url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/hunger-homelessness-summit-focuses-on-awareness,Hunger & Homelessness Summit Focuses on Awareness,2013-12-23,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Wausau, WI – More than 100 registered participants joined U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) for his first Hunger & Homelessness Summit held in Wausau this past Wednesday. The daylong summit brought together volunteers and representatives from dozens of organizations from across the 7th Congressional District. The event included several panel discussions, a keynote address from Steve Berg from the National Alliance to End Homelessness and concluded with a “bright spots” session that challenged participants to implement a takeaway from the event. In his opening remarks to the attendees, Rep. Duffy offered: “My team and I wanted to do what we could to try to make a difference with those who have fallen on hard times and make sure we can collaborate together on community resources. Also collaborate on the Federal and state side to make sure resources don’t just flow to the urban parts of the country but can actually come to the parts of the country that have real problems but don’t have huge staffs to cut through the red-tape.” Offering his thoughts on the summit, Rep. Duffy said, “We found that by reaching out to each other and building a coalition within our community we can be more effective in our efforts to serve the neediest in our area.” Rep. Duffy’s office plans to post the entire summit on YouTube. Click here to watch and check back for updates from the daylong event. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/comfort-joy,Comfort & Joy,2013-12-22,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, During this season of joy, I find myself more aware than maybe ever before of the people in our community who are in need of great comfort this Christmas. Whether it is a mother who is struggling to pay her utility bill, or a father who is dealing with the loss of his family’s health insurance plan, this week I have been fortunate to work with many people from our community on ways we can help the neediest among us and hopefully make life a little more comfortable for them. Building Effective Awareness: A year ago I sat down with many of the pastors in Wausau and asked them, “What are the needs in our community?”  I was taken back when all of them commented on the issues of hunger and homelessness in our community. I think I’m like a lot of people in our community who don’t know the issues that a lot of people who are having a tough time are facing. I wanted to do what I could with my team to make sure we can make a difference with those who have fallen on hard times and make sure we can collaborate together on community resources. Also collaborate on the Federal and state side to make sure resources don’t just flow to the urban parts of the country but can actually come to the parts of the country that have real problems but don’t have huge staffs to cut through the red-tape. This week, more than 100 people came together for our first Hunger & Homelessness Summit. It was an honest conversation and ultimately a productive one as well.  We found that by reaching out to each other and building a coalition within our community we can be more effective in our efforts to serve the neediest in our area. We are in the process of uploading the entire summit on YouTube. Click on the image below to watch it and keep checking back for more from the day long event. They need an Obamcare exemption too: I joined with a bipartisan group of Wisconsin Congressmen to ask U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to extend the federal Health Insurance Risk-Sharing Plan (HIRSP) through March 31, 2014. Gov. Walker signed legislation on Friday to extend current coverage for Wisconsin citizens under several medical assistance programs, including HIRSP, through March 31, 2014 citing the failed rollout of Obamacare. The Secretary should offer all Americans with pre-existing and, in some cases, life threatening conditions the same courtesy.  Not offering this extension nationwide could leave some of our poorest and most medically vulnerable Americans without coverage. These individuals should not lose their healthcare coverage due to technical difficulties. This Administration is delaying multiple pieces of its signature legislation on an almost daily basis because it is politically convenient for them. It is our hope that the Secretary will also offer an extension to the numerous Americans who have had their lives inconvenienced by this ill-conceived law. To read the full letter to Sec. Sebelius, click here. Waiting in joyful hope: Our family is anxiously awaiting the birth of our Lord this week and if you saw Rachel and my appearance on “Morning Joe” you may have heard that our family is also very much looking forward to the arrival of the newest addition to our Duffy clan. Click on the image to watch the full announcement and the other topics we discussed.   This is a very exciting time of year in our house. As we celebrate Jesus’ birth this week, we will also cherish this time together as a family. Rachel, the kids, and I are always grateful for the kindness so many of you have shown us. We hope that you are able to spend this time surrounded by those you love as well. We wish you and yours a safe, merry and very blessed Christmas season.   Merry Christmas,  Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=365156,Why We Must Reform Military Compensation,2013-12-22,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"The Bipartisan Budget Act that Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and I drafted will soon become law. We think it's a small step toward fiscal discipline in Washington. