url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=60ef538d-ab36-4454-ac97-9434aaeacd1a,Senate Passes Bipartisan PRIME Act Provisions to Curb Medicare and Medicaid Waste and Fraud,2015-12-18,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today, the Senate passed major provisions of the bipartisan Preventing and Reducing Improper Medicare and Medicaid Expenditures (PRIME) Act (S. 861) to improve program integrity within Medicare and Medicaid.The PRIME Act, which has 17 bipartisan cosponsors, was introduced by Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.). Medicare and Medicaid provide access to quality healthcare to seniors, children and families across the country every day, said Sen. Carper. But each year, millions of dollars that should be going to our most vulnerable Americans are lost to waste and fraud. The common-sense measures within the PRIME Act are a win-win. They will help us fulfill our responsibility to make sure this vitally important program has the resources it needs, while working to make us better stewards of taxpayer dollars by reducing instances of waste, fraud, and abuse. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the House to get this legislation over the finish line and on to the President for his signature. We hear a lot about how Washington lacks common sense. People are usually right about that. This time, however, were using common sense, said Sen. Enzi. This bill does not affect coverage or benefits, but does make practical changes to the system. Weve used Government Accountability Office, HHS Inspector General and other expert findings and recommendations to build in better efficiencies. The provisions approved today will specify criminal penalties for fraudulently buying, selling or distributing Medicare and Medicaid patient information, specifically beneficiary identification numbers. The legislation will also facilitate information sharing between federally administered Medicare and state-administered Medicaid to prevent fraudulent activity in both programs, and incentivize accurate payments to Medicare providers in order to prevent improper payments. The PRIME Act provisions were included as part of a larger package of health care related legislation approved by the Senate by Unanimous Consent called the Patient Access and Medicare Protection Act (S.2425). In April, an additional set of waste and fraud prevention provisions from the PRIME Act, were included as part of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act that was signed into law in April.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/video?ContentRecord_id=34bf9421-d6d6-4e1e-bb56-d1d38fdcbfdf,Gillette Christmas ornament speech,2015-12-17,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"December 16, 2015 Senator Enzi went to the floor to speak about a letter and Christmas ornament that he received from Gillette seniors that they wanted delivered to the president. The letter along with the ornament expressed how the industry of Campbell County play an important role in supporting vital programs for the community.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=403a653e-0e91-4ca4-b600-7da1fbfece81,Barrasso: Its Been a Productive Year in the Senate,2015-12-15,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting the accomplishments of the United States Senate this year. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Its actually been a very productive year in the Senate. And Im not just the only one saying that. Last Wednesday, U.S. News and World Report said, Theres reason for optimism on Capitol Hill ahead of a looming deadline to pass the trillion-dollar omnibus funding measure. The magazine asked: Whats behind it? Well, they said, After years of partisan gridlock, Congress has seemingly regained the ability to get things done. The Bipartisan Policy Center said the same thing recently. They pointed out that the House and Senate have both both - made important progress its year. They said, Both chambers have reinvigorated a robust committee process. Getting committees back to work is essential to getting Congress back to work and thats what Republicans have done this year. So far this year, the total number of days worked is up from last year by almost three additional weeks of work on the Senate floor.. This is in comparison to when Harry Reid was in charge. Weve been considering a lot more amendments this year as well. For all of last year, there were only 15 up or down votes on amendments. Just 15 for the entire year. So far this year, weve voted on around 200 amendments. These are amendments both by Democrats and by Republicans. These are opportunities for individual senators to stand up, to offer their ideas and to be heard. Ideas that they think will make America better, make legislation better. Not just what the leader of the party wants Senator Reid, who blocked so many amendments, and not just what Senator Reid might be best for the president. No. What the American people think is important. So, when you look into the substance of what weve done, the news is even better for the American people. So far this year, weve passed major legislation that has been helping Americans across the country. ""We passed an important law on Medicare to make much-needed reforms, and to reauthorize the Childrens Health Insurance Program. We passed the first multi-year highway bill since 2005. We passed the longest reauthorization of the Highway Trust Fund in almost a decade. Now, these arent just the short-term patches for a few months or a year. Thats what happened when the Democrats were in charge. These are long-term fixes that create the certainty and stability our economy needs. This year, the Senate passed the most significant education reform since 2002. We passed an important human trafficking law. We passed a budget can you imagine that? There hasnt been a budget to pass both houses of Congress since 2009. Well, we passed one this year. As chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee, I can tell you that we have made a lot of progress this year on legislation to improve the lives of people across Indian Country. We passed a measure that will help make crucial and long-overdue improvements to roads on tribal lands. Just last week, we passed legislation that helps give tribes more economic opportunities. It gives them more control over developing their natural resources. Republicans are eager to work with Democrats and to produce legislation that the president will sign. We are proud of these accomplishments of this year. At the same time, we are not afraid to challenge President Obamas most misguided and dangerous policies. Thats why the Senate passed legislation repealing Obamacare to ease Americans pain under this law. We passed a measure on the Keystone XL pipeline to create jobs, create energy security, and economic growth and we put that bill on the presidents desk to force him to finally make a decision. We challenged President Obamas job-crushing energy regulations by voting to block his power plan and his devastating rules on waters of the United States. And I would point out, Mr. President, looking at a headline from yesterdays New York Times, EPA broke the law with regard to pushing their water rule. EPA broke the law. The EPA, which is this issue of this whole waters of the United States - the EPA must be held accountable, accountable for breaking the law, accountable for misuse of government funds. So we will hold this administration accountable. Of course, we also opposed the presidents nuclear deal with Iran. We have shown the American people that we can get things done, and there is a viable alternative to the reckless policies coming out of the White House. Looking back on what we have been able to do this year, I think there is real reason for optimism. The Senate does not have to be the place gridlock that it had become under Harry Reid. In 2016 the Senate will be taking more votes on important legislation and on amendments. There will be more debates, and more consideration of ideas from both sides of the aisle. Thats what the American people have sent us here to do. Its what they expect from us. The American people have seen that it is possible to govern and that not everything in Washington is broken. It just takes leaders who are committed to getting things done and committed to looking out for the best interests of the American people. This is the end of the year it is not the end of this Congress. It is not the end of what the Senate can do to make the lives of the American people better. Weve done a lot there is still a lot of work to be done over the next month and the next year. We will continue to work to relieve the burden and the expense of excess government regulations. To reduce the power of unelected, unaccountable Washington bureaucrats. And to return to the states and to the people more of the control that belongs to them. The goal is to give the people at home the power to make their own decisions about whats best for them, their communities, and their families ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=957c91d6-247a-4e64-933a-44f9b42d8d8f,Barrasso Responds to Paris Climate Deal,2015-12-15,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding President Obamas support for the United Nations climate proposal recently signed in Paris: Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Over the weekend, countries meeting in Paris signed a broad new climate agreement. President Obama called the agreement a success. He said it was a strong agreement. Well, despite the fanfare, lets keep some things in perspective. There are important parts of this agreement that can do a great deal of damage to American jobs and to the American economy. And that should be, and is a big concern to the American people. Parts of the agreement can do damage to our jobs and our economy. At the same time, important parts are not binding on other countries. The American people are right to wonder if the White House has signed yet another terrible deal just to try to shore up the presidents legacy. Earlier this year, President Obama was so anxious, so desperate to get a deal with Iran over its nuclear program, that the president signed a terrible deal. Since then, the International Atomic Energy Agency says that Iran has seriously undermined the agencys ability to verify what Iran has done. Well, here we are again. Its another bad deal, and other countries who signed it, well they are already ignoring it. To point, India is the worlds third-largest emitter of carbon. The agreement was on Saturday, this agreement tied plans to meet their emission targets to getting U.S. taxpayer dollars. Then on Monday, just yesterday, India said that it plans to double its coal output by 2020. Is that what President Obama calls in his mind a success? Well, a Gallup poll came out yesterday that showed that the American peoples biggest concern is not climate change, its terrorism. Only three percent of all Americans said that pollution or the environment is the most important problem facing America today. President Obama said that climate change is our biggest threat. President Obama continues to put a priority on things that he expects to help his legacy, not on the things that the American public actually are concerned about. Well, as elected representatives, we should not allow the president to buy a legacy for himself using American taxpayer dollars. I am willing to sit down with any Democrat who wants to work on a realistic, responsible, and achievable plan to make American energy as clean as we can, as fast we can, without raising costs on American families. That really should be our goal. Coming together to find a real solution, real world solution, things that work not just signing a symbolic agreement that does not solve anything. Something that may make the president feel good, but doesnt actually do good. Democrats and Republicans in the Senate can do it just look at all that weve accomplished this year working together. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=9329fbd1-36ac-40c1-9198-de37972e4531,2015 Budget Year In Review - From a Balanced Budget to Obamacare Repeal,2015-12-15,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said today that with the Senate under new Republican management, the Budget Committee has played an important role by working to pass the first ten-year balanced budget since 2001 and approving the repeal of Obamacare through the budget reconciliation process. The Senate has also pushed back on the Administration's Clean Power Plan and Waters of the U.S. rule. The Wyoming delegation helped restore the Abandoned Mine Lands funding back to Wyoming. Republicans in the Senate have been focused on putting our country on not just another course, but a better course, and the Senate Budget Committee has played an important role, said Chairman Enzi. From a balanced budget to Obamacare repeal, we are beginning to rebuild the trust of hardworking taxpayers, who have seen their government become less effective and accountable. Chairman Enzi noted the Budget Committee has been focused this year on increasing oversight and transparency surrounding Congressional spending and the budget process, and over the course of the year, the committee: Held 17 hearings focused on biennial budgeting, regulatory reform, Congressional Budget Office (CBO) oversight, and the nations surging national debt; Published 9 Budget Bulletins, which provided regular expert articles by committee analysts on the issues before Congress relating to the budget, deficits, debt, and the economy; and Directed CBO to produce 4 budget scorecards that tracked the budgetary impact of enacted legislation against the FY 2016 balanced budget resolution the Republican Congress approved. The Senate is under new management, and these accomplishments, and others still to come, show hardworking taxpayers that Republicans in the Senate are working to deliver a government for the people and by the people, that supports them when it must, and gets out of the way when it should, Chairman Enzi said. We have made great progress this year, but there is still much more to be done. By working together, we are proving that we can deliver real solutions and real progress that the American people want and deserve.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=c22a71ef-12b7-4fef-acff-abcdfe545811,"The Enzi Insider - December 11, 2015",2015-12-11,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Letters Enzi Signed Signed Municipal Broadband Letter to FCC Senator Enzi signed a letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler urging the FCC to halt its efforts to encourage municipal broadband deployments and seeking information to determine how the FCCs policies on municipal broadband could hurt private sector investments. Led by Senator Deb Fischer (R-NE). Other Legislative Activities Submitted QFRs for Senate Finance Committee Hearing on International Tax Issues Senator Enzi submitted questions for the record to the Senate Finance Committee with respect to the hearing on International Tax: OECD, BEPS & EU State Aid held on December 1, 2015. The QFR asks the Internal Revenue Service to comment on recent tax rulings made by the European Commission that affect multinational corporations.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d8805254-ceeb-49a0-8233-a8c65f8c12ce,"Barrasso: Climate Deal is Surrender of American Energy Security, Reliability and Jobs",2015-12-09,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting President Obamas plan to sign an international climate change deal without congressional approval. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: This week, the United Nations climate change conference is continuing in Paris. I understand that over the weekend, several Democratic senators went to Paris to watch part of the discussion. Well, Ive been talking with people from my home state of Wyoming about this and I will tell you that the people of Wyoming are not happy. Theyre not happy about President Obamas plan to destroy American energy jobs, and the communities that depend on these jobs. Theyre not happy about the presidents plan to give away billions billions - of U.S. taxpayer dollars to other countries. Theyre not happy about the presidents plan to ignore the will of the American people, and sign an expensive and destructive treaty on climate change in Paris. Thats what they think the president is planning to do and I think they are exactly right. Last Friday, the Foreign Relations subcommittee that I chair released a new report called: Senate Outlook on United States International Strategy on Climate Change in Paris 2015: A New Report on President Obamas Plan to Bypass Congress and Transfer American Taxpayer Funds Overseas. This report shows how President Obama is supporting an effort to bypass Congress and sign a climate deal that will give money to developing nations. This subcommittee report found four things: First, the report says that the president is making false promises to other countries about his ability to meet his own greenhouse gas reduction targets. President Obama has promised to cut back American energy production dramatically. The administration is pushing power-plant regulations that will destroy jobs, and make electricity more expensive and also less reliable. Bipartisan majorities in Congress in the House and in the Senate - have rejected these regulations. So president Obama wants to use this international agreement to force new regulations on the American people. This administration has been doing all that it can to cripple American energy producers all over the country. Its piled new regulations onto coal producers. Its blocking exports of American crude oil, and liquefied natural gas. It has set emissions standards that are designed to put power plants out of business. That was the second thing that this report found. The presidents unrealistic targets and timetables for reducing our carbon emissions are threatening jobs and are threatening communities across America. The third main point in this report was that the president is forcing American taxpayers to pay for it to pay for our past economic success through his contributions to the so-called Green Climate Fund. Now, I did a town hall event the other day in Wyoming , and I asked people what they thought of that plan and the president using their taxpayer dollars in this way. 94 percent of the people in that town hall said that they oppose President Obamas plan to send their taxes to this United Nations climate slush fund. President Obama doesnt care. He says he wants that money anyway. He knows that American emissions have been declining over the last decade. He knows that were not the biggest source of carbon dioxide in the world. Far more of the emissions are coming from developing countries. Well, those countries say that if theyre going to cut their emissions if theyre going to be a part of President Obamas plan they say somebody else is going to have to pay up. They expect developed countries like the United States will foot the bill. How much money do they want? What are we talking about? So far, developing countries have said that they want at least $5.4 trillion not millions, not billions, trillions - if theyre going to participate in President Obamas scheme. Thats what 73 developing countries are demanding over the next 15 years. It doesnt even count another 90 developing countries that havent made their demands public yet. The reality is that a great deal of this money would end up lining the pockets of government officials in these developing countries. The American people know it, they see through it even if the Obama administration wont admit it. That brings up the fourth thing that this report found. Our subcommittee found that the president plans to reach a climate change deal that ignores the American people and cuts them out of the process entirely. The American public doesnt want these policies. Congress has passed laws to change these policies. The Obama administration just goes on and on and makes its rules that it wants anyway. The administration refuses to have accountability to the American people. So, what are we talking about with regard to the money? Well, its interesting. Just today, this morning from Paris, a report from The New York Times, U.S. proposes raising spending on the climate change adaptation. Heres the byline from France: In an effort to help smooth the passage of a sweeping new climate accord here this week, Secretary of State John Kerry announced on Wednesday announced today in Paris a proposal to double its grant-based public finance for climate change adaptation. It says, Mr. Kerrys announcement came as the momentum toward a deal -- the momentum toward a deal appeared to have hit a momentary snag. Why? Oh, well, read further The issue of money has been a crucial sticking point in the talks, as developing countries demand"" - demand demand that richer countries open up their wallets... So John Kerry is there to open up his wallet, open up the wallet of the American taxpayers because its not his money. Open up the American wallet, doubling what he's offering - doubling - to try to buy a solution that he wants to accomplish, even though it's in the direct face and opposition to the American public. This administration, President Obama, Secretary Kerry - out of touch with the American people who reject this expensive and destructive energy and climate policy. The Obama administration is also out of touch with the rest of the world. The Obama administration says that some parts of any agreement reached in Paris will be legally binding, and other parts wont be. Because, obviously, we're the Congress. We're the elected representatives of the people. We have a say. So, he's saying parts are binding, some parts are not. Well, China says the whole thing is binding. The European Union say the entire thing is binding. So whos right? President Obama or the rest of the world? The Obama administration says that it will give billions of our tax dollars to these developing countries. That includes a lot of countries who dont like us very much. Doesnt seem to care to the president. The developing countries say they want trillions. John Kerry is there in Paris today doubling the amount of money that the president has promised, doubling just to try to buy support for something the American people dont support. And its interesting because if you think back just a couple of months, President Obama was frantic desperate - to get a deal with Iran over its nuclear program because of his legacy and he signed a terrible deal. By all accounts, a terrible deal. And now hes doing it again. He is once again frantic, once again desperate to get a climate deal in Paris. Why? Because of his so-called legacy, so hes planning once again to sign a terrible deal. And he has his Secretary of State John Kerry there giving speeches and making the promises promises the American public will have to pay for if they get their way. Now, Iran says that it will play the Obama administrations game on emissions and reduce its carbon emissions like the president wants. But before it does, it expects the Obama administration to lift all of the remaining sanctions from the Iranian deal. All of the sanctions. It wants the United States and other countries to give them $840 billion over the next 15 years. Thats whats at stake here, and those are the things the president continues to give away. As he surrenders our energy security, our energy reliability, our energy jobs. A surrender by the president. He is desperate for approval by the other countries, when he should be focusing on the United States. He seems to want to promise any policy, pledge any amount of money to get it. The American people oppose sending their money to a United Nations climate slush fund. As their elected representatives, Congress must not allow the president to continue to try to buy popularity for himself using Americans tax dollars. Congress must not allow the president to use this meeting in Paris to advance his own legacy at the expense of the American people and the American economy. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=47923179-0bb4-4fa2-8eec-e46c1f2830d1,Chairman Enzi: We Must Understand Economic Impact Of Americas Regulations,2015-12-09,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"During a hearing today on regulatory budgeting, Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said it was vital to understand the cumulative costs and impact of regulations on the economy imposed by federal agencies through new rules. The effects of regulation can be seen every day in my home state, not as fluctuations in statistical data, but in lost jobs and in the concerns that people have about the future of their communities, Enzi said. The EPAs crusade to keep coal in the ground is already costing hundreds of jobs in my state and will cost this country billions of dollars. This is why our focus continues to be on the dangers that high regulatory burdens pose for our nations ability to sustain economic growth and fiscal health. Enzi noted that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the potential growth rate of our economy (or the rate of growth that is possible given the education of workers, the quality of capital equipment, and the business formation rate) averaged 3.3 percent from 1950 through 2014, but that the potential growth rate of the U.S. economy has been dropping steadily since 2002. In fact, from 2008 through 2014, it averaged only 1.4 percent. CBO now expects that annual rate to remain significantly below its long-term average and to fall to 2.1 percent for the period 2015 through 2025. That represents a 36 percent reduction in the long-run average potential growth rate of the economy. With our almost $19 trillion debt, we cannot afford to accept the notion that were entering into what some are calling a new normal of anemic economic growth, Enzi said. Better guidance by Congress will help lift some of the regulatory drag on our economy, provide discipline against overspending or overregulation, and provide a path forward to success and prosperity for each and every American.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b775a08b-67fa-4ec7-9c86-2d13e83a5697,"Congress leaves No Child Left Behind, passes new education bill to return power to parents, teachers, states",2015-12-09,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today Congress passed a monumental education bill that returns the responsibility of educating our nations students back to states and local communities. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., applauded the bipartisan legislation that overhauls No Child Left Behind testing requirements and ends federal incentives that impose Common Core standards on states. Enzi is a senior member of the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee and served on the conference committee between the House and Senate that put the final version of the bill together. For too long now I have heard stories from teachers, students, and parents from all across Wyoming about the harm inflicted by the prep-for-the-test system that has been in place, Enzi said. That ends with the signing of this bill. A reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Enzi said the bill is designed to empower parents and teachers to make the decisions they think are best in the classroom instead of bureaucrats in Washington. This legislation allows issues to be debated and decisions to be made in a room of parents, students, teachers, school leaders, and community members who know best what works for their students, Enzi said. That is one of the purest forms of democracy that I can think of and certainly something I believe our founders had in mind for their idea of America. The Senate passed the legislation with large bipartisan support, 85-12. The House passed the bill last Wednesday and President Obama is expected to sign it.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=4ee5c865-ee4d-4734-a4c8-94a397a8489d,Barrasso Releases Report on Paris Climate Talks,2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Click here to read report. WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy, released a new report entitled: Senate Outlook on United States International Strategy on Climate Change in Paris 2015. The report outlines how President Obama plans to bypass Congress and transfer American taxpayer funds overseas. It also highlights how the president is undermining American sovereignty and binding the American people to targets and timetables for greenhouse gas reduction targets in Paris. President Obama is so desperate for a climate deal in Paris that he will do anything he can to get one. This includes undermining U.S. sovereignty and misusing American taxpayer dollars to grease the wheels, said Chairman Barrasso. The president needs to understand that Congress does not support this pay-to-play promise. This new report details how the presidents agenda in Paris is threatening jobs, industries and communities at home. Key Findings Highlighted in the Report: The president is forcing American taxpayers to pay for past economic success through his contributions to the Green Climate Fund. The president and foreign nations in Paris plan to bypass Congress to reach a climate change deal, thus eliminating the voice of the American people who are opposed to his climate change policies. The president is demonstrating failed leadership as he is making false promises to foreign countries about his capability to meet his greenhouse gas reduction targets. By undermining American sovereignty and binding the American people to targets and timetables for greenhouse gas reduction targets in Paris, the president is threatening jobs, industries and communities at home. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d6413a97-341d-41d1-ae17-b7d3c047ac49,Wyoming Priorities Included in Federal Highway Bill,2015-12-04,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) touted Wyoming priorities included as part of a bipartisan surface transportation bill that passed Congress Thursday. The bill provides five years of long-term funding for state and local governments to improve American roads, bridges and other transportation projects. Barrasso was selected to be a member of the bicameral surface transportation conference committee, which was tasked with resolving differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill. He successfully included key provisions in the bill that provide regulatory relief and flexibility for rural states like Wyoming. Maintaining our nations strong commitment to the safety of our roads, bridges and infrastructure is extremely important, said Barrasso. After months of hard work, Im pleased we were able to pass a bipartisan, long-term solution to our nations transportation challenges. Important provisions included in the bill will provide much needed flexibility for rural states like Wyoming, as well as for Indian tribes. Background on Barrasso Provisions included in the Bill: Indexing Categorical Exclusion Projects This provision allows projects with categorical exclusions to adjust the project dollar amounts for inflation. MAP-21 currently allows for categorical exclusions for projects for any highway or transit project that receive less than $5 million in Federal funds. Unless those amounts are adjusted for inflation, the value of the categorical exclusion will degrade over time. Critical Rural Freight Corridor Designation Flexibility This provision provides the states with more flexibility to designate rural routes as critical rural freight corridors. This would include designating routes to agricultural and forestry facilities or energy development that connect to primary freight networks or interstate highways. Rural Road Waivers This provision provides the Secretary of Transportation with new authorities to provide exceptions and exemptions that provide regulatory relief and flexibility for rural road and rural bridge projects. This will help cut red tape and expedite project delivery. Abandoned Mine Land (AML) Funding This provision will force the federal government to fully return past and future AML payments owed to Wyoming. Under the agreement championed for years by U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming is now eligible to receive approximately $241.9 million immediately, and approximately $350 million in future years. Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) Program This provision reinstates flexibility for states that have at least one nonattainment area to use CMAQ funding for rural transit operations or street sweeping equipment to limit particulate pollution in attainment areas. TIFIA Qualification Provides language in the bill to ensure that Wyoming rural projects would qualify for lower interest rates and require a lower project dollar amount in order to be eligible under the program. Rural Road Data Collection Flexibility Provides language in the bill that would provide an exemption from a MAP-21 requirement that State DOTs collect that same amount of data on a gravel road as a major intersection in Cheyenne. Tribal Administrative Expenses Decreases administrative expenses paid by the Tribes to the Bureau of Indian Affairs from 6 percent to 5 percent of the total amount of the project. This provision will put more money into tribal projects instead of bureaucratic expenses. Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) TTP will receive an immediate increase of $15 million for fiscal year 2016 and $10 million every year thereafter, culminating in $505 million for tribes in fiscal year 2020.Compared with current law, this would be an increase of $55 million by 2020 for tribal communities. The increases in the act mirror S. 1776, the Tribal Infrastructure and Roads Enhancement and Safety Act (TIRES Act), a bill sponsored by Barrasso who is Chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. The TIRES Act is a bill to improve the safety of roads in Indian Country.The TIRES Act passed the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs unanimously on July 22, 2015. On April 22, 2015, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held an oversight hearing on the issue titled: Tribal Transportation: Pathways to Safer Roads in Indian Country.Two Wyoming witnesses testified on the need to improve roads on tribal lands, including Mr. John Smith, Director of the Transportation Department for the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes of the Wind River Indian Reservation and Mr. Delbert McOmie, Chief Engineer with the Wyoming Department of Transportation. Tribal Road Data Collection and Road Safety Studies H.R. 22 also includes other items that were part of the TIRES Act, including a study at the U.S. Department of Transportation to examine the quality of transportation safety data collected that can benefit tribes in preventing crashes and seeking reimbursement from those that damage tribal roads; and a study at the U.S. Department of the Interior to examine ways to improve safety on public roads on Indian reservations. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=344444e8-8871-4910-b5f0-f8daae4ca8b7,Delegation Restores Wyoming AML Funding,2015-12-03,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC A provision secured by Wyomings Congressional delegation as part of a long-term surface transportation spending bill will force the federal government to fully return past and future abandoned mine land (AML) payments owed to the state. Under the agreement championed for years by U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming is now eligible to receive approximately $241.9 million immediately, and approximately $350 million in future years. The bill passed the U.S. House and Senate late Thursday and is expected to be signed into law by the president. The provision will restore the full amount of AML funding for all certified states, including Wyoming, and Indian tribes. Additionally, it eliminates the $15 million yearly cap previously imposed. This is about returning money that rightfully belongs to the people of Wyoming that was raided in the 2012 highway bill, Enzi said. Trust funds such as AML set aside money for a specific reason and should not be poached by politicians. Its money from Wyoming for Wyoming. This provision is the culmination of three years of work by this delegation to properly restore AML funds to Wyoming, and I sincerely thank John and Cynthia for their efforts. Barrasso, who served on the House-Senate Conference Committee that helped negotiate final details of the highway measure said, It came down to a matter of fairness to return what was wrongfully taken from Wyoming years ago. The delegation was relentless and after a long stubborn fight, the federal government will be forced to stand by their commitments to the people of Wyoming. With energy revenues on the decline, its even more important now that Wyoming receives the money Washington owes us, Barrasso said. This Abandoned Mine Land money has always rightfully belonged to Wyoming, despite Senate Democrats middle-of-the-night provision in the last multi-year highway bill that stripped this money from Wyoming, said Rep. Lummis. I am very proud and very pleased that our hard fought battle has won this victory for Wyoming. Righting this wrong could not have come at a better time, especially with the drop in revenues from coal, oil, and gas. I thank and congratulate Senator Enzi and Senator Barrasso. This was a team effort and I couldnt be happier: a full restoration of the AML monies legally owed to Wyoming. Since 1977, federal law requires coal operators to pay a fee on each ton of coal into the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund. Annually, half of the funds were to be returned to the state from which they were collected to be used for such purposes as mine reclamation and restoration of land and water resources affected by coal mining. In 2012, a provision was added to a transportation bill to limit funds paid to each state to $15 million annually, shorting states like Wyoming by hundreds of millions of dollars. The House of Representatives voted 359 to 65 and the Senate voted 83 to 16 to approve the Fixing Americas Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, the bill that includes the AML provision. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=fa2aba17-b0c0-43af-881e-210eb53b9dbf,Barrasso Statement on Obamacare Repeal Vote,2015-12-03,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after the Senate voted to repeal the presidents health care law. As a doctor whos taken care of people in Wyoming for decades, Im always looking to make health care more affordable and accessible for American families. After almost six years of increased premiums and decreased access to care, its clear that Obamacare is not the answer. The president famously promised that if you liked your plan, you could keep your plan. Families in Wyoming who have lost their insurance because of this law know firsthand this is just another broken promise. To help people who don't have insurance, the president should not have had to hurt so many people who already had insurance. Congress has acted, and a repeal bill is now headed to the presidents desk. He has an important decision to make. He can stand by and do nothing, or he can work with Congress to replace this unworkable law with the kind of health care reforms that the American people actually need and want. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=63767ab4-1637-41d1-9146-a0bb8a758767,Delegation Restores Wyoming AML Funding,2015-12-03,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A provision secured by Wyomings Congressional delegation as part of a long-term surface transportation spending bill will force the federal government to fully return past and future abandoned mine land (AML) payments owed to the state.Under the agreement championed for years by U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming is now eligible to receive approximately $241.9 million immediately, and approximately $350 million in future years. The bill passed the U.S. House and Senate late Thursday and is expected to be signed into law by the president.The provision will restore the full amount of AML funding for all certified states, including Wyoming, and Indian tribes. Additionally, it eliminates the $15 million yearly cap previously imposed. This is about returning money that rightfully belongs to the people of Wyoming that was raided in the 2012 highway bill, Enzi said. Trust funds such as AML set aside money for a specific reason and should not be poached by politicians.Its money from Wyoming for Wyoming. This provision is the culmination of three years of work by this delegation to properly restore AML funds to Wyoming, and I sincerely thank John and Cynthia for their efforts. Barrasso, who served on the House-Senate Conference Committee that helped negotiate final details of the highway measure said, It came down to a matter of fairness to return what was wrongfully taken from Wyoming years ago.The delegation was relentless and after a long stubborn fight, the federal government will be forced to stand by their commitments to the people of Wyoming.With energy revenues on the decline, its even more important now that Wyoming receives the money Washington owes us, Barrasso said. This Abandoned Mine Land money has always rightfully belonged to Wyoming, despite Senate Democrats middle-of-the-night provision in the last multi-year highway bill that stripped this money from Wyoming, said Rep. Lummis. I am very proud and very pleased that our hard fought battle has won this victory for Wyoming. Righting this wrong could not have come at a better time, especially with the drop in revenues from coal, oil, and gas. I thank and congratulate Senator Enzi and Senator Barrasso. This was a team effort and I couldnt be happier: a full restoration of the AML monies legally owed to Wyoming. Since 1977, federal law requires coal operators to pay a fee on each ton of coal into the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund.Annually, half of the funds were to be returned to the state from which they were collected to be used for such purposes as mine reclamation and restoration of land and water resources affected by coal mining. In 2012, a provision was added to a transportation bill to limit funds paid to each state to $15 million annually, shorting states like Wyoming by hundreds of millions of dollars. The House of Representatives voted 359 to 65 and the Senate voted 83 to 16 to approve the Fixing Americas Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, the bill that includes the AML provision.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=f116ab7a-26f6-4aa4-856b-a2bc779b0b4d,Senate Approves Far-Reaching Obamacare Repeal,2015-12-03,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The United States Senate today, through the budget reconciliation process, passed the most comprehensive and far-reaching repeal of Obamacare possible. The House of Representatives is expected to take up and pass the Senate-approved version shortly, which would send the legislation to the president for the first time. With approval of this budget reconciliation bill, the Senate today has passed the most comprehensive and far-reaching repeal of Obamacare that will actually reach the presidents desk, said Chairman Enzi. Most Americans are still opposed to this unprecedented expansion of government intrusion into health care because it represents nothing more than broken promises, higher costs and fewer choices."" The budget reconciliation bill repeals more than $1.2 trillion in Obamacare tax hikes that hard working families would be forced to pay over the next 10 years, it reduces spending by nearly $1.5 trillion and provides almost $400 billion in on-budget deficit reduction over that same period, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Obamacare is expected to cost American households more than $116 billion a year in new taxes. We need health care reform, but it must be done the right way, Chairman Enzi said.Our nation has made great strides in improving the quality of life for all Americans, but these changes were always forged in the spirit of bipartisan compromise and cooperation. The bill the Senate has approved today is the first step in building a bridge from Obamacares broken promises to better access to high-quality health care for each and every American.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=363cf23f-372e-4c69-959b-deff84ccd3ae,Senators Fight to Hold IRS Bureaucrats Accountable with New Legislation,2015-12-02,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today, Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Chuck Grassley (R- IA), Dean Heller (R-NV) Johnny Isakson (R-GA), and Tim Scott (R-SC) introduced the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Accountability Act of 2015. This legislation will keep IRS bureaucrats accountable to the American people by giving the IRS Commissioner new authority to fire senior executives who have failed in their performance or committed misconduct. This legislation is based on a law Congress passed last year in the wake of the VA health care scandal that enables the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to fire senior executives for misconduct. Currently, the IRS Commissioner does have the authority to fire high ranking employees for certain forms of misconduct, but has not yet used this authority against those who engaged in political targeting of taxpayers. The Administration has claimed that only mismanagement occurred at the IRS and that mismanagement is not a crime and has used this logic to justify its failure to act in the case of Lois Lerner and others who targeted Americans based on their political beliefs. This bill seeks to rectify this problem by giving the Commissioner clear authority to fire employees who fail to meet the standards of conduct and performance we should demand of senior managers at Federal agencies. Its extremely troubling that these problems have persisted for so long, said Sen. Burr. IRS employees must be held accountable for misconduct. Under the current policy, high ranking IRS officials can cheat on their taxes, lie to Congress, even threaten to audit people for personal gain all without risking their six figure government salaries. This misconduct is absolutely unacceptable and I am confident we will put a stop to it. The American people deserve better. IRS employees should swiftly be held accountable for their misdeeds, Sen. Enzi said. This legislation could bring that needed accountability to an agency that has a history of serious misconduct. The American people are rightly frustrated when senior federal employees get away with misconduct and poor performance, Sen. Grassley said. It sends the wrong message that anything goes at the top tiers of the federal bureaucracy. Sometimes, a personnel change is what it takes to begin turning things around. The IRS has an obligation to taxpayers in Nevada and across the country to ensure it lives up to its mission of providing top quality service and enforcing the law with integrity and fairness to all, said Sen. Heller. It is totally unacceptable for IRS employees to discriminate and commit misconduct based on a taxpayers political views. There must be ramifications for this egregious behavior. Last year, I was an adamant supporter of giving the Secretary of Veterans Affairs the ability to fire senior executives for misconduct. Granting the IRS Commissioner similar authority to fire senior executives who have failed in the performance of their duties is desperately needed at the IRS. For far too long, so many of our taxpayer-funded federal agencies have operated unchecked under a culture of waste, fraud and abuse, said Sen. Isakson. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, I have seen firsthand the bureaucratic hurdles that prevented leadership at the scandal-ridden Department of Veterans Affairs from holding bad actors appropriately accountable for their misdeeds and inappropriate conduct. Thats why Congress gave the secretary of the VA firing authority to remove employees that are found to be directly responsible for misconduct. Mirroring the reforms we enacted last Congress at the VA, I strongly support this measure to hold errant employees at the Internal Revenue Service accountable and help restore Americans trust in the IRS. For too long the American people have been told there was nothing the IRS Commissioner could do to hold IRS employees who targeted conservative and religious organizations accountable for their actions, said Sen. Scott. Thats not good enough for the American people and thats not good enough for me, and thats why Im pleased to join my colleagues to introduce legislation making it easier to fire poorly performing senior executives at the IRS.I am committed to working with my colleagues to get all the answers about what happened at the IRS and preventing it from happening again, because Americans on all ends of the political spectrum need to be able to live without fear of being targeted by their own government for their political beliefs. This legislation applies to the highest ranking IRS employees in the Senior Executive Service (SES). Actionable examples of misconduct include but are not limited to: threatening to audit someone for personal gain, conducting a seizure without approval, assaulting, harassing or violating the civil rights of a taxpayer or a coworker, lying under oath, falsifying or destroying records, concealing information from Congress, underreporting income, and failing to file a tax return on time. The IRS Accountability Act has been endorsed by the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) and is part of a package of bills Sen. Burr has introduced to clean up the mess at the IRS. In October, Sen. Burr introduced the No Bonuses fox Tax Cheats Act, which would prohibit IRS employees who cheat on their taxes from getting tax-payer funded bonuses.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=997e4cad-076d-4b3a-890f-aaa7375a84c9,Barrasso Previews Senate Obamacare Repeal Vote,2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting how the presidents health care law continues to fail Americans in advance of this weeks vote in the Senate to repeal the law. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: We are soon to be debating the future of Obamacare. The American people have told us that they want Congress to repeal this so-called health care law. They have told us to start over with real health care reform. You know, this actually shouldnt be a very controversial vote. Its clear even to the laws supporters that the Obama health care law has not worked out in any way that they had specifically expected. The Obama health care law is collapsing whether the president wants to admit it or not. Democrats really should be eager to join us to join us to help fix the damage thats been done by this law. So far, theyve been much more focused on protecting President Obamas legacy, than on protecting the American people and the health of the American people from Obamacare. Last month, President Obama did a radio show in which he was asked about the law and problems with the law, because people all across the country are seeing significant problems with the law. The president would not admit to a single problem with this law. He insisted, he said: It has been a success. Well, I go home to Wyoming every weekend, Im a doctor who practiced medicine in Wyoming for 25 years, and the people who I talk to, my patients, my neighbors, people from all around the state, people I run into in my travels, they do not consider Obamacare a success. Now, Democrats come to the floor and they say that its ok that insurance rates are rising, remember the president said theyd go down by $2,500 per family? Its ok, the Democrats say, that insurance rates are rising because they say the rates always went up before the law. But what they wont tell you is that premiums arent just going up a little theyre going up a lot next year. Actually, theyre going through the roof. Now that was a study by the McKinsey Center for U.S. Health System Reform. They found that the median increase for bronze plans is 13 percent from this year to next year. Thats just the average. That means for half of the people, theyre going to pay more than that. For the silver plans, its up 11 percent. Platinum, 12 percent. For gold plans its up 15 percent. These are double-digit price increasesthese are not a success. Democrats have come to the floor and talked about some of the people whove gotten insurance coverage since the law took effect. What they wont tell you, is that having coverage, having insurance coverage, is not the same thing as getting medical care. The New York Times ran an article about two weeks ago with a headline: Many say high deductibles make their health law insurance all but useless. They dont even call it health insurance, they call it health law insurance. Because its insurance to comply with a law, not to actually give you health care. The article tells the story about David Reines from Jefferson Township, New Jersey. Hes 60 years old, has a history of chronic knee pain. This man says that his $3,000 deductible makes it impossible to actually go to the doctor. He says, We have insurance, but cant afford to use it. President Obama, this is not a success. Democrats who support the health care law say that it created these marketplaces, where people can shop for insurance. What they wont tell you is that companies have been pulling out of the marketplaces, pulling out of the exchanges, all across the country. More than half of the state co-ops have gone out of business, have failed. The largest health insurance company in America says that it may drop out of the program entirely next year. In Wyoming, theres just one company participating in the Obamacare exchange. Thats the choice on the Wyoming exchange: one. Does the president call that success? Democrats say that a lot of people like their insurance plans. Well they wont tell you about the Gallup poll last month that found the American people are far from happy. Just 33 percent of Americans said that health care coverage in this country is either excellent or good. One out of three. Only one out of five are satisfied with the total cost of health care. Both of these numbers are worse than were when President Obama took office. So how are you doing now compared to where you were when Barack Obama went to the White House? People will tell you that when it comes to health care, it is worse. Another survey last month by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that just 38 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the health care law. Is that that the way President Obama measures success? Is that what he calls success? Why wont the Democrats come to the floor and talk about these surveys? Democrats come down to the floor and say that Obamacare has put millions of people on Medicaid. Im not sure how many of them have a full understanding of Medicaid. As a doctor who practiced medicine for 24 years, I can tell you a lot about Medicaid. They wont say anything about what a failed program, they wont admit to the fact that Medicaid is a failed program. A new study last month found that cancer patients with Medicaid in Californiawe have two senators from California who voted for this lawMedicaid in California, patients with cancer are less likely to get recommended treatment and they have lower survival rates than people with other types of insurance. The Democrats say to celebrate the fact that they have all of these new people on Medicaid, this is not a success. Democrats dont want to talk about any of this. Nobody on this side of the aisle is denying that there are people who have been helped by the health care law. Why wont any Democrat come to the floor of the United States Senate and admit that for every person who has benefited, someone else may have been harmed, may have suffered? Why wont Democrats admit, why wont the president admit that the law has not lived up to his promises? Why did we need a 2,000 page law that upended the entire health care system in this country to basically expand the broken Medicaid program? None of this had to happen. None of this is what people were asking for when Democrats wrote their law behind closed doors, back there. It is certainly not what people are asking for today. This health care law has been an expensive, disruptive, and devastating. It is headed for collapse and if Democrats wont admit that, then they are just kidding themselves. Republicans are ready to move, to move on with a better approach. We will work to lower costs, and make insurance affordable for all Americans. We will make sure that people who need insurance can actually get usable insurance. That means making coverage equal carethats what it should do. Coverage ought to equal care. We will give people freedom, flexibility and choice to allow patients to make the decisions that are best for them and their familynot Washington and President Obama telling them whats best for them or their family. Well protect consumers, by making insurance predictable and stable, so people dont have to switch their coverage and their doctor every year. Finally, were going to fix Washington by making Medicare and Medicaid stronger for the people who absolutely rely on these programs. President Obama and Democrats in Congress do have a choice. They can join with Republicans in accepting the inevitable. They can act now to reform our health care system in a way that works. Or they can stand by, and watch as the wheels come off of Obamacare. The program is collapsing its unavoidable. Congress should not allow this health care law to harm the American people for one day longer. Democrats should work with us to create a replacement that actually delivers care, not just unusable coverage. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=7834e608-e3e7-4c68-b850-0934f6c3fd07,Enzi: From Obamacares Broken Promises to Better Care,2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY) today noted that Americans are ready to move past Obamacares broken promises to better health care as the U.S. Senate opened debate on repealing the presidents health care law as part of the budget reconciliation process. Obamacare still remains unworkable, unaffordable, and more unpopular than ever. For millions of Americans, the law today represents nothing more than broken promises, higher costs and fewer choices, said Chairman Enzi.Most Americans still oppose this unprecedented expansion of government intrusion into health care decisions for hardworking families and small businesses. Enzi noted that the presidents health spending law is saddling American households with more than $1 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), Obamacare will cost taxpayers more than $116 billion a year. In fact, on average, every American household can expect more than $20,000 in new taxes over the next 10 years. For every American, Obamacare has meant more government, more bureaucracy, and more rules and regulations, along with soaring health care costs and less access to care, Chairman Enzi said.Today, we take a crucial step forward in beginning to lift the burdens and higher costs this law has placed on all Americans. By the time we are done, the legislation the Senate passes will eliminate more than $1 trillion in tax increases placed on the American people, while saving more than $500 billion in spending. Most importantly, this bill begins to build a bridge from the presidents broken promises to a better health care system for hardworking families across the country.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=91a1846f-22fb-49f3-ab69-890677a53e00,Public Comment Period Extended on VAs Proposed Reconfiguration of Black Hills Health Care System,2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Members of the South Dakota, Wyoming and Nebraska congressional delegations made the following statement yesterday in support of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decision to extend the public comment period on the environmental impact statement regarding proposals for reconfiguration of the Black Hills Health Care System (BHHCS) until February 5, 2016. Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), John Thune (R-S.D.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) and U.S. Representatives Kristi Noem (R-S.D.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) and Adrian Smith (R-Neb.), sent a letter to VA Secretary Robert McDonald earlier this month requesting the extension. We are pleased that Secretary McDonald listened to our concerns and extended the public comment period for the VAs proposed changes to the BHHCS, said the Members. Any reconfiguration will impact veterans in the tri-state area who rely on the system for their health care needs. For this reason, it is critical that area veterans and stakeholders have adequate opportunity to voice their opinions regarding the future of its facilities. On October 28, 2015, the VA released its draft environmental impact statement (EIS) with respect to the BHHCS. The delegations letter to Secretary McDonald requesting an extension of the comment period can be found here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=dfae6574-a3a0-442d-a037-887202443a6a,Wyoming Delegation Supports Passage of Breast Cancer Stamp Reauthorization,2015-12-01,2015,2015-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today a strong bipartisan majority in the House of Representatives approved the Breast Cancer Research Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2015. The effort was led by U.S. Representatives Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) and Jackie Speier (D-CA) in the House (H.R. 2191) and by Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) in the Senate (S.1170), with Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) cosponsoring. The legislation, now sent to the Presidents desk, authorizes the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to continue issuing the breast cancer research fundraising stamp through 2019. ""With so much at stake in the fight against breast cancer, I am glad to see the House take action and pass this important legislation,"" said Sen. Enzi. ""Breast cancer takes too many of our loved ones. We have already raised millions of dollars through this program to help with research against this deadly disease and renewal of this legislation will continue to support innovation, bringing us closer to a cure."" ""As both a doctor and a husband of a breast cancer survivor, I know firsthand how important medical research can be in saving lives,"" said Sen. Barrasso. ""Finding a cure for cancer is one issue that brings both Republican and Democrats together. We all want to eliminate breast cancer once and for alland this important program will help bring us one step closer to that goal."" Since 1998, this has been an effective, budget-neutral way to fund critical research to treat and hopefully one day cure this disease, said Rep. Lummis. For the health of all Americans, both women and men, it is important that we continue to support this fiscally responsible funding of medical research. I am proud to join my friend Jackie Speier and our House colleagues to pass this reauthorization bill to, as the stamp says, Fund the fight. Find a cure. The stamp was created by Congress in 1998 and almost one billion stamps have been sold in the United States since. This has raised over $80 million for cutting-edge breast cancer research and this reauthorization will raise millions more. The Breast Cancer Research Stamp is available for purchase at 11 above the cost of regular first-class postage which covers the USPSs administrative costs and funds breast cancer research programs at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Defense (DoD). The Breast Cancer Research Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2015 is budget neutral.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=447f17b7-c50b-4a83-b91c-ea0245c2435c,Barrasso Spends Thanksgiving with Wyoming Troops in Afghanistan,2015-11-26,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"AFGHANISTAN U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) shared Thanksgiving dinner with Wyoming National Guard soldiers serving in Afghanistan. Barrasso visited primarily with members of the A Battery, 2nd Battalion, 300th Field Artillery, who are conducting artillery missions in Afghanistan. Its always an honor to share Thanksgiving dinner with Wyoming troops serving overseas, said Barrasso. Its hard to find anyone braver than our men and women in uniform. Everyone in Wyoming can be proud of the outstanding job theyre doing. They asked me to relay to their families and communities at home that they are doing well and look forward to getting back home to Wyoming. Barrasso ate Thanksgiving dinner with the service members, toured the medical facilities, and observed the Cowboy Cannoneers conduct artillery drills. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d7f403ae-cd81-4bde-86a9-c1f1b7f7fffe,Barrasso Introduces Bill to Reauthorize LWCF and Return Power to States,2015-11-20,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) introduced legislation (S. 2318) this week to reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) for 10 years and reestablish fair and equitable funding for states. The bill specifically returns to the original 1965 funding allocation split between state (60 percent) and federal (40 percent) purposes, resulting in more opportunities for citizens to enjoy a healthy lifestyle in their local communities. Many members of Congress and the administration have praised the original 1965 Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) as a visionary or historic act. Over the years, the program funding shifted from being locally focused to being primarily Washington focused, said Barrasso. Its time to return the LWCF back to its original intent of strengthening the health and vitality of U.S. citizens. Giving states more control over decisions will give local land managers in Wyoming and other states the resources they need to increase local opportunities for outdoor recreation. I greatly appreciate Senator Barrasso's LWCF reauthorization bill that more closely resembles the intent of the original 1965 act, said Domenic Bravo, President of the National Association of State Park Directors. This bill places an emphasis on close-to-home recreation, where people can get outside and get healthy. Background: The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) expired on Sept. 30, 2015. The original 1965 LWCF law authorized offshore oil and gas royalties to be split 60 percent for state purposes and 40 percent for federal purposes. In 1976, the 60 percent state purposes requirement was removed, leaving only the 40 percent minimum for federal purposes. According to the National Association of State Park Directors, prior to expiration, states were receiving approximately 12 percent of the funding. According to an October 2014 Congressional Research Service (CRS) report, The $16.8 billion appropriated throughout the history of the LWCF program has been unevenly allocated among federal land acquisition (62%), the state grant program (25%), and other purposes (13%). By returning to the original intent of the law, states and local governments can provide close-to-home recreational opportunities to strengthen the health and vitality of American citizens. The matching fund requirement also means states will be able to further leverage the 60 percent allocation into more recreation and conservation projects. Senator Barrassos S. 2318 will: Enable more local outdoor recreation opportunities, which have a greater impact on the health and wellness of individuals daily lives. Promote healthy lifestyles by increasing the number of recreation opportunities (e.g. bike paths and jogging trails, playgrounds, green space, state and urban parks and forests, baseball and soccer fields, etc.) in both rural and urban neighborhoods. Take a landscape-scale approach to ecosystem health and watersheds by helping states protect, conserve and maintain more than 18 million acres of state parks and forests, water resources, recreation sites and natural areas. Increase the economic benefit to neighborhoods and communities with proximity to local LWCF projects as part of revitalization efforts. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=4353b090-5c2e-49cc-a890-f25979539d95,Senators to Pres. Obama: No International Climate Funding without Senate Approval,2015-11-19,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-WY) and Jim Inhofe (R-OK) led a group of 37 senators in sending a letter to President Obama pledging that any international climate agreement with a binding timetable and targets on emissions, as well as U.S. taxpayer funding, must be brought before Congress for approval. The Obama administration agreed to help raise $100 billion annually in funding for developing nations as part of the Green Climate Fund. The target for the upcoming Paris Conference was to raise an initial $10 billion. In the letter, the senators highlight how President Obama has unilaterally pledged $3 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds to the Green Climate Fund without the consent of Congress. Congress has never authorized funding for the Green Climate Fund. We therefore request that you direct United States Special Envoy Todd Stern to be forthcoming with his foreign counterparts representing developing nations in Paris about the views of members of Congress. He must provide these nations with the full picture of where a co-equal U.S. branch of government stands on these issues. He must explain that Congress will not be forthcoming with these funds in the future without a vote in the Senate on any final agreement as required in the U.S. Constitution, the senators wrote. In addition to Senators Barrasso and Inhofe, the letter was signed by Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), John Cornyn (R-TX), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Roy Blunt (R-MO), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Pat Toomey (R-PA), Mike Lee (R-UT), John Thune (R-SD), Jim Risch (R-ID), Richard Burr (R-NC), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), John McCain (R-AZ), Steve Daines (R-MT), Rand Paul (R-KY), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Ted Cruz (R-TX), John Boozman (R-AR), David Vitter (R-LA), Dan Coats (R-IN), Pat Roberts (R-KS), David Perdue (R-GA), James Lankford (R-OK), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Joni Ernst (R-IA), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Tim Scott (R-SC). Full text of the letter below: November 19, 2015 President Barack Obama The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear President Obama: With the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Paris starting at the end of November, leaders and diplomats from around the world will be coming together in an attempt to reach a climate agreement to address global greenhouse gas emissions. As members of the United States Senate, we want to be on record expressing our concerns about the new Green Climate Fund. We also want to reiterate our position that any agreement with binding timetables and targets must be brought before Congress for approval. We support international dialogue on global environmental problems. We do, however, have serious concerns about the impact any deal reached in Paris will have on the American economy and our international priorities. Our constituents are worried that the pledges you are committing the United States to will strengthen foreign economies at the expense of American workers. They are also skeptical about sending billions of their hard earned dollars to government officials from developing nations. Your administration agreed to help raise $100 billion annually in funding for developing nations as part of the Green Climate Fund. The target for the Paris Conference was to raise an initial $10 billion. You have unilaterally pledged $3 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds to the Green Climate Fund without the consent of Congress. Congress has never authorized funding for the Green Climate Fund. While the Executive Branch and Congress both play an important role in the foreign policy of our nation, Congress ultimately holds the power of the purse. We pledge that Congress will not allow U.S. taxpayer dollars to go to the Green Climate Fund until the forthcoming international climate agreement is submitted to the Senate for its constitutional advice and consent. We therefore request that you direct United States Special Envoy Todd Stern to be forthcoming with his foreign counterparts representing developing nations in Paris about the views of members of Congress. He must provide these nations with the full picture of where a co-equal U.S. branch of government stands on these issues. He must explain that Congress will not be forthcoming with these funds in the future without a vote in the Senate on any final agreement as required in the U.S. Constitution. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=04b56b76-4198-48a4-a79a-099c53f03339,"Barrasso to International Climate Czars: No Vote, No Money",2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks at todays Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on the upcoming international climate negotiations in Paris. Transcript of Senator Barrassos Remarks: If there is one message that I would like to send to the international community ahead of the international climate change conference, it is this: without Senate approval, there will be no money. Secretary Kerry says that a treaty requiring Senate approval will not emerge from the international climate talks. This is despite the fact that the State Department is pushing for parts of the agreement to be legally binding on the United States. On November 13, the State Department stated Our position has not changed: the U.S. is pressing for an agreement that contains provisions both legally binding and non-legally binding. Any agreement reached in Paris that contains legally binding requirements on the American people must come to the Senate for a vote. This isnt only the right thing to do, it is also what the Constitution requires. As we know, the United Nations Green Climate Fund was proposed during the 2009 Conference of Parties in Copenhagen, Denmark. The fund facilitates a giant wealth transfer of taxpayer dollars from developed nations to developing nations to help them adapt to climate change. Congress has never authorized funding the Green Climate Fund. The United States and other developed nations have pledged approximately $10 billion for the initial capitalization of the fund, with the goal of raising $100 billion annually. Thats right, most people think thats a misprint, but its truea $100 billion annually is what theyre talking about. On November 15 of last year, the Obama administration pledged $3 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds over four years during the G-20 meetings in Australia. The administration's FY2016 budget request asked for $500 million for the fund. We cannot support providing taxpayer dollars to this fund if Congress does not get approval of an agreement. So I want to make it clear to the administration, as well as to foreign diplomats across the globe who are looking for U.S. dollars, which is the lynchpin of this conference without Senate approval, there will be no money. Period. I and many of my colleagues will be sending the President a letter stating that very soon. Weve circulated a copy of the letter NOTE: The Barrasso-Inhofe letter mentioned above is still being circulated for signatures. To read the text in advance click here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=a3b2e26e-3199-4061-bd23-e898e4d9b32b,Barrasso Statement at the Surface Transportation Conference Committee,2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following opening remarks at the first meeting of the bicameral surface transportation conference committee: Full transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Thank you so much Chairman Shuster and Vice-Chairman Inhofe, thank you for holding this important meeting for all conferees. I also want to thank Senator Boxer and Congressman DeFazio for their hard work to get us here today. The Senate bill creates a freight program that will be critical to ensuring the delivery of goods and services and can move across state lines efficiently and safely. If we allow bureaucrats in Washington to decide which projects get funded, we will inevitably create a patchwork interstate system. I believe the Senate position will help every state as opposed to just a few by distributing freight funding through the formula. Leaving out rural states is not part of the solution if we want to maintain a national highway system. In Wyoming, we have a short construction season. It typically starts in May and ends in October or earlier depending on the weather. So we need to give our state DOTs and highway contractors the certainty they need to plan. As we continue to reconcile the differences, I urge the conference committee to act expeditiously to ensure we have a long-term bill. Thank you and I look forward to working with everyone to get this done. Background On Nov. 10, 2015, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) appointed Senator Barrasso to serve on the bicameral surface transportation conference committee.The committee is tasked with resolving differences between the Senate and House passed long-term surface transportation bills. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=f7156be1-68ad-4ab3-89d2-f19f1b507181,"New bipartisan education bill would empower states, not Washington",2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., praised a bipartisan education bill today that would help strengthen state and local control over education. Speaking during a conference committee between the House and the Senate to finalize a bill to replace No Child Left Behind, Enzi said he believed that the measures in the bill would help ensure that Wyoming teachers and school leaders have more flexibility to tailor the education to meet the needs of all students. We Wyomingites are proud of our school system. Enzi said. Were proud of the way that we support our students, educators, and staff. Were proud of the way that our schools help students prepare for whats next and ensure they have the tools necessary to succeed in a rapidly evolving society. A reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the bill would end the emphasis on standardized tests. Enzi said the bill would also reaffirm the states role in defining education standards by making it clear that the federal government may not mandate or incentivize states to adopt any particular set of education standards, including Common Core. As a grandfather, I look forward to hearing from my grandkids about the innovative ways that they will be learning and less about the prep-for-the-test system that we have had for too long now, Enzi said.