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://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1380,Star Tribune Editorial: Broaden the fight on sex trafficking,2013-11-03,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Article by: EDITORIAL BOARD , Star Tribune  November 2, 2013 - 5:26 PM  Minnesota’s position at the crossroads of two nation-spanning interstate highways. Its proximity to the oil fields of North Dakota. The bustling international shipping port in Duluth. Year-round professional sporting events that make the rapidly growing metro area a popular tourist destination. The reasons why the Twin Cities area is one of the nation’s hubs for child prostitution, according to the FBI, are both varied and debatable. What isn’t in dispute is that this shocking designation is a horrifying blight on a state typically known for its natural resources and healthy lifestyles. As a longtime health care leader, Minnesota has a moral obligation to be at the forefront in fighting a public-health threat and human-rights abomination: the buying and selling of young girls and boys on the Internet for sex. While state lawmakers have taken some solid but beginning steps to help prostituted children here, Minnesota’s entire congressional delegation needs to rapidly ramp up the fight at the federal level for broader protections. The disturbingly youthful victims whose services are advertised in Minnesota and elsewhere on websites like Backpage.com are but a few of the millions entrapped in the commercial sex industry. While many are brought in from other countries, up to 300,000 American children under the age of 18 are recruited into prostitution annually, according to statistics compiled by the respected nonprofit Ark of Hope for Children. Between 8,000 and 12,000 people are involved in prostitution or sex trafficking in Minnesota each day, according to information from Republican U.S. Rep. Erik Paulsen’s office. Some estimates suggest that the average age of girls trafficked is between 12 and 14 — a finding that is mirrored in the day-to-day work of one of Minnesota’s foremost advocates for exploited children. “There are two undeniable trends. There are just more and more of these kids … and they are also getting younger and younger,’’ said Jeff Bauer, public-policy director for the Twin Cities-based Family Partnership. “When I first started my job back in 2008, the average age of girls coming through was 16, 17, 18 years old. Now we see a lot more 13-, 14-, 15-year-olds, with some as young as 11.’’ Fortunately, members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation are stepping up and shouldering their responsibility as policymakers and parents to put in place federal safeguards for exploited children. They’re drawing upon in-state resources like Bauer and respected advocacy organizations such as Breaking Free and the Women’s Foundation of Minnesota. They’re using recently passed state initiatives as the inspiration and building blocks for federal legislation. Paulsen, Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Democratic Rep. Rick Nolan in particular have led on this issue. In 2011, legislators took an important step forward by passing the “Safe Harbor” act, which put Minnesota among a handful of states that treat prostituted children as crime victims instead of prosecuting them. While legislators this year fell far short in funding shelters and other protections for victims, Minnesota is still in the vanguard because too little is being done elsewhere. That’s why swift congressional action is needed. In late October, Paulsen testified compellingly before Congress about a bipartisan bill he’s introduced that will strengthen law enforcement database information on missing children and, in doing so, help put a spotlight on the high risk that runaway children and those in the foster-care system face for being lured into prostitution. The legislation has strong support from Bauer’s organization and from Ramsey County Attorney John Choi, whose office has put an admirable priority on prosecuting and preventing sex trafficking. Late last week, Klobuchar announced she will soon introduce “major legislation” that will take the Minnesota “Safe Harbor” model national to help minors sold for sex avoid criminal charges and get the help they need. The legislation is also expected to give prosecutors additional tools to fight traffickers. Democratic Sen. Al Franken’s office said this week he is supportive of Paulsen’s bill and that he expected to be added as a cosponsor of the Senate companion bill in the next few days and will work to shepherd key components through the committee process. There’s no reason the names of any member of the Minnesota congressional delegation should be missing as supporters of these important, potentially lifesaving initiatives. Wielding the state’s considerable congressional influence is critical to passing these measures and getting kids off the street and back in the arms of caring communities as soon as possible. Read entire article online here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1359,MinnPost: Tax unites medical device industry and Minnesota's lawmakers,2013-10-22,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Tax unites medical device industry and Minnesota's lawmakers   By Devin Henry | 10:00 am   WASHINGTON — For about six hours last Tuesday, it looked like House Republicans would take another stab at Minnesota Rep. Erik Paulsen’s top legislative priority: repealing or delaying the tax on medical device sales under President Obama’s health-care law. Their effort petered out that night, and Republicans would eventually accept a short-term government funding bill with hardly any GOP demands included. But Paulsen and tax repeal advocates say they see an opening, and, more importantly, momentum for repealing the 2.3 percent tax that is expected to bring in $30 billion to fund Obamacare over the next 10 years. “So many people are aware of it because it’s been in the news so often, it’s going to be right there again when we’re talking about the budget issues again in two and a half months,” Paulsen said. Device industry groups say the tax, which has brought in about $2 billion in new revenue so far this year, is stifling innovation and growth across the board. Tax supporters have dismissed the concerns, at least for large companies like Medtronic, while admitting the tax — levied on profits as opposed to revenue — might be squeezing small device companies. “The 10 largest manufacturers have 86 percent of the sales