The timing is being watched closely by proponents and critics of missile defense against the backdrop of the presidential campaign in which the speed and cost of deployment have become issues. The first interceptor missile was loaded into a silo in Alaska last month, and five more are due for installation by mid-October.

President Bush declared last week that the system will become operational later this year, reaffirming a goal he set two years ago. On Tuesday, he chided those who want to shrink and slow the program -- a thinly veiled attack on Democratic nominee John F. Kerry, who has called for reduced spending on missile defense.

But the program has been plagued by a series of testing delays -- most recently, the postponement this week of a critical flight test after the discovery of a faulty computer in the interceptor's booster.

Maj. Gen. John Holly, who is overseeing development, said here Wednesday that postponement of the test would not necessarily force a delay in start-up of the system.

"We've never set a prerequisite event prior to going on alert," the general told reporters. "We're continuing to accumulate information and data on a daily basis, and as we get closer to a place where we think it will be appropriate to brief the leadership, we will do that."

In a separate interview, Holly said he plans to submit a final readiness assessment by mid-September.
Administration officials have said the initial system will serve a dual purpose: It will provide a rudimentary defense against a potential North Korean missile attack, and it will enable the Pentagon to conduct more rigorous and diverse testing.

How defense officials plan to balance the demands of keeping the system on alert while also conducting tests has remained in question. Rumsfeld said Wednesday that if he had to choose between maintaining the alert status or running tests, he would opt for testing -- provided there was no missile crisis at the time.

"My attitude would be, take it off [alert], do the developmental activity, keep learning from this," Rumsfeld said at a news conference.

Earlier, addressing the gathering here of hundreds of military, government and contracting officials, Rumsfeld hailed the system's construction as "the triumph of hope and vision over pessimism and skepticism."

Bush Turns to Part-Time Troops
New Educational Benefits for Guardsmen, Reservists Proposed
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 19, 2004; Page A04
CHIPPEWA FALLS, Wis., Aug. 18 -- President Bush proposed new educational benefits for National Guardsmen and reservists on Wednesday, using a campaign appearance here to appeal to part-time troops disillusioned by extended tours of duty in Iraq.

Bush said those who serve more than 90 consecutive days on active duty in the Guard and the reserves would be given enhanced payments for schooling, and he said rules would be changed to make it easier for children in military families to change schools when the families move. "We'll continue to stand side by side with those who wear the uniform and with the family members of those who wear the uniform," the president said at an open-air rally for Republican faithful in western Wisconsin.

As he has done in other recent rallies, Bush tucked the policy proposals into a stump speech that harshly criticized Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry and said the senator from Massachusetts took a "blame America" approach to terrorism. "He says that going to war with the terrorists is actually improving their recruiting efforts," Bush said, adding: "It's wrong to blame America for anger and the evil of these killers. We don't create terrorists by fighting back. You defeat the terrorists by fighting back."

Bush was referring to a statement Kerry made two weeks ago in which he said: "I believe this administration, in its policies, is actually encouraging the recruitment of terrorists. We haven't done the work necessary to reach out to other countries. We haven't done the work necessary with the Muslim world."

In another assault on Kerry that has become a standard part of Bush's speeches, the president ridiculed Kerry's Iraq position. "Now, almost two years after he voted for the war in Iraq, and seven months after switching positions to declare himself the antiwar candidate, my opponent has found a new nuance," Bush said. "He now agrees it was the right decision to go into Iraq."

Bush's statement that Kerry had called himself "the antiwar candidate" is based on an interview on MSNBC's "Hardball" show earlier this year in which host Chris Matthews asked Kerry if he was "one of the antiwar candidates." Kerry replied that he was, "in the sense that I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have." Kerry added: "Was there a way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable? You bet there was, and we should have done it right."

As Bush made his appeal to military families here, Kerry made a similar pitch at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Cincinnati. "Military families are going through difficult times these days; many of their loved ones are in faraway places, leaving them to care for their families alone," he said.