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=41049ec8-f2f7-4060-835e-c8c1e99280b9,Senate fights Obamas no power plan - FULL SPEECH,2015-11-18,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, I rise today to speak about yet another battle in the regulatory war being waged by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Just two weeks ago, the Senate considered two measures aimed at rolling back an ill-thought rule the EPA came up with the Waters of the United States rule. This body did the right thing in stating our bi-partisan resolve against that rule. Unfortunately, here we are again another week, another proposed rule to massively expand the EPAs power, and another attempt by this Administration to stomp out Americas coal industry. That is exactly what the Clean Power Plan is a miscalculated regulation aimed at keeping coal in the ground at any cost. This latest travesty of a rule, known as the Clean Power Plan, requires states to develop and implement plans to reduce carbon emissions between 2022 and 2030 in order to accomplish interim and final emissions goals established by the EPA. Let me clarify that, Mr. President this is actually not one rule, but three separate rules, which taken together would be more aptly named the No Power Plan. The Clean Power Plan includes a final rule to revise carbon pollution standards for new, modified, and reconstructed power plants; a final rule to revise carbon pollution standards for existing power plants; and a federal plan for enactment and enforcement of the other two rules. Simple, right? Under the guise of flexibility and cooperation, the CPP requires states to choose from two types of plans, described by EPA as an ""emission standards"" approach or a ""state measures"" approach. Some states, like my home state of Wyoming, will have some terrible choices to make under the CPP. Under the final rule, by the year 2030, Wyomings carbon emissions will have to be 44% lower than in 2005, which is the baseline year the EPA uses for this plan. That is more than double the 19% reduction the EPA imposed upon Wyoming in the proposed rule, which was released about 18 months ago, in June 2014. As Wyomings Governor Matt Mead said recently when my home state joined 23 others in suing the EPA to strike down the rule, The fact that the agency more than doubled the damage to Wyoming in the final rule shows arbitrary and capricious action. So how did Wyoming end up with such a huge burden under the Clean Power Plan? Because the Clean Power Plan supposes it will achieve carbon emissions reductions from electric generating units that burn fossil fuels coal, oil, and natural gas states that produce those fuels are hit hardest. Wyoming is the largest coal producing state in the nation. Wyoming produces 40% of our nations coal and coal represents almost 40% of the electricity generated in this country. It is abundant, affordable, clean and stockpile-able. If the power plants that produce energy from fossil fuels like coal are forced to shutter their doors or make dramatic structural changes, it will have tangible negative impacts on fossil fuel consumers. If that doesnt alarm you, it should, because according to the National Mining Association, every person in America uses 20 pounds of coal a day. As I said, under the Clean Power Plan, Wyoming will have to reduce its carbon emissions by 44%. But thats not just a problem for Wyoming, or the 27,000 people who are employed by the states coal industry. If you represent Illinois or Missouri, you should be worried about the CPP too, because in 2013, each of those states received more than 10% of Wyomings coal. Wisconsin, Kansas, Arkansas, and Michigan each got about 5% of Wyomings coal. Wyomings coal was also distributed to Georgia, Alabama, Colorado, Louisiana, Minnesota, and Arizona. And if I didnt list your state dont think this issue doesnt affect you: More than a dozen other states and foreign entities got smaller amounts of Wyomings coal in 2013. According to the National Mining Association, which commissioned a report on the Clean Power Plan after it was released, the plan will cost $366 billion and bring double digit electricity rate increases to 43 states. All of this because of the administrations vendetta against coal and power plants that burn it to provide energy. Just this week, the EPA held a hearing in Denver to receive public comments on the proposed federal plan to implement the Clean Power Plan. Thats right even though 24 states are suing the EPA to block the plans implementation, the agency is going ahead with a rule to implement it. At that hearing, Micky Shober, a County Commissioner from Campbell County, Wyoming also known as the Energy Capitol of the Nation had a chance to speak. Campbell County has eleven surface mines that produce over 340 million tons of coal every year the majority of which is delivered by train to about 30 states across the country for electricity generation. All in all, Campbell County coal provides about one quarter of the nations electricity every year. So when a Campbell County Commissioner gets up to talk about power generation, everyone should be paying attention. As Commissioner Shober pointed out, the coal industry has historically stepped up and dealt with every new regulation and challenge the federal government can throw at it. But new technology and innovation the type that will have to be utilized if there is any way for new and existing power plants to comply with this rule, takes time. And it takes money. Like the Commissioner said Americas energy industry always rises to the challenge. But the EPA isnt fighting fair this time. This rule needs to be scrapped in its current form, and that is exactly what these joint resolutions of disapproval will do. Mr. President, Ive spoken now about why this rule is bad for my home state of Wyoming, and why its bad for any state that consumes fossil fuels. But I would be remiss if I didnt address the reasons the CPP is bad for the U.S. At the end of this month, the President is going to send his team of environmental experts and negotiators to the U.N. climate summit in Paris. That summit aims to map out a global accord to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The emissions goals described in the CPP which have been rejected by industry and rejected by almost half the states are at the heart of this administrations plan to contribute to the overall global emissions reduction. To make commitments to our allies based on a plan that doesnt have the support of the American public is nothing short of irresponsible and disingenuous. We are living in a dangerous, complicated, frightening world. A world that forces our nation to rely daily on its friends for priceless assets things like shared intelligence and safe havens at which to strategically position our military troops around the globe. The very least America can give our allied partners in return is our candor. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=75068738-8e4b-4ea7-8934-939f18aecd85,Barrasso: Congress Will Vote to Stop Presidents Illegal Energy Regulations,2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting the necessity of congressional action on the Obama administrations irrational, burdensome regulations that affect Americas energy industry ahead of this months international talks on climate change. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Mr. President, it's fascinating today to listen to my colleague and friend from Rhode Island because I just had the National Journal Daily printed today. Back-to-back pages talking about the terror, the horror in Paris and obviously the thoughts and the heartfelt condolences of the people of this country continue to go out to our friends in France who have stood by us and we will stand by them. One page talks about how President Obama has continued to underestimate ISIS. They go back -- this is in today's paper - quoting President Obama saying, The analogy we use around here sometimes and I think is accurate, - he says - if a J.V. team puts on a Lakers uniform, it doesn't make them Kobe Bryant. The president has continued to underestimate ISIS. The other side of the page, ISIS versus climate change. It talks about the Democrat debate Saturday night - national television after the tragic events in Paris the night before. The moderator asks one of the leading Democrats running for president, running second in the polls now, if that candidate has a chance to back off on his claims that climate change is the greatest security threat facing the country. That candidate says, in fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism. That's the position I just heard from the senator from Rhode Island. It's a position we hear from a leading candidate for president of the Democrat side of the aisle. I would wonder how many Americans believe that, who if they heard that statement, believe that that's true. That's why I come to the floor today, Mr. President, to talk about President Obama's plans, his plans to tear down the American energy reliability, American energy stability - things that are important for our national security - because he wants to remake energy into a form that he prefers. The president has a strategy to do it. He made it clear when he was running for president back in 2008. He bragged that if his plans went through, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Ever since then, President Obama has been pushing to make that happen. When he tried to get part of his plan through Congress, even Democrats rejected it. They knew that the American people didnt want it, and the American economy couldnt afford it. Did President Obama listen to the people? Did he accept the overwhelming judgment of Congress that his extreme attacks on American energy were a bad idea? Of course not. The president is more interested in the opinion of far-left extreme environmentalists than he is in the opinion of hardworking Americans. He has done everything he could to give his plans the effect of law, without asking Congress to actually pass them as laws. He had his Environmental Protection Agency draw up regulations that would shut down American energy producers, and damage our own economy. Thats what the presidents own Energy Information Administration said. That agency put out a report that found that the EPAs new rule on carbon dioxide emissions would close coal-fired power plants, raise electricity prices and reduce the gross domestic product of our nation. Thats just one of many rules that the administration has been pushing into force without legal support. Every one of these rules would mean middle-class Americans losing their jobs and hardworking families paying higher electric bills. Put them all together, and the price tag could reach hundreds of billions of dollars. Whos asking President Obama to do this? Whos asking to pay more in their electric bill every month? People dont want it, and the president doesnt have the authority to do it. Thats why hes not asking Congress to weigh in on his plans. Thats why hes pushing these rules by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats instead of going to the people and their representatives. Well, the American people have a voice and they are making their voice heard through us today. Were here talking about two rules in particular. These are the restrictions on existing power plants and on new power plants that havent even been built yet. These are the core of what the president calls his Clean Power Plan. Were here to say that these rules go too far. The Obama administration has tried this before. Its pushed through other regulations that people didnt want, cant afford. The administration has said that it gets to decide whats best that it gets to decide what people should do. And the courts have legitimately have said: not so fast. This summer, the Supreme Court rejected a different EPA rule because the administration never bothered - this is what the court said never bothered to take into account the costs of that rule. The Supreme Court said: One would not say that it is even rational, never mind appropriate, to impose billions of dollars in economic costs in return for a few dollars in health or environmental benefits. Two courts have blocked the EPAs rule on Waters of the United States. One of the courts said that the rule was likely the result of a process that is inexplicable, arbitrary, and devoid of a reasoned process. Well, all of these other rules are suffering from the same kinds of problems. The Obama administration has been acting far beyond its authority, and far beyond anything that is rational or appropriate for our nation. The same day that president Obama put out the new rules for his so-called Clean Power Plan, 26 states filed lawsuits in federal court to stop this disastrous rule. Twenty-three states have sued to block the rule for new power plants. Twenty-seven states have sued to block the rule for existing power plants. I think that these states are going to win in court because these rules are so extreme, and this administration is so out of control. President Obama doesnt really care about any of that. He thinks that he still wins, even when he loses in court. He thinks that if he can drag this out long enough, businesses will have to spend the money to comply anyway. Thats what his EPA chief said before the last regulation got rejected by the Supreme Court. She went on television a few days before the decision and said that it didnt matter what the Supreme Court said, doesnt matter if the administration loses because the rule had already been in place for three years. Thats exactly what the Obama administration is counting on this time as well. Thats why it is so important that Congress act now to block these rules from taking effect. Were debating two measure that would do that. The measure by Senator McConnell and Senator Manchin this is bipartisan - would block the rule for new power plants. The measure by Senator Capito and Senator Heitkamp - once again a Republican and Democrat working together to block the rule for existing power plants. These are bipartisan resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act. They are our chance for Congress to stand up for the people we represent. America cannot afford for these illegal rules to be in effect for three years before the courts toss them out. Theres another reason that Congress needs to vote to strike down these expensive, burdensome regulations immediately. Later this month, the president will be participating in the international talks on climate change. This is a meeting of about 200 countries to limit the amount of carbon dioxide and other emissions that each country can produce. The president desperately wants his so-called Clean Power Plan so people can say that hes leading on this issue. Without these illegal regulations, he has nothing to offer. Congress needs to make clear that the American people do not support these regulations. Foreign diplomats at the climate change conference need to understand that the rules will not stand up in court. President Obamas ego is writing checks that his administration cant cash. Any climate deal based on these flawed rules is simply not worth the paper it is printed on. Its time for President Obama to be honest about what he can and cannot do. If he wont admit that, then Congress is going to have to make it clear so that everyone understands. The American people do have a voice. They will not allow these reckless and destructive regulations to shut down American energy production. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=9f6f2b41-0804-4304-92a9-1e0da65e94cf,Barrasso Calls on Energy Department to Turn Over Excess Uranium Contract,2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) sent a letter to Energy Secretary Moniz expressing concern about the Department of Energys (DOE) failure to conduct oversight of transactions of uranium between Fluor-B&W Portsmouth LLC and the Traxys Group. Since 2011, DOE has transferred roughly $1 billion of publicly owned uranium which has financially benefitted these two companies. In the letter, Barrasso outlines how it is especially important that DOE examine these transactions following the nomination of John Kotek, a former consultant to Fluor, to be Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy. Barrasso calls on DOE to ensure that Fluor-B&Ws transactions with Traxys do not come at the expense of the American public. If confirmed, Mr. Kotek would play a major role in determining the circumstances and the conditions under which DOE authorizes additional transfers of the publics excess uranium. At Mr. Koteks confirmation hearing, I asked Mr. Kotek whether he would recuse himself from decisions benefitting FluorAt a minimum, DOE should condition future transfers of excess uranium to Fluor-B&W on the requirement that it disclose its contract(s) with Traxys to members of the House and Senate committees which oversee DOE. Until that happens, I will withhold my support for Mr. Koteks nomination, Barrasso wrote. Full text of the letter below: November 17, 2015 The Honorable Ernest Moniz Secretary U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 Dear Secretary Moniz: I write to follow up on my April 23, 2015 letter, expressing concern about the Department of Energys (DOE) failure to conduct oversight of transactions of uranium between Fluor-B&W Portsmouth LLC and the Traxys Group. Since 2011, DOE has transferred roughly $1 billion of publicly owned uranium which has financially benefitted these two companies. It is appropriate for DOE to examine these transactions particularly in light of the nomination of John Kotek, a former consultant to Fluor, to be Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy. DOE must ensure that Fluor-B&Ws transactions with Traxys do not come at the expense of the American public. For years, DOE has refused to include in its budget request the funding necessary to cleanup DOEs gaseous diffusion plant in Piketon, Ohio. Beginning in December 2009, DOE has used excess supplies of publicly owned uranium to help finance decommissioning efforts at this facility. Since 2011, DOE has provided Fluor-B&W roughly $1 billion of uranium in exchange for decommissioning services at the site. During this time, Traxys, a metal commodities merchant, has been the exclusive buyer of the uranium that DOE has provided to Fluor-B&W. According to Traxys, the excess uranium that DOE transfers to Fluor-B&W and which Fluor-B&W then sells to Traxys has made Traxys a top 10 supplier of uranium to the world market. In April, I wrote to you questioning whether DOE receives full value of the uranium that it transfers to Fluor-B&W if it does not consider the terms under which Fluor-B&W sells that uranium to Traxys. I explained that both Fluor-B&W and Traxys are traders in, not consumers of, uranium, suggesting that DOE receives far less than the full value of the publics uranium. In a response dated May 14, 2015, Mark Whitney, Acting Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management, stated that [t]he value of the services that DOE receives [from Fluor-B&W] are based on prevailing market prices. However, Mr. Whitney failed to explain whether DOE would capture additional value through an alternative arrangement to its current one with Fluor-B&W, such as an arrangement in which DOE gradually releases the uranium into the market. If confirmed, Mr. Kotek would play a major role in determining the circumstances and the conditions under which DOE authorizes additional transfers of the publics excess uranium. At Mr. Koteks confirmation hearing, I asked Mr. Kotek whether he would recuse himself from decisions benefitting Fluor. I also asked Mr. Kotek whether he would condition future transfers to Fluor-B&W on the requirement that Fluor-B&W publicly disclose its contract(s) with Traxys. In both instances, Mr. Kotek would not commit to taking these steps. At a minimum, DOE should condition future transfers of excess uranium to Fluor-B&W on the requirement that it disclose its contract(s) with Traxys to members of the House and Senate committees which oversee DOE. Until that happens, I will withhold my support for Mr. Koteks nomination. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to your prompt response. Background: On April 23, 2015, Senator Barrasso sent a letter to Secretary Moniz, highlighting his concerns about the appointment of Daniel Poneman, former Deputy Secretary of Energy, to the board of directors of Traxys. Senator Barrasso called on DOE to conduct oversight of uranium transactions between Fluor-B&W and Traxys. DOE responded to Senator Barrassos letter on May 14, 2015. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=1d902ab2-057e-4ca2-af89-811b87f39cd9,Senate fights Obamas no power plan,2015-11-17,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Though the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claims that it is trying to pass a clean power plan, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said it is more honest to call the new energy regulations a no power plan. Enzi applauded the Senate passage of two resolutions today aimed at scrapping the EPA rules that are intended to end coal power plants. Speaking on the Senate floor today Enzi called the EPA rules a miscalculated regulation aimed at keeping coal in the ground at any cost. Enzi said the new rules would cost the country hundreds of billions of dollars and cause double digit electricity rate increases across the country. Twenty-four states have also sued the EPA to block the plans implementation, including Wyoming. If the power plants that produce energy from fossil fuels like coal are forced to shutter their doors or make dramatic structural changes, it will have tangible negative impacts on fossil fuel consumers, Enzi said. If that doesnt alarm you, it should, because according to the National Mining Association, every person in America uses 20 pounds of coal a day. Enzi was critical of the presidents intent to present the clean power plan to a U.N. climate summit in Paris at the end of the month. To make commitments to our allies based on a plan that doesnt have the support of the American public is nothing short of irresponsible and disingenuous, Enzi said. President Obama has said that he plans to veto the resolutions the Senate passed today.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=271a5767-4341-476c-b434-9d0fd5ed0e77,"Johnson, Barrasso Introduce Gray Wolf Delisting Bill",2015-11-12,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) introduced legislation this week that directs the secretary of the Interior to reissue final rules related to the listing of the gray wolf in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Wyoming under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The bill serves as the Senate companion to the bipartisan House bill introduced by Reps. Reid Ribble (R-Wis.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) earlier this year. Wyoming has honored its commitment and put together a solid and working plan to protect the states wolf population. Even the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agrees that wolves should be delisted in Wyoming,said Barrasso. This is just one of many legislative opportunities well continue to pursue until Wyomings wolf management plan is protected and fully implemented. After over 30 years of needed protection and professional pack population management, the wolf has made its comeback, Johnson said. In 2011, the administrations Department of the Interior determined the number of wolves in the western Great Lakes states to be sufficient and growing and made the correct decision to delist them as an endangered species. President Obamas own Interior secretary applauded the decision, saying, Thanks to the work of our scientists, wildlife managers, and our state, tribal, and stakeholder partners, gray wolves in the western Great Lakes region are now fully recovered and healthy. Unfortunately, in late 2014, a liberal judge in Washington, D.C. overruled the administrations wildlife experts in the field and returned the gray wolves to the Endangered Species List. Its obvious the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service judges its past delisting decision to have been correct, and the ongoing efforts in Wisconsin and elsewhere to properly manage the wolf levels are working well. Simply put, wolves in these four states are no longer endangered and do not need the protections the ESA afforded them in the past. Our bill's language does not modify the Endangered Species Act, nor does it prevent the Fish and Wildlife Service from ever returning the wolf to the endangered list if it determines the population is again threatened and in need of federal protection. I strongly agree with Wisconsins farmers, ranchers, loggers and sportsmen that future gray wolf listing decisions should come from the experts, and not from judges. Several important strides have been taken this year to once and for all give the final say on the gray wolfs status to our expert researchers inside the state Department of Natural Resources and the Department of the Interior. Im glad to be a part of this important effort, and it is my hope that all senators from these four affected states will join Sen. Barrasso and me in this effort. A full text of the bill can be found here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=8b824e98-2eb8-4841-865e-76b585754b4a,Barrasso Statement on Cynthia Lummis,2015-11-12,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement: There is much more to be said about Cynthias extraordinary career in public service thus far, but for now I want to say simply that she will be greatly missed. Wyoming will miss her energy and her fight. The U.S. House of Representatives will miss one of the most decent, honest and irreplaceable voices for western principles and ideals in Congress today. I know Cynthia is particularly looking forward to spending more time with her family, being on her ranch, and enjoying more of those things that made her fight for Wyoming so important to begin with. Bobbi and I wish her the best.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=1c4e589b-b825-4a79-a962-555363ba7672,Enzi statement on Cynthia Lummis,2015-11-12,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., issued the following statement today in response to Representative Cynthia Lummis announcement that she will not seek re-election in 2016. I'm sorry to hear thatCynthia Lummis is retiring from Congress after 2016.Cynthia has done a marvelous job. She has worked vigorously for America and for Wyoming. Her ability has magnified her voice and her vote. She is known on both sides of the aisle and gets things done. She has been an essential part of our Washington team using her agriculture, business, legal, legislative and state treasurer background to make a big difference. Her ability combined with her infectious laugh makes up a winning personality. She listens and then shares ideas in such a way that people often think it was their idea - which is one of the best ways to get support. She travels around Wyoming most weekends so she can relay the Wyoming common sense she hears when she goes to Washington. Her previous legislative experience made it possible for her to be successful from the moment she got here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b337e905-d82b-4c66-9a96-a1afc7c70ab5,"Enzi: To those who served, happy Veterans Day",2015-11-12,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"***Watch Veterans Day Video Here*** Serving in the military requires a willingness to serve others to keep this country great. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., a veteran of the Air National Guard, issued the following statement for Veterans Day. My Dad served in the Navy. My Uncle served in the Army. I thought it was something that everybody does. I wound up in the Air National Guard, and Im proud of my service there. Service means doing things for others, doing the right thing, being a patriot and serving your country. And from one veteran to another thanks for your service, thanks for the time that you put in and thanks for the blank check that you gave the United States. To those who went before us, to those who served with us and to those who came after us, happy Veterans Day. Click here to watch a video commemorating Veterans Day with several senators, including Enzi, who served their country.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=8a28363c-7abe-427c-8c80-38d313c285f4,Federal court blocks Obamas amnesty plan,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A federal appeals court ruled on Monday against President Obamas plan to grant amnesty to 5 million people. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., who has opposed the presidents amnesty plan, said the ruling was a win for the American people and the constitution, which this Administration has tried to disregard in favor of expanding executive power. The courts decision this week shows the presidents pen is not a magic wand that can make Congress, the courts and the Constitution disappear at his whim, Enzi said. The president tried to set a very dangerous precedent by granting amnesty to millions without a single vote from Congress. Our country is struggling with an illegal immigration problem, but amnesty is not the solution. As this case likely moves forward to the U.S. Supreme Court, I hope that the president realizes that he is not above the rule of law. In May, Enzi joined 25 senators and 88 members of Congress in filing an amicus brief in the case brought against the administration by the State of Texas and 25 other states stating that President Obamas executive overreach on immigration is unconstitutional and contrary to congressional intent. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling upheld a lower court's injunction blocking the programs from taking effect in the case. The Obama Administration has said that they plan to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=f711943a-4c44-4b12-9c7f-32617ab070c5,Tri-State Delegation Requests Extended Public Comment Period of Reconfiguration of Black Hills Health Care System,2015-11-10,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, led his colleagues from South Dakota, Wyoming and Nebraska in a letter to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary Robert McDonald to request an extension of the public comment period in the wake of the VAs Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed reconfiguration of the Black Hills Health Care System (BHHCS). The letter was signed by U.S. Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), John Thune (R-S.D.), Mike Enzi (R-Wy.), John Barrasso (R-Wy.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) and U.S. Representatives Kristi Noem (R-S.D.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wy.) and Adrian Smith (R-Neb.). The time constraints imposed by the current 60-day comment period may present a significant challenge for veteran stakeholders given that many may be traveling or spending time with family throughout the holiday season, wrote the Members. The VAs public comment meetings also overlap the holiday season, which may further limit stakeholder involvement. For these reasons, we respectfully request that the VA extend the comment period to February 5, 2016. As you know, we continue to have concerns about the impact the VAs proposal to reconfigure the BHHCS will have on access to care for our regions rural veterans, veteran mental health services, the assumptions made about a future partnership with the Fall River Hospital, and data used to support this proposal, wrote the Members. Unfortunately, there also remains an underlying distrust among veterans and Hot Springs stakeholders that the VA has proceeded with a predetermined decision to vacate the Hot Springs VA hospital and domiciliary. Full text of the letter can be found here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d1c0d032-ba00-4725-abb6-3f80975d0fe2,Barrasso Statement on Presidents Rejection of Keystone XL Pipeline,2015-11-06,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after President Obamas announcement that he is rejecting the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Today, President Obama put the interests of a small group of well-funded environmental extremists ahead of the interests of American workers, our economy, and our nations energy security. For someone who claims to put science first, the presidents rejection of five favorable environmental reviews for the Keystone XL pipeline is an act of stunning hypocrisy. The presidents decision will make it exceedingly more difficult to build infrastructure projects of all kinds in the future. Now, whenever a group of activists decides to oppose another pipeline, road, bridge, rail or port project, they will pull out the Keystone playbook and have confidence that even public officials of the highest rank can be convinced to put politics ahead of facts. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=41f38914-ef65-44d3-b637-29568b0f4bee,Enzi accepting applications for 2016 spring internship program,2015-11-06,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is encouraging students and graduates from all backgrounds to apply for a spring internship in his Washington, D.C. office. The deadline for applications is November 20th. An internship in my office is rich with opportunity and provides students with firsthand knowledge and experience, Enzi said. Interns are an important part of the office. They also have the chance to meet some remarkable people, workon projects and experience the dynamic of living in Washington, D.C. The internships, which include hands-on, individualized activities, offer experience in the heart of the nations government. Interns are able to network, develop crucial job skills and cultivate meaningful experiences to further their education and career goals. Interns will have the opportunity to give U.S. Capitol Building tours, write policy and hearing summaries, prepare legislative memos, conduct research for legislative aides, observe floor proceedings and attend committee hearings and lectures. Interns receive a monthly stipend to defray the cost of living in Washington, D.C. and can also coordinate receiving college credit for the internship. Priority is given to students from Wyoming, or those studying in Wyoming. The spring 2016 internship runs from January 4th to May 20th.Applicants should have achieved at least sophomore status at an accredited university or college. Individuals interested in an internship with Senator Enzis office should apply online. The application is available at www.enzi.senate.gov. Select the Students tab and click on Internship Information. For additional information, contact the Internship Coordinator Dea Kollekowski at (202) 224-3424 or Intern_Coordinator@enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b509d66a-8bba-4817-9f5b-cc99fe238153,Enzi statement on Obama Admin. rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline,2015-11-06,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"TodayU.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., released the following statement in response to President Obamas announcement that the Administration would reject the application to build the Keystone XL Pipeline . This Administration has proven itself time and time again to be the most anti-energy administration in recent memory. This announcement falls right in line with the disastrous policies they have put in place, Enzi said. With the rejection of the pipeline the Administration is rejecting the creation of tens of thousands of jobs and proving that keeping energy prices affordable for our nation is not a priority.Our country is inventive and resourceful.We can both pursue new energy sources while seeking to make traditional energy greener, but actions like this tell me this Administration would rather take the politically easy way out. There are better ways to approach energy policy and I hope more people begin to see this soon.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=ce792034-14a4-4d6d-94ac-db1e3f647677,"The Enzi Insider - November 6, 2015",2015-11-06,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored and Cosponsored National Bison Day Resolution encourages the people of the United States to observe National Bison Day with appropriate ceremonies and activities. The resolution was agreed to by unanimous consent on October 28, 2015.Led by Senator Enzi (R-WY). National Native American Heritage Month Resolution designates November as a month of national recognition of Native Americans, their culture, and their many contributions to the United States. The bill was introduced on November 5, 2015, and passed the Senate by unanimous consent the same day. Led by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY). Cosponsored National Pregnancy Center Week Resolution designating the week of November 8, 2015 as National Pregnancy Center Week. There are approximately 2,500 pregnancy centers in the United States that offer a variety of health and support services. These centers are community based with less than 10 percent of their funding coming from government sources. The resolution is expected to be introduced the week of November 8, 2015. Led by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=cb9cdf7f-5e37-477e-8cc6-733ca693c97d,"Senate advances veterans funding, but troop funding blocked",2015-11-05,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today the Senate was able to advance a spending bill that pays for military construction and veterans programsbut was blocked by the Senate minority from moving forward on a defense spending bill. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said he was glad the Senate could make some progress on spending bills but found it irresponsible that the Senate minority would block a bill to help fund the troops. Two of Congress most important responsibilities are to strengthen the countrys national security and to fund the government responsibly through 12 separate spending bills, Enzi said. While I appreciate that we were finally able to make some progress on the veterans spending bill, it is unreasonable that the Senate minority would block the defense funding bill, especially since it passed out of committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. The Senate minority would prefer that we just pass a giant all-in-one spending bill instead of doing our job responsibly. Congress should be thoughtfully and carefully considering every line of each spending bill its the kind of diligence we owe the taxpayers who fund this government. These comprehensive bills are the reason we have a country deep in debt and a Congress with dismal approval ratings. It is time the Senate minority work with us to fund the government sensibly instead of relying on a bloated catch-all government funding bill created at the last minute through backroom deals.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=bdd93674-bcea-4535-914e-9de31b163e29,Barrasso Introduces Bill to Rein in Invasive Species,2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) introduced legislation to improve the way invasive species are managed and reduced on federal lands. The Federal Lands Invasive Species Control, Prevention and Management Act specifically directs the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior to work with on-the-ground experts to develop and implement a strategic plan for prevention, control, and management of invasive species. These strategic plans target a 5 percent reduction in invasive species each year. Worldwide, invasive species are spreading at an alarming rate. Not only do these species cause severe ecological harm, they also cost the United States billions of dollars each year, said Barrasso. Weve also seen how harmful invasive species can be, in particular cheatgrass, which pushes out native grasses, threatens sage grouse habitat, and increases the risk of catastrophic wildfire. Its critical that federal agencies work with local, on-the-ground experts to tackle this increasing problem. By working together to meet clear reduction targets, we can begin to rein in the spread of invasive species. The Federal Lands Invasive Species Control, Prevention and Management Act is cosponsored by Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY), Mike Crapo (R-ID) and James Risch (R-ID). Background: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) reports that invasive plants spread across public lands at an unchecked rate 4,600 acres per day. This unbridled expansion threatens private lands, waterways, and infrastructure and increases the risk of secondary threats like habitat loss, pressure on threatened species, and wildfire. The Fish and Wildlife Service has supported figures from 2005 that estimate invasive species infestations cost the United States more than $120 billion each year across multiple sectors. The Federal Lands Invasive Species Control, Prevention and Management Act: -Requires the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to develop strategic plans in coordination with local/state/tribal authorities to target a 5 percent annual decrease in IS through control, prevention, and management. -Requires that 75 percent of funds allocated to IS control should be used for control and management of IS and limits administrative outlay to 10 percent. -Provides for Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and cooperative agreements to facilitate coherent development and implementation of plans across private, state, and federal lands. -Provides for Categorical Exclusions (CE) for high-risk land and water sites to enable critical control, management and prevention to maintain healthy ecosystems. -Require the Secretaries to actively engage in ongoing coordination with on-the-ground experts to determine the appropriate approach for IS control, prevention, and management. -Requires Secretaries to submit a report to Congress 60 days following the end of the second fiscal year after enactment of the Act to measure implementation and assess progress. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=045f13b5-3750-4029-ab4a-68c98e9d7bce,Enzi: Two-year budgets will make spending process more transparent,2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"During a Senate Budget Committee hearing today, Chairman Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said that moving the nation to a biennial budget process would create more stability and predictability for agencies as well as state and local governments. Most importantly, he said, it will increase the transparency of the federal spending process and help make government more accountable. The worst kept secret in Washington is that we essentially operate on a two-year budget already, Enzi said. In 2011, 2013, and now 2015, Congress has set spending limits for the following two fiscal years. But these deals have been negotiated without the transparency and predictability that regular order provides. True reform of the federal budget process would formalize biennial budgeting and move spending decisions from the shadows and into the light, where they belong. Enzi noted that a biennial budget process could improve Congress management and oversight of federal spending. If less legislative time were devoted to setting budget targets for the next year, more time could be spent on reviewing program management. Under an annual cycle, authorizing and appropriating committees only have time to assess how much money is needed in relation to the previous year, rather than conducting a systematic review of federal programs in their jurisdiction. Oversight under a biennial budget would help make government more accountable by allowing additional time to consider whether taxpayer dollars are being spent effectively. Congress energy and attention should be redirected to reviewing all federal spending, Enzi said. By moving to a two-year budget cycle, lawmakers will have more time to focus on the true drivers of spending and debt, which will help make our government more accountable and ensure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=8ad84101-86d1-4dcb-b554-4c3d7dbc7aee,Enzi: States dont need the EPA to regulate every drop of water,2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"States already know best how to manage their water and they dont need the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to over-regulate one of Wyomings most precious resources said U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., speaking on the Senate floor today. Enzis comments came shortly after the Senate voted (53-44) to disapprove of the EPAs waters of the United States rule, crafted to allow the agency to regulate every pond, puddle and ditch in the United States. The overregulation by the EPA and this administration have to be stopped, Enzi said. Today we had an opportunity to do just that. By passing this resolution of disapproval, we sent a message to the president, his Administration and all its bureaucrats. A cosponsor of the resolution of disapproval, Enzi said the EPA water rule is a prime example of a federal agency coming up with regulations that are a menacing threat to this countrys economic security and success. What America needs now is a smaller, less burdensome regulatory framework that will permit our nations economy to thrive, Enzi said. The state of Wyoming has joined 30 other states in suing the EPA and Corps of Engineers to block the waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule and earlier this year a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the rule asserts jurisdiction over waters that are remote and intermittent waters.No evidence actually points to how these intermittent and remote wetlands have any nexus to navigable-in-fact water. I couldnt have said it better, Enzi said. What the EPA is doing is more about control than protection. For the sake of farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and small businesses it is time to stop this outrageous regulation. A simple majority of the Senate can pass a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The resolution would ensure a federal agencys new rule would have no force or effect, and prevents the same or similar rule from being reissued. The House also needs to pass the resolution and the president needs to sign it for it to take effect. Yesterday the Senate minority blocked the Senate from being able to debate U.S. Senator John Barrassos bill, which would have sent the WOTUS rule back to the EPA to be rewritten.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=3c12d6bf-5e3f-4424-a2c2-cf90b79912ae,"Statement of Michael B. Enzi Waters of the United States""",2015-11-04,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, I applaud my colleagues who today took a stand against the regulatory onslaught and overreach being waged by the Environmental Protection Agency. In promulgating the Waters of the United States rule, or WOTUS, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers have teamed up to promulgate one of the most expansive federal power grabs across the nation. Recently, I spoke to this body about the threat that the growth and expansion of federal regulations pose to this countrys economic well-being. The growth of federal regulation and bureaucracy is a menacing threat to this countrys security and success. What America needs now is a smaller, less burdensome regulatory framework that will permit our nations economy to thrive. With $18 trillion in debt, we can only afford policies that will serve as a catalyst for economic growth. This WOTUS rule is a prime example of a federal agency coming up with regulations that do the precise opposite. In the early 1970s, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, and charged the EPA with protecting our nations navigable waters from pollutants. Since then, the EPA and the Corps have been working to ever-expand the definition and scope of navigable water, this time stretching the meaning all the way to the outer limits of common sense. With the WOTUS rule, the Administration has once again demonstrated a willingness to advance its own goals at any cost. Under this expansive new rule, the EPA may implement substantial additional permitting and regulatory requirements under the Clean Water Act, without any thought to employees who will lose jobs at businesses or industries this rule may cripple. As the Chamber of Commerce said earlier this week in a letter to this body, business owners and their employees in all sectors of the economy would be affected by the regulatory uncertainty of this rule, which is certain to chill the development and expansion of large and small projects across the country. Again, this is not the kind of regulation America can afford. The WOTUS rule is so expansive that it would redefine the jurisdiction of bodies of water under federal control all the way down to, for example, all water located within 100 feet of any other jurisdictional water. The rule further includes all water located within 1,500 feet of any other jurisdictional water, if it also is in the 100 year flood plain. I dont know about you, Mr. President, but I wont stand for giving any federal agency much less the EPA - five football fields worth of leeway to enforce any rule or regulation. As Chairman of the Budget Committee I seldom hear any agency talking about having enough resources. The EPA is not an exception. They cant take care of what they already do. States already know best what makes their waters navigable, and they dont need a federal rule like WOTUS to constrain them. This is particularly true for western states, where water is a rare and protected resource and is respected accordingly. In Idaho, a state which historically relied upon streams to support its timber industry, lawmakers consider a stream navigable if it will float timber in excess of six inches in diameter or if it is capable of being navigated by oar. Six inches thats not a big log. If the state of Idaho protects streams small enough to float logs that size, they dont need a rule like WOTUS to further constrict what is considered navigable. At some point, the overregulation by the EPA and this administration have to be stopped. [Today we had an opportunity to do just that. By passing this resolution of disapproval, we have sent a message to the President, his Administration and all its bureaucrats.] Earlier this week, this body missed a keen opportunity to pass my friend Senator John Barrassos bill to roll back this regulation. His bill would have sent the EPA and the Corps back to the drawing board to develop a new rule. And, it would have told them how to do it. It would have required them to conduct a thorough economic analysis, and consult with states, local governments, and small businesses. Congress made a mistake back in 1972 when it passed the Clean Water Act and left too much up to the EPA to define. We had a chance to fix that error with Senator Barrassos bill. [In approving Senator Ernsts resolution, we narrowly avoided making the same mistake twice in one week.] This rule allows the EPA to regulate any body of water that has a significant nexus to a navigable water. Unfortunately, the rule leaves the definition of significant nexus open to the EPAs interpretation. As anyone from Wyoming would attest, never has a federal bureaucrat missed an opportunity to make life a little more complicated for folks out West. I cant possibly think of why wed give the EPA an opportunity to do so here. The Clean Water Act recognizes states as having primary responsibility for land and water resources within their boundaries. Thats a responsibility taken very seriously in places like my home state of Wyoming, where so many farmers, ranchers and small business owners rely on water for their livelihood. In Wyoming, folks know that you have to take care of the land, or the land will never take care of you. You wont find better stewards of the land and water anywhere. So if the folks in Wyoming tell you a rule governing the use of water is no good, you can take that to the bank. As the states Governor Matt Mead has said, this rule was bad from the start. In his words, the EPA failed to properly consult with states or consider states concerns. The rule unlawfully seeks to expand federal jurisdiction over water, undercuts state primacy and burdens landowners and water users in the West. Wyoming has joined thirty other states in suing the EPA and Corps of Engineers to block this rule. If over 60% of the states in this nation are spending time and money to ask the courts to block this rule, then this resolution should pass with flying colors. If the two senators from each state suing the EPA on this regulation would have voted for the resolution yesterday it would have reached cloture. It would have passed with 2 votes to spare. In passing this Joint Resolution of Disapproval, our actions appropriately reflected what our states are telling us to do stop this rule. Two federal courts have already recognized the fallacy of this rule and issued stays to prevent it from being enforced. Those courts have recognized what we all should recognize: the massive scope of this rule, and the potential damage it could cause. Wyoming was lucky, in that it got some relief from a U.S. District Court Judge before the rule could be enforced in late August. In that ruling, by which the court stayed the rules enforcement, the court said, the rule asserts jurisdiction over waters that are remote and intermittent waters. No evidence actually points to how these intermittent and remote wetlands have any nexus to navigable-in-fact water. I couldnt have said it better. What the EPA is doing is more about control than protection. For the sake of farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, small businesses and their employees it is time to stop this outrageous regulation. I thank the majority leader and Senators Barrasso and Ernst for recognizing how important it is to fight this bad EPA rule and bringing legislation to the floor to push back. [I urge my colleagues in the House to pass this resolution of disapproval so that we can send a clear message to the President that this Congress will not continue to accept ill-thought, ever-expansive, unendingly complicated regulations from his Administration.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=5a83da79-6603-450a-9401-13afbd7fcad8,Senate Majority Votes to Stop EPA Water Rule,2015-11-03,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after the Senate failed to proceed to S. 1140, his bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act. A clear bipartisan majority of senators voted today to stop the Environmental Protection Agencys federal water grab. Regrettably, too many Senate Democrats chose to block this first real opportunity to vote yes to clean water and no to extreme bureaucracy. Instead of standing with Americas farmers, ranchers, small businesses and private-land owners, these senators chose to side with President Obamas out-of-control EPA. While we may have fallen short today, this is not the end of this issue. One way or another, Republicans wont stop until this rule is withdrawn or the courts ultimately strike it down for good. Background on S. 1140: S. 1140 directs the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers to issue a revised waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule that protects traditional navigable water and wetlands from water pollution, while also protecting farmers, ranchers and private landowners. Senator Barrasso introduced S. 1140 on April 30, 2015 with Senators Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), among others. S. 1140 has a total of 46 cosponsors, including Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY). The bill passed the Environment and Public Works Committee on June 10, 2015. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f097e7fd-8dc2-4520-b20a-5a63b715699a,Barrasso Calls on Senate to Support Federal Water Quality Protection Act,2015-11-03,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor in support of the bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act (S. 1140). Senator Barrasso introduced the legislation in response to the Environmental Protection Agencys overreaching waters of the United States rule. The Senate will vote on the motion to proceed to S. 1140 at 2:30 pm ET today. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: I appreciate the opportunitytoday to move this legislation,that is bipartisan and itprotects our environment, and ithelps small businesses allacross the country. S. 1140, the Federal Water Quality Protection Act, is legislation that I introduced with Democrat Senators Donnelly, Heitkamp and Manchin, along with many other senators. The senator from California previously spoke, and I would just point out to her that the California Chamber of Commerce supports my legislation. The California Farm Bureau supports my legislation. Because this legislation will protect our nations navigable waterways and the streams and wetlands that help keep our navigable waters clean. This bill is a testament to the hard work that both sides of the aisle have done in achieving an agreement on an environmental protection bill. Our rivers, our lakes ,our wetlands and other waterways are among Americas most treasured resources. In my home state of Wyoming we have some of the most beautiful rivers in the world the Snake River, the Wind River, and dozens of others. People from around the world come to Wyoming they come to visit - because we have an environmental landscape that is second to none. Anyone who has gone to my state and experienced Yellowstone National Park, the Grand Tetons and the Big Horn Mountains, comes away with a sense that Wyoming is a pristine and beautiful place. Its what Wyoming sells, and it is what makes Wyoming so unique. The people of Wyoming are devoted to keeping these waterways safe. We want to preserve the water for our children and grandchildren. We understand that there is a right way and a wrong way to do that. It is possible to have reasonable regulations to help preserve our waterways, while still respecting the difference between state waters and federal waters. This is the environmental legacy that my constituents want, and it is the legacy they have earned for their decades of sound management that they have put into keeping Wyomings waterways pristine and beautiful. But the EPA has released a new rule. The new ruled is called waters of the United States WOTUS. This rule doesnt work for the people of Wyoming, and most likely it doesnt work for any of your constituents either certainly not for those who have to put a shovel in the ground to make a living. The Courts have begun to weigh in with their concerns about this WOTUS rule, and they have given Congress and stakeholders a necessary pause. Judge Erickson of the District of North Dakota on August 27, issued an injunction that blocked the WOTUS rule in 13 states because the rulemaking record was, in the judges words, inexplicable, arbitrary, and devoid of a reasoned process. He also stated with regard to the rationale behind EPAs threshold for what is and is not federal water that, again in the judges words, On the record before the court, it appears that the standard is the right standard because the agencies say it is. The United States 6th Circuit Court of Appeals put a nationwide stay on the rule on October 9 of this year. The Court stated in granting the stay that the sheer breadth of the ripple effects caused by the Rules definitional changes counsel strongly in favor of maintaining the status quo for the time being. The court added, a stay temporarily silences the whirlwind of confusion that springs from uncertainty about the requirements of the new Rule and whether they will survive legal testing. What the Courts have done is basically say let Congress have time to act. We dont have to sit on the sidelines and watch this rule slowly crumble under legal scrutiny. Contrary to some activist groups rhetoric, we are not facing an immediate environmental water pollution crisis. In fact, the 6th Court stated that in granting the stay that neither is there any indication that the integrity of the nations water will suffer imminent injury if the new scheme is no immediately implemented and enforced. They called it a scheme. However, no one disagrees that the status quo is optimum for the long term for our nations waters. We can do better, and we can act now. That is why we must take this opportunity to pass the legislation before us that will have EPA do a new rule under specific principles outlined by Congress. These are principles that protect navigable waters and adjacent wetlands, as well as farmers, as well as ranchers, as well as other land owners. I know that some Senators gave the administration the benefit of the doubt with their rule, despite concerns from constituents, and those senators waited for the final result before making a judgement to see if those concerns would be addressed. I am here to tell you today, Mr. President, that no matter what concessions EPA has claimed to address the serious problems raised about the proposed rule, they added new provisions in the final rule that greatly expand their authority. This is disappointing because I believe the great majority of senators voiced concerns in this process, and those concerns fell on deaf ears. The EPA has produced a final rule worse than the one they originally proposed. For example, instead of clarifying the difference between a stream and an erosion on the land, the rule defines tributaries to include any place where EPA thinks- the EPA thinks - it sees an ordinary high water mark. What looks likenot what it isbut what looks like they think is a high water mark. Even worse, EPA proposes to make these decisions from their desks, using aerial photographs and laser generated images claiming a visit to the location is not necessary. Under the rule, the Environmental Protection Agency also has the power to regulate something as waters of the United States if it falls within a 100-year floodplain or if it is within 4,000 feet of a navigable water or a tributary, and the EPA claims there is a significant nexus. So what is a significant nexus? Under this rule, significant nexus can mean a water feature that provides life cycle dependent aquatic habitat for a species. If you start drawing 4,000 foot circles around anything the EPA identifies or defines as a tributary - now, remember: 4,000 feet ; were talking over 13 football fields long - and everywhere there is potential aquatic habitat. Essentially, almost the entire United States, according to this, would be underwater. Actually, 100 percent of the state of Virginia is under this jurisdiction. 99.7 percent of the state of Missouri falls within this area. Underwater, if you will, according to the EPA guideline. Now, Id like to take a moment to talk about puddles because one of the speakers on the other side of the aisle talked about puddles. People know what they think about when they think about a puddle - when it rains. The final rule does exempts puddles, defined as very small, shallow, and highly transitory pool of water that forms on pavement or uplands during or immediately after a rainstorm or similar precipitation event. I guess that would mean, like, when the snow melts. The rule specifically does take control of other pools of water created by rain, such as prairie potholes and vernal pools, even if the land where these pools of water form is far away from any navigable water, or even a tributary. Under this new regulation, Mr. President, nearly all of these pools of water created by rain will now be considered waters of the U.S., giving the Environmental Protection Agency the power to regulate what you do on that land. These provisions are sweeping, and will create unnecessary and uncertainty activities in communities across the country. Mr. President, there is plenty that I have already outlined in the WOTUS rule that is bad for agriculture with the many methods it provides for federalizing previously state controlled water. Its bad for agriculturewith the many methods itprovides for federalizingpreviously state-controlled water.States have made these decisionsin the past.Now we're adding another levelof government bureaucracy. This rule is bad for agriculture.For those people who produce ourfood.Farmers, ranchers, and othersare used to working with theirstates to protect their land andwater under that you are ownstewardship. But I will tell you,Mr. President, we heard from thesenator from California aboutgroups opposing this - 480 different groups supportthis bill and they are majornational groups: The American Farm Bureau; The Agricultural Retailers Association; The American Soybean Association; The American Sugar Alliance; The Colorado Pork Producers Council; The Corn Refiners Association; The Milk Producers Council; The National Association of Wheat Growers; The National Cattlemens Beef Association; The National Chicken Council; The National Corn Growers Association; The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives; The National Pork Producers Council; The National Turkey Federation; The U.S. Poultry and Egg Association; The United Egg Producers; The USA Rice Federation; I could go on and on. These are the food producers of America. They support the legislation in front of the senate today. The point is there is not one state, not a single state, in this country that doesnt have a strong agricultural presence. We all d. I urge all senators to make sure, before you vote on the motion to proceed to this bill, that you check in with your folks. I would also note that many industries outside of agriculture are concerned about this rule as well- these include manufacturers, homebuilders, small businesses, you name it. They are all very concerned with this rule and want Congress to act now. Action could mean Congress pass a Congressional Review Act resolution, which will be considered possible later in the process. But that would eliminate the WOTUS rule, and prevent a substantially similar rule from being proposed. That would allow for a new rule, as long as it was not substantially similar to the existing rule. We need to vote on this resolution because I believe that S. 1140 is a better route, the one that we have here today. This is the bipartisan compromise. This is the bill that has a number of senators from the Democrat side of the aisle cosponsoring the legislation. It is a bipartisan compromise. Most importantly, this piece of legislation on the floor today allows for Congress to establish the principles of what the new EPA rule would look like. Now, I know there are a number of Democrats who have ideas to improve the legislation that's on the floor today specific for their own states. If my colleagues vote for the motion to proceed, we can have an open amendment process that would allow members to improve S. 1140 in a bipartisan way. We are willing to work with anyone who wants to improve this rule in a bipartisan way. Lets not sit on the sidelines anymore. Rather than support an final EPA rule that is actually worse than the proposed rule, that will likely not survive legal scrutiny based on what we saw from the courts, a rule that does not represent the interests of our farmers, ranchers, families, small businesses and communities, lets move forward with the bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act to assure the public that we hear and we understand their concerns. At the same time, lets give EPA and the Army Corps the certainty that they need to confidently move forward with a new rule, a rule that truly reflects the needs of the constituents we represent. Lets protect our nations waterways for the long term. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=63e4ae50-8b3d-4cd9-b08c-1c6174602558,ICYMI...Washington Times: Beginning of the End of Obamacare,2015-11-02,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Beginning of the End of Obamacare By: U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, M.D. Nov. 2, 2015 Washington Times Obamacares third year of open enrollment began on Sunday. People hoping to sign up saw a website with fresh photos and high-tech features. They found the actual insurance of the presidents signature law has gotten even worse. Unless something dramatic happens, this may be the year of the health care laws collapse. Prices keep rising and service keeps fading. It should not surprise the administration that people are not signing up. Despite all the Obama administration has done to completely upend health care in this country, there are still more than 30 million uninsured people in America today. The reason theyre not buying Obamacare isnt because they havent heard enough about it. Theyre not buying because its a bad deal for them. As people log on to the government exchanges this year, they will see the telltale signs of Obamacares impending failure. These include: costs soaring, cancellations mounting, and choices disappearing. The first thing most people will notice is the higher price tag. Premiums are jumping by double digits in many states. In Alaska, premiums will be nearly 40 percent higher next year. People buying insurance on the Minnesota exchange will pay anywhere from 14 to 49 percent more. Premiums are just one part of the high-cost story. Many plans are raising deductibles, co-pays, and other out-of-pocket costs. Remember when President Obamas mantra was If you like your health care plan, you can keep it? Now the administration is singing a different tune: If you have an Obamacare plan, you better shop around. Thats about the only advice Washington has for people who want to avoid brutal rate increases. If youre willing to switch insurance plans each year, your rates may go up by slightly less. For some people, their old plan wont be available at any price. This includes more than a half-million people insured by one of the health co-ops that have shut down in 11 states over the past few months. It also includes people whose insurer decided it simply couldnt afford to sell Obamacare coverage anymore. Thats what happened in my home state, Wyoming, where the company WINHealth is dropping out of the exchange entirely. In some states, plans are changing dramatically even if the company remains. A patient may find that her longtime doctor will no longer be a part of her plans network. Maybe the hospital nearest to her home is no longer included by her insurance. These kinds of changes can leave people with very different coverage than they had before. As people work their way around the website, they may notice that the remaining options are slimmer than ever. Analysts at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation say that more of the choices will be HMOs this time around. That can mean narrower networks and no out-of-network coverage. In some states, the number of options is practically non-existent. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, people living in 14 of Nevadas 16 counties will have only one or two companies to pick from. In Wyoming, with the failure of WINHealth, residents will have only one option. Insurance through Obamacare is largely coming down to a simple choice of take it or leave it. More and more Americans are leaving it. The only people who are consistently signing up are the ones who get subsidies from Washington. For them, the website should come with a warning label reading: Buyer beware. According to the IRS, 90 percent of people who received government insurance subsidies last year got the wrong amount. To avoid an all-out panic over low enrollment, the administration is trying to lower expectations. Its lowered the bar for success to around 10 million people enrolled for 2016. Thats half of the 21 million people the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says should be covered next year. Its also essentially flat compared to the 9.9 million who were enrolled in June. The administration is playing the lowered expectations game because they know how hard it is to convince more Americans to buy government-mandated insurance that costs so much. For so many people, Obamacare doesnt have much to offer. Even the $695 tax penalty isnt enough incentive to coerce people to buy. People facing premium increases along with a $5,000 deductible see little reason to pay for insurance they may not want, need, or be able to afford. Obamacare is failing because too many people want nothing to do with it. As the costs continue to rise, more people get cancellation notices, and the exchanges offer fewer choices, the collapse will only continue. We may look back at this past Sunday as the beginning of the end. John Barrasso, chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, is a senator from Wyoming and a physician. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=c0be6c73-8a5a-4e27-8e6c-47a24d5c3023,Key Endorsements Fuel Momentum for Bipartisan WOTUS Vote,2015-11-02,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) announced hundreds of national, state and local endorsements of his bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act, S. 1140. The Senate is scheduled to vote on the motion to proceed to S. 1140 on Tuesday, Nov. 3 at 2:30 pm ET. Several state attorneys general, the National Association of Counties, National League of Cities and hundreds of agriculture, electricity and builders associations and small-business groups have endorsed S. 1140. Some of these groups include the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Association of Home Builders, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, American Public Power Association, National Federation of Independent Business and the American Road & Transportation Builders Association. The National Federation of Independent Business and U.S. Chamber of Commerce are also scoring Tuesdays vote on S. 1140 as a key vote. For a full list of endorsements of S. 1140 click here. Background on S. 1140: S. 1140 directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers to issue a revised waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule that protects traditional navigable water and wetlands from water pollution, while also protecting farmers, ranchers and private landowners. Senator Barrasso introduced S. 1140 on April 30, 2015 with Senators Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), among others. S. 1140 has a total of 46 cosponsors, including Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY). The bill passed the Environment and Public Works Committee on June 10, 2015. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=fec36d5d-1248-41a3-8a5e-35f031d89d31,Key Endorsements Fuel Momentum for Bipartisan WOTUS Vote,2015-11-02,2015,2015-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) announced hundreds of national, state and local endorsements of his bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act, S. 1140. The Senate is scheduled to vote on the motion to proceed to S. 1140 on Tuesday, Nov. 3 at 2:30 pm ET. Several state attorneys general, the National Association of Counties, National League of Cities and hundreds of agriculture, electricity and builders associations and small-business groups have endorsed S. 1140. Some of these groups include the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Association of Home Builders, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, American Public Power Association, National Federation of Independent Business and the American Road & Transportation Builders Association. The National Federation of Independent Business and U.S. Chamber of Commerce are also scoring Tuesdays vote on S. 1140 as a key vote. For a full list of endorsements of S. 1140 click here. Background on S. 1140: S. 1140 directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers to issue a revised waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule that protects traditional navigable water and wetlands from water pollution, while also protecting farmers, ranchers and private landowners. Senator Barrasso introduced S. 1140 on April 30, 2015 with Senators Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), among others. S. 1140 has a total of 46 cosponsors, including Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY). The bill passed the Environment and Public Works Committee on June 10, 2015. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=2631c534-ce14-400c-b45f-26c414f1870b,"The Enzi Insider October 30, 2015",2015-10-30,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored and Cosponsored Federal Lands Invasive Species Control, Prevention and Management Act would develop a better strategy for invasive species control. Led by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY). Small Business Saturday Resolution would encourage consumers to support their communitys small businesses on the Saturday after Thanksgiving. Led by Small Business Committee Chairman David Vitter (R-LA) and Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). Letters Enzi Signed Signed Wild Horse Letter to Bureau of Land Management Director Neil Kornze asking about the agencys plan to manage wild horse numbers. Led by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY). Signed Thunder Basin FACA Letter to Agriculture Secretary, Tom Vilsack, asking for the creation of a Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) group for prairie dog management on the Thunder Basin Grassland.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=04d71f1f-a9f1-424e-876c-fa2fa0aaeee6,Barrasso Announces Vote on Bipartisan Bill to Protect Navigable Waters in the United States,2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) announced that the Senate will vote on the motion to proceed to his bipartisan Federal Water Quality Protection Act, S. 1140, during the week of Nov. 2. S. 1140 directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers to issue a revised waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule that protects traditional navigable water and wetlands from water pollution, while also protecting farmers, ranchers and private landowners. The Senate has the opportunity now to take up the Federal Water Quality Protection Act, a strong bipartisan bill that will direct the Environmental Protection Agency to write a reasonable rule to protect our navigable waterways, said Barrasso. Our beautiful rivers and lakes deserve protection, and this bill does nothing to block legitimate efforts to safeguard the true waters of the United States. By striking the right balance, well restore Washingtons attention to the countrys traditional waterways, protecting these cherished natural resources. At the same time, well give certainty to farmers, ranchers and small-business owners that they can use their property reasonably without fear of constant Washington intervention. The recently finalized rule on Waters of the U.S. is the posterchild of EPA overreach. Many of my colleagues, particularly those from rural states in both parties, have talked about their concern with the rule. This will be their chance to show their constituents that they are ready to do something about it. Senator Barrasso introduced S. 1140 on April 30, 2015 with Senators Joe Donnelly (D-IN), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV), among others. S. 1140 has a total of 46 cosponsors. The bill passed the Environment and Public Works Committee on June 10, 2015. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=6c04a210-8022-4e7e-9416-da0dca7aa811,Barrasso: Congress Works to Rein in Irresponsible EPA,2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting the recent report that confirms the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could have prevented the Gold King Mine spill. Barrasso also details some of the Obama administrations most egregious new rules and how members of Congress are working to stop them. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Back in August, several western states and Indian tribes suffered an enormous environmental disaster. Its been called the Gold King Mine Spill. In this disaster, the Environmental Protection Agency spilled three million gallons of toxic wastewater into a tributary of the Animas River in Colorado. This plume of toxic waste threatened people in Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. It stretched to the land of the Navajo Nation, and the Southern Ute Indian Tribe. Last month, I chaired a hearing of the Indian Affairs Committee that looked at the spill. The EPA was there to testify. The EPA claimed that it was taking full responsibility and that it did everything it could to deflect actual blame. They said theyre taking full responsibility, then they did everything they could to deflect actual blame. The agency administrator actually told our committee that the spill was inevitable. Does that sound like someone whos actually taking full responsibility? Well, last week we got the results of the investigation by the Interior Department about what actually happened at the Gold King Mine. On Friday, the Washington Post reported, EPA gets blame for mine spill into rivers. According to this report, the EPAs crew didnt take engineering into account when it was working on the mine. The agency didnt understand that water in these mines can create hydraulic forces similar to a dam. How could the experts from the EPAthe U.S. governments Environmental Protection Agencynot know that? The report also said that the conditions and actions that led to the Gold King Mine incident are not isolated or unique, and in fact are surprisingly prevalent. Remember, the EPA said it was inevitable. The only way this spill was inevitable is because the EPA is so inept, so negligent, so incompetent that it was inevitable the agency would cause a disaster like this someday. Now they have. It is inevitable that the agency is going to keep making the same mistakes unless something changes at this irresponsible, incompetent agency. So whats changed? Its been almost three months since this disaster happened. The Environmental Protection Agency has not named a single person whom it is holding responsible for poisoning the river. If the EPAs incompetence is surprisingly prevalent as the investigation found youd think that this agency should be trying to get its house in order, before it takes on new jobs. Thats not what the Obama administration is doing. Its not slowing down at all. Its not slowing down in its quest for more power, and more ways that it can control what people do. On Friday, the Obama administration published the final rule for what it calls its Clean Power Plan. This regulation would create more Washington control over how electricity is produced across the country. That very same day, 26 states including mine and that of the presidents, 26 states filed lawsuits in federal court to stop this disastrous rule. These states say that the Environmental Protection Agency went far beyond anything that the law allows and far beyond anything Congress ever intended. I completely agree. This rule is too expensive, it is too extensive, and it is too extreme. Now the EPA does has a job to do and it is failing dramatically at its job. Instead of going back to basics and doing its job right the EPA wants more power, more control, less accountability. The so-called Clean Power Plan will cost billions of dollars. According to one estimate, it will destroy the jobs of more than 125,000 Americans. None of that seems to matter to the President of the United States or his administration and the EPA. They are driven by ideology, not by the facts and their ideology is driven by their desire for more control. Thats why its so urgent that we focus our attention on all of the ways this Washington bureaucracy is trying to restrict peoples freedom and take more control for themselves. The Obama administration isnt even satisfied telling states how to get their energy. Now the Obama administration wants to be involved in making these decisions for the whole world. Its trying to negotiate a climate change treaty that will impose broad new limits on American energy. This treaty will also do incredible damage to the American economy. At the same time, the administration wants to pay billions of American taxpayer dollars, hard-earned dollars, they want to pay it to other countries. In return for these other countries adopting green energy sources like solar panels, the Obama administration will help prop up their economiesnot at their expensebut at Americas expense. It wants to do all of this behind closed doors without any oversight from Congress or the American people. The administration wants to make sure that nobody can do anything to stop it, until after its too late. It wants to tie the hands of the American economy, dole out billions of taxpayer dollars, and not even ask the American people if this is what they want. The United States Congress cannot stand for that. Its the wrong choice for America and its the wrong choice for the rest of the world as well. There was an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last Thursday by Bjorn Lomborg. Now hes the director of a non-partisan, international group called the Copenhagen Consensus Center. The headline is This Child Doesnt Need a Solar Panel, with a photo of a child in a slum in Mozambique. The author points out that the Obama administration is wrongly focused on this kind of climate change payoff that the president is promoting. In the op-ed he writes: This effectively means telling the worlds worst-off people, suffering from tuberculosis, malaria, or malnutrition, that what they really need isnt medicine, mosquito nets, or micronutrients, but a solar panel. It is terrible news. He goes on: In a world in which malnourishment continues to claim at least 1.4 million childrens lives each year, 1.2 billion people live in extreme poverty, and 2.6 billion lack clean drinking water and sanitation, this growing emphasis on climate aid is immoral. Thats the assessment coming out of the Copenhagen Consensus Centerthe presidents actions are immoral. There are some very real dangers facing the United States and other countries today. Like the threat from global terrorists and from countries like Russia, Iran, North Korea. There are desperate humanitarian crises around the world. These should be the focus of the Obama administrations foreign policy. Here at home, the EPA should be cleaning up the environment, not poisoning Americans rivers and lakes. Until the Obama administration gets its priorities straight, Congress will have to act to stop it. Republicans have introduced legislation to block some of the administrations most egregious new rules. Senator Ernst has filed a resolution against the so-called Waters of the U.S., the WOTUS, rule. Ive introduced legislation to replace the WOTUS rule with one that protects waterways, while preventing Washingtons takeover of non-navigable waterways. Senator McConnell and Senator Capito have filed resolutions against the extreme limits on power plants. Senator Flake has filed one on the burdensome new ozone standard. Were going to keep a spotlight on this administration as it negotiates this new climate change treaty. Were going to stop it from committing this country to another bad deal and the rest of us will be paying for that bad deal long after President Obama is out of office. Congress is going to hold the Obama administration accountable and rein in the Washington bureaucrats before they do additional damage.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=3c8607ab-c8df-45cb-91d0-6627bdb937ef,Senators Introduce Bill to Withhold Bonuses from Tax Cheat Bureaucrats,2015-10-29,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) and Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), along with Senators John Thune (R-SD), Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Mike Enzi (R-WY) yesterday introduced No Bonuses for Tax Cheats Act, which withholds bonuses from federal employees who are delinquent on their taxes or have engaged in documented misconduct. Today, were taking the first step to prevent bureaucrats from getting paid bonuses while fleecing the taxpayers at the same time, said Senator Burr. Its unconscionable that federal employees are eligible for bonuses, paid for by Americans, while they have dodged the tax collectors. We know of too many examples of bad behavior from individuals like the IRSs Lois Lerner, who targeted Americans for their political beliefs and received over $129,000 in bonuses even as she was engaged in wrongdoing. The IRS alone has paid over $2.8 million of taxpayer money to employees who havent paid their own taxes. This bill will put a stop to this egregious practice, once and for all. The fact that millions of dollars in bonuses have been given to IRS employees who havent been paying their taxes is alarming and completely unacceptable, Senator Manchin said. No federal agency is above the law nor should anyone be able to reward tax-delinquent employees with taxpayer-funded bonuses, least of all the IRS. We cannot expect the American taxpayer, especially those struggling to make ends meet, to have faith in their government when they discover the agency they are paying their taxes to is rewarding employees who havent paid theirs. Im at glad to join this bipartisan effort to help fix this oversight. This bill is about as common sense as they come, said Senator Thune. At its core, its about accountability. This bill says to hard-working Americans that the federal bureaucrats who collect their taxes have the same responsibility they do in fulfilling tax obligations. No one, especially employees at the IRS, should be rewarded while willfully cheating on their taxes or otherwise engaging in misconduct. Simply put, IRS employees should live by the rules they enforce and should not receive a bonus while owing back taxes, Senator Roberts said. Our bill makes sense and is one small way to help restore faith in an agency that has lost the trust of the American people. Its time to stop giving bonuses to IRS employees who behave badly, Senator Enzi said. Why should we reward IRS employees for late taxes or misconduct? This bill will provide a rational solution to ensure the IRS is more accountable to the American people. In April of 2014, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report that found the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had paid $2.8 million in bonuses, as well as tens of thousands of hours of leave and hundreds of pay-step increases to employees who were tax delinquent or had committed serious misconduct, including fraud and drug use. More recently, in their April 2015 report, TIGTA found 108 of 364 employees with willful tax noncompliance cases closed between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2013, received one or more awards, promotions, quality step increases or Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments within one year after being disciplined for the tax noncompliance. Senators Burr and Manchin initially introduced a version of this legislation in April, 2014. No Bonuses for Tax Cheats bill text No Bonuses for Tax Cheats one-pager",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=2bbf6166-d2ac-4785-b935-861960a9963d,"Less expense, complication and intimidation",2015-10-28,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"There should be hope for the future even after you retire.A good retirement plan can help, but for employees of small businesses this can be more difficult than it is for larger employers and their employees. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., believes making retirement plans less complicated, less intimidating and less expensive for small businesses could go a long way to help retirees.He said allowing more small businesses to join together to better manage retirement plans is the answer, but this will require the federal government to take a step back and give businesses more flexibility. As Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Primary Health and Retirement Security, Enzi invited Jackson, Wyoming small business owner Scott Anderson of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, AARP and others with retirement knowledge to sit down and discuss the issue. Enzi suggested that a bipartisan solution to help enhance retirement security for employees could be achieved by allowing the expansion of Multiple Employer Plans, which allow small businesses to join together to make retirement plans easier to manage and significantly less expensive. It seems to me that access to Multiple Employer Plans can and should be broadened to provide small businesses with administrative simplicity with regard to retirement benefits, Enzi said. Click here to access the roundtable in its entirety.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=89ee5504-6536-4b6b-b8fd-451160bcb8d6,Senators act to block EPAs regulations aimed at killing coal power plants,2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC U.S. Senator Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, R-Wyo., cosponsored two bipartisan resolutions today in an attempt to overturn the Environmental Protection Agencys unprecedented regulations aimed at putting coal out of business. Aimed at two pillars of the proposed Clean Power Plan, the resolution introduced by Senators Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., and Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., would overturn regulations aimed at existing coal-fired power plants, while the resolution introduced by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Senator Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., would protect new coal-fired power plants. The state of Wyoming is fighting this rule in federal court, and we are using the legislative tactics we have at our disposal to fight it here in Washington, Enzi said. In the face of bipartisan opposition, it is astonishing that the EPA continues to try to destroy Americas coal industry through a string of ill-thought rules and bureaucratic maneuvers. The bipartisan opposition to the Obama administrations multi-billion dollar carbon mandate only grows stronger each and every day. Its no surprise that many states, including Wyoming, have already rejected this rule by filing lawsuits to block it, Barrasso said. Todays bipartisan resolution is just one of the tools Congress can and will use to fight back against this costly and unprecedented Washington overreach. Well continue to pursue any and all opportunities to stop regulations that will crush jobs, harm public health, and increase energy prices for American families. With an estimated price tag of at least $366 billion, the Wyoming senators said the regulations would not only devastate the coal industry by mandating unrealistic carbon reductions, they will also distress American families by forcing job cuts and causing double-digit electricity rate increases in more than 40 states. Enzi and Barrasso have also cosponsored the Affordable Reliable Energy Now Act (ARENA), which would delay the compliance date of the Clean Power Plan until the courts decide if the rule is on good legal standing. - end-",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d0e69d59-a101-4224-91a0-694baf0c9342,Barrasso Questions Assistant Secretary Schneider on OSMs Anti-Coal Stream Rule,2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) questioned Janice Schneider, the Interior Departments assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management, about the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcements (OSM) proposed stream protection rule. Barrasso also asked Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Director Todd Parfitt, who also testified at todays Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing, to respond to the administrations estimates on the cost of the rule to states. Senator Barrasso Questions Ms. Schneider about ignoring states in rulemaking process: Click here to watch Sen. Barrasso question Ms. Schneider Ms. Schneider, I would like to turn to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires every federal agency to assess the environmental impacts that would result from actions taken by that agencyactions like approving a permit or issuing a new regulation. A federal agency assesses environmental impacts in what is known as an environmental impact statement. Prior to issuing an environmental impact statement, a federal agency is required to consult with other agenciesincluding state agencieswhich have special expertise with respect to the action under consideration. The federal agency preparing the environmental impact statement is called the lead agency the other agencies are called cooperating agencies. Under NEPA, the lead agency is not only required to consult with cooperating agencies. It must ensure that the participation of cooperating agencies is meaningful. So when the Office of Surface Mining began developing the so-called stream protection rule, it identified ten state agencies as cooperating agencies. The Office signed agreements with each of these state agencies in which it pledged to provide them with: copies of key or relevant documents underlying the EIS; administrative drafts of the EIS; and a reasonable time for review and return ofcomprehensive comments. Thats what you promised. However, between January 2011 and the issuance of the proposed rule on July 2015, the Office of Surface Mining did none of this. For four and a half years, the Office of Surface Mining shared neither drafts of the EIS nor documents related to the EIS. During this time, it engaged in no meaningful consultation whatsoever with state agencies. It even ignored the states repeated requests for consultation. And in response, eight of the ten state agencies felt they had no other choice but to withdraw as cooperating agencies. Now you have overseen the Office of Surface Mining since May 2014. Why is the Office of Surface Mining allowed to make a mockery of its obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act? Lets be clear, that sharing was done before January of 2011. I want to know where this law allows your agency to go dark for four and a half years? How is that consistent with the Presidents claim that his administration is the most transparent administration in history? They seem like lame excuses to me. Senator Barrasso Questions Ms. Schneider about the cost of rule: I would like to turn to the Office of Surface Minings draft regulatory impact analysis or the R-I-A. A regulatory impact analysis estimates the cost of a rule on industry as well as the federal government and the states. The Office of Surface Mining estimates that the total annual cost of the proposed stream rule to the entire Rocky Mountain region is $29,000. Now, Mr. Parfitt testifies that: [o]n its face, that figure is laughable. He says the state of Wyoming spent more than that simply reading and analyzing the Proposed Rule and associated documentsan effort that is not even remotely close to being finished. He goes on to say that the Office of Surface Mining: grossly underestimates the impact of the proposed rule on Wyoming and federal tax revenueby more than $1.3 million per year. Ms. Schneider, wouldnt you agree that the Office of Surface Minings annual cost estimate of $29,000 for the entire Rocky Mountain region ison its faceridiculous? Senator Barrasso asks Mr. Parfitt to respond to Ms. Schneiders comments: Click here to watch Mr. Parfitt respond to Ms. Schneiders comments ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f4c88bc9-7c1c-4556-bdd9-f86bac5ce672,WY DEQ Director Parfitt Testifies Before Senate on Anti-Coal Stream Rule,2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) welcomed Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Director Todd Parfitt before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.Senator Barrasso invited Parfitt to testify on the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcements (OSM) proposed stream protection rule. Parfitt testified alongside Janice Schneider, the Interior Departments assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management, and three others. The Obama administration has botched the stream rulemaking process from the beginning. Ithas flagrantly violated its obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act and, for that reason alone, it should scrap this proposed rule and start over, said Barrasso. No one knows this better than Wyoming DEQ Director Todd Parfitt. Director Parfitt can attest firsthand to how the Office of Surface Mining left state agencies out of the rulemaking process for four and a half years. He can also explain how the administration continues to ignore the costs that this job-crushing regulation poses to Wyoming and the entire nation. Parfitt, testified about how OSM is understating the cost of this rule that will negatively impact coal states like Wyoming. The Regulatory Impact Analysis grossly underestimates the financial impact of implementing the new standards and grossly underestimates the impact of the proposed rule on Wyoming and federal tax revenue, understating that impact by more than $1.3 million per year, said Parfitt. Parfitt also discussed OSMs lack of engagement with state agencies and how they missed an opportunity to work with states to create a more appropriate proposal. The proposed rule is a one-size-fits-all regulation imposing nationwide standards without consideration for the fundamental regulatory, environmental, ecological or economic differences amongst the states, said Parfitt. In summary, the failure of OSM to engage cooperating agency states throughout this process is reflected in the poor quality of the proposed rule and inaccuracies in the draft EIS [environmental impact statement] and Regulatory Impact Analysis. OSM should withdraw the rule and work in a meaningful way with the states, to put forth a more appropriate proposal. You can listen to Parfitts entire committee statement here, and Senator Barrassos statement and questions here. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=edf6cbfe-4034-4029-bd84-16fe18ba1d9c,Senators act to block EPAs regulations aimed at killing coal power plants,2015-10-27,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, R-Wyo., cosponsored two bipartisan resolutions today in an attempt to overturn the Environmental Protection Agencys unprecedented regulations aimed at putting coal out of business. Aimed at two pillars of the proposed Clean Power Plan, the resolution introduced by Senators Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., and Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., would overturn regulations aimed at existing coal-fired power plants, while the resolution introduced by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Senator Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., would protect new coal-fired power plants. The state of Wyoming is fighting this rule in federal court, and we are using the legislative tactics we have at our disposal to fight it here in Washington, Enzi said. In the face of bipartisan opposition, it is astonishing that the EPA continues to try to destroy Americas coal industry through a string of ill-thought rules and bureaucratic maneuvers. The bipartisan opposition to the Obama administrations multi-billion dollar carbon mandate only grows stronger each and every day. Its no surprise that many states, including Wyoming, have already rejected this rule by filing lawsuits to block it, Barrasso said. Todays bipartisan resolution is just one of the tools Congress can and will use to fight back against this costly and unprecedented Washington overreach. Well continue to pursue any and all opportunities to stop regulations that will crush jobs, harm public health, and increase energy prices for American families. With an estimated price tag of at least $366 billion, the Wyoming senators said the regulations would not only devastate the coal industry by mandating unrealistic carbon reductions, they will also distress American families by forcing job cuts and causing double-digit electricity rate increases in more than 40 states. Enzi and Barrasso have also cosponsored the Affordable Reliable Energy Now Act (ARENA), which would delay the compliance date of the Clean Power Plan until the courts decide if the rule is on good legal standing.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=7f0935e8-738e-45de-9cd7-09c2b7515deb,"The Enzi Insider - October 23, 2015",2015-10-26,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Letters Enzi Signed Sent Letter to OMB Director Shaun Donovan to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Shaun Donovan to voice concerns about spending by Executive Branch entities on messaging activities. Led by Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY). Legislation Enzi Sponsored and Cosponsored Regulatory Authority Clarification Act would allow Congress to provide additional clarification on what regulatory authority has or hasnt been granted to executive agencies through the use of concurrent resolutions that do not require the presidents signature. Led by Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY). Career and Technical EducationAct Bipartisan Reauthorization Process sets out seven bipartisan principles for reauthorization of the Perkins Career and Technical Education Act to the education and workforce community asking for their submissions of specific policy recommendations. Led by Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY) along with Senators Bob Casey (D-PA), Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Patty Murray (D-WA). Ensuring Access to Affordable Home Care for Seniors and the Disabled Act would reverse the Department of Labors rule that makes it harder for elderly or disabled individuals to get third-party companion care. Led by Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS). No Bonuses for Tax Cheats Act would deny the payment of discretionary bonuses to Internal Revenue Service employees (IRS) involved in either misconduct or delinquent taxes. Led by Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Joe Manchin (D-WV).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=d6b512df-1c67-4ab6-9ace-bdd17b3e3069,Senators introduce bill to rein in regulatory authority,2015-10-23,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A group of senators introduced legislation today to help Congress rein in out-of-control executive agencies who interpret laws incorrectly to help grant themselves more regulatory authority than Congress intended. The Regulatory Authority Clarification Act, introduced by U.S. Senators Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., and Steve Daines, R-Mont., would allow Congress to provide additional clarification on what regulatory authority has or hasnt been granted. Although Congress can already rein in agencies by passing new laws or using the Congressional Review Act, these methods require the presidents approval, effectively creating a two-thirds majority requirement to override a veto. Under the Regulatory Authority Clarification Act, Congress could pass concurrent resolutions that are not subject to presidential approval to make it clear what authority Congress has or has not granted agencies in law and to overrule improper interpretations by agencies. The resolutions would not be able to rescind authority that is explicitly granted, or create new authority that didnt exist in the original law.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=092221ae-d432-42f0-8b1a-37dd2bfb4624,Barrasso Statement on Presidents NDAA Veto,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) released the following statement after President Obama vetoed the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). With todays veto of the bipartisan defense authorization bill, President Obama is choosing to hold American troops hostage. This bill gives our men and women in uniform the tools they need to protect our country, and a quality of life that they deserve. Despite Congress agreeing with the president on the amount of military funding, he is ransoming the well-being of our service members for more money to carry out his partisan domestic agenda through the IRS, the EPA and other agencies unrelated to Americas national security. That the president would veto this bill at all and do so at a White House photo-op is disgraceful. That he would do so on a day when an American soldier lost his life in Iraq makes a mockery of what is at stake for American security. Our service men and women deserve better than the support theyre receiving from this president. Its time for Congress to override this veto. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=ae7d9292-1772-40c5-847e-397f1eef52bb,Barrasso: New Report Confirms EPA Could Have Prevented Gold King Mine Disaster,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after the Department of Interior announced its report confirming that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could have prevented the Gold King Mine disaster. Literally and figuratively, the EPA blew it. The governments own report directly refutes the EPAs claim that a toxic spill that caused 3 million gallons of toxic wastewater from the Gold King Mine to poison rivers in three states was likely inevitable. Responsibility for this disaster lands directly on the EPAs doorstep. I want to know who at the EPA will be held accountable for this disaster. Senator Barrasso, as chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, held a hearing on the Gold King Mine disaster with EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on September 16, 2015. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=5289926a-3962-4d84-81b2-4d502d708d21,Enzi: Help the economy by stopping onslaught of regulations,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"It is often said that there are two constants in life death and taxes, but according to U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., it appears there is one more issue that Americans cant seem to escape from regulations. Speaking on the Senate floor today, Enzi said this inability to escape federal regulationsis making it harder for Americans by slowing down the economy and making it more difficult to find a good job. This is a relationship that is clear to the people that experience the difficulties of complying with more and more regulations that make it harder to succeed, Enzi said. I hope that what is clear to business owners, employees, and communities across the country can be understood here in Washington. Enzi introduced legislation today to help fight back against executive agencies that overreach using laws passed by Congress to grant themselves more authority than Congress intended. The Regulatory Authority Clarification Act would allow Congress to provide additional clarification on what regulatory authority has or hasnt been granted. Although Congress can already rein in agencies by passing new laws or using the Congressional Review Act, these methods require the presidents approval, effectively creating a two-third majority requirement to override a veto. Under the Regulatory Authority Clarification Act, Congress could use concurrent resolutions that are not subject to presidential approval to make it clear what authority Congress has or has not granted agencies in law and to overrule improper interpretations by agencies. Along with the billions of dollars that recent regulations from the EPA and other agencies are predicted to cost the economy, Enzi noted that the regulations slowing the economy also grow the debt by decreasing revenue for business and individuals, meaning less tax revenues. With $18 trillion in debt, Enzi said the nation cannot afford to accept the notion that were entering into what some are calling a new normal of anemic economic growth. We need to help our economy reach its potential, which will help each and every American, Enzi said. This cannot be done if the number and cost of significant federal regulations continues to rise. Click here to read the full speech as prepared for delivery.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=6247ae9a-4c6c-4983-9f42-c505ea538808,Enzi statement of President Obamas veto of defense authorization,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"President Obama went through with his threat to veto legislation that sets Americas defense policy and authorizes spending for the military, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Senator Enzi issued the following statement in regard to the veto. President Obama had a photo op so he could be seen vetoing a bill that exists to strengthen our countrys national defense and support our troops. Its a bill that had pretty solid bipartisan support in both the House and the Senate. I hope my fellow legislators on both sides of the aisle will finally say enough is enough, and support Americas military as we attempt to override this ill-advised veto.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=31c16f0d-2e64-479a-92f2-56a53abe6975,True Cost of Regulations on Americas Economy,2015-10-22,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President: It is often said that there are two constants in life death and taxes but I would like to add one more for consideration regulations. We often talk about the threat Americas growing debt poses to our economy and our future but the growth in federal regulations also poses a serious threat to our nations long-term economic growth and job creation. According to the Congressional Budget Office or CBO, the potential growth rate of our economy (or that rate of growth that is possible given the education of workers, the quality of capital equipment, and the business formation rate) averaged 3.3 percent for the period 1950 through 2014. However, CBO expects that annual rate to fall to 2.1 percent or the period 2015 through 2025. Thats a 36 percent reduction in the potential growth rate of the economy. Why is this so critical? According to the Presidents own Office of Management and Budget, a 1 percent increase in the economys growth rate will yield more than $400 billion in new revenues to the government. But when that growth rate falls, when we grow more slowly than we could and arent meeting our full potential, government revenues also fail to keep up with budget projections. So what happens when the government revenue comes up even shorter in the face of growing overspending? More borrowing, bigger deficits, and expanding debt. Senators from Western states know all too well the economic effects of regulations coming out of bureaucracy-bloated agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency. Today I want to focus not just on the impact of recent regulations on my home state of Wyomings economy, but the drag they are creating on our economy nationwide. The State of Wyoming is the largest coal-producing state in the nation. Coal represents almost 40 percent of our share of electricity generation across the United States. It is abundant. It is affordable. It is stockpileable. This is an energy source that has the potential to power our country for hundreds of years, supports jobs for hundreds of thousands of people, and doesnt put us at the mercy of unstable regimes overseas. But this administration continues to try to regulate coal out of existence. Since 2012, two EPA rules, the mercury and air toxic standards rule and the ozone rule, are estimated to cost in the tens of billions of dollars. Thats just two rules, and doesnt include the billions of dollars lost to thousands of more rules imposed by the EPA and other agencies every year. If all those rules werent onerous enough, in August, the EPA doubled down on its war on coal when it released the final rule of the Clean Power Plan. With an estimated price tag of at least $366 billion, this rule will not only devastate the coal industry by mandating unrealistic carbon reductions, it will also distress American families by causing double-digit electricity rate increases in more than 40 states (according to the National Mining Association). And the coal industry in Wyoming is feeling the impact. The coal industry and businesses that rely on it are facing higher regulatory costs at the same time as energy producers are seeing a tougher market than they have in years, which is a bad combination for economic growth and job creation. At the end of July, Wyoming had 15 percent fewer energy industry jobs than it did a year earlier, according to the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. Most of those lost jobs are in coal, oil, and gas and businesses that rely on them. Given that close to half of Wyomings GDP comes from this sector, and that nearly half of our state is federally owned and removed from development activity, we are have always been concerned about any unnecessary government intrusion on our economic livelihood. But the impact of EPA and other federal regulations is not just hurting Wyomings economy and costing my state jobs. Theyre a major reason why the economy nationwide is not operating at its full potential and economic growth is has been stuck around two percent since the beginning of the so-called economic recovery. The onslaught of federal regulations targeted directly at the coal industry are not just concerns, they are real threats to peoples economic livelihood, the ability to support their families, and entire communities in Wyoming and across the country. With our $18 trillion in debt, we cannot afford to accept the notion that were entering into what some are calling a new normal of anemic economic growth. We need to help our economy reach its potential, which will help each and every American. This cannot be done if the number and cost of significant federal regulations continues to rise. The Obama Administration continues to push federal regulations like the Waters of the U.S. rule, which significantly expands federal authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA), as well as the recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rulemaking redefining the meaning of an employer. These regulations taken by themselves have the potential to impose billions of dollars in economic costs on family farms, ranches, and small businesses, while hindering the growth of Americas entrepreneurial spirit. Over the next few weeks and months, I am going to share with my colleagues new information from leading economists that show there is a real relationship between the growth of regulations and our struggling economy. This is a relationship that is clear to the people that experience the difficulties of complying with more and more regulations that make it harder to succeed. I hope that what is clear to business owners, employees, and communities across the country can be understood here in Washington I will share new statistics and data showing the lost income and jobs due to federal regulations; the effects of regulation on key industries, and the breakdown of how specific federal agencies are impacting our economy; and the regulatory burden the federal government has placed on hardworking Americans in economic sectors in every state. It is crucial for lawmakers and hardworking Americans to understand the true cost of the regulations that are being issued by this administration. Shining a light on these regulations and the burden they impose on each and every American is the only way to hold government accountable and to begin the process of reining in out-of-control agencies so we can halt the flood of regulations choking our economy. Mr. President, thank you for your time and I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f45096f4-10e2-421d-b2e0-331cf4470035,Barrasso: Obamacare Fails Rural Americans,2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting Obamacares failures in addressing rural health care. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Mr. President, I'd like to associate myself with the remarks of the majority leader and point out that in today's New York Times, Wednesday, October 21, the big headline, Insurance out of reach for many despite law. Despite this law, insurance is out of reach for many. And I know that my colleagues who are back home visiting with people around their home states last week, listening to what was on constituents' minds, heard exactly this, the problems of the health care law. I was at home in Wyoming, and I heard from a lot of people who are very concerned about President Obamas collapsing health care law. People in Wyoming just learned that the insurance company WINHealth will no longer be selling insurance through the Obamacare exchange in our state. The company said that it had to stop selling Obamacare plans because there was just no way to make money without big taxpayer subsidies coming from Washington. This company was already planning to raise rates significantly next year. It turns out that even that wasnt going to be enough money to make it worthwhile. In less than two weeks, Obamacare exchanges across the country will start selling insurance for next year. So the total number of companies left selling insurance in the exchange for the state of Wyoming will be exactly one. There will be no competition at all in the Obamacare exchange. If your doctor doesnt take that insurance you are out of luck. If you cant afford it you are out of luck. Is that what the president promised the American people? I got an email from one of my constituents Al Harris in Green River, Wyoming. He wrote: HELP!!!!!! He says, WINHealth has become the latest casualty of Obamacare. Al says that at his business, I have about 30 people that now will have no insurance at least not this insurance. I am scrambling with few options and Im convinced any option will be substantially more expensive. Al says, This train wreck needs to be stopped. And I agree. President Obama and Democrats in Congress made a mess of the health care system in our country. They said they had a better way of doing things. They said they knew best how to create competition, and how health care should operate in America. They created all of these Washington mandates. They required people to buy expensive coverage that was more than many people wanted, needed, or could afford. Then they created the exchanges where people could buy this new, expensive, Washington-mandated insurance coverage. And now the people of Wyoming are left with one option on the Obamacare exchange. Buy this insurance from this one company or the IRS will come knocking at your door to collect a big tax penalty, and Mr. President, the penalty is going up next year. Because of the significant failures of Obama administration, rural Americans now have fewer choices. Its not just in Wyoming. We just learned last week that insurance co-ops in Colorado, Oregon and Tennessee are all closing their doors. Why? Because theyve all lost so much money. Eight of the 23 health care co-ops in the country have collapsed completely collapsed - in the past few months. Co-ops have closed in New York, Kentucky as the majority leader has just said, Louisiana, Nevada, Iowa, and Nebraska. Many are in rural areas, where people already dont have a lot of choices. Now, were talking a half million people here losing their coverage, losing their insurance. Remember that promise the President Obama made if you like your coverage, you can keep your coverage? Wheres the president now? The president said the health care law is working better than he even thought. Amazing. Obamacare created these co-ops claiming to provide lower-cost insurance then it saddled them with so many mandates and restrictions that they need massive taxpayer bailouts. Altogether, these failed co-ops collected nearly $900 million already in taxpayer loans to help get them going. Thats how President Obama put this together. Now the co-ops have sunk, theyre are sinking and theyre taking their taxpayer loans with them. The ones that are trying to survive have been hiking their rates. The co-op in Utah plans to raise premiums by 58 percent starting in January just to be able to stay open. Is that what the president promised when he said rates would drop $2,500 per family? In Montana, the rates are set to go up by 43 percent for some co-op plans. This wasnt what rural Americans needed. President Obama said that the American people were going to get more choices because of his health care law instead theyre getting fewer choices. And yet he stands up and boldly says, it's working better than he expected. Obamacare created the illusion of coverage. Now even this illusion is disappearing. Whats even worse for rural Americans is that its not just the coverage thats turning out to be an illusion under Obamacare. The care is actually disappearing. Earlier this month we learned that Mercy Hospital in Independence, Kansas, will be closing down. This is the 56th rural hospital to close in the United States since 2010 when Obamacare became law. Another 238 hospitals are in danger of closing. The added expense, the regulations, and the other destructive side effects of Obamacare are a big reason for this. The patients who rely on these hospitals will have to find some other place to go to get their medical care somewhere farther away from home. Democrats in Congress many who live in big cities may take for granted that they can get to a hospital quickly. Thats just not the case in rural America. As a doctor who practiced medicine for 25 years, I can tell you that the extra time people spend travelling to a hospital can make all the difference in the world between life and death. For someone whos had a heart attack, or been in a traffic accident, or for a woman with a high-risk pregnancy, every minute counts. Only 20 percent of the U.S. population lives in rural areas and these areas account for 60 percent of all trauma deaths. Americans living in these rural areas didnt need President Obama making it tougher for their rural, local hospital to stay open. Mercy Hospital was the center of medical care in its community for 100 years and it also provided jobs for nearly 200 people. In many parts of the country like Independence, Kansas, and much of my home state of Wyoming the local hospital can be the biggest employer in the area. If the hospital closes, those people lose their jobs. The tax base for the community goes down, which means fewer services like schools, firefighters and public safety. Maybe the local restaurant or florist doesnt have enough business to stay open. Nurses, teachers, and other workers move away, looking for a better chance somewhere else.Its harder for the town to attract new doctors, teachers, or businesses. The town suffers. Thats what these communities across America are facing. Was that what President Obama promised the American people? Is that how Obamacare was supposed to work? Ezekiel Emanuel was one of the architects of the president's health care law. He says that 56 hospitals shutting down is not enough. Hes actually written about this its astonishing. He says that over the next few years, more than 1,000 hospitals will close. One thousand American communities, where people will be farther away from medical care. ""One thousand American towns in danger of fading away because of the lost jobs and lost health care. We needed health care reform in this country thats not in dispute. We did not need the disruptive, destructive, and dangerous Obamacare law. Its been bad for patients, bad for providers like doctors and nurses who take care of those patients, and terrible for taxpayers. It has been especially hard on rural communities. We have got to do something to stop this corrosive condition causing hospitals to close,insurance co-ops to collapse and health care choices to disappear. Democrats in Congress need to sit down with Republicans and start talking about the kind of health care reforms that the American people need, want, and deserve. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=8a45f027-24d0-4d15-ac7c-528e48431f9e,Enzi: Healthy budget process strengthens democracy,2015-10-21,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, held a hearing on the need to take action on reforming the federal budget process. Testifying were Michael Peterson, President and CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and Dr. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, President of the American Action Forum and former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). A well-functioning budget process strengthens democracy by giving citizens a better understanding of government's role, which provides them with the knowledge that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, Enzi said. When the process breaks down, so do the people's faith in government and their elected officials. Enzi noted that regular order has been incredibly rare in the budget process and that Congress has passed budget resolutions in less than half of the last 15 fiscal years. Prior to this year's balanced budget resolution, the last time Congress passed a 10-year balanced budget was in 2001. Enzi said over the past 40 years, the appropriations process has been completed on time in only four fiscal years. In 15 of those years, not one appropriations bill was enacted on time. Instead, since 1977, Congress enacted 173 short-term spending bills for an average of 186 days per year over half the year. Hardworking Americans yearn for a government that is both accountable and effective, Enzi said. This is why it is critical to reform the federal budget process by encouraging regular order and predictability, active legislative oversight, and spending transparency, all critical ingredients to strengthening our democracy and reducing our nations unsustainable spending and debt.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=040ffdbf-1192-4021-85c3-cb9c910cf394,"Barrasso Questions DOE, DOI Nominees on Uranium, Anti-Coal Stream Rule IG Report",2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) questioned Department of Interior (DOI) nominee Mary L. Kendall and Department of Energy (DOE) nominee John Frances Kotek about excess uranium management and an inspector generals (IG) report on the DOIs anti-coal stream rule. Ms. Kendall is nominated to be inspector general at DOI. Mr. Kotek is nominated to be an assistant secretary at DOE (nuclear energy). Question to Ms. Kendall on Stream Buffer Zone Rulemaking IG Report Ms. Kendall, Id like to ask you about a report that your officethe Office of Inspector Generalissued on the Office of Surface Minings ongoing stream buffer zone rulemaking. For years, members of Congress have expressed grave concerns about this rulemaking. Prior to the issuance of your report, the House held a number of hearings which examined the rulemaking, including the jobs that would be lost as a result of the rule. A redacted copy of the report indicates that your office completed the report on February 28, 2013. But your office did not release the report to the public or to Congress until December 20, 201310 months after your department completed the report. So you completed it, and then we waited 10 months until you released it. So December 20. I would note that December 20th was the Friday right before Christmas. It was also three days after this committee held a confirmation hearing on Janice Schneidernow she was nominated to oversee the very office under investigationthe Office of Surface Mining. So you waited 10 months, and then you released it the Friday before Christmas, three days after the committee held the confirmation hearingso we couldnt ask questions about it. So the question is, shouldnt it have occurred to you that the Senate and the public had an interest in seeing your report prior to Ms. Schneiders confirmation hearing? To people who look at this, it certainly seems like youre playing games with Congress. So I would love to hear back from you on that. You know, I understand you did provide a copy of the report to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. So Im also going to ask that you look intobecause prior to December 20th, if you shared the reportor any information related to the reportwith anyone else outside the Office of the Inspector General? If so, with whom? So Ill ask that you follow up in writing. Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Ms. Kendall on stream buffer zone rulemaking IG report Question to Mr. Kotek on Excess Uranium Management Mr. Kotek, before joining the Department of Energy earlier this year, you worked as a strategic consultant for the Fluor Corporation. Since 2011, the Department has given Fluor about a billion dollars worth of publicly owned uranium from its stockpile of excess uranium. In exchange, Fluor has provided decommissioning services at the departments gaseous diffusion plant in Ohio. The Government Accountability Office has said that these transactions violate federal law. So I question whether the department receives full valuation for the uranium that it gives to this company. So if confirmedyou will be responsible for overseeing the publics stockpile of excess uranium. You will play a significant role in determining the circumstances and conditions under which the department disposes of excess uranium. So given your past employment by the Fluor Corporation, do you plan to recuse yourself from decisions that would benefit this corporation? And if not, why not? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Mr. Kotek on excess uranium management Question to Mr. Kotek on Ensuring Public Gets Full Value for Excess Uranium I question whether the department actually is receiving full value for the uranium that it gives to the [Fluor] corporation. The corporation did not consume the uranium that it receives from the department. Instead, it sells the uranium, as you know, to another party. Earlier this year, I called on the department to condition all future transfers of uranium on the requirement that the company publicly disclose the terms under which it sells the uranium. So if confirmed, would you be willing to do that? I question whether the department actually is receiving full value for the uranium that it gives to the corporation. The corporation did not consume the uranium that it receives from the Department. Instead, it sells the uranium, as you know, to another party. Earlier this year, I called on the department to condition all future transfers of uranium on the requirement that the company publicly disclose the terms under which it sells the uranium. So if confirmed, would you be willing to do that? Do you think this it is an unreasonable request given your past employment by the Fluor Corporation? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Mr. Kotek on getting full value for uranium ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=0c2e8c31-956d-4ee3-8283-a276e8697a95,Barrasso Chairs Subcommittee Hearing on Paris Climate Talks,2015-10-20,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Click here to watch Sen. Barrassos Opening Remarks. WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy, and Environmental Policy, presided over a hearing on the economic and environmental impacts of the international climate negotiations to be concluded in Paris this December. The hearing featured testimony from Todd Stern, the lead U.S. negotiator for the Paris talks. For more information and video of Mr. Sterns testimony, click here. During the hearing, Barrasso questioned Mr. Stern about what a Paris agreement would look like and if it would be legally binding on the United States. To watch Senator Barrasso question Mr. Stern, click here. Transcript of Senator Barrassos Opening Statement: Good afternoon. I would like to call this hearing to order, the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy and Environmental Policy. I would also like to welcome our Ranking Member, Senator Udall, and our guests today. Today, we are examining the objectives and the intentions of the administrations international climate negotiations in Paris, as well as the potential ramifications for the United States. The International Climate Change Conference will take place from November 30 to December 11 in Paris this year. With this event happening in a matter of a little more than a month, I think its important that we examine what this administration plans to accomplish in Paris. So I am pleased to welcome our witness from the State Department, Mr. Todd Stern. He is the United States Special Envoy for Climate Change, and will be the lead negotiator for the Paris climate change conference. He has a unique perspective as to what it is that this administration is negotiating for in any climate change deal, and what any final deal may look like. So Mr. Stern, thank you very much for being with us today. While I support international dialogue on global environmental problems, I do have serious concerns about the impact any deal reached in Paris will have on the American economy, on our international priorities, and on our environmental goals. I am hearing from my constituents back home about their concerns. Theyre concerned that the pledges that the president is committing the United States to will strengthen foreign economies at the expense of American workers, and will line the pockets of developing nations with millions of American taxpayer dollars. All this of this is being proposed at a time of scarce resources which are needed to strengthen our economy; to fend off threats to our nations security; and to address humanitarian crises abroad. Whatever deal is reached in the backrooms of the Paris Climate Change Conference, it has been telegraphed by this administration that the deal will be a calculated end run around Congress. Just like the Kyoto Protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, any agreement that commits our nation to targets or timetables must go through the process established by the founders of our Constitution. It must be submitted to the United States Senate for its advice and consent. The president has made clear that he doesnt see it that way, as was the case with the Iranian nuclear deal. For that reason, we need to send a message to the nations that are partners with the president in any final deal, that beyond a shadow of a doubt, the Senate will not stand by any agreement that binds the American people to targets or timetables on emissions, without our advice and consent. The presidents joint announcement with China has sent a loud and clear signal that a Paris deal could be an economic and environmental loser for the American people. In November 2014, President Obama and the President of China made a joint announcement on targets to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions. President Obama pledged to reduce U.S. net greenhouse gases by 26-28 percent by 2025. China agreed to peak its carbon dioxide emissions in 2030. This agreement forces Americans to drastically decrease our emissions immediately while China will be allowed to let their emissions continue to rise for the next 15 years. According to the Congressional Research Service, China has been the highest emitter of greenhouse gases across the globe since around 2007. Currently, China emits 23% of net greenhouse gases worldwide, while our nations share has declined to only13%. This is a terrible deal for Americans but it is a great deal for the Chinese government and the Chinese economy. Now, I also want to address my concerns about the Administrations $3 billion pledge to the Green Climate Fund. The American public does not support paying their hard earned taxpayer dollars into a slush fund that spends billions on international climate change programs in developing nations to address the impacts of extreme weather. The need for spending on natural disasters is down historically, while other international priorities have increased. According to the 2014 Annual Global Climate and Catastrophe Report released by Aon Benfield-Global natural disasters in 2014 combined to cause economic losses of $132 billion, 37 percent below the ten-year average of $211 billion. With immediate global priorities such as the upheaval in the Middle East in Syria and Iraq to a resurgent Russia in Eastern Europe and abroad, we should be focusing our resources on countering global terrorist threats; on humanitarian assistance, on democracy promotion, and on embassy security measures. The only reason I can see that the administration wants to provide this funding is that there would be no deal without this wealth transfer to developing nations. Despite talk of American leadership bringing everyone to the table to save the planet, its apparently American taxpayer cash that will pay off developing nations to act. American taxpayer cash is the only green that the international bureaucrats in Paris seem to care about, and it is the only green that will result from any climate change agreement. Because after all is said and done, this deal wont achieve the environmental gains that will be promised. In fact, the environment will be in worse shape. Nations like China that are the main emitters internationally are getting a pass on having to take any shared economic pain. If China doesnt play a major role and contribute significantly, all that will result environmentally from Paris is hot air from bureaucrats and politicians over-promising and under-delivering in front of the cameras. There will be no temperature reductions. Meanwhile international priorities will go underfunded. So I have serious concerns about what will occur in Paris and ask that the members of this committee consider these concerns as we approach the climate change conference. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=c45e0b16-d483-49f4-bfe2-87d8092f6c4f,Barrasso Applauds Court Decision Blocking WOTUS,2015-10-09,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals halted action on the Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. Todays ruling is a welcome reprieve for farmers, ranchers and small-business owners across the country, said Barrasso. The courts decision confirms that the EPA does not have the authority to completely circumvent Congress and the American people to further its radical regulatory agenda. The EPA is fixated on unilaterally imposing impractical, ideology-based rules. Its time for the agency to go back to the drawing board and work with Congress to write a reasonable rule that truly protects Americas waterways while also safeguarding the rights of citizens. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=6ca725e8-d003-44c0-8804-86602239edcf,Enzi comments on court decision halting WOTUS,2015-10-09,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., issued the following statement after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit haltedenforcement of the waters of the United States regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers. Todays court ruling is a relief for people across the country worried about the Environmental Protection Agencys attempt to regulate every creek and pond, Enzi said. Just as the court recognized the massive scope and potential damage this rule could cause, it is time for the EPA to recognize that they dont have the authority to circumvent Congress. What the EPA is doing is more about control than protection. For the sake of farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and small businesses it is time to end this outrageous regulation and create a more commonsense approach.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=4ccf8a34-f5b8-42e0-a98a-f47f5096979b,Enzi Pushes OMB Director to Disclose Spending by Feds on Outside Public Relations Activities,2015-10-08,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, in a letter today to Shaun Donovan, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), voiced concerns about spending by Executive Branch entities on messaging activities. Enzi noted that according to a recent report by the Congressional Research Service, oversight on agency spending on advertising, public relations and media relations is largely unknown because it is hard to tell how much is spent and where the money is going. The Chairman is requesting Director Donovan to provide an Executive Branch-wide total of all spending on advertising, public relations and media relations efforts in FY 2015, as well as a breakdown of how much was spent within each category. Federal law prohibits the use of appropriated federal funds for publicity or propaganda purposes. Excerpts follow: I am concerned about how much is being spent on this SAMHSA contract and other such messaging activities conducted by Executive Branch entities. Agency spending on advertising, public relations and media relations is largely a black box, according to a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report. Its hard to tell how much is spent and where the money is going, according to CRS, which reports that agencies tend to have great discretion over how such funds are spent. CRS did estimate that close to a billion dollars was spent on advertising and public relations services contracts in FY 2013 alone, including $892.5 million dollars on advertising services contracts, and another $86.6 million for public relations services. That is all apart from the cost of in-house media relations activities conducted by federal employees. Please provide an Executive Branch-wide total of all spending on advertising, public relations and media relations efforts in FY 2015. Describe the manner in which the Administration categorizes such spending, and a breakdown of how much was spent within each category. Also provide an agency-by-agency accounting of such spending, broken down into the same categories. Describe how messaging activities are categorized, and provide Government-wide and agency by agency totals for spending on messaging activities.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=9fbd1ca6-6c4f-4955-86b4-925bd5dbc799,Senate committee passes bipartisan regulatory reform bills,2015-10-07,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted on a bipartisan basis today to approve four bills that reform the regulatory process. The bills would increase accountability and improve the regulatory process. Taken together, these bills would address gaps among agencies in the requirement to do cost-benefit and other analyses and to build automatic lookback procedures so that regulations are reviewed after several years. The reforms address deficiencies in the rulemaking process by improving the quality of regulatory analysis, making analysis requirements more uniform across all agencies, and codifying smart regulation principles that have been supported by Democratic and Republican administrations for over two decades. There is no doubt that people in Wyoming and across the country are frustrated by the regulatory burden imposed on them from Washington, Enzi said. These bills may just be the first steps in a long list of needed reforms to inject common sense into how regulations are developed, but the bipartisan cooperation and support we saw today is a good sign of the progress that we can make if we continue to work together. The committee also approved seven other bills unanimously, including the Fair Chance Act, legislation that would give an opportunity to formerly incarcerated individuals to have a fair chance at employment. Also approved was legislation to reduce government waste, increase accountability and help protect the nations borders.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=dd99f026-ec3a-4524-bb0e-8bc1656e0896,Senator Enzi accepting applications for nominees to military academies,2015-10-07,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is encouraging Wyoming youths interested in a military career to apply for a nomination to the military service academies for the 2016 school year. Candidates who are interested can apply through Enzis office for nominations to the Air Force Academy, the Merchant Marine Academy, the Military Academy at West Point and the Naval Academy. Military service academies provide outstanding opportunities to our nations youth through education and training. Attending one of these academies is a great way for our young men and women to serve our country, develop leadership skills and begin a career in military service, Enzi said. For every vacancy available at each academy, Enzi is allowed to nominate 10 people. Nominations are based on an evaluation of leadership, extracurricular activities, applicants personal statement of interest, SAT/ACT test scores, and letters of recommendation. Based on the applicants interview with Enzis selection committee, applicants are recommended to Enzi for final approval. Following Enzis nomination, final selection for an appointment will be made by each academy. All applicants for service academies require a Congressional nomination. Applications for nomination are due to Enzis Cheyenne office by November 10. Address: 2120 Capitol Ave. Ste. 2007 Cheyenne, WY 82007 Applicants will be interviewed in Senator Enzis Casper office on December 5th and final nominees will be announced in late December. The application, procedures, and specific applicant criteria are available at enzi.senate.gov in Academy Nominations under the Students tab. For additional application information, contact Karen McCreery at (307)527-9444 Karen_McCreery@enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=5c057dd0-cfb0-46ae-85d2-51fa452ece1d,Barrasso Questions Energy Secretary on U.S. Crude Oil Exports,2015-10-06,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) questioned U.S. Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz about the ban on American exports of crude oil and the energy security of our nations allies. Secretary Moniz was testifying before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on the potential modernization of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and other related energy security issues. On U.S. Crude Oil Exports and Energy Security of U.S. Allies As you talk about the role that energy plays in our national security, global securityin your testimony, you advocate for: an expanded view of energy security that broadly encompasses the needs of the United States, our allies, and trading partners. You go on to say that: The crisis in Ukrainehighlighted the vulnerability of our European allies to increasing reliance on a single, dominant supplier for much of its energy supplies. You explain that: [t]his is not only true in regard to natural gas, but also crude oil. Your words. You cite the European Commissions finding that: some European refineries are optimized for using Russian crude, [and] that EU refining capacity is increasingly in the hands of (a shrinking number of) Russian owners. So, Im encouraged that the administration continues to approve U.S. liquefied natural gas exports. But I question about the administration, why it seems to be dithering when it comes to crude oil exports? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Sec. Moniz on US oil exports and energy security On if Obama Administration Opposes Lifting U.S. Crude Oil Export Ban Mr. Secretary, later this week, the House plans to vote on legislation, repealing the crude oil export ban. Last month, the White House press secretary, stated that the administration: wouldnt support legislation like the one thats been put forward by Republicans. But last week, the Senate Banking Committee advanced legislationintroduced by Senator Heidi Heitkamp, a Democratto repeal the crude oil export ban. So it doesnt seem the administration supports efforts to move this bill, according to the White House spokesperson. Does the Obama administration oppose all legislative efforts to repeal this crude oil ban? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Sec. Moniz on U.S. crude oil export ban. On Russias Efforts to Expand Nord Stream Natural Gas Pipeline The Nord Stream pipeline, running from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea, circumvents Eastern Europe. I understand a number of Eastern European leaders have expressed opposition to expanding Nord StreamI dont know if that came up at your recent meeting. What, if any, steps is this administration taking to stop the expansion of Nord Stream? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Sec. Moniz on Nord Stream pipeline ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d26cdec0-5f3b-4bfc-8c1a-5b72a5c192d7,Barrasso: Obama Regulations Stifle Economic Growth,2015-10-06,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Click here to watch Sen. Barrassos remarks. WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor about the onslaught of costly and job-crushing regulations coming out of the Obama administration. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Last Friday, the Obama administration released the latest numbers on unemployment and jobs. Once again, the numbers were grim. Experts predicted that our economy would create 200,000 new jobs in September. Instead, they fell woefully short, got just 140,000, so theyre about 60,000 jobs short. Now thats a big miss and its nowhere near as many jobs as American families need right now. So heres how Investors Business Daily put it in a headline Monday, Oct. 5th, yesterday: Private Hiring Pace Is Worst in 3 Years; Labor Force Shrinks. Wages have gone almost nowhere for six years they actually declined in September. Its 74 straight months with wage growth below 2.5 percent. Before the recession, we routinely got three percent growth, month after month. President Obama seems to be satisfied with this limping progress. He bragged over the weekend about how many jobs have been created while hes been president. Is missing expectations good enough for President Obama? Its not good enough for me. Its not good enough to give the economic growth that we need in this country and that we should have had coming out of a recession. One of the very big reasons for this slow growth is all of the regulations that this administration has piled onto the backs of American families. Since 2009, this administration has come out with more than 2,500 regulations, new regulations. According to the American Action Forum, the total cost of all these new regulations, this new red tape, is about $680 billion. Now thats more than $2,100 for every man, woman, and child in America right now. According to the World Bank, the United States is 46th in the world in terms of how easy it is to start a business. Is 46th in the world good enough? May be good enough for President Obama, I dont think its good enough for the American people. All of these regulations, they just make it very tough for someone to start a business right now. Its also tough for existing businesses to create new jobs. Last week, the energy company Royal Dutch Shell announced that it was going to suspend drilling for oil off the coast of Alaska. It said one of the reasons was the challenging and unpredictable federal regulatory environment in offshore Alaska. Too much regulation is making it too difficult to produce the American energy that we need and to create the American jobs that we need. Unelected, unaccountable Washington bureaucrats have been having a field day at the expense of our economy. Now as the Obama administration runs down, it is in a race to get even more rules on the books. Just last week, the administration announced three big new regulations. On Tuesday, the EPA finalized a rule on oil refineries. Its going to require refineries to install new equipment to spend more money on something other than creating jobs, other than paying higher wages to their workers. Its estimated that the rule could cost up to $1 billion and provide very little in the way of health benefits. Then on Wednesday, the EPA finalized more limits on coal, gas, and nuclear power plants. Just like Tuesdays rule, this one is going to cost another half a billion dollars a year. The rule sets the acceptable amount of some emissions at zero. Finally, on Thursday, the EPA released a new limit on ozone in the air. The limit was 75 parts per billion, they cut it to 70 parts per billion. Now this is a tiny change, were talking parts per billion, but that tiny change is going to cost more than $2 billion a year once the rule is in full effect. Huge chunks of the country are going to have to adjust to meet the new standard and the benefit is minuscule. Farms and small manufacturing companies will to have to buy new equipment, or change the way they do things. States and cities will have to change how they do local transportation projects. All of that adds up to lost jobs and even less economic growth than weve had the past six years. Huge effects, all to chase another few tiny parts per billion of ozone. Five parts per billionits the equivalent of five seconds out of 32 years. Thats how small it is, but the costs are enormous. Three days last week three new regulations, that are going to cost our economy billions of dollars at a time when private hiring pace worst in three years, labor force shrinks. We all agree that reasonable regulations make good sense. In the 1960s and 70s, regulations helped to clean up pollution in our air, in our land, and in our water. But now, Washington bureaucrats are chasing after smaller and smaller trace amounts of chemicals, no matter what the cost, how high the cost, how insignificant the benefits. EPA issued one ruleI mean its hard to believe, I thought this was a misprint but its notthey issued one rule that had about $9.6 billion per year to administer and what are the benefits? Only $4 million. I thought they had misplaced or misspelled the b and m but no, $9.6 billion and only $4 million in direct benefits. Thats as much as $2,400 in costs, for every one dollar in benefits. I mean how can they do this? The EPA tried to say, well, there are all sorts of what they called ancillary benefits. Who gets to decide how much these are worth? Apparently the Obama administration says that it does. Its no surprise that the administration cooks up an imaginary number for those theoretical benefits, not direct benefits, but their ancillary benefits and they say its big enough to balance the very real costs that American families feel. Its all a way to justify these ridiculous rulesrules that destroy jobs, that restrict freedom, and do very little good for Americans. It is Washington and this administration run amok. Is the Obama administration trying to make sure that our economy continues to limp along like it has for the past six-and-a-half years? Is that what they want? In 1972, the Clean Water Act was meant to protect navigable waters. That was reasonable. We want to protect our navigable waters. Today, the administration has a new water rule, its called the Waters of the United States. Its going to give Washington bureaucrats control over everything from irrigation ditches to small natural ponds in someones back yard. This is unreasonable. Where does it end? Well, bipartisan majorities in the Congress already say it needs to end now. Ive introduced a bill that would direct the Obama administration to come up with a new rule on Waters of the United States. One that protects traditional navigable water from pollution, which we must do, but it also protecting farmers, ranchers, and private landowners. We can do both. This legislation has 46 cosponsors Democrats and Republicans. We are telling the Obama administration that enough is enough. I expect the Senate to take up this bill in the next few months and to tell President Obama that enough is enough. Republicans are also ready to take on some of these other outrageous rules like the extreme new restrictions on power plants. Thats what Congress is going to be doing to stop the insanity of these out-of-control regulations and out-of-control regulators. We need to cut through the red tape. Americans want to get back to work they want to get our economy going again. Congress needs to help them do it, because this administration certainly is not. The Obama administration basically needs to get out of the way. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b5f573d4-c905-47f1-8033-f1215b08bf45,Senate advances defense bill with bipartisan vote,2015-10-06,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Today the U.S. Senate voted 70-27 to advance legislation that sets Americas defense policy and authorizes spending for the military, overcoming a key procedural hurdle. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., who voted in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), said he was glad that senators from both sides of the aisle were able to come together to support the legislation, which would help strengthen the countrys national security and support the troops. Along with prohibiting the transfer or release of Guantanamo detainees and preventing the reduction of our current ICBM force, Enzi said the bill includes legislative efforts he previously introduced in the Senate that would improve opportunities for small businesses competing for federal contracts. These changes would require agencies to credit small businesses for the past experience of their partners when competing for contracts and direct the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (OSDBU) in each agency to assist small businesses and make sure that contracts are not being structured to exclude them. This legislation is a win for our troops, for Wyoming, for small businesses and for the country, Enzi said. We still have a lot of work left to actually fund the government. I hope the support for this legislation is a sign that senators will be able to come together in the near future to support the spending bills that came out of the appropriations committee with almost 80 percent bipartisan support. The bill is expected to land on the President Obamas desk after the Senate takes a final vote on the legislation later this week. Though the bill authorizes defense spending at the amount Obama requested, he has threatened to veto the bill.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=75b2f2e5-5231-4613-980a-bfa36b74da43,Congress passes bipartisan healthcare bill to protect small business,2015-10-05,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Last week the Senate passed the PACE Act unanimously which protects Americas small businesses from healthcare premium increases under the Affordable Care Act. The House passed the same bill and now it awaits the presidents signature. U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., cosponsored the PACE Act introduced by U.S. Senators Tim Scott, R-S.C., and Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. Currently under the Affordable Care Act, on January 1, 2016, the definition of the state based small group markets is scheduled to change from employers with up to 50 employees to include employers with up to 100 employees. This change would require many small and mid-sized businesses to be subject to different rating rules and requirements, with the potential of increasing the health insurance premiums for small businesses, their employees and their families. According to a recent report, if the small group definition moves to 100 employees, premiums could increase by approximately 18 percent for a majority of the mid-sized employers. As a result, many employers may choose to self-insure instead of remaining in the small group market because those employers will no longer be subject to the various requirements of the small group market. This could further increase the premiums for those left in the newly expanded risk pool. The PACE Act is backed by a coalition representing small and mid-sized businesses, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation, the National Restaurant Association, the National Federation of Independent Business, and has bipartisan support from state regulators and health policy experts. Click here for a full version of the PACE Act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=8862c99f-86ee-4e2f-a829-defe28c67c7e,"The Enzi Insider - October 5, 2015",2015-10-05,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored and Cosponsored Cosponsored Joint Resolution of Disapproval of Clean Power Plan Rule for Existing Power Plants would nullify the EPAs final rule requiring existing power plants to achieve carbon dioxide emissions reductions and establishing state-specific emissions reduction requirements. It would also prevent the EPA from again promulgating the same or a similar rule. Led by Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV). Cosponsored Joint Resolution of Disapproval of Clean Power Plan Rule for New, Modified and Reconstructed Power Plants would nullify the EPAs final rule limiting carbon dioxide emissions from new, modified and substantially reconstructed power plants. It would also prevent the EPA from again promulgating the same or a similar rule. Led by Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Cosponsored National Character Counts Week Resolution which encourages individuals, families, schools, youth organizations, religious institutions, civic groups, and other organizations to spend the week of October 18th, 2015 focusing on character education. Elements of good character are defined as trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship. Led by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Cosponsored Toxic Substances Control Act Modernization Bill would revise and reform the Toxic Substances Control Act. Led by Senators Tom Udall (D-NM) and David Vitter (R-LA). Letters Enzi Signed Cosigned CPFB Prepaid Card Letter to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray expressing concerns that the Bureaus proposed prepaid card rule would impose overly burdensome restrictions on providers that would prevent them from meeting the growing and diverse consumer demand for innovative prepaid products. Led by Senator Mike Rounds (R-SD) and Representative Scott Tipton (R-CO). Cosigned Positive Train Control Letter requesting the Senate take up an extension of the deadline for the Positive Train Control (PTC) requirements that go into effect in 2016. Led by Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) and Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Cosigned Follow-up Planned Parenthood Letter to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) asking them to further investigate the allegations raised in the recently-released videos and also asks they conduct an audit of all fetal tissue research funded or conducted by HHS and determine contractor and grantee compliance with the law. Led by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY). Cosigned Letter Seeking FDA Clarification of Biosimilars Policy to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asking to clarify its biosimilars policy. While the Biosimilars Act was signed into law in 2010, the FDA has only approved one biosimilar to date. Led by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). Cosigned Letter Seeking Delay of CMS Biosimilars Reimbursement Policy to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) asking to postpone proposing any changes to its biosimilar reimbursement policy. Biosimilars are living cells medical treatment. While the Biosimilars Act was signed into law in 2010, the FDA has only approved one biosimilar to date, and having CMS establish a biosimilar reimbursement plan before the FDA establishes a clear process for approving biosimilars could negatively impact biosimilar development. Led by Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) Sent Letter on Transition from $1 Bill to $1 Coin to Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Keith Hall requesting CBO conduct an analysis of the economic impact of a transition from the $1 bill to a $1 coin. Led by Senator Enzi. Other Legislative Activities Introduced Wyoming Governor Mead Senator Enzi introduced Wyoming Governor Matt Mead before the Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries. Governor Mead testified on improving the Endangered Species Act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=cede3a1a-6c41-4ad3-b615-c5aba743d094,Senator John Barrasso Delivers Weekly Republican Address,2015-10-03,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. In the Weekly Republican Address, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming says the Obama Administration is saddling the nation with thousands of costly and burdensome regulations that are driven more by ideology than practicality. In the past six years, the administration has issued more than 2,500 new regulations that are expected to cost the American economy a staggering $680 billion. You might ask, what do Americans get for all this time and money? One of EPAs rules on power plants would cost as much as $2,400 for every $1 in direct benefits. This imbalance is a big reason why Americans wages have been stagnant since President Obama took office, says Barrasso. The Weekly Republican Address is available in both audio and video format and is embargoed until 6:00 a.m. ET, Saturday, October 3, 2015. The audio of the address is available here, the video will be available here and you may download the address here. A full transcript of the address follows: Hi. Im Dr. John Barrasso, United States Senator for Wyoming. Let me tell you a story about a family in my home state. Andy Johnson is 32, he works as a welder. He and his wife Katie have four kids and they live out in the country. They have a few cows and some horses. Two years ago, the Johnsons wanted to build a small pond in their front yard. They got their plan approved by the state, and used the pond to provide water for their animals. They thought it was a beautiful addition to the dry landscape. The pond attracts birds and other animals that make our state a special place to live. Everything was fine until the Johnsons got a visit from the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Even though the state of Wyoming had approved the pond, the federal government had not. The Johnsons now face fines of more than $37,000 every day, until they remove the pond. This is whats happened to government in America. Its gotten so aggressive, so inflexible, and so unyielding and seemingly for so little purpose. And its going to get worse. The Obama administration is seizing new authority to control what it calls Waters of the United States. This includes things like irrigation ditches, isolated ponds even low points in the landscape where water might collect after a heavy rain. The consequences of this new federal authority will be severe. Local land-use decisions will now be driven by Washington bureaucrats. And this new water rule is just one of the thousands of regulations that Washington is churning out. In the final 15 months of the Obama administration, Washington bureaucrats are working overtime, to finalize new rules on everything from prairie puddles to power plants. Just this week, the White House released a new ozone rule that will increase electricity costs and decrease reliability. In this administrations race to control more of what Americans do every day, it has lost all perspective. The rules are based on ideology, rather than practicality. The result is an explosion of expensive regulations and new federal requirements on hardworking families. Washingtons assault on Andy Johnson in Wyoming could soon be repeated all across the country. The Obama administration has issued more than 2,500 new regulations in the past six years. Complying with these regulations is expected to cost our economy a staggering $680 billion. People will be forced to spend millions of hours filling out the paperwork. You might ask, what do Americans get for all this time and money? One of EPAs rules on power plants would cost as much as $2,400 for every $1 in direct benefits. This imbalance is a big reason why Americans wages have been stagnant since President Obama took office. The costs of these regulations are real. They are significant to our economy, to good-paying jobs, and to the ability of Americans to live freely. Thats why Republicans are fighting so hard. The White Houses cynical response is that only polluters would oppose these new environmental rules. Im fortunate to live in Wyoming, one of the most beautiful, pristine places in the world. We protect fiercely our open spaces, our clean air, and water. At the same time, the entire country benefits from our responsible and reliable production of American energy. Weve proven you can have both. The Obama administration long ago left this reasonable objective in the dust. What the administration wont tell you is that both Republicans and Democrats in Congress oppose many of these regulations including the new rules on Waters of the United States. Senators Joe Donnelly, Heidi Heitkamp and Joe Manchin all Democrats joined us to change these water regulations. Yet commonsense changes to all this rulemaking are being blocked by the president and the liberal Democrat leaders in the Congress. Even the courts have dealt the Obama administration serious setbacks to its regulatory rampage. But by the time the courts finally act, the damage is already done those jobs are gone, and communities suffer. The head of the EPA bragged that it didnt matter if the Obama administration lost in court because the rules had already been in effect for three years. Thats outrageous. Meanwhile, the fines against Andy Johnson continue to pile up, and could exceed $16 million. His family cannot afford to fight anymore. Just like the Johnsons in Wyoming, the American people cant afford the overreach and the near-constant onslaught of new Washington regulations. This fall, Republicans will put legislation on the presidents desk to rein in runaway regulations. He will have to choose between big government and hardworking Americans. Weve already made our choice. Thanks for listening. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=28ea5a85-001e-4594-9e82-fadd0255120b,Barrasso Chairs Hearing on Bipartisan American Soda Ash Competitiveness Act,2015-10-01,2015,2015-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining, delivered the following opening statement at the subcommittee hearing on the American Soda Ash Competitiveness Act (S. 2031). In September, Senator Barrasso introduced S. 2031 with ranking member of the subcommittee Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), to maintain a competitive royalty rate on Americas natural soda ash. Soda ash is critical in manufacturing industrial products like glass, chemicals and detergents. The bill will set the royalty rate on sodium compounds produced from federal land at 2 percent for five years. Wyomings Fred von Ahrens, vice president for manufacturing at Tronox in Green River, testified in support of S. 2031 today. Click here for Mr. von Ahrens written testimony and video of his testimony here. The hearing also featured testimony from Amanda Leiter, deputy assistant secretary for Land and Minerals Management at the U.S. Department of the Interior; Chris Douville, president of American Natural Soda Ash Corporation; and Rick Finn, federal affairs manager for the Port of Portland. Click here for more information on their testimony. Senators Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) are original co-sponsors of the Soda Ash Competitiveness Act. Senator Barrassos opening remarks: This afternoon, the Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining will hold a hearing on S. 2031the American Soda Ash Competitiveness Act. Last month, the Subcommittees ranking memberSenator Wydenand I introduced this bipartisan legislation along with Senators Enzi and Merkley. The purpose of our bill is to help Americas natural soda ash producers compete in the global market. Natural soda ashalso known as sodium carbonateis a raw material used to manufacture glass, chemicals, and other industrial goods. Natural soda ash is produced from tronaa mineral found in high concentrations primarily in California and Wyoming. The production of soda ash supports thousands of jobs across the country in a variety of industries, including mining, shipping, and manufacturing. In my home state of Wyoming, soda ash production directly employs over 2,300 people. In 2014, the United States exported nearly 58 percent of all soda ash produced for a total of about $1.3 billion. Last year, soda ash was our nations second-largest inorganic chemical export. Soda ash exports help reduce Americas trade deficit and grow our nations economy. But we must not assume that soda ash exports will increase. Americas soda ash producers continue to battle unfair trade practices imposed by other nations. For example, China has aggressively moved to help its synthetic soda ash producers capture market share from Americas soda ash producers. Since 2009, China has given its synthetic soda ash producers a 9 percent rebate on Chinas value-added tax, its VAT. More recently, China devalued its currency the yuanby 4.4 percent, to boost exports. It is estimated that Chinas value-added tax rebate and currency devaluation give Chinese soda ash producers roughly a $27 per metric ton benefit. This unfair benefit is only expected to grow over the next year. CNBC reported recently that China may devalue its currency by a total of 15 to 20 percent by the end of 2016. CNBC cited a source that said: Engineering a devaluation of this magnitude will not be easy,[h]owever, the [Peoples Bank of China] has the mechanismto achieve a creeping devaluation and maintain the appearance of it being market-led. This report and Chinas track record on currency devaluation make me very skeptical and suspicious of any commitments that Chinas President allegedly made last week. Chinas unfair trade practices threaten Americas soda ash producers and its important that Congress respond. Thats why we have introduced the American Soda Ash Competitiveness Act. Our bipartisan bill will help level the playing field for Americas soda ash producers. Specifically, our bill maintains a competitive royalty rate for soda ash produced from federal land. Tomorrow, the Bureau of Land Management, the BLM, is expected to increase the royalty rate on soda ash. I strongly disagree with this decision. The Administration should not raise costs on Americas soda ash producers without first ensuring that China and other countries scrap their unfair trade practices. So I want to thank Senator Wyden for his support of this bipartisan legislation. Senator Wyden knows the importance of the soda ash industry to Oregon, Wyoming, and communities throughout the country. He also knows that Americas natural soda ash has a significantly lower environmental impact when compared to Chinas synthetic soda ash. So I want to thank Senators Enzi and Merkley for their support of this bill. On July 29th, the House Natural Resources Committee approved identical legislation on a bipartisan vote. I will encourage members of this committee to advance our legislation as quickly as possible. I would also like to point out a front-page story in yesterdays Wall Street Journal entitled: Export Weakness Hampers Growth According to this story: Hopes for an American export boom are wilting. U.S. exports are on track to decline this year for the first time since the financial crisis, undermining a national push to boost shipments abroad. The article goes on to say that: The weak trade performance is restraining overall economic growth. The article also discusses the challenges that Portland, Oregon has faced in trying to increase its exports. I will enter this article into todays hearing record.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=002f8643-6e02-4851-bcc2-b92a1dd9eeef,"Barrasso Questions Administration Witness on WOTUS, Regulatory Overreach in WY",2015-09-30,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) questioned Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) Jo-Ellen Darcy about the Obama administrations Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, highlighting a family in Wyoming who was fined for building a stock pond on their property. Darcy was testifying before todays Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife oversight hearing. Excerpts of Senator Barrassos remarks: I want to read a story that was on the front page of the New York Times, September 18th this year. The story is entitled Family Pond Boils at Center of a Regulatory War in Wyoming. The story highlights the plight of a young man, Andy Johnson, hes 32, hes a welder, hes a part-time caterer, hes a father of four girls, lives in Fort Bridger, Wyoming. The article talks about a pond that Mr. Johnson built on his property the EPA now says violates the Clean Water Act and that he should have gotten a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Now, Wyomings already said its ok to do this. The article states that Mr. Johnson and his wife, Katie, had spent $50,000 most of their savings to create a pond of water to help his 10 head of cattle and four horses. Mr. Johnson and his family have been threatened with fines of $37,500 a day thanks to the EPA and the Corps heavy-handed management of water policy. The article states that the family has accrued fines of as much as $16 million. He sold off most of his livestock to pay his legal fees and environmental studies. Something is terribly wrong with the EPA and your agency where you destroy peoples lives over a pond. You may claim your rule and regulatory approach is based on science, but it certainly is not based on common sense. I dont want to see this happen to anymore Wyoming families, families anywhere in the country. Why should any family trust EPA or the Corps with this Waters of the United States rule that will ultimately empower unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats to steamroll families, take their college savings, clean out their retirement accounts? This is abysmal. And when the EPA, through its actions, get talked about in the front page of the New York Times with an article about Wyoming, you can tell how much overreach is here. Any answer to this? And the $16 million fine against this Wyoming family? A 32 year-old, family of four daughters, wants to get them to collegeyoure going to provide better clarity to them? Well, its pretty clear that when you have a $16 million fine that the EPA certainly thinks they have the authority to do this. Click here to watch the rest of Senator Barrassos questioning of Assistant Secretary Darcy. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=08e97599-7dfe-4948-bd9e-7b283f309394,Barrasso: More Bad News on Obamacare,2015-09-30,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor highlighting recent alarming headlines about President Obamas health care law. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: The American people have gotten used to hearing bad news about their health care ever since the Democrats passed Obamacare. It seems like each and every day theres another headline about another way the health care law is hurting people. Last Wednesday, there was a remarkable amount of bad news in one day. The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, September 23, the headline Health Insurers Defend Deals. You flip the page over and the bottom half of that page, Cost of a Family Health Plan Tops $17,000. One day, one page. The top article about the wave of health insurance company mergers weve been seeing recently. Now, the president said that his health care law would increase competition among insurance companies. Just like a lot of other predictions that President Obama made, this one has not come true. Back in June, the insurance company Aetna announced plans to buy Humana. Then the company, Anthem, decided to buy Cigna. If these mergers are approved, it means that the five largest insurance companies in the United States would now be down to three. The president said that there would be more competition well, Americans are about to have much less competition. Its not only because of these giant insurance company mergers. Obamacare also set up health co-ops in 24 states. These co-ops were supposed to add competition and help keep prices down. Taxpayers put up $2.4 billion to help these companies get started. Well, over the past few months, whats happened? These co-ops have been dropping like flies. Just the other day, regulators in New York shut down the largest Obamacare co-op in the country. Why? Because its lost so much money. 215,000 New Yorkers will now have fewer options for where they can buy their Washington-mandated insurance. This is the fourth co-op to fail in just the past few months. Another one failed before it ever enrolled a single person. Think about that: government loan, set up a co-op, dont enroll anyone and close shop. Theres only one co-op of the original 24 that is actually making any money so it can stay in business. The American people know that they are not getting the increased competition that President Obama promised. They also know that they arent getting the lower prices that the president promised. Another article came out last Wednesday that talked about how much more Americans are paying for their health care. This was a September 23rd New York Times, with the headline Health Insurance Deductibles Rising Faster Than Wages. Here it is: unaffordable care. From 2010 to 2015, wages up 10 percent, premiums up 24 percent, deductibles up 67 percent. The article describes a recent study by the Kaiser Family Foundation. According to Kaiser, health insurance premiums for a single person have gone up more than twice as fast as peoples earnings since Obamacare became law. And were talking about all the people who get their insurance through work , which is about 150 million Americans. This isnt just a small group of people this is all the people who get their insurance through work. Deductibles have gone up almost seven times faster than earnings. Thats an enormous hit to the finances of American families. This article talked about how these high deductibles are hurting a woman named Beth Landrum. Shes 52 years old, shes a teacher. The article says that about two years ago Beth saw the deductible on her familys plan increase to $3,300 per year. Shes a teacher, shes 52. $3,300 per year deductible under Obamas healthcare law. A couple of years ago is when a lot of these Obamacare mandates were really starting to bite. This woman survived a brain tumor 10 years ago. Here she is she has insurance, she had a brain tumor 10 years ag, successfully treated. Now shes putting off having an MRI thats been recommended by her doctor. She says, My doctors really mad at me because I havent had the MRI. They want to see if theres any recurrence of the tumor. She says that she and her husband need to save up money to pay for the test. She has the health insurance under Obamacare and she can no longer afford to get the health care. Coverage without care. The president continues to ignore this fact about his unaffordable health care law. Cant afford to get care, not under Obamacare. President Obama promised that people would save $2,500 per family, per year under his health care law. Average premiums are up nearly $4,000 since the law passed. Does the president really believe its affordable? This new study by Kaiser only looked at insurance that people get, as I say, through their jobs. It didnt look at the deductibles people are paying when they buy their insurance through the Obamacare exchanges. President Obama said that these plans would be cheaper than a cell phone bill. Thats what he said cheaper than a cell phone. Easier to use than Amazon for shopping on the web, and cheaper than a cell phone. According to this article in the New York Times, thats not how its worked out for a woman named Rebecca Bullard. Rebecca is 27-years-old, and she purchased her plan through her state exchange for $129 per month. To get a plan at that price, she had to accept a deductible of $6,000. But she has Obamacare. The president can say he did her a favor. The article says that when she worried that she had cracked a rib recently, she chose to ask friends on social media about what to do rather than go to the doctor. Because of the Obamacare that was not worth very much to her. Thats how concerned she is about paying the out-of-pocket costs that Obamacare brought her. She says, Now I dont even want to go to the doctor. Is that what the president promised the American people? Deductibles so high that people dont even want to go to their doctor? People may have coverage, but they cannot afford the care. People are paying more and getting less. Its not surprising that the Obama administration is starting to worry. They have to figure out how to convince people that its worth signing up for this outrageously expensive Obamacare insurance. Thats what the Wall Street Journal said in another article on September 23. This was under the headline Insuring More People Seen as Tough. According to this article, the Secretary of Health and Human Services says that this open enrollment is going to be tougher than last year. We know its going to be tough for families that are getting hit with higher premiums and other costs. Now, the Obama administration isnt worried about these people. What the Obama administration is now worried about is that it will be tough to sign up enough customers for this awful law. By now, they were supposed to have 21 million people signed up for Obamacare by next year. Right now there arent even 10 million people signed up. Theyre not even half way to where they need to be and where they said they would be. If they dont get more young, healthy customers soon, the whole system is likely to collapse. Thats why the Obama administration is worried. Theyre worried about their ability to sustain this law. Theres a reason people arent signing up. The people who havent signed up yet know that the insurance is not a good value. Its not good for them, personally. About half of the people who still dont have insurance have less than $100 in savings. How is someone with less than $100 in savings supposed to pay a $6,000 deductible? Why wont the president answer these questions? Why wont they Democrats come to this floor and answer these questions? I havent seen a Democrat come address any of these issues or any of these headlines. President Obama promised the American people that his health care law would produce lower costs and more choice. Instead, hes given people fewer choices, more powerful insurance companies, higher deductibles and higher premiums. Weve had too many of these alarming headlines, and thats just in one day. Too much bad news about Obamacare. The American people get it, its a bad deal for them. President Obama is a lame duck. He forced through Congress a terrible program. Its time for Democrats in Congress to sit down with Republicans and start talking about the kind of health care reforms that the American people need, want and deserve. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=a5ba2012-c29d-46b7-8c24-a2b12aad81cb,Barrasso: Final Jordan Cove EIS Great News for Rocky Mountain Natural Gas,2015-09-30,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commissions (FERC) publication of its final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Jordan Cove liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminal: Now that FERC has given a second positive environmental review of the Jordan Cove LNG export project, I call on the Department of Energy to quickly give its final approval to this important project. The administration has given communities along the Gulf Coast and East Coast the opportunity to access overseas markets. It must not leave the West behind. The administration must give western states and Indian tribes equal opportunity to access overseas markets and fully reap the benefits of LNG exports. Background: The Jordan Cove LNG export terminal would be located in Coos Bay, Oregon. The terminal would provide Rocky Mountain states and Indian tribes access to overseas markets. On January 12, 2015, Senator Barrasso led a group of bicameral lawmakers from Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah in a letter to FERC Chairman Cheryl LaFleur expressing their support for the proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal. On February 9, 2015, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe (Colorado) sent a letter to FERC Chairman LaFleur expressing support for the proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal. On March 24, 2014, the Department of Energy (DOE) approved a conditional license to Jordan Cove to export LNG to nations that do not have free trade agreements with the United States. On November 12, 2013, Senator Barrasso led a group of bipartisan, bicameral lawmakers from Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah in a letter to the Secretary of Energy expressing their support for the proposed Jordan Cove LNG export terminal. On October 29, 2013, the Ute Indian Tribe on the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (Utah) sent a letter to the Secretary of Energy expressing its support for the project, and on January 27, 2014, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe sent a letter to the Secretary of Energy expressing its support. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=aeec0069-f04e-41f5-940f-1254ab7b2a4f,Enzi: Congress should pass annual spending bills instead of continuing resolutions,2015-09-30,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, today released the following statement after the Senate passed a short-term continuing resolution, which would fund government agencies through December 11, 2015: Earlier this year, Congress approved its first joint 10-year balanced budget since 2001. Now one of our top priorities must be to approve fiscally responsible spending legislation to match this sensible blueprint, Enzi said.For the first time in many years, the Senate Appropriations Committee has approved 12 spending bills that fit within that budget, but are currently being blocked from Senate consideration. It is unfortunate that a minority of Senators has thwarted implementation of our budget plan, resulting in the need for this continuing resolution. Hardworking taxpayers deserve responsible spending from their leaders in Washington, so we can begin to pay down the nations debt, which threatens future generations.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=443c9667-e456-41f7-9a5d-6ab0635c5a8e,"Barrasso Questions EPA Air Official on Ozone Rule, Clean Power Plan",2015-09-29,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) questioned Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Janet McCabe about the Obama administrations new ozone rule and final clean power plan. Assistant Administrator McCabe was testifying before todays Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee hearing on the economic implications of President Obamas air agenda. On Clean Power Plan and Double Counting Benefits: Ms. McCabe, I want to follow up on some lines of questioning that I had with you at the February 11th hearing, on the presidents Clean Power Plan before this committee. I had asked you about the EPA claiming co-benefits of reductions, sort of the double counting that I believe is going on at the EPA. I asked if EPA was double counting health benefits, because it sure seems that way to mein terms of reduction in particulate matter since other EPA air rules claim the same reductions in particular matter claim the same health benefits. So my point was, you can only reduce the dust once and accrue the health benefits of that reduction once. Not over and over again to justify different rules. You stated that you were not double counting, and you say that were careful in all our regulations to make sure that we dont do this. Yet when you take a look at the EPAs own documents, you state that you are counting co-benefits of reducing the same PM 2.5 in other rules before 111d rule for existing power plants was even released. EPA stated in its Regulatory Impact Analysis for the proposed rule for existing power plants that it is possible the benefits estimated in this RIA (Regulatory Impact Analysis) may account for the same air quality improvements as estimated in the illustrative NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards) RIAs. The same air quality improvements, thats what the EPA is saying, the same air quality improvements for previous regulatory impact analyzes are being counted again. To me that means double counting. So do you still stand by your testimony in front of this committee and reject your own agencys statement about double counting the same co-benefits in reductions of air pollutants like the particulate matter? Well thats not what the documentation said. To me, this sounds like Volkswagen accounting and I think government ought to be held to a much better standard than what were seeing coming from this agency and this administration. Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning McCabe on Clean Power Plan On New Ozone Rule and Wyoming: According the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, the EPA designated all of one of the counties in Wyoming, Sublette County, and portions of Lincoln and Sweetwater counties as ozone nonattainment areas in 2012. Judge Gary Moore, President of the National Association of Regional Councils testified at a June 3rd hearing that Sublette County, Wyoming serves as an example of how the new standard, hes referring to the new ozone standard, could impact economic development activities. And if the ozone standard is tightened further he says, Sublette County will likely be classified as fully in non-attainment with severe restrictions on industrial development, which will limit jobs in the community. So under your new ozone rule, it is likely that more counties in Wyoming, more counties around the country, will be in non-attainment, including the counties that have not yet achieved the previous level for ozone. So given the high costs in terms of jobs, regulatory burdens on struggling counties, the significant, detrimental health impacts to people who lose their jobs, chronically unemployedunder what rationale do you believe you should be moving the goal posts on counties that have not yet even met the current standard? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning McCabe on New Ozone Rule On EPA Giving States Same Access as Environmental Groups On the February 11th hearing, I asked you if the states had the same access to crafting the Clean Power Plan rules as the environmental groups do, given the headlines about the NRDCs involvement in crafting your rules in the EPA. You stated, I speak with states all the time. They have very good access. Well you didnt answer the question about the states getting the same or better access than the environmental groups. So states are going to disagree with you, and you say you talk to states all the time and they have access. Our own Department of Environmental Quality came and testified about whats happening and he says, In the air programs alone, there have been dozens of new rules in the regulation of air quality, therefore EPA relies heavily upon the states to carry out these initiatives. We are the boots on the ground that ensures the nations priorities in cleaning up the air and protecting human health are achieved. But, state resources are being stretched ever more thin. As EPA continues to propose regulations at their current pace, they must consider the ability of states to meet this demand. That doesnt sound to me like states are getting heard in the process as you develop rules and work with the environmental extremist groups to develop those rules. Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning McCabe ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=8eefba14-b322-4c03-9c65-bd1477f677aa,Barrasso Discusses ESA Reform with USFWS Director Ashe and WY Governor Mead,2015-09-29,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) welcomed Wyoming Governor Matt Mead and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Director Dan Ashe to a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee briefing on improving the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Barrasso questioned both Director Ashe and Governor Mead about ESA reform and how the grey wolf and grizzly bear listings impact Wyoming and other states. Barrasso Questions USFWS Director Ashe on ESA Reform and Grizzly Bear: Today, there are more than 1,000 species that are listed as endangered by the Fish and Wildlife Service, even more are considered threatened. And yet, in the 40-year history of the Endangered Species Act, only 30 species have actually been delisted because they have been recovered. To me, this demonstrates clear failure of a policy that was established to provide for the recovery of imperiled plants and animals. So, my question has to do with implementation. I think the implementation of the Endangered Species Act is notoriously inconsistent. In their 2013 resolution, the Western Governors Association identified seven key goals that your agency should consider. The first was to require clear, measurable recovery parameters. In Wyoming, there have been several cases where your agency has changed population requirements multiple times through the listing process. Theyre moving targets and they compromise our states ability to engage in meaningful conservation activities. One example is the grizzly bear. The agency has continued to move the goal posts for grizzly bear recovery. Management of the bears, which are recovered, cost the state of Wyoming more than $1.5 million a year in conflict resolution, damage investigations, and landowner compensation. Isnt it fair to say that if the agency continues to use these moving targets for population, it not only creates a financial burden for states, but it also fosters a sense of distrust with your agency? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning USFWS Director Ashe on Grizzly Bears Barrasso Questions USFWS Director Ashe on Grey Wolf: Director Ashe, you testified before this committee in May that Wyoming had met every goal set by Fish and Wildlife Service and it was time to delist the grey wolf. There are other recovered species that remain protected under the Endangered Species Act. So the question comes, does the management of the grey wolf and other already recovered species have the potential to distract from other more pressing species and the recovery efforts that you need to make elsewhere? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning USFWS Director Ashe on Grey Wolf To watch Senator Barrassos entire questioning of USFWS Director Ashe, click here. Barrasso Questions Gov. Mead on ESA and Grizzly Bear/Grey Wolf Welcome, Governor Mead. First I would like to say that I appreciate your work with the Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure the sage grouse determination was not warranted. You spoke about the way the Fish and Wildlife Service has approached conservation of the grey wolf and the grizzly bear in Wyoming. Specifically, you mentioned some of the economic burdens placed on states when recovered species remained listed. So can you provide examples of the way the Endangered Species Act places economic burdens on state and local governments? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Gov. Mead on Grizzly Bear, Grey Wolf Barrasso Questions Gov. Mead on ESA Moving Targets and Grizzly Bears I asked Director Ashe about moving targets and I dont know if you would like to comment at all about moving targets, if thats been a frustrating process for our state and how we try to deal with and meet federal goals that I believe keep changing? Click here for video of Sen. Barrasso questioning Gov. Mead on ESA and Grizzly Bears ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b1c7a1a9-cdcf-4a93-8edb-41ba60271b3e,Delegation compliments award-winning school in Laramie,2015-09-29,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The U.S. Department of Education has chosen Spring Creek Elementary School in Laramie as a National Blue Ribbon School for 2015. The Blue Ribbon Schools award honors schools which have achieved high levels of performance or made significant improvements in closing the achievement gaps among student subgroups. U.S. Senators Mike Enzi, John Barrasso and Representative Cynthia Lummis, all R-Wyo., congratulated Spring Creek on its national recognition for their hard work, dedication to learning and innovative approach to education shared by schools across the state. The Department of Education will honor the 285 public and 50 private schools who won the award at a recognition ceremony on Nov. 9-10 in Washington, D.C. Each school will receive an award plaque and a flag as symbols of their accomplishments. More information about the Blue Ribbon program can be obtained at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/2015/index.html .",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=5cd5e4f0-1323-4cf3-9cae-2f0dbc80b2f4,"The Enzi Insider - September 29, 2015",2015-09-29,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored and Cosponsored Iran Sanctions Amendment would prevent Iran sanctions from being lifted or relaxed until Iran releases U.S. prisoners and recognizes Israel. Led by Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Devils Tower Legislation would designate the mountain and community at Devils Tower National Monument as Devils Tower. Led by Senator Enzi with Senator John Barrasso (R-WY). Representative Lummis (R-WY) introduced companion legislation in the House. Waters of the United StatesJoint Resolution of Disapproval would nullify the final rule regarding bodies of water falling under the jurisdiction of the federal government. It would also preclude the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and United States Army Corps of Engineers from promulgating the same rule or similar rule. Led by Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA). National Retirement Security Week Resolution designating October 18-24, 2015 as National Retirement Security Week. The week is sponsored to raise public awareness of the various tax-preferred retirement vehicles, increasing personal financial literacy, and engaging the people of the United States on the keys to success in achieving and maintaining retirement security throughout their lifetimes. Led by Senator Enzi. Financial Aid Simplification and Transparency Act simplifies the student financial aid system and the Free Application for Federal Student Aid. Led by Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN). Born-Alive Abortion Survivor Protection Act sets out requirements for health care practitioners in the event a child is born alive during the abortion process and also lays out penalties for violations of these procedures.Led by Senator Ben Sasse (R-NE). Pharmacy and Medically Underserved Areas Enhancement Act would allow pharmacists to serve Medicare beneficiaries and receive reimbursement to their full scope of practice, as allowable by the state and Medicare. Led by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). American Soda Ash Competitiveness Act would reduce the soda ash federal mineral royalty rate to two percent. Led by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR). Letters Enzi Signed Chinese Biotech Crop Approvals Letter to President Obama asking that the U.S. press Chinese President Xi Jinping on the approval of biotech crops in China during Xis visit to Washington. Sent in conjunction with Senator John Thune (R-SD) and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). Forest Service C-130 Letter to USDA Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment Robert Bonnie, asking that all viable Wyoming locations be considered as a permanent base for the Forest Services HC-130H Program. Sent with Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). Other Legislative Activities Named Host of 40th Anniversary of the Washington Performing Arts Embassy Adoption Program Senator Enzi, as Co-Chair of the Senate Cultural Caucus, will be a host of a reception and concert on Tuesday, October 20, 2015 honoring the 40th anniversary of the Embassy Adoption Program. This program pairs 5th and 6th grade classrooms in the D.C. public schools (across all eight Wards) with foreign embassies desiring to share their countries and cultures with the students. Throughout the year, participating embassies arrange several visits with their partner class or school, showcasing their culture, art, food, history and current affairs through presentations and field trips. Budget Scorekeeping Report Released On September 10, 2015, Senator Enzi submitted the latest Budget Scorekeeping Report, a comparison of current budgetary levels and those assumed in this years budget resolution.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=50e4e834-c7a6-4d3a-ab7f-71577567d753,Barrasso Accepting Military Academy Nomination Applications,2015-09-28,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) announced that he is accepting applications for nominations to the U.S. military service academies for the 2016 school year. Senator Barrasso nominates Wyoming students to compete for appointments to the Military, Naval, Air Force and Merchant Marine academies. Nominating some of Wyomings best and brightest students to our nations military academies is one of the greatest privileges I have as a U.S. senator, said Barrasso. I strongly encourage all those students who are interested to apply. Young men and women interested in U.S. service academies apply to members of Congress for nominations. Senator Barrassos Academy Nominations Board evaluates all students who apply based on academic achievement, leadership, extracurricular and athletic activities. To be nominated, a student must be a Wyoming resident between 17 and 22 years of age.He or she must complete an application form (available on www.Barrasso.Senate.Gov) and provide the following information: Academic record/high school transcript Letter or essay describing career goals of the applicant Results of Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) and/or American College Testing (ACT) scores Three letters of recommendation from various sources (school officials, coaches, community leaders) Following a nomination, final selection and appointment is made by each service academy based on: character, scholarship, leadership, physical fitness, motivation and suitability for a military career. To be considered for a nomination, the completed application should be postmarked by October 31, 2015. Those students who meet the requirements will be invited to an interview with my Academy Nominations Board in Casper on December 5. For more information about my nomination process, or to obtain an application packet, please contact Chelsea Rodekuhr in Senator Barrasso's Cheyenne office at: U.S. Senator John Barrasso 2120 Capitol Avenue, Suite 2013 Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 (307) 772-2451 ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=95859503-bb05-4fda-b8bf-3d61a080cd04,In Case You Missed It It's Time to Unleash The Power of American Oil,2015-09-28,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"It's Time to Unleash The Power of American Oil By: U.S. Sen. John Barrasso FOX News Sept. 28, 2015 President Obama is scheduled to meet this week with Vladimir Putin in New York. The president plans to discuss Russias invasion of Ukraine and its military support of the Assad regime in Syria. Putin is a bully. He only understands force. That force can come just as effectively from a barrel of oil as from the barrel of a gun. President Obama should back up his talk by unleashing the power of American oil to compel Russias cooperation. American energy is a master resource, a powerful tool that could be used against belligerent nations like Russia and Iran. President Obama has been far too eager to reject that tool or trade it away. Since the 1970s, there have been tight restrictions on U.S. oil exports. Most of what we export goes to Canada. Yet American exports could quadruple if the law allowed it. American energy is a master resource, a powerful tool that could be used against belligerent nations like Russia and Iran. President Obama has been far too eager to reject that tool or trade it away. Our self-imposed limit gives Russia an added advantage to use oil to fund its aggression. Keeping American oil out of the global market helps keep international prices high, which helps to fund Putins belligerence. Republicans want to lift these restrictions. Legislation is working its way through both houses of Congress to make that happen. While these bills have bipartisan support, so far, the Obama administration has rejected the idea. The meeting at the United Nations would be a perfect moment for the president to reverse course. He should make clear that the United States will use all of the resources at our disposal to curb the actions of hostile nations. Allowing U.S. crude oil exports would concretely, and immediately, empower Americas allies and undermine our adversaries. Lower oil prices over the past year have hit the Russian economy hard and caused trouble for Putins ambitions. More American oil could add to his troubles by increasing global supply. Sanctions against Irans ability to export oil hurt its economy and contributed to forcing Iranians to the negotiating table. Irans energy revenue dropped by 47 percent in 2013, and by another 10 percent in 2014. The Obama administration is preparing to let Iran recapture much of that lost revenue and to reassert itself on the world stage. Some of the money will also end up in the pockets of the terrorists Iran supports. The president compounds the problem by refusing to let Americas oil compete. Iran soon will be able to export four times as much oil as America does. Even former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has talked about the power of Americas oil. The U.S. remains the great arsenal of democracy, he has said. It should also be the great arsenal of energy. Energy can be deployed to restrain the ambitions of our enemies and support our allies around the world. Today, Poland gets 96 percent of its oil from Russia. Belgium gets 60 percent of its oil from Russia and Saudi Arabia. Japan gets 75 percent from Russia and the Middle East. When these countries are negotiating to buy more oil, why wouldnt we want to give them the option of American oil as an alternative? Of course, another country that would be helped is Israel. President Obamas deal with Iran has put Israel in a much more dangerous situation. The White House plans to offer Israel more military aid. They should also give Israel the opportunity to import American oil. The chance to buy crude oil from the U.S. instead of places like Russia would help ensure that Israels energy supply is secure and stable. While the advantages for Americas foreign policy would be great, the benefit here at home is just as real. Adding more of our crude oil to global supplies could lower the price Americans pay at the pump. A 2014 study by ICF International estimated that Americans would save $5.8 billion per year. The increased economic activity could support an additional 300,000 jobs by 2020. When President Obama has dealt with Russia, he has been too hesitant to use the economic power of American oil and natural gas. When the president was negotiating with Iran, he freed Irans oil producers at the same time he has refused to free Americas. America must not concede world oil markets to belligerent nations like Russia and Iran. We have the energy resources to stand up to these hostile countries. Now is the time to use these resources. Republican John Barrasso represents Wyoming in the U.S. Senate. He serves in the Senate as a member of both the Energy and Environment Committees. Follow him on Twitter@Sen.JohnBarrasso. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=59bb7048-4dd0-4731-8d0a-0ce1b57c6706,Senate pages wanted for Spring 2016,2015-09-28,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is encouraging Wyoming students who are juniors in high school to apply to be a Senate page for the spring session in Washington, DC. There are a total of 30 page positions in the United States Senate each session and Senator Enzi is fortunate to have the opportunity to sponsor a young adult from Wyoming to serve in one of these positions. The deadline for fall applications is November 4. The page program allows students to have a front row seat during debates in the U.S. Senate, said Enzi. The program will provide experiences that participants will carry with them forever. Page duties consist primarily of delivering correspondence and legislative material at the Capitol. Other duties include preparing the Senate chamber for sessions and carrying bills and amendments to the appropriate people on the Senate floor. Pages attend classes at the Senate Page School from 6:15 a.m. until 9:45 a.m. and then work until 4:00 p.m. or until the Senate adjourns for the day. The Senate Page School provides a rigorous academic course of studies and the necessary requisites for a junior year course of study. Spring page eligibility is limited to juniors in high school who will be 16 or 17 years old on or before the date of appointment. Applicants must have a minimum grade point average of 3.0. Pages live in Webster Hall located near the Capitol and receive a stipend to cover the cost of the residence. Breakfast and dinner are provided each day. The spring session runs from February 1, 2016 June 10, 2016. The application and additional information can be found by going to www.enzi.senate.gov. Further questions can be directed to Dianne Kirkbride in Senator Enzis Cheyenne office at 307-772-2477 or Dianne_Kirkbride@enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=0d7d4048-c28b-41d0-b3d1-31649231241e,Learn how to make your bright ideas shine,2015-09-25,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A single idea or invention could be all that it takes to make a business grow and thrive. But it is hard to be successful without knowing how best to patent, market and sell your invention. That is why U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is hosting his annual Inventors Conference to bring inventors together to help educate them on how to make their ideas a reality. This years conference will be held on Saturday, October 3rd in Cheyenne in the Laramie County Community College (LCCC) Theater. I am committed to helping Wyoming's small business owners and inventors succeed in today's rapidly changing marketplace, Enzi said. That means bringing information about the patent process, business planning and marketing to peoples doorstep. The conference has become a Wyoming tradition over the years, where speakers and other Wyoming inventors share knowledge, expertise and wisdom on securing patents, developing business plans and marketing products, according to Enzi. Regardless of background or experience, everyone is welcome to attend and learn how to build on their ideas. The conference will have a day full of speakers and inventors who will share words of knowledge, expertise and wisdom on securing patents, developing business plans and marketing products. Admission to the conference is free. The room opens October 3rd at 7:45 a.m. and Enzi will lead off the days events at 8:30 a.m. Pre-registration is available now by contacting Enzis State Director Karen McCreery, at (307) 527-9444 or Karen_McCreery@enzi.senate.gov. If youre unable to pre-register, registration will be available the morning of the conference.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=fa866578-37e0-42f6-901d-28f300be0fc8,Senate passes bill to reauthorize breast cancer research stamp,2015-09-23,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The Senate last night unanimously approved a bill to renew congressional approval for the breast cancer research stamp through 2019. The stamp has raised $80.9 million for breast cancer research since its creation in 1998. The bill, introduced by Senators Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is cosponsored by John Barrasso, R-Wyo., and 22 other senators. Representatives Jackie Speier, D-Calif., and Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., have introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives. The breast cancer research stamp provides first-class postage and currently costs 60 cents. The additional 11 cents over the regular postal rate helps fund breast cancer research at the National Institutes of Health and the Medical Research Program at the Department of Defense. The idea for the stamp was devised by Sacramento breast cancer surgeon, Dr. Ernie Bodai. Dr. Bodai partnered with Betsy Mullen, a breast cancer survivor from San Diego, and David Goodman from Orinda, who lost his wife to breast cancer, to advocate for the creation of the stamp. The breast cancer research stamp has been incredibly successfulraising $81 million for life-saving research over the past 17 years. It offers Americans a simple way to contribute to improved screening, diagnosis and treatment for the most commonly-diagnosed cancer in women, said Senator Feinstein. October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month and I look forward to working with the Post Office to spread public awareness about the stamp and ensure its available at every location. This stamp provides the opportunity for any American to make a small contribution in order to make a big difference in the fight against breast cancer, said Senator Enzi. Over the years, this stamp has raised tens of millions of dollars. By passing this bill, Congress can ensure that this research will continue to be there to help the hundreds of thousands of women who will be diagnosed in the future. I am thrilled that the breast cancer research stamp will be reauthorized for an additional four years, said Dr. Ernie Bodai. To date, the stamp has raised nearly $81 million for much-needed research. These funds have resulted in major advances not only in breast cancer, but other malignancies as well. I am truly grateful for the ongoing support of Senators Feinstein and Enzi and their dedication to finding a cure. Proceeds from the stamp help fund the National Cancer Institutes breast cancer research programs. These programs focus on how to improve early detection of breast cancer. Scientists study how cancers originate and develop in order to improve prevention, screening, diagnosis and treatment. Scientists also research how to identify markers that precede the development of breast cancer, find better ways to predict whether tumors and lesions found through cancer screening are likely to become life-threatening and investigate links between pregnancy factors and breast cancer risk. The bill is supported by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American Association for Cancer Research, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American College of Surgeons, Are You Dense Advocacy, Breast Cancer Fund, Center for Women Policy Studies, Susan G. Komen, Breast Cancer Research Foundation and Tigerlily Foundation.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=3b6094aa-9474-49b7-b85d-409d979b6891,Barrasso: End the American Crude Oil Export Ban,2015-09-22,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor calling on the Obama administration to work with Congress to end to the ban on U.S. crude oil exports. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: Last week a bipartisan majority of Senators, members of this body, voted to try to stop President Obamas dangerous and desperate deal with Iran. The president wants to give Iran relief from economic sanctions that the world had imposed. I believe that President Obama traded away these sanctionshe traded away them too readily and he got too little in return. These sanctions included limits on the sale of Iranian oil. Now, according to one estimate, Iran could soon begin to export as much as a million additional barrels of oil each and every day. The money Iran makes from these sales will go, as I know, to shoring up its economy and it will go to building up Irans military. Some of it will undoubtedly go to supporting global terrorists. Thats what President Obama traded away. Iran will be allowed to sell its oil anywhere in the world and American oil producers are largely prohibited from selling American oil anywhere in the world. Apparently, thats exactly the way the White House wants to keep things. There is legislation working its way through Congress right now to lift the ban on American crude oil exports. The Obama administration has said that it doesnt support the bill. They think that Congress shouldnt even get to decide. They think it should be up to Washington bureaucrats in the Obama administration to make the decisions. The administration thinks that they are the only ones who should be allowed to decide whether the oil export ban gets lifted. It was the Obama administration that let Iran off the hook by signing such a terrible deal. It was the Obama administration that now wants to lift the sanctions and give Iran access to more than a hundred billion dollars. Should the Obama administration be the ones to decide whether Iran gets to sell its oil without American competition? Is that what the president wants? Why is the Obama administration so interested in making sure Irans economy gets back on its feet faster? The president ought to be focused on helping America's economy, not Irans economy. Right now, American producers export about 500,000 barrels of oil a day. Where does it go? It goes to Canada. Iran is exporting about one million barrels a day, but once President Obama lifts the sanctions, that number is going to jump to almost two million barrels a day. So President Obama favors a situation where Iran will be allowed to export four times as much oil as America does. And Senate Democrats who voted to help the President lift the sanctions, they want the same thing. Thats what they say, four to one, Iran over the United States. Republicans want something very different. If the export ban is lifted, U.S. energy producers could export another 1.6 million barrels a day. Our daily oil exports would jump from half a million barrels to about two million barrelsthats what we wantlift the sanctions. At the same time, Republicans voted to keep the sanctions in place against Iran. So under Republican plans, America would be exporting twice as much oil as Iran. So the Democrats vote four for Iran, one for the United States. The Republicans voted two for the United States, one for Iran. Thats the difference between what Washington Democrats want, and what Senate Republicans want. The Brookings Institution looked into this in September 2014, they came out with a report. They looked at a variety of different scenarios for how much oil America might export. They found that for every scenario they looked at, there are positive gains for U.S. households by the United States being able to export more crude oil. The Government Accountability Office said the same thing last year. It said that Removing export restrictions is expected to increase the size of the economy, thats the U.S. economy, with implications for employment, investment, public revenue, and trade. Those are key for America. These studies and others predict that adding American crude oil to global supplies could ultimately reduce gasoline prices right here at home. By how much you ask? Well, one study estimated that it would save American consumers an average of almost combined $6 billion a year. This study found that the savings would help increase the U.S. economy by about $38 billion by 2020. New oil exports could support an additional 300,000 jobs by 2020. These are huge benefits for the American economy, American families all because we free up American energy, we allow it to compete on worlds markets. There would also be benefits for Americas foreign policy. More oil would reduce prices worldwide. That means that the other countries that export a lot of oil wont be able to make as much money off of their own oil salestheyd have to compete with us. This includes Iran it includes countries like Russia and Venezuela. That would undercut the ability of those countries to do things that arent in our own, Americas best interest. It would also help American allies around the world. Poland gets 96 percent of its oil from Russia. When theyre negotiating to buy more oil, they would love the opportunity and the option of American oil as an alternative. Belgium gets 60 percent of its oil from Russia and Saudi Arabia. Japan gets 75 percent of its oil from Russia and the Middle East. All of these countries and many more around the world could benefit from U.S. oil being sold on the world market. Of course, another country that would really be helped is Israel. President Obamas reckless deal with Iran has put Israel in a much more dangerous situation. Even the White House seems to recognize this. The Obama administration says that it plans to offer Israel more military aid aid to be used to bolster Israels defenses against Iran. The administration should not stop at military aid. It should also offer Israel the opportunity to import American oil. Israel has trouble buying oil from many of its neighboring countries because they dont recognize the State of Israel. Now that leaves places like Russia and Iraqi Kurdistan as its largest suppliers of crude oil. If the Israelis had the opportunity to buy from American oil producers instead, now that would be a big help to make sure that their oil supply is stable and secure. It would also help repair some of the significant damage that the presidents Iran deal did to relations between our two countries. This should be an easy call. Ending the ban on U.S. oil exports would be good for American families, good for our national security, and good for our allies. The Obama administration should change course now. The Obama administration should work with Congress to end this ban on American energy exports as quickly as possible. This past Saturday marked seven years since a Canadian company filed its application to build the Keystone XL pipeline. It has been buried in the bureaucratic limbo of the State Department ever since. That pipeline would provide American jobs just like more oil exports would. Americans should not have to wait another seven years for Washington to lift the oil export ban, and unleash the power of American energy. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=a4ab0fcc-a4b3-427d-bd2a-a2c0c7be63f9,Senate Western Caucus Chairman Barrasso Statement on Sage-Grouse Decision,2015-09-22,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, Senate Western Caucus Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY), released the following statement in response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlifes announcement that the greater sage-grouse does not warrant protection under the Endangered Species Act. The Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service also released their final land management plans today that restrict land use across the West. Todays decision not to list the sage-grouse confirms that the hard work and tough decisions made by Wyoming and other states in the West worked. Im pleased the Fish and Wildlife Service reached the conclusion that we reached a long time ago: state and local agencies are best-suited to manage lands and protect species, said Senate Western Caucus Chairman John Barrasso. While this decision may seem like a victory for the West, the administrations land management plans are nothing more than a Washington land grab. The administration should focus on policies that address real threats to sage-grouse, such as catastrophic wildfires, predators and the unchecked spread of invasive species. These would help ensure that sage-grouse and other species continue to thrive across the West.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=04a24c0f-d37d-4d0e-83f6-570000b5d3c4,Minority in Senate blocks protections for unborn children,2015-09-22,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The Senate fell six votes short (54-42) Tuesday of moving forward on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. The bill, which the House passed in May, would generally prohibit abortions after 20 weeks.U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is a cosponsor of the bill. At five months, an unborn child is developed.These lives deserve the same protection that the lives of other children are given, said Enzi. As the father of a child born pre-maturely, I want other children to have the same chance that my daughter had. The U.S. is one of only seven countries that allow abortions after 20 weeks. The list includes North Korea and China. Enzi applauded Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for bringing the bill up on the Senate floor, which the previous leader prevented.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=ae067d3b-a56c-4e32-8310-9a772cacab3b,Enzi statement on sage grouse decision,2015-09-22,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"TodayU.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., released the following statement in response to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services decision that the sage grouse does not need protection as an endangered species. This decision is a success for Wyoming and for the sage grouse, Enzi said. Wyoming has worked with stakeholders over many years to develop and implement a sage grouse management plan and I am glad that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was able to recognize their accomplishments. The Wyoming plan has a demonstrated record of success and the decision keeps the State of Wyoming in the drivers seat when it comes to sage grouse management.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=0455697e-c4a5-4961-8cc8-5478cd2a9dbf,Barrasso: Gold King Mine Disaster Highlights Incompetence of Environmental Protection Agency,2015-09-17,2015,2015-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the Gold King mine disaster. Transcript of Senator Barrassos remarks: I want to speak today about a tragedy that hit the American West last month that didnt get nearly as much attention as it should have. Im talking about whats been called the Gold King Mine spill, which happened on August 5. Thats when the Environmental Protection Agency spilled three million gallons of toxic waste water into a tributary of the Animas River in Colorado. This is water that contained toxic substances like arsenic and lead. The agency was doing some work at an old mine when water under very high pressure started rushing out. This disturbing incident raises serious questions about how the EPA does business. First of all, it raises questions about the agencys responsiveness. After the EPA had this accident, apparently it never occurred to them to immediately call the towns downstream and to let anyone know that this toxic plume was headed their way. The Animas River connects to the San Juan River, which connects to the Colorado River, and to Lake Powell. These are some of the most beautiful natural resources in America. They also provide water for communities all along their runs. They provide recreation, and water for irrigation of crops, and for homes. This water that was polluted by the Environmental Protection Agency flows from Colorado to New Mexico and into Utah. It flows through the land of the Navajo Nation, and the Southern Ute Indian Tribe. These waterways are a sacred part of the culture of Native Americans who live near them. So why didnt the EPA get on the phone? The Navajo Nation was not informed until a full day after the spill. It got the news from the state of New Mexico not from the agency that caused the disaster. At first, EPA didnt even want to admit how bad the spill really was. They said that it was one million gallons of waste water. Days later, they admitted that they actually spilled three times that amount. Four days after the spill, EPA still had not reported to Navajo leaders the presence of arsenic in the water. It took five days for the agency to set up a unified command center in Durango, Colorado. Yesterday, I chaired a hearing of the Indian Affairs Committee that looked at how this disaster affected tribes along its route. The agencys explanations were very disappointing. This disaster happened six weeks ago. The EPA is still not giving detailed answers about what went wrong. This tragedy also raises questions about the EPAs basic competence. According to a preliminary review by the agency, the EPA failed to take basic precautions. The agency never even checked how high the water pressure was at the mine. This report did say that the EPA knew about the risk of a blowout 14 months before it actually happened. They never bothered to figure out a worst-case scenario, and what they would do if water started rushing out. The people who live along these rivers are frustrated by the agencys incompetence, and they are frightened. People are afraid of what the long-term health effects might be for them and for their children. Farmers and ranchers are being devastated by this disaster. They are uncertain about whether the agency will be compensating them for their full losses. Losses that are a result of the EPAs own competence. At our hearing yesterday, we heard from Gilbert Harrison, who has a 20-acre farm on the Navajo Reservation. He grows corn, alfalfa, watermelons and other crops. He estimates that hes going to lose 40 to 50 percent of some of his crops because he couldnt use the river water to irrigate. This farmer told our committee yesterday: This spill caused by the U.S. EPA created a lot of chaos, confrontation, confusion and losses among the farming community. This was a man-made disaster. Obama administrations Environmental Protection Agency inflicted it upon Americans in these communities. Ive spoken with tribal leaders who say that the EPAs mishandling of this spill has seriously damaged their trust the tribes trust - in the agency. I dont blame them. Finally, the EPAs failure in this incident raises questions about the agencys priorities. The Obama Environmental Protection Agency has expanded its authority and seized control over one area after another. Look at its destructive new rule on waters of the United States. This agency has declared that only Washington can be trusted to protect Americas rivers and streams. How then do they justify grabbing all of this new power when they cant even protect rivers from themselves? They caused this problem. Does this look like the work of a bureaucracy that should be in charge of protecting Americas precious waterways? The Obama administration has focused on its radical climate change agenda, neglecting its most basic responsibilities. Do we really think that Washington should have more control over rivers and streams? Does anyone in America believe that? Washington did this. Washington poisoned this river. The so-called Environmental Protection Agency must be held accountable. When any private company is accused of violating the Clean Water Act, the EPA has aggressively pursued civil fines against that company and the individual people involved as well. Even criminal prosecution occurs. If this were a three million gallon toxic spill caused by private citizens, the EPA would act aggressively against those people. The EPA would not accept the kind of feeble half-apologies and explanations weve heard so far from this administration and from the director of the EPA, who testified yesterday. There is clearly a double standard between the way the EPA treats itself and how it treats everyone else. ""The Environmental Protection Agency failed to do the proper planning before it caused this disaster. I believe it also failed to do the proper work before writing regulations like its Waters of the United States rule, and its so-called Clean Power Plan. With this spill, the agencys careless approach has done terrible damage to Americans living along the Animas River and other waterways. Its reckless and irresponsible regulations will have a devastating effect on the jobs and lives of millions of Americans all across the country. At our hearing yesterday the EPA administrator continued to try to downplay the impact of its actions. The agency needs to step back, and rethink its priorities. This disaster happened because the EPA is inept at its job. There should be no more trying to deflect attention from its failure. No more trying to grab additional power that it can use to do more damage. The Environmental Protection Agency has been out of control for too long. Its time for Congress and President Obama to hold the EPA accountable for its failure. Its time to rein in this runaway bureaucracy before it does more damage. ### https://www.barrasso.senate.gov Twitter | Facebook | You Tube",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z