In case your member of Congress missed it ~

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood – 2/22/13 Press Briefing

President Obama Opens 2012 by Advancing Pipeline Safety

Posted by Secretary Ray LaHood on January 3, 2012 at 7:04 PM EST

Ed note: This has been cross-posted from the Department of Transportation’s Fastlane blog

When we say at DOT that safety is our number one priority, we are not kidding around. And today, as part of that important goal, President Obama signed into law the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act.

Last April, following several fatal pipeline accidents, we called upon U.S. pipeline owners and operators to conduct a comprehensive review of their oil and gas pipelines to identify areas of high risk and accelerate critical repair and replacement work. We also convened a Pipeline Safety Forum with state officials, industry leaders, and other stakeholders to discuss steps for improving the safety and efficiency of America’s pipeline infrastructure.

In one of their final actions for 2011, the House and Senate passed a pipeline safety bill consistent with the legislative proposal we submitted to Congress last year. This legislation gives the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, an important part of DOT, stronger enforcement tools and increases civil penalties for pipeline operators who do not meet safety regulations. It’s another terrific step forward for greater pipeline safety.

Not only will this legislation help keep America’s communities safer; it also helps give pipeline operators the certainty they need to run their systems more effectively.

To advance pipeline safety, the bill doubles the maximum fines that pipeline operators face for safety violations. The Bill requires PHMSA to issue new pipeline safety standards requiring operators to install automatic or remote-controlled shut-off valves and excess flow valves in new or replaced transmission pipelines. As U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller said, “Communities can rest a little easier knowing that Congress has implemented tougher safety rules.”

The bill authorizes PHMSA to award $110 million in safety-related grants each year. These include state damage prevention programs, technical assistance to local communities, emergency response training, and one-call system improvements. And PHMSA is authorized to add a number of new pipeline inspectors to support its investigation and enforcement obligations.

To promote regulatory certainty for the pipeline industry, the new bill prohibits PHMSA during a two to three year Congressional review period, from issuing regulations establishing leak-detection requirements or expanding integrity management requirements beyond high-consequence areas. However, this restriction would not apply if a condition poses any risk to public safety, property, or the environment.

As the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee observed, “By providing greater regulatory certainty, the bill will help create a better economic environment for U.S. businesses to create jobs.”

This bill is a win for safety and a win for America’s communities. And, by signing it into law on the first business day of the new year, President Obama has sent a clear message that this Administration believes we can achieve greater safety and stronger economic growth at the same time.

I can’t think of a better way to start 2012.

Energy: Big Oil Subsidies

Top executives from the Big 5 oil companies — ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips — flew into Washington, D.C. on their corporate jets to defend their industry at a U.S. Senate hearing yesterday. The Associated Press reports that “Motorists are paying nearly $4 for a gallon of gasoline as the oil industry reaps pretax profits that could hit $200 billion this year.” The oil industry is not only benefiting from spiking gas prices, but also from over $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies they receive every year. With those subsidies and loopholes, Exxon’s federal tax rate for the last three years was 17.6 percent, lower than what the average American pays. “Voters’ anger over high gas prices is directed squarely at the oil companies and the politicians who defend them,” according to a recent national survey by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club. “Voters are furious with oil companies, according to our polling, and overwhelmingly support ending their subsidies.” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) “wants to bring a bill to the floor next week” Wednesday to repeal tax breaks for the major oil companies, “to help ease the deficit by about $21 billion over 10 years.”

PROFITING FROM PAIN: “Given profits of $35 billion in just the first quarter alone, it is hard to find evidence that repealing these subsidies would cut domestic production or cause layoffs,” Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, said yesterday. “After all, based on first-quarter profits, these tax breaks represent less than 2 percent of what these companies are on pace to make this year. Even without these tax breaks, these companies would clearly be highly profitable.” In his opening statement, Baucus argued that the most vulnerable in society shouldn’t have to suffer for the benefit of oil companies. “We should use this money to reduce our deficit instead of putting the burden on seniors and our children’s future. The oil executives were unmoved. “Do you think that your subsidy is more important than the financial aid that we give to students to go to college?” Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asked. ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva said the question was “very difficult” to answer. “Not once during this hearing have I heard any semblance of a willingness to share unless every company also has to,” Rockefeller concluded. “I haven’t heard anybody talk about what they are doing — what they would be willing to do — to share in our budget problem. The total concept of what keeps America together…is a sense of fairness, that everybody has to lose at some point, everybody has to give something up to be a real country.”

‘UN-AMERICAN’: On Wednesday, ConocoPhillips CEO Jim Mulva outraged many on Capitol Hill when he released a statement calling it “un-American” to end subsidies to the Big 5 oil companies. At yesterday’s Senate Finance Committee hearing with the oil CEOs, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) repeatedly pressed Mulva for an apology, but the ConocoPhillips CEO refused to give one, claiming “nothing was intended personally” by his press release. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) summed up, “So the bottom line is you’re unwilling to apologize for a company’s statement. Okay, so I’ll continue to take offense to it.” Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) rushed to Mulva’s defense and echoed his claim that it was “un-American” to end tax breaks for big oil companies. The executives actually used the hearing to argue for increased drilling subsidies. “A much better solution lies in permitting our industry to increase energy supplies,” said Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson. “We have shackles on us,” cried Mulva. “Put us back to work.” The idea that oil companies need taxpayer subsidies to drill for oil is nonsense. “The price of oil is so high that removing these tax breaks would probably have little to no effect on domestic oil production,” the Associated Press reports, corroborated by an analysis from the Congressional Research Service. By the end of the hearing, Baucus was reduced to pleading with the executives. “How about a trade here? More leases, give up the tax breaks.” “I don’t think I came to negotiate a trade with you today, Senator,” Tillerson responded mockingly.

‘YOU ARE LIKE SAUDI ARABIA’: “I get the feeling that it’s almost like you’re — like the five of you are like Saudi Arabia,” Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) told the Big Oil executives. “That you’re caught up in your profits, you’re highly defensive, you yield on nothing,” he said. “I think you’re out of touch. Deeply, profoundly out of touch. And deeply and profoundly committed to sharing nothing.” Throughout the hearing, the millionaire executives proved Rockefeller’s point. “Don’t punish our industry for doing its job well,” said Chevron CEO John S. Watson. Watson did not elaborate on the consequences to the United States of the “job well done” by the oil industry. “I don’t think American people want shared sacrifice,” he rebuked Rockefeller. “I think they want shared prosperity.” Watson’s compensation in 2010 was nearly $9 million, about 300 times the median American income. The executives felt comfortable that their friends in Congress would protect their extravagant lifestyles. Watson, Tillerson and Mulva “have made a combined total of $258,870 in political donations since 1990. Of that amount, $237,670, or 92 percent, was contributed to Republicans.” Finance committee members have received $5.1 million in oil industry contributions since 1999, going by a four-to-one ratio to Republicans. “You have a great sense of assurance. I don’t think you feel threatened by anything that’s going on here,” Rockefeller said. “You always prevail in the halls of Congress.”

Congress: – the Republican led House – the Senate

The Senate Convenes at 9:30amET April 6, 2011

Following any leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 11am with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, with the time until 10:40am equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the Majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half and and at 10:40am Senator Ayotte be recognized to deliver her maiden speech to the Senate.

Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of S.493, the Small Business Jobs bill. Senator Reid or his designee will be recognized to call up the following amendments:

- Baucus #236;

- Stabenow #277;

- Rockefeller #215;

- Coburn #217;

- Coburn #223;

- Coburn #273;

- Inouye #286;

The pending Sanders amendment #207 will be modified with the changes that are at the desk; the Senate will then debate the amendments concurrently until 4pm with the time equally divided between the two Leaders, or their designees, prior to votes in relation to the following amendments in the order listed below:

- Baucus #236;

- Stabenow #277;

- Rockefeller #215;

- McConnell #183;

- Coburn #223;

- Inouye #286; and

- Coburn #273;

There will be two minutes equally divided in between the votes; and all after the first vote will 10 minutes in duration; and the amendments will be subject to a 60 vote threshold.

Upon the disposition of the Coburn amendment #273, amendment #s 184 and 217 offered by Senator Coburn will be agreed to.

Therefore, Senators should expect up to 7 roll call votes at approximately 4pm in relation to amendments to the Small Business Jobs bill.

The following amendments are pending to S.493, SBIR and STTR Reauthorization Act of 2011:

- McConnell amendment #183 (Prohibits the EPA from regulating carbon pollution)

- Vitter amendment #178 (require Federal government to sell unused Federal real property).

- Johanns amendment #161 (1099 repeal)

- Cornyn amendment #186 (bipartisan commission)

- Paul amendment #199 (spending cuts)

- Sanders amendment #207, as modified (Social Security)

- Hutchison amendment #197 (Delay health care reform)

- Coburn amendment #184 (GAO Study)

- Pryor amendment #229 (Patriot Express Loan program)

- Landrieu amendment #244 to amendment #244 (effective date)

- Baucus #236 (EPA)

- Stabenow amendment #277 (EPA)

- Rockefeller amendment #215 (EPA)

- Coburn amendment #217 (covered bridge preservation)

- Coburn amendment #281 (UI for millionaires and billionaires)

- Coburn amendment #273 (duplicative programs)

- Inouye amendment #286 (duplicative programs)

Votes:

51: Baucus amendment #236: (greenhouse gas related exemptions from permitting process); Not Agreed to: 7-93

52: Stabenow amendment #277: (suspension of stationary source greenhouse gas regulations);

Not Agreed to, 7-93

53: Rockefeller amendment #215: (suspend any EPA action with respect to carbon dioxide or methane);

Not Agreed to: 12-88

54: McConnell amendment #183: (prohibits EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions);

Not Agreed to, 50-50

55: Coburn amendment #223: (end federal unemployment payments to jobless millionaires and billionaires);

Agreed To: 100-0

56: Inouye amendment #286: (consolidating unnecessary duplicative and overlapping government programs);

Not Agreed To: 57-42

57: Coburn amendment #273: (consolidating unnecessary duplicative and overlapping government programs);

Agreed To: 64-36.

This is the last vote of the day.

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

The next meeting is scheduled for 10:00 a.m. on April 6, 2011.

CURRENT HOUSE FLOOR PROCEEDINGS

LEGISLATIVE DAY OF APRIL 6, 2011

112TH CONGRESS – FIRST SESSION

7:24 P.M. -

SPECIAL ORDER SPEECHES – The House has concluded all anticipated legislative business and has proceeded to Special Order speeches.

