You are here:

The Hill: Johnson threatens Senate filibuster over lack of budget

Posted January 27, 2012 in Balanced Budget, BCA, Budget, Economy & Jobs

By Josiah Ryan

Freshman Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) threatened once again this week to bring the Senate to a grinding halt if Democrats fails to produce a budget that can clear the upper chamber by April 15.

“If we haven’t passed a budget by April 15th this year, you can rest assured that on April 16th… I’ll start withholding my consent to draw attention to the issue that we have not passed a budget, that we are not seriously addressing the financial situation of this country,” said Johnson speaking at the Capitol. “It’s the minimum that the American people can expect or should expect.

“This is a national scandal,” continued Johnson. “[I]t is imperative that we get our federal budget under control. And the first step, the minimum thing that Congress should do, is follow the law that it passed to put discipline on itself and pass a budget.”

Johnson was referring to the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, which requires the House and Senate to each pass budget resolutions with spending limits and revenue targets by April 15 for the next fiscal year.

Republicans in both chambers on Tuesday noted in advance of President Obama’s State of the Union address that it was by coincidence the 1,000-day anniversary of the last time Congress passed a budget by regular order.

Ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Budget Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) suggested his Democratic counterpart Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) did not want to produce a concrete budget because it would reveal plans for out-of-control spending.

Conrad, however, hit back from the Senate floor arguing that the summer’s Budget Control Act included a budget for the next two years and in was in some respects more meaningful than a budget since it carries the force of law.

Johnson, however, dismissed that argument, claiming the Congressional Budget Act still needed to be satisfied with a real budget, passed by regular Senate order.

“It is a ridiculous notion to say that a hurried backroom deal replaces the budgeting process and committee markup in the Senate,” Johnson said. “Budgets aren’t just a single maximum number, but begin the process for Congress to identify the nation’s priorities and what resources will be spent to address them.”

Johnson has leveled several filibuster threats since entering the Senate last January, making good on at least one in June when he also objected to what he characterized as Democrats’ negligence on budgetary matters.

This article was published on The Hill.

calendar

Op-Ed: Bridge is example of political parties working together

Posted January 27, 2012 in Bi-Partisanship, Stillwater Bridge Project

By Ron Johnson, U.S. Wisconsin Senator (R-Oshkosh)

If you pay attention to the news from Washington, D.C., you might believe that Republicans and Democrats can’t agree on anything. But I went to Washington willing to work with anyone who will acknowledge a problem and help develop real solutions. A case in point is the bipartisan agreement that has now been reached on replacing the Stillwater lift bridge.

Traveling around western Wisconsin, the need for a new bridge crossing over the St. Croix River is obvious. The current bridge has been a problem for decades. It is 80 years old, and was rated “structurally deficient” in 2008. The Interstate 35W bridge, which collapsed in Minnesota in 2007, received a considerably higher rating than the Stillwater lift bridge.

The lift bridge was never intended to carry the level of traffic that it currently does. The Twin Cities has seen enormous growth since 1930 — as has the entire region. A bridge that was sufficient 80 years ago is simply inadequate now. All too often, drivers are caught in backups that stretch for miles. This has created serious safety concerns, as motorists cut corners and look for ways to cross the river more quickly.

The outdated bridge poses more than just a safety concern. This inadequate infrastructure imposes limits on economic growth in the region. When workers and commerce can’t move quickly and efficiently, jobs, investment, and growth go elsewhere. This has become a serious problem for people on both sides of the St. Croix River.

My experience in manufacturing and business has also taught me how economic development can positively affect an area when a major project is initiated. The economic impact of a new bridge on the local communities — both during construction and after — will be decidedly positive. According to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, more than 6,000 full time workers will be required during peak construction. In addition, this upgrade of an important element of regional infrastructure will help facilitate economic development for decades.

It has been 30 years since the states of Wisconsin and Minnesota began working with the Department of Transportation to determine a way to replace the bridge. It has been nearly 10 years since a group of 27 stakeholders started meeting to try to develop a concrete plan. And it’s been six years since those stakeholders came together in near unanimity on a way forward: the existing bridge would be retained for pedestrian and bicycle crossings, while a new one was built for vehicles. That bridge would be built with a combination of state and federal money — funds that have already been provided. With clear direction and buy-in from those most affected, it seemed only a matter of time before the project was under way.

Since then, the biggest obstacle has been federal regulations that prevented a new bridge from being built. The well-intentioned Wild and Scenic Rivers Act effectively blocked any action. Instead of seeking a balance between economic development and environmental protection, some interest groups have resolutely stood in the way of a compromise.

Despite this opposition, Wisconsin and Minnesota members of Congress from both parties worked together to break the logjam. In November, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved the St. Croix River Crossing Project Authorization Act. Both Congressional delegations then met with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to express support for the legislation. The bill grants an exemption that allows the crossing to be built with safeguards to ensure it has a minimal impact on the environment. The bill was approved by the Senate Monday.

Passage of this legislation is an important bipartisan achievement of the Congressional delegations of Wisconsin and Minnesota. It would not have been possible without the hard work of bill sponsor Senator Amy Klobuchar, who has been a real leader on this issue, as well as myself, Senator Al Franken and Senator Herb Kohl. Hopefully the House with the strong leadership of Representatives Michele Bachmann, Chip Cravaack, Sean Duffy, and Ron Kind will soon pass the bill and deliver a common sense win for the entire region.

