Recently in Washington

Last week the House passed the Senate Amendment to H.R. 4899, the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2010, which provided emergency funding for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as emergency disaster relief for the Gulf Coast and Haiti and funding for Vietnam veterans affected by Agent Orange.  The House also passed H.R. 5822, the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act for FY2011.  In addition, the House passed H.R. 5851, the Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Protection Act of 2010, which would prohibit employers from discriminating against individuals who report suspected safety violations to federal or state officials.  Congressman Simpson supported all of these bills.

The House also passed H.R. 5850, the Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act for FY2011.  Because of his concerns about the cost of the bill, Congressman Simpson was unable to support this legislation.  The House also passed H.R. 3534, the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources Act of 2010.  This legislation enacted sweeping reforms of domestic oil and gas regulations and included unrelated provisions that created a new $30 billion entitlement spending program.  Congressman Simpson is deeply concerned about the impact that this legislation will have on our nation’s ability to become energy independent and on our national deficit, and he was unable to support it.

In addition, the House Budget Committee held a hearing entitled, “The Budget Implications of Closing Yucca Mountain.”  To watch a video of Congressman Simpson from the hearing, visit his YouTube webpage at http://www.youtube.com/CongMikeSimpson.

CIEDRA:  Land Designations in the Boulder-White Clouds
By Congressman Mike Simpson
“Of all the rumors about what my CIEDRA bill does or doesn’t do, the most common rumor I hear is that this bill is going to give away vast swaths of state land and dramatically increase federal regulation in our state.  These claims are absolutely false.  Idahoans deserve the truth about this bill and about land designations in the Boulder-White Clouds.

“First and foremost, it is important to know that CIEDRA does not give any state or private lands to the federal government.  It does not create any additional federal land.  In fact, the only land transfers in the bill give federal land to local counties to be used for important public purposes, like a cemetery, a waste transfer station, a fire station, and a school bus turnaround. 

“Most areas affected by CIEDRA are existing federal lands that are currently designated as wilderness study areas.  As such, the federal government already manages them as if they were wilderness, which means that land use in this area is significantly restricted right now.  Because the federal government has complete discretion over this land today, federal agencies could further restrict access, or even designate the area as a national monument without any local input. 

“I don’t want to see that happen.  I believe that Idahoans should have a say in how this land is managed.  In fact, I originally became involved in this issue because the Idahoans whose livelihoods were being threatened by the status quo asked me to help them find a solution to this problem.  This is why I have worked for nearly a decade with local ranchers, elected officials, recreationists, and other affected parties to craft legislation to ensure that they are no longer subject to the whim of the federal government.

“One thing CIEDRA does do is permanently release 130,000 acres of wilderness study areas from restrictive management into multiple use so that it can be used for recreation, ranching, mining, and other traditional purposes.  I believe this is vastly preferable to the status quo.  So do those who live and recreate in the Boulder-White Clouds and need long-term solutions to the serious land management conflicts in this area.  I think that Idahoans can be very proud of the compromise that they have developed to ensure that all Idahoans can use and enjoy the Boulder-White Clouds now and into the future.

“If you are interested in learning more about CIEDRA or viewing maps of the areas impacted by the bill, please visit my website at www.simpson.house.gov/ciedra.”

Getting Our Fiscal House in Order Will Require Tough Decisions
By Congressman Mike Simpson
“The recent fight over the extension of unemployment insurance clearly demonstrates two fundamental realities for the American people. The first is that congressional Democrats are incapable of prioritizing federal spending in an effort to reduce the deficit. The second is that congressional Republicans have learned the lessons of their own fiscal failures and are ready to make the tough decisions required to get our nation back on track.

“From the outset, it is important to understand that Idaho’s congressional Delegation stood united on the unemployment extension issue. Like Senators Crapo and Risch and Congressman Minnick, I strongly support extending benefits to those who are out of work – in fact, I am a cosponsor of H.R. 5618, legislation that would extend unemployment benefits without adding a penny to the national deficit – but we feel the cost of that extension should be offset by reductions in unspent stimulus funds.

“Unfortunately, congressional Democrats felt it was more important to leave intact their massive unspent stimulus reserve and instead tack the cost of the unemployment insurance extension onto the already calamitous national debt.

