Inhofe Introduces Bi-Partisan Water Legislation

Inhofe Introduces English Language Legislation

Inhofe Amendment Improving Weapons Acquisition Unanimously Accepted by Senate

Inhofe Decries Defense Budget Cuts

Inhofe Expresses Dismay Over Obama Budget Proposal

Inhofe Co-Sponsors Legislation to Protect the American Flag

Inhofe Opening Statement: Armed Services Committee Hearing on Piracy

Senator Inhofe Questions Commission Findings on the Strategic Posture of the United States

Inhofe Recognizes National Day of Prayer

Enid
302 N Independence
Suite 104
Enid, OK 73701
(580) 234-5105
Map this | Directions To
Washington D.C. Office

McAlester
215 E Choctaw Ave
Suite 106
McAlester, OK 74501
(918) 426-0933
Map this | Directions To
Washington D.C. Office

Oklahoma City
1900 NW Expressway St
Suite 1210
Oklahoma City, OK 73118
(405) 608-4381
Map this | Directions To
Washington D.C. Office

Tulsa
1924 S. Utica Avenue
Suite 530
Tulsa, OK 74104
(918) 748-5111
Map this | Directions To
Washington D.C. Office

Washington
205 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-4721
Map this | Directions To
Washington D.C. Office

Inhofe Introduces Bi-Partisan Water Legislation

U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, together with Senators Benjamin L. Cardin (D-MD), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Water and Wildlife Subcommittee, subcommittee ranking member Mike Crapo (R-ID) and EPW Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA), joined together to introduce S. 1005, The Water Infrastructure Financing Act, which provides the foundation for our nation’s efficient drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. The bill contains authorizations for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund to most importantly help communities across Oklahoma and the nation meet unfunded mandates issued by the federal government and expand eligibility for funding for projects including storm water management, water conservation, or efficiency projects, reuse and recycling projects. 

“I am pleased to join Senators Cardin, Crapo, and Boxer in introducing bipartisan legislation today that will help address many of our nation’s most pressing water needs,” Senator Inhofe said. “Through my leadership position on the EPW Committee, I have made reauthorization of the SRF one of my top priorities—and we have come together to put forward a bill that balances the needs of all states, especially rural states like Oklahoma.  We simply cannot afford to shortchange our nation’s water needs; in fact, investments in water infrastructure prior to disasters can even save us money. Yet for nearly twenty years, the federal government has burdened state and local government with unfunded mandates.  While this bill faces a tough road ahead, I believe our bipartisan agreement represents the best opportunity in two decades to get a SFR bill signed into law.”

Duane Smith, Executive Director of the Oklahoma Water Resources Board praised Inhofe’s long-standing work on Oklahoma infrastructure needs and praised the introduction of the bill saying, “Few people understand Oklahoma’s infrastructure needs and the struggles of local communities to meet federal mandates than Senator Jim Inhofe. His legislation will not only provide needed loans and funding for communities across Oklahoma to meet critical water needs, but is only one more part of the Senator’s continuing work to address our state’s critical infrastructure.”

Steven A. Thompson, Executive Director for the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, expressed his appreciation for Senator Inhofe’s work on the bill, writing: “We are extremely grateful to Sen. Inhofe for authoring legislation to reauthorize the State Revolving Funds. This reauthorization is vital in our effort to protect water resources and in helping communities deliver safe drinking water to their customers. We are particularly grateful that the bill includes loan forgiveness provisions for small and disadvantaged communities while providing our larger communities funding to correct sewer overflow issues.”

“The highest priorities of the Water and Wildlife Subcommittee are to ensure that all Americans have clean and safe drinking water and that our aging national water infrastructure can handle all that we ask of it. The health and safety of our citizens, our rivers and streams, and our economy depend on clean, flowing water,” said Senator Cardin.  “I appreciate the bipartisan support from Chairman Boxer, Senators Inhofe and Crapo, in crafting legislation that allows us to reinvest in America, providing thousands of new jobs and meeting our basic water quality needs.”

Senator Boxer said, "Clean, safe water is essential to the health of every American.  I am pleased that the four key leaders from both parties have joined together in supporting a bill that invests in protecting the health of American families, creates jobs and encourages communities to use the latest green technologies.  It has been over 20 years since we have reauthorized the Clean Water Revolving Fund, and more than 12 years since we reauthorized the Drinking Water Revolving Fund – the American people have waited long enough and I look forward to working with my colleagues to move this important legislation forward."