covered by the tax,” said Topher Spiro, an analyst for the liberal Center for American Progress and a former congressional staffer who helped write the Affordable Care Act. He dismissed full repeal efforts, but said, “I think the tax could be even better targeted than it is. The big guys can definitely afford it.” Lawmakers' focus has been either a full repeal — Paulsen’s preference — or a delay of the tax, which Republican leadership pursued in the final stages of the shutdown fight. Though that effort failed, repeal supporters say congressional support is growing. Paulsen’s bill has 266 co-sponsors — more than half the House — and Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who is helping guide the bill through the Senate and at one point pitched it as a shutdown solution, said she’s persuaded a handful of Senate Democrats to sign on to the effort. More than 30 Democrats — all of them Obamacare supporters — voted for a non-binding repeal bill in March. Paulsen, Klobuchar and repeal supporter Sen. Al Franken all said the proposal could move forward either in budget negotiations over the winter or in a broader tax reform effort next year, assuming lawmakers can agree to both one of those larger packages and a way to offset the revenue lost by ending the tax (which is certainly not guaranteed). “We’ve gained so much momentum to either have it now or have it in the larger budget discussions, which we want to have at the end of the year or in January,” Klobuchar said last week. “I think there is a lot of positive development on that front, no matter what bill it’s on.” 'Plain vanilla constituent service'   Shaye Mandle, the CEO of Minnesota-based tech group LifeScience Alley, said there is a two-fold lobbying effort underway to get the tax off the books: National groups lobby leadership and connected lawmakers in D.C. while groups based in states with a heavy tech prescience — Minnesota, Massachusetts, etc. — focus on their delegations. Their efforts have won support from interesting sources: a handful of liberals like Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren have supported repealing the tax, as does the entire Minnesota House delegation, Twin Cities Democrats and all. Considering the size of the device industry in many of these Democrats’ states, it’s not that surprising they’re backing repeal, University of Minnesota political science professor Larry Jacobs said. He called it “plain vanilla constituent service” for a lawmaker to back an industry’s priorities when that industry is so influential in their state. “For Klobuchar or Franken, you’d be surprised if they weren’t fighting to protect one of the major industries in Minnesota,"" he said. ""In a sense, that’s their job.” The industry spreads its cash around as well, and Minnesotans benefit: Paulsen received the most House contributions from the medical supplies industry last cycle, $113,000. Klobuchar ($90,000) was third among senators last cycle and Franken ($12,950) is the industry’s second-favorite senator so far this year. Paulsen dismissed the donations in a Politico article last week, saying, “This is about saving lives; it’s about helping patients.” Jacobs said the industry’s tactics have been about par for the course. “I think it’s the usual bag of tricks: it’s campaign contributions, it’s lobbying, the med tech industry spends a lot of time with Minnesota’s senators,” he said. “Just substitute whatever the favored state industry is and you’d see the same dynamic playing out in every state.” Idea behind the tax   The basic idea behind the device tax — as well as those on pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and insurance companies as a whole — is that the Affordable Care Act would grow the pool of potential device users so much to warrant a new tax to help fund the law. Companies and lobbying groups say they haven’t seen that higher demand yet, though they’ve had to pay the tax for more than 10 months. They argue the ACA is unlikely to grow a new base of device users at all — many who need the products are older and already covered by some type of health insurance. But tax supporters say business should pick up once the bulk of the law, including the individual insurance-coverage mandate, kicks in down the road. They point to a much-cited Wall Street report that predicts the device industry will eventually recoup all of the tax’s expenses through increased demand for its products. “You should start to see it this year once coverage gains steam,” Spiro said. “Enrollment this year isn’t going to be full projected enrollment under the law. Device manufacturers can expect revenue to slowly increase.” Industry lobbying groups say there’s already a pressing need to repeal the tax, warning it’s hurt venture capital investment in medical technology and led to stagnant company growth and, in some cases, layoffs — Paulsen said there have been as many as 10,000 so far. Mandle said big companies are shedding their research and development budgets and cutting positions while small companies have been unable to grow their businesses. Minnesota impact   In Minnesota, med tech giants say they’ve already factored the tax into their business expenses. Medtronic told the Star Tribune it will pay up to $120 million because of the tax next fiscal year, on profits of $16.6 billion. St. Jude, which saw $5.6 billion in revenue last fiscal year, will pay up to $60 million. A handful of smaller Minnesota companies say the tax is mostly delaying hiring. That’s the case for Clarus Medical, whose CFO, Randy Gatzke, said the tax is essentially a worthless expense for his company — he compared it to an employee who shows up and punches his time card, but who just sits around and refuses to work all day. The company tried to pass on the cost as a new line-item charge to its customers, but “the longer the year went on the less tolerant they became of it,” he said. “We’ve been eating that for a number of months here.” Jennifer Ness said her company, Medsource, a 20-person outfit in Mound, is looking to expand its product development department, but it, too, has had to cover the cost since its customers won’t pay. She also questioned whether Medsource would see any of the new device business promised by the law. “Most of our products are for emergency medical services,” she said. “Emergencies aren’t going to increase just because everyone has health insurance.” Joseph Shultz, the vice president of Nascent Surgical, said his company has struggled to attract new investors and said the tax may be pushing technology businesses