Border Security Enforcement Act – H.R. 1507
This bill would aim to bring our Southern border under operational control in 10 ways:
1. By deploying up to 6,000 National Guard troops to the United States-Mexico border.
The National Guard provides assistance to the Border Patrol and serves as an excellent deterrent to illegal immigrant crossings.
2. By deploying 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents to the United States-Mexico border by 2016.
Recent GAO studies have reported that Border Patrol staffing levels are insufficient in many areas, including staffing at checkpoints and public lands and staffing for the border generally. 1,000 agents per year will ensure that enough agents are hired to accommodate retirements and growing and violent threats in the Tucson Sector as well as other Border Patrol sectors around the country.
Additionally, funding for 500 additional Customs inspectors for the southwest border is needed. Even with the addition of 250 inspectors in the 2010 border supplemental, most cross-border trade experts have concluded that 200 additional inspectors are needed just for Arizona’s ports. Increasing the number of inspectors by 500 will help ensure that other heavily trafficked ports of entry will have enough personnel to reduce wait times and enhance port security efforts.
3. By fully funding and support Operation Streamline along the southwest border to, at a minimum, ensure that repeat illegal border crossers go to jail for 15 to 60 days.
Where Operation Streamline has been implemented, the number of illegal crossings has decreased significantly. The Tucson Sector, and other sectors, need additional resources to increase the number of prosecutions. Such an increase, if applied strategically, will greatly deter others from illegally crossing the border.
4. By providing funding for the Southwest Border Prosecution Initiative to reimburse state, county, tribal, and municipal governments for costs associated with the prosecution and pre-trial detention of federally-initiated criminal cases declined by local offices of the United States Attorneys.
5. By providing increased funding for Operation Stonegarden, a program that has provided much needed, but limited, reimbursement to local law enforcement agencies for additional personnel, overtime, travel and other costs associated with illegal immigration and drug smuggling along the border.
6. By constructing double-layer fencing at needed locations along the United States-Mexico border and replace outdated and ineffective landing-mat fencing along the southwest border.
7. By substantially increasing the number of mobile surveillance systems and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) along the United States-Mexico border and ensure the Border Patrol has the resources necessary to operate the UAVs 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Additionally, the bill would send additional fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters to the United States-Mexico border.
8. By providing funding for vital radio communications and interoperability between Customs and Border Patrol and state, local, and tribal law enforcement to assist in apprehension efforts along the border.
9. By providing funding for additional Border Patrol stations along the southwest border and explore the possibility of creating an additional Border Patrol sector in Arizona.
The bill would create six additional permanent Border Patrol Forward Operating Bases, and provide funding to upgrade the existing bases to include modular buildings, electricity and potable water. In a fall 2010 Government Accountability Office study, the Border Patrol reported that distances between Forward Operating Bases is too great and hinders timely response to reports of illegal aliens and their apprehension.
10. By completing construction of the planned permanent checkpoint in Arizona.
Deploy additional temporary roving checkpoints and increase horse patrols throughout the Tucson Sector.
The Border Security and Enforcement Act was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security in July, 2011.
Debt Buy-Down Act of 2011 – H.R. 634
With Congress seemingly unwilling or unable to rein in record levels of deficit spending, and a crushing national debt, the time has come to give taxpayers the opportunity to take action and the flexibility to direct their tax dollars to deficit reduction if they choose. Congress may not be ready to tackle the debt, but taxpayers are.
In order to let taxpayers directly affect the process, Senators John McCain and Marco Rubio and Congressman Flake reintroduced in the 112th Congress H.R. 634, the Debt Buy-Down Act of 2011.
The Debt Buy-Down Act would require the IRS to include a check-off on tax forms providing taxpayers the flexibility to voluntarily designate that up to 10% of their tax liability be put toward debt reduction. In order to ensure that reductions in the debt are protected, the bill also requires an equal amount of permanent reductions in federal spending.
