Senator Ensign Defends Reno Police Department

Senator John Ensign (R-NV) made strides for the good name of the Reno, Nevada police department this evening, defending their honor from the defamation of the popular TV show "RENO 911!" on Comedy Central. He made sure there would be $300,000 set aside for a campaign to fight the bad reputation portrayed on the sitcom, without a doubt winning favor with his constituents back in Reno. The Amendment to The Sunshine Act was added this evening during mark-up. The Reno Amendment is as follows:


Section I – Applauding the Reno Sheriff’s Department by

(a) recognizing the Reno Sheriff’s Department as a law-abiding, capable, legitimate, and effective police department, contrary to its portrayal in the television program and movie “Reno 911;” and

(b) Allocating $300,000 to be used in an advertisement campaign by the Reno Sheriff’s Department in order to distance it from its negative reputation propagated by Comedy Central.



Senator Ensign also issued the following statement:

Since the TV show "Reno 911" hit the air, the Reno Sheriff's Department has endured severe blows to their reputation. I think that the amendment our committee passed today will work to restore their rightful image as an effective law enforcement department and increase their ability to uphold the liberty, safety, and security deserved by the residents of Reno. Our nation's heroic law enforcement officers deserve our unwavering respect, the Reno Amendment will help a damaged department regain it's rightful reputation.

President's Financial Bill Passes After Bitter Debate

     Minority Leader McConnell Questioning Secretary Geithner

The day has been filled with Democratic praise and Republican backlash from President Obama's recently introduced financial legislation. Finally, the bill was introduced in committee as an amendment today and reported to the floor.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) introduced an amendment that calls for more regulations on financial institutions to "protect consumers and investors."

As he has done throughout the day, Sen. Grassley (R-IA) immediately decried it as a "massive and unprecedented power-grab by federal government" that is "completely irresponsible." He promised that it "won't find the support of any Republican," a sentiment that was echoed by Sen. Kyl (R-AZ).

Sen. Schumer lashed back at the GOP, pointing out their many examples of abusing power during the last eight years, including the authorization of torture without Congressional oversight.

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was called in as a witness to discuss the bill, finding himself in a heated debate with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

To reiterate the democratic stance, Sen. Schumer then made a point to explicitly ask which party was in power for the last eight years and thus responsible for the crisis. Of course, Geithner's response was "Republican" for both.

The final vote was divided 100% along party lines, and passed.

Sahil Kapur contributed to this article.

Senator Roberts Brings to the Finance Committee Patriotism... and The New York Times?

Senator Roberts (R-KS) has brought life into the Finance Committee the past two days, bringing an edition of the New York Times to the committee's hearing today. 

Monday, the Senator donned an American flag style scarf and incited imagery from "Bleeding Kansas" to display his patriotism. 

After an incident with a hijacked taxi, he entered the committee room with an American top hat and passed out cookies. Several minutes ago, he appeared enthralled in an edition of the New York Times.

Democratic Senator Kent Conrad pointed out, "it's good to see a Republican reading the New York Times".

When questioned on Sen. Roberts actions', Republican Minority Leader McConnell responded, "It is not treason. The Republican Party is a big tent, accepting of all viewpoints... especially those of David Brooks and Bill Sapphire."

What will Senator Roberts think of next?

Sahil Kapur contributed to this article.

Statement from the President on EPW Walk Out

"I have been informed of a walk out in the Environmental and Public Works Committee during the opening remarks and, needless to say, I am disappointed. Both Governor Romney and I stress bipartisanship. Games and gimmicks do not advance the cause of the American people. I also urge committee chairs to work closely with the minority party. This is not the change voters asked for, this is more of the same. Thank you and God bless."

(Remarks submitted around 8pm, shortly after the incident mentioned)

Grassley introduces amendment for "health enthusiasts" immigrating to Iowa

Senator Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Finance committee, has introduced an amendment for Iowans, offering incentives to "health enthusiasts" who like "flatter, more temperate terrain in which to indulge in their running desires." An argument subsequently broke about regarding the technicalities of running.

