Thune Statement on Five-Year Anniversary of ObamaCare “Higher premiums, higher deductibles, less choice, and fewer jobs – that’s the story of ObamaCare five years later.”
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) issued the following statement on the five-year anniversary of ObamaCare being signed into law:
“Higher premiums, higher deductibles, less choice, and fewer jobs – that’s the story of ObamaCare five years later. The Democrats’ signature legislative achievement has proven to be one big broken promise after another. Millions of Americans lost the coverage they had and liked, and many are facing fewer choices because of it. ObamaCare is hamstringing America’s small businesses – our engines of economic growth – and their ability to hire more people and grow.
“The American people have waited long enough for relief from the pain ObamaCare is causing them. I look forward to finally repealing this fundamentally flawed law and replacing it with real reforms that will actually lower costs and increase access to care.”
EPA Smog Regulations Could Hurt South Dakota Families and Businesses By Senator John Thune
When I think of the Great Plains, I think of rolling hills and sprawling farmland—open spaces stretched between scattered towns. South Dakota is blessed with an abundance of space and fresh air, both of which are critical for our agriculture and hunting industries. But a rule proposed by the Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) restricting air quality standards is so strict that even the expansive prairies of the Midwest and the untouched beauty of national parks like Yellowstone may be considered too polluted.
The proposal has to do with ground-level ozone—or what we usually refer to as smog. What the EPA has proposed doing is lowering the smog standard from the current level set in 2008, which is 75 parts-per-billion, to anywhere between 70 and 65. The new Obama EPA smog regulations would impose heavy-handed, costly new requirements in the open plains of South Dakota before first ensuring that we address smog problems in urban areas, such as Los Angeles, where smog remains a consistent problem.
In 2010, the Obama administration put forward a similar proposal to lower the standard, but later withdrew it because of the burdens and uncertainty it would impose. One reason this is such an aggressive standard is that currently, 277 counties in 27 states can’t even meet the current standard. When these counties are considered in “non-attainment” they are expected to implement expensive plans to reach compliance.
Just to give you an idea of the cost of this regulation, research from the National Association of Manufacturers indicates that the EPA’s proposal could lead to 1.4 million fewer jobs per year and reduce annual Gross Domestic Product by $140 billion. According to the EPA’s own estimate, this regulation is one of the most expensive in the agency’s history.
Such staggering costs is why on March 17, Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, and I introduced a bill to block the EPA from implementing what is expected to be the most costly regulation in the EPA’s history. The bill I introduced would block the EPA from lowering the air quality standards until 85 percent of the counties currently in non-attainment achieve compliance with the existing standard. My bill would also require the EPA to consider the costs and feasibility of the lower standard, which the EPA currently does not consider.
In South Dakota alone, a lower standard would cost jobs in manufacturing, natural resources and mining, and construction, and severely cut household spending by over $1200 per year. Costs for the typical South Dakota family could include expensive annual vehicle emission tests and higher energy costs.
This issue is yet another example of just how out of touch the Obama EPA is with the American people. Rather than strangle American industry with a job-killing regulation that could slash economic growth and raise energy prices for American families, the Obama EPA needs to focus its efforts on areas already struggling with air quality attainment standards. My bill takes a sensible stand against this aggressive EPA and puts American jobs and communities first.
Obamacare’s Five Year Anniversary: More Money, More Problems By Senator Mike Rounds March 20, 2015
It has been five years since the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, was rushed through Congress on a partisan vote and forced upon the American people. Since becoming law, it has been plagued with lawsuits, website glitches, cancelled policies, unworkable provisions, delays and repeals. Premiums are skyrocketing for many South Dakota families, and small businesses are spending thousands of dollars to comply with new paperwork mandates. And that is just the first five years. As we look ahead, we can foresee more problems and uncertainty.
The ACA subsidies are currently under review in the United State Supreme Court in the case of King v. Burwell. The court will determine whether the law only allows individuals who enroll through state-run exchanges to receive health care tax credits. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiff, residents in 34 states, including South Dakota, are at risk of losing the tax credits they have been receiving through federal exchanges. Without these credits, close to 10 million Americans will be confronted with ACA’s true cost, facing much higher premiums. Despite a ruling expected in June 2015, the Obama Administration has said it has no contingency plans to help these Americans if the provision is overturned. Obamacare is a mess, plain and simple.