Invoking his service in Vietnam and the more than 940 Americans killed in Iraq, Kerry added that "you and I, who once left our families and our shores to defend the principles that make America great, understand more than most the cost of keeping our country free."

The dueling appeals to military families underscored the importance of foreign affairs in this year's presidential campaign. According to a new poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, national security and foreign affairs are viewed by voters as more important than the economy for the first time since the Vietnam War.

The cost of Bush's proposals are modest. A White House spokesman said the expanded education benefits for the nearly 150,000 guardsmen and reservists now mobilized would be paid for with existing funds. Bush's fiscal 2005 budget anticipates spending $10 million on "voluntary reciprocity" programs for preventing disruptions to children of military personnel who move.

Traveling with Bush was Karen Hughes, a key figure in his 2000 election who joined the campaign this week at a salary of about $15,000 per month. "I took the training wheels off today," said Hughes, who will travel with Bush for the rest of the campaign.

Bush's visit to Wisconsin, on the eve of a week-long Texas vacation, was his 13th as president to this state, one of about 15 states considered battlegrounds for the election. After the Chippewa Falls rally, Bush took a bus tour through rural Wisconsin, his third this year, stopping at a cheese factory and at the training camp of the Kansas City Chiefs football team. In the afternoon, Bush fielded friendly questions from supporters at a waterside rally in Hudson, Wis., before attending a third campaign event in St. Paul, Minn.

In Hudson, two supporters told Bush they were praying for him, and one named an opponent rarely mentioned on the campaign trail. "The enemy that we need the greatest freedom from right now happens to be Satan," the supporter said.

Bush rapidly changed the subject.
Republicans Head to Convention Divided on Gun Ban
By Robert B. Bluey
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 19, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - If there's one issue on which Republicans usually agree, it's their strong defense of the Second Amendment. But less than two weeks before the GOP convention, moderates and conservatives find themselves at odds over the soon-to-expire semi-automatic gun ban.

In a clash with pro-gun Republicans, President Bush has publicly supported the ban on so-called "assault weapons" dating back to his 2000 presidential campaign. Although he hasn't actively pushed for an extension of the 1994 law, his spokesmen consistently reaffirm his support for it.

The law would sunset Sept. 13 without action from Congress. Republican leaders in the House of Representatives have refused to bring up the matter for debate, and with only four working days left before it expires, even the law's supporters acknowledge it is doomed.

At the same time, however, a band of moderate Republicans have stood in stark opposition to their more conservative colleagues in House leadership posts. They believe enough Republicans would join with Democrats to send a bill to the president's desk.

The Republican-controlled Senate has already voted 52-47 to extend the ban, thanks in part to 10 Republicans who broke ranks. Because the March 2 vote came in the form of an amendment to another bill, the legislation was later voted down in an effort to defeat the measure.

Differences of opinion among Republicans existed in 1994 at the time Congress approved the ban. As a result of that vote, former President Bill Clinton estimated it cost 20 Democrats their jobs, giving Republicans control of Congress.

Political observers disagree whether the stakes are as high today, but both gun-control advocates and Second Amendment supporters suggested Bush ought to tread carefully.

"President Bush has made some key mistakes, such as saying he would sign an extension of the gun ban," said Erich Pratt, spokesman for Gun Owners of America, which has voiced some of the most stringent criticism of Bush as a result of his support for the ban.

By essentially staking out the same stance as his Democrat challenger, Sen. John Kerry, Bush has hurt his reputation with gun owners, Pratt said.

"The president has almost shot himself in the foot in that he has taken away one of the huge magnets that pulled Democratic voters over to his side of the fence," Pratt told CNSNews.com.

Gun-control groups like Americans for Gun Safety have made much of Bush's support for extending the ban. One of its advisers, Matt Bennett, said there's little difference between Bush and Kerry as a result.

