Milwaukee Biz Blog

This week, our national debt hit $15 trillion. The urgency of our debt crisis demands that Congress pass true spending reform that will enforce fiscal discipline. This can only be accomplished with a balanced budget amendment.

If we want to give job creators certainty for the future, and encourage them to expand and grow, we must rein in out-of-control spending.

The House considered a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, which requires a 2/3 vote in each chamber of Congress to pass. 

With opposition from the tax-and-spend left, the amendment did not pass.

This Balanced Budget Amendment closely mirrors the same one that passed the House in 1995 — with broad bipartisan support — and failed by only one vote in the Senate. Since then, our debt has nearly quadrupled.

My colleagues across the aisle who voted against this amendment are either burying their heads in the sand or trying to misrepresent this effort to score political points. But ignoring our debt crisis won’t make it go away.

In fact, a group of moderate Democrats openly supported this amendment and called opposition “unfortunate” because almost two-thirds of Americans support this measure. One Democratic member said, “This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. We should come together and take steps to get the country back on the appropriate path.” 

Under President Obama, this country has seen an explosion of Washington spending and unmatched trillion-dollar deficits. Since President Obama took office, our debt has increased by $3.7 trillion. The Democratic-controlled Senate has not passed a budget in more than 900 days.
 
Setting our federal budget is one of the most basic functions of government. Washington has been spending without any limits in place, and our President has failed to offer any leadership to address the debt crisis, and in fact has led us in the opposite direction.

But we did not get here over night. Under both Republican and Democratic Administrations, Washington has spent too much. It is too tempting for politicians to spend now, while passing the debt on to future generations.

A child born in 2011 carries $47,093 of our national debt. If we continue on this path, future generations will be left with an America where uncertainty and debt crowd out opportunity for prosperity and economic progress.

President Ronald Reagan said it well: "Only a constitutional amendment will do the job. We’ve tried the carrot, and it failed. With the stick of a Balanced Budget Amendment, we can stop government squandering, overtaxing ways, and save our economy."

I supported the Balanced Budget Amendment in 1995 and I supported it again in 2011. I will continue to fight for policies that pay down our debt and stop out-of-control spending.

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.

On Tuesday, I will be holding a Job Creators Roundtable in Brookfield to discuss what Washington can do to promote private-sector job creation and growth.

I want to hear directly from small business owners and job creators in the 5th Congressional District about what obstacles they face in this current economic climate and hear about solutions that Congress can pursue to infuse confidence and certainty into the economic environment.

We cannot tax and spend our way to prosperity. Out-of-control spending and the constant threat of new taxes and regulations chill hiring and discourage businesses from investing or growing.

Things have gotten worse under President Obama’s economic policies, and there is no time to waste to start enacting smart, commonsense solutions.

Last week, the World Bank issued their annual “Doing Business” report, which ranks 183 countries on attractiveness for business development. In 2007, the US ranked 3rd in the “ease of starting a business” category, and now we are 13th.

When President Obama was inaugurated in 2009, according to the World Economic Forum, the US was ranked first in global competitiveness. In 2011, we dropped to 5th.

Early this year, House Republicans introduced a plan for job creation that reduces regulatory burdens, keeps taxes low, utilizes our domestic energy resources, and pays down our unsustainable debt. Since that time, we have been focused on passing legislation to promote economic recovery and job growth.

There are now 18 bills awaiting Senate action. The 14 million unemployed Americans cannot continue to wait for political stalling.

In contrast to the do-nothing Senate, the House has passed legislation to reform costly regulations and save hundreds of thousands of jobs.  We have passed legislation to reform our tax code and enable small businesses to gain access to capital.

I don’t want to wait and see how continuing the same failed policies will make America less competitive in the future.

Our economy is suffering from ‘Washington knows best,’ mentality. Instead, we should look outside the Beltway to find what creates an environment for success.

On Tuesday, I will be hearing from job creators who have first-hand experience in this economic climate. I hope to learn what is working and where government is holding job creators back.

I look forward to a productive discussion about how we can make America, and Wisconsin, more competitive and spur job development.