7:20 P.M. -

ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded further with one minute speeches.

Mr. Crenshaw asked unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 10:00 a.m. on April 7. Agreed to without objection.

H.R. 910:

to amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes

7:18 P.M. -

The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

7:17 P.M. -

The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.

The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 910.

7:16 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Kind amendment Failed by recorded vote: 160 – 264 (Roll no. 241).

7:11 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Doyle amendment Failed by recorded vote: 173 – 250 (Roll no. 240).

7:08 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Rush amendment Failed by recorded vote: 165 – 260 (Roll no. 239).

7:04 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Markey amendment Failed by recorded vote: 156 – 266 (Roll no. 238).

7:01 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Polis amendment Failed by recorded vote: 168 – 257 (Roll no. 237).

6:56 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Waxman amendment Failed by recorded vote: 184 – 240 (Roll no. 236).

6:50 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Murphy (CT) amendment Failed by recorded vote: 182 – 240 (Roll no. 235).

6:46 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment Failed by recorded vote: 157 – 266 (Roll no. 234).

6:42 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment Failed by recorded vote: 161 – 259 (Roll no. 233).

6:17 P.M. -

UNFINISHED BUSINESS – The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question on adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.

6:15 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Kind amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Kind demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

6:03 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Kind amendment in the nature of a substitute number 12.

Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Kind.

An amendment in the nature of a substitute numbered 12 printed in House Report 112-54 to codify the Environmental Protection Agency’s Tailoring Rule in order to protect farms, small businesses, and small- and medium-sized stationary sources from greenhouse gas regulation.

6:02 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Doyle amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Doyle demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

5:50 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Doyle amendment number 11.

Amendment offered by Mr. Doyle.

An amendment numbered 11 printed in House Report 112-54 to include a study to determine whether regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act to address climate change, if not repealed or otherwise made unauthorized by section 2 of the bill, would cause greenhouse gas leakage and reduce the international competitiveness of United States producers of energy-intensive products.

5:49 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Rush amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Rush demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

5:37 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Rush amendment number 10.

Amendment offered by Mr. Rush.

An amendment numbered 10 printed in House Report 112-54 to prevent the provisions of this act from going into effect until the EPA Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, certifies that the consequences of not regulating greenhouse gas emissions, and its subsequent impact on climate change, including the potential to create sustained natural and humanitarian disasters and the ability to likely foster political instability where societal demands exceed the capacity of governments to cope, do not jeopardize American security interests at home or abroad.

5:36 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Markey amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Markey demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

5:24 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Markey amendment number 9.

Amendment offered by Mr. Markey.

An amendment numbered 9 printed in House Report 112-54 to ensure that any prohibition on or limitation to EPA’s Clean Air Act authority contained in the bill would not apply to any action EPA could take to reduce demand for oil.

5:23 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Polis (CO) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Polis (CO) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

5:10 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Polis (CO) amendment number 8.

Amendment offered by Mr. Polis.

An amendment numbered 8 printed in House Report 112-54 to ensure the EPA Administrator can protect the public health in case of public health emergency.

5:09 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Quigley amendment Failed by voice vote.

5:00 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Quigley amendment number 7.

Amendment offered by Mr. Quigley.

An amendment numbered 7 printed in House Report 112-54 to require GAO to report to Congress the results of a study of health care costs in the U.S. as affected by the elimination of EPA regulation under this Act, as compared to health care costs in the U.S. as would be affected by the EPA proceeding under their regulating authority as determined in Massachusetts v. EPA.

4:59 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Waxman amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Waxman demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

4:49 P.M. -

Amendment offered by Mr. Waxman.

An amendment numbered 6 printed in House Report 112-54 to add a new section with respect to Congressional Acceptance of Scientific Findings: Congress accepts the scientific findings of the Environmental Protection Agency that climate changes is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for public health and welfare.

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waxman amendment number 6.

4:48 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Murphy (CT) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Murphy (CT) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

4:45 P.M. -

ORDER OF PROCEDURE – Mr. Upton asked unanimous consent to extend debate time by 1 minute on each side on the amendment. Agreed to without objection.

4:32 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Murphy (CT) amendment number 5.

Amendment offered by Mr. Murphy (CT).

An amendment numbered 5 printed in House Report 112-54 to clarify that the Agency can continue to provide technical assistance to states taking action to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

4:31 P.M. -

On agreeing to the Cuellar amendment Failed by voice vote.

4:22 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Cuellar amendment number 4.

Amendment offered by Mr. Cuellar.

An amendment numbered 4 printed in House Report 112-54 to amend the definition of greenhouse gas, to remove water vapor as a part of the definition, amend the act by striking the removal of existing EPA findings and rules, and exempt all auto standards from the legislation.

4:21 P.M. -

On agreeing to the McNerney amendment Agreed to by voice vote.

4:20 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McNerney amendment number 3.

Amendment offered by Mr. McNerney.

An amendment numbered 3 printed in House Report 112-54 to clarify that voluntary programs addressing climate change classify as exceptions to the bill’s prohibitions.

4:19 P.M. -

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.

4:07 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment number 2.

Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (TX).

An amendment numbered 2 printed in House Report 112-54 to insert a new section to provide considerations and procedures in finalizing greenhouse gas regulations.

4:06 P.M. -

3:54 P.M. -

DEBATE – Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 203, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment number 1.

Amendment offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (TX).

An amendment numbered 1 printed in House Report 112-54 to require an EPA study to determine the long term impact of a complete ban on their authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

2:40 P.M. -

GENERAL DEBATE – The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 910.

2:39 P.M. -

The Speaker designated the Honorable Steve Womack to act as Chairman of the Committee.

House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 203 and Rule XVIII.

Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 910 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. All points of order againist the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived.

Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 203.

2:38 P.M. -

On approving the Journal Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 321 – 98, 1 Present (Roll no. 232).

2:31 P.M. -

UNFINISHED BUSINESS – The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the question of adoption of the Speaker’s approval of the Journal.

H. Res. 203:

providing for consideration of the bill ( H.R. 910) to amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit to Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes

2:30 P.M. -

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 250 – 172 (Roll no. 231).

2:22 P.M. -

On ordering the previous question Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 266 – 158 (Roll no. 230).

12:56 P.M. -

DEBATE – The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 203.

12:54 P.M. -

Considered as privileged matter.

12:53 P.M. -

On motion to adjourn Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 36 – 367 (Roll no. 229).

12:29 P.M. -

Mr. Jackson (IL) moved that the House do now adjourn.

12:04 P.M. -

ONE MINUTE SPEECHES – The House proceeded with one minute speeches which by direction of the Chair, would be limited to 15 per side of the aisle.

12:03 P.M. -

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – The Chair designated Mrs. Hartzler to lead the Members in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS – The Chair announced that he had examined the Journal of the last day’s proceedings and had approved it. Mr. Poe demanded that the question be put on agreeing to the Speaker’s approval of the Journal and by voice vote, the Chair announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Poe objected to the voice vote based upon the absence of a quorum and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of the Speaker’s approval of the Journal until later in the legislative day.

12:01 P.M. -

Today’s prayer was offered by Bishop Henry Fernandez, The Faith Center, Sunrise, Florida

The House convened, returning from a recess continuing the legislative day of April 6.

10:50 A.M. -

The Speaker announced that the House do now recess. The next meeting is scheduled for 12:00 P.M. today.

10:00 A.M. -

MORNING-HOUR DEBATES – The House proceeded with Morning-Hour Debates. At the conclusion of Morning-Hour, the House will recess until 12:00 p.m. for the start of legislative business.

The Speaker designated the Honorable Renee L. Ellmers to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.

The House convened, starting a new legislative day.

Tell Sens. Murray and Cantwell: Stop the Republicans’ radical assault on EPA funding

Republicans have launched an unprecedented budget assault on clean air and public health protections — and Senate Democrats have two weeks to stop it.

The House Republicans’ Continuing Resolution spending bill slashes this year’s remaining EPA budget by almost 60%, and contains numerous amendments that hamstring the Clean Air Act, block the EPA from limiting greenhouse gas emissions for any reason, eliminate funding for climate science and climate pollution monitoring, and make it easier for coal plants to dump certain toxic wastes into lakes and rivers. And the list of radical amendments to defund the EPA Just. Keeps. Going.1

http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=7259&id=17506-2591629-Ehd1dhx&t=9

The passage of a temporary spending bill on Wednesday keeps the government funded through March 18th and gives the Senate more time to take a stand against Republican attempts to hold EPA and Clean Air Act funding hostage with threats of forcing a shutdown.

Sadly, the Obama administration is already caving on a number of Republican budget demands.2 So it’s essential that Senate Democrats oppose this budget attack, draw a line in the sand, and filibuster any bill that blocks funding for the EPA to enforce the Clean Air Act.

There are just enough votes to do it. Barely. Strong EPA supporters — especially strong Clean Air Act supporters — are in a minority in the Senate. But if all of our environmental champions stand strong, and we pressure a few of the more tentative supporters to join them, we can protect the Clean Air Act’s ability to limit carbon pollution, and stop the draconian cuts to EPA funding.

http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=7259&id=17506-2591629-Ehd1dhx&t=10

Republicans claim these cuts are about reducing the deficit. If they actually believe that, then Republicans are telling us that they are incapable of achieving deficit reductions without endangering the lives of millions of Americans.

If its funding continues, the Clean Air Act will save 4.2 million lives, and prevent 43 million cases of Asthma from 1990 to 2020. These health benefits, and avoiding costs that would otherwise be passed onto citizens and the government, makes the Clean Air Act one of our most cost effective pieces of legislation, saving us 30 times more than it costs to implement.3

Americans know this. Numerous recent polls show that overwhelming majorities of the public support tighter Clean Air Act limits on carbon pollution, and explicitly oppose Republican attacks on the EPA.4

Of course, these cuts aren’t about our deficit, or the will of the people. At all. They are about handcuffing the EPA, and pushing the legislative agenda of big polluters like the Koch brothers, the Chamber of Commerce, and other oil, gas and coal giants who were able to spend unlimited funds to elect the most polluter-friendly congress in history, and are now spending millions on lobbying to preserve their ability to freely pollute our nation and avoid the massive public health costs they pass on to us. (“You’re welcome. Love, polluters.”)

The Continuing Resolution budget battle is just the first of these attacks on the Clean Air Act. There will be more. On Thursday, Rep. Fred Upton and Sen. Jim Inhofe introduced a bill to permanently block the Clean Air Act from regulating climate pollution. It is co-sponsored by Democratic Senator Joe Manchin. Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller has cosponsored legislation to delay the Clean Air Act’s climate limits for two years — that bill has six Democratic co-sponsors.