"Six months out of a year are too cold for running in a midwestern state," exclaims Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.

Grassley urged that "the US Senate should be concerned with increasing the health and fitness of America as a whole."

The discussion involved sparring between Democrats and Republicans on menial issues, punctuated by moments of laughter, signaling the silliness and uselessness of this amendment.

"What an unbelievable waste of time," noted one Claremont Beat reporter. "This is an embarrassment to all Americans everywhere."

The amendment was voted down after 15-20 minutes of discussion.

Sahil Kapur

Testimonies for EPW stress cap and trade costs and benefits

Testimonies for the Climate and Energy Protection Act ranged from environmental expert, Bjorn Lomborg, to power plant worker, Jeremiah O'Malley.

While witnesses differed on their views of global warming and carbon emissions, all seemed willing to agree that the status quo concerning energy emissions policy insufficiently addresses the problem.

Lomborg, a Swedish professor and environmental analyst, argued against a cap and trade system, claiming the results would be disastrous for the energy companies and American citizens as a whole.

Others were not as opposed to the proposed system, such as Chris Brigham of Southern California Edison, who supported a modified cap and trade system.

"A carbon tax will cripple the industry…and we will have to forward these expenses on the customers, said Brigham. "The electricity industry…is willing to support a fair and well designed cap and trade system…that has adequate lead time for implementation."

Cost analysis was not the only topic discussed during testimonies as witness Jeremiah O'Malley commented on the devastating effects of emphysema. O'Malley believes he developed the disease from working at his town's power plant for 26 years. O'Malley's father, who died of emphysema, also worked for the power plant.

Finance Committee Strikes Language Regarding Abortion from HOPE Act

Chairman Baucus, Sens Schumer and Lincoln Lead the Debate Against Section 4 for the Democrats

Senators in the Finance Committee just struck section 4, containing changes to the Public Health Act and abortion, from its HOPE Act.

Senator Schumer introduced the amendment, and after a heated debate, found success.

When Senator Grassley said the bill did not explicity mention abortion, Chairman Baucus retorted, "the implicit language does not make the explicit fact go away".

Grassley firmly defended the section, offering changes but hoping to "maintain the religious protections that our doctors have enjoyed for several decades".

Senator Kyl chimed in, adding that current language in the Public Health Act "forcing providers to perform any sort of abortion... violates part of a very hippocratic oath that they take to become a doctor".

In a final attempt, Senator Grassley introduced a second amendment that would not strike Section 4, but would add a clarifying statement at the end of the bill regarding a threat to life for mothers seeking an abortion. 

Before administering the vote, the Chairman told his colleagues, "we vote on second degree amendments first, that means keep your hands down". The democrats listened and in succession voted down the second degree amendment and voted for the first degree amendment that struck section 4 from the bill.

Democratic Press Conference

President Barack Obama and Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner centered their press conference on economic issues. Obama opened by emphasizing the need to restore consumer confidence and economic stability. Geithner then presented a more detailed account of how to reach these objectives through legislation.

Geithner wants to use his reform strategy as the “New rule of the road” to protect consumers and investors through greater government regulation. This regulation applies to distressed companies but also allows the government to preemptively regulate certain companies that could put the American economy at risk.

Republicans have responded by calling this bill reckless and unconstitutional. Not surprisingly the administration disagrees and feels these reforms are necessary to build back consumer confidence and credit in the market. Stay tuned to see Congressional reactions.

EWP at standstill

The EPW committee reached a standstill as Democrats and Republicans argued over the appropriateness of opening statements concerning the Green Bill, or Climate and Energy Protection Act.

According to Senator Kit Bond, "Senator Alexander was speaking and cut off by chairwoman Boxer without parliamentary justification. Therefore, Republicans felt it necessary to walk out." The Republicans' action, he said, was "unavoidable" because "Democrats are currently prohibiting cooperation."

After yielding 10 minutes to Senator Inhofe, who then yielded to Senator Alexander, a discussion of the Green Bill. Republicans quickly cited serious errors in the bill such as appropriations for "$60 $200," which Alexander asserted was not a real number.