The bill requires spending reductions for the coming year (in order to ensure that gains in debt reductions are protected in the coming year). Congress has an opportunity to pass spending reductions equal to the amount of debt reduction designate by taxpayers. Otherwise, the spending reductions are gained via an across-the-board cut in program spending levels.
The bill also provides several exemptions in the event of an across-the-board cut, including Social Security benefits, benefits for the uniformed services, and payments for net interest.
Several organizations in Washington dedicated to reducing America's debt expressed during the 111th Congress their support for the Debt Buy-Down Act. They include the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, Americans for Tax Reform and the Americans for Tax Reform Center for Fiscal Accountability, National Taxpayers' Union, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, Club for Growth ,and Americans for Prosperity. President of Americans For Prosperity, Tim Phillips, said in a letter of support for the Debt Buy-Down Act that "it will be invigorating to see the country’s response to such a small but important change in the IRS form."
The Debt Buy-Down Act was referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the House Committee on the Budget in February, 2011.
Recreational Shooting Protection Act – H.R. 3440
This bill would maintain that it be the general policy of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to keep national monument lands open to access and use for recreational shooting.
The Recreational Shooting Protection Act allows the BLM to unilaterally close or restrict national monument lands to recreational shooting for up to 6 months for reasons of national security and public safety, and to comply with federal law.
The bill would also require the BLM to publish public notice of the closure or restriction and
submit to Congress a report detailing the evidence justifying the closure or restriction no later than 30 days following such closure or restriction.
After six months, should Congress fail to pass an Act approving a BLM-initiated closure or restriction, the BLM must revert back to managing the land in a manner that supports, promotes, and enhances recreational shooting opportunities. Alternatively, should Congress pass an Act disapproving a BLM-initiated closure or restriction, the BLM must revert back to managing the land in a manner that supports, promotes, and enhances recreational shooting opportunities within 30 days.
The Recreational Shooting Protection Act is endorsed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and the Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife.
The Recreational Shooting Protection Act passed the House as part of H.R. 4089, the Sportsmen’s Heritage Act, which is now awaiting consideration in the Senate.
Commonsense Legislative Exceptional Events Reforms (CLEER) Act – H.R. 5381
Following the massive dust storm that rolled through Tucson and Phoenix in July, 2011, the level of particulate matter (the scientific term for dust) reached more than double the level federal standards consider healthy. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows naturally-occurring events such as these to be exempted from air quality requirements, expensive and time-consuming reports must be filed; even then, there is no guarantee that an exception will be granted. H.R. 5381, the Commonsense Legislative Exceptional Events Reforms (CLEER) Act of 2012, would help prevent the future bureaucratic nightmare of states being held accountable for air quality issues they couldn’t possibly have controlled or prevented by requiring the EPA to:
- Review exceptional events documentations within 90 days allowing for a one-time optional 90-day extension. The EPA currently has no timetable for review;
- Allow decisions on exceptional events demonstrations to be appealable; currently, exceptional events demonstrations are final and may not be appealed;
- Do a rulemaking providing specific and publically-disclosed criteria, developed with the states, on which exceptional events demonstrations will be evaluated (that reflect the varying levels of expertise, resources, and monitoring data and the need for an expedited approval process);
Base decisions on the preponderance of the evidence and give substantial deference to the states.
Groups that support H.R. 5381 include the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, the National Association of Home Builders, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the Family Farm Alliance, the National Sand, Stone & Gravel Association, the National Mining Association, the Public Lands Council, the Associated General Contractors of America, the National Water Resources Association, and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.
The CLEER Act was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in May, 2012.
Highway Fairness and Reform Act – H.R. 632
With funds collected from the federal gas tax dwindling and states continuing to struggle to balance their budgets, every precious gas tax dollar should go back to the states that paid them. This is of particular concern to the thirty “donor states,” which have historically received less in highway formula funds than their states contribute to the Trust Fund via the federal gas tax.
The Highway Fairness and Reform Act would allow states, including Highway Trust Fund donor states that are short-changed by the current system, to keep the funds they would otherwise be forced to contribute to the Highway Trust Fund. The bill would provide the states the option of being removed from the unfair formula calculations, letting them decide where these funds would best be spent.
