LATHAM SPONSORS LEGISLATION TO BRING TRANSPARENCY TO CONGRESS

RESOLUTION REQUIRES 72 HOURS AND PUBLIC NOTIFICATION BEFORE DEBATE OF BILLS

Washington, Sep 24 – Iowa Congressman Tom Latham is spearheading an effort to make sure citizens have the time they need to analyze legislative proposals before Congress can vote on them.

Congressman Latham has signed on as a co-sponsor of a bipartisan resolution that would stop lawmakers from rushing votes on critical measures without allowing citizens adequate time to read the proposals and register their feedback with their representatives in Congress.

The legislation, H. Res. 554, would require any legislation to be made available to the public 72 hours before Congress can begin debate. It also requires that a document be made available to the public outlining the impact proposed legislation would have on existing law 72 hours ahead of any debate. The resolution applies to all significant amendments to legislation in addition to original bills.

“In my eyes, it’s simply common sense to give the American people the time they need to analyze proposed legislation,” Congressman Latham said. “Unfortunately, it’s become a common practice for lawmakers in the House of Representatives to offer sweeping legislative measures just hours before we’re expected to vote on them. Sometimes, these proposals are introduced in the dead of night. This is undemocratic, and it needs to stop.”

For example, lawmakers added a 300-page manager’s amendment to the cap-and-trade energy bill at about 3 a.m. on June 26, the day the House voted on final passage of the bill. Citizens had only a few hours to look at the proposal before it was approved by the House of Representatives.

Congressman Latham also is co-sponsoring H. Res. 721, which calls for any major health care reform legislation to be available to the public for 30 calendar days before a vote in the House of Representatives.

“Shadowy legislative practices shut the people out of the process and force representatives in Congress to vote on important proposals without knowing what’s in them,” Congressman Latham said. “It’s time to bring transparency back to Congress.”

LATHAM STATEMENT ON PRESIDENT’S HEALTH CARE SPEECH TO CONGRESS

Washington, Sep 9 – Iowa Congressman Tom Latham issued the following statement on Wednesday in response to President Barack Obama’s health care speech before Congress:

“President Obama’s speech tonight proved once again that he is an exceptional orator, but the American people have made it very clear over the past several weeks that they don’t want more speeches. What the American people want is a new plan.

There is no doubt that millions of Americans face a health care crisis and that common sense reforms are needed. But when the dust settles and the debate ends, we must be sure we’ve done the right thing for future generations.

I’ve held town meetings in each of the 28 counties I represent and have listened to the concerns of thousands of Iowans. I’ve heard overwhelming support for reforms that strengthen and expand the health care safety net as long as those reforms do not destroy the health care Iowans already have and, for the most part, are happy with.

Plain and simple, some of the proposals sought by the President and his party’s leaders in Congress give the federal government even greater influence over every single person’s personal health care while committing taxpayers to a path of massive new spending that we can’t afford.

Because health care reform will touch the lives of every single American, we must start over and work together to achieve a bipartisan solution. I’ve proposed legislation as a starting point for health care reform that would contain health care costs while preserving competition, choice, ownership and individual control. My solution puts patients, their health and their well-being ahead of special interest groups and partisan politics. I hope those same principles will guide the rest of my colleagues as we continue with this debate.”

LATHAM STATEMENT ON OMB DEFICIT PROJECTIONS

$9 TRILLION DEFICIT OVER NEXT DECADE

Washington, Aug 25 – Iowa Congressman Tom Latham issued the following statement on Tuesday in response to recent federal budget figures from the White House Office of Management and Budget projecting a $9 trillion deficit over the next decade:

“These latest budget numbers illustrate the depth of our country’s fiscal predicament. The national deficit is spiraling out of control, weakening America’s economic foundation and pinning future generations with massive debt. Irresponsible and ineffective measures such as the $787 billion stimulus package, the $410 billion omnibus appropriations bill and risky bailouts for Wall Street financial firms have contributed to America’s fiscal disarray, all while American families continue to deal with high unemployment and economic uncertainty. The cost of a government takeover of health care would add even more fuel to the skyrocketing deficit.