"Republicans would rather play politics than legislate," said Democratic Senator Conrad of the incident.

Democratic Senator Reid and Senator Alexander exchanged heated words during the showdown, continuing the hostility shown to one another from the previous session.

Currently, the walkout continues with no resolution in sight.

BREAKING: Republicans Walk Out of EPW Hearing

Ten minutes ago, Republican members walked out of the Environment and Public Works Committee Hearing, citing mistreatment from Chairwoman Boxer as reasoning. More to come from correspondent Danielle Peebles who witnessed the dramatic event.

Sen. Roberts' taxi hijacked by French youth

Senator Roberts' taxi was hijacked on his way to the hearing by "some youth from France," according to his text message to his fellow Senators. Roberts initially believed the French youth was Jeb Bush, former President George W. Bush's younger brother. He will be late to the hearing, beginning imminently.

BREAKING NEWS: Republicans Speak Out Against “The Blank Check Act”

The Republican Caucus held a press conference at 5:00pm PST, outlining the party’s grievances with the Authority for System Significant Financial Companies Act of 2009. In their press conference, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) stood before a large group of united Republicans on the steps of the Capitol and delivered a passionate statement calling for support against the “Blank Check Act.”

The act is an effort by the Democratic Party to ease the economic crisis that has ripped through the financial services industry over the past few months. In a statement issued by Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, the Democrats remark that the US government needs additional authority to handle a financial collapse on the scale of the AIG or Lehman Brothers. The Democratic statement observes that the government only has two options in the current environment: 1). Give the struggling financial firm funds; 2). Allow the firm to fail. In the statement, the Democrats mention that “those options do not provide the government with the necessary tools to manage the resolution of the firm efficiently and effectively in a manner that limits the systemic risk with the least cost to the taxpayer.”

As a solution to the current situation, the Authority for System Significant Financial Companies Act of 2009 would give the government the power to put the firm into a conservatorship or receivership the government decided to reorganize or liquidate of the firm. The act would further reduce the burden on taxpayers by giving the government the ability to pay off a company’s debt obligations through the sale of assets.

According to the statement attached to the act, the proposed legislation would be financed by the government’s ability to liquidate firm’s assets. Any additional funding would come from the FDIC, ex-ante or ex-post taxation.

The Republican caucus firmly opposes this legislation because it effectively gives the government a “blank check” and unregulated authority when dealing with struggling financial institutions. Senator McConnell remarked that the act gave the government “unprecedented and irresponsible” levels of power. McConnell observed that the act would effectively give the government a blank check in bailing out non-bank financial firms, without any mention of where the funds would be appropriated from.

Senator Grassley (R-IA) was most especially concerned with the bill’s provision that gives the government the ability to seize power of an organization for 30 days without any regard for the shareholders of the company. Grassley remarked that this effectively gives the government the ability to do whatever they want with a company without regulation or oversight.

Finally, Senator Specter (R-PA) drew on his experience as a former prosecutor and took issue with the constitutionality of the potential for ex-post-facto taxation. He directly referenced the constitution, demonstrating that ex-post-facto taxation is explicitly unconstitutional.

The Republican press conference closed with the GOP proclaiming that they are dedicated to fighting this legislation in order to protect the freedoms that Americans hold to be self-evident.

Republicans Fight Back for HOPE Act

Republican leaders addressed allegations of deceitful clauses in the HOPE Act from the Obama Administration during their press conference today held in North Quad. 

Senator Grassley, the author of the bill, stood up for the clause regarding the Public Health Act. He said expanding coverage of the conscience clause with regards to abortions would be "giving doctors and hospitals in American the same choice as women". 

"The bill will keep doctors practicing medicine who may not be covered because of their religious convictions", Grassley responded to questions of why a clause regarding abortion was included in an act titled the "Hospital Operating Procedure Enhancement for America's Veterans Act of 2009". Republicans argue this would make sure rural areas retain a sufficient number of physicians, keeping as many doctors practicing as possible.

With his republican colleagues standing behind him, Grassley declared and repeated, "Republicans will defend religious freedom until the day we die".

