White House: Nothing Says Happy Mother's Day Like Free Birth Control

    As part of the White House campaign to push the Affordable Care Act by linking it with Mother's Day, the White House tweeted this today:

Thanks to the #ACA, 1 in 3 women under 65 gained access to preventive care—like birth control—with no out-of-pocket costs. #HappyMothersDay
— The White House (@whitehouse) May 10, 2013

    And kids, you don't even have to wrap it.

The Federal Government's "Death Master File" (I Am Not Making That Up)

    While I certainly would not dispute the reasons for maintaining such a record, does it strike anyone else as just a little creepy that the government has a database called the Death Master File?  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is currently conducting a review of the Social Security Administration's Death Master File to determine weaknesses and irregularities and recommend improvements to prevent improper payments.  The review is still in process, but the GAO issued a preliminary report this week.  Apparently this review is a long time in coming.  In a run-through of some 98,000,000 records, the GAO found a few peculiarities:

Specifically, we identified:
• 130 records where the date of death was recorded to occur before the date of birth;
• 1,295 records where the recorded age at death was between 111 and 129; and
• 1,791 records where the recorded death preceded 1936, the year SSNs were first issued, although the decedents had SSNs assigned to them. 

SSA officials said some of these anomalies were likely associated with records added prior to the mid-1970s that were manually processed.

    Obviously the government's interest in knowing when U.S. citizens die is not so it knows when to send flowers.  The report noted the real reason: money.

Federal benefit-paying agencies generally can access the information in this file and match it against data in their files to alert them to deceased benefit recipients, and therefore help reduce improper benefit payments. As the steward of taxpayer dollars, the federal government must guard against improper payments. Yet for fiscal year 2012, the Office of Management and Budget reported federal agency improper payment estimates totaling almost $108 billion.

    If it is true that the only two things certain in life are death and taxes, then I think there's plenty of evidence that the government has got the certainty of the latter handled.  With the help of the GAO, the government should be able to nail down the former, too.

W.H. Touts $30 Million Award for Technology that Led to 3D Gun

    Just this week, news broke that the "world’s first entirely 3D-printed gun" was successfully built and test-fired by an engineer in Texas.  The technology involves a special printer that uses melted polymers to generate plastic components for a variety of uses, now including working firearms.  Today, in a press release announcing a $200 million program for a "Competition for Three New Manufacturing Innovation Institutes," the White House also touted a $30 million award in a similar competition in August 2012 for the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute.  President Obama mentioned the new institute in his February State of the Union speech.  The purpose of the institute is to help develop the very 3D technology used to produce the newly revealed 3D gun:

Pilot Institute 

In August 2012, the Administration announced the winner of an initial $30 million Federal award to create a pilot institute, the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute (NAMII).  Headquartered in Youngstown, Ohio, NAMII consists of a consortium of manufacturing firms, universities, community colleges, and non-profit organizations primarily from the Ohio-Pennsylvania-West Virginia ‘Tech Belt’.  NAMII was selected from amongst twelve teams from around the country that applied for the award.  The members of NAMII will co-invest $40 million against the initial Federal award.  

Additive manufacturing, often referred to as 3D printing, is a new way of making products and components from a digital model, and will have implications in a wide range of industries including defense, aerospace, automotive, and metals manufacturing. Like an office printer that puts 2D digital files on a piece of paper, a 3D printer creates components by depositing thin layers of material one after another using a digital blueprint until the exact component required has been created. The Department of Defense envisions customizing parts on site for operational systems that would otherwise be expensive to make or ship. The Department of Energy anticipates that additive processes would be able to save more than 50% energy use compared to today’s ‘subtractive’ manufacturing processes.

    This announcement comes in the midst of the ongoing gun-control debate led by the White House and spearheaded by Vice President Joe Biden.  Some lawmakers, including New York Senator Chuck Schumer, have already called for legislation to ban the plastic guns and regulate the technology involved.  Rep. Steve Israel, D-NY, renewed a call to pass his recently introduced Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act which renews the current ban on undetectable weapons that expires this year.


Note: This article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.