Small businesses have also felt the adverse effects of the ACA. A recent report from the National Small Business Association found that on average, small business will have to spend $15,000 annually to comply with all the paperwork issued in Obamacare. Another study of small businesses found that Obamacare has lowered employment by 350,000 and reduced workers’ wages by approximately $1,000 annually. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy. This government-imposed obstacle to growth will be felt in every community in America.
As a small business owner working in the insurance industry, my ideas for healthcare reform are very different from Obamacare. First, I support a market-based, patient-centered approach that is truly affordable for families. I believe this can be achieved by enacting transparent, step-by-step reforms, rather than a 2,700 page bill written behind closed doors. I support common-sense initiatives, like expanding Health Savings Accounts and creating pools, such as the Multiple Employers Welfare Trust, in which small businesses can unite to secure better rates.
I also believe we must eliminate the employer mandate, the individual mandate, and the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Additionally, we can cut health care costs by reforming medical liability laws. Our current system encourages frivolous lawsuits which come at a high cost to doctors, taxpayers, and truly injured patients who deserve timely compensation. We can also protect consumers and hold insurance companies more accountable by increasing transparency, standardizing paperwork, and helping those with pre-existing conditions maintain access to care.
As Obamacare reaches the five-year mark, South Dakota families and business owners have been riddled with confusion, premium increases, lost coverages and fewer choices when it comes to health care. I will continue to work with my colleagues to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a market-based solution that gives families the power to choose the plan that best fits their needs and budget.
Serving Up Some Commonsense By Rep. Kristi Noem March 20, 2015
Between the 2010-11 and 2012-13 school years, 1.2 million kids dropped out of the federal school lunch program. It was the first decline we’d seen in over a decade. According to the Government Accountability Office – a nonpartisan agency that serves as a watchdog over taxpayer-funded programs – the decline was largely due to challenges with the “palatability” of the food being served and the implementation costs of new federal mandates. Despite falling participation, the federal government wants to go even further.
As is true for any parent, I want nothing more than my kids to be healthy and happy. I make sure the meals they get at home are nutritious and I expect the same when they go through the lunch line at school. But what the federal government has done to school lunches doesn’t work. It pushes every child into a one-size-fits-all mold, tying the hands of those who are closest to our kids and empowering bureaucrats in Washington to dictate what goes on the tray.
These bureaucrats clearly aren’t cooks. Schools are struggling to get a pasta that holds together under the new whole-grain requirements. Tortillas and many breads are out of the question too. The ultra-low sodium levels, which are to be implemented soon, could push items like milk and cheese off the plate, because these foods have naturally occurring sodium.
The federal government has kicked commonsense out the window with these requirements because they think people in D.C. know better than a parent, local nutritionist, or school administrator. That’s a problem.
What’s worse is that schools are breaking the bank trying to pay for the new requirements. I’ve heard from many schools that are being forced to pull dollars from the general fund in order to cover school meal costs. For many districts, that’s money that could have gone toward the school’s instructional programs. That should not happen.
We need to give our local schools more flexibility on these requirements. Earlier this month, I introduced the Reducing Federal Mandates on School Lunch Act. This bill takes aim at the overly restrictive whole grain and sodium requirements while also giving administrators more flexibility on the rules that have increased their costs.
I believe everyone in this debate has the same goal: To serve our kids healthy meals at school. But if schools have to divert scarce education dollars to comply with federal mandates that insist upon serving foods kids won’t eat anyways, we have to reassess the program. That’s the point we’re at now.
We need to give control back to the people who are closest to the students, because our kids deserve better than a lunch designed by bureaucrats.
Thune to DHS, DOL: H-2B Visa Fix Isn’t Good Enough
-Letter calls on DOL, DHS to begin processing premium H-2B visa applications-
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) today sent a letter to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary (DHS) Jeh Johnson and U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Secretary Thomas Perez calling on the agencies to work together to alleviate the current backlog of H-2B visa applications and immediately reinstate the premium processing service for H-2B petitions. Earlier this month, DOL began halting all H-2B labor visas after a federal judge ruled the agency was stepping outside its statutory authority. Last week Thune called on DOL and DHS to take immediate steps to resume the processing of H-2B visas.