This battle may be won or lost in the Senate. And with few if any votes to spare, supportive Senators must make clear right now that they will oppose this attack on EPA funding, and filibuster all future attempts to gut the Clean Air Act.

http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=7259&id=17506-2591629-Ehd1dhx&t=11

Thank you for fighting the Republicans’ radical anti-environmental agenda.

Elijah Zarlin, Campaign Manager

CREDO Action from Working Assets

Congress: the Senate works for Americans -the Republican led House returns 2/8/2011

the Senate Convenes at 10:30amET February 1, 2011 —Tuesday

Morning Business until 12:30pm.

Recess from 12:30pm until 2:15pm to allow for the weekly caucus meetings.

At 2:15pm the Senate will proceed to the consideration of S.223, FAA Authorization.

Senators will be notified when any roll call votes are scheduled.

The following amendments are pending to S.223, FAA Authorization:

- Stabenow #9 (1099 Reporting)

- McConnell #13 (Health Care Repeal)

There will be no roll call votes this evening.

The managers of the bill and leadership on both sides of the aisle will work on an agreement to dispose of the pending amendments tomorrow. The Senate will consider the FAA Authorization bill for debate only for the remainder of the night.

Unanimous Consent:

Passed S.188, a bill to designate the United States courthouse under construction at 98 West First Street, Yuma, Arizona, as the “John M. Roll United States Courthouse”.

Harry Reid &Senate Democrats in the Newsroom -for the week of 1/28 -Cantor/Ryan say their roadmap: to privatize Social Security-update

January 28, 2011

Reid Spokesman: Republicans Waging Losing War On Health Care While Democrats Focus On Jobs

Washington, D.C. – Jon Summers, spokesman for Nevada Senator Harry Reid, released the following statement today:

“With today’s GDP numbers showing that our economy is continuing to recover, it’s a shame that Republicans are wasting time with their losing war on health care instead of working with Democrats to create jobs and strengthen the middle class. While Democrats are focused on jobs, Republicans are pushing extreme, ideological plans to fire at least one million workers, explode our deficit by $1 trillion, and end Social Security and Medicare. Republicans should stop playing to their base with political stunts, and start working with Democrats to create jobs, invest in what makes us stronger and cut what doesn’t.”

###

January 27, 2011

Reid: Next on the agenda… JOB Creation http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0111/Reid_Next_on_agenda_is_job_creation.html?showall

Minutes after the Senate passed a modest rules reform package, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Thursday the next items on his chamber’s agenda will be bills targeting job creation. ??Reid told reporters that he would try that evening to get the ball rolling on a Federal Aviation Administration bill or a “small business innovation bill that would also create jobs.” ??

“We still recognize that our number one issue is jobs,” he said. “We cannot have a robust economy, we cannot do anything about balancing the budget, when we have 15 million people out of work.” ??

Senate Republicans have made it clear what they would like their next major bill to be a vote to repeal the health care overhaul law passed last year. Reid has previously stated that it is unlikely a repeal bill will come to the floor, and he said Thursday that if Republicans want to try to force a vote, he will not have any part of it. ??

“I know the procedures of the Senate, and if the Republicans want to do all those things to people and increase the debt over the next 18 years by about $2 trillion, let them do it, but I’m not going to be part of it,” he said.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0111/Reid_Next_on_agenda_is_job_creation.html?showall

January 27, 2011

Reid Spokesman: Republicans Moving Ahead With Plan To End Social Security & Medicare

Washington, D.C. – Jon Summers, spokesman for Nevada Senator Harry Reid, released the following statement in response to the news that House Republicans are moving forward on a bill the end Medicare as we know it:

“Republicans are trying to carry out their plan to end Social Security and Medicare. In public, Republicans are trying to distance themselves from this extreme plan because they know hard-working Americans don’t want to see Social Security and Medicare ended. But they should stop trying to hide the ball, and just come out and say what has become perfectly clear: that ending Social Security and Medicare is now the official position of the Republican Party.”

BACKGROUND GUIDANCE: This news comes days after Republicans chose Rep. Paul Ryan, the architect of Republican’s plan to end Social Security and Medicare, to deliver their response to the State of the Union. Ryan’s plan has been endorsed by the Republican Majority Leader and the top Republican on the Senate budget committee – and since Rep. Ryan is the chair of the House budget committee, this plan now officially has the backing of the top Republicans on the House and Senate committees that set the funding parameters for both programs.

Under the Medicare portion of the proposal, Americans who depend on Medicare – most of whom are elderly or have pre-existing conditions or illnesses – will have a capped, fixed amount to spend on care. They would be forced to find insurance that can be covered by that amount, which will not exist for many, effectively denying them insurance. Moreover, without the reforms in the Affordable Care Act for limited age rating, no health status rating, and no pre-existing condition exclusions, insurance at an affordable price for anyone in this cohort will not exist in most places.

###

House GOP to Consider Move to Privatized Medicare

by Matthew DoBias

Thursday, January 27, 2011 | 6:03 a.m.

House Republicans are considering a measure to privatize Medicare that would be included in their alternative to President Obama’s annual budget.

House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling of Texas said on Wednesday that he expects Republicans to support a provision to convert Medicare into a voucher system, which would effectively turn the government-backed health care program over to private insurers. Hensarling is the second-ranked Republican on the Budget Committee.

President Obama’s budget proposal will be delivered to Congress next month.

“Unless you deal with Medicare, unless you go into Medicaid, unless you deal with Social Security for future generations—programs that were a great comfort to my grandparents and parents are morphing into a cruel Ponzi scheme for my 8-year-old daughter and my 7-year-old son,” Hensarling said during a panel discussion sponsored by National Journal and The Atlantic.

“You can’t get there from here without those kinds of reforms, so I expect it to be in the budget, I hope it’ll be in the budget, and I would certainly support it,” Hensarling added.

It’s unclear what such a proposal would look like, and Republican leaders have offered few specifics. The voucher proposal is contentious even among many Republicans—and it’s a non-starter among Democrats.

Hensarling said he had not spoken directly to Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., about the measure. “But I would hope most of the Republicans would [support it], because ultimately it will deliver better health care and retirement security at a more reasonable cost than what the government is promising today but can’t deliver.”

Under one scenario championed by Ryan, people who turn 65 on or after January 1, 2021, would receive a voucher to buy private insurance in the “exchanges” expected to be formed by the new health care law. Meanwhile, the eligibility age for Medicare would increase incrementally from its current 65 years of age to 69 for those born in 2022 and later.

The first crop of vouchers would be worth $5,900. Low-income seniors whose health care is paid by Medicaid would instead have access to federally subsidized medical savings accounts, with the government kicking in $6,600 per year.

Federal actuaries have said that such a program would give the Medicare program a stronger financial base and a level of predictability in spending that it does not enjoy now. Vouchers would potentially save the program billions of dollars because they would pay less than Medicare does now per beneficiary.

But it would increase premiums for seniors not accustomed to paying higher rates for their care. And they could sway seniors to buy less comprehensive plans that don’t cover nearly the same services that Medicare does.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who also participated in the morning discussion, said the voucher idea would have no support among his Democratic colleagues in the Senate.

“I just worry about privatizing Medicare, putting it into a voucher system,” he said. “I think there are going to be a lot of losers in that equation, people who won’t be able to find the health care that they need.”

http://nationaljournal.com/member/daily/house-gop-to-consider-move-to-privatized-medicare-20110126?print=true

January 27, 2011

Reid Announces Committee Assignments For The 112th Congress

Washington, D.C.—Nevada Senator Harry Reid made the following statement on the announcement of committees for the 112th Congress:

“This Congress has incredibly important work to do moving our country forward, creating jobs in Nevada and across the nation and strengthening the middle class. I am thankful to all my colleagues in the Senate for the work they do in committee crafting the policies that will bring this country back from one of the worst recessions in recent memory, and for their service to their home states and to this nation. I am humbled by and look forward to the work we will undertake together during the 112th Congress.”

A Committees

Agriculture:

Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow

Patrick Leahy

Tom Harkin

Kent Conrad

Max Baucus

Ben Nelson

Sherrod Brown

Robert Casey

Amy Klobuchar

Michael Bennet

Kirsten Gillibrand

Appropriations:

Chairman Daniel Inouye

Patrick Leahy

Tom Harkin

Barbara Mikulski

Herb Kohl

Patty Murray

Dianne Feinstein

Richard Durbin

Tim Johnson

Mary Landrieu

Jack Reed

Frank Lautenberg

Ben Nelson

Mark Pryor

Jon Tester

Sherrod Brown

Armed Services:

Chairman Carl Levin?Joseph Lieberman

Jack Reed

Daniel Akaka

Ben Nelson

Jim Webb

Claire McCaskill

Mark Udall

Kay Hagan

Mark Begich

Joe Manchin

Jeanne Shaheen

Kirsten Gillibrand

Richard Blumenthal

Banking:

Chairman Tim Johnson?Jack Reed

Charles Schumer

Robert Menendez

Daniel Akaka

Sherrod Brown

Jon Tester

Herb Kohl

Mark Warner

Jeff Merkley

Michael Bennet

Kay Hagan

Commerce:

Chairman Jay Rockefeller

Daniel Inouye

John Kerry

Barbara Boxer

Bill Nelson

Maria Cantwell

Frank Lautenberg

Mark Pryor

Claire McCaskill

Amy Klobuchar

Tom Udall

Mark Warner

Mark Begich

Energy:

Chairman Jeff Bingaman?Ron Wyden?Tim Johnson

Mary Landrieu

Maria Cantwell

Bernard Sanders

Debbie Stabenow

Mark Udall

Jeanne Shaheen

Al Franken

Joe Manchin

Christopher Coons

Environment and Public Works:?Chairwoman Barbara Boxer

Max Baucus

Thomas Carper

Frank Lautenberg

Benjamin Cardin

Bernard Sanders

Sheldon Whitehouse

Tom Udall

Jeff Merkley

Kirsten Gillibrand

Finance:

Chairman Max Baucus

Jay Rockefeller

Kent Conrad

Jeff Bingaman

John Kerry

Ron Wyden

Charles Schumer

Debbie Stabenow

Maria Cantwell

Bill Nelson

Robert Menendez

Thomas Carper

Ben Cardin

Foreign Relations:

Chairman John Kerry

Barbara Boxer

Robert Menendez

Benjamin Cardin

Robert Casey

Jim Webb

Jeanne Shaheen

Christopher Coons

Richard Durbin

Tom Udall

Health, Education, Labor and Pension:?Chairman Tom Harkin ?Barbara Mikulski

Jeff Bingaman

Patty Murray

Bernard Sanders

Robert Casey

Kay Hagan

Jeff Merkley

Al Franken

Michael Bennet

Sheldon Whitehouse

Richard Blumenthal

Homeland Security and Government Affairs:

Chairman Joseph Lieberman?Carl Levin

Daniel Akaka

Thomas Carper

Mark Pryor

Mary Landrieu

Claire McCaskill

Jon Tester

Mark Begich

Select Committee on Intelligence:

Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein

Jay Rockefeller

Ron Wyden

Barbara Mikulski

Bill Nelson

Kent Conrad

Mark Udall

Mark Warner

Judiciary:

Chairman Patrick Leahy

Herb Kohl

Dianne Feinstein

Charles Schumer

Richard Durbin

Sheldon Whitehouse

Amy Klobuchar

Al Franken

Christopher Coons

Ricahrd Blumenthal

B Committees

Special Committee on Aging:

Chairman Herb Kohl

Ron Wyden?Bill Nelson

Robert Casey

Claire McCaskill

Sheldon Whitehouse

Mark Udall

Michael Bennet

Kirsten Gillibrand

Joe Manchin

Richard Blumenthal

Budget:

Chairman Ken Conrad

Patty Murray

Ron Wyden

Bill Nelson

Debbie Stabenow

Benjamin Cardin

Bernard Sanders

Sheldon Whitehouse

Mark Warner

Jeff Merkley

Mark Begich

Christopher Coons

Joint Economic Committee:

Chairman Robert Casey ?Jeff Bingaman

Amy Klobuchar

Jim Webb

Mark Warner

Bernard Sanders

Rules and Administration:

Chairman Charles Schumer

Daniel Inouye

Dianne Feinstein

Richard Durbin

Ben Nelson

Patty Murray

Mark Pryor

Tom Udall

Mark Warner

Patrick Leahy

Small Business and Entrepreneurship:

Chairman Mary Landrieu

Carl Levin

Tom Harkin

John Kerry

Joseph Lieberman

Maria Cantwell

Mark Pryor

Benjamin Cardin

Jeanne Shaheen

Kay Hagan

Veterans’ Affairs:

Chairwoman Patty Murray

Jay Rockefeller

Daniel Akaka

Bernard Sanders

Sherrod Brown

Jim Webb

Jon Tester

Mark Begich

Select Committee on Ethics:

Chairwoman Barbara Boxer

Mark Pryor

Sherrod Brown

Indian Affairs:

Chairman Daniel Akaka

Daniel Inouye

Kent Conrad

Tim Johnson

Maria Cantwell

Jon Tester

Tom Udall

January 27, 2011

Reid, McConnell Colloquy On Rules Package

McConnell Agrees Not to Pursue Constitutional Option “In This or the Next Congress”

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell today entered into the following colloquy. Below is the text of the colloquy as prepared for delivery:

Senator Reid: Over the past few months, Democrats and Republicans have had many positive discussions about the direction of the 112th Congress. There are many important issues facing our country and solutions will require bipartisan cooperation. In particular, there has been a lot of discussion lately about the Senate rules. Many of my colleagues have spoken to me about the way the Senate operated during the last Congress. I think my friend from Kentucky would agree with me that there was great frustration on both sides of the aisle.

The Senate was always intended to be, has always been, and should always remain, the saucer that allows the boiling tea to cool to ensure rash actions do not get enacted into law; to ensure that laws reflect the cold rationality of reason and not the heat of perhaps misplaced passion. But, there has been concern in recent years that the Senate rules have been abused – that a very few have turned rules designed to ensure careful examination into a simple bottleneck for parochial purposes. Some have even expressed concerned that the Senate is broken.

Now, I wouldn’t say the Senate is broken, as I am proud to say that the last Congress was historic in its achievements. But, the Senate Republican Leader, my friend from Kentucky, and I have heard concerns from many different Senators about Senate rules and processes, and we have discussed the issue with each other at length. Senators Schumer and Alexander have been an important part of this discussion. Together, we’ve made important progress on a number of important areas.

Senator McConnell: Thank you, Senator Reid. Senators in both of our parties agree that there has been a significant breakdown in the Senate, though I am sure there are different perspectives on the causes of the breakdown. We both recall that in the not too distant past, when the Minority and Majority were reversed, we both had somewhat different perspectives on these issues. But, I know that the Majority Leader and I both care about this institution and the vital role it plays in our democracy.

I am happy about the reforms that we will be adopting today. The rules create many rights – for individual Senators, for the Minority, and for the Majority Leader. But, with rights come responsibilities and Senator Reid and I have discussed how to ensure that we return to a better balance between those two this Congress, and that the twin hallmarks of the Senate—the right to debate and amend legislation—are restored.

Senator Reid: Yes, we both would like to see a different Senate this year – with fewer filibusters and procedural delays and more opportunities for debate and amendments. In many cases, the problem is not necessarily in the Senate rules, it is in the lack of restraint in the exercise of prerogatives under the rules. Toward that end, we will now enter into a colloquy to discuss some of these issues. Senator McConnell, I have discussed with you that many Senators in the Majority have been very unhappy at the excessive use of the filibuster the last two Congresses, particularly on motions to proceed but also at other times when a matter that has bipartisan support is filibustered purely for delay.

Senator McConnell: And, in my Caucus, I have many Senators who have complained that the Majority Leader has abused his ability to “fill the amendment” tree, preventing Senators from offering and debating amendments that they believe are important, especially when a matter has not gone through committee or cloture is filed too quickly.

Senator Reid: As we have discussed, in the interests of comity and more open process in the Senate, we have agreed that we should use these procedural options of filling the amendment tree and filibustering the motion to proceed infrequently. And, we’ll do our best to ensure that other Members of our caucuses respect this colloquy, as well.

Senator McConnell: I agree that both sides should do their best to reinstitute regular order, where bills come to the floor and Senators get amendments. Of course, there will be times when there is no consensus and when either side may want to use all its rights to defeat a bill. But we should endeavor to work together to follow the regular order where practicable and use our procedural options with discretion. And, I will do my best to ensure that other Members of my caucus respect this.

I want to close by clearly reaffirming my view that if we are going to change Senate rules, we must do so within those rules. As Rule 5 states, the Senate is a continuing body, and the rules continue unless changed within the parameters of the Rules.

I strongly reject this notion that a simple majority can muscle their way to new rules at the beginning of a new Congress. I believe this is a flawed approach. Majorities come and go. My Democratic colleagues should be wary of attempting this maneuver because they will not always be in the Majority. The Senate is not the House of Representatives, and our Founding Fathers never intended it to be. What some of my colleague in the Majority propose would damage the institution and turn the Senate into a legislative body like the House where a simple Majority can run roughshod over the Minority. I would oppose such an effort to change the rules with a simple majority in this Congress or the next Congress, regardless of which political party is in the majority. I ask the Majority Leader to join me in rejecting this effort.

Senator Reid: The Minority Leader and I have discussed this issue on numerous occasions. I know that there is a strong interest in rules changes among many in my Caucus. In fact, I would support many of these changes through regular order. But, I agree that the proper way to change Senate rules is through the procedures established in those rules, and I will oppose any effort in this Congress or the next to change the Senate’s Rules other than through the regular order.

And, I hope and expect that we will have a more deliberative and efficient Senate this Congress. In particular, I hope we can reach an agreement to move nominees in regular order. One important reform to the nominations process is reducing the number of Senate confirmed positions. Our offices are working with Senators Schumer, Alexander, Lieberman, and Collins to draft a bill to accomplish this goal. This bill will be introduced in short order and we will work to get it enacted as quickly as possible.

Many of these positions are part-time boards and commissions or various agency positions that are unrelated to the management of that agency. They could be Presidentially-appointed rather than going through the Senate. Although similar efforts have been proposed in the past, I think all of my colleagues realize the need to address this situation as soon as all the details are finalized.

Senator McConnell: I agree that the Senate spends too much time dealing with a growing number of nominees. It makes sense to reduce the number of positions confirmed and free up Committee staff to focus on other nominees or legislation. I appreciate the work of these Senators and look forward to passing this legislation as soon as it is complete.

Senator Reid: I look forward to putting into practice the sentiments in this colloquy. Finally, I hope Senators of good will in both parties will continue discussions as to how we can make the Senate a better institution.

Our discussion today is in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation to express hope and anticipation that the 112th Congress will be different in many ways than the 111th. We look forward to greater comity on both sides of the aisle so that we can move legislation and nominees that have bipartisan support from the majority of Senators in this body. There are areas that we can and should work together to achieve progress for the American people.

Senator McConnell: I agree with the Majority Leader that this Congress should be more bipartisan than the last Congress. I do support the idea that the Senate should be able to move forward and complete action on matters with broad bipartisan support. Neither party has all of the solutions to the problems our nation faces. Many of the successes of past Congresses have been the result of bipartisan cooperation and input. I look forward to such cooperation and input in this Congress.

January 27, 2011

Democrats And Republicans Reach Agreement On Rules Package

McConnell Agrees Not to Pursue Constitutional Option “In This or the Next Congress”

Washington, DC— Democrats and Republicans reached an agreement on a rules package today that includes a pledge by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell not to use the so-called “constitutional option” to seek to change Senate rules “in this or the next Congress.”

“We are making these changes in the name of compromise, and this agreement itself was constructed with the same respect for mutual concession,” Sen. Reid said. “Senator McConnell and I both believe that our reverence for this institution must always be more important than party. And as part of this compromise, we have agreed that I won’t force a majority vote to fundamentally change the Senate – that is, the so-called ‘constitutional option’ – and he won’t in the future. The five reforms we are making, however, are significant. They will move us five steps closer to a healthier Senate.”

Under the terms of the agreement the senate will hold votes on:

· Eliminating secret holds, including the right of senators to pass their secret holds to another anonymous senator to keep a rolling secret hold;

· Eliminating the delaying tactic of forcing the reading of an amendment that has already been submitted for 72 hours and is publicly available;

· Legislation to exempt about 1/3 of all nominations from the Senate confirmation process, reducing the number of executive nominations subject to Senate delays, which will be scheduled at a future date under the terms of an agreement reached by Sens. Mitch McConnell and Lamar Alexander, Homeland Security and Government Affairs Chairman Joe Lieberman and HSGA ranking member Sen. Susan Collins, along with Sens. Reid and Chuck Schumer.