McConnell Issues "Republican Response to Irresponsible and Unlimited Democrat Spending"

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell just dropped the following flier in my lap (literally). Senator McConnell apologized for the late notice on the press conference, but stressed its importance given he did not see the need for it until "literally minutes ago." The flier reads as follows:

_________________________________________________________________________

Republican Response to Irresponsible and Unlimited Democrat Spending

• Their bill proposes that Congress authprize the Treasury Department to take over any non-bank financial institution if it deems it a 'risk'
• The Bill promises unlimited sums of money to these companies, to be authorized by the Executive Branch
• The Bill provides NO explanation of how this measure will be funded.
• Their own statement admits there is no plan to fund the bill. It may be funded by ex post facto taxes, or some other scheme they have not announced
• The Government is authorized to seize assets from shareholders without being specifically authorized by COngress or approved by the company's shareholders.

BOTTOM LINE

THIS IS A MASSIVE COMMITMENT BY THE US GOVERNMENT WITH NO PLAN TO PAY FOR IT. THIS BILL IS COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE.

_________________________________________________________________________

Administration Furious Over Abortion Clause in HOPE Act, Threatens Veto

What seemed yesterday to be a bipartisan and friendly bill, the HOPE Act has now spawned anger in the Obama Administration and provoked a veto threat from the President.

A top official in the Obama Administration told The Claremont Beat today “A clause was included that greatly expands the conscience provision which states the government cannot stop funding to any physician or health care provider” based on the providers decision whether or not to perform abortions”.

The clause originally was enacted to cover “an individual physician” and dealt with the performance of abortions. Republicans inserted “provide coverage of, or pay for” along with “perform”, and also added other health professionals to the coverage.

Finally, the biggest change in the act would be the change to section 245 of the Public Health Service Act expanding the Act’s coverage to “a hospital, a provider sponsored organization, a health maintenance organization, or any other kind of health care facility or organization”.

The President expressed anger over this deceptive behavior by the Republican Party, but his official assured me the call for bipartisanship has not ended. He said, “We hope for more transparency in the future [but this] strains relations”.

“We can’t speak for the Democratic Party, we can only say that the administration will veto the bill if this provision is not removed and transparency is not increased”, he ended.

Both parties have scheduled press conferences for today before hearings begin – Republicans at 5pm and the Obama Administration at 5:45pm.

Busy Day for the Press

There are two major press conferences this evening. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is hosting the first at 5 pm PST in front of Bauer. President Obama and Treasury Secretary Geithner will host a closed session for the press at 5:45 pm PST.

Check back for blog and twitter coverage.

Obama Administration to Hold Press Conference Tonight; Issues Press Release

Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner announced last night that the Obama Administration will be holding a private Press Conference at 5:45 pm tonight. No outside parties will be allowed, and only those invited and have their press passes will be admitted.

The Subject will be the Senate Resolution Authority for System Significant Financial Companies Act of 2009. Secretary Geithner issued the following Press Release with the announcement:

The legislative proposal would fill a significant void in the current financial services regulatory structure and is one piece of a comprehensive regulatory reform strategy that will mitigate systemic risk, enhance consumer and investor protection, while eliminating gaps in the regulatory structure.
Why We Need Resolution Authority:
The current financial crisis reveals the consequences of this regulatory gap. Generally when a large, interconnected non-bank financial firm is in severe distress, there are currently only two options:

1. Obtain outside capital or funding from the US government as in the case of AIG
2. File for bankruptcy as we witnessed with Lehman Brothers

Those options do not provide the government with the necessary tools to manage the resolution of the firm efficiently and effectively in a manner that limits the systemic risk with the least cost to the taxpayer.

• In the case of AIG, the government has provided financial assistance in order to avert the risks to the global financial system of the rapid and disorderly failure of such a large, complex entity in a fragile market environment. Had the government possessed the authorities contained in the proposed legislation, it could have resolved AIG in an orderly manner that shared losses among equity and debt holders in a way that maintained confidence in the institution's ability to fulfill its obligations to insurance policyholders and other systemically important customers.
• The Lehman Brothers bankruptcy illustrates the potential impact of the bankruptcy of a large interconnected financial firm during a period of severe financial stress. Several money market funds had significant exposure to Lehman. Concern about the stability of money market funds caused investors to withdraw funds, thus creating further instability in the financial system. That instability ultimately obliged the Treasury Department to establish the money market fund guarantee program.