out of the country (tax supporters say this fear is overblown, since the tax applies to the sale of all devices in the United States, foreign-made or otherwise). When foreign business groups have tried convincing Schultz and others to move off-shore, “it’s been pretty convincing,” he said. “I think if I were to start this thing again, I don’t think it would be in Minnesota.” Read the entire piece online here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1360,Star Tribune: Tea Party may have hurt chances for device tax repeal,2013-10-21,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Tea Party may have hurt chances for device tax repeal Article by: JIM SPENCER , Star Tribune  Updated: October 21, 2013 - 4:29 PM WASHINGTON – Business and political leaders trying to repeal the medical device tax connected to national health care reform hope to build on the publicity the tax received during the recent government shutdown and debt ceiling crisis. But as the nation’s budget negotiations continue in the weeks ahead, the push to kill the device tax as part of the ill-fated effort to defund the Affordable Care Act, often called Obamacare, may have created as many problems as opportunities for those who want the tax dead. Repealing the device levy became “the shield at the front of the army” of Tea Party congressional lawmakers who pushed for a shutdown and near default to eliminate Obamacare, said Don Kettl, dean of the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy. Fair or not, the medical technology industry’s goal to kill the tax will be associated with the fallout of that political failure, he added. “[Devicemakers] were swept underneath the same tent,” Kettl said. “They ended up finding themselves aligned with it.” Lawmakers who pushed the device tax repeal into the battle strongly reject the notion that their goal has been compromised. “I don’t have any reservations that [device tax repeal] has been tarnished at all,” said Republican Rep. Erik Paulsen of Minnesota, who wanted the tax’s repeal made part of any House budget bill. “If anything, we have gained more support going forward.” Devicemakers, including hundreds from Minnesota, have been paying the 2.3 percent tax on certain device sales since Jan. 1, pouring an estimated $2 billion into the federal treasury. The collections help pay for the expansion of health care coverage under Obamacare. But the device tax is the bane of Minnesota’s mammoth medical technology sector. Device companies say the levy will stifle employment and innovation, asserting that the tax could cost 43,000 jobs over the next decade. The tax’s supporters, however, say any ill effects are overstated because Obamacare will provide devicemakers with enough newly insured patients to offset the cost of the tax. Ultimately, a repeal of the device tax was not included in last week’s legislation to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling. But the decision to include an elimination of the tax in the Republicans’ unsuccessful attempt to defund Obamacare has sparked differing views about the tactical wisdom. Paulsen concedes that Tea Party demands to kill or diminish President Obama’s signature legislation kept the device tax repeal from playing a more positive role in the shutdown/debt ceiling saga. “If we [Republicans] had more realistic attitudes or expectations about what was achievable, [repealing the tax] could have been the linchpin that would have solved the whole impasse a whole lot earlier,” he said. Still, Paulsen expects the device tax repeal to be part of a budget deal required by Dec. 13 under legislation passed last week to reopen the government and raise the debt limit. If not, he expects it to be part of a tax reform plan or part of a continuing resolution funding the government. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat who worked with a bipartisan group to fashion a compromise last week, attempted to get the device tax repeal — or a two-year timeout for collecting it — into the final agreement that reopened government and raised the debt ceiling. Still, she remains optimistic about the chances of killing the tax. “I think it’s pretty clear that it will continue to be on the table going forward,” Klobuchar said. Former Minnesota congressman Vin Weber, now a Washington lobbyist, said having the device tax repeal mentioned in talks among Senate moderates should “immunize” the device industry from any association with the negative politics of the shutdown and debt ceiling debate. Putting the device tax repeal into the House’s proposal for ending the government shutdown attracted “unprecedented attention,” even though it failed, said Stephen Ubl, head of the Advanced Medical Technology Association, the device industry’s leading trade group. He, like Paulsen, thinks the device tax repeal benefited from the attention. But the public will also focus on the shutdown and why the device industry was singled out among all the health-care-related businesses being asked to help pay for Obamacare, said congressional expert Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute. “Keeping the government shut unless you bail out the medical device industry is not necessarily good news for the industry,” Ornstein said. With the Affordable Care Act still in the cross hairs of many Republicans, Kettl believes it will be increasingly difficult for Democrats to embrace a repeal of the device tax, because it undermines health care reform and makes the effort seem partisan. Associating the device tax repeal with the government shutdown or potential default “was not a savvy move,” said Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison, who represents Minneapolis. “The industry should have actually discouraged that.” At a minimum, Ellison said, proponents of the tax’s repeal will have to offer a clear alternative for the $30 billion that will be lost over 10 years if the device tax is eliminated. A new proposal to replace the device tax by recalculating pensions may be too confusing, he added. Paul Van de Water, an economist who studies health issues at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, says the device industry has exaggerated the effects of the tax. The tax applies to foreign-made medical devices imported to the U.S., as well as to American-made devices sold in this country, Van de Water said, but it does not apply to American-made devices sold abroad. An AdvaMed-sponsored study “assumed that the tax would reduce the competitiveness of U.S. firms with foreign firms. That’s absolutely false.” Most