Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Baker County press. (Baker City, Ore.) 2014-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 9, 2015)
FRIDAY, JANUARY 9, 2015 4 — THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS Opinion — Guest Opinion — How to fix Congress (Part Three) By Sen. Mike Lee Public domain screen shot. Re-elected speaker of the House John Boehner kisses Nancy Pelosi as she hands him the gavel. — Editorial — Could’ve been worse than Boehner Bear with us as we explain our headline and desperately grasp at a silver lining. We couldn’t muster up disappoint- ment when John Boehner was reelected to Speaker of the House this week. The growing disconnect been most Republi- cans voters in the conservative base and the Republican establishment has, sadly, come to be something we expect. We couldn’t find anyone—not an - one who wasn’t registered Democrat anyway—this week who approves of or wanted Boehner to have this third term. The problem didn’t start this week, though. The fate of the speakership was sealed, we think, back during conference in November when a majority of the GOP in the House should have nominated and lined up behind a new candidate for the position. Should have, but didn’t. No one else stepped up back then. This means our representatives ended up with limited choices Tuesday, and little to no possibility of organizing behind an alternative to Boehner before the vote. If too many of our representatives voted for random candidates without a majority assured, they risked giving the Letter to the Editor Policy: The Baker County Press reserves the right not to pub- lish letters containing factual falsehoods or incoherent narrative. Letters promoting or detracting from specific for-profit business- es will not be published. Word limit is 375 words per letter. Letters are limited to one every other week per author. Letters should be submitted to Editor@TheBakerCounty- Press.com. Advertising and Opinion Page Dis- claimer: Opinions submitted as Guest speaker position over to the minority party’s nominee—Nancy Pelosi. See? It really could have been worse than reelect- ing Boehner. Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California would have been the next Republican in line for the speakership, based on senior- ity alone. It’s possible that McCarthy is an even bigger RINO than Boehner. Again, it could have been worse. All in all, 25 dissenters formed the biggest rebellion against an incumbent Speaker of the House since 1923. Boehner should view this as a warn- ing shot, quit kissing ass across the aisle (meant literally and solely in the Demo- cratic party logo sense of the word) and turn back toward his base, which is clearly supportive of the 25 dissenters. In case you haven’t heard, here’s the list: Reps. Justin Amash (R-MI), Rod Blum (R-IA), Dave Brat (R-VA), Jim Briden- stine (R-OK), Curt Clawson (R-FL), Scott DesJarlais (R-TN), Jeff Duncan (R-SC), Scott Garrett (R-NJ), Chris Gibson (R-NY), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Walter Jones (R-NC), Steve King (R-IA), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Mark Meadows (R-NC), Richard Nugent (R-FL), Gary Palmer (R-AL), Bill Posey (R-FL), Scott Rigell (R-VA), Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Randy Weber (R-TX), Daniel Webster (R-FL) and Ted Yoho (R-FL) all voted for someone other than Boehner. Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) voted that he was present. What we hope doesn’t happen, but already seems to be starting, is that plum committee positions and perks will be removed from them in retaliation. Of course, there’s not much worse than a sore winner. —The Baker County Press Editorial Board Opinions or Letters to the Editor express the opinions of their authors, and have not been authored by and are not necessarily the opinions of The Baker County Press, any of our staff, management, independent contractors or affiliates. Advertisements placed by political groups, candidates, businesses, etc., are printed as a paid service, which does not constitute an endorsement of or fulfillment obligation by this newspaper for the products or services advertised. — Contact Us — The Baker County Press PO Box 567 Baker City, Ore. 97814 Open Monday-Thursday for calls 9 AM - 4 PM Open 24/7 for emails Office location: TBA Phone: 541.519.0572 TheBakerCountyPress.com Kerry McQuisten, Publisher Editor@TheBakerCountyPress.com Wendee Morrissey, Advertising and Sales Wendee@TheBakerCountyPress.com David Conn, Advertising and Sales David@TheBakerCountyPress.com Published weekly every Friday. Subscription rates per year are $29.95 all areas, e-mail delivery. $39.95 print issue, home delivery, Baker City city limits only. $49.95 print issue, mail delivery, outside Baker City city limits only. Payment in advance. A division of Black Lyon Publishing, LLC Copyright © 2014 YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS President Barack Obama 202.456.1414 202.456.2461 fax Whitehouse.gov/contact US Sen. Jeff Merkley 503.326.3386 503.326.2900 fax Merkley.Senate.gov US Sen. Ron Wyden 541.962.7691 Wyden.Senate.gov US Rep. Greg Walden 541.624.2400 541.624.2402 fax Walden.House.gov Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber 503.378.3111 Governor.Oregon.gov State Rep. Cliff Bentz 503.986.1460 State Sen. Ted Ferrioli 541.490.6528 Baker County Commissioners Bill Harvey; Mark Bennett; Tim Kerns 541.523.8200 541.523.8201 3. Keep it Simple on the Budget. The biggest strategic and legislative question the new Republican Congress will face in 2015 is what we should do on the budget. The procedural and political realities of the budget process demand that, in an era of divided government, it highlight the contrasts between the two parties. (Unless, like the Democrats, you ignore federal law and just don’t do a budget at all, the better to conceal your true beliefs from the public.) We should try to agree on a handful of principles that all Republicans can agree on and not try to have the budget alone substitute for everything Congress needs to do. Come the spring, House and Senate Republicans have to pass a common Bud- get Resolution for the fiscal year starting next fall. The budget’s privileged process allows for its passage in the Senate with only 51 votes—which in all likelihood will mean 51 (hopefully 54!) Republicans and no Democrats. This step must be fulfilled to begin the so-called reconciliation pro- cess, under which Congress can fast-track a single fiscal reform bill later on—again with only 51 Senate votes. It’s such a complicated process, and such a delicate political balancing act that to succeed, the Republican establishment and conservative grassroots should come to an