“This path is unsustainable. The current economic climate requires us to return to fiscal discipline. We must abandon the erroneous notion that we can tax, spend and borrow our way back to prosperity. It’s time for Congress to put the American taxpayers first and stop treating them as if they are a resource to be harnessed in difficult times.”

Latham: The Health Care Debate

Dear Friend:

Health care reform has the potential to be one of the most consequential initiatives to come before Congress in decades. The decisions made on Capitol Hill and in the White House in the coming months will directly impact the health care your family receives.

That’s why I’m heartened to see so many Iowans getting involved in the debate by contacting their elected officials, taking part in town hall meetings and letting Congress know how they feel about health care reform. A robust public debate that allows every citizen to have a voice will improve the final outcome. That’s the American way.

In that spirit, I’m inviting you to attend one of the public town hall meetings I’m hosting throughout Iowa’s 4th Congressional District in the coming weeks. These meetings offer you an opportunity to have a frank and honest discussion with me and other members of your community about health care and what the proposed reforms mean for Iowans. I’ve also posted an in-depth health care survey on my website as another avenue for Iowans to let me know how they feel about health care reform.

In an effort to make sure the health care debate is as transparent and accessible to the citizenry as possible, I’ve signed a pledge stating that I will not vote for any health care reform package that I have not read in its entirety, and I will not vote for any reform proposal that has not been available for public scrutiny at least 72 hours before a vote on final passage.

Throughout this debate, I’ll fight to uphold the principles of choice, competition and individual responsibility in our health care system. I’ll vote against any proposal that would allow a government bureaucrat to come between you and your doctor. And, I will only support health care legislation that meets the following criteria:

- The legislation must contain future health care costs for consumers and must not increase our nation’s deficit

- The legislation must be the result of a truly bi-partisan effort

- The legislation must provide accessibility for every single American

- The legislation must provide affordable health care

- The legislation must be responsive to the needs of patients

- The legislation must not stifle innovation and groundbreaking research

- The legislation must protect and preserve choices for patients

- The legislation must guarantee that government rationing is prohibited

- The legislation must uphold and improve the quality of health care overall

- And the legislation must provide coverage that is owned by individuals – rather than the government.

Please visit my website if you’d like to learn more about my common-sense health care proposal to expand accessibility and rein in costs or about my response to the proposal put forward by Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Health care reform will have a direct impact on you and your loved ones, and you can’t afford to remain silent in this debate. Please get in touch with me, take my survey and let me know where you stand on health care reform.

Best wishes,

King, Latham Introduce Bill Supporting Iowa’s Rural Hospitals

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Iowa Congressmen Steve King and Tom Latham today introduced the Medicare Support for Rural Hospitals Act. The legislation will provide increased Medicare payments to “tweener” hospitals – hospitals too large to receive additional Medicare payments as Critical Access Hospitals, but too small to be financially viable under the Medicare hospital prospective payment system (PPS).

There are eight “tweener” hospitals in Iowa, including three in Iowa’s Fifth District: St. Anthony Regional Hospital (Carroll), Spencer Municipal Hospital and Lakes Regional Hospital (Spirit Lake). Other “tweener” hospitals in Iowa are located in Fort Madison, Muscatine, Grinnell, Newton and Keokuk.

“Iowa’s rural hospitals are extremely important to the communities they serve,” Congressman King said. “It is important that we take steps to ensure the viability of our rural hospitals. For years, these tweener hospitals have been put at a significant financial disadvantage by Medicare’s payment policies. This bill will begin to address this problem by providing these hospitals with much-needed support through increased Medicare payments. This will allow these important community anchors to continue the great work they do in rural Iowa.”

“Iowa hospitals continue to deal with a Medicare system that penalizes medical facilities in rural areas,” Congressman Latham said. “This system ultimately hurts the seniors and communities that depend on these hospitals, and I’m proud to work toward a more equitable disbursement of Medicare payments.”

Latham and King Blast Cap and Trade

Latham: Cap-And-Trade Will Tax Your Lights Out

Dear Friend:

The U.S. House of Representatives is rushing toward a vote on the more than 1,200-page cap-and-trade energy proposal, a piece of legislation that will have very far-reaching and unknown negative consequences, including the potential to cause significant financial pain for every household, farmer and small business owner in America.