Since then, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida granted a motion permitting DOL to begin issuing temporary labor certificates under the H-2B visa program. While the judge’s ruling is good news for South Dakota employers, the temporary injunction has already caused a backlog in processing that may take some time to resolve. Thune’s letter calls for DOL to resume premium processing of H-2B visas, which should not only help address the backlog, but should also expedite many of the applications, ensuring seasonal positions for the upcoming tourist and construction seasons are filled.
“We’re talking about numerous South Dakota businesses across multiple industries being hamstrung by the Obama administration’s poor planning and lack of foresight—and that’s totally unacceptable,” said Thune. “While I’m pleased H-2B visas are being processed again to ensure South Dakota businesses are able to fill important seasonal positions ahead of the upcoming tourist and construction season, we need to address the backlog as quickly as possible and that means reinstating the premium processing service for H-2B petitions. I’ll continue to stay in close contact with DOL and DHS and remain committed to working with South Dakota businesses to ensure DOL reinitiates premium processing as soon as possible.”
Thune encourages South Dakota employers to stay in contact with his office about the delays they are experiencing.
The text of the senator’s letter is below:
__
March 20, 2015
The Honorable Thomas Perez
Secretary of Labor
Office of the Secretary
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room S-2018
Washington, DC 20210
The Honorable Jeh Johnson
Secretary of Homeland Security
Office of the Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretaries Perez and Johnson:
As you know, on March 18, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, in Perez v. Perez, granted a motion permitting the Department of Labor (DOL) to begin issuing temporary labor certificates under the H-2B visa program. Although the court’s ruling allows adjudication of H-2B visas to recommence, the temporary injunction has already caused a backlog in processing that may take time to resolve. Additionally, despite this ruling, the premium processing option for H-2B visas has yet to be reinstated, which means employers who need workers for the upcoming tourist and construction seasons in South Dakota may not be able to fill these positions in time.
For this reason, I request that DOL and the Department of Homeland Security work to alleviate this backlog and immediately resume premium processing for H-2B visas. Please let me know your respective departments’ projected timelines for recommencing the premium processing option for H-2B visas.
Thune and Nelson Introduce Bipartisan Freight Rail Reform Bill -Legislation scheduled for Commerce Committee mark-up next week-
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), who respectively serve as the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, today introduced S. 808, the Surface Transportation Board (STB) Reauthorization Act of 2015.
The STB is the federal regulatory body responsible for economic oversight of the nation’s freight rail system. Run by a three-member, bipartisan board, the agency has regulatory jurisdiction over railroad rate reasonableness, mergers, line acquisitions, new rail-line construction, line abandonment, and other rail issues. The STB was created by Congress in 1996 as the successor to the Interstate Commerce Commission. Since that time, the STB has not been reauthorized or substantively reformed.
“While the STB has been working diligently to ensure the major rail service issues experienced last year by shippers and businesses in South Dakota and other states across the U.S. don’t happen again, last year’s crisis highlighted some of the inefficiencies that currently exist at the agency,” said Thune. “Oversight efforts have identified causes of wasteful and unnecessary delays in adjudicating cases that harm rail shippers, freight operators, and ultimately consumers who pay higher costs. These reforms will help make the STB a more efficient, effective, and accountable agency for the benefit of shippers and railroads alike.”
Thune and Nelson’s bill would allow board members to work together in a more streamlined approach. Their bill would expand the STB board membership from three to five members, and allow for board members to discuss pending matters without issuing a public meeting notice, but with later public disclosure. The bill would also allow the board to initiate some investigations, not just respond to complaints, and would require the STB to establish a database of complaints and prepare quarterly reports on them.
Thune and Nelson’s bill would also change the case review process by requiring the board to establish timelines for stand-alone rate cases and a report on rate case methodology. The bill would codify an arbitration process for certain rate disputes and carrier complaints.
The STB reform bill expands on the work Thune has done over the past year and a half to prevent the rail service challenges experienced in the Upper Midwest in 2013 and 2014 from happening in the future. Thune has worked with the STB, as well as senior leadership of Canadian Pacific Railway and BNSF Railroad, to address service issues that South Dakota shippers have raised.
Thune serves on both the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee which has jurisdiction over our nation’s freight and passenger railroads, as well as the Senate Agriculture Committee. In addition, Thune previously served as State Railroad Director under former Governor George S. Mickelson from 1991-1993. For a complete outline of Thune’s work to reduce the rail service backlog, visit his website.