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill will reduce the deficit over the next ten years by over $20 billion. And unlike current law, it will provide much-needed relief to our already strained defense budget. One part of the bill has become particularly controversial: the reduction in cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) for working-age military retirees. The federal government has no greater obligation than to keep the American people safe and we must take care of the men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line. For that reason, Congress is understandably hesitant to make changes to military compensation. But even hesitance has a cost. The need for reform is undeniable. Since 2001, excluding the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the cost per service member in the active-duty force has risen by 41% in inflation-adjusted dollars. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, a combat vet himself, has said ""that we can no longer put off military compensation reform. DOD's leadership, Chairman Dempsey, the service chiefs, the service secretaries, and myself, we all know that we need to slow cost growth in military compensation. Otherwise, we'll have to make disproportionate cuts to military readiness and modernization."" Here's what the new law will do. We make no changes for those currently at or above age 62. This reform affects only younger military retirees. Right now, any person who has served 20 years can retire —regardless of age. That means a serviceman who enlists at 18 becomes eligible for retirement at 38. The late 30s and early 40s are prime working years, and most of these younger retirees go on to second careers. All this reform does is make a small adjustment for those younger retirees. If they retire before age 62, the annual increase in their retired pay will be 1% less than the inflation rate. In other words, their benefits will grow every year — just at a slower rate. And when the retiree hits 62, DOD will recalculate the retired pay so that it will be where it would have been if he or she had received the full inflation adjustment every year since he or she retired. Here's an example: If a serviceman enlisted at 18 and retired at 38, under this policy his lifetime benefit would be about $1.7 million instead of $1.8 million. For a service member who retired at the average military retirement age of 44, the difference would be smaller, about $30,000 over his or her lifetime. This is a far more modest reform than other bipartisan proposals, some of which would have fully eliminated the adjustments for inflation for working-age retirees. And to be clear, the money we save from this reform will go right back to the military. Veterans aren't Washington's piggy bank. They deserve fair compensation. And we owe them a benefit structure they can count on. That said, when Congress was considering the bill, many raised concerns that these reforms would affect the retired pay of service members who are medically retired and those receiving survivor's benefits. So Senator Murray and I have agreed to amend the law to exclude them well before the reform takes effect in December 2015. But I stand behind the need for reform. In 2012, Congress established the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission to examine the entire military-compensation system from top to bottom. The commission's recommendations are due in May, and the leaders of the armed-services committees in Congress have agreed to consider their recommendations and look for other ways to reform the system. That's why this reform does not take effect until the end of 2015 — it gives Congress ample time to consider alternatives. For me, there's simply no choice between responsible reforms of military compensation and making what our military leadership has called ""disproportionate cuts to military readiness and modernization."" Every time we kick the can down the road, we put our troops' combat readiness at risk. This agreement put forward one reform option, and I invite others to do the same. Our troops have been willing to sacrifice everything for this country. We owe it to them to give them the best equipment on the battlefield and a secure retirement when they come home. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., was the Republican vice-presidential nominee in 2012 and is chairman of the House Budget Committee. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/12/22/veterans-retirement-paul-ryan-budget-deal-column/4164713/",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-5-wisconsin-congressmen-to-sebelius-extend-hirsp-federal-plan,"Duffy & 5 Wisconsin Congressmen to Sebelius, ""Extend HIRSP Federal Plan""",2013-12-20,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"""Not offering this extension nationwide could leave some of our poorest and most medically vulnerable Americans without coverage.” Washington D.C. - U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy, with a bipartisan group of Wisconsin Congressmen, asked United States Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to extend the federal Health Insurance Risk-Sharing Plan (HIRSP) through March 31, 2014. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed legislation on Friday to extend current coverage for Wisconsin citizens under several medical assistance programs, including HIRSP, through March 31, 2014 citing the failed rollout of Obamacare. The group of Federal lawmakers pleaded with the Secretary to offer all Americans with pre-existing and, in some cases, life threatening conditions to be afforded the same courtesy. Rep. Duffy offered the following comments: ""Not offering this extension nationwide could leave some of our poorest and most medically vulnerable Americans without coverage. These individuals should not lose their healthcare coverage due to technical difficulties. This Administration is delaying multiple pieces of its signature legislation on an almost daily basis because it is politically convenient for them. It is our hope that the Secretary will also offer an extension to the numerous Americans who have had their lives inconvenienced by this ill-conceived law.""  Rep. Duffy was joined on the letter by Representatives Paul Ryan (WI-01), Ron Kind (WI-03),  Jim Sensenbrenner (WI-05), Tom Petri (WI-06) and Reid Ribble (WI-08) Full text of letter to Sec. Kathleen Sebelius:",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131224084330/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364892,House Judiciary Committee Members Call for DOJ Investigation of National Intelligence Director Clapper for Lying to Congress,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Today, Representatives Jim Sensenbrenner (WI-5), Darrell Issa (CA-49), Trent Franks (AZ-08), Blake Farenthold (TX-27), Trey Gowdy (SC-04), Raul Labrador (ID-01) and Ted Poe (TX-02) sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr. urging an investigation of the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, for lying to Congress while testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in March of 2013.  “Director Clapper’s willful lie under oath fuels the unhealthy cynicism and distrust that citizens feel toward their government and undermines Congress’s ability to perform its Constitutional function,” the Members write in their letter to Holder. “There are differences of opinion about the propriety of the NSA’s data collection programs.  There can be no disagreement, however, on the basic premise that congressional witnesses must answer truthfully.” “Congressional oversight depends on truthful testimony—witnesses cannot be allowed to lie to Congress.  Accordingly, we request you investigate Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s ‘erroneous’ statements to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence earlier this year.” At a March 12, 2013 Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing, Director Clapper was asked if, “the NSA collected any type of data at all on millions of hundreds of millions of Americans” to which he responded with, “No, Sir.”  Four months later, in June 2013, after the Snowden leaks publicly exposed Clapper’s testimony as false, Clapper finally retracted his remarks and wrote, “My response was clearly erroneous, for which I apologize.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221193111/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364834,Sensenbrenner and Kind Lead Successful Effort to Include Cushing Amendment in NDAA,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"U.S. Reps. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and Ron Kind (D-Wis.) today celebrated the passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which included a provision to posthumously award Lt. Alonzo Cushing with the Medal of Honor. Lieutenant Cushing, a Wisconsin-born Civil War hero, played a key role in securing a victory for the Union at Gettysburg.“Lieutenant Cushing was a courageous leader who gave his life to protect our country and deserves to be recognized for his bravery,” Rep. Sensenbrenner said. “I am extremely pleased that the Cushing amendment was passed by the House and Senate and hopeful President Obama awards Lieutenant Cushing with the Medal of Honor for his heroic service during the Civil War."" “It’s never too late to do the right thing, especially when it comes to honoring our war heroes,” said Rep. Kind. “I am heartened to be joined by my colleagues in Congress in sending this bill to the President so we as a nation can finally honor Lt. Cushing with his well-deserved Medal of Honor.” A native of Delafield, WI, Lt. Cushing is best remembered for his actions on the last day of the Battle of Gettysburg when he helped turn the tide during Pickett’s Charge. On July 3, 1863, the third day of battle, Cushing and the 110 men under his command received the full force of Confederate artillery and Pickett’s Charge of 13,000 infantry. Over the course of just a few hours, all of his officers had been killed and Cushing himself was wounded. But he continued to fight, and sustained two more wounds before dying on the field of battle. Recommendations for the Medal of Honor must be formally made within two years of the heroic action and awarded within three years. The legislation passed by Congress makes it possible to waive this requirement.  The medal can be awarded after the bill is signed by the President and the waiver is approved by the Department of Defense. Reps. Kind and Sensenbrenner are sending a letter to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel requesting his prompt attention to Lt. Cushing’s record and look forward to his recommendation that Lt. Cushing be recognized with the Medal of Honor. Reps. Kind and Sensenbrenner also thanked Wisconsin Senators Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin for leading the effort in the Senate to award Lt. Cushing.