Milwaukee Biz Blog

With the health care debate grabbing most of the headlines, you may not have heard much about the energy war in Congress. A California-Massachusetts team of legislators is pushing expensive regulations on carbon emissions that would be paid for by the industries and consumers of the Midwest.

Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) recently introduced a bill similar to legislation that has passed the House. Like its House counterpart, the bill would result in a steep tax on coal, America's most affordable and plentiful fuel source. Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) sponsored the House bill. It is no coincidence that they are also a California-Massachusetts duo.

Only 12 states use less coal as a percentage of electricity production than Massachusetts, which gets about 25 percent of its power from coal. Only three states use less coal than California.

Which states use coal? Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas and Ohio use coal to generate more than 50 percent of their electricity. Wisconsin gets more than two-thirds of its electricity from coal.

How much would cap-and-tax cost you? The National Association of Manufacturers projects that nationwide cap-and-tax would cost each household an average of $1,248. But in Wisconsin, NAM found, cap-and-tax would cost each household more than $1,400.

After the Waxman-Markey bill passed the House, the National Mining Association produced a map that showed how cap-and-tax would impact individual states. States with the highest costs were shown in deep red; states with the lowest costs were shown in green. The result was striking. The map showed a deep sea of red, bracketed by a few green states on the West Coast and in the Northeast.

With costs like these for most of America, it is no surprise that a majority of people oppose this scheme. The opposition has led the bill's sponsors to attempt to rebrand their efforts. Instead of cap-and-trade, supporters of the Senate bill are calling their proposal "pollution reduction and investment." I think cap-and-tax is a more accurate and honest description.

A recent poll shows 65 percent of Americans want Congress to work on creating jobs. Cap-and-tax won't create jobs, despite a desperate insistence by the bill's supporters that government spending on so-called green jobs will stop the decline in employment that's miring our economy.

To understand the truth on green jobs, we need look no further than Spain. The Spanish government dumped $1.6 billion into green jobs last year and trumpeted 200,000 new jobs it said the subsidies created. But a study by an economist at Rey Juan Carlos University in Madrid showed that for every job created through green-job subsidies, up to 2.2 jobs were lost in other sectors. And Spanish taxpayers had to pay about $855,000 for each green job, most of which proved to be only temporary construction jobs. Spain's unemployment rate is currently above 18 percent.

Cap-and-tax isn't yet the law of the land, but carbon emissions fell 6% this year. How is this possible? It's a result of the recession. The Senate bill's goal is a 20% emission cut by 2020. As Kerry recently said: "We are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent."

A bill like the one Kerry is pushing just might get us there. After all, a study of the House bill projected that it would cause 2.4 million job losses by 2030 and up to a 2.4-percent reduction in Gross Domestic Product. A prolonged recession of that magnitude likely would lead to the emissions cuts that Kerry is seeking.

This not-so-secret plan was spelled out in a report from a U.K. think tank. It advocated a "planned recession" to help meet steep carbon emission goals. The cap-and-tax bill that Democrats are pushing would have a similar effect, especially for those of us in the Midwest.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Menomonee Falls) is the ranking Republican on the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

In President Barack Obama's recent "health care" press conference remarks, he said Washington needed deadlines, or nothing gets done. To a certain extent, I agree. 

However, when setting demands and expectations, it's also important to be reasonable and realistic. For a man who briefly served as a U.S. Senator, and complained about the former President moving legislation too quickly, this President should have a better grasp on the natural give-and-take between the White House and the Capitol.   

While I understand the sense of urgency, with so many varying opinions on health care, President Obama cannot expect to rush through and cure the system in just a matter of weeks.

Consider the outcomes from some of the other times the President has rushed … The President rushed the vetting process of his cabinet appointees and was embarrassed on several occasions. The President rushed to announce the closing of Gitmo, but still has no solution for relocating these prisoners six months later. And he rushed the economic stimulus plan that gave AIG employees millions of dollars in bonuses, while Americans across the country were losing their jobs.

The only thing this President hasn't tried to rush is the selection of the family dog! 

