Bob Latta|
Posted by
Staff
on
December 01, 2010
NOTE: This opinion piece originally appeared in Politico on December 1st, which can be found here.
Energy change isn't easy for a reason By: Republican Members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee December 1, 2010 04:55 AM EST With a new congressional session comes a recycling of the old proposal to raid the jurisdiction of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. This seems a bizarre moment to advance the idea that a group, which didn’t stand up to the Barack Obama-Nancy Pelosi axis on its radical energy and environmental initiatives, should now take over the work of the committee that did. (Rep. Doc Hastings’s Opinion piece, “One Energy Panel Better for Nation,” POLITICO, Nov. 22) The fact is that unparalleled tenacity and teamwork characterized Energy and Commerce Republicans while we were in the wilderness. Our members blended this tenacity with meager resources and went up against the power of a united Democratic majority. Remember cap and trade? What was supposed to be an unstoppable, greased-pig markup on the Obama administration’s signature cap-and-trade bill was turned into a fight by the 23 determined Republicans on Energy and Commerce. Four long days and nights spent in Room 2123 of the Rayburn building found Republicans sharply disputing Democrats and their theories about global warming and the U.S. economy. Deals were offered and rejected, while 300 Republican amendments piled up on the clerk’s desk and majority members were forced into extended debate on 47 of them. The process exposed the ragged seams of the majority strategy and laid bare the failings of their absurd cap-and-trade scheme. Today, the tattered Waxman-Markey bill is gathering dust on a Senate shelf, consigned in part by the sunburn it received from exposure to the Energy and Commerce Committee. But some say that success in blocking this threat to the American economic system is yesterday’s news. They now say that the hard work keeping energy available and affordable is done — it’s someone else’s turn to take over. Some even say that consolidating power over every facet of U.S. energy in a kind of college of congressional cardinals seems like an innovation. We note that if those things were to happen, they can’t stop by stripping just the Energy and Commerce Committee of its responsibility. The line for surrendering responsibility gets long fast. In alphabetical order, first comes the Agriculture Committee. That would necessarily lose oversight of both the Rural Utilities Service, which regulates electric co-ops, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which oversees energy commodities. And what about the Foreign Affairs Committee’s oversight of international energy issues — including nuclear 123 Agreements? Or the Homeland Security Committee’s responsibilities for energy as part of emerging threats, infrastructure protection and emergency response? Or the Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s authority over domestic policy and government management? Or the Science and Technology Committee’s jurisdiction over energy research and development? Or the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s pipeline jurisdiction? Or ... well, the list goes on and on, doesn’t it? Putting all of Congress’s energy eggs in one superbasket might make sense in a sweeping and comprehensive restructuring of the House system — until the idea is confronted with the sacrifice of knowledge and good sense for the sake of creating an artificial efficiency. It’s no accident that energy is our committee’s first name, because it is inextricably linked to the U.S. economy. Even if you don’t care much about the jobs, growth and opportunity fueled by energy, separating energy policy from environmental policy seems a particularly bad notion. In a jurisdictional sense, dividing these intertwined matters would create an environment committee invested with actual power — and unencumbered by the inconvenience of actual knowledge. Instead of a committee with a built-in brake on radicalism, we fear we would have a panel with legislative authority and subpoena power that is dominated by people who, in varying degrees, view energy as the enemy. Energy policy is more than digging and drilling. It covers energy markets, generation, efficiency and conservation, information, interstate transmission, electric reliability, nuclear power and rate-making, plus all the regulators of those areas. The Natural Resources Committee has a strong lineup of expert members who understand and ably handle public land issues. We bow to their wisdom in those matters, because we respect their judgment and informed views. But the effective management of public lands is hardly an analog to the assembly of U.S. energy policy that drives world energy policy. Policymaking on the Energy and Commerce Committee is about applying a unique storehouse of knowledge and experience — some of it hard-earned, indeed — toward ensuring reliable, low-cost energy for making and doing things that generate a robust American economy. What’s being proposed is a grab. It is not a thoughtful reorganization of energy jurisdiction, nor does it advance the “all-of-the-above” strategy that Republicans advocate for cutting reliance on foreign energy, improving the environment, reviving the U.S. economy and putting people back to work. Some say change isn’t easy, but we haven’t had enough. Others have been talking about how changes over the past four years turned their lives upside down — and they just turned to Republicans to undo the recent past. The Energy and Commerce Committee is equipped to begin working on energy policy on the first day of the new Congress. Others will have to go to school first. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) serves as the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Reps. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), John Shimkus (R-Ill.), Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.), Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.), Greg Walden (R-Ore.), Lee Terry (R-Neb.), Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), John Sullivan (R-Okla.), Tim Murphy (R-Pa.), Michael Burgess (R-Texas), Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.), Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Bob Latta (R-Ohio) serve on the committee.
