safe.

We Americans often take our first responders for granted and this is particularly true of our nation’s earliest first responders, the National Guard. The concept of the “citizen-soldier” goes back to the earliest days of our country, even before the American Revolutionary War. The “citizen-militia” was also something our Founding Fathers insisted upon as far as the future security of the young Republic was concerned. Today, more than 50 percent of our National Guardsmen have combat experience.

The National Guard is today’s “citizen-militia” and today they have both a federal and state mission. They help fight our nation’s wars and keep us safe, but they are also among the very first to respond to hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters.

In addition to holding down a regular job, these American patriots are always ready to respond to terrorist attacks, deploy overseas, or help restore power and basic necessities to their fellow countrymen who have endured a catastrophe on the home-front. They were there at Bunker Hill, Valley Forge, the Argonne Forest, Normandy, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and Afghanistan just to name a few. And they were also there at Hurricanes Hugo, Andrew, Katrina, the California Rim Fire, and countless other domestic emergencies.

Yes, National Guardsmen do all of this while still maintaining a civilian job. Multiple deployments put a strain on National Guard families, but they are always, always ready when called. And since we can train roughly three or four Guardsmen for every one active duty troop, the American taxpayers have been the real beneficiaries of putting much of our national security capability in the National Guard.

Fortunately, members of both political parties over the years have realized the vital role the National Guard plays with our nation’s security, as well as the economic sense it makes, even when the Pentagon hasn’t. The bipartisan National Guard Caucus in the U.S. Congress has done a great job with its National Guard & Reserves Equipment Account (NGREA) of keeping the National Guard properly equipped.

This 9/11 weekend, the National Guard Association of the United States (NGAUS), will come together for its annual conference in Baltimore, MD. NGAUS has emerged as our nation’s premier grass-roots military organization and it has done much to ensure that our National Guard is properly trained and equipped to keep all of us safe. NGAUS also does much to help take care of National Guard families in need.

The vision of our Founding Fathers to have a “citizen-militia” always ready to keep America safe and secure is alive today in our National Guard. It’s an unique concept that has served America well and that other nations have tried to emulate. Our Founding Fathers knew what they were doing. As citizens, we must always work to ensure that the National Guard has what it needs to keep America safe and secure so that it will always be ready when called.

http://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/747460/346

The post Honoring Our First Responders appeared first on American Defense International.

The post American Defense International’s Michael Herson on Hill Priorities, Defense Shifts appeared first on American Defense International.

by Karoun Demirgian | Washington Post | October 14, 2016

The Obama administration last month warned Congress there could be serious national security consequences for overriding the president’s veto to enact a law giving families of 9/11 victims a chance to sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly supporting the terrorists who carried out the attacks.

The law allows courts to waive claims to foreign sovereign immunity in situations involving acts of terrorism on U.S. soil — a change the president, along with senior defense and intelligence officials, said undermines the long-time practice of exempting foreign governments from lawsuits. As a result, they argued, other nations may change their laws, exposing American officials and members of the military to legal threats abroad over U.S. diplomatic and military decisions.

Despite the warnings, Congress overwhelmingly voted to override Obama’s veto last month, although congressional leaders have since expressed uneasiness with the law and may try to amend it during the post-election “lame duck” session.

“They voted for a bill that they knew had negative consequences for America’s national security,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said last month, accusing Congress of “buyer’s remorse.”

What follows is a breakdown of the biggest concerns and issues that will weigh on lawmakers’ minds as they consider whether to change the law in the weeks following the election.

Will U.S. officials and members of the military really be sued abroad?

The administration’s main argument against the bill as it moved through Congress was that it could cause other countries to enact similar laws.

The administration’s concerns were echoed by foreign officials, including from France, Turkey and China, who warned that countries putting domestic concerns over established international principles like sovereign immunity puts the world on a dangerous course.

So far, no foreign official has publicly threatened to change its country’s laws or file a retaliatory lawsuit.

“International law is created by state practice,” said John B. Bellinger, the State Department’s legal adviser during the Bush adminsitration, noting that no matter how narrow the 9/11 law is, it encourages a “gradual chipping away” of international norms that contributes “to state practice about the erosion of sovereign immunity.”

The U.S. engages in controversial, deadly operations all over the world, through drone strikes, combat operations and providing tactical support to allies that could be fodder for legal actions. If, for example, a Saudi national were killed in an American drone strike in Yemen, Bellinger said, bringing a tit-for-tat lawsuit against the United States would be relatively straightforward.

Lawmakers are particularly concerned members of the military could be targeted in foreign courts — a major reason why the House Armed Services Committee’s chairman and ranking member warned the law would “increase the risk to our military and other personnel around the world.”