Senator Crapo said, “The challenges of water use and conservation across our nation are as numerous as they are varied, with the needs of extensively developed states and rural states like Idaho rarely aligned.  With this in mind, the progress the EPW Committee has made in reauthorizing the Clean Water SRF bill is outstanding.  Under this bill, Idaho and other small states will receive a greater share of appropriated funds.  While the bill introduced today is not perfect, it represents a good faith compromise among myself and Senators Inhofe, Cardin, and Boxer to introduce legislation that addresses many of our nation’s water needs.”

Inhofe Introduces English Language Legislation

On Wednesday, Senator Inhofe introduced the National Language Act of 2009, legislation that calls on the federal government to preserve and enhance the role of English as the national language. It clarifies that there is no entitlement to receive federal documents and services in languages other than English, unless required by statutory law, recognizing decades of unbroken court opinions that civil rights laws protecting against national origin discrimination do not create rights to government services and materials in languages other than English.  Senator Inhofe’s bill would make English the national language of the United States government, a status in law it has not previously had.  Furthermore, the legislation clarifies that there is no entitlement to receive federal documents and services in languages other than English, unless required by statutory law. Senator Inhofe was joined by Senators Alexander (R-Tenn.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Chambliss (R-Ga.), Burr (R-N.C.), Shelby (R-Ala.), Vitter (R-La.), Bunning (R-Ky.), Coburn (R-Okla.), Wicker (R-Miss.), DeMint (R-S.C.), Enzi (R-Wyo.), Thune (R-S.D.), Corker (R-Tenn.), and Cochran (R-Miss.) in introducing this legislation. 

“Our nation was settled by a group of people with a common vision, and as our population has grown, so has our cultural diversity,” Senator Inhofe said. “This diversity is part of what makes our nation great. However, we must be able to communicate with one another so that we can appreciate our differences.  By establishing that there is no entitlement to receive documents or services in languages other than English, we set the precedent that English is common to us all in the public forum of government.  
 
“I am especially pleased to be introducing these bills today because just hours ago in my home state the Oklahoma State Legislature passed a joint resolution in support of English as the official language.  This resolution, which passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives by an overwhelming vote of 89 to 8 and the Senate by a vote of 44 to 2, will allow the people of Oklahoma to vote on a statewide ballot for a constitutional amendment to make English the official language of Oklahoma.  I am encouraged by the State Legislature’s tireless efforts to affirm the importance of English as the unifying language in our society.  Sharing the stage with 30 other states that have made English their official state language, Oklahoma has preceded the U.S. Congress in beginning to address the need for a commonality amongst a nation of immigrants. I hope that the United States Congress will follow their lead and let the voice of the people be heard – a voice that overwhelming supports English as the official language.” 

U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said, “One of America’s greatest accomplishments is the manner in which we unite our magnificent diversity, and one way we have done that is by speaking a common language, English,” said Alexander. “The federal government should value our common language, not devalue it.  We can do the right thing by establishing English as our national language so that America remains one united country.” 

U.S. Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) said, “The English language is part of our national identity. I hope our colleagues in the Senate will support this commonsense piece of legislation.” 

U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said, “Americans are right celebrate our diversity, but our greatest accomplishment as a nation has been the building of a unifying culture: out of many, one.  Our common language is the mortar that holds our culture together, and the gateway to citizenship and success in America.  Command of the English language carries with it countless opportunities, and this bill will help ensure those opportunities are available to all Americans.” 

Senator Inhofe also introduced today the English Language Unity Act of 2009, which incorporates the National Language Act and goes further by requiring that all official functions of the United States be conducted in English, requiring the establishment of a uniform language requirement for naturalization, and setting the framework for uniform testing of English language ability for candidates for naturalization. This is identical to legislation introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 997, by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), with 112 bipartisan cosponsors.

Background:

Senator Inhofe has worked in the 109th, 110th and 111th Congresses to establish English as our national language, and has garnered widespread bipartisan support each time. His bill is identical to S. 2715 from the 110th Congress, as well as the English amendments that passed the Senate in 2007 as Senate Amendment 1151, and in 2006 as Senate Amendment 4064, each being part of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of each respective Congress. Senate Amendment 1151 was agreed to in the Senate by a vote of 64 – 33. Senate Amendment 4064 was agreed to in the Senate by a vote of 62 – 35.
 
