House Energy and Commerce Committee launched an investigation following the release of a video revealing the Planned Parenthood Senior Director of Medical Services discussing the sale of fetal body parts on Wednesday, July 15, 2015.
Michelle Obama has succeeded in banning fried foods from the Navy's menu, and U.S. Navy members are not happy about this.
Rep. Jackie Walorski (IN-2), Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Nutrition, held a hearing to discuss the development and utilization of evidence-based solutions to improve nutrition programs. This hearing is a continuation of the committee’s ongoing review, known as the Past, Present, and Future of SNAP. The subcommittee heard from experts who shared how results from quality research can be implemented in meaningful ways to improve recipients’ lives and better target limited taxpayer dollars
The House Budget Committee announced the launch of Restoring the Trust for All Generations – a new initiative aimed at raising awareness about the fiscal and policy challenges inherent in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security as well as other mandatory spending programs like income support and educational assistance. The effort will enlist Americans in a call to action in order to build a consensus in support of reform. To begin the conversation, the Committee has released a policy paper entitled Restoring the Trust for All Generations: Principles for Saving and Strengthening America’s Health, Retirement, and Economic Security Programs.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2898, the Western Water and American Food Security Act of 2015 with bipartisan support by a vote of 245-176. Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) issued the following statement upon final passage. “In the midst of the drought crisis in California and the West, H.R. 2898 will liberate Americans from the prison of outdated water laws and radical environmental regulations that have exacerbated the drought and choked the economy. This imperative legislation will restore water to communities across California and the West and stabilize food prices for Americans across the country. Most importantly, it restores people as our unmistakable, rightful first priority in the nation’s water policies,” Chairman Bishop stated. “I commend Rep. David Valadao for his leadership on H.R. 2898, and thank my California colleagues and members of the Committee, for their work on a strong bill that will alleviate manmade drought effects and return prosperity to the West.” The Western Water and American Food Security Act of 2015 passed the Committee on Natural Resources on June 9, 2015.
In 2014, President Obama issued an executive order to require contractors and subcontractors to disclose potential violations of 14 federal labor laws and equivalent state laws from the preceding three years. On May 28, 2015, the Department of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council issued proposed guidance and a draft regulation intended to implement the executive order. Republican leaders of three congressional committees today wrote to the Department of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council to call for the withdrawal of the administration’s proposed blacklisting guidance and regulation. If the proposed guidance and rule are not withdrawn, the chairmen ask that the administration extend the public comment period by 90 days to “ensure that interested parties have adequate time to review, assess, and provide meaningful input.” The current period, they argue, does not provide stakeholders enough time to “effectively evaluate the full ramifications of the proposals.”
Thursday, July 16, 2015
More Stuff in the News: Small Business, Prisoners Commuted, Minimum Wage, Airport Screening, Writing your Representatives
Sens. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.) introduced the “Small Business Regulatory Sunset Act”; versions appeared in this (S. 846) and the prior congressional session. It calls for agencies to publish plans for review of small business rules, assemble comments from the affected and sunset rules after seven years unless agencies reaffirm. Similarly Sen. Roy Blunt’s (R-Mo.) “Regulatory Review and Sunset Act“ (S. 1067) (The House version is H.R. 2010 from Rep. Randy Hultgren) provides for reviews of the heftiest of rules and for assessments of whether they should be “continued, modified, consolidated, or terminated.”
President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of 46 people incarcerated in federal prison. This follows the commutation of eight people incarcerated in federal prison for drug offenses in December of 2014, and 22 in March 2015. Fourteen of the people who received commutations today were serving life in prison for nonviolent drug offenses. In taking this step, the President has now issued nearly 90 commutations, the vast majority of them to non-violent offenders sentenced for drug law violations under draconian sentencing laws. President Obama has been under significant public pressure from advocacy groups and family members of people incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses who are serving long, mandatory minimum sentences.
Decades of infrequent and inadequate adjustment to the federal minimum wage have left today’s low-wage workers earning significantly less than their counterparts 50 years ago. Raising the federal minimum wage to $12 per hour by 2020 would lift wages for one-quarter of American workers and help restore the minimum wage’s role as a labor standard that ensures work is a means to escape poverty, according to EPI economic analyst David Cooper. “The average minimum wage worker is not a teenager working after school to earn some extra spending cash. The reality is that these are older workers who often have families to support,” Cooper said. “Raising the minimum wage, eliminating the lower minimum wage for tipped workers, and indexing the wage floor to median wages will improve the wellbeing of millions of workers and their families and will prevent low-wage workers from getting left behind again going forward.”