But with nearly 1 in 5 dollars of the GDP being spent on health care, the economy struggling, and health care reform potentially costing DOUBLE what the stimulus package did - with Americans feeling more of a direct impact, we need to really do our homework. We need to evaluate the long term ramifications, as well as our ability to pay for any new spending. 

The majority of America is in agreement. In a July 24 Gallup Poll, six out of ten Americans think health care legislation can wait until next year, if we even need legislation at all.

There are a lot of complexities to health care. Everyone agrees that health care should be more affordable and more accessible. However, everyone also has an opinion on how to do this and how to pay for it.  Some prefer putting a band-aid on the health care problem, some prefer surgery and others prefer a complete transplant.  This makes writing and passing legislation very difficult.

In my opinion, before we create a new, costly, health entitlement program that if passed, would be virtually impossible to undo, there is a lot of government waste that should be rooted out of current programs.
Health care reform requires us to think about the big, long term picture, not the short term achievement of a campaign promise. 

Although the President wanted a quick vote - well knowing that the longer people had to scrutinize the legislation, the less likely they would support it - it's a good thing we will not be voting on health care before the August recess. Now, members and their constituents have the needed time to really understand the issue and give it a good, healthy check-up before they're given a dose of some really bad tasting medicine. 

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

 As Democrats in the House were working to ram through their "Cap-and-Tax" legislation before the Fourth of July Congressional Recess, all in the name of saving the environment, behind the scenes - at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - they were busy covering up a study on climate change because the conclusions contradicted the findings they wanted to reach. 
It frustrates me that the EPA let politics trump research. The repression of this important study casts doubts on EPA's finding, and frankly, on other analysis EPA has conducted on climate issues.
President Barack Obama promised an "unprecedented" level of transparency and accountability, yet, the EPA went out of its way to withhold new data to justify a political conclusion. As taxpayers will be paying higher taxes if the "Cap-and-Tax" legislation becomes law, they deserve to know all the facts, not have information filtered or censored because it's in the administration's best interest.
On June 8th, I joined with several other members of Congress in asking the EPA to extend the comment period for its so-called “endangerment finding” for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. By determining that greenhouse gas emissions pose a danger, the EPA granted itself the authority to regulate these emissions through the Clean Air Act.
In a letter to the EPA, we wrote that "EPA's Endangerment Finding is one of the most significant regulatory findings in the country's history. It would give EPA unprecedented authority to regulate every aspect of American life. It is truly alarming that EPA apparently prejudged this outcome and then moved forward on an incomplete record."
Additionally, after the July Fourth Recess, I asked for an investigation into the lack of transparency at the EPA, as the report on the "endangerment finding" was not the only recent incident where it appears as though the Administration tried to quash critical reports and information. 
In a different case, the head of the California Air Resources Board revealed that the White House held a series of secret meetings on crafting new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and that Carol Browner, assistant to the president for Energy and Climate Change, quietly orchestrated the discussions and instructed participants to "put nothing in writing."
As policymakers, we must be open and honest, and be able to consider all reliable evidence, so that we can make educated decisions. We cannot and should not be silencing alternative perspectives - even when it's inconvenient. I hope we are able to further investigate this matter and that the EPA begins to live up to their promise of being transparent.

U.S. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R- Menomonee Falls) represents Wisconsin's 5th Congressional District.

On June 12, the transition to digital television will be complete. I’m encouraging everyone who has not yet taken the needed steps to do so now.

Households that are already hooked up to cable, satellite or another form of pay television service do not need to do anything. These households will not see their service affected at all.

However, households that use “rabbit ears” or a rooftop antenna to receive their television reception will be affected by the transition to digital television, unless they purchase a converter box.

Government coupons to purchase the converter box are available upon request. The TV Converter Box Coupon Program, which is administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce, offers up to two coupons per household worth $40 each toward the purchase of eligible converter boxes. Coupons are available through July 31, or until supplies run out, so do not delay. Coupons are valid 90 days from the time they are mailed and converter boxes can be found at most major retail stores.  Legislation that Congress recently passed allows consumers whose coupons have expired to request replacement coupons. Individuals may apply for a coupon or a replacement coupon online at www.dtv2009.gov or by calling 1-888-DTV2009 (1-888-388-2009). Deaf or hard of hearing callers may dial 1-877-530-2634 (TTY).