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.

According to the President’s proposal, the second stimulus will be paid almost entirely by raising taxes and permanently capping itemized tax deductions for some Americans, and Wisconsin taxpayers will be hit particularly hard.

The President’s plan offsets his new stimulus by limiting the tax value of allowable deductions to 28 percent for individuals and families in the top two tax brackets.  Reports indicate that limiting these tax deductions will increase taxes by around $405 billion.

Wisconsinites stand to lose in this game of tax-and spend, and deserve to know that many taxpayers— not just ‘millionaires and billionaires—would face a higher tax liability.

Wisconsin has one of the highest state income and local property tax burdens in the US according to the Tax Foundation, and as a result, residents rely on itemizing their deductions more than other states. This tax increase will hit Wisconsinites, who will reach that 28 percent cap much faster, and feel the impact in their wallets much more than in other states. 

By contrast, in states like Texas, where there are no state income taxes and low property taxes, people will be more able to absorb these caps. 

The same failed policies of the past won’t spur the future economic growth America needs, and instead will stall the job creation we are now seeing in Wisconsin. House Republicans are committed to pursuing common sense solutions to getting America back to work, but this proposal relies on tax increases that both parties have already rejected. This time, I am even more concerned because Wisconsinites will end up shouldering more of the burden.”

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.

I send out an annual questionnaire to Fifth District residents so that I may hear directly from them on important issues. Sometimes, people find it hard to choose just one option as the choices are difficult or oversimplified, but I am often left making those equally difficult choices when I vote in the House of Representatives. I appreciate the time people took in responding to the questionnaire and sharing their viewpoints. This survey is one of many valuable ways constituents can communicate with me.

The questions, answer options, and results are below.

1) In 2011, the federal government will run a $1.4 trillion deficit. Of the following, what is the best way for Congress to address this issue?
A) Increase taxes on individuals making more than $250,000- 32%
B) Increase taxes on all Americans- 5%
C) Reduce federal spending- 61%
D) Other- 3%

2) Do you support efforts to repeal and replace last year's health care law?
A) Yes- 58%
B) No- 33%
C) Undecided- 9%

3) Should illegal immigrants be eligible for in-state college tuition?
A) Yes- 7%
B) No- 89%
C) Undecided- 4%

4) Do you support continued government subsidies for ethanol?
A) Yes- 13%
B) No- 76%
C) Undecided- 10%

5) Do you support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution?
A) Yes- 67%
B) No- 18%
C) Undecided- 15%

6) Do you believe current Transportation Security Administration (TSA) airport screening procedures are appropriate?
A) Yes- 50%
B) No- 33%
C) Undecided- 17%

7) What is the greatest threat facing the United States today?
A) Wasteful government spending- 27%
B) Economic instability- 17%
C) Rising debt/deficit- 21%
D) Illegal immigration- 5%
E) Terrorism- 5%
F) High unemployment- 17%
G) Other- 8%

8) The space shuttle will soon be retired. Should NASA invest in a new vehicle for manned flight?
A) Yes- 39%
B) No- 37%
C) Undecided- 23%

9) Medicare is unsustainable in its current form. Do you support reforming the program for individuals age 54 and younger?
A) Yes- 58%
B) No- 28%
C) Undecided- 14%

10) When considering budget cuts, should Department of Defense spending be on the table?
A) Yes- 63%
B) No- 28%
C) Undecided- 8%

11) Do you support the continued efforts of the United States in the War on Terror?
A) Yes- 69%
B) No- 17%
C) Undecided- 14%

I always welcome comments from constituents. Fifth District residents are invited to call, send a letter or fax, write an email, stop by the district office in Brookfield, or attend a Town Hall Meeting to share any thoughts they have on federal issues or receive help with a federal agency.

F. Janes Sensenbrenner is a Republican Congressman, and represents Wisconsin's Fifth Congressional District.

I supported the Budget Control Act, a bipartisan bill which passed both the House and the Senate, because I believe this legislation is an important step to change the direction of Washington.