analysts, including Van de Water, agree that paying the tax could be a challenge for some smaller companies with narrow profit margins, but not for major corporations. Fridley-based Medtronic Inc., the country’s largest devicemaker, believes the tax will cost the company $120 million in fiscal 2014, which is less than one percent of its $16.6 billion in net sales in fiscal 2013. Studies by two investment firms reached opposite conclusions about devicemakers’ ability to pay for the tax with increased sales to new patients getting health insurance from Obamacare. A 2012 report by Roth Capital Partners said the new patient market would be small because most medical device recipients are in their 60s or 70s and already receive devices paid for by Medicare. Only 2 percent of the uninsured Americans covered by Obamacare are over 65, Roth’s researchers said. However, from 2000 to 2010, knee, hip and pacemaker implants grew at far greater percentages for patients ages 18 to 64 than for those over 65, according to data from the U.S. Agency for Health Care Quality and Research. In an April 2013 report titled “Health Care Coverage Expansion a Shot in the Arm for Med Tech,” Wells Fargo Securities predicted an industrywide sales increase of 3.6 percent from 2012 to 2022. “We believe this will be sufficient to offset the 2.3 percent med-tech tax,” the authors concluded. Sign-ups for expanded health insurance under the Affordable Care Act began Oct. 1, and the effort to register people online has been beset with website problems. Determining their economic impact on medical device makers will be little more than speculation for months, if not years, experts say. In the meantime, Kettl offered a political observation that he believes will be a major factor as Congress debates the tax’s future. “The longer the medical device tax remains on the books,” he said, “the harder it is to repeal.” Read entire article here.    ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1362,Minnesota Republicans saw little choice on fiscal compromise,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"MN Republicans saw little choice on fiscal compromise Article by: Kevin Diaz  Star Tribune  October 17, 2013 - 10:36 AM WASHINGTON – From Congress, a pair of Minnesota Republicans send their regrets. “It’s not where we wanted to be, there’s no question about that,” said Rep. John Kline, a close ally of House Speaker John Boehner. “We had hoped to make more progress toward getting more fairness in Obamacare. We didn’t get that.” But Kline, along with Minnesota Republican Erik Paulsen, felt he had no choice but to take the deal that emerged Wednesday from frenzied negotiations between Republican and Democratic leaders in the Senate. “I think the Republican brand has suffered under what has taken place,” said Paulsen, who, like Kline, represents a district that went to President Obama in the 2012 election. Both took flak from the right and left, particularly from Democrats, who portrayed the two swing-district Republicans as hostages to the GOP’s Tea Party wing, which sought to make the government spending resolution a referendum on blocking the new health care law. The only other Minnesota Republican in Congress, Tea Party stalwart Michele Bachmann, voted against the 11th-hour agreement that ended the government shutdown and averted Thursday’s deadline to begin defaulting on the national debt. Bachmann, however, has long since announced she is not running for re-election. It will be up to Kline and Paulsen — and much of the House GOP leadership — to pick up the pieces of what some Tea Party groups are calling “unconditional surrender.” Both men, who were among 87 Republicans voting for the deal, vowed to fight on in the next round of debt and deficit negotiations that will follow what has been a 16-day impasse. The deal passed the House on a 285-144 vote; no Democrats voted against the deal. “It’s fair to say virtually none of us like this deal,” Kline said after coming out of a sobering GOP caucus meeting. “But it’s a question of tactics now. Do we move forward? We have upcoming events where we will try to push for the things that we think are important.” Kline faces what could be a spirited rematch with former DFL state Rep. Mike Obermueller, who lost to Kline by 8 percentage points last year. Obermueller released a statement Wednesday accusing Kline of “reckless partisanship” that risked the nation’s credit rating. “Just another reminder that Congressman Kline is part of the problem in Washington,” Obermueller said. Kline, in his sixth term, also faces another GOP primary challenge by “grass roots” candidate David Gerson, who faults Kline for his New Year’s Eve fiscal cliff vote that averted another financial crisis by letting tax rates rise on the wealthiest taxpayers. GOP activists in Kline’s Second Congressional District south of the Twin Cities say he has little to worry about. “He’s considered to be a very reasonable congressman,” said Jeff Lorsung, the district’s deputy GOP chairman. “Some on the far right would call that squishy. But as it relates to electability, that puts him where people want him to be.” Paulsen, who voted against the fiscal cliff deal last January, has no declared Democratic opponent in the Third District. But party operatives in Washington have been trying to recruit one, pushing out internal polling in recent days purporting to show him vulnerable on the shutdown issue. Paulsen, however, was able to use the crisis to push for the repeal of a new tax under the health care law that is opposed by Medtronic and other large medical device companies in Minnesota. “I can absolutely tell my constituents that I’ve been working on finding solutions to break the logjam,” he said. The repeal of the medical device tax, which is unpopular with many Democrats as well as Republicans, was seen for a while as a potential linchpin for compromise. In the end, however, it was dropped. Still, the issue allowed Paulsen to distance himself from the conservative hard-liners who pressed for what turned out to be a futile shutdown strategy. With the benefit of hindsight, both Kline and Paulsen acknowledge the flaws in the House GOP strategy of forcing a series of votes tying continued funding of the government to ending or delaying Obama’s health care overhaul. “I don’t think it was the best way to start,” Kline said. “There were some in my conference who were persuaded by, frankly, the junior senator from Texas [Ted Cruz] … so we are where we are.” Both Kline and Paulsen went along with those votes, one of which tied continued government funding to repealing the medical device tax. Both emphasize they were votes to keep the government open — albeit with conditions the Democrats would not accept. “I never had any option,” said Paulsen, noting that House leaders did not bring a so-called clean funding resolution that would have allowed members to vote to reopen government without conditions. Amid the angst and recrimination, Democrats and Republicans in Congress pointed to the near-economic cataclysm as an object lesson. That was particularly true for the two Minnesota Republicans most on the bubble because of the political dynamics of their districts and the growing sense of public frustration on both sides. “As a Republican, I think it’s important for our party to understand that we need to be for positive solutions, and not just always saying no,” Paulsen said. Said Kline: “This is a time for all of us for reflection.” Read entire article online here.  ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1363,Republicans say Obama might deal on medical device tax,2013-10-11,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Republicans say Obama might deal on medical device tax Posted by: Kevin Diaz Updated: October 11, 2013 - 5:31 PM  Repeal of a device tax that has hit Minnesota medical technology companies hard could be the sweetener that breaks the deadlock over the debt limit and the government shutdown, which went into its 11th day Friday. A repeal the 2.3 percent medical device tax levied under President Obama’s health care law was part of a package Senate Republicans brought to the White House Friday. The offer would temporarily raise the debt ceiling and fund the government, which has been shut down since Oct. 1. Maine Republican Susan Collins told reporters afterwards that Obama did not reject the idea of repealing the medical device tax out of hand. She was quoted saying “he clearly also recognizes that it is not the heart of Obamacare.” Her account was seconded by Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who said the president called the tax a “legitimate concern” that might not be an integral part of the new health care law. The Minnesota congressional delegation has uniformly opposed the tax, which has cost large medical technology companies like St. Jude and Medtronic millions of dollars already. But Democrats in the delegation largely oppose making the device tax, or any aspect of Obamacare, part of the budget fight. Republicans, on the other hand, have tied several measures defunding or delaying Obamacare to a spending resolution that would reopen the government. Minnesota Republican Erik Paulsen, working with Democrat Ron Kind of Wisconsin, has been pushing behind the scenes in the House to offer up a device tax repeal as a compromise. The question remains, however, whether that alone would be enough for Republicans, or whether Democrats would even put it on the table. Some House Democratic leaders reacted with dismay at the prospect of repealing a tax that is expected to raise $30 billion to help fund the new health care law over the next decade. New York Democrats Joe Crowley, vice chairman of the Democratic caucus, lampooned the proposal. But with closed-door talks intensifying Friday to end the impasse, it remained hard to predict whether the tax will stay on or go off.  Read entire article online here.  ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1270,"Patent trolls collect ""nuisance fees"" and political enemies",2013-06-17,2013,2013-06,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Article by: JIM SPENCER , Star Tribune Updated: June 15, 2013 - 9:32 PM Firms insist they perform a valuable function in buying up intellectual property. WASHINGTON – Mason Cos. of Chippewa Falls, Wis., sells shoes, women’s clothing and general merchandise on the Internet and through mail-order catalogs. It does not produce or market computers or their components. Yet six times in the past three years the 100-year-old business has been sued for infringing on software patents. Each time, the company felt no choice but to pay a licensing fee to avoid litigation costing 10 times as much to adjudicate. “It’s a shakedown,” Mason’s general counsel Tim Scobie said. Mason is one of thousands of U.S. businesses targeted each year by patent trolls, companies that invent nothing but buy patents from companies and individuals that do. Critics say the trolls then file multiple suits in hopes of collecting licensing fees from people and businesses too poor or too busy to fight them in court. “You end up with companies that aren’t making anything, trying to extract a nuisance fee,” explained Tom Cotter, a patent expert at the University of Minnesota Law School. Cotter said the number of “patent assertion entities” and “non-practicing entities” — the formal names for trolls — has increased dramatically in the past few years. The growth stems from an explosion of patents for minute bits of information technology and broadly applicable business methods. For example, a single smartphone may contain thousands of patented parts, or a single patented business method could be applied to thousands of different circumstances. Companies that buy and enforce patents generally reject the label of trolls. They say they have a legitimate business and provide a necessary way for small companies or individuals to receive payment for their intellectual property. A spokeswoman for Intellectual Ventures, one of the country’s biggest non-practicing entities, declined to be interviewed. But a blog entry by the company’s founder, Peter Detkin, summed up the philosophy: “The owner of the [intellectual property] is irrelevant; the fact of the [intellectual property] is what matters.” A recent survey by RPX Corp., a patent risk management firm, showed that patent trolls filed 62 percent of all patent infringement claims in 2012, up from 19 percent in 2006. The cost of legal fees and settlements from patent troll suits grew from $5.3 billion in 2008 to $10.9 billion in 2012. The issue has reached such proportions that the White House declared war on patent trolls. Earlier this month, President Obama outlined legislative and regulatory fixes for a situation he said is hurting America’s high-tech innovation and putting the country at a competitive disadvantage in the global economy. Patent assertion entities, said the president, “leverage and hijack somebody else’s idea and see if they can extort some money out of them.” Mass filings of infringement suits for a single patent are an expensive, time-consuming distraction to businesses and people who must defend themselves, said Dan McDonald, a patent attorney with the Minneapolis firm of Merchant & Gould, who just published a book on patent trolls. “The main impact,” he said, “is that companies have to spend money on lawyers instead of research and development.” But McDonald said companies sometimes must push back. He recently persuaded a small Minnesota medical device maker to challenge the validity of patents cited in three troll suits. St. Paul-based 3M has interests on both sides of the issue. 