In addition, in a colloquy entered into the record:

· Sen. McConnell agreed not to use the constitutional option to seek to change Senate rules “in this Congress or the next Congress.”

· Sen. McConnell agreed to reduce use of the filibuster on motions to proceed and Sen. Reid agreed to reduce the use of “filling the tree” to block all amendments.

“While we didn’t get everything we wanted to, the Senate will be a significantly better place with these changes,” Sen. Schumer said. “As a result of this agreement, there should be more debate, more votes and fewer items blocked by a single senator or a small minority of senators. Make no mistake about it: this agreement is not a panacea, but it is a very significant step on the road to making the Senate function in a better, fairer way. This would not have been possible without the continued insistence on change by Senators Tom Udall, Jeff Merkley and Tom Harkin. Their push to establish the Jimmy Stewart-style filibuster, which would require senators to actually hold the floor if they want to block a bill, is one I hope will be accepted by the other party in the future.”

###

Reid made the following remarks today on the rules agreement. Below are his remarks as prepared:

“Our ability to debate and deliberate without the restraints of time limits is central and unique to the United States Senate. It’s supposed to be that way. It’s in our DNA. It’s one of the many traits intentionally designed to distinguish this body from the House of Representatives, and from every other legislative body in the world. It has always been central to the Senate, and it always should be.

“But when that arrangement is abused, we have to do something. Not merely in the name of efficiency, or for the sake of a political party’s fortunes in the next election. We have to act because when abuses keep us from doing our work, they deter us from working together, and they stop us from working for the American people. And within these four walls, it degrades the relationships that make the Senate run.

“What’s special about the Senate is that this body operates by consensus. It runs on a fuel made of comity and trust. When abuses happen, or when colleagues act in bad faith, it dilutes and degrades that fuel, and the Senate stalls.

“There are nearly as many opinions on what to do about the Senate as there are Senators. Senators Harkin, Udall of New Mexico and Merkley have listened to many ideas and have worked to find solutions.

“So have Senators Schumer and Alexander. No one has worked harder than they have to find a way out of this crisis, and I admire and appreciate their efforts.

“Leader McConnell and I have worked alongside all of them, and with each other, to find common ground.

“In the spirit of compromise that we are trying to restore to the Senate, this is what we have agreed to:

“First, we have to get rid of secret holds. Last year, a single Senator held up more than 70 nominations over a parochial issue in his state. The standoff ended only after it became public.

“That was within his right. But it wasn’t the right thing to do, and the rule has to be changed. Senators will no longer be able to hide behind anonymity, and the light of day will shine harder on the Senate. I thank Senators Wyden, Grassley and McCaskill for their leadership on this subject.

“Second, we have to recognize that public servants are not political pawns. An appointment by the President to a federal agency is a great honor. In recent years, it has often become a sentence to purgatory.

“The Senate no longer efficiently performs our Constitutional duty of confirming nominees. That leaves important offices without leaders, leaves important duties unfulfilled, and unfairly leaves in limbo well-qualified nominees.

“The Senate is responsible for confirming about 300 nominees to part-time boards and commissions. Nearly all of them are non-controversial. There is no reason for Senators to keep them from their posts, but that is exactly what happens.

“This process needs to be changed, too. So we will work to cut by about one-third the number of executive nominations that require the Senate’s approval. Senators Schumer and Alexander are working with Senators Lieberman and Collins to develop legislation that will do exactly that.

“Third, we cannot afford to waste time for the sake of wasting time. One of the minority’s favorite tactics has been to force – or threaten to force – the clerks to read amendments.

“This is nothing short of showmanship, and in this day and age, almost always unnecessary. In the 18th and 19th centuries, and when Senators’ offices were no larger than their desks here on the Senate floor, hearing the clerk read aloud a bill was an essential part of the debate. Today that is no longer the case.

“During the health reform debate two Decembers ago, while snow covered Washington and Christmas neared, opponents of the bill worked hard to delay its inevitable passage.

“On a Saturday toward the end of the debate, the minority forced the nonpartisan Senate clerks to read the entirety of an important amendment to the bill. The reading started just after 8:30 a.m., and lasted until just before 4 p.m. That’s more than seven hours of time during which nobody listened to the reading of a bill everyone had already studied, after each Senator had already decided how he or she would vote on it.

“We don’t have time for this kind of gratuitous delay. So the third change we’ll make is this: If an amendment has already been filed for 72 hours, a Senator cannot force its reading.

“Finally, I have often expressed my concerns about the procedural hurdle of forcing a preliminary vote simply to determine whether we can have a second vote to determine whether we can debate a bill – the vote called cloture on the motion to proceed. It is another one of the most commonly used tactics deployed simply to frustrate progress and waste time.

“Last Congress, we had 26 cloture votes on motions to proceed. But many of these bills were not even close to controversial. We had to hold a vote on whether to hold a vote on whether to debate a bill to promote foreign tourism – the Travel Promotion Act. After wasting days of precious time, it passed 90-3.

“We had to jump through the same hoops before we could vote on extending emergency unemployment benefits, which passed with 87 votes. And before we could vote on letting the FDA regulate tobacco, which passed with 84 votes. And before we could vote on updating our food-safety laws for the first time in a century, which passed with 74 votes.

“Democrats are bothered by how often Republicans have forced procedural votes like those on the cloture on the motion to proceed. I know Republicans are equally frustrated with me for sometimes filling the amendment tree.

“So this is the agreement Leader McConnell and I have reached to clean up this waste: Just as I will exercise restraint in using my right as Majority Leader to fill the amendment tree, he and his Republican conference will curtail their habit of filibustering the motion to proceed. Both practices should be the exception rather than the rule – and starting now, they will be.

“Senator McConnell and I have prepared a colloquy reflecting our agreement on these provisions. I ask unanimous consent that it is entered into the Record, as if read live.

“Again, the changes we will agree to today are:

· First, ending secret holds.

· Second, reducing by about one-third the number of executive nominations that are subject to Senate delays.

· Third, ending the time-consuming practice of reading aloud amendments that have been publicly available for three days.

· Fourth, limiting the use of filibusters on motions to proceed to a bill.

· And fifth, filling the amendment tree only when necessary.

“I know some want us to go even further. There are just as many arguments for not going so far. But remember this: We are making these changes in the name of compromise, and this agreement itself was constructed with the same respect for mutual concession.

“Senator McConnell and I both believe that our reverence for this institution must always be more important than party. And as part of this compromise, we have agreed that I won’t force a majority vote to fundamentally change the Senate – that is, the so-called ‘constitutional option’ – and he won’t in the future.

“The five reforms we are making, however, are significant. They will move us five steps closer to a healthier Senate.

“Yes, we want the Senate to move deliberately. But we want it to move. We have to find a balance that encourages us to debate, but also enables us to legislate. We are governed by a delicate mix of rules, rights and responsibilities. To that mix, we need to add respect.

“The Senate should function as the Founders intended it to function and as the country needs it to function – not simply as slowly its rules will allow it to function.”

January 26, 2011

Schumer: House Elections Bill Would Allow Uncontrolled Flood Of Special Interest Money Into Our Elections

Washington, D.C. – Senator Charles Schumer, Chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee and Chair of the Senate Rules Committee, released the following statement in response to House Republicans passing a bill that would give special interests more influence over our elections:

“This is an attempt to finish the job that the Supreme Court started with the Citizens United decision. It would bust one of the last dams protecting our election system from an uncontrolled flood of special interest money.”

January 26, 2011

Shot/Chaser

SHOT >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8RBL3EgPIo

Sen. McConnell: “Millions of Americans are still asking the same simple, persistent questions, Mr. President: where are the jobs?”

CHASER:

SENATE DEMOCRATS ACCUSE REPUBLICANS OF AXING ONE MILLION JOBS >> http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/26/senate-democrats-accuse-republicans-axing-one-million-jobs

by Trish Turner | January 26, 2011

“Accusing congressional Republicans, specifically fiscal hawks and their $2.5 trillion plan for spending cuts, of using ‘a meat ax’ approach, Senate Democratic leaders said Wednesday that the plan would leave one million Americans out of work and the nation less safe, with some 4,000 FBI agents off the streets. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., called the proposed cuts ‘disconcerting’ and said, ‘They want to have a fire sale.’ http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/01/26/senate-democrats-accuse-republicans-axing-one-million-jobs

January 26, 2011

Schumer: House Elections Bill Would Allow Uncontrolled Flood Of Special Interest Money Into Our Elections

January 26, 2011

Reid Statement On The Resolution Honoring Victims And Heroes Of Tucson Shooting

Washington, DC—Nevada Senator Harry Reid released the following statement today following passage of a Senate resolution honoring Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and the victims and heroes of the Tucson shooting:

“I join my colleagues today in honoring Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and all of the victims of the tragedy in Tucson earlier this month. I am encouraged by the improvements in her condition, and hope for her continued speedy recovery. She is an inspiring example of the human spirit persevering through extreme tragedy. Today is also a time to remember those who lost their lives during an event that should have been a testament to our democracy, a discussion between a dedicated public servant and her constituents. I express my deep condolences to the families of those who lost loved ones and commend the men and women who showed the best in us by stepping up to prevent an even greater tragedy. My thoughts are with all Arizonans today as they continue to mourn and begin the healing process.”

January 26, 2011

Senate Democrats: House GOP Budget Will Cost 1 Million Jobs

Middle-Class Americans Can’t Afford Republicans’ Plans To Destroy Jobs

Washington, DC—House Republicans’ extreme plans to slash the federal budget will cost 1 million jobs at a time when the economy is finally beginning to turn around, Senate Democrats said at a press conference today.

“Last night the President called for us to out-educate, out-innovate and out-build our competition around the globe. It’s clear today that Republicans didn’t get the message,” Sen. Durbin said. “Their budget plan decimates education funding, slows innovation, and ignores our crumbling infrastructure. All told, the Republican budget plan would destroy 1 million jobs and add another trillion dollars to the deficit. It seems their roadmap leads straight to job loss at a time when America can afford it least.”

The proposed cuts would decimate essential programs, with 42 percent cuts for everything from K-12 education to the FBI to the Center for Disease Control. Republicans’ plan would mean pink slips for 4,000 FBI agents, 3,000 food safety inspectors and 6,000 nuclear safety workers. And it would mean longer waits for veterans at VA hospitals, seniors at the Social Security office and travelers in airport security lines.