Noem Introduces Legislation Offering More Flexibility for Local School Meal Programs
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. Kristi Noemtoday introduced legislation that aims to reduce federal mandates on school meal standards, including the more stringent whole grain requirements that went into effect in July 2014 and the Target 2 sodium requirements set to be implemented in the coming years.
“As a parent, I want nothing more than for my kids to grow up happy and healthy,” said Rep. Noem. “Unfortunately, current school meal requirements push all kids – and all schools – into a one-size-fits-all model. The declining number of kids in the school lunch program shows that it’s not working. Our kids deserve better. They deserve a school meal program that is rooted in science-based nutrition plans – a program that includes food that they’re actually going to eat. My bill gives schools the flexibility to accomplish that.”
Rep. Noem introduced her initial Reducing Federal Mandates on School Lunch Act in December 2013. The latest version of the bill includes new provisions to address concerns with the Target 2 sodium levels and whole grain requirements.
“Everyone in this debate shares a common goal. We want our kids to be served healthy and nutritious foods through the school lunch program,” said Neil Putnam, a member of the Mitchell School Board and the Western Region Director for the National School Board Association. “The issue comes when federal mandates sometimes divert scarce financial resources from a school’s instructional program. I am grateful to Rep. Noem for introducing legislation that maintains the goal of healthy meals, but does it in a way that gives school districts, like Mitchell, the flexibility and affordability to make decisions on the local level that are best for our students’ overall success.”
The Reducing Federal Mandates on School Lunch Act, which has been endorsed by the National School Board Association and the School Superintendents Association, would:
Allow schools to maintain the previous whole grain requirements. Without this change, 100 percent of the grains that schools would be required to serve students would be whole-grain rich, pushing items like tortillas and pasta largely off the menu. Rep. Noem’s bill would restore the requirement back to 50 percent, meaning at least half of the grains served would be required to be whole-grain rich.
Maintain Target 1 sodium requirements. Absent a change, schools would have a difficult time serving healthy foods that include milk, cheese, meat and other foods with naturally occurring sodium.
Give administrators flexibility on some of the rules that have increased costs for school districts, including the school breakfast program, a la carte options, and school lunch price increases.
Make the USDA’s easing of the meat and grain requirements permanent through law, rather than regulations. This would give certainty to schools that they’ll be allowed more flexibility in serving meats and grains while still staying within calorie maximums.
Thune to FCC: Can’t Apply Old Rules of Telecom to New World of Internet
“… the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.”
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, today at a hearing entitled, “Oversight of the Federal Communications Commission” questioned the five members of the FCC about its controversial Open Internet Order.
Video of the questions for the commissioners is here and remarks as prepared for delivery are below.
“Welcome to today’s oversight hearing on the Federal Communications Commission. Every day, every single American relies on some part of our nation’s vast communications system – the Internet, the telephone, television, GPS, or the radio. An efficient, effective communications system is the bedrock of our nation’s economy and it is the tie that binds together our 21st century society.
“The FCC sits right in the middle of America’s digital world. And this is even more true following the FCC’s recent decision to turn our nation’s broadband Internet infrastructure into a public utility. As is apparent from that action last month, the FCC is also a potentially threatening and unpredictable agency as it struggles to operate under legal authority designed nearly 100 years ago and not seriously updated in decades.
“To be clear, today’s hearing is not a response to the Title II order, but clearly no discussion about the FCC can ignore one of the most significant and most controversial decisions in the agency’s history. My views on this subject are well known. I believe there should be clear rules for the digital road with clear authority for the FCC to enforce them. I have put forward a draft bill with my House colleagues to begin the legislative discussion about how best to put such rules into statute. Like most first drafts, our draft bill is not perfect. I invite members of this committee and stakeholders from across the political spectrum to offer us ideas on how we can improve it, so that the final draft can win bipartisan support and provide everyone in the Internet world with the certainty that they need.
“The FCC’s recent action accomplished the exact opposite. Rather than exercising regulatory humility, the three majority commissioners chose to take the most radical, polarizing, and partisan path possible. Instead of working with me and my colleagues in the House and Senate on a bipartisan basis, to find a consensus, the three of you chose an option that I believe will only increase political, regulatory, and legal uncertainty, which will ultimately hurt average Internet users. Simply put, your actions jeopardize the open Internet that we are all seeking to protect.