What the Legislation Would Do:
Instead of subjecting a firm to bankruptcy or simply injecting taxpayers' funds with no real control, the legislation would:

• Grant the US government resolution authority, which would allow the government to put the firm into conservatorship or receivership and then to administer its effective, orderly reorganization or wind-down.
• Enable the government to reduce the need for taxpayer funds. For example, it would enable the federal agency acting as conservator or receiver to sell or transfer the assets or liabilities of the institution in question, to renegotiate or repudiate the institution's contracts (including with its employees), and to address the derivatives portfolio, thus reducing the potential for further disruption

More Details on the Proposed Legislation:

• The legislation would authorize the US government, in appropriately limited circumstances, to intervene at the appropriate time to avert the systemic risks posed by the potential insolvency of a significant financial firm.

• Many aspects of the bill are modeled on the statutory framework that governs the FDIC's exercise of emergency resolution and other authority with respect to banks. 

Key

Features of the Proposed Legislation:

• Covered institutions: It would cover financial institutions that have the potential to pose systemic risks to our economy but that are not currently subject to the resolution authority of the FDIC. This would include bank and thrift holding companies and holding companies that control broker-dealers, insurance companies, and futures commission merchants.

• Prerequisites for the actions to be taken: Parallel to the current provisions of law that apply to depository institutions, before any of the emergency measures specified in the proposed legislation may be taken, the Secretary, upon the positive recommendations of both the Federal Reserve Board and the appropriate federal regulatory agency and in consultation with the President, must make a triggering determination that -- (1) the financial institution in question is in danger of becoming insolvent; 
(2) its insolvency would have serious adverse effects on economic conditions or financial stability in the United States; and 
(3) taking emergency action as provided for in the law would avoid or mitigate those adverse effects. 

• Selection of emergency measures: The decision whether to provide financial assistance to the institution or to put it into conservatorship/receivership will be made by the Secretary and the FDIC, and will be informed by the recommendations of the Federal Reserve Board and the appropriate federal regulatory agency (if different from the FDIC). 

• Financial assistance measures: The proposed legislation permits the US government to utilize a number of different forms of financial assistance in order to stabilize the institution in question. These include making loans to the financial institution in question, purchasing its obligations or assets, assuming or guaranteeing its liabilities, and purchasing an equity interest in the institution. This authority is modeled on current law with respect to banks. The Deposit Insurance Fund will not be used to fund such assistance.
• Conservatorship/receivership: This authority is modeled on the resolution authority that the FDIC has under current law with respect to banks and that the Federal Housing Finance Agency has with regard to the GSEs. 

• The objective of a conservatorship is to take actions that are necessary and appropriate to restore the institution to a position of solvency so that it can carry on its business; the objective of a receivership is to provide for the orderly liquidation of the institution. 

• Here, the goal of the conservatorships or receiverships would be to minimize the impact of the potential failure of the financial institution on the financial system and consumers as a whole, rather than simply addressing the rights of the institution's creditors as in bankruptcy. 

• The trustee of the conservatorship or receivership would have broad powers, including to sell or transfer the assets or liabilities of the institution in question, to renegotiate or repudiate the institution's contracts (including with its employees), and to deal with a derivatives book. A conservator would also have the power to fundamentally restructure the institution by, for example, replacing its board of directors and its senior officers. None of these actions would be subject to the approval of the institution's creditors or other stakeholders.

