The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge as being subsequent to the review of "a board of officers." This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers.

According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.

A Kerry campaign spokesman, David Wade, was asked whether Mr. Kerry had ever been a victim of an attempt to deny him an honorable discharge. There has been no response to that inquiry.

The document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972. It is highly unlikely that either the man who at that time was a Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, John Kerry, requested or the Navy accepted an additional six year reserve commitment. And the Claytor document indicates proceedings to reverse a less than honorable discharge that took place sometime prior to February 1978.

The most routine time for Mr. Kerry's discharge would have been at the end of his six-year obligation, in 1972. But how was it most likely to have come about?

NBC's release this March of some of the Nixon White House tapes about Mr. Kerry show a great deal of interest in Mr. Kerry by Nixon and his executive staff, including, perhaps most importantly, Nixon's special counsel, Charles Colson. In a meeting the day after Mr. Kerry's Senate testimony, April 23, 1971, Mr. Colson attacks Mr. Kerry as a "complete opportunist...We'll keep hitting him, Mr. President."

Mr. Colson was still on the case two months later, according to a memo he wrote on June 15,1971, that was brought to the surface by the Houston Chronicle. "Let's destroy this young demagogue before he becomes another Ralph Nader." Nixon had been a naval officer in World War II. Mr. Colson was a former Marine captain. Mr. Colson had been prodded to find "dirt" on Mr. Kerry, but reported that he couldn't find any.

The Nixon administration ran FBI surveillance on Mr. Kerry from September 1970 until August 1972. Finding grounds for an other than honorable discharge, however, for a leader of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, given his numerous activities while still a reserve officer of the Navy, was easier than finding "dirt."

For example, while America was still at war, Mr. Kerry had met with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong delegation to the Paris Peace talks in May 1970 and then held a demonstration in July 1971 in Washington to try to get Congress to accept the enemy's seven point peace proposal without a single change. Woodrow Wilson threw Eugene Debs, a former presidential candidate, in prison just for demonstrating for peace negotiations with Germany during World War I. No court overturned his imprisonment. He had to receive a pardon from President Harding.

Mr. Colson refused to answer any questions about his activities regarding Mr. Kerry during his time in the Nixon White House. The secretary of the Navy at the time during the Nixon presidency is the current chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner. A spokesman for the senator, John Ullyot, said, "Senator Warner has no recollection that would either confirm or challenge any representation that Senator Kerry received a less than honorable discharge."

The "board of officers" review reported in the Claytor document is even more extraordinary because it came about "by direction of the President." No normal honorable discharge requires the direction of the president. The president at that time was James Carter. This adds another twist to the story of Mr. Kerry's hidden military records.

Mr. Carter's first act as president was a general amnesty for draft dodgers and other war protesters. Less than an hour after his inauguration on January 21, 1977, while still in the Capitol building, Mr. Carter signed Executive Order 4483 empowering it. By the time it became a directive from the Defense Department in March 1977 it had been expanded to include other offenders who may have had general, bad conduct, dishonorable discharges, and any other discharge or sentence with negative effect on military records. In those cases the directive outlined a procedure for appeal on a case by case basis before a board of officers. A satisfactory appeal would result in an improvement of discharge status or an honorable discharge.

Mr. Kerry has repeatedly refused to sign Standard Form 180, which would allow the release of all his military records. And some of his various spokesmen have claimed that all his records are already posted on his Web site. But the Washington Post already noted that the Naval Personnel Office admitted that they were still withholding about 100 pages of files.

If Mr. Kerry was the victim of a Nixon "enemies list" hit, one might have expected him to wear it like a badge of honor, like many others such as his friend Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers, CBS's Daniel Schorr, or the actor Paul Newman, who had made Mr. Colson's original list of 20 "enemies."

There are a number of categories of discharges besides honorable. There are general discharges, medical discharges, bad conduct discharges, as well as other than honorable and dishonorable discharges. There is one odd coincidence that gives some weight to the possibility that Mr. Kerry was dishonorably discharged. Mr. Kerry has claimed that he lost his medal certificates and that is why he asked that they be reissued. But when a dishonorable discharge is issued, all pay benefits, and allowances, and all medals and honors are revoked as well. And five months after Mr. Kerry joined the U.S. Senate in 1985, on one single day, June 4, all of Mr. Kerry's medals were reissued.

His name is Aaron Schock of Peoria. Cruising through high school with sky-high grades while running his own small business dealing in rental property, Schock toted up his credits and determined he could graduate in three years. But the Peoria school board had a rule banning early graduation. So Schock went to the school board to plead his case. There he ran headlong into the educational bureaucracy. You can't do it, he was told. You're supposed to spend four years in high school, and that's that. Schock put in the required four years, but that wasn't that. He hadn't thought much about politics in school, but after earning a degree in finance from Bradley University in two years, he decided to run for the school board at age 19 to replace the board president. He wanted kids with incentive not to be held back.

The bureaucracy took him as a threat and enlisted a local lawyer to remove Schock's name from the ballot. Whereupon he mobilized a write-in campaign. His opponent had received 3,000 votes in the last election, so Schock figured he would need at least 1,000 lawn signs. Raising money on his own for his campaign, he went door-to-door mobilizing a grass-roots effort that contacted 13,000 homes. He left door-hangers at all the homes in Peoria, instructing residents how to spell his name correctly. On Election Day a squadron of Schock volunteers gathered at respectful distances from all the polling places, telling voters how to write in his name. Schock won easily, receiving 6,406 votes -- and 99 percent had his name spelled correctly.