But the potential consequences could go beyond threats to American government officials and spread to U.S. corporations, according to Bellinger.

“If this ripple effect continues… then we may begin to see other countries lifting not just the defense of sovereign immunity for governments, but defenses that companies have,” Bellinger said, noting, as an example, how Ecuador changed its environmental laws in 1999, enabling a lawsuit over pollution charges to be brought against Chevron.

“Right now, we’re talking about sovereign immunity,” Bellinger said. “But we’re contributing to the opening up of courts around the world.”

How could this impact U.S.-Saudi relations?

Officials have also warned the law could compromise the military’s mission in critical foreign campaigns, such as in Syria, where Saudi Arabia is a key player in the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State. Though the two countries have disagreed about whether the Kingdom is providing enough support to the effort, American officials don’t want to give Saudi Arabia an incentive to reduce its role.

The law “puts a big cloud over U.S.-Saudi relations on the eve of the new president coming into office,” said Bruce Riedel, an expert on Saudi relations at the Brookings Institution. “Certainly you may find them to be less cooperative on things like Syria.”

Syria isn’t the only concern. U.S. officials worry the 9/11 bill could harm intelligence sharing with Saudi Arabia that is critical to counter-terrorism planning. And in war-torn Yemen, where human rights groups have charged Saudi Arabia’s bombing of civilians constitute war crimes, Riedel said the 9/11 bill “has made using American leverage harder at this critical juncture.”

Some experts also said they worry tensions over the new law could cause the Saudi monarchy to be less sympathetic to U.S. entreaties to improve human rights in the country, where dissidents and activists are routinely jailed and women can’t legally drive.

Whether and how Saudi Arabia will challenge the United States to express its anger over the law is unclear. Riedel said the Saudis have been too “humiliated” by Congress’ vote not to retaliate in someway, but they are likely to “more look for diplomatic theater than anything else.”

Will Saudi Arabia really liquidate its U.S. assets?

Saudi officials warned earlier this year that if Congress passed the bill into law, the Kingdom would pull assets from the United States. But experts say Riyadh may not make good on its $750 billion dollar threat.

“I don’t think they’re going to withdraw hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury,” Riedel said. “They’re having severe economic problems of their own; they’re not in any position to do something like that.”

The Treasury Department unveiled information for the first time this year showing how much U.S. debt Saudi Arabia holds. As of July, the Kingdom held $96.5 billion in Treasury securities, down from a peak of $123.6 billion in January. Saudi Arabia has other U.S.-based assets as well, including buildings, farmland and a stake in an oil refinery.

The law didn’t change property protections in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which means courts cannot freeze Saudi Arabia’s U.S.-based assets unless a judgement is rendered against the Kingdom, Bellinger said.

Why is the defense industry worried?

Saudi Arabia is currently the top buyer of U.S. military equipment, spending hundreds of billions critical to keeping the U.S. defense industry afloat. “Our military doesn’t buy enough to keep many of our production lines open anymore,” said Michael Herson, a prominent defense lobbyist.

Recently, members of Congress have raised objections to U.S.’s military sales to Saudi Arabia over concerns they help fuel attacks against civilians in Yemen’s brutal war. But economic and geostrategic concerns keep the vast majority of members from supporting proposals to block arms sales.

If Saudi Arabia stops making mega-purchases of U.S. military products in response to this law, it jeopardizes American jobs — while likely strengthening U.S. rivals, Herson argued.

“The problem is that if they don’t buy from us… they’ll turn and buy Chinese and Russian equipment,” Herson said. “It’s a concern not only as a threat to our industrial base, but from a foreign policy standpoint, we start to push them into their orbit and out of our orbit.”

What countries other than Saudi Arabia might get sued in U.S. courts?

The intent of the law is to aid 9/11 victims’ families who have now taken advantage of the legal changes and filed lawsuits against Saudi Arabia in federal courts in Washington, D.C. and New York. Their claims likely rest on proving what a congressional inquiry couldn’t: that alleged links between Saudi officials and the 9/11 terrorists mean the Saudi government bears some responsibility for the attacks.

But could other countries find themselves sued under this law? Not likely, experts say.

U.S. courts can already waive sovereign immunity claims when the accused government is designated a state sponsor of terror. And while other countries might worry they could be sued in situations where officials were privy to information about a terrorist attack even if they had no role in the event, the relatively low number of terror attacks on U.S. soil means there simply aren’t a lot of accusations to make.

“It would be exceedingly rare that some other country could be alleged to be responsible for some other act of terrorism in the United States,” Bellinger said.

What will Congress do?

Since it first emerged in 2009, the 9/11 bill went through several changes to pare back its scope. If Congress decides to try to amend the law further, it will have limited options.