There is no question that we must work together to pursue comprehensive long-term common sense solutions that protect the environment without economically crippling hardworking American families. The cap-and-trade bill being pushed through Congress by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) is misguided and will do nothing to actually protect our planet and has every possibility of punishing the back pockets of every American who turns on a light switch. I have opposed the cap-and-trade proposal from the outset, and I want you to know that I will do everything I can to stop this misguided policy from becoming law.

The U.S. House version of cap-and trade (the “Waxman-Markey” energy legislation) seeks to limit greenhouse gas emissions on the part of businesses by establishing a scheme under which a government carbon emissions cap is set. Businesses would then buy and sell ‘permits,’ or pollution credits, that allow them to emit certain levels of CO2. A business can either use permits/credits to discharge a level of CO2, or it can sell its permits/credits to other businesses that need extra permits. In essence, this legislation creates an energy rationing system that will cause energy to become more expensive and lead to higher costs of production that will be passed on to hardworking consumers. This eventually will weaken the overall economy and raise prices for many goods and services.

One of the close-to-home impacts for households will be electricity rates as utility companies will face additional costs to produce energy as a result of cap-and-trade. These costs will then be passed along to consumers in the form of higher rates. At a time when we are trying to climb out of a terrible recession, a cap-and-trade policy will raise energy bills for families, farms and small businesses. The policy will be especially painful in Iowa because of the state’s dependence on coal as an energy source. Major utility companies in Iowa have estimated that energy bills could go up as much as 25 percent due to cap-and-trade. Americans are already straining to make ends meet, and cap-and-trade will pile yet another tax on everybody.

The cap-and-trade proposal also puts America at a competitive disadvantage in the world economy because other countries, particularly China and India, have no reason to impose similar caps on emissions. One of the reasons that these countries will not impose emission caps is that they are continuing to invest in energy production facilities, such as coal plants and refineries. The last thing these countries want to do is impose emissions caps on their producers and populations. After all, they need to recoup the costs of these facilities, upon which they rely for economic development as they climb out of the recession.

In addition, the United States currently has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. As such, the cap-and-trade proposal could provide further incentive for employers to relocate from the United States to places such as China or India, where energy and environmental regulations are not as stringent. If cap-and-trade becomes law, Congress will enhance the chances that American jobs will be sent overseas in a nicely-wrapped package.

The proponents of cap-and-trade argue that this legislation is necessary to slow global climate change, but recent studies have shown that the policy will have only a minor impact on the environment. The proposed reduction in emissions would slow warming by only a small fraction of a degree by the year 2050, according to some predictions.

The environmental impact of cap-and-trade is difficult to measure, but the economic damage it can cause has become quite evident in Europe, where a similar cap-and-trade system has been operating for about three years. The results: the system has largely failed and the price of utilities in the average household has risen. For example, reports have shown that German household electricity rates climbed by 25% under the European cap-and-trade scheme. Manufacturers often shut down production for part of the day to save money, losing environmental efficiencies in the process.

In an effort to protect the economic well-being of American families, farmers and small businesses, I have authored an amendment that, if accepted, would kill the cap-and-trade scheme if it is determined that it increases the cost of energy for consumers or small businesses anywhere in the country. My amendment would provide an economic insurance policy that would repeal cap-and-trade if it has a negative impact on consumers, farmers or job-creating businesses. Adding the measure to the bill would protect America from the disastrous effects that so many expect this bill to cause.

Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have pushed for comprehensive energy reform that puts the American people first. Rather than create tax schemes that target every American who flips a light switch or puts gas in a car, we need to invest in an all-of-the-above approach to energy that embraces conservation and efficiency as well as renewable fuels, nuclear energy and expanded energy exploration in this country. We must implement a comprehensive approach to strengthen America’s energy foundation while also protecting the environment. We can meet these goals without levying a massive energy tax on the American people. Cap-and-trade falls far short of that ideal. Make no mistake, it is a massive energy tax.

Best wishes,

Tom

LATHAM STANDS UP FOR OUSTED IOWA GM DEALERSHIPS

CONGRESSMAN LATHAM EXPRESSES CONCERN TO GM CHIEF OVER “MISMANAGED AND PAINFUL BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING”

Washington, Jun 12 – Iowa Congressman Tom Latham expressed his concern over the closures of numerous GM dealerships in Iowa in a letter sent on Thursday to General Motors Chief Executive Fritz Henderson.