This article was published on The Hudson Star Observer .

calendar

Senator Johnson’s Response to President Obama’s State of the Union Address

Posted January 25, 2012

Senator Ron Johnson delivered the following remarks in response to the President’s State of the Union address:

“On September 30, 1987, our total federal debt was $2.3 trillion. It took our ancestors over 200 years to accumulate that much debt. Last year, Washington passed an agreement that will increase the debt ceiling by another $2.1 trillion, and we’ll blow through that in less than two years.

“Today marks 1,000 days since the Democrat-controlled Senate has passed a budget. Last year, President Obama’s budget was so unserious; it lost in the United States Senate by a vote of ZERO to 97. Not one member of the President’s own party voted for his budget, and he put no pressure on Senate Democrats to pass one of their own. As a result, the largest financial entity in the world, our $3.6 trillion federal government, is running totally out of control.

“On the single greatest threat currently facing America, our unsustainable deficit spending and growing debt, President Obama and his party have shown absolutely no leadership. Instead, the man who said he would unite us has purposely sought to divide us by pitting one group of Americans against another.

“In his efforts to divert attention away from his miserable economic record, he is targeting scapegoats in order to blame anyone but himself and his policies. He fully understands the ugly division he is sowing in America, but his willingness to do so demonstrates his lack of good will in working with those of us who genuinely want to solve our fiscal problems.

“President Obama is talented at giving a good speech, but his actions speak far louder than his words. He says he wants to create jobs, invest in shovel ready infrastructure projects, and reduce America’s dependence on Middle East oil. But then he kills the Keystone XL pipeline, and the 20,000 jobs and $20 billion of private sector infrastructure spending that died with it.

“In the year ahead, Americans will have a choice. Do we want to follow President Obama down his path of bigger government, unsustainable debt, higher taxes and energy costs, a government takeover of healthcare, and anemic economic growth? Or, do we want to put our nation on a path toward true prosperity and economic security?

“That prosperity can only be achieved by growing our economy though the private sector, reducing Washington’s spending and over regulation, maximizing our domestic energy resources, repealing Obamacare, and enacting common sense, pro-growth tax reform.

“It is time for America to choose.”

calendar

The Hill: GOP lawmakers mark 1,000 days since last Senate budget

Posted January 24, 2012 in Balanced Budget, BCA, Budget, Budget Control Act, Budget Deficit, Economy & Jobs, SOTU, State of the Union

By Bernie Becker and Erik Wasson – 01/24/12 12:33 PM ET

Senate Republicans slammed their Democratic colleagues on Tuesday for not passing a budget in exactly 1,000 days, accusing Democrats of shirking their duty in a period of soaring deficits.

Four senators at a Tuesday news conference said President Obama should be more of a leader on reining in deficits. GOP lawmakers have for months pointed out the time elapsed since the Senate last passed a budget.

“It is imperative that we get our federal budget under control and the first step – the minimum thing that Congress should do – is follow the law that it passed to put discipline on itself,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), who also called the lack of a Senate budget “a national scandal.”

Johnson also said that he would procedurally tie up the Senate if the chamber hasn’t passed a budget by April 15, a move he also made last June to protest the budget situation.

“The other side really does need to put their plan, their budget, on a piece of paper,” Johnson added. “Not just say that they’re for a grand bargain, not just say they’re for fiscal control.”

Republicans’ latest push on the issue comes the same day that the president is scheduled to head to the Capitol to deliver his State of the Union address.

GOP aides said that it was a coincidence that the president was invited to speak to Congress on the 1,000-day anniversary of the last Senate budget. Obama also delivered his 2011 State of the Union address on the fourth Tuesday in January.

For their part, Senate Democrats on Tuesday pushed back on the GOP claims that the Senate had not cleared a budget plan.

The Senate Budget Committee, chaired by Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), released an analysis asserting that the deal reached in August to raise the debt ceiling was, for all intents and purposes, a budget.

The Budget Control Act (BCA) included caps on discretionary spending and examined entitlement programs and revenue, the analysis said. “Republican rhetoric aside, Congress did pass a budget,” the fact sheet added.

“Either they don’t know what they did or they are misrepresenting what we all did,” Conrad said on the floor.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said that Democrats should be embarassed to claim the budget act as their blueprint because it “fell far, far short of solving this country’s fiscal problems.”

“If the BCA is their answer to fiscal sanity and preventing a debt crisis, then heaven help us,” Ryan said.

The office of Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) pointed out that Senate Democrats did write a budget resolution but refused to mark it up in committee last year.

Sessions said that the U.S. still faced a dire debt situation, even with the caps included in the debt ceiling deal and the automatic cuts scheduled to go into effect due to the failure of the deficit-reduction supercommittee.

“The limits that we have are not sufficient,” Sessions said. “They were the best that could be accomplished under the circumstances, with the threat of a government shutdown.”

In all, the debt-ceiling deal will lead to north of $2 trillion in spending cuts, while bipartisan commissions have said that the U.S. needs more like $4 trillion in fiscal restraint over a decade.

“Is it not the responsibility of the president, the chief executive office, to tell the American people that the $2 trillion is not enough?” Sessions said, hours before Obama’s State of the Union address.

target=”_blank”>This article was published on TheHill.com.