“The tech and telecom industries agree on few regulatory matters, but there was one idea that unified them for nearly two decades – the Internet is not the telephone network, and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.
“The debate over the open Internet illustrates the importance of the FCC, which makes it all the more amazing that Congress has not reauthorized the FCC since then-Representative Markey’s bill was passed a quarter century ago. Indeed, the FCC is the oldest expired authorization within this committee’s expansive jurisdiction – a situation that I intend to rectify this Congress.
“Today’s hearing marks the beginning of the Commerce Committee’s efforts to write and pass legislation to reauthorize the FCC. I know that contentious matters like Title II divide the membership of this committee, but FCC reauthorization is an area where I believe Republicans and Democrats can and should work together. Wanting the FCC to be an effective, efficient, and accountable regulator shouldn’t be a partisan goal. I know members on both sides of the aisle have common-sense ideas to make the agency more responsive to the needs of consumers, Congress, and regulated companies alike, and I look forward to hearing their suggestions and views. And I look forward to hearing the commissioners’ thoughts today about ways Congress can help their agency improve.
“Writing a new FCC reauthorization bill should not be a one-off effort. It is my hope that the committee will get back to regularly authorizing the commission as part of its normal course of business. In order to do that effectively, the committee must be diligent in its oversight. As such, the commission should expect to come before this committee again.
“How the commission works is just as important as what the commission does. In addition to discussing important communications policy matters, I hope members will use today’s hearing to explore the Commission’s operations, processes, and budget. For example, the FCC has requested $530 million dollars for Fiscal Year 2016. This funding level would be the highest in the Commission’s history. That alone raises eyebrows, particularly when American households continue to do more with less in this stagnant economy, but the FCC also wants to fund this increase in part by raiding the Universal Service Fund.
“Paying for record high budgets by siphoning money from USF is a dangerous precedent. While members of this committee may have varying views on the USF’s efficiency, scope, and growth, one thing I think we can all agree on is that its limited funds should not be used as a reserve fund to pay for the FCC’s core statutory functions. That’s what the Commission’s regulatory fees are for. USF funds should pay for USF services, and I don’t believe the FCC should jeopardize the stability and integrity of the Universal Service Fund in order to paper over its record high budget request.
“Given the significant interest in hearing from the commission today, I do not expect this hearing will be a short one. In order to more quickly get to members’ questions, I have asked that all the witnesses limit their oral statements to three minutes apiece. Their longer written statements will be submitted for the record.
“I look forward to hearing from our witnesses in what I hope will be a productive afternoon.”
Rounds to Administration: Act Quickly To Protect
South Dakota Tourism and Construction Industries
WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) today wrote a letter to Department of Labor (DOL) encouraging the agency to act quickly to find a long-term solution for issuing temporary, seasonal employment visas (H-2B) that are critical for a number of industries in South Dakota. Earlier this month, DOL stopped processing H-2B visas following an injunction by a federal court. Today, a judge granted stay that would allow DOL to continue issuing H-2B visas while a long-term solution is established.
“I’m pleased the Administration finally took the steps necessary to get this important program moving again,” said Rounds. “South Dakota tourism and construction industries rely on this temporary work program to fully operate. Now, it’s imperative DOL works quickly to find a long-term solution so that our businesses have both the certainty and labor force they need to be successful.”
The motion to stay runs until April 15, 2015. Last week, DOL and the Department of Homeland Security announced on they intend to issue an interim final rule by April 30th, 2015. This could leave a two-week gap between the stay and the final interim ruling in which H-2B visas may not be issued.
Text of the letter can be found below:
March 17, 2015
The Honorable Thomas Perez
Secretary of Labor
Office of the Secretary
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Room S-2018
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Secretary Perez:
When the Northern District Court of Florida vacated the Department of Labor’s H-2B regulations on March 4, 2015, in Perez v. Perez, No. 3:14-cv-682, this caused great concern and adverse consequences for several businesses in our States. While the District Court today has stayed this action and allowed visa applications to be processed, it is critical that the ramifications of this court decision be addressed as soon as possible and that the Department find a definitive solution to this problem.