Academy and Pulitzer Prize Award-winning documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. transportation security agencies demanding they release records documenting a six-year period in which she was searched, questioned, and often subjected to hours-long security screenings at U.S. and overseas airports on more than 50 occasions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing Poitras in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, DOJ, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has created a new tool that makes emailing your congressional lawmakers a quick and easy process. Democracy.io simplifies and streamlines the current fractured system for contacting lawmakers, allowing you to message your two senators and your representative from a single website. At Democracy.io, you enter your home address, and a quick look-up provides the names of your three congressional lawmakers. You then can choose any or all of those lawmakers, and send them whatever message you’d like. Democracy.io follows best practices for protecting the privacy of users, and all of the code is licensed under the AGPL, which means people can create new versions with different features. EFF does not control or influence the messages sent through Democracy.io.
President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of 46 people incarcerated in federal prison. This follows the commutation of eight people incarcerated in federal prison for drug offenses in December of 2014, and 22 in March 2015. Fourteen of the people who received commutations today were serving life in prison for nonviolent drug offenses. In taking this step, the President has now issued nearly 90 commutations, the vast majority of them to non-violent offenders sentenced for drug law violations under draconian sentencing laws. President Obama has been under significant public pressure from advocacy groups and family members of people incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses who are serving long, mandatory minimum sentences.
Decades of infrequent and inadequate adjustment to the federal minimum wage have left today’s low-wage workers earning significantly less than their counterparts 50 years ago. Raising the federal minimum wage to $12 per hour by 2020 would lift wages for one-quarter of American workers and help restore the minimum wage’s role as a labor standard that ensures work is a means to escape poverty, according to EPI economic analyst David Cooper. “The average minimum wage worker is not a teenager working after school to earn some extra spending cash. The reality is that these are older workers who often have families to support,” Cooper said. “Raising the minimum wage, eliminating the lower minimum wage for tipped workers, and indexing the wage floor to median wages will improve the wellbeing of millions of workers and their families and will prevent low-wage workers from getting left behind again going forward.”
Academy and Pulitzer Prize Award-winning documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. transportation security agencies demanding they release records documenting a six-year period in which she was searched, questioned, and often subjected to hours-long security screenings at U.S. and overseas airports on more than 50 occasions. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is representing Poitras in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, DOJ, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has created a new tool that makes emailing your congressional lawmakers a quick and easy process. Democracy.io simplifies and streamlines the current fractured system for contacting lawmakers, allowing you to message your two senators and your representative from a single website. At Democracy.io, you enter your home address, and a quick look-up provides the names of your three congressional lawmakers. You then can choose any or all of those lawmakers, and send them whatever message you’d like. Democracy.io follows best practices for protecting the privacy of users, and all of the code is licensed under the AGPL, which means people can create new versions with different features. EFF does not control or influence the messages sent through Democracy.io.
Stuff in the News: DHS Funding, Child Abuse, Farmer's Market, Selling Baby Parts, Medicare Fraud
The House Appropriations Committee passed its fiscal year 2016 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Appropriations bill. The bill provides funds to secure the nation’s border, enforce immigration laws, combat smugglers, protect against cyber threats, respond to natural disasters, and fight terrorism. In addition, the bill improves oversight of DHS to hold this Administration accountable to the American people. The bill does not contain funds to implement President Obama's executive action on immigration, and specifically bars the use of funds for these activities while there are legal proceedings on the issue.
Congresswoman Katherine Clark (D-Mass) and Congressman Joe Heck (R-NV) introduced the Child Abuse Awareness and Prevention Act, legislation to protect children from sexual abuse. The proposed legislation funds school programs that provide age-appropriate lessons to primary and secondary school students on how to recognize and safely report sexual abuse. The Child Sexual Abuse Awareness and Prevention Act provides federal funding to develop, implement or expand these programs for students, teachers, and guardians.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has declared Aug 2 through 8, 2015, as "National Farmers Market Week." The declaration was made official by proclamation signed by Secretary Vilsack. This year marks the 16th annual National Farmers Market Week in honor of the important role that farmers markets play in local economies. Throughout the week, USDA will celebrate thousands of our nation's farmers markets, the farmers and ranchers who make them possible and the communities that host them.
Center for Medical Progress released the results of a three-year investigation into the handling of the remains of aborted babies at Planned Parenthood centers. What it uncovered was shocking. Officials at the highest levels of Planned Parenthood were aware of, and seemingly complicit in, the selling of whole cadavers and/or parts of the aborted babies for a profit. In support of its claims, CMP released a video showing Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s senior director of medical services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, describing how Planned Parenthood sells the body parts of aborted fetuses, and admitting she uses partial-birth abortions to supply intact body parts. In addition to the demand that the government suspend Medicaid reimbursements, American Life League has called on the members of Congress to immediately begin hearings and institute an investigation into Planned Parenthood.