Two Hours After Learning of Benghazi Attacks, White House Tweets About "A Safer World"

    The congressional hearings on Benghazi this week have once again refocused attention on the events of September 11, 2012.  On that day, news of the attack on the Benghazi Consulate reached the White House Situation Room at 4:05 PM Eastern Time (ET).  CBS News prepared a timeline of the events and the actions of administration officials:

10:05 p.m. (4:05 p.m. ET): An alert from the State Department Operations Center is issued to ... the White House Situation Room... "US Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack" -- "approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well... 

Around 10:30 p.m. (4:30 p.m. ET): Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his top military adviser learn of the incident... 

11 p.m. (5 p.m. ET): ...White House National Security Advisor Tom Donilon tells President Obama of the attack and the fire at the main villa... 

Midnight (6 p.m. ET) ... Over the next two hours, Sec. Panetta holds a series of meetings and issues several orders...

    Missing from the timeline is this, at 6:02 p.m. ET:

President Obama: "The true legacy of 9/11...will be a safer world; a stronger nation & a people more united" twitter.com/whitehouse/sta…
— The White House (@whitehouse) September 11, 2012 

    In retrospect, the timing for this message could hardly have been worse.  And along with President Obama's fund raising trip to Las Vegas the following day, it does little to dispel the notion that the White House did not take the events in Benghazi as seriously as it should have.

Benghazi Whistleblower Gregory Hicks in Same Building as ARB in October [corrected]

Correction: Gregory Hicks was interviewed by the ARB as he stated in his testimony at the congressional hearing on May 8th.

    Gregory Hicks is one of the so-called whistleblowers due to testify at congressional hearings on the Benghazi attacks on Wednesday.  He is prepared to give some of the most explosive testimony at the hearings, reportedly telling congressional investigators that "if the U.S. had quickly sent a military aircraft over Benghazi, it might have saved American lives."  Despite having been on the phone with Ambassador Chris Stevens as the Benghazi attacks were beginning, Hicks was not interviewed by the Accountability Review Board (ARB) convened by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and was not even mentioned in the report that the ARB produced.
    The ARB was convened on October 4, 2012.  Three weeks later, on October 25, 2012, Hicks was listed on a State Department schedule as meeting with Rick Barton, the Assistant Secretary for Conflict and Stabilization Operations at the State Department.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR CONFLICT AND STABILIZATION OPERATIONS RICK BARTON
9:00 a.m. Assistant Secretary Barton meets with Deputy Chief of Mission for Embassy Tripoli Greg Hicks, at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    According to State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, the ARB's meeting place was in the State Department building in Washington, D.C., the same place Hicks met with Barton.
    There is no public record of what transpired at the meeting between Hicks and Barton, and it is not clear why Hicks would not have been interviewed by the ARB given his presence in the same building as the investigators.  Perhaps Hicks's testimony this week will shed some light on this and other questions about why the American public has had to wait eight months to hear Hicks's version of the events surrounding the Benghazi fiasco.

State Dept. Official: 'The Content Had Expired' in Withdrawn Pre-Benghazi Terrorism Report

    The Congressional hearings on the 9/11 Benghazi attacks this week will likely focus on the classic questions often asked on such occasions: what did those involved know and when did they know it.  Not only will the post-attack words and actions of government officials come under scrutiny, but those preceding the September 11, 2012 attacks on the Benghazi consulate, as well.  One largely overlooked aspect of the investigations thus far involves a report issued by the State Department's Overseas Security Advisory Council on September 6, 2012, just five days before the attack. That report was removed from the OSAC website on September 14, just three days after the attacks because, in the words of a State Department official, "the content had expired." The report was removed the same day that the now infamous "talking points" were undergoing extensive revision.  The report begins as follows (the text of the entire report is included at the end of this article):

Terrorism and Important Dates
9/6/2012
Summary
OSAC currently has no credible information to suggest that al-Qa’ida or any other terrorist group is plotting any kind of attack overseas to coincide with the upcoming anniversary of September 11. However, constituents often have concerns around important dates, holidays, and major events, Often times, these concerns are the result of increased media attention to the issue, rather than credible evidence of a terrorist plot.