3M needs to enforce the patents it receives to protect a $1.5 billion annual research and development effort, said Kevin Rhodes, the company’s vice president for intellectual property. But 3M also has been a target of patent infringement claims by companies that don’t develop or make products. “We’re not labeling anyone,” Rhodes said last week as he moved around Capitol Hill talking to members of Congress about patent issues. But “there are some unfortunate practices that have developed.” While 3M worries that proposed legislation could make it harder for inventors to protect their intellectual property, the company has offered sample language for a law that would make it easier to see when shell companies buy up old patents and sue. Also, 3M has crafted language for a law that would make it easier to sanction those bringing frivolous patent suits. The House and Senate seem poised to act, as they did two years ago when they agreed to the America Invents Act, the first comprehensive patent reform in more than 50 years. “Patent trolls are a clear drag on innovation,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar said. “This is not just some made-up anecdotal problem.” The Minnesota Democrat expects to examine the issue as part of a larger patent hearing she will hold as chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Anti-Trust Subcommittee. Rep. Erik Paulsen, a Republican representing Minnesota’s Third Congressional District, believes the House and Senate will come quickly to a bipartisan agreement. “There is abuse that’s going on,” he said of patent trolls. “The challenge is to target the abusers in an effective way without casting too wide a net.” The way patent laws work, anyone who makes, sells or uses a legally patented device, technology or idea without paying a licensing fee breaks the law, the U’s Cotter said. This fact has led patent assertion entities and non-practicing entities deep into the supply and demand chain. “They blanket the country with suits on the hunch that some people will pay,” Mike Lafeber of Minneapolis law firm Briggs and Morgan said. “They have stepped over a line.” A decade ago, “patent owners rarely if ever sued consumers,” Cotter noted. “Today they might go after a coffee shop for using wireless technology.” Or they might go after an online seller like Mason Cos. for using software it had no role in developing or selling. What started more than a century ago as a shoemaking company is being coerced into paying licensing fees merely “for selling stuff on the Internet,” Scobie said. “It’s not Oracle calling us up saying we’re using their spreadsheet,” he explained. “It’s law firms that bought a bunch of patents at a fire sale.” Paying off those people is a “gut-wrenching ordeal,” Scobie said. But it is also an inevitable business decision. “We are a small organization in a small town,” he said. “If it’s going to cost us $25,000 for a license fee or it’s going to cost us $250,000 to fight, don’t even bother asking me.” Read entire article online here.  ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1234,Paulsen Talks Tax Reform for Politico's Morning Tax,2013-05-03,2013,2013-05,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Morning Tax  By Lauren French | 5/2/13 6:01 AM EDT With help from Alysha Love   PAULSEN: SUMMER WILL BE FILLED WITH DISCUSSION DRAFTS, HEARINGS. Rep. Erik Paulsen is ready. Ready for more meetings, discussion drafts and hearings if the process could push lawmakers toward a true comprehensive scrub of the tax code — and he’s about to get this wish with the Ways and Means Committee slated to begin meetings next week. “I think these meetings are going to be opportunities to show where there is consensus, but there is still going to be differences of opinion, so it will be helpful to show everyone where those differences of opinions might be. It has been a helpful process for all of us to learn what is important to different members or constituencies. We need to come together and see where we can add some consensus and just move forward,” Paulsen told Morning Tax from a snowy Minnesota.   As lawmakers spend the summer in and out of D.C., Paulsen, who joined the retirement and pensions reform group, said there will be continued efforts to better understand the code — and how to reform it. “The chairman has been very clear that we’re going to produce a bill this year, a tax reform measure. I would not be surprised if additional discussion drafts were released that were products of the workings groups because those discussion drafts have allowed us to build a good basis upon some needed reforms. We’ll easily fill the summer months with additional hearings and some of the working groups actually are likely to continue to meet on their own,” he said. ####",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1213,Trade pact with E.U. would benefit Minnesota,2013-04-22,2013,2013-04,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"Trade pact with E.U. would benefit Minnesota Lowering tariffs, streamlining regulations means more jobs. By Star Tribune Editorial Board The Obama administration may have signaled a strategic “pivot” to East Asia, but it hasn’t forgotten that the world’s largest economic relationship is between the United States and the European Union. So it was welcome news when President Obama announced in his State of the Union Address in February that the administration would begin negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the E.U. As with previous free trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and bilateral pacts with South Korea and other countries, an eventual agreement would seek to eliminate, reduce or prevent tariffs and quotas on goods and services, as well as make regulations more compatible between the United States and the 27 nations that comprise the E.U. U.S.-E.U. trade is already robust. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, about $2.7 billion in goods a day flows between U.S.