In polling reported only a few days ago, 86% of Oklahomans favor making English the official language. 87% of Americans support making English the official language of the United States.  77% of Hispanics believe English should be the official language of government operations. 82% of Americans support legislation that would require the federal government to conduct business solely in English.  74% of Americans support all election ballots and other government documents being printed in English.
 
OMB estimates that the annual cost of providing multilingual assistance required by Clinton Executive Order 13166 is $1-2 billion annually.    

Inhofe Amendment Improving Weapons Acquisition Unanimously Accepted by Senate

On Wednesday, Senator Jim Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, introduced an amendment (S.Amdt.1044) to the Weapons Systems Acquisition Reform Act 2009 (S.454), which he has co-sponsored. His amendment was unanimously accepted by the Senate. Senator Inhofe’s amendment would require the Department of Defense (DoD) to report to Congress when an acquisition program is terminated due to ‘critical’ cost growth, a requirement that would assist in improving the DoD’s acquisition process by helping identify common causes of weapon systems program failures.   Senator Inhofe’s amendment to the bill will provide much needed and timely feedback on the reasons for cost overruns within the military’s major weapons programs.  It is critical for the public and the Congress to maintain oversight on the acquisition process to ensure responsible spending of taxpayer dollars. Senator Inhofe’s speech upon introduction, as prepared for delivery, is below:

Senator Inhofe’s Remarks (As Prepared for Delivery)

Mr. President, I would like call up Senate Amendment 1044.

The purpose of this amendment is to require a report to Congress when an acquisition program is terminated due to ‘critical’ cost growth.  Acquisition problems we have seen in the past are many and can be tied to several issues that the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Department of Defense (DoD) have been trying to work through.  Some of the issues we have been trying to tackle include growing back our acquisition force, providing realistic cost estimates, accurately defining and holding to the program requirements, and ensuring the right amount of oversight to improve the overall process while not slowing it down by adding additional layers of bureaucracy.
 
The purpose of Section 204 of this bill is to enhance the statutory requirements of Nunn-McCurdy by requiring major defense acquisition programs that experience critical cost growth, 25 percent from the current baseline or 50 percent from the original baseline, to be terminated unless the Secretary certifies that continuing the program is essential to national security and the program can be modified to proceed in a cost-effective manner.  Section 204 requires the Secretary to submit written certification if the program is not terminated that states the acquisition program is essential to national security, no alternatives meet the joint military requirement, new estimates are reasonable, and the management structure is adequate to manage and control program acquisition costs.

I concur with this certification process but noticed no similar requirement for the termination of an acquisition program, an area in which oversight is required and information critical as we continue to improve the acquisition process.  My amendment requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a written report explaining the reasons for terminating the program, the alternatives considered addressing any problems in the program, and the course of action the Department of Defense plans to pursue to meet continuing joint military requirements intended to be met by the program being cancelled.

This report will provide Congress with historical documentation of terminated, or failed, programs and why they were terminated.  This information could be used to make further changes to our acquisition process as well as identify common causes of program failures.
 
There is bipartisan agreement that the Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition process for weapons systems is broken. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that DoD’s major defense acquisition programs are a combined $296 billion over budget.  There is wide consensus among defense analysts that DoD does not need new rules, they need to enforce existing rules. The legislation contained in this bill begins the process of improving the acquisition process.
 
I encourage my fellow Senators to support this important legislation.

Inhofe Decries Defense Budget Cuts

Senator Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed disappointment Thursday in the significant defense cuts in President Obama’s budget.  The Appendix to his FY2010 budget shows President Obama’s total spending proposals on a line-by-line basis and includes $17 billion in cuts to 121 programs, a number less than half of 1% of Obama’s overall budget. 

“I could not be more disappointed in the priorities the President’s budget reveals, in which national security apparently ranks dead last,” Senator Inhofe said. “President Obama’s budget, the largest in the history of America, triples the public debt in 10 years and funds every welfare program imaginable, but cuts funding for our troops in the field during an ongoing war.  I could not be more disappointed in the priorities the President’s budget reveals, in which national security apparently ranks dead last.  Our brave troops continue to fight overseas while their President guts our military, cutting programs such as Missile Defense, Future Combat Systems, F-22s, C-17s and the Next Generation Bomber.  These systems would not only provide for our national defense today, but will invest in our security for decades to come. 