Funding: The proposed legislation would create an appropriate mechanism to fund the appropriately limited exercise of the resolution authorities it confers. This could take the form of a mandatory appropriation to the FDIC out of the general fund of the Treasury (subject to all the restrictions on the use of appropriated funds, including apportionments under the Anti-Deficiency Act), and/or through a scheme of assessments, ex ante or ex post, on the financial institutions covered by the legislation. The government would also receive repayment from the redemption of any loans made to the financial institution

Reid: Romney Sent Mixed Messages

Late last night, Majority Leader Reid issued a statement on the SOTU and Mitt Romney's response:

President Obama and Mr. Romney both stated their positions with commendable eloquence. President Obama in particular summed up the challenges that we face today as a nation and what we need to overcome them, while Mr. Romney sent mixed messages, at times bashing the Democratic Party, while at other times encouraging "reaching across the aisle". I don't believe Mr. Romney will be disappointed in this last respect, assuming he takes a realistic look at today's crises.

McConnell: Democrats set to announce "massive reckless open-ended bailout"

A press statement issued moments ago by Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:

The GOP will be holding a press conference today at 5pm. Sorry for the late notice, but the press conference will deal with events which we only just found out about.

The GOP will be discussing the massive reckless open-ended, bailout which the Democrat Administration plans to announce tonight. We will also take questions on any issue you would like to raise.

I appreciate that this is late notice, but I would hope as many of you as possible could attend. Also (side note out of simulation) please do not feel that you have to wear reporter attire, you can ask your questions from off camera if you wish.

Best,
Mitch McConnell

EPW Republicans Respond to Obama's State of the Union

President Obama’s historic State of the Union Speech yesterday, he highlighted a number of initiatives on his agenda that pertained directly to the Environment and Public Works Committee. Following his speech, Senator Crapo (R-ID) a member of the Environment and Public Works committee had the following reaction:

Tonight was a great night for democracy and a great night for America. We saw our first African-American president with our first female Speaker. Both have rightfully earned their place on the world stage. And although I'd be lying if I told you I wasn't disappointed that my party was giving up leadership, I still think that significance of this transition of power--peaceful for the 43rd time--should not be overlooked. 

As for Mr. Obama's speech, it is clear that the administration and my party share many of the same goals. We both agree that fixing the economy is imperative, and should be the top priority. Millions of Americans are suffering because of the greed on Wall Street and their defenders in Washington, and something needs to be done about it. We also agree that our skyrocketing health care costs need to be reexamined and made affordable for all Americans. And when it comes to the environment, action is needed to wean ourselves from our dangerous addiction to foreign oil and to begin encouraging a reduction in our greenhouse gas emissions.

But although we may share these goals, we clearly see two very different roads to get there. I'll talk specifically about our approach in the Environment and Public Works Committee. Addressing climate change is sure to be a priority in our committee, as it should. But the Democrats and the Administration need to know that we will not allow this country to dive head-first into their extensive liberal fantasy just because they (dubiously) claim the banner of climate protection. Enacting strict cap-and-trade legislation or could significantly raise costs on American businesses is a tall order in the midst of a recession. Instead of adding additional costs to the already overburdened American consumers, we should further encourage the development of renewable energy. The great state of Idaho gets the vast majority of its electricity from clean renewable sources, including hydropower, wind, solar, biofuels, and nuclear energy. I would like to see more states follow in our path instead of further expanding government with strict mandates and more taxes from Washington. 

I look forward to the days ahead. The first meeting went okay. It seems that our colleagues across the aisle don't quite have their policy agenda fully in order. This further reinforces our fear that the Democrats may be attempting to rush the American people into some very major changes through half-baked legislation rather than wait and begin a more intensive dialogue about whether our citizens true interests are best being served. 

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), the ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, further echoed Sen. Crapo’s call for a revitalization of the economy with the proposition of the Generating the Requisite Opportunities for Work in the United States Act (GROW US Act). Sen. Inhofe remarked that “this act is instrumental in helping those who have been hard hit by the decline of the auto industry and outsourcing and serves to better the current economic situation in the United States.” The act aims to provide opportunities for entrepreneurial Americans and pump money back in to the nation’s economy.

Senator Crapo and Senator Inhofe have both demonstrated that the Republican agenda in the Environment and Public Works Committee centers on a revitalization of the US economy through the support of alternative sources of energy and the reliance on the ingenuity of the American people.