While not perfect, this bill will save taxpayers trillions of dollars and avoid a default on our nation’s bills. I am encouraged that Congress is no longer talking about whether or not we should cut spending, but how much to cut. The discussion is not about how to expand government, but how we can create a smaller, more efficient government.

For the past few weeks, debate in Washington revolved around our national debt limit, or how much the Administration can legally borrow to pay our nation’s obligations. However, the issue at hand was not just the debt limit, but our federal debt. America today borrows 42 cents of every dollar, and that is unacceptable and irresponsible. We didn’t get here overnight, and it will take some time to turn this ship around.

The underlying problem is Washington’s addiction to spending. Simply raising the debt limit every time the bill is due will not fix anything.

While the Budget Control Act is not a perfect bill, in this time of divided government, we cannot allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Let’s not forget how this discussion started, with a request from the President for an unconditional increase in the debt ceiling that would have just extended the status quo and the policies bankrupting our country. Instead, this legislation enacts real cuts, accounting to greater than the increase of the debt ceiling. Additionally, this bill rejects the President’s request for job-killing tax increases.

This bill includes a framework that will begin bringing fiscal discipline to Congress, a discipline that is sorely needed. The bill includes spending caps that would actually set limits on how much the government can spend. The agreement also creates a 12-member joint committee charged with finding an additional $1.5 trillion in cuts to reduce the deficit. If Congress does not settle on an agreement by the end of the year, across-the-board cuts will go into effect. Finally, the agreement requires, for the first time in 15 years, that both the House and Senate vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment. Under both parties, Washington has spent too much, and this framework helps to transform the culture of spending into a culture of responsibility.

The end goal has not changed, which is to bring long-term, structural spending reform to Washington and avert a debt crisis. The next generation, and our future economic growth, depends on it. This bill is one step toward that goal, and I look forward to continuing the fight to rein in out-of-control deficits and get our economy on the right track again.

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. represents Wisconsin’s 5th District.

Congress has recognized the absurdity of subsidizing the ethanol industry, but unfortunately the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its own agenda.

In January, the EPA issued a waiver to allow E15 (gasoline with a 15 percent ethanol blend) to be sold for vehicles with model years 2001 and later. This decision was made at the behest of the ethanol industry but it will come at the expense of American drivers.

While the EPA deemed E15 environmentally safe for models produced after 2001, this higher blend of gas could seriously damage cars. 

I sent letters to the major US automakers to investigate how E15 would affect people’s cars.  Overwhelmingly the automakers complained that E15 would void warranties, damage engines, and lower fuel efficiency. To date, I have received 12 responses, and all 12 oppose EPA’s waiver.

According to Honda, “Vehicle engines were not designed or built to accommodate the higher concentrations of ethanol. . .There appears to be the potential for engine failure.” Chrysler wrote, “We are not confident that our vehicles will not be damaged from the use of E15.”

It is summer time and we don’t just use gasoline for our cars. Boats, motorcycles, ATVs, and lawnmowers all use gasoline.  The EPA did not approve E15 for small engines, but small engine manufacturers are worried that E15 will find its way from gas pumps to small engines, where it can do significant harm. 

Thus far, the EPA’s only solution to consumer confusion is to impose more regulations and rules on manufacturers and business owners. 

The decision to increase the allowable blend appears to have limited environmental benefits with huge costs for American consumers.  According to Volvo, “the risks related to emissions are greater than the benefits in terms of CO2 when using low-blend E15 for variants that are designed to E10.”

The government has artificially propped up the ethanol industry with a 45-cent- a-gallon subsidy to oil refiners and a 54 cent-per-gallon tariff on imported ethanol. The ethanol lobby claimed the biofuel would reduce our dependence on unstable sources of oil and reduce greenhouse gas. After $6 billion per year of taxpayer money, ethanol has achieved neither goal. Instead, research and analysis shows that increased ethanol production raises the cost of food and emits more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels.

In southeastern Wisconsin, we already have to deal with the consequences of the EPA-imposed reformulated gas. Despite history’s warnings, the EPA has allowed E15 to be widely available in the marketplace.

