Cynthia Lummis RSS Articles

Lummis Announces Park County Office Hours

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Michael B. Enzi, U.S. Senator John, U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis R-Wyo., has announced their respective Field Staff Members Karen McCreery, Pam Buline and Ryan McConnaughey will be available to visit with Park County residents at the following date, times and locations:

Cody
Monday, February 13, 2012
1:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.
Cody City Hall
1338 Rumsey Avenue

Powell
Monday, February 13, 2012
3:30 p.m. – 4:30p.m.
Powell City Hall
270 North Clark

Area residents are encouraged to visit with the Wyoming delegation on an individual basis to discuss issues or their views, questions, or concerns regarding the federal government. These comments and concerns will then be relayed to their U.S. Senators and Congressman.

Please contact Senator Enzi’s office at 307-527-9444, Senator Barrasso’s office at 307-856-6442 or Congressman Lummis’ office at 307-261-6596 with any questions.

Lummis Expresses Disappointment in Sen. Tester’s Incomplete EAJA Legislation

Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT

WASHINGTON - U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) issued the following statement after Senator Jon Tester’s (D-MT) introduction of S.2042, legislation to track and report on tax-payer subsidies for lawsuits against the government:

“The fact that Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) payments has operated under a cloak of secrecy for the last 17 years is widely accepted to be a problem. Users of EAJA, including veterans, seniors and environmental organizations, collectively agree this program should be subject to tracking and reporting requirements. So I find it odd that Sen. Tester would introduce a bill to track only half of EAJA payments.

“In 2010 I introduced H.R. 4717, the Open EAJA Act of 2010, legislation that would comprehensively track and report on EAJA payments made government wide. Although Sen. Tester was invited to become a cosponsor in the Senate, he refused.

“Between the initial introduction of the 2010 bill, and the recent introduction of my bill to improve and modernize the program, H.R. 1996, the Government Litigation Savings Act, a compelling body of evidence has been compiled on EAJA payments. We now know that EAJA was written for veterans, retirees and small business and that EAJA payments are flowing to those groups as intended. We also know that EAJA payments are flowing to large, well-funded environmental groups, which was not the intent of EAJA.

“Environmental groups have environmental laws that give them the right to sue, settle, and receive tax-payer subsidies to their heart’s content. Conversely, EAJA provides for the nation’s veterans and seniors and small business owners. We do not need the incomplete data that would be provided by Senator Tester’s bill to know that today, environmental groups unfairly use both avenues to pad the coffers of their litigation shops. What we do need is legislation to return EAJA to its intended purpose – reimbursement for lawsuits not already provided for by other laws. We also need to understand specific details regarding EAJA payments so we know if it is working for the people it was intended to serve.

“I had assumed the Senator, as I am, was interested in understanding exactly how EAJA works for seniors and veterans. Unfortunately, Senator Tester’s bill does not require tracking or reporting for the section of EAJA chiefly responsible for the payment of legal representation for our nation’s veterans and seniors. Even if he ignores the fact that EAJA is for seniors and veterans, and environmental laws are for environmentalists, I’m still confounded as to why Sen. Tester wouldn’t want to track the entirety of EAJA payments.

“I call on Sen. Tester to abandon his legislation, and support comprehensive tracking of EAJA payments and clarify the line between EAJA and environmental laws.”

Background:

· The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) was passed by Congress in 1980, establishing two methods by which individuals or groups could recover the costs of suing the federal government.

· The first method is through agency proceedings, codified under Title 5, Section 504 of U.S. Code. It provides payments for adjudicatory proceedings within the agency themselves, as opposed to courts proceedings.

o The EAJA required the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) to track these payments and report on them to Congress.

o In 1994, Congress defunded ACUS without transferring the responsibility of tracking EAJA payments to another agency.

· The second method to recover EAJA fees is through court proceedings, codified in Title 28, Section 2412(d) of U.S. Code.

o The EAJA directed the Department of Justice to track these payments and report them to Congress.

o In 1994, The Paperwork Reduction Act eliminated the DoJ’s tracking and reporting responsibility for EAJA payments.

· In March of 2010, U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis (WY-R) and then-Representative Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (SD-D) introduced H.R. 4717(Open EAJA Act of 2010). This legislation, along with its mirror legislation in the Senate (S. 3122), would have reinstated tracking and reporting of both Title 5 and Title 28 of EAJA. It also required that the online reporting provide more detailed information on who receives EAJA payments, and to what amount, but left the remaining EAJA law intact. Sen. Tester refused to support that legislation.