Households that have already received their coupon(s) should purchase their converter boxes now so that they can hook them up prior to the transition. Installing a converter box is simple, but you should allow yourself time to iron out any kinks, including antenna adjustments and running a “channel scan” both before and after June 12, 2009 to ensure you are receiving all available digital channels. 

In addition to gaining a clearer picture, the DTV transition will also benefit the (citizens) by freeing up airwaves for use by first responders so they can better communicate during emergencies. 

The June 12 national transition to digital television is almost here.  I urge all residents to take action now and also offer any needed assistance to friends and family members who may need additional help with the transition. For technical assistance, including names of local DTV assistance organizations, you can call 1-888-CALL-FCC or go to www.dtv.gov.

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

Monday begins the unofficial start of summer. Pools across the country are opening, picnic tables are being wiped clean from a winter of gathering grime and grills are being fired up for the season’s first cookout.

The long weekend is often one of celebration and relaxation. And while many of us enjoy having that extra day off – with the excitement of summer finally being here, the school year almost being over and the taste of that first summer bratwurst – it’s easy to forget the true meaning and purpose of Memorial Day: remember, reflect and honor those who have given service to our country and made the ultimate sacrifice.

Although we don’t know all the details of the first official Memorial Day celebration, which historians date back to the 1860s, with the significance of the day often being overshadowed and so many troops currently serving overseas, the need to honor those who served is greater than ever. 

This Memorial Day, at 3 p.m. local time, I encourage you to pause in taking advantage of that sale at the mall, step away from the grill, put the backyard volleyball game on hold, turn-off the television and stop to observe a moment of silence in respect and remembrance of all who have died in service to our nation – fighting for the freedom we cherish so deeply.

And while you pause to remember these individuals on Monday, I encourage you to think about the men and women who are currently serving in the Armed Forces, who wish they could be with you this weekend, but have chosen to protect and defend our nation. We are grateful for their sacrifice, appreciate their courage, and are thankful for their devotion to our nation. 

In addition to holding a moment of silence at 3 p.m., use this Memorial Day to thank a veteran. Lay a flower on the grave of someone who served. Remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice and say your own prayer for those who are currently in harm’s way. This Monday, please join me in taking an extra step to help our country put the Memorial back into Memorial Day.

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

Lately, the Democrats have been really into iPods. First, the President gave the Queen an iPod with his speeches on it as his gift (at least the iPod worked, unlike the DVDs the President presented as the official gift to Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown).

And now, Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle wants to tax the songs you download to your iPod – among all your other online purchases. This means that buying something online will now be double taxed in Wisconsin, as Governor Doyle intends to keep the Internet access tax on the books (look on your next service bill – it’s there). 

This past Wednesday, Governor Doyle’s Secretary of Revenue and Tax Administrator was in D.C. to lobby for state taxes. I’ve never voted for a tax increase and I don’t intend to start now so that Governor Doyle can continue on his wasteful spending spree.

Wisconsin currently has a budget deficit of more than $6 billion. Rather than trying to figure out where else he can impose a tax, Governor Doyle needs to start saying NO. One of the reasons Wisconsin is struggling right now is because our taxes are too high and Governor Doyle attempts to tax everything that moves. After all, I’m pretty sure Al Gore didn’t invent the Internet just so Governor Doyle could tax it. 

Wisconsin is one of only a handful of states that has not stopped unfairly taxing an individual’s Internet service access. In the 1992 case of Quill vs. North Dakota, the Supreme Court concluded that states can only require businesses to collect state taxes in territories where they have offices or stores. Governor Doyle is exploiting a loophole to take more money from Wisconsinites to access the Internet, and he actively supports efforts to legislatively circumvent Quill so he can collect even more money now.   