Champions of the law already dismissed proposals to limit it to only the Sept. 11 attacks, arguing that would give “every country, including Saudi Arabia, a green light to [support terrorist attacks in the U.S.] in the future,” as Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. There is also a proposal to set up a special legal tribunal to handle claims, but that involves procedural and financial considerations Congress might find hard to tackle in a jam-packed lame duck session.

The simplest approach may be to expand the administration’s waiver power under the law, which is now limited to circumstances where the administration is engaging in “good faith” negotiations with the accused country to settle claims.

For the law to be changed in the coming weeks, sentiments in Congress will have to shift. Schumer and other supporters are reluctant to make changes and, so far, only about 28 senators have called for revisiting the issue before the end of the year.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/10/14/examining-the-potential-consequences-of-the-911-bill/

The post Critics claimed Saudi 9/11 bill would have serious consequences. Were they right? appeared first on American Defense International.

By The Hill Staff | The Hill | October 26, 2016

Lobbying runs deep in Washington.

Every day, thousands of law firms, associations and advocacy groups seek to exert influence over policymaking away from the glare of presidential and congressional politics.

In such a crowded field, a select few have shown an ability to get things done — and it’s those movers and shakers who are among The Hill’s Top Lobbyists.

From the “hired guns” who populate K Street, to the lobbyists who derive strength from grassroots organizing, to the trade associations harnessing industry might, to the professionals representing America’s biggest companies, influence comes in many forms.

Many of the people on The Hill’s list are not formally registered to lobby. We use the term broadly here to encompass Washington’s influence arena and those who do battle within it.

Josh Ackil and Matt Tanielian, Franklin Square Group 

From Apple to Uber, the hottest names in the tech world trust this bipartisan firm with their advocacy efforts.

Andy Barbour, Smith-Free Group 

Barbour, a former Clinton administration official, is among the top Democrats on K Street when it comes to financial issues.

Haley Barbour, Lanny Griffith, Ed Rogers and Loren Monroe, BGR Group 

This GOP-run powerhouse has made strategic Democratic hires in recent years, giving it more range when representing its stacked client roster.

Doyle Bartlett, Eris Group 

The firm is well established in the financial services landscape, counting everyone from angel investors to hedge funds to payday lenders as clients.

Hunter Bates and Geoff Davis, Republic Consulting LLC 

Bates, a former top staffer for Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and Davis, a former congressman from Kentucky, have a small but mighty advocacy team.

Kirk Blalock, Fierce Government Relations

A veteran of the George W. Bush administration, Blalock helps keep business booming at this all-Republican firm.

Dan Boston, Health Policy Source Inc. 

Boston runs this health-centric shop, which has been busy working on Medicare-related issues for clients like the American Medical Group Association, the Alliance for America’s Hospitals and Centene Corporation.

Chuck Brain, Capitol Hill Strategies LLC 

Brain, a fixture of the lobbying business, has been representing top-flight clients like Altria Client Services, the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America and Ally Financial.

Robert Chamberlin and Sam Whitehorn, Signal Group

The pioneering lobbying and PR shop is reinventing itself for a new era after the departure of founder Steve McBee.

Rob Collins and Mike Ference, S-3 Group

The firm’s ties to GOP leadership and the appropriations committees are an asset when working for Fortune 500 companies on budget and regulatory issues.

Justin Daly, Daly Consulting Group 

After stints at the House and Senate banking panels and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Daly has built a firm that is trusted by heavyweights in the financial world.

Linda Daschle, LHD & Associates Inc. 

Daschle, a former acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, continues to dominate the aviation space at the firm she founded in 2008.

Licy Do Canto, The Do Canto Group

Do Canto brings two decades of Washington experience to the table when fighting for public health initiatives.

Ken Duberstein and David Schiappa,The Duberstein Group Inc. 

A former chief of staff to President Ronald Reagan, Duberstein commands one of K Street’s most enviable books of business.

Missy Edwards, Missy Edwards Strategies

As the former director of development and finance at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Edwards has an insider’s perspective on process and politics.

Steve Eichenauer, Public Strategies Washington

Eichenauer, a former aide to Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), runs the lobby shop that juggles advocacy and coalition management for clients.

Steve Elmendorf and Jimmy Ryan, Subject Matter

The Democratic duo is as connected as they come, powering a lobbying and PR venture that has shown an ability to maneuver around the gridlock on Capitol Hill.

John Feehery, QGA Public Affairs

Feehery, the savvy leader of the firm’s communications and government affairs shops, formerly worked for former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and former Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas). He is a columnist for The Hill.

Mitchell Feuer and John Anderson, Rich Feuer Anderson

The firm nurtured by Feuer and Anderson specializes in financial policy, with success for 13 years and running.