Elected in April 2001, Schock figured he would learn from the expert board members -- but his energy was such that his colleagues eventually elected him president of the school board. There he was: a CEO of the third-largest employer -- the public schools -- in Peoria. He found the budget in disarray. ''The board was in debt; they only talked about how to raise the levy and get more grants,'' he says. Schock cut $3.5 million out of the $130 million budget -- the first cuts the board had made in 10 years. There was controversy regarding the superintendent whom Schock fired. She protested the firing; he made it stick. Local TV covered this brilliant young school board president in a face-down with the bureaucracy. Running Peoria's schools, he learned how to deal fairly with the teachers, how to reach out to the students and their families. He learned how to handle labor negotiations, how to bargain.

Reaching out for help for Peoria's schools, he invited state lawmakers to come to his meetings. One, state Rep. Ricca Slone (D-Peoria Heights), who represents 90 percent of the school district, never showed up. Nor was he alone: Of Peoria's 50 social service agencies, 90 percent had never had a visit from Slone. Schock went to Springfield to see Slone, but was turned away, her secretary saying, ''Ms. Slone is too busy to see you."

You can guess the rest of the story. Slone, a four-term incumbent with no opponent two years ago, now has one: Aaron Schock. Tom Cross, the House Republican leader, signed him up. Cross, who was only 32 when he was elected to the House, is recruiting a farm team and is giving younger members a more active role in the caucus. If Schock wins this fall, he will be the youngest state representative, but will join other Cross recruits, including Frank Aguilar, 42, of Cicero, the first elected Hispanic Republican in the legislature; Jim Watson, 39, of Jacksonville; Ed Sullivan, 35, of Mundelein, and Chapin Rose, 28, of Mahomet.

However, it is the genial Schock -- bright but humble in the sense that he does not pretend to know all the answers -- who could be the crown jewel in a Republican House renaissance. Schock is telling the 92nd District politely but firmly that he has four years more experience than Ricca Slone had when she was elected. But the issue is vision: Schock is urging the governor to call lawmakers back into special session to enact malpractice reform. The contrast involves more than issues. Schock, a fiscal conservative, lives in an area once high in crime but undergoing revitalization; Slone, who voted for every fee and tax increase the governor wanted, lives on the wealthier side of town, as befits her liberal station. The district leans Democrat, but new-breed Republican Aaron Schock is playing exceedingly well in Peoria -- and may one day be a key player in Tom Cross' future majority.
****************************

Tom is now at home and everything is going well. You can send well wishes and cards to:

Tom Roeser
333 N Michigan
Suite932
Chicago Il 60601

Kerry Opposes The HEALTH Act Of 2003, Which Would Encourage Vaccine Production. The HEALTH Act of 2003, which President Bush supports but Kerry opposes, contains a provision immunizing vaccine manufacturers from punitive damages for products that are approved as safe by the FDA. Because profit margins on vaccines are low, such a provision is critical to encouraging the development and manufacture of vaccines. (H.R. 5, The HEALTH Act of 2003, Section 7; Business Week, "Biotech's Babies," 1/14/04)

Kerry Missed 2003 Vote On Medical Liability Reform But Announced Against It. The July 2003 vote was a motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the motion to proceed to the bill that would cap awards in medical malpractice lawsuits. It would limit awards for non-economic damages to $250,000, cap punitive damages at $250,000 or double economic damages, whichever is greater, and would protect manufacturers of FDA-approved medical products such as vaccines from punitive damages. (S. 11, CQ Vote #264: Motion Rejected 49-48: R 49-2; D 0-45; I 0-1, 7/9/03, Kerry Did Not Vote But Announced Against)
Just Last Year, The FDA Approved A New Flu Vaccine – But Kerry Would Deny That Flu Vaccine Important Protections. In 2003, the FDA approved FluMist, a new inhalable flu vaccine that does not require a shot and is thus ideal for children ages 5 to 17. The FDA's approval of FluMist would qualify it for protection under the HEALTH Act, but Kerry opposes the bill. (Marilynn Marchione, "FDA Approves Inhaled Flu Vaccine," Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/18/03)

U.S. Flu Vaccine Manufacturers:

"Today There Are Only Two Significant Makers Of Flu Vaccine For The U.S. Market, Aventis-Pasteur And Chiron Corp., Which Now Finds Itself Besieged By Federal Subpoenas." (Editorial, "Infectious Politics," The Wall Street Journal, 10/14/04)

In The 1990's, "A Wave Of Far Tighter Manufacturing Regulations" Forced Several Vaccine Makers Out Of Business. (Editorial, "Infectious Politics," The Wall Street Journal, 10/14/04)

The Problem With The Flu Vaccine Shortage "Lies With A Political Class That Has Driven All But A Handful Of Companies Out Of The Vaccine Business." "Americans are angry about the sudden shortage of flu vaccine, and well they should be. But we hope they don't fall for the current story line that this is all the fault of a single company and its British factory. The real problem lies with a political class that has driven all but a handful of companies out of the vaccine business." (Editorial, "Infectious Politics," The Wall Street Journal, 10/14/04

Companies Producing Vaccines Have "To Run An Obstacle Course Of Price Controls, Regulation And Tort Lawyers." (Editorial, "Infectious Politics," Wall Street Journal, 10/14/04)

It Takes Eight Months To Produce The Flu Vaccine. "Regulatory hurdles have also stifled innovation. It currently takes up to eight months to produce flu vaccine, which is grown with the help of special chicken eggs and is only good for one year." (Editorial, "Infectious Politics," The Wall Street Journal, 10/14/04)

==>Steve Schmidt, Bush-Cheney '04