· Following a year of study on court documents and IRS filings, Rep. Lummis and U.S. Senator John Barrasso (WY-R) introduced the Government Litigation Savings Act (GLSA). The GLSA (H.R. 1996, S. 1061) requires comprehensive tracking and reporting of both Title 5 and Title 28 of EAJA, and consolidates the tracking and reporting within the newly reconstituted ACUS.

o GLSA requires ACUS to track the payments, and provide an annual online database that allows the public to search EAJA payments. The GLSA requires the report to indicate which groups received EAJA payments, for what amount and for what purpose.

· On January 30, 2012, Sen. Tester introduced a bill requiring only partial tracking of EAJA payments (S. 2042).

o S. 2042 requires the DoJ to track and report only Title 28 (court awarded EAJA payments). S. 2042 does not require tracking Title 5 payments, those most likely to go to veterans and seniors.

o S. 2042 does not require the DoJ provide in its report anything other than a total of EAJA payments over which the DoJ has jurisdiction, rendering the data meaningless.

Lummis Announces Afton, Thayne and Alpine Office Hours

Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Christine D’Amico
(202) 225-2311

Lummis Announces Afton, Thayne and Alpine Office Hours

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., has announced that her field representative, Pat Alluman, is scheduled to hold “Office Hours” in Afton, Thayne and Alpine at the following times and places:

Afton
Monday, January 30, 2012
1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Afton Town Hall
416 South Washington Street

Thayne
Monday, January 30, 2012
2:30 p.m. – 3:30p.m.
Thayne Town Hall
171 Vista Drive

Alpine
Monday, January 30, 2012
4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Alpine Town Hall
Off highway 89

Area residents are encouraged to visit with Aullman on an individual basis to discuss issues or their views, questions, or concerns regarding the federal government. These comments and concerns will then be relayed to Lummis.

If residents are unable to attend at the scheduled times, but would like information or assistance, please contact Aullman at (307) 883-1088.

Rep. Cynthia Lummis Response to State of the Union Address

Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Christine D’Amico
(202) 225-2311

January 24, 2012

WASHINGTON – U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., issued the following statement following President Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress:

“The President’s policies have not only failed they’ve actually made matters worse. So I think it’s time that we try some bipartisan ideas. Let’s cut spending 1 percent per year for the next eight years. That alone will balance the budget.

“Then there’s the idea of reforming our entitlement programs in order to save them because they’re on the path to insolvency now.

“Also we need to focus on jobs. Republicans have sent 30 jobs bills to the Senate, with no response from the Senate, while the Senate itself is on its 1,000 day without a budget. We need to work together on the Keystone Pipeline and other means to create jobs for our country.

“Finally, it’s time we stop spending our money on other people’s energy. We have plenty of natural gas, oil, coal, nuclear and renewables here in Wyoming. Energy independence means more Wyoming jobs.

“I call on the President and the Senate to work with us on a bipartisan basis to solve these problems for the American people. They expect no less.”

Lummis Statement on Wolf Rider Language in FY 2012 Appropriations Legislation

Fri, 16 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) issued the following statement regarding the removal of the Lummis wolf rider language in the fiscal year 2012 Appropriations legislation that mirrored a no-sue clause passed in the Spring that delisted wolves in five other Western states:

“The decision to pull the wolf language was based on politics, not policy. Radical environmentalists have the ear of many in Washington and their considerable sway in the White House is the reason for the removal of this important language. When the deal that gives Wyoming the ability to manage wolves is complete, environmental groups will resume their relentless lawsuits. Governor Mead’s successful negotiations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will ensure that wolf management in our state is returned to the most capable managers: Wyoming’s on the ground experts. I will fight tooth and nail to protect Wyoming’s right to manage wolves and all wildlife within our borders. ”

Lummis to Labor Secretary Solis – Hands Off 4-H, FFA, and Family Farms, Ranches

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) today urged Department of Labor Secretary Hilda Solis to withdraw the Department’s misguided proposal to limit the participation of youth in farming and ranching activities.

The DOL’s rulemaking, initiated without congressional authorization, will have significant negative consequences for family farms and ranches and the training provided by 4-H and FFA. The rule places new federal limitations on the work young people can perform on farms and ranches, including operating tractors and handling livestock. It also narrows the exemption from federal rules enjoyed by family farms and ranches.

Raised on the family ranch herself, Lummis told Secretary Hilda Solis, “There may be good intentions behind your proposal, but that does not justify this federal intrusion into the livelihood of America’s farming and ranching community, of which I am a proud member. Agriculture is at once an occupation, a way of life and a cultural asset of rural communities. It is a complex and technologically-advanced trade, the perpetuation of which is critical to meet rapidly increasing global demand for a safe and reliable food supply. America’s agricultural tradition is based on the intergenerational transfer of skills and knowledge, most of which must be obtained through hands-on experience.