“The military budget is shrinking.  It is becoming squeezed by inflation, increased manpower costs, increased funding of contingency operations costs from the core defense budget, and decreased wartime supplementals, now known as Overseas Contingency Operations, despite the fact that GAO has projected an increase in the cost of operations for Iraq and Afghanistan.  I was also surprised to see our Army budget increase by only 2.1%, the lowest of all the services, while they shoulder the brunt of our combat operations both on its equipment and its people.  There are more than 162,000 Soldiers deployed, more than 3.5 times the number of any other service.” 

Inhofe Expresses Dismay Over Obama Budget Proposal

U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe, Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and a Senior Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed dismay that President Obama continues to hail the spending ‘cuts’ in his budget, while the budget details released today indicate that the cuts are barely a fraction of the overall $3.6 trillion budget, and most come at the expense of important defense programs and weapons systems. The Appendix to his FY2010 budget shows President Obama’s spending proposals on a line-by-line basis and includes $17 billion in cuts to 121 programs, a number less than half of 1% of Obama’s overall budget.
 
“President Obama has proposed a $3.5 trillion budget during a time of record deficits, and in the same proposal recommends $17 billion, or .05%, in ‘budget cuts,’ which are actually redirected to other government spending programs,” Senator Inhofe said. “It’s not a genuine attempt at a disciplined budget.  I don’t take this approach to budgeting seriously, and I don’t think the American people do either.”

Senator Inhofe has been an outspoken critic of the Obama Administration’s intent to “gut military spending.” In a YouTube Press Release from Afghanistan early this month, Senator Inhofe said, “President Obama is disarming America. Never before has a president so ravaged the military at a time of war... The brunt of this decision will be felt by our men and women in uniform right here in Afghanistan.” After returning from his time abroad, Senator Inhofe spoke on the Senate floor providing a detailed assessment of the cuts, saying that we were heading “down a dangerous road leading to the gutting of our military and settling for ‘adequacy' versus ‘supremacy.”  

Today, Senator Inhofe expressed dissapointment with the line-by-line defense budget, saying, “I could not be more disappointed in the priorities the President’s budget reveals, in which national security apparently ranks dead last. President Obama’s budget, the largest in the history of America, triples the public debt in 10 years and funds every welfare program imaginable, but cuts funding for our troops in the field during an ongoing war. Our brave troops continue to fight overseas while their President guts our military, cutting programs such as Missile Defense, Future Combat Systems, F-22s, C-17s and the Next Generation Bomber.  These systems would not only provide for our national defense today, but will invest in our security for decades to come.”

Inhofe Co-Sponsors Legislation to Protect the American Flag

Senator Jim Inhofe,  a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is a co-sponsor of a joint resolution (S.J.Res.15) introduced Wednesday by Senator David Vitter (R-La.) that would allow Congress to protect the flag of the United States by preventing its desecration. The bill, SJ Res 15, would give Congress the power to overrule a 1989 Supreme Court decision that declared previous flag protection laws unconstitutional. Senators Inhofe and Vitter were joined by 15 other co-sponsors in the U.S. Senate.  

“There is no more visible symbol of the strength, freedom and dignity of our nation than the American flag,” Senator Inhofe said. “Our flag has flown above battles that sealed our nation’s sovereignty, and over the remains of buildings destroyed by terrorists.  It is raised every morning over our nation’s Capitol, and is draped in honor over the coffins of our men and women in uniform who have given their lives to protect our freedom. The American flag deserves respect and protection. This long-overdue resolution proposes a Constitutional amendment to authorize Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the U.S. flag.  I am proud to join Senator Vitter and my colleagues in co-sponsoring this important resolution.” 

“This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 5-4 vote to declare the desecration of our flag to be constitutional, yet millions of Americans and all 50 state legislatures have endorsed prohibiting flag desecration,” Vitter said. “This resolution will illustrate Congress’s support for protecting this symbol of our freedom.”

“Protection of the flag is an American tradition and this issue goes right to the heart of the value that our society places on the flag.  An overwhelming number of Americans revere the flag as a symbol of all that we stand for,” said David Rehbein, National Commander of The American Legion.  “Senator Vitter agrees with the majority of Americans, and the majority of his colleagues who support legal protection for the one symbol of all that is good in this country.  Thanks to his commitment and that of others like him, the people, not the courts, can prevail and our flag can again have the protection a national monument deserves.”

Similar amendments were taken up in each of the 104th through 109th Congresses. Each time, the House passed the resolution with the required two-thirds majority, but the Senate could not assemble the required votes. The most recent attempt to make flag desecration unconstitutional, sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch in 2006, was defeated by just one vote.