“Years ago, perhaps even just a year ago, suggesting the federal government must live within its means was a catchphrase thrown around by politicians who wanted to give lip service to the idea of reducing spending but who were unwilling to commit to doing anything specific.

“Today, Republicans in Congress are ready to walk their talk when it comes to fiscal responsibility and are prepared to make the tough choices that come with it.

“Some will argue that unemployment insurance is the wrong place for Republicans to make their stand.

“I disagree.  If we won’t make our stand on unemployment insurance, how can we tackle Social Security and Medicare, or defense and homeland security spending? How do we deal with exploding Medicare spending and an education system that keeps consuming more money without getting results? If we can’t prioritize extending unemployment insurance over locking up unspent stimulus dollars, how can we prioritize anything?

“The simple answer is that Democrats can’t, while Republicans are ready to give it a try.

“I’ll be the first to admit that congressional Republicans lost their compass for the better part of the last decade. We came to Congress with a mission to work on behalf of the people and got sidetracked by process. We desired to keep government in check but became more interested in winning elections.

“Not anymore.

“The fight over unemployment insurance and the way in which we fund its extension is a marker, a line-in-the-sand if you will, showing that we will not just take the easy road any longer and that we are prepared to do what is right – whether it helps our re-election or not.

“Congressional Democrats don’t really want to make tough choices, and the unemployment debate proves it. Instead of taking steps to cut spending, their strategy to deal with the debt is to raise your taxes, which is why they are doing nothing to prevent the largest tax increase in American history from taking effect next year.

“The simple truth is that tough budget times are ahead and our fiscal outlook is bleak. Anyone with any common sense understands that government must downsize and tough choices need to be made. Favored programs will be cut, benefits will be reduced, people will be mad, and elections will be lost – and that is how it should be.

“My colleagues and I need to re-commit ourselves to doing that which is right for America – whether or not it is right for our own careers. That is the only way that we can get our budget under control and put our fiscal house back in order.

“Unlike congressional Democrats, Republicans in Congress understand that and are ready to put their seats on the line to do what is necessary for our nation’s future.  One need look no further than the debate over the extension of unemployment insurance to see that.”

Simpson Praises Passage of the FY2011 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Bill
Congressman Mike Simpson, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, last week praised the House passage of the Fiscal Year 2011 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations bill.

“This bill provides critical funding for our nation’s veterans, and I am pleased to see that the House has approved this legislation in a timely manner,” said Simpson.  “Our veterans have made tremendous sacrifices to protect our freedom, and we have a responsibility to provide them with the very best service in return.”

The Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill provides funding for military construction projects on bases in the United States and throughout the world, and it also provides funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Veterans Health Administration.  Funding is provided for a variety of veterans’ programs, including compensation for veterans and survivors, pension payments for disabled veterans, widows and children, training and tuition assistance, and veterans’ medical care and treatment. 

“Taking care of our veterans is one of our highest priorities as a nation,” said Simpson.  “I am proud that this bill provides sufficient funding to ensure they receive the care and treatment they deserve.”

The bill passed the House by a vote of 411-6. It now awaits consideration in the Senate.

Simpson Questions Department of Energy Officials on Yucca Mountain
Last week Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson spearheaded Republican efforts to examine the waste of taxpayer dollars by abandoning Yucca Mountain as our nation’s long-term disposal site for nuclear materials.  The hearing was largely bipartisan, as both Democrats and Republicans pushed Department of Energy (DOE) Under Secretary Kristina M. Johnson and other officials to justify their decision to close Yucca Mountain and look elsewhere after 25 years of planning at that site.

Simpson began his questioning by stating, “I honestly don’t believe that anybody within the Department of Energy or here (in the Committee) believes that a good decision was made by shutting down Yucca Mountain.” He would later add after the hearing, “The simple truth is a campaign promise made between Senator Reid (NV) and President Obama is what now dictates this county’s long-term nuclear waste storage policy.  Without a doubt, this Administration has chosen politics over science, and it has already cost billions of taxpayer dollars.  Sadly, we do not yet know, and cannot estimate, the amount of taxpayer dollars that will be wasted because of this decision.”