Posted by
Staff
on
October 25, 2010
On October 21, Congressman Bob Latta (R-Bowling Green) sent a letter of support to U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu regarding a recent application by the Solar Valley Research Enterprise (SVRE) for solar energy research funds that will benefit Northwest Ohio. The letter can be found here.
SVRE is a not-for-profit organization formed by the University of Toledo, a leader in alternative energy research and development, and the Dow Corning Corporation in a joint venture with Hemlock Semiconductor Corporation. Latta states in the letter "...By selecting this not-for-profit organization for this Federal grant, the SVRE will be centered in two Midwest locations, one in Northwest Ohio near the current University of Toledo’s Wright Center for Photovoltaic’s Innovation and Commercialization, and the other near Midland, Michigan in the Great Lakes Bay region. These two facilities will contain manufacturing-scale capabilities, high tech laboratories, and will also be dedicated to the acceleration of solar research with a focus on reducing the cost per kilowatt hour of solar power, all the while aiding in solar researchers from start to finish. Energy is continuing to be a central economic driver, and alternative energy sources such as solar will directly impact the availability of jobs, incomes, and the quality of life for many years to come. As the United States moves towards lessening its dependency on foreign oil, solar will continue to play a vital role..."
Posted by
Staff
on
September 28, 2010
Earlier this week, Congressman Bob Latta signed onto a letter to United States Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the MOVE Act.
The MOVE Act requires states to mail unmarked absentee ballots to military and overseas voters at least 45 days prior to an election. The bill does allow for states to apply for a waiver from the 45-day requirement, but only if at least one of three specific situations arise that renders the state “unable” to comply with that timeline. The letter, which can be found here, asks for an updated database of all states that have requested waivers because of their inability to comply with the timeline laid out within the MOVE Act. While some states have been added to the database, many are still missing. On August 3rd, Congressman Latta sent a letter to Mr. Robert Carey, Director of the Federal Voting Assistance Program for the Department of Defense, encouraging him to ensure the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act is followed. The press release and letter can be found here.
Posted by
Staff
on
September 24, 2010
Congressman Bob Latta (R-Bowling Green) is notifying small nonprofit organizations that if they have not filed returns for 2007, 2008 and 2009, their tax-exempt status will be discontinued by the Internal Revenue Service. Hundreds of entities in Northwest and Central Ohio are at risk of losing their tax-exempt status; however, it can be preserved by filing returns by October 15, 2010 under a one-time relief program.
Small tax-exempt organizations can view information on the relief program and a list of entities at risk of losing their status at http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=225889,00.html. These organizations have return due dates between May 17 and October 15, 2010, but IRS does not possess record of a return being filed for any of the past three years. Two relief options exist for small exempt organizations. For more information on these two filing options, organizations are encouraged to visit www.irs.gov. Individuals having any concerns related to the federal government are encouraged to call Congressman Latta’s offices toll-free at 1-800-541-6446 or visit his Bowling Green, Defiance or Norwalk office in person, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., with the exception of federal holidays.
Posted by
Staff
on
September 23, 2010
Congressman Robert E. Latta
The Committee on Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Opening Statement – For the Record September 22, 2010 MR. CHAIRMAN; RANKING MEMBER BURGESS: Thank you for holding this subcommittee hearing on the outbreak of Salmonella in eggs, as incidences of contaminated food products are a serious concern for public health. I am very glad that the two witnesses on our first panel who were affected by these eggs are on the road to recovery and are able to be with us today. This hearing is also of great concern to me because egg production is critical to my state, Ohio, which is the second-largest egg producing state in the nation, with 7.1 billion eggs. Many of you have heard me say that I represent the largest manufacturing district in Ohio, but I also represent the largest agriculture district in Ohio. Furthermore, my district is home to one of the top two egg producing counties in the nation. Ohio’s egg industry produces 465.5 million eggs in my district, and has an economic impact of 102.4 million dollars. Ohio is also one of the ten states with an egg quality assurance program with the aim to minimizing Salmonella in eggs. First of all, I think it is important that we remember that the purpose of this hearing is to get the facts. While we have the FDA form 483 with general observations about the conditions at the Wright County Egg and Hillendale Farms operations in Iowa that are being investigated, we do not yet have the Establishment Inspection Report which will provide more clear answers. Furthermore, I am disappointed that the FDA Commissioner is not here to testify, nor is a representative from the USDA. We need to get answers and hear what went wrong from these producers so that the industry learns from this recall. We do not want the public to lose confidence in our egg producers. Several of the egg producers in my district are fourth generation farmers and have been committed to producing a safe, healthy product for years. If we have over-burdening regulations that are placed out there, many of these farmers may be forced out of business - unfortunately, preventing a fifth-generation from being able to farm. The safety and security of the nation’s food supply is of utmost importance to me. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to hearing the testimony from the witnesses on the panel today. I would also like to submit a document for the record from the Ohio Poultry Association on egg facts in Ohio.