Through this proposed online purchase tax, Governor Doyle is doing more harm to Wisconsin than good. Many of the governors in the 45 states that don’t tax their residents Internet usage know that when an economy is struggling, taxing customers double is not the way to increase consumer spending and improve the economy. 

Wisconsinites don’t want to pay more taxes, they want more economic relief. Governor Doyle should do better and want better for the people of Wisconsin.

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

The "restructuring" of jobs at the Chrysler Kenosha Engine Plant is a prime and realistic example of why I voted against the bailout funding, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the other mass amounts of spending Democrats have done over the last few months in the name of "economic recovery."

Since the spend-a-thon started, I've held many Town Hall Meetings. At each of these meetings I hear how the people of Wisconsin are fed up with their hard-earned taxpayer dollars being spent on subsidizing failing corporations. In my opinion, no corporation is too big to fail.

But now, the President has added insult to injury. Despite many vocal objections, the Obama Administration approved the restructuring plan with Chrysler's bankruptcy filing on April 30. What this means is that the 800 employees of Chrysler's Kenosha Engine Plant will face "restructuring" (read: lose their jobs), AND they, along with their fellow Wisconsinites will be paying for their jobs to be relocated to a facility in Mexico.

Yes, you read that correctly. Chrysler is asking for an additional $8 billion from the government, on top of the $4 billion they've already received, to help implement their plan in Mexico, despite the proper resources already existing at the Kenosha Engine Plant.

Now, outsourcing jobs in a terrible economic market is really bad governing; but then having those workers help pay for their jobs to be outsourced through taxpayer bailout funds is a slap in the face and absolutely appalling. This is not the economic recovery Wisconsinites hoped for and expected.

Last Thursday, I sent a strongly worded letter to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner asking him to deny future bailout funds to Chrysler if it goes forward with outsourcing American jobs to Mexico. I know others in the Wisconsin delegation continue to take similar actions with the Administration to bring about a positive resolution for the people of Wisconsin. Under no circumstances, should we be rewarding these types of action with more money. Let's hope the Administration reaches that conclusion as well, before it's too late.

I guess when the President says that it's time for change - he should really talk to those 800 employees who are about to experience some real life change.

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

Last Wednesday, the House and Senate passed the Democratic Budget Conference Report, the non-binding budget for 2010. While this report is not gospel, it does provide the blueprint budget recommendations to the Appropriations Committee.

In only 100 days, the new Democratic majority and the Obama Administration increased federal spending to nearly 28 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - the highest level of spending since World War II. The budget recommendation also breathes new life into the death tax, as it was scheduled to be repealed in 2010. The resurrected death tax will now be one of the ways in which Congress and President Obama will collect approximately $1.4 trillion in additional taxes over the next decade. As they are spending too much and borrowing too much, clearly they will need to tax too much to pay for their out of control spending - which includes expanding entitlements by $1 trillion over the next decade, doubling the deficit and laying the groundwork to implement universal health care.

It came as no surprise to me that the Democrats out of control spending continued through the passage of this report or that the Democrats didn't favor the Republicans smaller scale alternative spending recommendations.

What DID somewhat surprise me was that immediately after the House approved the budget report, the next item on the agenda was a resolution supporting the goals and ideals of financial literacy month. As part of this resolution for the month of April, one of the intents was to, "educate the public about the need for increased financial literacy for youth and adults in the United States."

So to be clear, members of Congress had just approved an astronomical amount of spending for 2010, to follow up on the first 100 days of record-setting spending (remember TARP, the stimulus package, the Omnibus spending bill, etc.), and immediately following that they approved a resolution calling for "financial literacy." Does anyone else see the irony in these actions?

Given no one in Washington seems to even be able to differentiate the difference between billions and trillions of dollars any more (forget about millions), and Lady Liberty's credit cards are being maxed out without even the hint of a minimum down payment, it seems as though members of Congress and President Obama should be the first in line for this financial literacy education. This way, they can lead the American public by example, as opposed to saying, "do as I say, not as I do."