“In their first weeks in Congress, Republicans have pushed ideological plans to add $1 trillion to the deficit and embraced ending Social Security and Medicare. Now they’re pushing a fiscal plan that would destroy American jobs at a crucial point in our economic recovery,” Sen. Schumer said. “Not only would these cuts cost a million people their jobs, they would put our national security at risk.”

Democrats released a report today detailing the cuts, which come from almost every sector of the economy – from transportation to law enforcement to health care.

Among the job losses are 161,000 employees of small businesses, who would face layoffs because of a draconian $4 billion in cuts to small businesses lending programs. Less money for border and homeland security means nearly 13,000 fewer law enforcement agents keeping our nation safe. And slashing 70,000 teacher jobs would hamper efforts to adequately train our children to compete in a global economy.

“The Republicans’ plan would lead our country down the path to fewer jobs, fewer services for our veterans and small businesses and fewer opportunities for our students,” said Sen. Murray. “We need to rein in spending, but we need to do it in a way that will keep America competitive in the 21st century economy—and we can’t allow it to happen on the backs of our workers, our families, or our communities.”

SENATE DEMOCRATS RELEASE REPORT SHOWING HOUSE REPUBLICAN BUDGET WILL CUT MORE THAN ONE MILLION AMERICAN JOBS

During the 2010 elections, we heard a lot from Republicans about jobs. But since taking control of the House, jobs have been the last thing on the Republicans’ to-do list. Now, the Republican Study Committee, whose membership roster includes Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan and more than two-thirds of the House Republican caucus, has proposed $2.5 trillion in discretionary spending cuts over ten years. In the Senate, Sen. Jim DeMint and Budget Committee Chairman Jeff Sessions have already praised this draconian plan, which would put more than one million jobs at risk, halt our economic growth and hurt middle-class families.

ESTIMATED JOB LOSSES UNDER THE REPUBLICAN STUDY COMMITTEE PLAN: MORE THAN ONE MILLION

· Small Business Loans: 161,600 Jobs. Small businesses would receive about $4 billion less in guaranteed loans in 2011 under SBA’s flagship 7(a) loan guarantee program – According to the International Franchise Association, for every incremental $1 billion in lending, franchised businesses can create 40,400 jobs and $4.2 billion in economic output.

· Law Enforcement: 12,900 Jobs. Approximately 4,000 positions for FBI agents, 800 ATF agents, 1,500 DEA agents, and 900 U.S. marshals would be lost, as would 5,700 correctional officers in federal prisons.

· Teaching: 70,000 Jobs. American schools – and their students – would have 70,000 fewer teachers and school aides.

· Transportation: 75,000 Jobs. Approximately 75,000 transportation infrastructure jobs would be at risk due to drastic cuts to highway programs.

· Food Safety: 3,000 Jobs. The Agriculture Department would have to cut about 3,000 food safety inspectors.

· Manufacturing Partnership: 50,000 Jobs. The RSC plan eliminates funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program which helps create or retain over 50,000 manufacturing jobs every year.

· Amtrak: 160,000 Jobs. There would be no federal support for Amtrak, even as Amtrak announced a long-term plan last year that would provide over 160,000 jobs.

· Intercity and High-Speed Rail: 100,000 Jobs. The RSC plan eliminates $2.5 billion for intercity and high-speed rail, which represents nearly 100,000 jobs.

· Health Care: 400,000 Jobs. There would be no funding to carry out the Affordable Care Act, putting up to 400,000 jobs at risk and raising health care and prescription drug costs for American families and seniors.

· Weatherization: 27,500 Jobs. The Department of Energy’s weatherization program would be eliminated, representing more than 27,500 jobs every year.

· USAID: 9,000 Jobs. All federal funding for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which employs nearly 9,000 people and advances our national security interests throughout the world, would be eliminated.

· Bureau of Indian Affairs: 600 Jobs. The Bureau of Indian Affairs would have to cut more than 600 law enforcement officers on the beat in Indian reservations, where the crime rates are many times greater than the national average.

· TSA: 750 Jobs. The Transportation Security Administration would have to cut approximately 750 security staff.

· SEC: 600 Jobs. The SEC would need to cut at least 600 employees, severely inhibiting its ability to implement financial reform legislation enacted in 2010.

· Nuclear Waste Cleanup: 6,000 Jobs. The Environmental Management program would eliminate more than 6,000 jobs for nuclear waste cleanup including construction jobs for waste treatment plants needed to dispose of high-level, liquid radioactive waste currently stored in underground tanks in Washington and South Carolina.

The Republican Study Committee plan would have a devastating impact on American children, families and seniors.

· Head Start would be forced to cut about 389,000 children from its rolls

· K-through-12 classrooms across America would lose $11.25 billion

· Key education programs would be eliminated entirely, including Race to the Top, vocational training and college scholarship programs

· $16.1 billion in state aid for Medicaid would be repealed, forcing additional financial pressure at a time when many states are already facing a budget crisis

· The Community Development Block Grant Program would be eliminated, as would the Essential Air Service, which guarantees access to commuter air in over 100 rural communities

January 26, 2011

Senate Democrats Introduce Legislation Calling For New Safeguards For National Security, American Economy Against Cyber Attack

Washington, DC—Yesterday Senate Democrats introduced a bipartisan bill to stop state actors, criminals and terrorists in cyberspace determined to harm America’s economy and national security by attacking our technology infrastructure. The bill is sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the chairs of seven committees of jurisdiction, Chairs Joe Lieberman, Jay Rockefeller, Carl Levin, Patrick Leahy, Dianne Feinstein, John Kerry and Jeff Bingaman. ??“Today we rely more heavily than ever on technology to run everything from power plants to missile systems to personal computers,” Sen. Reid said. “Cyber attack could, for example, bring down our nation’s air traffic control system in a matter of seconds, with devastating impact on the economic vitality of tourist destinations throughout Nevada and our country. We must strengthen security to ensure that never happens.”

Cyber criminals and state adversaries pose a threat to both national security and our economy by threatening infrastructure, defense systems and global communications. Criminals and hackers probe U.S. government computer networks millions of times every day, about 9 million Americans have their identities stolen each year and cyber crime costs large American businesses $3.8 million a year. More than $1 trillion worth of and intellectual property has already been stolen from American businesses.

Sen. Patrick Leahy said: “In the digital age, our nation faces the difficult challenge of protecting our vulnerable computer networks from cyber threats, while at the same time encouraging American innovation and respecting privacy rights and civil liberties. With this legislation, we begin the important work of enhancing the security of our digital infrastructure and ensuring the privacy rights of all Americans. I look forward to working with Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle as this legislation moves forward.”

Sen. Carl Levin said: “Cyber space is an arena of great potential and vulnerabilities. Congress and the Administration have been acting to address some portions of these vulnerabilities. In fact, as part of a bipartisan effort to improve certain areas within the Defense Department, the Armed Services Committee last year sponsored legislation to resolve longstanding policy issues, develop better cyber acquisition processes, and conduct major commercial technology demonstrations. However, much more needs to be done across the government, and in partnership with the private sector and the international community. This bill would be a significant and essential step in speeding that process along.”

Sen. Jeff Bingaman said: “This legislation will address gaps in Federal authority to protect against cyber security threats. It will help safeguard our nation against the possibility of an act that disrupts, or attempts to disrupt, America’s critical electric infrastructure.”

Sen. John Kerry said: “As the last few years have shown, the threats emerging from cyberspace will only continue to multiply. The United States urgently requires comprehensive cyber legislation that will bolster our diplomatic and security efforts, increase American competitiveness and generate jobs, while safeguarding access to information and individual privacy. This bill lays an important first marker in support of those goals.”

Sen. Jay Rockefeller said: “Every day, cyber thieves are stealing our identities, our money, our business innovations and our national security secrets. We must secure our networks to safeguard our future. The comprehensive bill we’ve introduced will stop the hemorrhaging of America’s assets to cyber criminals and spies. I commend Sen. Reid for his leadership, and look forward to working with my colleagues and the White House to get this bill passed this year.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman said: “The future security of the American way of life depends on passage of comprehensive cyber security legislation that will provide the federal government with modern tools to secure and defend the nation’s most critical networks and assets. Last Congress we made great, bipartisan strides towards passing such legislation, and I’m pleased the Cyber Security and American Cyber Competiveness Act will build on that progress. I commend Senator Reid for making cyber security legislation a priority in the 112th Congress and I urge the Administration to do the same and engage in the legislative process as soon as possible.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein said: “The intelligence shows that the threat from criminals, terrorists, and foreign governments in cyber space is real and growing daily. We cannot address this threat piecemeal, and the intelligence community has the expertise to be part of the solution. I believe comprehensive legislation will help individual citizens, private companies and the federal government improve their ability to defend against these attacks.”

The legislation calls for urgent action to safeguard critical infrastructure, including the electric grid, military assets, the financial sector and telecommunications networks. It urges incentives for the private sector to assess the risk of cyber terrorism and take action to prevent it and promote investments in the American IT sector, which will create high-paying jobs. The bill also seeks to improve the capability of the U.S. government to assess cyber risks, and to prevent, detect and respond to attacks. It calls for safeguards to protect consumers by preventing identity theft and guarding against abuses of personal information, and seeks to promote cooperation between nations in responding to cyber threats.

January 25, 2011

Senate Democrats To: Rep. Ryan: Be Honest With America Tonight About GOP Plan To Privatize Social Security

Schumer Says: Ryan ‘Can’t Sweep Roadmap Under The Rug Just Because Spotlight Will Be Shining Brighter Than Usual’

Washington, DC – With Rep. Paul Ryan delivering the Republican response to the State of the Union tonight, Senate Democrats are calling on him to level with Americans about his plan to privatize Social Security and Medicare.

In recent days, enough top Republicans have endorsed Ryan’s “roadmap” for dismantling Social Security and Medicare that the plan has in effect become the official position of the Republican Party.

“Paul Ryan owes it to the national audience tonight to explain why he wants to privatize Social Security and Medicare,” U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer said. “He can’t sweep his roadmap under the rug just because the spotlight will be shining brighter than usual.”

Rep. Ryan has been appointed to give the official Republican response to the President’s State of the Union address. His plan has been endorsed by Republican Congressional leadership, including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, which sets funding parameters for Social Security and Medicare. Yesterday, Senator Jeff Sessions, the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, went so far as to say of Rep. Ryan’s roadmap, “his whole plan and approach is fabulous, we need to be listening to it.”

?A fact sheet detailing Rep. Ryan’s proposal is below.

