How our state's members of Congress voted last week
Here’s how Washington state members of the U.S. Senate voted on major issues in the week ending March 30. (A little background about why I’m re-posting this can be found here.)
House
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION: Voting 247 for and 174 against, the House on March 27 sent the Senate a bill (HR 3309) making it more difficult for the Federal Communications Commission to draft and implement rules for the U.S. telecommunications industry. In part, the bill would subject a larger share of the FCC’s activities to judicial review; require the agency to prepare cost-benefit analyses of proposed rulemakings having major economic impacts; stay clear of rules that “impose additional burdens on industry or consumers” and weaken the agency’s authority to obtain concessions from companies seeking its approval of proposed mergers. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the FCC would have to hire 20 new staffers to handle the workload imposed by the bill.
Established by the Communications Act of 1934 as an independent agency, the FCC has jurisdiction in areas such as ensuring competition among telecommunications firms, making broadband available to all Americans, allocating airwaves spectrum, ensuring communications systems work efficiently in crises, licensing broadcast media and protecting consumer interests.
Greg Walden, R-Ore., said: “This is good, solid government-reform legislation. It does not protect the status quo” because “some of us came here to change how the federal government operates in Washington.”
Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the bill “strips the FCC of its authority to require merger conditions that promote broadband adoption, require minimum broadband speeds, require the repatriation of jobs from overseas or ensure broadband coverage in rural or low-income areas.”
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-3, Doc Hastings, R-4, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-5, Dave Reichert, R-8
Voting no: Rick Larsen, D-2, Norman Dicks, D-6, Jim McDermott, D-7, Adam Smith, D-9
Not voting: None
CAMPAIGN-MONEY DISCLOSURES: Voting 179 for and 238 against, the House on March 27 refused to require public disclosure of all individuals and organizations contributing $10,000 or more to groups buying political advertising on broadcast, cable, satellite or radio outlets. The amendment to HR 3309 (above) sought to plug disclosure loopholes in existing law that enable many donors to remain anonymous as they contribute large sums to political organizations such as super PACs.
Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., said: “People across the country are deeply and profoundly upset about the undisclosed sums of money that are being poured over and through our political system … We do not know who is contributing. We don’t know how much they’re contributing. We don’t even know if foreign countries are involved.”
Greg Walden, R-Ore., called the amendment out of place on this bill, saying its objectives would be “best achieved and accomplished through the Federal Election Commission, not the Federal Communications Commission.”
A yes vote backed the amendment.
Voting yes: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Not voting: None
PASSWORD-SECRECY PROTECTIONS: Voting 184 for and 236 against, the House on March 27 defeated a motion to HR 3309 (above) aimed at helping workers guard the secrecy of their personal passwords for accessing social-media sites such as Facebook and Twitter. The motion affirmed the FCC’s power to bar companies it licenses or regulates from requiring workers or job applicants to disclose confidential passwords as a condition of employment.
Sponsor Ed Perlmutter, D-Colo., said his motion “makes sense because those that are using these kinds of social media … have an expectation that their right to free speech or their right to free religion will be respected.”
Greg Walden, R-Ore., agreed it is “awful that employers think they can demand … passwords and can go snooping around,” but said the motion was so flawed it would do little to curb the practice.
A yes vote backed the motion.
Voting yes: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Not voting: None
RELAXING RULES, RAISING CAPITAL: Voting 380 for and 41 against, the House on March 27 sent President Barack Obama a bill (HR 3606) to waive parts of the Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank financial-reform laws in order to help small and midsized businesses rapidly enter capital markets, attract investors and create jobs. The bill defines a new category of firms with annual revenues under $1 billion that will be able to float initial public offerings without first having to meet Securities and Exchange Commission requirements in areas such as auditing and transparency.
This bill lowers standards for providing investors with audited financial statements; eases reporting requirements on executive compensation; allows companies to “crowd-fund” by using social media and the Internet to solicit large pools of small investors; increases the amount of capital a company can raise and the number of shareholders it can have without registering with the SEC and raises from 500 to 2,000 the maximum number of shareholders in community banks. Additionally, the bill renews a Small Business Administration program that provides companies with long-term financing for purchasing real estate and other fixed assets.
A yes vote was to pass the bill.
Voting yes: Larsen, Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Dicks, Reichert, Smith
Voting no: McDermott
Not voting: None
REPUBLICAN BUDGET: Voting 228 for and 191 against, the House on March 29 approved a Republican budget blueprint (H Con Res 112) for fiscal 2013 and later years that would eventually privatize Medicare, raise the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 and convert Medicaid and food stamps into block-grant programs run by the states. The GOP plan would permanently extend all Bush-era tax cuts; slash discretionary spending for most domestic programs; generate annual deficits well below those in a competing Democratic budget; repeal the 2010 health law; increase national-security spending and keep Social Security in its present structure. For 2013, the budget approves federal spending of $3.5 trillion and projects a deficit of nearly $800 billion, down about one-third from the 2012 deficit.