Jeff Forbes and Dan Tate Jr., Forbes-Tate 

The bipartisan firm offers clients a spate of communications services, in addition to its federal and grassroots advocacy, and is on pace for its highest lobbying revenues ever.

Elizabeth Frazee and Sharon Ringley, TwinLogic Strategies 

It’s been a banner year for TwinLogic, with lobbying work for the music streaming service Pandora Media, the Competitive Carriers Association and the Consumer Technology Association.

Sam Geduldig and Steve Clark, CGCN Group

The trendsetting Republican firm continues to innovate, adding former reporter Patrick O’Connor to its ranks and opening up a strategic communications arm.

Chris Giblin and Moses Mercado, Ogilvy Government Relations

Lobbyists at Ogilvy had a hand in several legislative initiatives this year, including the successful overhaul of toxic chemical regulations.

Nick Giordano, Washington Council Ernst & Young 

The fiscal-focused shop is shifting into overdrive as corporate clients such as General Electric, American Express and Mars Inc. lay the groundwork for tax
reform; it’s also the sole lobbying firm for the Newman’s Own Foundation.

Rich Gold, Kathryn Lehman and Gerry Sikorski, Holland & Knight 

Bringing a collaborative approach to its municipal, industry, foreign and nonprofit clients, lobbyists at Holland & Knight have amassed a business sheet that speaks to results.

Micah Green and Jason Abel, Steptoe & Johnson LLP

The firm boasts a strong advocacy roster with Green, a longtime financial services policy expert, and Abel, a former aide to Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) who specializes in government ethics.

Ilisa Halpern Paul, District Policy Group

Serving as the advocacy offshoot of the law firm Drinker, Biddle & Reath, the firm made its mark in the world of healthcare policy.

J. Steven Hart and Susan Hirschmann, Williams & Jensen PLLC

Hart, a former Reagan administration official, and Hirschmann, who comes armed with House Republican leadership experience, run one of the oldest independent firms in Washington.

Ralph Hellmann and David Lugar, Lugar Hellmann Group LLC 

Republican operatives Hellmann and Lugar are the only lobbyists at the shop, but the pairing has attracted businesses from some of the nation’s largest companies.

Michael Herson, American Defense International Inc. 

Herson, a longtime lobbyist and former Defense Department official, is an institution in the intelligence and defense communities.

Mike House, Hogan Lovells

An industry veteran, House brings invaluable experience to the table for clients like the insurance company Aflac, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Airbus.

Joel Jankowsky, Scott Parven, Arshi Siddiqui and Michael Drobac, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Business is reaching stratospheric heights at K Street’s No. 1 firm, with action this year on everything from drones to Cuba to healthcare policy.

Joel Johnson, The Glover Park Group 

Clients have a trusted guide in Johnson, a former Clinton administration official who leads the advocacy efforts of the public relations powerhouse.

Matt Keelen, The Keelen Group LLC

Keelen’s boutique firm, which represents clients including Las Vegas Sands, the Humane Society of the United States and the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association, has been taking its revenue numbers to new heights.

Ken Kies, Federal Policy Group 

The tax policy guru has been in the trenches during a more than three-decade career in Washington; he’s likely to be in high demand as Congress eyes action on tax reform.

Lisa Kountoupes, Kountoupes | Denham 

A Clinton administration veteran, Kountoupes has been working on everything from drug approval reform to cybersecurity and recently appeared on the first lobbying contract for the messaging app Slack Communications.

Jon Kyl, Howard Berman, Holly Fechner and Bill Wichterman, Covington & Burling LLP

The law and lobby firm has been boosting its revenues over the last year and a half since Kyl, a former GOP senator, became free to lobby.

Marc Lampkin and Al Mottur, Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck 

Lampkin, a former aide to former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), and Mottur, a top bundler on K Street for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, are riding high at what is now the second-highest-grossing lobby shop in Washington.

Blanche Lincoln, Lincoln Policy Group 

The former Democratic senator from Arkansas helped Monsanto tackle the labeling of genetically modified foods; she also manages policy advocacy for the environmental charity Ocean Conservancy.

Bob Livingston, The Livingston Group LLC

Livingston, a former congressman whose firm has long held sway on K Street, was among the first lobbyists to get behind GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.

Trent Lott and John Breaux, Squire Patton Boggs

Former lawmakers Lott and Breaux are the engine of the firm’s lobbying machine, which represents clients like Amazon and Saudi Arabia.

Sander Lurie, Dentons

A former Senate aide, Lurie guides clients through thickets of legislative and regulatory issues at what is now the largest law firm in the world.

Bruce Mehlman and David Castagnetti, Mehlman Castagnetti Rosen & Thomas 

This bipartisan firm knows how to get things done in every political climate, a big selling point in an era of congressional gridlock.