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) flaunted the supposed success of their “cutting-edge technology” designed to identify and prevent improper Medicare payments. CMS claimed to have saved the Medicare Trust Fund $820 million since 2010 through the “Fraud Prevention System” (FPS). What was missing from the CMS statement was any mention of the most successful Medicare fraud prevention tool in history: The Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program. Since it was implemented nationwide in January 2010, the RAC program has returned more than $9.7 billion to the Medicare Trust Fund. Until the program was stymied and certain audits were suspended by CMS in October 2013, RACs were recovering about $1 billion per quarter, which would eclipse CMS’s FPS’s $820 million over a three year period. Plus, unlike the FPS, the RACs operate at zero taxpayer expense. They are compensated only if they correctly identify and recover improper payments.
Congresswoman Katherine Clark (D-Mass) and Congressman Joe Heck (R-NV) introduced the Child Abuse Awareness and Prevention Act, legislation to protect children from sexual abuse. The proposed legislation funds school programs that provide age-appropriate lessons to primary and secondary school students on how to recognize and safely report sexual abuse. The Child Sexual Abuse Awareness and Prevention Act provides federal funding to develop, implement or expand these programs for students, teachers, and guardians.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has declared Aug 2 through 8, 2015, as "National Farmers Market Week." The declaration was made official by proclamation signed by Secretary Vilsack. This year marks the 16th annual National Farmers Market Week in honor of the important role that farmers markets play in local economies. Throughout the week, USDA will celebrate thousands of our nation's farmers markets, the farmers and ranchers who make them possible and the communities that host them.
Center for Medical Progress released the results of a three-year investigation into the handling of the remains of aborted babies at Planned Parenthood centers. What it uncovered was shocking. Officials at the highest levels of Planned Parenthood were aware of, and seemingly complicit in, the selling of whole cadavers and/or parts of the aborted babies for a profit. In support of its claims, CMP released a video showing Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s senior director of medical services, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, describing how Planned Parenthood sells the body parts of aborted fetuses, and admitting she uses partial-birth abortions to supply intact body parts. In addition to the demand that the government suspend Medicaid reimbursements, American Life League has called on the members of Congress to immediately begin hearings and institute an investigation into Planned Parenthood.
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) flaunted the supposed success of their “cutting-edge technology” designed to identify and prevent improper Medicare payments. CMS claimed to have saved the Medicare Trust Fund $820 million since 2010 through the “Fraud Prevention System” (FPS). What was missing from the CMS statement was any mention of the most successful Medicare fraud prevention tool in history: The Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program. Since it was implemented nationwide in January 2010, the RAC program has returned more than $9.7 billion to the Medicare Trust Fund. Until the program was stymied and certain audits were suspended by CMS in October 2013, RACs were recovering about $1 billion per quarter, which would eclipse CMS’s FPS’s $820 million over a three year period. Plus, unlike the FPS, the RACs operate at zero taxpayer expense. They are compensated only if they correctly identify and recover improper payments.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
20 House of Representatives Member Comments on Iran Agreement
Lou Barletta (R-PA, 11th)
“With an issue as monumental as national security at stake, this is not the time to be burnishing legacies or campaigning for the next Nobel Peace Prize. Congress must carefully examine the agreement and its impact on this country and our allies, particularly Israel. I am mindful of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s declaration that if Iran wants to be treated as a normal nation, it should act like one. As a consistent and belligerent state sponsor of terrorism, Iran has certainly not kept its part of the bargain."
Andy Barr (R-KY, 6th)
“As a member of the Task Force to Investigate Terrorism Financing, I am particularly concerned that the Obama Administration would lift sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. Giving the Iranian regime access to billions of dollars in frozen assets will further destabilize the region and help finance their terrorist allies.”
Joe Barton (R-TX, 6th)
“I think it would be absolutely insane to ratify this deal. This is nothing more than a speed bump in Iran’s road to a nuclear weapon. They are the single largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. They have a terrible human rights record. Why we would allow them to maintain the capability over time to create weapons grade material when this deal expires? It makes no sense. I am unalterably opposed to the deal.”
Joyce Beatty (D-OH, 3rd)
“Today President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and our P5+1 partners announced a nuclear agreement with Iran. I will be thoroughly reviewing the agreement in order to ensure that it prevents Iran from developing nuclear weapons capability.”
Xavier Becerra (D-CA, 34th)
“An agreement to halt nuclear proliferation cannot be built on trust but on verifiable, enforceable requirements. The hard work of President Obama, Secretary John Kerry and Secretary Ernest Moniz has brought us a step closer to an historic opportunity to prevent Iran’s nuclear weapons development. The unity of the international community has made the economic and trade sanctions work in pressuring Iran to negotiate a deal.