Donor states have been forced to remain in an inequitable system for long enough. The Highway Fairness and Reform Act would ensure that taxpayers get the equitable return they deserve.
The Highway Fairness and Reform Act was referred to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, subcommittee on Highways and Transit in February, 2011.
Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act – H.R. 5791
The conflict to restore the primary water source for the city of Tombstone, Arizona, damaged by flooding in the wake of the June 2011 Monument Fire, illustrates the need for the Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act.
As further background, in August 2011, Governor Jan Brewer declared a state of emergency for Tombstone and allocated funds for emergency repairs to the city’s aqueduct, damaged by the Monument Fire. According to Tombstone officials, the aqueduct has accounted for between 50 and 80 percent of the city’s water supply in recent years and is critical to the health, safety and economy of Tombstone’s 1,500 residents. Both the city of Tombstone and the United States Forest Service have been hamstrung by the 1964 Wilderness Act in trying to repair this water source as a result of the wilderness designation for the area.
The Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act grants state and local authorities greater authority to repair critical water sources in the wake of a disaster. Furthermore, the bill prohibits federal agencies from interfering in those repairs during a declared state of emergency.
The Emergency Water Supply Restoration Act was referred to the subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands in May, 2012, with hearings taking place in June, 2012.
Earmark Elimination Act – H.R. 3707
The Earmark Elimination Act would permanently prohibit the House from considering legislation containing earmarks and would strip any earmarks found in proposed legislation considered by the House.
This bill was introduced in the Senate by Senators Pat Toomey (R, PA) and Claire McCaskill (D, MO).
The Earmark Elimination Act was referred to the House Rules Committee in December, 2011.
Stopping Trained in America Ph.D.s From Leaving the Economy (STAPLE) Act – H.R. 399
U.S. employers’ current ability to hire foreign-born talent with advanced degrees earned from America universities is significantly hampered by growing backlogs in processing applications for employment-based permanent residency for high-skilled workers. These hurdles affect even doctoral graduates in crucial fields such as science, technology, math, and engineering (so-called “STEM” fields) trained at U.S. universities - who either return home or seek employment in a country with a more welcoming immigration system.
With our current system, the U.S. is needlessly sending home foreign-born, highly-skilled works who have already earned their advanced degrees in the U.S. The STAPLE Act would exempt foreign-born individuals who have earned a Ph.D. in science, technology, math, or engineering from the limits on the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas awarded annually.
The STAPLE Act was referred to the subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement in February, 2011.
The Reducing the Deficit through Eliminating Agriculture Direct Payment Subsidies (REAPS) Act – H.R. 2487
Direct payments are annual subsidy payments made to producers or owners of land that has historically produced commodity crops.
These fixed direct payments are not tied to current production or prices and do not require any commodity production on the land. Farmers and landowners have been receiving billions in taxpayer subsidies whether they farm or not or whether prices were high or low or whether or not yields were great or poor.
Created in the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act, they were intended to serve as a temporary transitional handout to farmers as they moved in a more market-oriented direction. Instead of expiring, Congress made direct payments permanent in 2002 and they have cost taxpayers more than $41 billion since then.
The REAPS Act would eliminate agriculture direct payments subsidies outright and permanently. This legislation is supported by the Club for Growth, Taxpayers for Commonsense, Citizens Against Government Waste, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Public Interest Research Group, and Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.
The REAPS Act was referred to the House Committee on Agriculture, subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management in July, 2011.
Remove Incentives for Producing Ethanol (RIPE) Act – H.R. 426
The RIPE Act would rescind the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) and eliminate the prohibitive import tariff on imported ethanol, ending taxpayer subsidies of the U.S. ethanol industry and opening up the market to competition. The RIPE Act would also repeal the Renewable Fuel Standard, a federal mandate on the private sector that has been in place since 2005. The ethanol industry has survived on government subsidies for thirty years and counting. If the free market cannot keep the ethanol industry afloat, taxpayers shouldn’t either.