"On the major issues of the day, Kerry and Bush are virtually identical in at least what they say about the gun issue," Bennett told CNSNews.com. "Bush has said he supports extending the assault weapons ban, he said he supports closing the gun-show loophole, he said he supports cracking down on gun crime. These are the things Kerry talks about when it comes to guns."

That's what Pratt said worries him, especially if voters buy into that argument. It's not as much of a concern for the National Rifle Association (NRA), which downplayed the gun ban's impact on the presidential race.

"We actually don't think it will play a big role in the election because we're cautiously optimistic that it will sunset on Sept. 13," said Kelly Hobbs, the NRA's spokeswoman.

But those on the other side of the gun debate see things differently. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a leading advocate of renewing the ban, has predicted a backlash against Bush should he not actively campaign for an extension before Sept. 13.

"If it is allowed to expire, it will be President Bush's fault, and we'll let people know that," said Chad Ramsey, a regional director for the Brady Campaign. "He is responsible. It will have expired on his watch. If that's the case, there will be a backlash. People will be angry he let this happen, and people will probably show up at the voting booth with that in mind."

Republicans, meanwhile, aren't saying much. CNSNews.com was unable to reach any of the House moderates who have signed onto legislation to extend the ban. The most outspoken advocate, Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), recently held a press conference with Jim and Sarah Brady.

Other House Republican who have bucked their party to support the ban include Reps. Doug Bereuter (Neb.), Tom Davis (Va.), Michael Ferguson (N.J.), Nancy Johnson (Conn.), Peter King (N.Y.), Mark S. Kirk (Ill.), Jack Quinn (N.Y.), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Fla.) and Christopher Shays (Conn.).

The more conservative House leaders, Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), have expressed little desire to bring up the matter for a vote.

In the Senate, the Republican defectors include Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R.I.), Susan Collins (Maine), Mike DeWine (Ohio), Peter Fitzgerald (Ill.), Judd Gregg (N.H.), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Gordon Smith (Ore.), Olympia Snowe (Maine), George Voinovich (Ohio) and John Warner (Va.).

"It is a divisive issue within the Republican Party ... between the moderates and conservatives," said Rob Recklaus, spokesman for Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), who has championed the issue. "It has to do a lot with the NRA leadership, which has the ear of the conservative wing of the Republican Party."

On the issue of the gun ban, however, Bush has strayed from his traditional conservative base. In Pratt's view, it would be best if the president kept his stance under wraps.

"I do think Bush is on one side of it and House leaders are on the other, but that being said, I don't really think it's an issue," Pratt said. "I don't think the president has a desire to push it. I don't think this is an important enough issue for the president. What he has said can only hurt him, but certainly, it won't hurt him as bad if he started actively pushing it."
Poll: Voters Eyeing National Security
WILL LESTER

Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Concern about national security is dominating public attention in the final months of the presidential campaign because of continuing fears of terrorism and unhappiness about the war in Iraq, according to a poll released Wednesday.

"For the first time since the Vietnam era, national security issues are looming larger than economic issues in an election year," said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press.

Such issues as war, terrorism and foreign policy were named as the most important facing the nation by four people in 10, while one-fourth of those polled said economic issues were most important. In January, national security issues were even with economic issues in this poll.

The last election year when national security issues were rated the most important was 1972, according to Pew's analysis of its own and Gallup Poll data going back half a century.

It's unclear whether the security focus is of more benefit to President Bush or Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.

Among the sentiments that would seem to favor Bush:
_ Nine in 10 say taking measures to protect the United States from terrorist attacks is a top priority.
_ Six in 10 say the use of military force can sometimes be justified against countries that may seriously threaten this country but have not attacked.

_ Bush is seen as stronger on handling terrorism than Kerry.
Others would seem to favor Kerry:
_ Two-thirds are worried about a loss of respect internationally by the United States and most think that is a major problem.

_ Six in 10 say the Bush administration is too quick to use force rather than trying harder for diplomatic solutions.
_ People were more inclined to say that foreign policy should take allies' interests into account than to say foreign policy should be based mostly on U.S. interests.