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is currently reviewing the legality of the Administration’s attempt to withdraw the Yucca Mountain licensing application without the consent of Congress, and Congress has not included funding to continue the license application in as part of the relevant House and Senate appropriations bills. 

Simpson sought answers from the DOE on the issue of funding, asking, “Should the NRC rule, as I believe they correctly will, that the Administration cannot unilaterally withdraw the application, what will the DOE do in terms of the $100 or $200 million that will be necessary to proceed with the licensing application? Will they come in and ask for a reprogramming to do that or will they just ignore it and say ‘we don’t have any funds?”

Undersecretary Johnson answered broadly that they will follow the direction of Congress and the NRC should that happen.  As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water which funds DOE, Simpson supported an amendment offered during consideration of the FY2011 Energy and Water Development Act to provide funding to continue the licensing process, but it was ultimately defeated.

After the hearing Simpson said, “This is the most studied piece of land on earth, at the cost of billions of dollars, and is ideal for long term storage, but it is the ONLY site in the country that will not be considered for storage in the future.  I am still waiting for an answer to my simple question: why not Yucca?  I fear that I already know the answer, as do most Americans: Washington politics.” 

Simpson is a member of the House Budget Committee, which establishes broad guidelines for funding, and is a member of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development which oversees funding for the Department of Energy, including the Yucca Mountain Project.

Simpson Introduces Bill to Establish Methamphetamine Prevention Campaign
Congressman Mike Simpson joined Congressman John Salazar (D-CO) and two of their colleagues in introducing bipartisan legislation to prevent America’s youth from using methamphetamine and to increase awareness of the dangers of the drug.  HR 5916 would establish a methamphetamine prevention campaign grant program. 

“The only way we can effectively combat meth in our communities is through education and awareness,” said Simpson.  “This bill will establish a public-private partnership to educate our youth on the devastating effects of meth.  In Idaho, Governor Otter and the First Lady deserve great credit for establishing the Idaho Meth Project, a public-private partnership to educate youth on the devastating effects of meth and to reduce first-time meth use, and we have seen first-hand the great success this program is having.  I am proud to introduce legislation that will give other states the opportunity to establish similar successful programs.”

"Meth is the most significant drug problem in Idaho, fueling crime and endangering our communities. Great credit goes to Congressman Simpson for his leadership on this issue.  With his support Idaho has experienced the largest decrease in teen meth use in the nation over the past two years," said First Lady Lori Otter. "Yet, with the supply of meth throughout the United States at a five-year high, it is critical that we remain focused and vigilant in our efforts to prevent meth use both here in Idaho and throughout the nation."

The RAND Corporation estimates that meth abuse costs the U.S. $23.4 billion each year, including $4.2 billion in meth-related crime.  Based on the RAND research model and current usage rates in Idaho, meth use could cost the state of Idaho more than $300 million each year. 

Roughly 13 million Americans have used meth, a drug considered more addictive than heroin and one of most significant contributors to crime in America. The National Association of Counties reports methamphetamine is the number one drug problem according to 47% of the county sheriffs surveyed in 2007, more than cocaine and marijuana combined.

In Idaho, 52% of inmates directly attribute meth use to their incarceration and 89% of female offenders in county jail indicate they have a meth problem.  As of 2007, 70% of Federal drug offenses in Idaho involved methamphetamine.  In 2007 Idaho ranked fourth in the country for past year meth use by 12-17 year olds and 18-25 year olds, and in 2008, Idaho ranked seventh for lifetime meth use by high school students.   According to the National Youth Risk Behavior Survey, meth use among Idaho teens declined 52% between 2007 and 2009 – the most significant decrease in the United States. 

This bill will establish a competitive grant program within the Department of Justice to implement a methamphetamine prevention campaign in states with critical methamphetamine problems and will incorporate a broad range of community outreach programs.  The program will mobilize communities to assist in meth awareness and prevention activities that educate youth on the risks and consequences of methamphetamine use. 

“The success of the Idaho Meth Project clearly demonstrates that if we can educate our young people on the dangers of meth, we will dramatically reduce the number of meth users and limit the unmistakable negative impacts this has on our society, both economically and socially,” said Simpson.