“Your proposed rule imposes new limits on youth operation and maintenance of tractors and other equipment, interaction with livestock, and herding on horseback. What your rules don’t recognize is that supervised exposure to these tools and activities is the most effective way to instill safe practices. The notion that the federal government knows better than an experienced farmer or rancher how to acclimate young people to agriculture is beyond comprehension.”

The full text of the letter follows:

December 15, 2011

The Honorable Hilda Solis

Secretary of Labor

200 Constitution Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20210

Dear Secretary Solis,

I write to request the withdrawal of your Department’s pending proposal to limit the participation of youth in farming and ranching activities (RIN 1235-AA06). The proposed rule should be immediately withdrawn because it does not comport with the realities of life on the family farm and ranch.

There may be good intentions behind your proposal, but that does not justify this federal intrusion into the livelihood of America’s farming and ranching community, of which I am a proud member. Agriculture is at once an occupation, a way of life and a cultural asset of rural communities. It is a complex and technologically-advanced trade, the perpetuation of which is critical to meet rapidly increasing global demand for a safe and reliable food supply. America’s agricultural tradition is based on the intergenerational transfer of skills and knowledge, most of which must be obtained through hands-on experience.

Your proposed rule imposes new limits on youth operation and maintenance of tractors and other equipment, interaction with livestock, and herding on horseback. What your rules don’t recognize is that supervised exposure to these tools and activities is the most effective way to instill safe practices. The notion that the federal government knows better than an experienced farmer or rancher how to acclimate young people to agriculture is beyond comprehension.

Because you propose to concurrently narrow the general parental exemption, the impact of these new restrictions will extend to a broad swath of family operations. Your interpretation of the law would limit the exemption to operations wholly-owned by a parent, which fails to acknowledge significant changes in farm and ranch ownership patterns over the years. Many operations are owned partly by other relatives under business arrangements that would not be covered by your interpretation.

I also take issue with your proposals to limit training opportunities provided by 4-H, the National FFA Organization (FFA) and similar organizations. These long-standing youth training traditions are successful in part because of their intimate relation to rural communities and the needs of local agriculture. I am disturbed by your Department’s criticism of this locally-determined approach and attempt to replace it with Washington-driven standards.

Finally, as a Member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, I am concerned that you have embarked on this rulemaking in the absence of congressional direction. Your purported goal of “parity” between agricultural and nonagricultural sectors actually runs counter to congressional direction, which for decades has recognized the uniqueness of agricultural occupations by creating agriculture-specific rules in the Fair Labor Standards Act. Please withdraw your proposed rule and refrain from other pursuits of “parity” in the absence of congressional direction.

Thank you in advance for your consideration and timely response. Please contact me or my staff should you require any clarification of my request.

Sincerely,

Cynthia M. Lummis

Member of Congress

Lummis Statement on Vote Against National Defense Authorization Act

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) released the following statement regarding her vote in opposition to the FY ’12 National Defense Authorization Act:

“Although the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) contains important provisions for national defense, after careful review of the legislation, I believe that the language in the bill muddies the water concerning the due process rights granted to American citizens by the Constitution. Granting authority to indefinitely detain American citizens suspected of terrorism without charge and without sufficiently addressing what rights an American citizen has if they are suspected of terrorism and arrested on U.S. soil, sets a troubling precedent.”

CST: Lummis’ Mission: Less government spending

Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

CHEYENNE — U.S. Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., is vocally unhappy with House Republican leaders for not holding the line on spending during ongoing budget negotiations. The second-term congresswoman from Cheyenne also said she opposes attempts to extend the payroll tax cut, saying it’s necessary for the federal government to avoid going deeper in debt. House and Senate appropriators are currently working to hammer out an agreement to pass an omnibus spending bill by Dec. 16, when a temporary spending bill expires.

Discretionary spending in the new budget is expected to be capped at $1.050 trillion, according to The Hill newspaper. While that’s about $40 billion lower than last year’s discretionary spending levels, Lummis said, it would exceed the $1.043 trillion spending cap set in the August debt deal, as an additional $7 billion would go toward federal disaster aid. That would violate the House Republicans’ Pledge To America signed last year, said Lummis and 27 other conservative Republican House members in a letter to House GOP leaders last month. “Doing so will further erode the trust that was placed in us by the people we represent and who are counting on us to save our country from the fiscally ruinous decisions of this Administration and past Congresses,” the letter stated.

Lummis has been a vocal supporter of the House GOP’s “cut, cap and balance” proposal, voted down this summer, that would have lowered discretionary spending to 2008 levels and slashed mandatory federal spending by about $50 billion. Last month, she also joined dozens of lawmakers in pressing Congress’ special debt reduction supercommittee to consider all options, including higher revenues, and shoot for $4 trillion in savings.