The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology recently held a hearing to examine the science behind the EPA’s decision to allow E15. While the political tide on Capitol Hill is turning against prolonging the ethanol boondoggle, the Administration seems to have missed the memo. The EPA is moving forward with a bad policy that will cost consumers dearly.

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. represents Wisconsin’s Fifth District.

This week, the House and Senate passed, and the President signed, a Continuing Resolution to keep the government running another two weeks. This action was needed because last session, under Democratic leadership, Congress failed to act – it never brought a budget to the floor for a vote, despite passing a bill to keep the federal government running being one of the most important duties of a member.

It was the first time since the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, that neither the House nor the Senate were able to pass a budget.

The two-week budget cuts $4 billion from last year’s spending levels and also gives the Senate additional time to consider the House-passed H.R. 1 – a budget bill that would fund the government through September while also cutting spending.

The United States does not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Our nation has a $1.65 trillion deficit. We spend way too much at the expense of our children and grandchildren.

Over the next few weeks, the budget, and all this spending, will continue to be a hot debate topic. To get our fiscal house in order, the House majority has pledged to cut up to $100 billion from the budget. I fully support this. All cuts help get our national deficit under control, but we need massive budget cuts.

In contrast to our spending cuts, President Obama recently released his budget, which increases spending. We have a large amount of debt; we pay interest on that debt, so I don’t understand why the President wants to spend more money when we continue to borrow nearly 42 cents on every dollar we spend – most of that being borrowed from China.

Cutting spending and getting our debt under control must be our priority. Since Republicans regained the majority we have honored our pledge to cut 5 percent from our own congressional offices, saving $35 million at the top, in addition to the money many offices, including mine, return to the treasury at the end of each session.

Furthermore, my colleague from Wisconsin, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, has been granted the power to impose spending limits, which will return agencies to pre-bailout and pre-stimulus levels. I pride myself on being fiscally responsible, and a key way to continue to be fiscally responsible is to rein in spending, cut the budget and ultimately cut our deficit.

We have staked the well-being of our nation on irresponsible spending. We run the risk of defaulting on our debt; we need to solve this issue. We must tackle the budget so that we may rein in federal spending.

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner represents Wisconsin’s 5th Congressional District.

Last week in Florida, U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson declared the new health care law unconstitutional.  In his ruling, he said that the individual mandate section – the law’s requirement that everyone must carry insurance or pay a fee – “is outside Congress' Commerce Clause power, and it cannot be otherwise authorized by an assertion of power under the Necessary and Proper Clause. It is not constitutional."

The Florida ruling came after the House voted 245-189 to repeal the law, and after a court ruling in December by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson in Virginia that found the individual mandate unconstitutional. The Virginia judge said his ruling applied only to the part of the law that established the mandate and any directly dependent provisions that refer to that section, while the Florida judge offered a much broader ruling in declaring the entire law void.

These court rulings and the House vote were all victories for states’ rights. And it is my hope that the Supreme Court hears this case quickly, so states aren’t forced to shell out money they don’t have for something that, in my opinion, is unconstitutional. 

Following the court rulings, the House vote, and mounting public pressure, the Senate held a vote on repealing the health care law. I was pleased that Senate Republicans were able to keep their promise of holding this vote; however the measure failed in a vote split down party lines. This was a disappointment given the rulings in the courts and the continued ruling in the court of public opinion.  And, this was especially disappointing for Wisconsin, as the Badger State has joined with 25 other states in the lawsuit questioning the constitutionality of the health care law, and will be eager for a final ruling.

Health care is an important issue that needs a resolution. We all agree that care needs to be improved, access needs to increase, costs must be reduced, and certainty is provided that no one is denied coverage for a pre-existing condition. However, we should do this using a market-based system, not with large government rule that treads on our Constitution.

As the health care discussion continues and this court case moves forward, I remain cautiously optimistic that the higher courts will determine this law is unconstitutional. In the meantime, Republicans in the House will continue to keep their promise by drafting replacement legislation that avoids putting our country further into the red, but rather uses common sense reform to develop the best solutions.