“Now that an agreement has reached Congress, it is our responsibility to review it. Every word will count in this agreement and we need to know the meaning of each provision of this deal. It must constitute measurable progress in halting nuclear proliferation and in driving the region and the world farther away from nuclear Armageddon.”
Don Beyer (D-VA, 8th)
"I commend our diplomats for skillfully averting a global showdown and blocking Iran’s efforts to obtain the bomb."
We cannot allow a nuclear Iran and this deal will serve as a lasting deterrent to keep the United States out of another devastating war in the Middle East. Now I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to ensure this deal goes forward unhindered.”
Gus Bilirakis (R-FL, 12th)
“At first glance, the so called Iran Nuclear deal is not an acceptable deal for America and our allies. As I suspected, this agreement will threaten our national security interests at home and abroad. It is now up to Congress to examine the specifics of the deal and ensure the most dangerous regime in the Middle East halts its nuclear armament progress in order to prevent further regional conflict and an international arms race.”
Sanford D. Bishop, Jr (D-GA, 2nd)
“The opportunity to improve our relationship with Iran could potentially lead to greater stability in a region torn apart by war and religious strife. Nevertheless, we must not be naïve. The prospect of peace and stability can only be realized if the world is assured Iran will not threaten its neighbors with nuclear aggression."
Mike Bishop (R-MI, 8th)
“Lifting sanctions while allowing the Iranian regime to simply slow their nuclear operations – in addition to not releasing the three Americans held captive under their watch – sends the wrong message to the world and is downright dangerous. I will remain highly skeptical of any deal without stronger provisions.”
Rob Bishop (R-UT, 1st)
“I’m concerned that this deal could do much to embolden the threat of terror in the Middle East and the United States. The potential lifting of sanctions frees up $150 billion for Iran to spend on further arming terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. In addition, no Middle-Eastern Sunni nations were represented in these negotiations. ISIS forces can use this fact to foster potential support among Sunnis who may be leery of the U.S. making deals with a Shia Iran.
“This deal threatens the safety of America and her allies. A US President should be in the business of protecting the US, not simply seeking to secure a faux legacy built on bad deals.”
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR, 3rd)
“As we all carefully assess this agreement, we must remember that measuring the framework against the unobtainable is likely to exhaust the patience of countries like China, India, and members of the European Union that have been critical members of the international effort to sanction and isolate Iran. Such a fracture would be devastating because we’ve tried the go-it-alone approach with sanctions and it didn’t work. We must also compare any agreement to the alternatives. The American public has made clear they will not likely support another military engagement in the Middle East. Even if money were no object, there is no amount of U.S. troops, bombs and military acumen that could guarantee an Iran free of nuclear weapons. That’s a gamble we should not be willing to take.”
Kevin Brady (R-TX, 8th)
“Congress will have time to assess the proposed Iran agreement, but clearly this is not about Republican versus Democrats, it’s about true security versus false security at a key moment in global history. Does President Obama’s agreement stop Iran’s nuclear capability for the long term? Does it prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East? And does it make America and our allies like Israel safer? I suspect the answer to all three is ‘no’.
Nothing less than complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program is acceptable.”
Jim Bridenstine (R-OK, 1st)
While I will keep an open mind, let’s remember who we’re dealing with: Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism. Tehran’s proxies effectively control four Middle Eastern countries: Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Iran continues to violate its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty commitments and numerous UN Security Council resolutions. Just last week, top Iranian officials chanted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” in the streets of Tehran. A nuclear weapons-capable Iran is a threat to the United States and our allies, especially Israel, and a destabilizing force in the world’s most volatile region. As a nuclear threshold state, Iran would also spur nuclear weapons proliferation across the Middle East as its Sunni Arab neighbors attempt to deter Iranian aggression.
Susan W. Brooks (R-IN, 5th)
“No deal is clearly a better outcome than a bad deal and I’m extremely concerned the Obama administration has negotiated a bad deal. My colleagues and I will leave no detail of the final negotiated terms unexplored as this decision comes with consequences that will reverberate for generations moving forward. If this agreement allows for a nuclear Iran and puts our security at risk, Congress must not support it.
The Obama administration only has itself to blame for the skepticism it now faces from members of both political parties. Throughout this process, critical negotiating objectives have been repeatedly ignored or altered. Iran has practiced violence and deception for decades. The world cannot afford a nuclear Iran and thus cannot afford a deal with unacceptable terms.”
Michael Burgess (R-TX, 26th)
“Despite assurances from the Obama administration that these negotiations would end Iran’s nuclear programs and that sanctions would not be lifted until their nation met concrete demands, this deal reflects otherwise,” Rep. Burgess said. “This agreement means billions in sanction relief, and an open door to continue their reckless foreign policy agenda. “Though I am relieved to see negotiations conclude, this product – which paves the path toward a nuclear Iran – is a risk to our national security and global interests.”