In the letter, Congressman Latham notes that the forced closures of Iowa dealerships will weaken the local economies the dealerships serve and cautioned against troubling examples of possible political favoritism intruding into GM’s bankruptcy proceedings.

Due to the unique circumstances surrounding the General Motors bankruptcy, Congressman Latham has also co-sponsored legislation with more than 90 other representatives that would require GM and Chrysler to honor agreements the auto manufacturers made with dealerships before entering Chapter 11 protection. Such a policy would preserve the rights of dealers to recourse under applicable state laws.

The letter, which was also sent to the Obama administration’s car czar, is available as a PDF here, and the full text follows below:

Dear Mr. Henderson:

I am writing to express my disappointment at learning of the decision by General Motors to force the closures of numerous dealerships throughout the State of Iowa. I’ve grown increasingly concerned of the economic pain created by the General Motors bankruptcy for thousands of Iowa families who rely on jobs at dealerships and other support businesses as they are forced to close their doors. I am also troubled by the recent news that politics are poisoning the General Motors bankruptcy proceedings. News is surfacing that members of Congress are using their influence to shield GM distribution centers and dealerships in their congressional districts from closure.

According to a June 5, 2009 article in the Wall Street Journal, you reversed the forced closure of a GM distribution center in Norton, Massachusetts, that employs 90 people at the request of Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA). The article points out that after “Mr. Frank put in a call to GM CEO Fritz Henderson” a new lease on life was secured for the Norton facility. The article further notes that Congressman Frank discussed “the facility’s value to GM.”

Additionally, according to a June 9, 2009 story on Minneapolis television station WCCO’s Web site, GM once again reversed the decision to force the closure of a Bloomington, Minnesota, dealership which employs 80 people after Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) “set up a meeting with top GM executives” to request the reversal of the closure.

Perhaps there is an appeal process you are making available to the elected officials who represent the GM facilities and dealerships that are being forced to close. If that’s so, then I’d like to formally request that you reconsider the closure of all the dedicated dealerships in the State of Iowa that are being forced to shutter their doors by GM.

If no such appeal process exists – and GM simply decided to bend to political pressure from Congressman Frank and Senator Klobuchar – then this situation highlights the possibility of government corruption and favoritism that would further taint an already mismanaged and painful bankruptcy proceeding.

While I do not take issue with the concerns expressed by Congressman Frank or Senator Klobuchar for the people affected by these issues, I am troubled by what appears to be a convenient path to relief through a hybrid bankruptcy exercise funded primarily with taxpayer dollars that voids auto dealer protections under state laws – and then the circumstantial or politically motivated reversals of decisions said to be in the interests of GM’s revival. It is difficult for me to grasp the notion that, on the one hand, GM has said that “tough” business decisions have to be made, including the closure of dealerships, while on the other hand concessions to those tough decisions are being made when politicians request them.

At a time when Iowa communities are already struggling during this economic downturn, the forced job losses because of this decision by GM creates additional economic hardships for these loyal dealerships, their loyal owners, their loyal and dedicated employees, their loyal customers, the numerous small businesses and employees that work with these local dealerships, and the communities in which these local dealerships are located.

Local dealerships are a pivotal partner in the overall financial success of GM because 90% of GM’s revenue comes from the hard work of dealerships and their loyal employees.

And, as you know, local dealerships do not place a financial burden on GM because the dealerships are responsible for paying their own way to represent and sell your brands. Local dealers are responsible for paying their employees, purchasing vehicles and parts directly from the manufacturer, and buying and maintaining their own sales centers. They even purchase the signs, logos, and brochures they proudly display on behalf of their partner and GM.

I look forward to discussing this matter with you personally and having Iowa dealerships, their dedicated employees and local communities be given the same quick and positive response afforded to the GM partners lobbied for by Congressman Frank and Senator Klobuchar.