-E.U. borders. In 2012, the United States shipped $265.1 billion worth of goods to E.U. nations. While that was down 1.2 percent from 2011, it represented a 57 percent increase since 2000. THE UPSIDE “The reality is with so many different countries involved in bilateral trade negotiations, having the E.U. and the United States work together on this transatlantic opportunity is really going to bring other trade agreements up to the 21st century, as well as leverage the opportunity for countries like China that haven’t been playing by similar rules to make sure that their standards are brought up to ours. And I think that is going to help the entire world economy.” -Rep. ERIK PAULSEN, R-Minn.   U.S. exports of private commercial services were valued at $194 billion in 2012 — a 2.8 percent increase from 2011 and a 108 percent spike since 2000. U.S. agricultural exports totaled $9.9 billion in 2012 and, together, U.S. and E.U. investors owned about $3.7 trillion in direct investment in each other’s economies. While the tariffs between the United States and the E.U. are already relatively low, the scale of the trade relationships suggests that even small adjustments could mean big economic gains. Even more upside exists if standards are aligned between the two trading partners. And the scope of the world’s largest trading relationship means that an agreement might kick-start the stalled “Doha Round” of World Trade Organization talks. Already, many countries are rushing to fill the trade vacuum with bilateral pacts. But a U.S.-E.U. pact could offer “a de-facto rule-setting for the rest of the world,” said Joshua Meltzer, a fellow in global economy and development at the Brookings Institution. That’s not just a U.S.-centric view, according to Ambassador Jukka Pietikainen, the consul general of Finland in New York. Pietikainen, Minnesota Rep. Erik Paulsen and others were in Minneapolis on Monday for a trade discussion organized by the Finnish American Chamber of Commerce Minnesota and the Minnesota International Center. “We need to set the standards, and since the WTO negotiations have stalled completely maybe this would give a boost for those negotiations … and then maybe Europe and the United States would have an upper hand on the setting of global standards,” Pietikainen told an editorial writer. Closer to home, the trade stakes are high for Minnesota, too. State exports totaled $5.13 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012, according to the state Department of Employment and Economic Development. The E.U., along with North America, led the way with 6 percent growth. Overall, the E.U. is Minnesota’s third-largest export market, accounting for 20 percent of all sales. Minnesota’s manufacturing base, particularly its medical device industry, as well as its services, stands to gain from expanded, streamlined transatlantic trade. More trade means more jobs. Of course, as with previous pacts, a U.S.-E.U. trade agreement would need to adhere to appropriate labor and environmental standards, among other key details. So it’s too early to advocate for a specific deal. But it’s not too early to laud the president and the bipartisan members of Congress who are working to expand the already strong economic and political ties with Europe. Read entire article online here.  Learn more about Rep. Paulsen’s work on advancing U.S. – EU trade relations http://ow.ly/kdXWf. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1214,Op-ED: Medical Device Tax Needs To Go,2013-04-22,2013,2013-04,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"By Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN) & Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI) An encouraging thing happened last month in the U.S. Senate. An overwhelming number of Republicans and Democrats came together in taking a step toward ending a policy that is having unintended consequences on job creation and innovation. Americans are clearly frustrated, and rightly so, by the lack of progress in Congress to spur job creation, economic growth and the entrepreneurial spirit that makes America unique. This is why we were pleasantly surprised at the strong measure of bipartisan support the Senate gave to repealing the medical device tax, an onerous policy that is harming a great American success story. As the lead cosponsors of legislation in the House of Representatives to put an end to this unfortunate policy, we know that repeal can’t come soon enough for patient care and job creation. The medical-device industry is responsible for nearly 2 million American jobs and has led the world in developing new technologies. In an economic environment where domestic manufacturing is an important part of our recovery, these are the very-high-tech manufacturing jobs we need to ensure stay here at home. American workers are now competing on a global stage, and medical technology is one of the few successfully exporting industries in the country. In fact, medical exports doubled between 1998 and 2008, to $33 billion annually. We often hear that America needs to “start making things again” to help turn this economy around. Medical-device innovators are doing just that. Unfortunately, in an effort to fund the Affordable Care Act, a new 2.3 percent excise tax was placed on medical devices. For full disclosure, one of us opposed the Affordable Care Act and the other strongly supported it, while wanting to make sure the bill was fully paid for. We both agree that the tax is harmful, and now, as the Affordable Care Act is being implemented, the impact is even more apparent. As we move forward in repealing the tax, with a bipartisan group of 235 of our colleagues in the House who support this legislation, we must also find another pay-for — one that won’t jeopardize innovation or jobs — so we don’t add to our nation’s debt. The impact of the tax is already being felt through layoffs at device manufacturers around the country. Over the long term, the device tax will also limit access to life-improving and life-saving innovations. We continue to hear of potential layoffs and cuts in research and development as companies scramble to pay their share of the tax. With 62 percent of medical-device companies employing less than 20 employees, and 98 percent employing less than 500, many of the hardest-hit companies are the very small businesses that are the lifeblood of our country. At the beginning of 2013, the first medical-device tax payments were collected from med-tech companies across the United States. Rather than putting that money toward cutting-edge advancements in health care or