The poll found that 43 percent feel the use of torture is sometimes justified and another 21 percent say it is rarely justified.

"The reason why we have all those people saying we can do some torture is because they continue to be scared," Kohut said. "That fear factor is what Bush has going for him."

As Kohut sees the election: If it were decided purely on terrorism, Bush would likely win; if it were decided purely on the economy, Kerry would likely win.

"In a sense, Iraq has become the trump card," he said.
When people are asked who would do a better job of handling Iraq, Bush and Kerry are tied, according to the Pew poll.
"Even though Bush's approval rating on Iraq is pretty miserable (43 percent approve), Kerry has yet to make that issue work for him," Kohut said.

He said Wednesday at a briefing at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York that Kerry had some success at his convention but "in the end, he has to make some progress on Bush's most vulnerable foreign policy problem - Iraq." The poll was conducted by the Pew Research Center in association with the council.

Bush's problems in Iraq include a death toll nearing 950 U.S. soldiers, a violent insurgency against the new Iraqi government and U.S. forces, and the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, which was among the central justifications for the president's decision to go to war.

But Kerry has struggled with stating his position on Iraq, defending his vote authorizing the war while criticizing the Bush administration's conduct of the war and difficulties in postwar Iraq.

Democrats say Kerry has a "nuanced position" and Republicans call the Democrat's position a series of flip-flops.
National polls have shown the overall race remains close, with Kerry slightly ahead in some surveys.
The Pew study was based primarily on a poll of 2,009 adults taken July 8-18 with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points and a second poll taken in August. The second poll of 1,512 adults from Aug. 5-10 has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The August poll was taken to provide updated findings on Iraq and the president's job approval rating, which remains in the mid-40s.

Posted on Wed, Aug. 18, 2004
A man cares for the family of man who saved his life decades ago
Associated Press
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. - A white soldier whose life was saved by a black serviceman in 1942's segregated army had a chance to give back, and he did, weaving an unlikely story of chance encounters and human decency.

During World War II, Everett Hines was training in Oklahoma with the crew of a B-17 bomber. The plane crashed, and the 23-year-old Bakersfield airman lost consciousness in the burning wreckage.

The army was segregated then, with black servicemen kept separate from whites. But when a group of black soldiers saw the accident, they rushed to help.

One of them, Abe (pronounced A-bee) Watson, entered the burning plane and pulled out Hines. Both men were burned, but recovered, and after a brief meeting were shipped out to war.

After serving in the South Pacific, Hines returned to Bakersfield, where he raised his family. In 1989, he lost his wife of 48 years, and thought his life was just about over as well.

But one day in the early 1990s, visiting a friend in a hospital, he glanced at a heart attack victim that paramedics were wheeling by.

That man - he'd seen him before, he said.
"I seen his face," he recalled in an interview with the Bakersfield Californian. "I went home and thought about it and thought about it."

The next day, Hines approached the man's sister. Hines said hearing the man's name - Abe Watson - hit him like a thunderbolt.

"When I walked in there, he looked at me, and looked at me. He said, 'Everett, you made it back, didn't you,'" Hines said.

But Watson would not live long after the meeting. The day before he died, Watson told Hines he had a favor to ask.
Watson had a daughter, a single mother with a newborn and two 1-year-old twin boys. She had little means of support. Could Hines watch out for them, Watson asked?

"How could I say no to this man? I wouldn't say no," Hines said.
So the struggling young mother and her three children moved in with the retired widower.
Fourteen years later, Hines is the grandfather Watson would have been. He helps the three boys with homework and keeps them in check, though he never imagined he'd be 85, with a house full of teenagers.

"It's very amazing," said Ruletta Watson, the mother of 15-year-old twins Kenth and Kendrick and 14-year-old Ronal. "Everett raised them like a grandfather."

It's not always easy. The family lives on Hines' Social Security payments, which are enough for food and clothing, but leave no extras for things like repairing the house, said R. Kent Scott, a volunteer at Calvary Bible Church who learned of the family's difficulties.