Additionally, the budget would simplify the tax code by closing not-yet-specified loopholes, deductions and tax credits while reducing the number of brackets for individuals to two: 10 percent and 25 percent. It would lower the top corporate and individual tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent, then use savings generated by tax-simplification and discretionary-spending cuts to offset revenue lost as a result of lower taxation.
Starting with people now 54 and younger, the GOP budget would privatize traditional Medicare. It would do so by switching these individuals to a “premium support” plan in which they would receive government vouchers for purchasing either a strictly private health policy or one offered through what is left of traditional Medicare. Voucher purchasing power would not rise fast enough to keep pace with growing medical costs, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which would result in varying levels of costs now covered by Medicare being shifted to seniors.
A yes vote was to adopt the GOP budget.
Voting yes: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Voting no: Larsen, McDermott, Smith
Not voting: Dicks
DEMOCRATIC BUDGET: Voting 163 for and 262 against, the House on March 29 rejected a Democratic budget blueprint that differed from the Republican plan (H Con Res 112, above) by letting Bush-era tax cuts for millionaires expire at the end of 2012 and using the resulting revenue for deficit reduction and funding robust spending on discretionary programs such as education, transportation and scientific research. The Democratic plan also differed by continuing traditional fee-for-service Medicare and preserving Medicaid, food stamps and other safety-net programs as presently structured. Democrats hewed to $1.047 trillion in fiscal 2013 discretionary spending that the two parties agreed to in last August’s Budget Control Act. The GOP budget disregards that deal in order to protect the defense budget from tens of billions of cuts that otherwise would occur in January.
A yes vote backed the Democratic budget.
Voting yes: Larsen, Dicks, McDermott, Smith
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Reichert
Not voting: None
BIPARTISAN BUDGET: Voting 38 for and 382 against, the House on March 28 defeated a bipartisan budget using a mix of tax increases, spending cuts and entitlement overhauls to restore soundness to federal finances. This budget (H Con Res 112) called for $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years, with at least $1.2 trillion generated by tax increases and the remainder coming from spending cuts, program restructurings and lowered interest payments on the national debt. The plan was patterned after recommendations issued in 2010 by the Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction commission, an advisory panel appointed by President Obama.
A yes vote backed the bipartisan budget.
Voting yes: Larsen
Voting no: Herrera Beutler, Hastings, McMorris Rodgers, Dicks, McDermott, Reichert, Smith
Not voting: None
Senate
POSTAL SERVICE OVERHAUL: Voting 51 for and 46 against, the Senate on March 27 failed to reach 60 votes for advancing a bill (S 1789) aimed at putting the U.S. Postal Service on a profitable basis by Sept. 20, 2015, mainly by a permanent restructuring that would cut payroll, retirement and health care costs. The postal service posted a $5.5 billion loss in fiscal 2011.
In part, the bill would authorize steps such as ending Saturday deliveries; closing or consolidating many of the country’s 32,000 post offices; starting new delivery services that do not compete unfairly with the private sector; using buyouts to reduce the postal workforce by as much as 20 percent below its current 547,000 level; establishing a less costly health program for postal employees, retirees and dependents; establishing a less beneficial retirement program; reducing some worker’s compensation obligations and cracking down on abuses, and starting wine and beer deliveries to people at least 21 years of age who show government-issued identification.
Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said: “There is no question there will be some short-term and long-term pain … Without tough choices, I can assure you there will be bankruptcy and the demise of the postal service.”
Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., said: “Too many people still rely on the postal service for us to sit back and allow its demise. Despite a 22 percent drop in mail volume in four years, the (service) will deliver 167 billion pieces this year. It is the second-largest private-sector employer in our country after Wal-Mart” and has “more domestic retail outlets than Wal-Mart, Starbucks and McDonald’s combined.”
No senator spoke against the bill.
A yes vote was to advance the bill.
Voting yes: Maria Cantwell, D, Patty Murray, D
Voting no: None
Not voting: None
OIL-INDUSTRY TAX SUBSIDIES: Voting 51 for and 47 against, the Senate on March 29 failed to reach 60 votes for ending GOP blockage of a bill (S 2204) to end several tax breaks worth $24 billion over 10 years for the five largest oil companies — BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Shell. More than half of the savings would be allocated to deficit reduction, with the remaining $11 billion used for tax credits to promote natural gas and propane as vehicle fuels, make U.S. homes more energy-efficient and spur the production of renewable and alternative fuels in order to reduce U.S. consumption of fossil fuels.
In part, the bill would require the five energy companies to treat intangible drilling costs as capital costs rather than expenses; limit the percentage-depletion allowance as a means of recovering capital investments; require the firms to capitalize rather than expense the cost of “tertiary injections” for extracting oil and increase certain royalties for deepwater oil and gas production on the Outer Continental Shelf.
A yes vote was to advance the bill.
Voting yes: Cantwell, Murray
Voting no: None
Not voting: None
— Thomas Voting Reports Inc.