Paul Ryan’s Roadmap To Privatize Social Security And Medicare

Congressional Budget Office: “Roadmap” Will Privatize Social Security. The CBO wrote in a letter to Ryan about his roadmap, “A system of individual accounts would be established in 2012. In that year, workers who are age 55 or younger would be able to participate in voluntary individual accounts, funded with a portion of their payroll taxes.” [Congressional Budget Office, 1/27/10]

• Roadmap Would Cut Social Security Benefits. “The Roadmap specifies reductions in traditional retirement benefits through progressive price indexing for many workers who are age 55 or younger in 2011.” [Congressional Budget Office, 1/27/10]

Ryan’s Plan Would Convert Medicare to a Voucher Program, Vastly Cutting Benefits. “People who become eligible for Medicare after 2020 would no longer have access to a defined set of benefits from any participating health care provider. Instead, they would receive a voucher worth $11,000 (on average) to be used to purchase private health insurance… Moreover, the Ryan plan imposes no requirement that private insurers actually offer health coverage to Medicare beneficiaries at an affordable price, or at all. Some beneficiaries, particularly the frail elderly, people with disabilities, and those with very modest incomes, could end up uninsured or heavily underinsured.” [Congressional Budget Office, 1/27/10; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/7/10]

Ryan’s Plan Would Eliminate the Children’s Health Insurance Program. “The Ryan proposal would eliminate most of Medicaid and all of the Children’s Health Insurance Program. Low-income families with children would receive a health insurance tax credit and some additional low-income assistance and be pushed into the private health insurance market to fend for themselves.” [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/7/10]

Ryan’s Roadmap Would Raise Middle-Class Taxes While Handing Giveaways To Millionaires.

Ryan’s Plan Would Give More Than $500,000 to Millionaires While Raising Taxes for Middle Class Families. Households with incomes of more than $1 million would receive an average annual tax cut of $502,000, while the wealthiest one-tenth of one percent of Americans would receive an average tax cut of $1.7 million a year. At the same time, about three-quarters of Americans — those with incomes between $20,000 and $200,000 — would face tax increases. For example, households with incomes between $50,000 and $75,000 would face an average tax increase of $900. [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 7/7/10; Urban Institute and Brookings Institution’s Tax Policy Center, 3/9/10]

· Under Ryan’s Plan, Wealthiest Americans Would Pay Lower Tax Rate Than Middle-Class Families. “The Roadmap would lead to the wealthiest Americans paying a lower average tax rate than most Americans. Eliminating taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest, as the Roadmap proposes, would overwhelmingly help taxpayers at the top of the income distribution, who receive most or all of their income from capital. For example, Wall Street financiers could shelter all of their income as tax-free stock options or carried interest.” [Economic Policy Institute, 1/20/11]

January 25, 2011

Reid: We Should Carefully Choose Our Words, But We Can’t Choose Our Own Facts

Washington, DC— Nevada Senator Harry Reid made the following remarks today to convene the Senate. Below are his remarks as prepared:

“In the two weeks we were away from Washington, all of us absorbed a numbing tragedy – the horrific attack in Arizona. The nation mourned the lost, thanked the heroes and waited anxiously by a brave Congresswoman’s hospital bedside. We continue to wish the victims a full and speedy recovery, and continue to keep their families in our thoughts.

“In the days since the Senate last convened, the nation also resumed a debate over the words, the tone and the metaphors we use here in the Senate, as well as along the campaign trail, on the Internet and over the airwaves.

“The national conversation about our national conversation is not new. It happens every year. Candidates promise it every election. But since the shooting in Tucson, calls for more careful language have multiplied and amplified.

“There is no evidence that partisan politics played any role in this monstrous attack. Even so, we should be more civil anyway. Being more mindful of the weight of our words always helps. We have much more to gain than to lose from civility and discretion.

“In this new year, I hope we will return to the respect that has always been a hallmark of the United States Senate. I hope my colleagues will join in renewing our commitment to productive debate.

“Some may be inspired by the town halls of two Augusts ago. Others by the heated election debates. Some may be motivated by the conversation that started after Arizona. And many will seek more civility simply because it’s the right thing to do. Whatever the reason, I hope the turn to more responsible rhetoric is more than empty rhetoric. I intend to do my part.

“What I’m talking about goes beyond inflammatory allegations or hate speech. It also means not questioning each other’s motives, or calling into question the patriotism of a colleague who has been elected to serve his state and country.

“But it’s even more than that. As we more carefully choose our words, we must also remember that we do not have the luxury, as Senator Moynihan used to caution, to choose our own facts. If we are really going to change the way we speak in the hope of changing the way we do business, we have to reintroduce truth into the public debate.

“That doesn’t mean just rephrasing an attack line from ‘job-killing’ to ‘job-destroying,’ as House Republicans have done in response to the shooting. It means that if there is no proof that a policy takes away jobs – if in fact the evidence shows the opposite – we shouldn’t pretend any differently. The nonpartisan referee we rely on for this data, the Congressional Budget Office, found that when it comes to health reform – which is what House Republicans were talking about in this case – the claim is simply not true. Changing our rhetoric requires us to debate the facts, not invent them.

“In the coming weeks, much of the discussion on the Senate floor will revolve around health care, the deficit and the debt limit. Each of these issues affects the number-one issue in America – jobs – and each issue is complex. If we are going to make the right decisions and point our economy back in the right direction, we have to start with a shared respect for the facts.

“First, let’s look at health care. Independent fact-checkers examined all the political rhetoric of the last year. Given the intensity of the legislative debates and the election season, there was a lot to choose from. But one claim stood out above all – the habit of those opposed to health care to call it a ‘government takeover.’ One of those nonpartisan experts, FactCheck.org, called it plainly ‘false.’ Another, PolitiFact, a project of the St. Petersburg Times, called it the ‘Lie of the Year.’

“So if we’re going to have an honest debate about the health reform law we passed last year, retiring this scare tactic would be a good place to start.

“Second, my friends on the other side are quick to associate the current President with the current deficit, as if it happened overnight and under his watch.

“But here is a brief review of the facts: In the 1990s, we balanced the budget. At the beginning of the new century, America had a bigger surplus than ever in her history. Over the next decade, while our troops went into battle, the costs of two wars went off the budget. The richest took home giant tax breaks, but nobody paid the bill. A massive prescription-drug program wasn’t paid for, either.

“President Clinton left President Bush a record surplus. President Bush left President Obama a record deficit. Those unpaid-for wars, tax breaks and programs are the reason we’re in a hole today. What we do next is fair game for debate. But facts, as John Adams said, are stubborn things.

“Third, we’ll soon debate the debt limit. Earlier this month the Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, sent each of us a letter outlining what would happen if we don’t raise that ceiling. It would be the first time in history our country would default on our legal obligations. He didn’t share his partisan opinion in that letter – he simply laid out the facts. This is what he wrote:

“‘Default would effectively impose a significant and long-lasting tax on all Americans and all American businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of American jobs. Even a very short-term or limited default would have catastrophic economic consequences that would last for decades.’

“What are some of those consequences? Our troops and veterans would no longer get their paychecks. Our seniors would no longer get their Social Security and Medicare checks. Student loans would simply stop. On a larger scale, the Secretary of the Treasury warned it would lead to a worse financial crisis than the one we’re still recovering from.

“There will soon be time to debate what we do about the debt limit. But these are the facts we must first acknowledge and consider.

“The American people voted in November for a divided legislative branch – a Democratic Senate and a Republican House. They didn’t elect houses led by competing parties because they want us to compete. They did so because they want us to cooperate.

“We cannot cooperate without an honest debate. And we cannot have an honest debate if we insist that fiction is fact.

“Mark Twain, a great Nevadan, once said ‘If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.’ He was right. But here’s one thing every Senator should remember, and never forget: Though there are many different points of view in this body, we all share the same reality.”

January 25, 2011

ICYMI: GOP Budget Cuts Would Put Homeland Security “At Risk,” Mean Longer Waits for Vets, Seniors

Key Point: “Going back to 2006 levels would place homeland security “potentially at risk if this goes through,” Thompson said… ‘If imposed across the board, such a cut would mean 42 percent less for health care for veterans; 42 percent less for K-12 education; 42 percent less for protecting the environment; 42 percent less for the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, and border security; 42 percent less for the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 42 percent less for food safety and inspection; and so on,’ according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an organization that studies federal budget issues from a center-left perspective.”

Federal workforce budget cuts would mean customer service cuts for taxpayers

By Joe Davidson

Washington Post Staff Writer? Monday, January 24, 2011; 10:21 PM

If you thought the two-year pay freeze President Obama and Congress imposed on federal employees would mollify Republican calls for harsher worker sacrifices, you would be wrong.

The Republican Study Committee, a group that makes up almost 70 percent of the Republicans in the House, wants more.

Cutting spending to 2008 levels, as House Republicans proposed last year, would be just the start for the committee members.

Under the committee’s Spending Reduction Act of 2011, http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/Solutions/SRA.htm ”at the beginning of the next fiscal year on October 1, 2011, [non-defense] spending is further reduced to 2006 levels and frozen there for the next decade, http://rsc.jordan.house.gov/news/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=220713 ” the committee said last week. “To help achieve these savings, the bill shrinks the size and cost of the civilian federal workforce and specifically targets over 100 budget items and spending reforms.”

But what the committee doesn’t readily address is what their cuts would mean for the many services Uncle Sam provides his customers.

For example, would waits for Social Security, veterans and discrimination claims grow? Would there be fewer workplace inspections? Would it take longer to approve drugs?

Committee Republicans would shrink the cost of the federal workforce through a five-year pay freeze and reduce the workforce by 15 percent through attrition. That would be reached by hiring one worker for every two who left government.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) stood with his House colleagues in a news release issued by the committee, against what he called “the wave of wasteful Washington spending. The Spending Reduction Act begins the difficult task of shrinking the federal bureaucracy that threatens our future prosperity.”

The federal bureaucracy and those who staff it always are an easy target. But the release fails to mention anything about the impact the proposed cuts would have on service. If cutting federal spending, the federal payroll and staffing levels are necessary, then those who push those policies also should be willing to say what services they are willing to cut to save money.

While the committee’s news release and fact sheet ignored the impact of its proposal on customers, others did not.

Bennie G. Thompson, the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, said many of the projects to enhance domestic security – along the border, at airports and in cyberspace – were paid for through the discretionary budget.

Going back to 2006 levels would place homeland security “potentially at risk if this goes through,” Thompson said. An overview of the legislation issued by the committee makes no mention of excluding homeland security and veterans’ spending from the proposed discretionary limits.

With defense programs excluded, the hit on the remaining parts of the budget would be huge.