Larry O’Brien, The OB-C Group LLC

Since forming the bipartisan firm in 1993, O’Brien, a prominent Democrat, has done policy work all across the spectrum.

Tom O’Donnell, Gephardt Group Government Affairs

O’Donnell has been a force in the lobbying world since he co-founded the firm with former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) almost a decade ago.

Kevin O’Neill and Eugenia Pierson, Arnold & Porter LLP

O’Neill and Pierson joined the firm from Squire Patton Boggs and are building out the law firm’s lobbying capabilities with gusto.

John O’Neill and Manny Rossman, Harbinger Strategies

With years of combined experience working in leadership and on influential committees, the GOP operatives of this four-person firm can reach Capitol Hill’s most powerful Republicans.

Manny Ortiz, VantageKnight, Inc.

Ortiz, a Democratic Party powerbroker, left Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck this year to form his own venture.

R. Scott Pastrick and Charlie Black, Prime Policy Group 

Pastrick, a former Democratic National Committee official, and Black, a former adviser to the White House runs of George W. Bush and John McCain, have spent time at the highest levels of political campaigns.

Jeff Peck, Peck Madigan Jones 

Peck has shown a knack for breaking through on tough financial services issues.

Steven Phillips, DLA Piper 

Whether it’s dealing with federal agencies or Capitol Hill, Phillips has it covered for his robust client sheet.

Jim Pitts and Chris Cox, Navigators Global 

Pitts, a George H.W. Bush alum, and Cox, a veteran of the George W. Bush White House, have wielded influence on several big-ticket issues, including a funding increase for the National Institutes of Health and the continuation of the wind energy tax credit.

Heather Podesta, Heather Podesta + Partners 

Podesta has been a trailblazer on the fundraising and advocacy scene; the Democrat has promised with her Republican colleagues to “Make Lobbying Great Again.”

Tony Podesta, Kimberley Fritts, Paul Brathwaite and Josh Holly,
Podesta Group 

The firm’s prowess in advocacy, digital campaigns and international lobbying has kept it at the front of the pack.

Thomas Quinn and Robert Smith, Venable LLP 

Quinn and Smith, a Democrat and Republican, respectively, made their reputations by winning big for clients.

Robert Raben, The Raben Group 

Raben, a former Justice Department official, has stayed true to his progressive values with his firm, showing there’s more than one way to make it on K Street.

John Raffaelli, Jim McCrery and Shannon Finley, Capitol Counsel LLC 

No policy battle is too challenging for this bipartisan firm, which is packed with Republican and Democratic power players.

Barry Rhoads and Kai Anderson, Cassidy & Associates

Cassidy has expanded aggressively in the defense, healthcare and energy spaces, building upon the budget and appropriations work that has long been its hallmark.

Emanuel Rouvelas, Bart Gordon and Jim Walsh, K&L Gates 

Whether it’s drones, space exploration or self-driving cars, the firm moves nimbly at the intersection of technology and regulatory policy.

Tom Scully and Mark Rayder, Alston & Bird LLP

Scully and Rayder are shaping healthcare policy for the American Orthotic & Prosthetic Association, the National Association of Children’s Hospitals and Humacyte, a biotechnology and regenerative medicine company.

Scott Segal, Bracewell & Giuliani 

Segal is one of the most sought-after names in environmental policy, with expertise few can match.

Rhod Shaw, Alpine Group 

Shaw has taken a leading role for the high-tech industry on spectrum policy, heading up a coalition that includes Cisco, Qualcomm and Intel.

Tom Sheridan, The Sheridan Group 

Sheridan, a longtime political operative, uses his influence to push for causes like the Children’s Aid Society and One Action, an international anti-poverty group.

Michaela Sims and Jennifer Bell, Chamber Hill Strategies

Sims and Bell took a risk to found their own firm and now are reaping the benefits of what is rapidly becoming one of the most successful healthcare-focused shops on K Street.

Mike Smith and Jim Richards, Cornerstone Government Affairs 

Smith and Richards help the firm leverage its expertise in policy, appropriations and state-level connections to get things done.

Tracy Spicer, Avenue Solutions

Spicer and her team stay at the center of healthcare policy, which is no small feat when debates are raging about drug policy, the Affordable Care Act and entitlement programs.

Alexander Sternhell, Sternhell Group

A former Senate Banking Committee aide, Sternhell is deeply versed in the complexities of financial services policy.

Linda Tarplin, Tarplin, Downs & Young LLC 

Tarplin co-founded the women-run firm a decade ago, and it has become a healthcare shop to be reckoned with.

Carl Thorsen and Alec French, Thorsen French Advocacy

Thorsen, a Republican, and French, a Democrat, are an effective one-two punch for their clients.