Seasonal industries make staffing and capital expenditure decisions months in advance. Without certainty, they cannot make these critical decisions. Due to the Federal District Court’s ruling that the Department of Labor’s H-2B rules are not compliant, seasonal businesses are left without a clear path forward through some of the most important months of the year. We urge you to act as expeditiously as you can to solve this problem, by the end of the stay.
While we realize that the Department of Labor overstepped its bounds in issuing these regulations, we believe that something must be done to remedy the problem that has arisen as a result. We understand that in response to some of our colleagues that the Departments of Labor and Homeland Security are working to issue a joint Interim Final Rule and do so by April 30, 2015. We urge you to act sooner by April 15th, the end of this stay. Businesses cannot wait these extra weeks until your Department acts.
“Daschle is not a registered lobbyist, but since leaving the Senate in 2005, he has been a policy adviser at large law firms” – October 2014
Yes, it was former Democrat Senator Tom Daschle who did that. And you know, I think he’d mentioned it a time…
Lobbyists, after all, are required to register with Congress and file quarterly reports disclosing their actions on behalf of clients. The South Dakota Democrat, like a growing number of people in his line of work, has made sure he doesn’t have to do that.
“I’ve not made a call nor made a visit since I left the Senate on behalf of a client. And I don’t have any expectation that I’ll do that in the future,” Daschle told the New York Times recently.
and..
Craig Holman, a lobbyist with Public Citizen, tells HuffPost that while Daschle may not be violating the letter of the law, he’s certainly violating its spirit.
“He gets paid a fortune, he spends more than 20 percent of his time on lobbying activities and he’s regularly meeting with covered government officials,” Holman told the Huffington Post. “That guy is just flouting the law.” – March 2010
or two…
Tom Daschle starts a new job today as a senior policy adviser in the government affairs division of DLA Piper. As he’s contemplating whether he needs a plant in his office and figuring out where to have lunch, he has already made one firm decision. Mr. Daschle won’t register as a lobbyist.
For anyone who might be unfamiliar with the term, “government affairs” is often a euphemism for “lobbying.”
Daschle has made the decision that he is not a lobbyist before. At his previous position at Alston & Bird, whose clients represent a who’s who of health care interests, Daschle acted as a “resource” to the President and high-level White House officials, and advised clients “about the personalities of his former colleagues, as well as strategies to achieve their policy goals.” – December 2009
Or three…
“The message I deliver to labor unions and business leaders is the same one I share with doctors, hospitals and insurance companies,” Mr. Daschle wrote in a brief e-mailed statement. “I do not tailor my views to any specific group or client.”
Mr. Daschle is not registered as a lobbyist and recently told U.S. News and World Report that he preferred to describe himself as a “resource” to those in government and industry. – August 2009
But what happened today?
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who started a public policy practice at Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz last year, said he will register with the federal government as a lobbyist for the first time in his career.
So, was this in honor of Sunshine Week? Because The Sunlight Foundation once noted of Daschle:
Until the 20 percent loophole in the LDA is closed, Daschle and untold numbers of former elected officials, corporate CEOs, and presidents of labor unions can act as stealth lobbyists—often with greater access and influence than the majority of registered lobbyists, and almost always without leaving a trace of what they are saying, who they are saying it to, and on who is paying them to say it.
When I think of the Great Plains, I think of rolling hills and sprawling farmland—open spaces stretched between scattered towns. South Dakota is blessed with an abundance of space and fresh air, both of which are critical for our agriculture and hunting industries. But a rule proposed by the Obama Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) restricting air quality standards is so strict that even the expansive prairies of the Midwest and the untouched beauty of national parks like Yellowstone may be considered too polluted.
It has been five years since the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare, was rushed through Congress on a partisan vote and forced upon the American people. Since becoming law, it has been plagued with lawsuits, website glitches, cancelled policies, unworkable provisions, delays and repeals. Premiums are skyrocketing for many South Dakota families, and small businesses are spending thousands of dollars to comply with new paperwork mandates. And that is just the first five years. As we look ahead, we can foresee more problems and uncertainty.
Between the 2010-11 and 2012-13 school years, 1.2 million kids dropped out of the federal school lunch program. It was the first decline we’d seen in over a decade. According to the Government Accountability Office – a nonpartisan agency that serves as a watchdog over taxpayer-funded programs – the decline was largely due to challenges with the “palatability” of the food being served and the implementation costs of new federal mandates. Despite falling participation, the federal government wants to go even further.