Bradley Byrne (R-AL, 1st)
“From the start of these talks I have warned that President Obama and his negotiating team were desperate for a foreign policy victory, and I fear the safety of Americans and our allies in the Middle East will be at greater risk because of this deal.
“Iran is no friend of the United States, and we should all be concerned about what they will do with billions of dollars in sanctions relief. Even Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey has stated that sanctions relief would allow Iran to send more money to terrorist groups in the Middle East.
“Congress will now have an opportunity to closely scrutinize and vote on this agreement, and I call on my colleagues to look past the short-term rhetoric and instead focus on the long-term implications this deal could have on our national security and the safety of our allies abroad.”
Michael E. Capuano (D-MA, 7th)
I have always hoped for a negotiated resolution to the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The general outlines of the deal, made public this morning, appear reasonable and encouraging. However, I will carefully review the details and discuss the scientific aspects of the agreement with qualified scientists. I have never expected a perfect agreement because that is an impossible standard. For me, the most important question is, if this deal is not acceptable, then what does the United States do next? Some argue for continued sanctions but it’s clear to me that Russia and China won’t go along with that. Moreover, I fear Europe would not support the U.S. in continued sanctions so we would be left with unilateral sanctions and historically these have been ineffectual. Nor do I think a military option is prudent or feasible at this time. Congress has 60 days to review this agreement and I will carefully consider all aspects of it before making a final decision.
Buddy Carter (R-GA, 1st)
"I fear this will be a legacy making deal for the Obama Administration but not the legacy it is looking to make,” Carter said. “This dangerous deal threatens to unleash a nuclear arms race in the most unstable region in the world, imperils our closest ally Israel, and signals to other regimes that America will not maintain its resolve to combat extremism.”
Kathy Castor (D-FL, 14th)
The historic nuclear disarmament agreement announced today between the United States, Iran, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the European Union requires thorough review and analysis over the coming weeks. My overriding concern is whether or not the agreement is in the national security interest of the United States. Iran must be blocked from proceeding any further towards developing a nuclear weapon. Aggressive, enforceable restrictions and thoroughly transparent inspections at any time are fundamental to approval of such an agreement. I have no illusions about the dreadful record and conduct of the Iranian regime, or the destabilizing influence Iran continues to have in the region. No matter what, all options must remain on the table in case Iran deviates from the terms of this agreement in any way.
Here’s what we have been told so far: (1) The parties have negotiated a comprehensive, long-term deal with Iran that will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Advocates say that every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off. (2) The agreement is not built on trust; it is built on verification. Inspectors will have 24/7 access to Iran’s key nuclear facilities. (3) Iran currently has a stockpile that could produce up to 10 nuclear weapons. Under the agreement, that stockpile will be reduced to a fraction of what would be required for a single weapon. This stockpile limitation will last for 15 years. Iran will not produce the highly enriched uranium and weapons-grade plutonium that form the raw materials necessary for a nuclear weapon. (4) Iran is permanently prohibited from pursuing a nuclear weapon under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Joaquin Castro (D-TX, 20th)
“I commend Secretaries Kerry and Moniz for their tireless efforts negotiating this agreement and for their and President Obama’s steadfast commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This agreement has the potential to position the United States and our allies toward a future of peace and security. Initial readings of the deal’s text indicate it contains stringent accountability measures that protect against the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran. Congress will now have a say in how the United States proceeds, and I hope that my colleagues will take time to thoroughly and thoughtfully evaluate the details of the agreement our negotiators achieved.”
Curt Clawson (R-FL, 19th)
“With mounting concern on the details over the Administration’s deal with the regime of Iran, the world's largest state-sponsor or terrorism, it is not in the interest of the American people to have the deal ratified by the United Nations before Congress can speak with a united voice. A deal with Iran is the Administration’s ‘Flounder’ moment. We all know what happens in Animal House when Flounder gave the keys to his brother’s car to his fraternity brothers. Why are we giving the keys to nuclear technology to the largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world, who has also called for the elimination of Israel, our strongest ally in the region. Today I join with many others, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, in saying, ‘No deal is better than a bad deal.’”
“With an issue as monumental as national security at stake, this is not the time to be burnishing legacies or campaigning for the next Nobel Peace Prize. Congress must carefully examine the agreement and its impact on this country and our allies, particularly Israel. I am mindful of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s declaration that if Iran wants to be treated as a normal nation, it should act like one. As a consistent and belligerent state sponsor of terrorism, Iran has certainly not kept its part of the bargain."