    This apparent downplaying of the likelihood of an anniversary-date attack is repeated in the conclusion of the report:

 As highlighted throughout the report, al-Qa’ida and other terrorist groups are unlikely to conduct large-scale attacks on significant dates or holidays due to the heightened security levels.  However, U.S. private sector organizations operating abroad in countries that have not raised their overall security levels may want to consider their vigilance and guard against complacency.

    The Overseas Security Advisory Council is part of the Bureau of Diplomatic Security under the U.S. Department of State.  The mission of the council is "to promote security cooperation between American private sector interests worldwide (Private Sector) and the U.S. Department of State."  Part of its function is to issue Travel Warnings, Travel Alerts, Emergency Messages to U.S. Citizens, and the like.   Many of the reports issued by the OSAC are available in full only to registered "constituents." However, there is a publicly accessible menu of reports, some requiring a login to access, some freely available to all.  Originally, the Terrorism and Important Dates report was listed in the public menu with the others.  Here is a screencap from September 8, 2012:

    Hundreds of such reports are listed on the OSAC website going back years.  However, three days after the Benghazi attacks, the Terrorism and Important Dates report disappeared from the menu.  A current search of the OSAC website for it still fails to turn up any evidence of its existence.  A source with subscriber access confirmed back on September 29, 2012 that as of that date, the report was behind the subscriber wall, accessible only with a login.
    When asked this week about the current status of the report and for an explanation of its disappearance, a State Department official replied via email, "A report was posted on September 6 and was removed on September 14, after the content had expired."  When pressed for clarification on what "expired" meant and who made the determination that it had "expired," the official did not respond.  The "expired" comment is curious since dozens of reports whose content has arguably "expired" are still listed on the site.
    Although the missing report received a substantial amount of attention on conservative blogs and news sites in the weeks following the attacks, the story was not reported in the wider media.  Additionally, it was not mentioned in either the State Department's Accountability Review Board report or the report issued by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.  (The latter report does mention a February 2012 OSAC report, see footnote on page 11, but not the September 6, 2012 report.)
    The OSAC's reports are prepared within the Bureau of Diplomatic Security of the State Department specifically for the private sector interests serviced by the Council.  However, the reports presumably draw upon the same intelligence available to the State Department as a whole and reflect the attitudes and posture of the larger department.  Indeed, at an August 29, 2012 press briefing, in response to a question about a State Department travel warning about Pakistan, spokesperson Victoria Nuland disavowed any connection of the travel warning to the upcoming anniversary, stating, "It doesn’t have anything to do with September 11th."
    Congress will have an opportunity this week to delve further into the decisions that led to the initial issuance of the Terrorism and Important Dates report, as well as the decision to remove the report after it "expired."  The answers to who made those decisions and for what reasons may help Congress get to the bottom of this disastrous episode.

------

Full text of Terrorism and Important Dates report:
The apparent full text of the OSAC report, as posted on September 6, 2012 on the website of an OSAC constituent, reads as follows:

Terrorism and Important Dates
9/6/2012
Summary
OSAC currently has no credible information to suggest that al-Qa’ida or any other terrorist group is plotting any kind of attack overseas to coincide with the upcoming anniversary of September 11. However, constituents often have concerns around important dates, holidays, and major events, Often times, these concerns are the result of increased media attention to the issue, rather than credible evidence of a terrorist plot.
While it is true that In the aftermath of the May 2, 2011 raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abottabad, Pakistan, several media sources reported on various documents recovered during the raid that suggested al-Qa’ida was seeking to conduct significant attacks on major holidays and anniversaries, there are no indications that any of these plans were ever operational. OSAC constituents should review their local emergency action plans and security protocols ahead of major U.S. holidays and anniversary dates.
Terrorism and Holidays/Anniversary Dates
Historically, al-Qa’ida and other transnational terrorist groups have not conducted successful attacks on major U.S. holidays and anniversary dates. One possible explanation for this lack of activity is due to the increase in security on major dates because of a perceived vulnerability. A terrorist group that has spent a significant amount of time monitoring a potential target, training operatives, and acquiring the weapons necessary for a major attack would be less likely to attack when security is at a heightened level.
Terrorist groups are predisposed to conduct the attack first and justify the reasoning subsequently. One recent example of this predisposition was the June 28. 2011 attack on the InterContinental Hotel in Kabul. The attackers primary motivation was to kill as many Westerners and Afghan officials as possible; however, after media reports began erroneously claiming that an important Transition Conference was going to take place at the hotel the next day, the terrorists responsible for the attack claimed that they were in fact targeting that conference. Although specific dates may be important symbolically to terrorist groups, a near-term successful attack will likely be painted as both revenge for the death of bin Laden and a blow against the United States.
Implications
An international terrorist attack around a major international date or holiday would likely fall into one of the three following scenarios.
1) Attacks abroad on significant U.S. holidays, such as July 4 – while U.S. Missions abroad have likely increased their security profile during major U.S. government holidays, host nation security forces are unlikely to elevate their security levels.
2) Attacks following a drawdown of security after a major date – foreign countries will often increase their security posture during a major event such as the Olympics or World Cup, effectively deterring major attacks during the event. However, following the conclusion of the event, security is often reduced. Terrorist groups may wait for security levels to decrease before launching an attack.
3) Lone wolf attacks by independently radicalized individuals on significant dates – while terrorists operating as part of an established cell or network may prefer to bide their time and wait for an opportune moment to strike, individual sympathizers with no formal training or connection to a terrorist group could be inspired to conduct an attack on a significant date despite heightened levels of security. Lone wolves are less likely to attract the attention of host nation counter-terrorism officials.
Conclusion
At this time, OSAC is aware of no specific or credible threats against the U.S. private sector on September 11. As highlighted throughout the report, al-Qa’ida and other terrorist groups are unlikely to conduct large-scale attacks on significant dates or holidays due to the heightened security levels. However, U.S. private sector organizations operating abroad in countries that have not raised their overall security levels may want to consider their vigilance and guard against complacency. OSAC continues to monitor trends and emerging issues that may have a significant security impact on U.S. private sector operations overseas.

Note: A version of this article appeared first at The Weekly Standard. 

President Obama's $2.5M Hotel and 'Vehicle Rental' Tab on Last Mexico Trip

    As the White House first announced in March, Barack Obama is scheduled to visit Mexico and Costa Rica later this week. The trip is billed as "an important opportunity to reinforce the deep cultural, familial, and economic ties that so many Americans share with Mexico and Central America." And at yesterday’s White House press conference, the president stated that he is "very much looking forward to taking the trip down to Mexico" this week.

    But the trip won’t exactly be cheap for taxpayers, assuming the costs mirror those incurred by the American taxpayers for President Obama's last trip to Mexico, for the G-20 summit in June 2012. According to recently discovered documents relating to the costs of that trip, taxpayers paid nearly $2.5 million for hotel and “vehicle rental.”

    The first government document is a contract with a travel agent for the hotels required for the president's delegation and entourage for the conference:

    The accompanying Justification and Approval (J&A) document estimates the total cost at $1,889,388.60, with a maximum payout of $2,078,327.46.  The document does not give details concerning the number of rooms or other special requirements.  It notes the usual security concerns and time constraints that apply to such VIP trips, but also lists this additional restriction imposed by the Mexican government:

    The second document relates to transportation needs for the presidential delegation for the G-20 visit.   The J&A accompanying this contract estimates the cost of transportation-vehicle rental at $630,760.00 with a maximum of $693,836.00, and also notes that the same company, Operadora Transtur, which had been contracted for an earlier visit to Los Cabos by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and was the best value:

     Both contracts were approved in late May 2012, a few weeks before the trip, but were not posted on the fbo.gov website until more recently. Although members of the president's travel party arrived in advance of the president and departed later, President Obama himself stayed in Mexico two nights.

    Regarding the president's upcoming trip, the Washington Examiner reported that there has been some speculation that the true motives for the trip may revolve more around the president's push for immigration reform.  And at a White House meeting on Monday with Latino leaders, President Obama discussed his upcoming trip to Mexico and Costa Rica.  The readout of the meeting provided by the White House concluded with, "At the meeting, the President made clear that immigration reform continues to be a top legislative priority this year."


Note:  This article first appeared at The Weekly Standard.