David Urban and Manus Cooney, American Continental Group 

Urban, a GOP chief of staff to the late Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), and Cooney, a policy maven who once built out Napster’s Washington office, are on the front lines of several legislative and regulatory battles.

Robert Van Heuvelen, VH Strategies

As a chief of staff to former Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Van Heuvelen knows how to work the levers of the Senate.

Stu Van Scoyoc, Van Scoyoc Associates 

The budget and appropriations process is an intimidating landscape; Van Scoyoc knows his way around every inch of it.

Stewart Verdery, Monument Policy Group 

The bipartisan lobbying firm, founded by Bush administration alum Verdery, helped the U.S. Olympic Committee convince Congress to nix the tax on Olympic medals.

Jack Victory and Rick Shelby, Capitol Hill Consulting Group 

Victory, a former aide to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), brings budget and energy know-how to Capitol Hill battles.

Vin Weber, Mercury

The former Republican congressman from Minnesota remains close to GOP policymakers and operatives, giving him power behind the scenes.

Jonathan Yarowsky, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 

He draws on decades of expertise to score for clients such as the American Association for Justice, Walgreen Co., the Beer Institute and Charter Communications.

The post Top Lobbyists 2016: Hired Guns appeared first on American Defense International.

By Jonathan D. Salant | NJ.com | November 9, 2016

New Jersey’s congressional delegation, which has been a 98-pound weakling on Capitol Hill, soon may bulk up.

When the 115th Congress convenes in January, Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-11th Dist.) elected to his 12th term Tuesday, will be in line to chair the House Appropriations Committee, one of the Big 3 House panels and the one that writes the annual federal spending bills.

“It’s a game changer for the state,” defense lobbyist Michael Herson said.

Frelinghuysen’s ascension singlehandedly would change the reality in Washington of New Jersey being 11th in population but only 23rd in power, as determined by those serving in leadership positions and wielding the gavel at committee and subcommittee meetings.

First elected in 1994 as part Speaker-to-be Newt Gingrich’s Republican revolution that ended 40 years of Democratic control of the House. Frelinghuysen, 70, has been building up seniority and climbing the leadership ladder since.

Frelinghuysen, now chair of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, and Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-2nd Dist.) were the two most powerful members of the state’s delegation, according to the NJ Advance Media study of congressional clout.

“One of the things that gets you power in Congress is how long you’ve been there,” said Matthew Hale, a professor of political science at Seton Hall University. “Hopefully, we won’t be 98-pound weaklings forever.”

With Republicans maintaining control of the U.S. Senate, both of the state’s Democratic senators, Robert Menendez and Cory Booker, will spend at least two more years in the minority.

Continued Republican control of the House keeps LoBiondo and Rep. Chris Smith (R-4th Dist.) as subcommittee chairs.

The state lost a subcommittee chairmanship when Rep. Scott Garrett (R-5th Dist.) lost his re-election bid to Democrat Josh Gottheimer. Garrett also was the only member of the state delegation to sit on the House Financial Services Committee.

That loss will be more than offset by Frelinghuysen’s expected rise to Appropriations chair. The current occupant, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) is term limited.

“That’s really where the action is,” said Krista Jenkins, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson University. “To have somebody heading it up who’s from New Jersey is a shot in the arm for people who usually look at New Jersey with some derision.”

Frelinghuysen spokesman Steve Wilson did not return repeated phone calls and emails.

The formal decision won’t be made until the incoming House Republican conference convenes this fall and selects the committee chairs for the next Congress.

Still, lobbyists and lawmakers indicated that that the post was Frelinghuysen’s for the asking.

“Everything that I’ve heard is that he has put his deck chairs in a row,” said Doc Syres, vice president for legislative affairs at Aerospace Industries Association, a trade group for aerospace and defense companies.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a fellow member of the Appropriations defense subcommittee, said Frelinghuysen has made his interest in the position known to his colleagues.

“Rodney has a lot of friends who would like to see him succeed,” Cole said. “He’s an exceptionally strong candidate with a wide basis of support. He’s the favorite to become the next chairman.”

Frelinghuysen has helped his fellow House Republicans. His campaign committee transferred $425,825 to the House GOP’s fundraising arm and his leadership political action committee contributed $179,000 to Republican candidates.

As the Appropriations defense chairman, Frelinghuysen has filled his campaign coffers with donations from the industry he oversees. Six of his seven biggest sources of contributions were employees of defense contractors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group.

Not only is he next in line by seniority, but he has a reputation for being able to work across party lines, an important trait at a time when House Republican leaders have had to rely on Democratic votes to pass the spending bills needed to keep the government open.

“He’s someone you can sit down with and reason together,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), a fellow member of the House Appropriations Committee.