U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson will offer similar legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Inhofe Opening Statement: Armed Services Committee Hearing on Piracy

On Tuesday, Senator Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, welcomed to the committee the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Michèle A. Flournoy, USN Director for Strategic Plans and Policy Joint Chiefs of Staff, Vice Admiral James A. Winnefeld, Jr., and Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Ambassador Stephen D. Mull.  During the hearing, at which he served as the Ranking Member, Senator Inhofe discussed the ongoing efforts to combat piracy on the high seas.

Click to Watch YouTube video of Sen. Inhofe’s Opening Statement

Senator Inhofe Questions Commission Findings on the Strategic Posture of the United States

Thursday, Senator Jim Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today spoke with members of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States during an Armed Services Committee hearing. The Commission was created as a part of the Fiscal Year ’08 National Defense Authorization Act and is facilitated by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP).  The final report, which was released yesterday, provides approximately 100 findings and recommendations aimed at strengthening America’s strategic security.

“The only finding by the Commission in which there was not 100% agreement was over the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), proving that there are still serious concerns with the substance of this Treaty and that our President and Congress should take extreme caution before rushing its ratification,” Senator Inhofe said.  “The Senate rejected the CTBT in 1999 by an overwhelming majority for good and substantial reasons, determining that the treaty would create unnecessary risk for basic requirements of U.S. national security. The first matter any arms control treaty must address is whether compliance with the obligations it creates can be verified.  As President Ronald Regan once said, we must ‘trust but verify.’  The CTBT was found by the Senate to be fatally lacking on this point.  In October 2008, Secretary Gates stated at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, ‘To be blunt, there is absolutely no way we can maintain a credible deterrent and reduce the number of weapons in our stockpile without either resorting to testing our stockpile or pursuing a modernization program.’  The Commission’s report, and the fact that this was the only issue in which the members could not agree, yields valuable cautions that the Senate and President should take seriously.  

“The Commission’s report touched briefly on an issue I feel very strongly about, Ballistic Missile Defense.  The report recommends that “the United States should develop and, where appropriate, deploy missile defenses against regional nuclear aggressors, including against limited long-range threats.’ It also states that the United States should develop effective capabilities to defend against increasingly complex missile threats. This suggests that we must continue to modernize and improve upon the missile defense capabilities currently being fielded to defend against missiles of all ranges – including long-range threats. I wholeheartedly agree with this, but am concerned about the apparent disconnect between this recommendation and the Secretary of Defense’s recent decision to reduce funding for missile defense by $1.4 billion and to terminate systems, such as the Airborne Laser and Multiple Kill Vehicle programs, which are designed to improve the ability of our national missile defense system and to defend against “increasingly complex missile threats,” as the report suggests. We must be able to defend our nation as well as our NATO and European allies against rouge nation ballistic missile threats. Though the Commission recommends the U.S. work with Russia to come to an understanding on missile defense, we must not rely on Russia to protect the United States from long-range missile threats, specifically from Iran.  We should, therefore, continue developing the ‘Third Site’ in the Czech Republic and Poland.

 “The Commission’s report states that the U.S. should employ a broad concept of deterrence.  In Recommendation 1, the report states ‘the force structure should be sized and shaped to meet a diverse set of national objectives.  This requires a high-level assessment of strategic context.’ Presumably, this is the purpose of the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which are just now getting started. In light of this recommendation, I am concerned that the Administration plans to conduct negotiations with the Russians on a Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) follow-on that reduces U.S. force levels below the 2,200-1,700 warheads codified in the Moscow Treaty before it has completed the QDR and NPR. While the Russian inventory is scheduled to be reduced to 2,200 from 2,800 by 2012, we should not rush to draft another treaty when there are provisions in the current treaty that allow us to extend negotiations up to five years, especially without the background analysis that would be provided by the QDR and NPR.  A further reduction of the U.S. inventory is unnecessary and would create a larger inventory imbalance with Russia that would likely only serve to upset regional alliances.

 “The Commission concludes that the conditions for nuclear abolition do not exist today.  Therefore, the United States must maintain and sustain its triad of strategic nuclear systems to deter attacks against the United States and its allies, as well as to prevent the proliferation of these weapons.  In order to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent, our nuclear force structure must be properly sized composed and modernized based on a rigorous analysis. Finally, this country must always maintain its ability to defend itself and its allies if deterrence fails.  A layered missile defense system is critical to that defense.”

Inhofe Recognizes National Day of Prayer

Click Here to Watch YouTube Video 

By Senator Jim Inhofe
May 7, 2009