Posted by
Congressman Latta
on
September 17, 2010
I have always been thankful that so many of our country’s greatest leaders and statesmen were able to be on this earth at the same time and place to draft the Constitution. As a lifelong student of history and government, we were blessed as a nation to have individuals that put self-interest and sectionalism aside to debate, argue, draft and sign the Constitution. Our Constitution has been that beacon upon the hill, that guiding star at night, and that shining city that millions of persons around the word have longed to be guided by within their own countries.
It is my privilege to have introduced House Resolution 1612 honoring the Constitution of the United States, and the freedoms and rights it has given to every American. Today, the Constitution is not read or studied by enough Americans. I am sure that many people would tell you that some early Americans got together and with the wave of the hand produced the document. I am sure it would be with disbelief to many to find out how it took four hard and acrimonious months from May to September 17, 1787, to actually bring fruition to their labor. The citizens that attended the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania were some of our greatest scholars of government and history; James Madison, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Robert Morris, and George Washington were just a few of these men. Madison had studied many forms of government from the ancients to the nations of his day. He reached out to others not only for their opinions but to citizens from around the country. Discussion, debate, and compromise all were the order of the Convention. Many different ideas were brought to the Convention. Were they only empowered to amend the Articles of Confederation? Could they go further and start from scratch? Many a discussion was held in Philadelphia’s boarding houses and taverns. These members began debates on creating three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. Madison brought his ideas while others had theirs. Also, there was no air conditioning and the secrecy of the proceedings mandated that all windows and doors be shut. The summer days were hot and tempers flared, but through it all they worked. These men knew that they would be creating a document for a nation and the ages. A new nation was being watched by the powers of the world. Would this new democracy survive, or would it succumb to infighting and intrigue? Fortunately for us, cooler heads would prevail when impasses occurred. Recesses and adjournments would be called. Personally, I marvel at these giants. Strong willed men would discuss and agree to points that they would not have had it not been for the persuasive and well reasoned arguments that were presented. No one received everything they wanted, and some even went home-but the majority of them stayed to give us our Constitution. It was reported that Benjamin Franklin was asked what (you) have given us. He is said to have replied, “A Republic, if you can keep it.” After the document was signed on September17, 1787, the next massive task began. The Constitution had to be ratified. The men returned to their states to explain why the Constitution should be ratified. Speeches were made, debates were held, letters were written, and people were persuaded. In true American style, nothing came easy. Today’s citizens should look for guidance from our forefathers. Let all Americans sit down and read this great document. Since the Constitution’s ratification, it has been the framework for our great nation. Not only did great men bring it forth, but for two hundred twenty-three years this Constitution has been paid for by hundreds of thousands of lives-the lives of our brave military men and women. Let the living give thanks to our honored dead who have paid the ultimate sacrifice that the Constitution of the United States remains our guiding light.
Posted by
Staff
on
July 14, 2010
Today, Congressman Bob Latta, along with 179 of his pro-life colleagues, sent a letter to Senate and House leadership. The letter urges House and Senate leadership to reject an amendment to the FY2011 National Defense Authorization Act offered by Senator Roland Burris (D-IL) to strike Section 1093(b) of Title 10 of the US Code. The amendment, which passed by a vote of 15-12, will permit the performance of abortions in both domestic and overseas military facilities.
A similar amendment to allow abortions in overseas military facilities was most recently offered in the House in 2006 when it failed by a vote of 191-237. The Burris amendment is more expansive than the 2006 amendment because it allows abortion on both domestic and overseas military bases. Current law prohibits the performance of abortion by Department of Defense medical personnel or in Department of Defense medical facilities except when the life of the mother is at risk or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. There is no distinction in this policy between military facilities within the United States and those overseas. A separate provision prohibits the use of DOD funds for abortion.
Posted by
Staff
on
June 28, 2010
On June 25th Congressman Bob Latta joined Ohio Senators George Voinovich and Sherrod Brown, in addition to Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur in sending a letter to President Obama asking FEMA to reconsider their decision to not declare Wood, Fulton, and Ottawa Counties as federal disaster areas in the wake of the deadly tornados that hit the area on June 5th. A copy of the letter can be found here.
Posted by
Staff
on
June 28, 2010
On June 25 Congressman Bob Latta sent a letter to President Obama asking him to temporarily waive the Jones Act within the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 which could allow foreign ships and vessels to assist with the ongoing cleanup in the Gulf of Mexico.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, President Bush issued a similar waiver to the Jones Act to allow foreign ships and vessels to travel within US Ports to assist with the transportation of petroleum products. A copy of the letter can be found here. |