But Hines said he doesn't regret what he's done.
"At their age right now, they're enough to give you a nervous breakdown," Hines said, chuckling. "But they're good boys, all three of them. They made my life, growing up here. Probably if it hadn't been for them, I'd be gone by now."

The Mercury:
Boyertown has sent its boys on their way to Oregon in hopes of bringing home another American Legion World Series championship.

By now, the statistics and the numbers surrounding Boyertown baseball are legendary, as are the perennial accolades for an organization that plays ball from the ground up.
Also legendary is the involvement of the community in this baseball program, from building Bear Stadium to staging some of the best-run tournaments in the country.

Even the fan base is bigger and better here.

The largest crowds that any of the World Series qualifiers played in front of at their respective regionals didn't come close to the 3,822 that showed up Monday night to see Boyertown and Chester, N.J., at Bear Stadium.

The largest crowd of the other seven regionals was 1,601 for the second-round game between Kennewick, Wash., and host Roseburg, Ore., in the Northwest Regional. And the 1,020 that showed up for the West Regional final between Taylorsville, Utah and Boulder, Colo., was the only other crowd of 1,000 or more fans.

This is the eighth time Boyertown has sent a team to the World Series. They have come home as world champions twice, in 1982 and 1987. Three others were runners-up -- in 1980, 1983 and 1988.

Regardless of the outcome, the Boyertown area -- and the state of Pennsylvania -- has always been represented well. This town, and this American Legion organization, does not suffer from arrogance or high-stepping sports mentality.

Boyertown's dominance of the game is coupled with decency on and off the field, and this year's team is no exception. There are many who say this group of young men is unsurpassed in character and as a class act.

The Bears begin play Friday in Oregon fresh from winning the Mid-Atlantic Regional Tournament and an unprecedented 18th state championship.

Whether or not they return next week with a third World Series championship, the message will have been sent across the country that the best qualities of the game of baseball reign in Boyertown.

Thursday, August 19, 2004              
Stability vs. strain: Troop relocation plan raises issues for military families

By Sandra Jontz and Lisa Horn, Stars and Stripes
European edition, Thursday, August 19, 2004
Quality of life for servicemembers could suffer if the Pentagon does not plan properly as it embarks on its plan to redeploy troops from Europe and Asia to stateside bases, one expert said.

Most public schools surrounding military bases in the States already are at or near capacity, with budgets that won't be able to accommodate an influx of students, said Joyce Raezer, director of government relations for the National Military Family Association.

"It happens with [military construction] and it's going to happen with reposturing. They're going to have the students coming back, mostly from Germany, to various installations, and a lot of the schools already are at capacity."

"There are so many, so many issues," she said. Raezer wondered whether the military will have enough medical providers to treat the influx of servicemembers and their families, and will the surge cripple the already-delayed access retirees suffer in getting treatment.

President Bush announced Monday a 10-year plan to return to the United States as many as 70,000 troops now living overseas, and 100,000 family members and civilian employees.

Even if the moves don't begin until fiscal 2006, as Pentagon officials have said, that still is not enough time for school districts to build schools, buy buses or hire teachers, Raezer said.

And the military's need to wait on actions of the Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which won't get Pentagon recommendations until May 2005, complicates matters, she said.

"The Army is not saying yet where these people are going to go, and school districts need to know."
The redeployment plan will save the military money in the long-term, Raezer said.
"It's a lot cheaper to have bare-boned bases [overseas] if you don't have to have schools, don't have to have quality of life such as family housing, youth programs and such. But they're still going to need to provide those services back in the States."

The plan, in reality, could mean more family separations, said Kathy Moakler, deputy director of government relations NMFA.

"We agree that it certainly will add to stability as far as location goes, but there's a double-edged sword. This also means there will be more frequent deployments and more family separations."