At the end of the week, DeLauro joins Frelinghuysen and another Appropriations member, Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) on the Acela to return to their homes. They’ll talk politics, baseball or other topics, Serrano said.

“He’s just an easy guy to get along with,” he said.

Frelinghuysen’s skills were on display in when he successfully obtained $33 million in Hurricane Sandy recovery funds in January 2003, bringing the total package to $60 million. The New Jersey and New York delegations lobbied their colleagues, reminding them that their states also could be hit by devastating storms. Frelinghuysen at the time said he personally talked to more than 100 lawmakers. The Hurricane Sandy Emergency Relief Appropriations became law at the end of the month.

“‘You just give me my shot on the floor,'” Syers recalled Frelinghuysen telling then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). “‘I’m going to pass this amendment if you give me the chance to bring it up.'”

Jonathan D. Salant may be reached at jsalant@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @JDSalant. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook

The post There’s game-changing news for N.J. coming in new Congress appeared first on American Defense International.

BY VAGO MURADIAN | Defense & Aerospace Report | November 10, 2016

Michael Herson, the president of American Defense International and one of Washington’s top defense lobbyists, discusses who will populate the Trump administration and Republican congressional leadership with Defense & Aerospace Report Editor Vago Muradian.

The post Herson on Trump Team, Republican Congressional Leadership appeared first on American Defense International.

By Karoun Demirjian | The Washington Post | November 14, 2016

Defense hawks are quietly celebrating the election of Donald Trump  — now, they might just get more than they ever dreamed possible.

That’s because Washington Republicans and the president elect have more in common on defense spending and priorities than it might seem given Trump’s hardline foreign policy stance against immigration, his questioning of longstanding strategic alliances like NATO and support for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump ally Rudy Giuliani, a contender for a cabinet position, said on CNN Sunday that strengthening the military is a major priority of the president-elect.

“He’s going  to be facing Putin with a country that is not diminishing it’s military but a country that is dramatically increasing it to Reagan like levels,” Giuliani said, invoking the Reagan mantra of “peace through strength.”

Trump and congressional Republicans are actually on the same page on a host of defense priorities, including increasing the number of active duty troops in the Army and size of the Navy, large-scale modernization of military facilities, weapons and the nuclear arsenal; and a dramatic spike in missile defense. And Trump — despite benefiting politically during the campaign from hacks of Democratic political groups — also touts the need for improved cyber security, which is already under discussion on Capitol Hill.

“This is all music to the ears of not only Republican leaders in defense, but many Democrats too,” said Michael Herson, a prominent defense lobbyist.

Trump’s team hasn’t laid out all the specifics yet on defense policy, which will be largely implemented by his defense secretary . A figure like Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) or Gen. Michael Flynn – both Trump campaign surrogates – could mean a different Pentagon than if the military establishment was headed by former Bush administration adviser Stephen Hadley, or an establishment hawk who has criticized Trump like Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

The biggest obstacle to enacting a wide-ranging host of GOP defense priorities is the cost — according to an estimate from the American Enterprise Institute’s Mackenzie Eaglen and Rick Berger, anywhere from about $100 billion to $300 billion more over the next four years than President Obama’s current plan.

Congress can’t legally spend that money until it gets rid of budget caps as part of the sequester holding spending check since the start of fiscal 2013. Trump called for the end of those budget caps on the campaign trail, promising he would “ask Congress to fully eliminate the defense sequester and will submit a new budget to rebuild our military,” during a September speech in Pennsylvania.

House Armed Services Committee Chair Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.) “is encouraged by the president elect’s determination to rebuild America’s military, a priority that Chairman Thornberry shares,” his spokesman Claude Chafin said.

So, apparently, are the markets: defense stocks spiked considerably the day after Trump’s election — with the stock value of some of the biggest defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Lockheed jumping between more than 5 to 7.5 percent at the news.

But there is still resistance in Congress to Trump’s plans — potentially from the more fiscally conservative Republicans and Democrats.

“There is considerably more demand for defense spending than there is money to meet that demand,” House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said the morning of the election. “Look at all the programs that are out there, from the B-21 (bomber) to upgrades to our submarines, upgrades to our arsenal, to rising personnel costs – add it all up and it is vastly more money than we’re going to have. How do you deal with that?”

Under a Trump administration, finding a way to lift budget caps depends on whether lawmakers and the president-elect can agree on a series of tax reforms and entitlement cuts, both of which could spark intraparty conflict. For example: Trump the populist promised not to touch Social Security benefits, which are limited under House Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) fiscal plan.

Progress is more likely on defense priorities because Republicans believe Trump is unlikely to adopt the Obama administration’s stance that every dollar of discretionary defense spending be matched by a dollar of discretionary domestic spending, which covers  such programs as food stamps, community development and education programs, and transportation and infrastructure.