Congressman Simpson and Salazar were joined in introducing the bill by Congressman Rehberg (R-MT) and Congresswoman Betsy Markey (D-CO).  This bill is currently pending in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Idaho Delegation:  F-35 Decision ‘Disappointing’
Members of Idaho’s Congressional Delegation say last week’s announcement by the U.S. Air Force that neither Mountain Home Air Force Base nor Gowen Field made the initial list for a new F-35 mission is “disappointing,” but does not mean Idaho’s bases are out of the running for future F-35 missions.  The Air Force says an initial review indicates a preference for locating the new fighter jets at locations other than Idaho.  Delegation members, who were briefed by phone on the decision, noted that they did receive assurances that both bases remain candidates for future F-35 missions. 

“The Air Force determined that housing three squadrons of F-35s at Mountain Home or Gowen Field would have required additional construction costs.  That determination is disappointing because all of the sites chosen will require new construction to accommodate three squadrons,” said the Idaho delegation in a joint statement.   “Other benefits should have factored into the decision besides initial cost savings.  We will be taking a close look at the data used to reach this decision to ensure it was a transparent and apolitical process.”

The Air Force’s review indicates Hill Air Force Base in Utah and the Burlington Air Guard Station in Vermont are the preferred sites for operations for the F-35.  Luke Air Force Base in Arizona was chosen as the preferred site for training missions for the F-35.

Idaho Senators Mike Crapo and Jim Risch and Congressmen Mike Simpson and Walt Minnick also noted that Gowen Field is in the running to receive an expanded mission for operations of the  C-27J aircraft.  The Boise base is one of two sites under consideration for operations for the Air Force cargo aircraft. 

The C-27J is a twin turboprop engine aircraft designed for medium airland transport, according to the Air Force.  It can provide access to airstrips otherwise unsuitable for fixed-wing aircraft.


Idaho Congressmen Recognize the Need for a Third Federal Judge
Idaho’s congressmen are working to add a judge to Idaho’s federal court system, which has a ballooning caseload and just two U.S. district judges. Congressman Walt Minnick introduced bi-partisan legislation with fellow Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson last week, directing the President to appoint a third district judge in Idaho.

As Idaho’s population has grown, so has the number of court cases. Federal criminal cases, for instance, have increased 177 percent—from 83 to 230 a year—between 2000 to 2009. (Fact sheet attached). When compared to rural states with similar problems, Idaho has the most “weighted case filings” per judge. Idaho has had to rely on assistance from visiting judges to help with the work load. This would be the first time in 56 years that the number of district judges in Idaho has increased.

“Idahoans have a right to a speedy and efficient court system, and that requires having enough judges to handle the recent rapid growth in cases,” Minnick said. “My Idaho colleague Mike Simpson and I are doing all we can to address this serious issue.”

“The caseload of the Idaho District Court has increased significantly in recent decades resulting in Idaho’s district judges carrying a disproportionate share of cases in relation to their colleagues in other states,” said Simpson. “It’s time to make this a reality.”

 “I’m grateful for the leadership that Walt Minnick and Mike Simpson have shown on this critically important issue to our great state,” Chief Judge B. Lynn Winmill said. “Five and a half decades have passed since we last saw an increase in the number of federal district judges in Idaho.  It is reassuring that our Representatives are working hard in this bi-partisan effort to address the needs of our growing population.”

For more information regarding Idaho’s federal district courts, contact Elizabeth A. Smith, Clerk of Court, at (208) 334-1373.

House Legislative Business This Week
The House is not in session.

In the News
A GOP Energy Alternative
Calif. Rep. Devin Nunes's nuclear proposal would do more to reduce carbon emissions than any Democratic plan on the table.

By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL, the Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2010
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703578104575397652539348486.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Out of the most tedious congressional debate sometimes comes a little ray of policy sunshine. The GOP got a glimmer this week.

As congressional Democrats plotted how to make their "oil-spill" legislation a political liability for Republicans, and as Republicans flapped over how to avoid that fate, one GOP member excused himself from the circus. California Rep. Devin Nunes instead unveiled his "Energy Roadmap," a companion bill to Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan's plan for tax and spending reform. Mr. Nunes wants to get his party thinking about a modern, principled energy policy. Lord knows the GOP could use the help.