For families in Europe, it's a matter of perspective.
Those with children, such as Jessica Sutfin of Katterbach, Germany, feel they can better handle their spouse's long deployments if they are back in the United States, where they are closer to the support network of family and friends.

Single soldiers, however, seem to appreciate the opportunities afforded to soldiers overseas, primarily the opportunity to travel and explore different cultures.

"I can handle all the six-month deployments they throw at me," said Sutfin, who has three young children and a fourth child on the way. "But these real long [deployments] are a pain in the butt [when you have] kids."

Out of the four years her husband has been stationed in Germany, they have been separated for roughly 2½ years, Sutfin said. He is currently in Iraq, serving a 12-month tour with the 1st Infantry Division's 4th Brigade.

Spc. Jonathan Dorshimer is a tank driver for Büdingen's 1st Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 1st Armored Division. Before coming to Germany, Dorshimer, who was flipping burgers at Burger King, said he bought into the military's promise to see the world.

If it weren't for the Army, "I probably never would have left the United States," Dorshimer said. "I do think it would be good for stability in terms of kids [to go to one school]."

Maggie Minniti, originally from Gdansk, Poland, has been married to a Darmstadt, Germany-based soldier, Sgt. John Andrew Minniti, for a year. After being separated for most of the year they were engaged, she is glad to live now wherever he is stationed.

"Being able to travel in Europe makes it worthwhile. We don't have any kids," Minniti said. "But for me, being with my husband is more important. I would prefer losing my job than not being with my husband."

Spc. Thomas Renner, who is married and has a 2-year-old daughter, wants his family to be wherever he is - be it in Europe or the States.

"I want my family to go with me wherever I go, except a war zone," he said. "Even two months is too long to be away from them," said Renner, referring to the possibility that in the future, troops may deploy from the States to remote bases in Eastern Europe for months at a time.

"It's going to be terrible if we leave," said Dorshimer's Army buddy, Pfc. Matthew Mitchell. "Germany is an amazing place."

Brandi Hennessy's husband left the Army "because of the time he was spending away from home," she said of Spc. Neal Hennessy, last with the 1st Armored Division in Germany. "I know that we would rather move more often, than have him deployed more. To me, it's more important that our family is together than we stay in the same place.

"We loved living in Germany, and would do it again in a heartbeat. I think that having a home base is a good idea, but that there are other things the Army could do first to make military life with a family better.

"For one, more training at their home base. My husband was infantry, and his unit spent the vast majority of their days on post mowing lawns, cleaning barracks and playing video games in single soldiers' rooms. If there was better leadership and better planning, a lot of the training that soldiers are sent away for could be done at home.

"Home base would force the Army to send them away from home more often," said Hennessy, who now lives in Visalia, Calif. "I personally would rather spend a few years in Germany, and have my husband there with me most of the time, than spend his entire career in the U.S. and have him miss our children growing up. Six months is a long time in the life of a toddler. My husband missed our son's first birthday, first steps, first words and many more firsts."

The Brownwood Bulletin:
Service Star banners available through American Legion
By Candace Cooksey Fulton -- Brownwood Bulletin
The simple practice of hanging a Service Star banner in the window when a family member is serving in the American Armed Forces has gained a renewed popularity.

And with the 3rd Battalion 112th Armor Regiment 36th Infantry Division activated, more and more area homes have reason to hang a banner in the window. The tradition is that while the family member is away, a red bordered silk banner with blue stars printed on a white background is hung in the window until the soldier's return. Up to four blue stars can be printed on a banner. Each blue star on the flag represents a service member in active duty. A gold star is displayed if a service member is killed in action or dies in service.

Al Moore with American Legion Post 196 said he hopes the word will get out that the banners are available through the Post, or at the Brown County Veterans Service office located at 2600 Memorial Park Dr., near Brownwood Regional Medical Center.

"We wish we could give these banners to families who have someone serving," Moore said, "but we can't because there is a cost we have to recoup. The banners are $8 each because that's what we have to pay for them."