Thornberry has frequently complained that Democrats’ insistence on parity between domestic and defense spending effectively means defense budgets are “held hostage” to non-defense spending.

The GOP argues that means the military must choose between rehabilitating planes so old they are running on scraped-together “museum piece” replacement parts and a credible missile defense; or between giving over-taxed and under-equipped soldiers a reasonable number of training hours and funding operations against the Islamic State.

Republicans have sought to get around this by demanding emergency war funds – which are not subject to budget caps — to cover certain defense spending. Democrats have repeatedly decried the tactic as a sneak attack to let the GOP avoid tough budget negotiations to end sequestration.

If the sequestration hurdle is cleared, Washington’s leading defense hawks are betting they start to see defense get a long-needed influx of cash.

“Nobody gets a blank check,” Herson said. “But I think we get the infusion we need to restore our strength.”

The first targets for an increase would be infrastructure and materiel upgrades, replacing legacy systems, and boosting the military’s recruitment program, which are already Republican priorities. Then could come some of the priorities Trump has identified — such as ramping up thew Army up to 540,000 soldiers and increasing the Navy’s fleet to 350 ships — and, Republicans hope, increasing procurement dollars for next-generation bombers and missile defense.

Trump has proposed cutting non-defense spending by about one percent a year, which could make way for more military investment. A recent estimate from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that under Trump’s plan, by 2026, spending on non-defense programs would drop by anywhere from 29 to 37 percent.

The post Republicans may get the defense spending they dreamed of under President Trump appeared first on American Defense International.

On this Roundtable episode of the Defense & Aerospace Report Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our guests include Byron Callan of the independent equity research firm Capital Alpa Partners, Michael Herson, President and CEO, American Defense International and Mackenzie Eaglen of the American Enterprise Institute.
Topics:
— Roundup of week on Capitol Hill has lawmakers maneuver for additional stimulus spending
— Analysis of Defense Secretary Mark Esper’s comments at the Brookings Institution about the Pentagon’s budget outlook in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and hard choices needed to trade legacy systems for future capabilities
— Impact of the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to award spectrum to Ligado Networks over the Pentagon objections that doing so would undermine GPS signals
— Update on Senate confirmation hearings for top administration jobs including Director of National Intelligence, Navy Secretary and US Air Force Chief
— Assessment of news reports that the White House will send an enforcer to the Pentagon to ensure appointees and civil servants are loyal to the president and plans to exclude coronavirus survivors from future military service
— What to watch in the week ahead

LISTEN HERE

The post Defense & Aerospace Podcast [Washington Roundtable May 07, 2020] appeared first on American Defense International.

On this Roundtable episode of the Defense & Aerospace Report Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our guests are Gordon Adams, PhD, Non-Resident Fellow at the Quincy Institute, Dov Zakheim, PhD, former DoD comptroller, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Michael Herson, President and CEO, American Defense International and Ilan Berman of the American Foreign Policy Council.
Topics:
— Outlook for next coronavirus economic stimulus package and implications for defense
— White House’s personnel crackdown at the Defense Department
— Next US steps in Afghanistan in the wake of deadly maternity ward attack and fraying support on Capitol Hill
— The reasons for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s impromptu visit to Jerusalem as US worries about Beijing’s investment in Israel’s high-tech sector
— Challenges with new Israeli government’s West Bank annexation strategy

LISTEN HERE

The post Defense & Aerospace Podcast [Washington Roundtable May 14, 2020] appeared first on American Defense International.

On this Roundtable episode of the Defense & Aerospace Report Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our guests include Byron Callan of the independent equity research firm Capital Alpa Partners; Michael Herson, President and CEO, American Defense International, Todd Harrison, the director of defense budget analysis and the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Christian Davenport, a staff writer at the Washington Post covering the space and defense industries and author of the 2018 book “The Space Barons: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and the Quest to Colonize the Cosmos.”
Topics:
— Update on National Defense Authorization Act markup in House and Senate
— Demise of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in the House after President Trump’s opposition
— Lawmakers’ view of China as tensions between Washington and Beijing increase over Hong Kong and proposed ouster of Chinese students from US universities
— Key takeaways from Bernstein’s annual conference
— Implications of SpaceX’s upcoming launch of the Crew Dragon that if successful will be the first commercial spacecraft — and crew — into earth orbit
— How SpaceX moves fast and lessons that government can learn to accelerate programs
— Outlook for legacy space contractors as a crop of new commercial providers enter the market

LISTEN HERE

The post Defense & Aerospace Podcast [Washington Roundtable May 28, 2020]–NDAA, China, SPACEX launch appeared first on American Defense International.