agreement very early on the broad parameters of what the budget must entail. Arguing over specific spending levels, cuts, programs, and reforms at this point is probably unwise. Rather, we should try to agree on a handful of principles that all Republicans can agree on and not try to have the budget alone substitute for every- thing Congress needs to do. The three most obvious Republican con- sensus principles—to me, anyway—are that our budget should: 1. Balance within ten years (without accounting gimmicks), 2. Not raise taxes, and 3. Repeal Obam- acare. These goals comprise the closest thing our party has to a mandate in the wake of this election, and my guess is that every House and Senate Republican is already on record supporting them. If we want to avoid an ugly establishment-grassroots battle next spring, Republican leaders and Budget Committee leaders would do well to reach out to all wings of the party to get buy-in on a framework like this, and only then begin the sausage-making. There are rumors around Capitol Hill that some Republicans don’t want to repeal Obamacare in the budget process. They would prefer to pursue something else—corporate tax reform, for instance— where bipartisan cooperation may be more attainable. They want to use budget reconciliation to “get a win.” But this has things backwards, it seems to me. President Obama and many Demo- crats have already voiced some support for corporate tax reform. Any plan that could get the president’s signature wouldn’t need to be done via reconciliation, because such a bipartisan compromise could easily get 60 votes in the Senate. The whole point of reconciliation is that it allows the major- ity one chance to pass something with only simple majorities. For Republicans in 2015—not as a matter of ideological purity but of practical coalitional unity—that one thing has to include repealing Obamacare. Corporate tax reform, and much else, can be pursued in other ways. 4. Fund It? Fix it. One of the biggest traps Republicans and conservatives fall into is any debate about budget “cuts.” When you stop for a moment and think, blindly “cutting” the federal government’s budget is not a very conservative approach to governing. After all, the conservative critique of Washington is not that the federal government is a bit profligate, but otherwise efficient and e fective with our money. No, the problem with Washing- ton is that it’s comprehensively wasteful, unfair, and dysfunctional. It is, in a great many areas of policy, trying to do the wrong things and doing them in the wrong ways. Just spending less on a misguided pro- gram doesn’t get you any closer to a real solution than just spending more on it. Just spending less on a misguided pro- gram doesn’t get you any closer to a real solution than just spending more on it. If the program is dysfunctional—if it doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do, and what it’s Submitted Photo Elected in 2010 as Utah’s 16th Senator, Mike Lee has spent his ca- reer defending the basic liberties of Americans and as an advocate for founding constitutional principles. supposed to do is worth doing—fix it. Fi - ing a leaky faucet is not an arbitrary “cut” in one’s water bill, it’s repairing a broken system so that it only costs what it must. Republicans can approach federal reform the same way. We can make a commit- ment in coming years not merely to cut big government, but to fix broken government, which is the more difficult but far more important work. For instance, we know for a fact that the federal highway trust fund wastes money: on bureaucracy, on special interest giveaways, on projects that are purely local and can be managed by state and municipal governments. Therefore, when the time comes next spring to reauthorize the federal highway program, the Republi- can Congress should insist on making the system at least a little bit better—rather than just “finding the money” to fully fund a legacy system we already know doesn’t work. I along with several other conserva- tives have proposed a plan to perma- nently reform the highway program; I also know that President Obama is unlikely to sign it. Republicans shouldn’t accept the president’s veto threat as the end of the negotiation, however, but the begin- ning. If he wants infrastructure money, he should accept some structural reforms to give states more flexibility and let gas tax revenue go further. We should put an end to ‘omnibus,’ all- or-nothing spending packages, and instead insist on consideration of each appropria- tions bill in regular order—with hearings, amendments, and specific votes Similarly, Head Start is a program that the Obama administration itself has found does not work. Decades of rigorous analy- sis have shown that it does not yield last- ing benefits for children in need. So, rather than spend less money on exactly the same broken system—and merely disserve fewer poor children—Republicans should start to fix it to better serve more children, at lower cost to the taxpayers. Sen. Tom Coburn has fought for years to clean up wasteful aspects of the Defense Department budget that have no bearing on national security. Sen. Dick Durbin and I have introduced a bill to reform federal criminal sentencing guidelines, which would save taxpayers $2.5 billion over ten years. Crumbling public support of Com- mon Core should force action on federal K-12 grants. The Ebola outbreak demands serious reprioritization at the Centers for Disease Control. The annual appropriations process should take up this approach, too. We should put an end to “omnibus,” all-or- nothing spending packages, and instead insist on consideration of each appropria- tions bill in regular order—with hearings, amendments, and specific votes. This is how the Constitution protects Americans from waste and exploitation, after all. It’s also the only way Congress can hope to rein in the Obama administration’s unprec- edented abuses of power—by withholding funding from corrupt bureaucracies. Indeed, the entire congressional budget- and-spending process is due for a com- prehensive overhaul. But at a minimum, Congress should only fund reformed programs. (Only in DC would this sugges- tion be even remotely controversial.) If the president rigidly resists intelligent, surgical reform based on thorough oversight, then we could turn to across-the-board cuts, as we did in 2011. These are not heavy lifts or ideologi- cal crusades I’m describing. They only seem novel because it’s been so long since we’ve had a functioning legislature. My modest proposal is that if there is a good reason for Congress to fund a program, that in and of itself is a good reason to continually improve it. (Final installment next week.)