Sincerely,

Tom Latham

Member of Congress

LATHAM ACCEPTS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ‘SPIRIT OF ENTERPRISE’ AWARD

LATHAM ACCEPTS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ‘SPIRIT OF ENTERPRISE’ AWARD
AWARD GOES TO REPRESENTATIVES WHO DEFEND FREE ENTERPRISE

Washington, Mar 30 – Iowa Congressman Tom Latham accepted an award last week from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for his defense of free enterprise on key votes in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue presented Congressman Latham with the Spirit of Enterprise Award on March 26 and and praised Latham for his leadership on business issues throughout 2008.

“Last year in particular, Congress had to make some tough choices, and Rep. Latham clearly demonstrated his commitment to the economy and keeping America competitive in an ever-changing global market,” Donohue said. “The Chamber is proud to present Rep. Latham with the Sprit of Enterprise Award on behalf of businesses large and small.”

The U.S. Chamber identified 18 key votes in the House during the second session of the 110th Congress and presented awards to representatives who supported free enterprise in at least 70 percent of those votes. Congressman Latham’s score was 89 percent in 2008, and he has amassed a cumulative score of 97 percent during his career in Congress.

This year marks the 14th time Congressman Latham has been awarded the Spirit of Enterprise. He’s received the award each year he’s been in Congress.

“Small businesses produce the bulk of our country’s economic activity, providing jobs and benefits for millions of Americans,” Congressman Latham said. “We have to strengthen our business climate and encourage our entrepreneurs to innovate and grow if we want to chart a path back to prosperity.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the largest business federation in the world, represents more than 3 million businesses of every size across the country.

THE LATHAM REPORT: WASHINGTON SHARES GUILT IN AIG OUTRAGE

By Iowa Congressman Tom Latham
Iowa’s 4th Congressional District

American taxpayers are once again being played for fools on Capitol Hill as the president and members of Congress shed crocodile tears and gnash their teeth over the fact that American International Group (AIG) used part of its $170 billion grant from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) for hefty employee bonuses.

As you know, the TARP was created last fall and is often referred to as the Wall Street bailout. For those of us in Congress who voted against creating the Wall Street bailout-TARP mess, this theater of the absurd is playing just as we had predicted last fall.

The executive bonuses are an insult to taxpayers, but we can’t lose sight of how AIG got its hands on the taxpayers’ wallets in the first place. The American people can pin the blame on the Washington politicians who ignored taxpayer demands for accountability and voted in favor of the Wall Street bailout plan last October.

I voted against the Wall Street bailout each of the three times it came before the U.S. House of Representatives, and I spoke out against the inherent risk in propping up financial institutions that were crumbling under the weight of their own irresponsibility. In my official statements last fall, I noted that the $700 billion bailout granted largely unchecked power to one person to spend that money. At the time, it was Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Now, President Obama’s Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, exercises that no-strings-attached authority. But most egregiously, the bailout bill lacked any guarantees for success, and it contained no measures to close the taxpayers’ checkbook if the plan failed.

Some have criticized my vote against the Wall Street bailout, and much of that criticism has come from those very same members of Congress who supported it last fall but this past week have loudly decried executive bonuses. These critics are now learning why some of us fought so vehemently against the Wall Street bailout – TARP scheme in the first place: the legislation approved by Congress in October lacked any restraint or control to protect the American taxpayer.

I faced similar criticism for my opposition to the $787 billion stimulus package approved in February of this year, and I worry that we may be in for even more embarrassing stories as the American people find that the stimulus legislation shares the same shortcomings as the bailout legislation. Just like the Wall Street bailout, the stimulus package comes with a huge price tag but contains little in the way of taxpayer accountability or oversight. I voted against both bills for similar reasons, and I suspect both will end with more stories of massive waste and uncertainty.

I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the millions of Americans who are demanding accountability in how their taxes are spent. We can’t send a message to failed Wall Street executives that the American people will always be there to save them when they’re faced with tough decisions.

Likewise, we must remind Washington and Congress that it breaks faith with the American people when we fail to work toward solutions based on sound economic principles that address the real needs of America. These are the principles on which our nation was founded, and these are the principles that we have a duty to protect. It’s time we put the American taxpayer first.

To listen to an mp3 of Congressman Latham answering questions on this issue, please visit the following url: http://latham.house.gov/UploadedFiles/090319_000.mp3