Though it was very widely used during World War II, the practice of hanging a Service Star banner in the window became a nearly forgotten effort when the U.S. was involved in later conflicts. The practice is thought to have begun during World War I. During World Wars I and II most flags were handmade by mothers of those who were serving.

One of the most famous flags was that of the five Sullivan brothers -- Albert, Francis, George, Joseph and Madison -- the sons of Thomas F. and Alleta Sullivan of Waterloo, Iowa. Though the practice was discouraged, the five brothers had insisted on serving together on the same ship, U.S.S. Juneau, during World War II. In combat actions in the Guadalcanal Campaign, the ship was torpedoed on Nov. 13, 1942 and all five were killed. Since then the Navy has observed a strict policy disallowing family members from serving together on the same ship.

For information on how to obtain a banner, contact Moore at 646-2481 or the Brown County Veterans Service office at 643-3597.

America's Armed Forces Show Strong Support for the GOP in 2004
NEW YORK, Aug. 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Nearly one in five delegates to the 2004 Republican National Convention is a veteran of the United States Armed Forces or an active member of the military, the 2004 Republican National Convention announced today. Veterans will make up 15 percent of the Republican delegation and active military personnel will make up 3 percent of the delegates traveling to New York City this month to re-nominate George W. Bush.

In comparison, when the Democrats gathered in Boston last month, veterans made up only 11.5 percent of the delegates.
"We're proud to announce that nearly one in five delegates to the Republican National Convention is a veteran or is currently serving this country in our nation's Armed Forces. From the veterans who have fought to protect and preserve the freedoms we enjoy today to the men and women who are protecting us now as we fight the war on terror, they deserve our thanks and gratitude. We appreciate their sacrifice and are grateful for their service, both to their country and to our democratic process," said Ed Gillespie, Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

"The Republican Party is honored to have the support of America's veterans and our active duty servicemen and women," said Bill Harris, CEO of the 2004 Republican National Convention and U.S. Army veteran. "On behalf of the 2004 Republican National Convention, it is truly an honor to welcome the more than 860 veterans and active military personnel participating in this month's four- day convention in New York City."

In an unprecedented show of support for the Republican Party and President Bush, 18 percent of the 2004 delegation identify themselves as veterans or active military personnel. Approximately 4,800 delegates and alternates in 55 delegations will travel to New York City this month. Over 15 percent are veterans, which means that approximately 720 men and women who have worn a United States uniform will represent their home states in New York City. Another 3 percent, or approximately 140 delegates, identify themselves as currently serving in the U.S. military.

 In addition to the large percentage of veterans and military personnel in the 2004 delegation, this year's Republican National Convention will be the most diverse in Republican Party history. The 2004 delegation shows a 70 percent increase among minority delegates compared to the 2000 Republican convention. With President George W. Bush leading the ticket, African- American representation is up an estimated 65 percent and Asian-American representation is up nearly 40 percent.

This month, Hispanic delegates will be the largest minority group represented, adding another 15 percent to the 100 percent surge the Republican Party saw between the 1996 and 2000 delegations. The Republican National Committee recently completed certification of the 2,509 delegates and 2,344 alternate delegates who will make up the most diverse Republican delegation in the party's history.

In 2004, minorities make up 17 percent of total delegates and women make up 44 percent. In 2000, minorities made up 10 percent of total delegates and women made up 36 percent. In 1996, minorities made up 6.3 percent of total delegates and women made up 33 percent.

The 2004 Republican National Convention will be held for the first time ever in New York City at Madison Square Garden from August 30 - September 2, 2004. Nearly 50,000 visitors are expected to visit the city for the occasion. For more information about the 2004 Republican National Convention, please visit our website at <http://www.gopconvention.com>. Paid for by the Committee on Arrangements for the 2004 Republican National Convention

Joe March
Director, Public Relations
The American Legion National Headquarters
700 N. Pennsylvania St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Tel: 317-630-1253
Cell: 317-748-1926
Fax: 317-630-1368