Republican Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.

President Obama signed the tax cuts deal into law Friday. While I didn’t agree with everything in the bill, I voted in favor of extending the tax cuts because increasing taxes by $3.9 trillion on Jan. 1, when we’re still in an economic downturn, would have been a bad idea.

President Herbert Hoover raised taxes during a recession and the U.S. sank further into the Great Depression. America and the world can’t afford our economy to worsen. 

To be clear, I’m not in support of increasing the deficit or of everything that was included in the compromise; however, I believe it is critical that we restore order to our fiscal house.  If this bill was the price we must pay to stop a $1,540 tax increase on an average middle-income family – Congress needed to support it. 

Extending these tax cuts is important to not only preventing the stock market from tanking as a result of the lower capital gains tax rate expiring, but also to protecting the middle class. If these tax cuts were not extended, we would have seen higher capital gains rates imposed, the marriage penalty brought back, the child tax credit cut in half, the Alternative Minimum Tax be increased and the Death Tax would have been increased to 55 percent.

Individually, these are all bad tax increases, but taken collectively, we must ask ourselves how many more jobs would have been lost, if taxes were raised? Furthermore, in addition to increasing taxes on the middle class, these tax hikes would have been placed on small businesses – our job creators – so again, if we placed added burdens on our job creators, how many more jobs would we have lost?  Too many have been lost already.

I’ve listened to you at town hall meetings throughout the Fifth District. Read your letters, emails and faxes. Received your phone messages. I get it. Wisconsinites want jobs. They want their family members and friends to get back to work. They want to see economic growth. They want to see more jobs created, which will in turn produce more tax revenue. They do NOT want higher taxes.

The compromise isn’t ideal for everyone. However, not raising taxes – and thereby killing more jobs – is a good place to start.

As I’ve said before, I don’t think tax cuts are the end-all-be-all solution to our economic woes, but they do offer a positive new start to turning this economy around and providing some certainty in a time of economic uncertainty. From there, we can then focus on cutting unnecessary spending and reducing the size of government. With our nation and our people hurting, it only made sense for Congress to renew these essential tax provisions –so that we can help our families, as well as our job creators more quickly.

U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.

Whether I’m at a fish fry, a pancake breakfast or visiting with small business owners in Wisconsin’s Fifth, the issue people continually talk with me about is outrageous government spending.

It seems everyone is concerned about the piles of debt that we are running up, and rightfully so. Seniors and those approaching retirement age worry that Social Security may not be there for them. And while every generation hopes to leave future generations better off than they were, our growing debt is making that a growing challenge.   

One of the first votes that the newly elected Congress will take in January is to increase the debt limit. The debt limit is the legal limit on how much the federal government can borrow.

Earlier this year, Democrats in Congress voted to increase the debt ceiling to $14.3 trillion. With the deficit running more than $100 billion per month, the Treasury Department expects that Congress will need to raise the limit again by summer.

My newly elected colleagues and I are going to have to think hard about voting to increase the debt limit. Republicans did not do the best job of controlling spending when we held majorities in the House and Senate, as good-intentioned conservatives strayed from their principles… and we paid the price in 2006 and 2008.

It’s my hope that since so many new members were elected on a pledge for fiscal responsibility, they will uphold that pledge, as well as remember the fiscal lessons learned from previous Congresses.

As I’ve often said throughout my career, it’s not what a politician says, but how he or she votes. My voting record shows being fiscally responsible is not a trend, but my voting style. I have cast many votes that have been unpopular with the previous and current White House, but I have stuck to my guns to ensure transparency, accountability and that taxpayer dollars are not wasted.

The new Congress will have many opportunities to cut spending – and Congress should.  Families in Wisconsin and across the nation are spending less and saving more, and it is time that Washington does the same. I pledge to all of you in Wisconsin’s 5th Congressional District that I will continue to vote against wasteful government spending.  With a renewed commitment, we can put America’s fiscal house in order again.

U.S. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Menomonee Falls) represents Wisconsin’s Fifth Congressional District.