Andy Barr (R-KY, 6th)
“As a member of the Task Force to Investigate Terrorism Financing, I am particularly concerned that the Obama Administration would lift sanctions on the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. Giving the Iranian regime access to billions of dollars in frozen assets will further destabilize the region and help finance their terrorist allies.”
Joe Barton (R-TX, 6th)
“I think it would be absolutely insane to ratify this deal. This is nothing more than a speed bump in Iran’s road to a nuclear weapon. They are the single largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world. They have a terrible human rights record. Why we would allow them to maintain the capability over time to create weapons grade material when this deal expires? It makes no sense. I am unalterably opposed to the deal.”
Joyce Beatty (D-OH, 3rd)
“Today President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and our P5+1 partners announced a nuclear agreement with Iran. I will be thoroughly reviewing the agreement in order to ensure that it prevents Iran from developing nuclear weapons capability.”
Xavier Becerra (D-CA, 34th)
“An agreement to halt nuclear proliferation cannot be built on trust but on verifiable, enforceable requirements. The hard work of President Obama, Secretary John Kerry and Secretary Ernest Moniz has brought us a step closer to an historic opportunity to prevent Iran’s nuclear weapons development. The unity of the international community has made the economic and trade sanctions work in pressuring Iran to negotiate a deal.
“Now that an agreement has reached Congress, it is our responsibility to review it. Every word will count in this agreement and we need to know the meaning of each provision of this deal. It must constitute measurable progress in halting nuclear proliferation and in driving the region and the world farther away from nuclear Armageddon.”
Don Beyer (D-VA, 8th)
"I commend our diplomats for skillfully averting a global showdown and blocking Iran’s efforts to obtain the bomb."
We cannot allow a nuclear Iran and this deal will serve as a lasting deterrent to keep the United States out of another devastating war in the Middle East. Now I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress to ensure this deal goes forward unhindered.”
Gus Bilirakis (R-FL, 12th)
“At first glance, the so called Iran Nuclear deal is not an acceptable deal for America and our allies. As I suspected, this agreement will threaten our national security interests at home and abroad. It is now up to Congress to examine the specifics of the deal and ensure the most dangerous regime in the Middle East halts its nuclear armament progress in order to prevent further regional conflict and an international arms race.”
Sanford D. Bishop, Jr (D-GA, 2nd)
“The opportunity to improve our relationship with Iran could potentially lead to greater stability in a region torn apart by war and religious strife. Nevertheless, we must not be naïve. The prospect of peace and stability can only be realized if the world is assured Iran will not threaten its neighbors with nuclear aggression."
Mike Bishop (R-MI, 8th)
“Lifting sanctions while allowing the Iranian regime to simply slow their nuclear operations – in addition to not releasing the three Americans held captive under their watch – sends the wrong message to the world and is downright dangerous. I will remain highly skeptical of any deal without stronger provisions.”
Rob Bishop (R-UT, 1st)
“I’m concerned that this deal could do much to embolden the threat of terror in the Middle East and the United States. The potential lifting of sanctions frees up $150 billion for Iran to spend on further arming terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. In addition, no Middle-Eastern Sunni nations were represented in these negotiations. ISIS forces can use this fact to foster potential support among Sunnis who may be leery of the U.S. making deals with a Shia Iran.
“This deal threatens the safety of America and her allies. A US President should be in the business of protecting the US, not simply seeking to secure a faux legacy built on bad deals.”
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR, 3rd)
“As we all carefully assess this agreement, we must remember that measuring the framework against the unobtainable is likely to exhaust the patience of countries like China, India, and members of the European Union that have been critical members of the international effort to sanction and isolate Iran. Such a fracture would be devastating because we’ve tried the go-it-alone approach with sanctions and it didn’t work. We must also compare any agreement to the alternatives. The American public has made clear they will not likely support another military engagement in the Middle East. Even if money were no object, there is no amount of U.S. troops, bombs and military acumen that could guarantee an Iran free of nuclear weapons. That’s a gamble we should not be willing to take.”
Kevin Brady (R-TX, 8th)
“Congress will have time to assess the proposed Iran agreement, but clearly this is not about Republican versus Democrats, it’s about true security versus false security at a key moment in global history. Does President Obama’s agreement stop Iran’s nuclear capability for the long term? Does it prevent the spread of nuclear weapons in the Middle East? And does it make America and our allies like Israel safer? I suspect the answer to all three is ‘no’.
Nothing less than complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program is acceptable.”