“If imposed across the board, such a cut would mean 42 percent less for health care for veterans; 42 percent less for K-12 education; 42 percent less for protecting the environment; 42 percent less for the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, and border security; 42 percent less for the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 42 percent less for food safety and inspection; and so on, http://www.offthechartsblog.org/house-gop-group-would-decimate-key-services/ ”according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an organization that studies federal budget issues from a center-left perspective.

But let’s say the center overstates the problem. According to the Senate’s Democratic leadership, even a 30 percent cut in non-security programs would have a serious impact:

· About 8 million students would have their Pell grants cut.

· Head Start would be forced to drop about 389,000 children and families.

· K-through-12 classrooms across America would lose $11.25 billion

· About 3,000 food-safety inspector positions would be eliminated

· Approximately 4,000 positions for FBI agents, 800 ATF agents, 1,500 DEA agents, and 900 U.S. marshals would be lost, as would 5,700 correctional officers in federal prisons.

· Guaranteed loans for small businesses would fall by about $4 billion in 2011.

Asked about service cuts, a spokesman for the committee said the Office of Management Budget would have flexibility to reassign worker slots between agencies if necessary. “People in the private sector often have to tighten their belts, increase productivity and provide the same services at lower costs,” he said. “We reject the notion that the federal government cannot do the same.”

Providing the same service at lower costs, however, is a notion that often ignores reality. Consider the difference in service between a Home Depot and a neighborhood hardware store. One way big-box stores keep costs low is by hiring comparatively fewer people. Along with lower costs come lower levels of service.

Sam can learn from recent experience. Many agencies were understaffed when President Obama took office and their customers suffered steep backlogs in service.

Going back to 2006 levels “would have significant impacts on staffing and slash productivity at a time when we are receiving record numbers of charges,” said Christine Saah Nazer, a spokeswoman for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

“We would see our pending inventory grow significantly and a marked decrease in our ability to provide training and technical assistance to employers. This would ultimately result in lengthy delays, keeping those who file complaints of discrimination, as well as businesses, in a costly state of limbo.”

The cost of government can be counted in different ways. Budget figures are one way, the cost to customers by cutting service is another. When politicians talk about the former, don’t let them get away with ignoring the latter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/24/AR2011012406162.html

January 24, 2011

ICYMI: Cantor: Roadmap To Privatizing Social Security Is “Something We Need to Embrace”

Yesterday on “Meet the Press,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor told host David Gregory that the “roadmap” to privatizing Social Security devised by Republican Rep. Paul Ryan is “something we need to embrace.”

WATCH the video here…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GltjgiJPxXY

Transcript:

MR. GREGORY: How about–and the irony of Paul Ryan being introduced, the budget chairman, and he’s doing the response to the State of the Union, he is the one who’s proposed draconian cuts to Social Security and to Medicare…

REP. CANTOR: Well, David…

MR. GREGORY: …and Republicans don’t stand behind him.

REP. CANTOR: David, that’s not true. I just told you that we put a chapter in our book about it because the direction in which the Roadmap goes is something we need, we need to embrace.

January 24, 2011

Reid Spokesman: Republicans Endorse Ryan’s Roadmap To End Social Security And Medicare

“In an unsettling development for America’s seniors, ending Social Security and Medicare is now the official position of the Republican Party. Republicans tapped Rep. Ryan, the architect of a plan to end Social Security and Medicare, to deliver their response to the President’s State of the Union, and his plan has been endorsed by the House Majority Leader and the top Republicans on the House and Senate budget committees. In fact, Republicans are not only endorsing Rep. Ryan’s extreme plan, but giving him unprecedented power to carry it out. It’s enough to make you ask ‘what’s next?’ But I’m not sure hard-working Americans would want to hear the answer.”

January 24, 2011

ICYMI: Top Senate Republican On Ryan’s Roadmap To End Social Security: “His Whole Plan And Approach Is Fabulous”

On ABC’s Topline a few minutes ago, Sen. Sessions said of Rep. Ryan’s plan to end Social Security as we know it, “his whole plan and approach is fabulous.” Sen. Sessions is the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, making Ryan’s roadmap a plan that has now been endorsed by the House Majority Leader and the top Republicans on both the House and Senate budget committees.

WATCH (Roadmap comments at 4:35):

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/jeff-sessions-investment-word-spend-12748772?&clipId=12748772&playlistId=12748772&cid=siteplayer

Transcript:

KARL: Do you embrace Ryan’s blueprint?

SESSIONS: Ryan has done a fabulous thing. He’s developed a plan that goes 60 years, and he deals with Social Security and Medicare… his whole plan and approach is fabulous, we need to be listening to it.

January 24, 2011

Reid Spokesman Responds To Positive Economic News, Record Justice Department Recovery Of Taxpayer Funds

Washington, D.C.—Jon Summers, spokesman for Nevada Senator Harry Reid, released the following statement on the news that 42 percent of businesses plan to hire in the next six months, nine out of 10 economists are more optimistic for 2011 than they were three months ago and the Justice Department recovered a record $4 billion in waste, fraud and abuse from Medicare:

“Today’s economic news shows that while we are not out of the woods yet, our work to turn the economy around in Nevada and the nation and strengthen the middle class is working. Employers are hiring, economists are raising their predictions for growth this year and the Justice Department recovered a record $4 billion by rooting out waste, fraud and abuse of Medicare. But at this crucial moment in our recovery, Republicans want to take us in the opposite direction. In their losing war against health care, they have lost focus on what’s important to the American people: jobs. Rather than working with us on strengthening the economy and making government more efficient, they are hell-bent on raising taxes on small businesses, charging seniors more for prescription drugs and adding to the nation’s debt.”

###

USA Today: Experts: Economy Looking Brighter

· “When asked to predict, nine of 10 economists said they’re more optimistic than three months ago, according to a USA TODAY survey of 46 economists conducted Jan. 13-19.”

· “They expect the economy to grow at an annual rate of 3.2% to 3.4% each quarter this year. That’s up from quarterly median forecasts of 2.5% to 3.3% in an October survey.”

· Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics “expects the economy to grow 4.4% this year.”

· “They [economists] expect employers to add 200,000 jobs a month by the second half of the year, more than double last year’s rate.”

Wall Street Journal: More Hiring Expected as Gloom Starts to Lift

· “The fourth-quarter poll of 84 companies by the National Association for Business Economics found 42% expected to increase jobs in the next six months. That is up from 29% in the first quarter of 2010. Only 7% of companies in the latest survey predict they will shed jobs in the coming six months, down from 23% at the start of last year.”

· “‘The economy is potentially at a turning point in job creation,’ said Randall Kroszner, a professor at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and a former Fed governor.”

· “The recent drop in weekly jobless claims points to a stronger labor market.”

Bloomberg: U.S. Jobs Outlook Rises to Decade High, Survey Says

· “U.S. companies’ employment outlook improved to a 12-year high this quarter after sales strengthened and economic growth picked up, a survey showed.”

· “The percentage of businesses expecting to increase payrolls in the next six months exceeded the share projecting more firings by 35 points, the most since the question was first asked in 1998.”

USA Today: $2.5B recovered in health care fraud

· “Federal agents recovered $2.5 billion from health care fraud judgments in the budget year that ended in September, a record-breaking amount they credit to whistle-blowers and a renewed effort from the Obama administration.”

· “Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius plans to announce today the money won in cases under the False Claims Act, as well as ways the health care law will prevent fraud in 2011. Overall the government recovered $4 billion, including $1.5 billion in administrative findings, rather than court action.”

· “The health care law created one agency and expanded another to help recover stolen money. The actuary for Medicare expects the provisions of the law to save an additional $4.9 billion in fraud and abuse during the next 10 years. That money will be folded back into Medicare to help it remain solvent until at least 2027.”

Think Fast …thinkprogress.org

On CBS’s The Early Show today, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) praised Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for signing on to the earmark ban yesterday. He credited McConnell “with listening to fellow GOP lawmakers and also to voters who showed their anger over federal spending at the polls in this month’s elections.”

The British government has announced that it will be offering monetary compensation “to former detainees at Guantánamo Bay who have complained that the British intelligence agencies colluded in their torture.” The compensation is expected to “total several million dollars.”

The House ethics committee found evidence to support 13 counts of misconduct by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY). The findings came after Rangel walked out of the proceedings, claiming he couldn’t continue to afford a lawyer; the committee will now begin considering whether to formally convict Rangel and recommend punishment.

A new USDA report released yesterday found that “about 15% of U.S. households — 17.4 million families — lacked enough money to feed themselves at some point last year.” The study “also found that 6.8 million of these households — with as many as 1 million children — had ongoing financial problems that forced them to miss meals regularly.”

President Obama met with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Reps. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) and Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) yesterday to discuss the chances of passing comprehensive immigration reform or the DREAM Act in the lame duck session. Menendez said the White House is “ready and willing” to talk about immigration reform.

Blue dog Democrat Rep. Health Shuler (NC) said yesterday that he will challenge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for the Democrats’ top leadership position when the Party moves into the minority in the next Congress. Although Shuler acknowledged that it will be an uphill battle, he noted he is following through with a campaign promise to challenge Pelosi.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) will meet with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) today to discuss a two-year freeze of the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate change agenda, which Rockefeller has been seeking all year. Rockefeller says Reid previously promised him a vote this year on the bill, which would block EPA’s climate change regulations for power plants, petroleum refiners and other major stationary sources.

In a unanimous decision Monday, the California Supreme Court ruled that undocumented immigrants who graduated from state high schools can continue to receive in-state tuition to California’s public universities and colleges. While California is one of 10 states that permit in-state tuition for undocumented students, the ruling is “the first of its kind in the nation.”

And finally: Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) “has made no secret” of the fact that he is a “superfan” of Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards — he even pardoned the rockstar for a 1975 misdemeanor in Arkansas. But in his new autobiography, Richards is less than grateful, and even criticizes Huckabee’s guitar chops , writing, “Governor Huckabee also thinks of himself as a guitar player. I think he even has a band.”

Point4CounterPoint

politics pop culture and petitions

Tag Archives: Jay Rockefeller

In case your member of Congress missed it ~

Energy: Big Oil Subsidies

Congress: – the Republican led House – the Senate

Tell Sens. Murray and Cantwell: Stop the Republicans’ radical assault on EPA funding

Congress: the Senate works for Americans -the Republican led House returns 2/8/2011

Think Fast …thinkprogress.org

Follow “Point4CounterPoint”

May 2013
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Follow “Point4CounterPoint”