adding more jobs, the companies sent approximately $388 million to the federal government. This is just the beginning of what is expected to be a $30 billion tax. While some have suggested that device manufacturers will reap a windfall of new business from the expansion of health coverage, that has not proved to be the case in Massachusetts, where there is near-universal coverage. Many of the newly insured will be relatively young and unlikely to need device-intensive procedures. In Congress and communities across the nation, we continue to debate and discuss ways to make our health care system more effective and affordable, but we agree that implementing policies that punish innovators shouldn’t be a part of the plan. When 79 senators vote in support of repealing the medical-device tax as a part of the budget resolution, it is clear that Congress wants to put an end to this policy. The urgency is real, and it’s time to act. Erik Paulsen, a Republican, represents Minnesota’s Third District in the U.S. House. Ron Kind, a Democrat, represents Wisconsin’s Third District. Read entire article online here.  Learn more about Rep. Paulsen’s work on repealing the medical device tax here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://paulsen.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=105&itemid=1207,The Hill: Restoring financial flexibility in healthcare,2013-04-11,2013,2013-04,Republican,House,MN,Erik Paulsen,P000594,paulsen.house.gov,,,legacy,"By Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) and Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-Minn.) Three years to the day after President Obama signed into law his massive healthcare overhaul, the Senate overwhelmingly approved a measure to repeal two provisions limiting families’ freedoms. For a brief moment in Washington, politics took a back seat, and the needs of nearly 33 million Americans were addressed.  These families, who take the initiative to budget for their healthcare expenses using flexible spending accounts (FSAs) or health savings accounts (HSAs), were some of the first to feel the impacts of the president’s health law. It requires them to obtain a doctor’s prescription to purchase over-the-counter (OTC) medications with their own money set aside specifically to cover health-related expenses. Beginning this year, it places a $2,500 cap on FSA contributions, limiting families’ abilities to use specialized accounts to pay for medical expenses sometimes not covered by health insurance. The amendment that passed as a part of the Senate budget resolution mirrors legislation we recently introduced to restore fairness and flexibility for the millions of Americans affected by these mandates. The Family Health Care Flexibility Act reinstates the original functions of these plans by eliminating the HSA and FSA prescription requirements for OTC medications and removing the arbitrary FSA cap. Recognizing the need to restore flexibility, the Senate approved this legislation in a bipartisan fashion. Without repealing these restrictions, patients in need of real medical care must endure longer waits as physicians’ schedules become cluttered with folks seeking OTC prescriptions to remedy minor maladies. Doctors are already in short supply, and demand will dramatically increase next year when 30 million more patients enter the health care market because of the law. But the health law’s penalties on these families don’t stop there. The new cap, limiting FSA annual contributions to a mere $2,500, places significant burdens on families with expenses that may not be covered by their insurance. Families who once used their FSAs to budget for their child’s braces, an expense that could cost $7,000, are now stuck finding other ways to cover these costs. This arbitrary cap is especially difficult for families who have children with special needs. Specialized education for these children can cost up to $14,000 a year, well above the new FSA annual ceiling. The National Down Syndrome Society and the National Center for Learning Disabilities both back our legislation to remove these barriers for families budgeting to help their children reach their potential. Neither restriction improves healthcare access or quality. They are ploys aimed at making the $2.6 trillion health law look less costly by collecting more taxes from folks who plan ahead for their health care needs. Rather than denying flexibility so many American families depend on, Washington should work to promote and protect programs that help lower the cost of healthcare and allow individuals to make better healthcare choices. Republicans and Democrats alike can appreciate the common sense in restoring a thoughtful approach to healthcare. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle represent a growing number of Americans becoming ensnared in costly and burdensome provisions slowly rolling out as a result of the health law. And as the law’s mandates become more and more evident, public support continues to disintegrate. We applaud the Senate for giving this legislative fix a chance, especially when doing so can be politically difficult. Despite partisan differences in Washington, constituents across the country are in need of these changes, and their Senators did not stand in the way. While the Senate budget resolution will likely never become law, our HSA and FSA legislation stands on its own merits, and those who supported it as an amendment should support its passage into law. These health law mandates are just a couple examples of new challenges raised over the past three years with undoubtedly more to come. Restoring Americans’ faith in our healthcare system will require a departure from government gimmicks and a return to common sense. The political battles have been fought and refought. It’s time now for sound policy to win out, and for lawmakers to take a closer look at this law without a red or blue partisan lens. Ending the unfair FSA and HSA requirements would be a great addition to the 1099 paperwork mandate that has already been repealed. Congress should send a message to families who have children with special needs that we are going to step up and do the right thing. Surely we can all agree letting families use their money as they see fit and freeing up doctors to treat the sick is a positive step for real health reform. Johanns is the senior senator from Nebraska. Paulsen represents Minnesota’s Third Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives. Read entire article online.    ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z