Jim Bridenstine (R-OK, 1st)
While I will keep an open mind, let’s remember who we’re dealing with: Iran is the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism. Tehran’s proxies effectively control four Middle Eastern countries: Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Iran continues to violate its Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty commitments and numerous UN Security Council resolutions. Just last week, top Iranian officials chanted “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” in the streets of Tehran. A nuclear weapons-capable Iran is a threat to the United States and our allies, especially Israel, and a destabilizing force in the world’s most volatile region. As a nuclear threshold state, Iran would also spur nuclear weapons proliferation across the Middle East as its Sunni Arab neighbors attempt to deter Iranian aggression.
Susan W. Brooks (R-IN, 5th)
“No deal is clearly a better outcome than a bad deal and I’m extremely concerned the Obama administration has negotiated a bad deal. My colleagues and I will leave no detail of the final negotiated terms unexplored as this decision comes with consequences that will reverberate for generations moving forward. If this agreement allows for a nuclear Iran and puts our security at risk, Congress must not support it.
The Obama administration only has itself to blame for the skepticism it now faces from members of both political parties. Throughout this process, critical negotiating objectives have been repeatedly ignored or altered. Iran has practiced violence and deception for decades. The world cannot afford a nuclear Iran and thus cannot afford a deal with unacceptable terms.”
Michael Burgess (R-TX, 26th)
“Despite assurances from the Obama administration that these negotiations would end Iran’s nuclear programs and that sanctions would not be lifted until their nation met concrete demands, this deal reflects otherwise,” Rep. Burgess said. “This agreement means billions in sanction relief, and an open door to continue their reckless foreign policy agenda. “Though I am relieved to see negotiations conclude, this product – which paves the path toward a nuclear Iran – is a risk to our national security and global interests.”
Bradley Byrne (R-AL, 1st)
“From the start of these talks I have warned that President Obama and his negotiating team were desperate for a foreign policy victory, and I fear the safety of Americans and our allies in the Middle East will be at greater risk because of this deal.
“Iran is no friend of the United States, and we should all be concerned about what they will do with billions of dollars in sanctions relief. Even Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey has stated that sanctions relief would allow Iran to send more money to terrorist groups in the Middle East.
“Congress will now have an opportunity to closely scrutinize and vote on this agreement, and I call on my colleagues to look past the short-term rhetoric and instead focus on the long-term implications this deal could have on our national security and the safety of our allies abroad.”
Michael E. Capuano (D-MA, 7th)
I have always hoped for a negotiated resolution to the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The general outlines of the deal, made public this morning, appear reasonable and encouraging. However, I will carefully review the details and discuss the scientific aspects of the agreement with qualified scientists. I have never expected a perfect agreement because that is an impossible standard. For me, the most important question is, if this deal is not acceptable, then what does the United States do next? Some argue for continued sanctions but it’s clear to me that Russia and China won’t go along with that. Moreover, I fear Europe would not support the U.S. in continued sanctions so we would be left with unilateral sanctions and historically these have been ineffectual. Nor do I think a military option is prudent or feasible at this time. Congress has 60 days to review this agreement and I will carefully consider all aspects of it before making a final decision.
Buddy Carter (R-GA, 1st)
"I fear this will be a legacy making deal for the Obama Administration but not the legacy it is looking to make,” Carter said. “This dangerous deal threatens to unleash a nuclear arms race in the most unstable region in the world, imperils our closest ally Israel, and signals to other regimes that America will not maintain its resolve to combat extremism.”
Kathy Castor (D-FL, 14th)
The historic nuclear disarmament agreement announced today between the United States, Iran, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the European Union requires thorough review and analysis over the coming weeks. My overriding concern is whether or not the agreement is in the national security interest of the United States. Iran must be blocked from proceeding any further towards developing a nuclear weapon. Aggressive, enforceable restrictions and thoroughly transparent inspections at any time are fundamental to approval of such an agreement. I have no illusions about the dreadful record and conduct of the Iranian regime, or the destabilizing influence Iran continues to have in the region. No matter what, all options must remain on the table in case Iran deviates from the terms of this agreement in any way.
Here’s what we have been told so far: (1) The parties have negotiated a comprehensive, long-term deal with Iran that will prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Advocates say that every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off. (2) The agreement is not built on trust; it is built on verification. Inspectors will have 24/7 access to Iran’s key nuclear facilities. (3) Iran currently has a stockpile that could produce up to 10 nuclear weapons. Under the agreement, that stockpile will be reduced to a fraction of what would be required for a single weapon. This stockpile limitation will last for 15 years. Iran will not produce the highly enriched uranium and weapons-grade plutonium that form the raw materials necessary for a nuclear weapon. (4) Iran is permanently prohibited from pursuing a nuclear weapon under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Joaquin Castro (D-TX, 20th)
“I commend Secretaries Kerry and Moniz for their tireless efforts negotiating this agreement and for their and President Obama’s steadfast commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. This agreement has the potential to position the United States and our allies toward a future of peace and security. Initial readings of the deal’s text indicate it contains stringent accountability measures that protect against the possibility of a nuclear-armed Iran. Congress will now have a say in how the United States proceeds, and I hope that my colleagues will take time to thoroughly and thoughtfully evaluate the details of the agreement our negotiators achieved.”