She’s certainly not alone in her dissatisfaction. In September, at least 50 GOP members vowed not to vote for any appropriations package that didn’t slash spending below the August spending cap. Lummis is quick to lay much of the blame with the Democratic- controlled Senate, which she said has refused to pass a budget. As a result, she said, House Speaker

John Boehner, R-Ohio, has had to “negotiate with himself.” “I do think our leadership’s heart is in the right place,” she said. “But I’m encouraging them to pick up the pace.” Senate Democrats have balked on a number of controversial riders in the House’s version of the omnibus budget, including a proposal by Lummis that would ban legal challenges to a pending federal- state agreement that would remove Wyoming wolves from the endangered species list.

And if the 50 or so House Republicans make good on their threat to oppose the budget, House GOP leaders may have to seek House Democratic support to pass it, according to several media reports. Lummis is also balking at supporting any proposal to extend a Social Security payroll tax cut, another contentious issue that has divided House Republicans and

Senate Democrats. If the tax cut isn’t extended by Dec. 31, workers will see their paychecks reduced by 2 percent. But Lummis said that with the national debt exceeding $15 trillion, the payroll cut should be taken off the table completely for the time being. “I don’t know anyone working who wants to see us borrow money from China to pay for their own Medicare and Social Security,”

Lummis said. “People in Wyoming know that you can’t get something for nothing.” One area where Lummis doesn’t want to see cuts is in America’s nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal. The Obama administration already plans to reduce the nation’s 450 land-based ICBMs, which are spread evenly between Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota. F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne oversees ICBM missiles stationed in Wyoming, Nebraska and northern Colorado.

In addition, with the debt supercommittee failing to reach a deal last month, unless Congress acts, automatic cuts will kick in starting in 2013, including a $500 billion to $600 billion reduction in Defense Department funding. That could mean the elimination of the nation’s entire force of 450 ICBMs, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta wrote last month in a letter to U.S. Sens. John McCain, RAriz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Last week, Lummis and House members from Montana and North Dakota wrote Panetta urging him to preserve America’s current ICBM force of 450 missiles. Lummis said it’s unclear right now exactly how the ICBM cuts would affect F.E. Warren. But she said it costs about $3 million for each land-based ICBM warhead — more than three times cheaper than a warhead delivered by via a bomber or a submarine. “It’s going to be important to us to try to remind folks of that during these negotiations,” she said.

Lummis Applauds Bipartisan House Passage of Farm Dust Legislation

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

Today, U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Vice Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, issued the following statement after the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 1633, the Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act:

“Imagine farmers being fined for doing things like driving a tractor down a dirt road or tilling a field. That’s what burdensome farm dust regulations would mean for our agricultural producers. This unjustified rule would impose significant costs on our farmers, ranchers, and rural communities, and ultimately, full compliance would be impossible to achieve, since kicking up a bit of dust is simply a fact of life on farms and ranches. This important legislation will bring much-needed certainty to Wyoming’s farmers and ranchers and some common sense to Washington.”

Background:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM). The review is required every five years under the Clean Air Act. The Second Draft Policy Assessment (PA) for PM released on July 8, 2010 in the Federal Register lays the foundation for establishing the most stringent and unparalleled regulation of dust in our nation’s history. H.R. 1633 is a part of the Jobs Frontier report, a Congressional Western Caucus initiative which highlights over 40 concrete legislative solutions that would create over 3 million jobs with little or no cost to taxpayers. H.R. 1633 now joins eight Jobs Frontier measures passed by the House and awaiting Senate action.

Lummis Statement on the REINS Act

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT

U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) issued the following statement after House passage of H.R. 10, The REINS Act, a bill that reins in out of control federal regulations by requiring congressional approval for any federal regulation with an economic impact of $100 million or more:

“While America’s economic environment struggles to regain its footing, Washington’s regulatory environment is enjoying robust and steady growth. In fact, more people are now at work writing government regulations than people working for McDonalds, Ford, Disney and Boeing combined. Washington officials who are not elected and cannot be held accountable to the American people have handed down mandates for decades that actively hinder the economy; not to mention that some of these rules have no place or justification in the American economy. With the game constantly changing for our country’s job creators, the incentive to make long-term business investments is nonexistent.

“It’s time to rein in the red tape factory in Washington, D.C. Anytime Washington issues a mandate that has an impact of $100 million or more, it should be subject to the review of Congress. The REINS Act is an important tool to help restore transparency and accountability to the maze of mandates created by Washington bureaucrats.”

BACKGROUND:

· If the federal government's regulatory operation were a business, it would be one of the 50 biggest in the country in terms of revenues, and the third largest in terms of employees.

· According to the Small Business Administration, federal regulations cost our economy $1.75 trillion per year (or one-seventh the national income).

· The Obama Administration’s December 2010 report on federal regulations listed more than 4,200 regulatory actions under development by federal agencies.