Recently in Washington

                   
Simpson Supports Bill to Keep IRS out of Obamacare

Idaho Congressman Simpson last week supported passage of H.R. 2009, the Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013.  Simpson is a cosponsor of this legislation, which prohibits the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from enforcing any provision of the new health care law. Obamacare represents the largest expansion of IRS authority in history.

“Following in the wake of the IRS scandal in which conservatives were systematically targeted, Americans are skeptical of the IRS embedding itself permanently into their health care with these new mandates,” Simpson said. “The IRS is charged with implementing some of the most controversial provisions of Obamacare – including the individual mandate which taxes Americans if they don’t purchase insurance.”

The Obama Administration has recently delayed implementation of the employer health insurance mandate for one year, and the House of Representatives has voted to delay several portions of the law in addition to voting to defund and repeal it on numerous occasions.

Recent studies have shown the expected cost of Obamacare increasing rapidly, while its expected benefits to Americans are shrinking.  The implementation of the law is proving to be a major challenge for the Administration, which has admitted that major portions of it are not ready to become law starting next year.

The bill passed 232 to 185 and now moves to the Senate for consideration.

                   
REINS Act Passes House of Representatives

Simpson Supports Bill Requiring Congressional Action for New Regulations

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson last week supported critical legislation to return accountability and transparency to the federal regulatory process. Simpson, an original cosponsor of the legislation, voted in favor of the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2013, H.R. 367, which passed the U.S. House of Representatives today by a vote of 232 to 183.

“The Obama Administration is using the regulatory process to force its agenda on the American people and it is weakening our economy and pushing the federal government further into our lives,” said Simpson. “The REINS Act is a crucial step in creating job growth and restoring economic confidence in America.”

The REINS Act amends the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to require Congress to approve every new major regulation proposed by the executive branch. Federal agencies may no longer unilaterally adopt a new regulation that would cost over $50 million per year without congressional consent. By returning to Congress its constitutional charge, the REINS Act further holds Congress accountable to the American people for laws imposed upon them.

“I believe Congress has a strong oversight role to play to ensure that federal agencies are not overreaching their authority and stifling job growth,” said Simpson. “I have heard from countless Idahoans who are frustrated with the impact of costly regulations on their ability to do business.” 

H.R. 367 now moves to the U.S. Senate for consideration.

                   
Simpson Votes to Address EPA Overreach

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson voted last week for legislation that would impose necessary oversight over regulations coming out of the EPA. H.R. 1582, the Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013, would provide for an independent and thorough review of the economic impacts of EPA energy-related regulations by the Department of Energy and other federal agencies with energy expertise. The bill passed in the House of 232 to 181.   

H.R. 1582 would ensure that economic impacts are considered as part of future EPA regulations.  Should a major energy regulation be found to have a significant negative impact on the economy following a mandatory audit, it could not move forward without a vote in Congress.  

“When you look at how much the major rules pending at the EPA would cost in terms of increased energy prices for consumers and job losses, it is clear that the Obama Administration doesn’t care about the full impact of its actions on the American people,” said Simpson.  “We need to ensure that the true economic impact of EPA’s energy-related proposals are taken into consideration before any rule is finalized.  H.R. 1582 provides for important oversight and transparency.”

H.R. 1582 is now under consideration by the U.S. Senate.

In the News

Onion Farmers Take Umbrage

By Shawn Zeller, Congressional Quarterly, July 29

After a rash of foodborne illnesses, Congress passed a law in 2010 giving the Food and Drug Administration more authority to regulate the food supply. In January, the FDA proposed a rule that would require farmers to make sure that clean water is used to irrigate crops. Onion growers have been the most vociferous opponents, saying their crop has no history of causing mass illness.

Their cause has been taken up by two Republicans from onion-growing areas, Reps. Greg Walden of Oregon and Mike Simpson of Idaho. Both opposed the 2010 law and say the FDA has agreed to work with the farmers at their request. “A practical, common-sense rule will help achieve the goal of greater food safety without placing unnecessary regulatory burdens on American farm families,” Walden says.

The onion growers say it’s wrong for the FDA to impose the same restrictions on their dry-bulb onions as it does on crops that have caused illnesses, such as herbs, leafy greens, tomatoes, melons and sprouts, or even hot peppers and green onions. “There is a long history of foodborne illness outbreaks in the United States and the differences in risk among commodities are well known. This approach unfairly burdens commodities that have never had a foodborne illness outbreak,” the National Onion Association said in comments to the FDA in May.

According to the onion association, onions are less prone to contamination because they have layers of skin over the edible portion, they grow partially above ground and farmers keep them dry in processing. In ignoring this, they say, the FDA would impose costs that could cut profits by 15 percent to 30 percent.

The debate over the proposed rules is likely to get more intense later this summer. The FDA this spring extended the comment period on its proposal to September, and a number of larger farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, say they plan to weigh in before then.