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

We've heard this tune before. On Wednesday, the House of Representatives voted on an $825 billion dollar economic stimulus package, described as legislation that will create jobs and stimulate the economy. As with other recent massive spending bills shoved through Congress, I have to report that this too will do neither, which is why I voted against it.

There is no doubt that times are hard, and that our country and countrymen are hurting financially. While there is undoubtedly a role for our federal government to play in helping Americans during these trying times, this stimulus bill is not the answer. The House Democratic leadership has a history of over-reacting by passing massive funding bills that ultimately lead to buyer's remorse - for the taxpayers who are eventually stuck with the bill. Americans are still reeling over the Democrats' one-hit wonder last fall which dumped $700 billion of taxpayer money into laps of failing corporations.

My constituents have been very clear in their calls to me urging me to vote against this sham of a stimulus bill, which has managed to sneak in earmarks for activities not related to job creation. A notable example includes the sum of $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - this is not the kind of stimulation that will help our economy.

Moreover, I'm disturbed by what I've learned and read in press reports that for Democrats, this bill is "a tool for rewriting the social contract with the poor, the uninsured and the unemployed, in ways they have long yearned to do." That does not sound like an economic stimulus package, but more like a backdoor way of inserting the federal government into everyone's lives and essentially saying, "Washington knows what's best for you."

On the other hand, Republican Members of Congress have offered an alternative that provides immediate tax relief for working families, small businesses, the unemployed (who currently have to pay taxes on their unemployment benefits), and credits for responsible home-buyers who can help stabilize the housing market. Looking at the chart below, sponsored by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, you can see that the Democratic stimulus package, which relies heavily on slow government spending initiatives, will not stimulate the economy now. Conversely, the few tax cuts that are included in the stimulus bill, will impact families and the economy twice as fast as government spending.

Finally, we have to ask where this money is coming from. At some point, our creditors - including countries like China and foreign organizations like OPEC - may call in our debts. When that happens, we're going to have to cough up the dough, and if we don't have it, our taxes will soar to prevent a total government shutdown. I'd prefer to bring an end to these wasteful spending bills to keep the fat lady from singing.

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

It's pretty hard these days to turn on a TV or pick up a paper without hearing or reading about bailouts. When Congress passed a bill in October providing around $800 billion dollars to help the US financial industry, I voted against it, as well as an earlier version a few days prior.

Now, we find ourselves in the midst of yet another potential bailout, because even as I write this column, the Senate, followed by the House of Representatives, is holding hearings on Capitol Hill to determine how more taxpayer money could be spent to bailout the auto industry.

It's bad enough that Congress is trying to find more ways to spend money it doesn't have, but it's a heck of a lot worse when that money is spent ineffectively. Rather than dipping into federal coffers and putting our country deeper into debt, we could help residents of this country in a real and practical manner.

For example, as we all know, Americans have seen significant decreases in the value of their investments, particularly their Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and 401(k)s.

Older Americans are particularly affected by the financial downturn.  Under current federal law, individuals aged 70 ½ and over are required to start taking minimum withdrawals from their individual retirement account or 401(k) plan. The amount of the withdrawal is based on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) life expectancy tables and the value of the account the end of the previous year.

This year, that's a real problem. The S&P 500 index has declined 42 percent since the end of 2007. This means that many seniors will be forced to draw down their accounts at a time of decreased value, resulting in significant financial losses. 

For that reason, I am proud to cosponsor legislation which would suspend the mandatory minimum withdrawal requirement for 2008 and 2009. The Temporary IRA Distribution Suspension Act will give retirees the option of leaving some or all of their current contribution in the market. The contributions would not be subject to existing tax penalties, and would be allowed to regain value as the current and next Congress continues to work to get our economy back on track. 

While younger retirees at least have the option of postponing withdrawals until the market recovers, those who are older than 70-1/2 aren't as fortunate. These individuals have worked hard, saved, and invested their money for years. The government should not force them to sell in a bad market.

I am hopeful that Congress will pass the Temporary IRA Distribution Suspension Act, and help preserve older Americans' retirement accounts.

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