The RIPE Act was referred to the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power in February, 2011.
Phantom Fuel Reform Act of 2012 – H.R. 6047
Under current law and based on annual EPA estimates, United States refiners are required to blend millions of gallons of cellulosic biofuel into the U.S. fuel supply, regardless of whether any cellulosic biofuel is produced. Currently, this still infant industry produces no commercially available product, yet in 2012, the EPA is requiring 8.65 million gallons of cellulosic biofuel to be blended. The EPA’s solution to this problem is to force U.S. energy producers to buy paper credits for this “phantom fuel” directly from the EPA at a cost of millions of dollars. If any U.S. energy producer does not buy these credits, they risk heavy fines from the EPA.
The Phantom Fuel Reform Act would require the EPA to base their annual cellulosic biofuel mandate on actual industry production levels, thus eliminating the need for U.S. energy producers to pay millions of dollars for credits of a product that does not exist.
The Phantom Fuel Reform Act was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in June, 2012.
Air Standard Review Interval and Dust Act (ARID) Act –H.R. 2458
The ARID Act would seek to ease the regulatory burden represented by air quality regulations on areas struggling to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by providing a longer duration between air quality standard revisions. It would revise the exiting requirement for EPA review of the NAAQS and air quality criteria on a five-year interval to conducting reviews every ten years.
The ARID Act would also prohibit the EPA from finalizing, implementing, or enforcing a revised standard for coarse particulate matter (PM10) until 2016, putting the review of that NAAQS on the 10-year cycle.
With citizen suits based on the five-year interval requirement often setting the agency’s agenda with respect to air quality efforts, the ARID Act would also provide the EPA with an expanded timeframe to satisfy statutory requirements and likely a better opportunity to manage its resources.
The ARID Act is supported by National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, Arizona Cattlemen’s Association, Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association, Arizona Cattle Feeders’ Association, American Farm Bureau, Arizona Farm Bureau, Home Builders Association of Central Arizona, Rural Transportation Advocacy Council of Arizona, and Arizona Rock Products Association.
The ARID Act was referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee in July, 2011.
Central Bank of Iran Sanctions - H.R. 3508
H.R. 3608 would levy economic sanctions on foreign financial institutions that conduct business with the Central Bank of Iran. These sanctions would put additional pressure on the Iranian regime and help to further protect oil prices from surging.
H.R. 3508 was referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade in November, 2011.
Orphan Earmarks Act – H.R. 633
This bill would rescind any earmark of funds provided for any federal agency with more than 90-percent of their total appropriated budget available at the end of the 9th fiscal year after it was first made available.
The bill would also add another layer of transparency to the earmarking process by requiring each agency head to identify and report every project that is an earmark that has not been spent at the end of each fiscal year to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), who will then report a listing and accounting for such earmarks to Congress and to the public via the OMB website.
The Orphan Earmarks Act was referred to the House Oversight and Government Reform, subcommittee on Government Organization, Efficiency, and Financial Management in February, 2011.
Western Hemisphere Energy Security Act – H.R. 4135
Cuba is moving forward with oil exploration activities and just last month Spanish oil and gas company Repsol, using the Norwegian-designed and Chinese-build Scarabeo-9, started drilling a series of exploratory wells within their waters. The long-standing economic embargo is making efforts by U.S. agencies to put together emergency management and contingency plans in the event of an oil spill that could threaten U.S. aquatic resources that lead to billions in economic activity in our country much more difficult.
Current U.S. policy toward Cuba is not only putting U.S. resources at risk, it also deprives the U.S. oil and gas industry of any opportunity to take part in oil and gas operation in neighboring waters. The Western Hemisphere Energy Security Act of 2012 would allow U.S. companies to participate in the exploration for and extraction of oil and gas, as well as spill prevention and remediation activities, in any maritime exclusive economic zone that borders ours.
The Western Hemisphere Energy Security Act was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affair in March, 2010.
|
|