Republicans have spent the past decade staying largely true to their belief in cheap fossil fuels, but the rise of the climate debate and "green energy" flummoxed them. Unwilling to be seen as against "clean" energy, they embraced green subsidies. Some excused it as the political price of continued drilling; others just liked the pork.

Calif. Rep. Devin Nunes's nuclear proposal would do more to reduce carbon emissions than any Democratic plan on the table.

Whatever the reason, it's been a boon for ethanol, solar panels, switch grass and General Electric. The Republicans' 2005 energy bill was an ode to Jimmy Carter, putting the government back in charge of picking energy winners and losers via handouts and loan guarantees. President Bush praised "wood chips." Even as gas prices soared to chants of "drill, baby, drill," Republicans carefully adopted the motto: "All of the above." Heaven forbid anyone think Republicans were not for solar water heaters.

And yet this defensive crouch has not, in fact, earned Republicans more oil drilling or nuclear power. All it has done is distort energy markets and embolden Democrats to ratchet back fossil fuels, crank up subsidies, and go for cap and tax. Republicans dissemble, having long ago ceded the right to talk about free energy markets.

On nearly any policy issue—Social Security, taxes, health care, education—Republicans are at least aware of a savvy conservative reform position. Not so energy policy, where they remain confused.

Purists will advocate getting government out of the regulatory way while axing all subsidies—and that would indeed be bliss. But it doesn't help Republicans with today's political realities. The carbon debate will continue to rage; renewables aren't going away; and many Americans worry about both foreign oil and the environment.

Mr. Nunes's interest is how to answer these concerns in a more free-market way. The Californian's road map is the product of years of work, most recently with Mr. Ryan and a handful of Republicans with energy expertise—Illinois's John Shimkus, Utah's Rob Bishop, and Idaho's Mike Simpson. It's a bill designed to produce energy, not restrict it. It returns government to the role of energy facilitator, not energy boss. It costs nothing and contains no freebies. It instead offers a competitive twist to government support of renewable energy.

The bill is unabashedly focused on allowing America to responsibly access more of its own low-cost resources. It opens up more of the Outer Continental Shelf, and takes another run at opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It restores the leasing for Western oil shale that the Obama administration has squelched.

Rather than throw federal loan guarantees at uncertain nuclear plants, the legislation attacks the true problem: bureaucratic roadblocks. It streamlines a creaky regulatory process, requires the timely up-or-down approval of 200 plants over 30 years, and offers new flexibility for dealing with nuclear waste. Mr. Nunes likes to point out that his nuclear provision alone would do more to reduce carbon emissions than any Democratic proposal in existence. And it would in fact create, ahem, green jobs. Imagine that.

The bill accepts the argument that renewables serve a purpose but can't yet compete against traditional energy. It would divert all the federal resource royalties into a fund. Companies or individuals with proven renewable technology would take part in a reverse auction. They'd bid for government bucks; those that can produce the most megawatts for the least money win. Auction winners forego other federal handouts. And consider this: The more fossil fuel extraction, the more royalties (potentially hundreds of billions of dollars) available to boost alternative energy.

In a better world, renewables would sink or swim. But Mr. Nunes notes that if there is a public will for supporting these technologies, this is at least a "more free-market and transparent way to deploy them immediately." Today, bureaucrats choose unproven technologies on which to bestow taxpayer grants. Blanket tax credits flow to industries—regardless of individual companies' merit. Auction participants, in contrast, would compete, and the market would first have a say in their success. If the GOP is determined to go green, this is megawatts more principled than the status quo.

Mr. Nunes doesn't suggest his bill is the end-all-be-all; his primary goal is to get his party engaged. Watch for the GOP response. The Republican leadership has shown little inclination to adopt bold proposals for the midterms. And the oil spill has spooked it on energy. Yet Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's recent decision to shelve cap-and-tax has shown that even Democrats now acknowledge the public isn't buying their high-cost, government mandate, subsidy approach. If not some new GOP energy principles now, when?