Curt Clawson (R-FL, 19th)
“With mounting concern on the details over the Administration’s deal with the regime of Iran, the world's largest state-sponsor or terrorism, it is not in the interest of the American people to have the deal ratified by the United Nations before Congress can speak with a united voice. A deal with Iran is the Administration’s ‘Flounder’ moment. We all know what happens in Animal House when Flounder gave the keys to his brother’s car to his fraternity brothers. Why are we giving the keys to nuclear technology to the largest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world, who has also called for the elimination of Israel, our strongest ally in the region. Today I join with many others, including Prime Minister Netanyahu, in saying, ‘No deal is better than a bad deal.’”
Stuff in the News: Foreign laws in Domestic Courts, Israeli Embassy, Labor, Business Start-Ups, Homes for Heroes
Congressman Diane Black (R-TN-06) introduced H.R. 3052, legislation to safeguard the integrity of our Constitution and U.S. laws by affirming that federal courts must follow and uphold our laws rather than deferring to those of foreign nations. The legislation follows a February 2015 report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) which found that “In recent years, foreign or international legal sources have increasingly been cited by the Supreme Court when considering matters of U.S. law.”
U.S. Representatives Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Gene Green (D-TX) have introduced H. Con. Res. 62, expressing the Sense of Congress that the United States Embassy in Israel should be located in Jerusalem. In 1995, the United States Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act requiring the President to move the United States embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The legislation was passed to secure American recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Successive administrations have used a Presidential waiver authority, included in the bill, to delay that transfer due to national security concerns.
Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05) in a U.S. House floor speech applauded Democrat presidential candidate’s goal of increasing American family incomes but noted that her “trickle down federal government dictates solution, while splendid rhetoric, misses the target entirely.” Brooks then detailed how the tsunami of illegal alien workers coupled with a second tsunami of lawful immigrant workers combine to explode the labor force and take job opportunities from, and suppress wages, of Americans.
U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-FL, has announced the introduction of bipartisan legislation that would make it easier and less costly for an entrepreneur to start a new business. Buchanan’s “Support our Start-Ups Act” (H.R. 2524) would quadruple the amount of start-up costs small business owners can deduct from their federal income taxes, raising it from $5,000 to $20,000.
The bipartisan Homes for Heroes Act of 2015, which passed on July 14, 2015, establishes a Special Assistant for Veterans’ Affairs and an annual report on veterans’ homelessness. The Special Assistant will coordinate all the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) programs and activities relating to veterans and serve as a HUD liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). It also will direct the Secretaries of HUD and VA to report annually to Congress with respect to veterans homelessness and housing assistance. According to the National Coalition for Homelessness, on any given night in the United States, 49,933 veterans experience homelessness. Additionally, approximately 12 percent of the homeless adult population are veterans.
U.S. Representatives Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and Gene Green (D-TX) have introduced H. Con. Res. 62, expressing the Sense of Congress that the United States Embassy in Israel should be located in Jerusalem. In 1995, the United States Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act requiring the President to move the United States embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The legislation was passed to secure American recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Successive administrations have used a Presidential waiver authority, included in the bill, to delay that transfer due to national security concerns.
Congressman Mo Brooks (AL-05) in a U.S. House floor speech applauded Democrat presidential candidate’s goal of increasing American family incomes but noted that her “trickle down federal government dictates solution, while splendid rhetoric, misses the target entirely.” Brooks then detailed how the tsunami of illegal alien workers coupled with a second tsunami of lawful immigrant workers combine to explode the labor force and take job opportunities from, and suppress wages, of Americans.
U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-FL, has announced the introduction of bipartisan legislation that would make it easier and less costly for an entrepreneur to start a new business. Buchanan’s “Support our Start-Ups Act” (H.R. 2524) would quadruple the amount of start-up costs small business owners can deduct from their federal income taxes, raising it from $5,000 to $20,000.
The bipartisan Homes for Heroes Act of 2015, which passed on July 14, 2015, establishes a Special Assistant for Veterans’ Affairs and an annual report on veterans’ homelessness. The Special Assistant will coordinate all the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) programs and activities relating to veterans and serve as a HUD liaison with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). It also will direct the Secretaries of HUD and VA to report annually to Congress with respect to veterans homelessness and housing assistance. According to the National Coalition for Homelessness, on any given night in the United States, 49,933 veterans experience homelessness. Additionally, approximately 12 percent of the homeless adult population are veterans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)