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221193128/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=365056,Congressional NSA critics: review panel report gives 'momentum' for reform,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"The chief congressional critics of the US National Security Agency said Thursday that a White House review panel report gave them momentum to end bulk domestic surveillance, but expressed reservations about one of the panel’s central proposals. In an indication of the changing political landscape for the NSA, Representative James Sensenbrenner, the chief House sponsor of a bill preventing the agency from collecting US domestic phone data, said Thursday that “President Obama’s hand-picked panel” highlighted “the need to enact the USA Freedom Act. But Sensenbrenner, in an interview with the Guardian, was wary of its recommendation that phone companies or other private parties should store communications data for the NSA to search. ""The administration has not yet made the case that increased data retention is necessary, but I welcome any proposals that serve our national security interests without undermining constitutional rights” Sensenbrenner said. The report by the review group, released Wednesday afternoon, has been greeted warmly by skeptics of mass surveillance, particularly for its recommendations to add privacy advocates at the secret Fisa Court and for endorsing greater use of data encryption. But as the review group’s recommendations help reshape the debate over bulk surveillance, all sides are girding for a fight over the extent to which any entity ought to hold Americans’ data – a fight likely to determine whether bulk domestic surveillance ends, or continues in a new form. In line with the USA Freedom Act, the review group rejected a need for the government to hold citizens’ data in bulk, and held out as a solution the ability of the government “to obtain specific information relating to specific individuals or specific terrorist threats” when it can demonstrate to the secret surveillance court “that it has reasonable grounds to access such information.” But the review group had less to say about a crucial detail: how long the telecoms ought to hold the NSA’s desired call data. It urged the government and the companies to “agree on a voluntary system” and relegated to a footnote a suggestion that two years would be the maximum appropriate period of time to hold the data. Civil liberties groups who back the USA Freedom Act’s flat prohibition on bulk domestic phone data collection flatly rejected having the phone companies or other “private parties” hold the data for NSA to query. Alexander Abdo of the ACLU said it would “simply repackage the bulk collection under private control.” Kurt Opsahl of the Electronic Frontier Foundation said it was “still heinous, even if private company servers are holding the data instead of government data centers.” Kevin Bankston of the Open Technology Institute said it would amount to “bulk collection by proxy.” For its part, the NSA has been publicly hinting for months that as long as the surveillance agency maintains access to a comprehensive database of domestic phone call information going back three to five years, it can live with that database existing outside of the NSA’s Fort Meade campus. ""I would love to give this hornet’s nest to someone else, to say ‘You get stung by this,’” General Keith Alexander, the outgoing director of the NSA, said in October. “But don’t drop it, because that’s our country, and if you do drop it, the chance that a terrorist attack gets through increases.”  On Capitol Hill, where fallout from the review group is unsettled as aides slogged through a lengthy report, pro-reform officials noted that the review group did not endorse the NSA’s call for years. Now that both a federal judge, Richard Leon, and the review group have both doubted the necessity of bulk collection for stopping terrorist attacks, they argued that the NSA will have difficulty arguing that the companies ought to be required to store the data for as long as the agency wants, especially since the phone companies have not shown enthusiasm for the proposal. Reform advocates, who have embraced the review group as a political success, were cautious about embracing the telecom-based proposal as a solution for bulk surveillance. Senator Patrick Leahy, Sensenbrenner’s chief partner in the upper legislative chamber, said that he would hold a hearing in January with the review group to further assess its recommendations. Senator Ron Wyden, a member of the intelligence committee who said the report in general provided “substantial, meaningful reforms,” indicated on Wednesday that he had concerns about having the companies hold the phone data for the NSA. “Obviously, there’s going to be a lot of technical issues associated with telecoms having the information,” Wyden told the Guardian in an interview. “That’s going to take some time to work through.” What the telecoms, NSA and privacy advocates agree on is that requiring the phone companies to hold the data is a complicated process, technologically and otherwise. Currently, the phone companies typically store customer data for 18 months. The NSA wants the information kept for at least three years and ideally five, ostensibly to detect domestic communications pattern to known terrorist groups. Legislation would be necessary to compel the companies to store the data longer – which is both expensive and raises concerns about keeping the data secure. The telecoms “would fight tooth and nail” against such a requirement, said a congressional aide, “unless there’s compensations.” Companies as well keep their data in different file formats, complicating the ability for comprehensive and rapid searches. So far, the telecos have not embraced the proposal. “A practical concern is that when you start saying you have to keep all this data, you open it up for access to divorce cases and down the line, everyone’s going to want a bite at the apple,” said Ross Schulman, a lobbyist with the Computer and Communications Industry Association. At the same time, a powerful opponent of the USA Freedom Act, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, worried on Thursday that the review group might weaken US intelligence efforts. “Though I am still studying the details, I have serious concerns with some of the report’s 46 recommendations,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, a Michigan Republican, former FBI agent and staunch advocate of the NSA’s bulk collection. ""Any intelligence collection reforms must be careful to preserve important national security capabilities. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Congress to enact meaningful reforms in the near future.” Senator Dianne Feinstein, Rogers’ counterpart in the Senate, has yet to respond to the review group’s proposals. Feinstein, a California Democrat, is backing an alternative to the USA Freedom Act that would bolster the NSA’s powers to store communications data. Its prospects are less clear in the Senate now that the White House’s surveillance review panel rejected its major rationale. The USA Freedom Act claims 132 co-sponsors in the House and Senate combined, a quarter of the Congress. Obama has yet to commit to either supporting or opposing it. “The report sent over by the White House reaffirms what many of my colleagues and I have been saying since June – the NSA has gone too far,” Sensenbrenner said. “All three branches of government have now said it is time to stop indiscriminately vacuuming up the data of innocent Americans. The report also agrees that the NSA’s bulk collection has come at a high cost to privacy without improving national security.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364818,Senate Passes the Bipartisan Budget Act,2013-12-18,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, the Senate passed the Bipartisan Budget Act, which the House approved in an overwhelming vote last week. The bill would reduce the deficit—without raising taxes—and cut spending in a smarter way. Upon passage of the legislation, Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin issued the following statement: “I want to thank Chairman Murray and her colleagues in the Senate for passing the Bipartisan Budget Act. She was a tough and honest negotiator in our talks. And this week, she worked very hard to secure final passage. I’m grateful for her leadership in forging this budget agreement. “This vote shows both parties—in both chambers—can find common ground. We can work together. This bill is only a small step. We need to do a lot more. But it’s a small step in the right direction.” Click here to learn more about the Bipartisan Budget Act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364882,Paul Ryan: 'We owe so much to these men and women who fight for us.',2013-12-18,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"CNBC’s Kudlow Report In an exclusive interview with Larry Kudlow, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), House Budget Committee chairman, discusses the budget deal, the Fed's decision to taper, and veterans' pensions. Larry Kudlow: House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan is a big winner tonight. The Senate late this afternoon passing the Ryan-Murray compromise budget framework, sending it to the White House. But despite passage, there are still concerns about how the bill will affect veterans, especially disabled veterans, and that has some calling for a fix. This afternoon I had a chance to speak with Chairman Ryan and I asked him if he agreed with these comments from his Senate counterpart Patty Murray. Patty Murray: In a provision included in this deal that mistakenly included disabled retirees and survivors for changes in the pension growth will be addressed in short order following passage of this bill. Paul Ryan: Yes, I do. That will be solved with the technical correction that will pass when Congress comes back into session. We wanted to make sure that we kept military pension retirement better than their civilian counterparts. Civilians who retired before 62 get no cost of living update at all. These military retirees will still get a cost of living update then they get the benefits recalculated when they turn 62, to make sure that they got back what they had lost. In effect, build back the base of their pension. Look Larry, we owe so much to these men and women who fight for us. We wanted to make sure that they always have a better pension system than anybody else in government. We maintain that, and we have very modest reforms to help the Pentagon with their very big budget problems. The Pentagon has some budget problems. We stopped the bleeding, we stopped the cuts, we gave them some mild reforms and we have two years before this actual provision kicks in place to give Congress enough time to adjust it in another way if they want to. Larry Kudlow: Let me just be clear on this. So in other words, you agree that disabled military vets will not be take the 1% call for reduction. You agree with that, and that was an oversight? Paul Ryan: That's correct. Larry Kudlow: And another big event today, I’m sure you're aware of this. The Federal Reserve released its minutes and they’re having a small taper. They are taking $10 billion off an $85 billion-a-month bond purchase and I wanted to get your sense of that. The stock market is rallying big time. What do you think? Paul Ryan: Well, I thought they should have started tapering a lot time ago. You and I have similar views on sound money. I was not a fan of these later rounds of quantitative easing. I thought it was necessary in the beginning of the crisis. Subsequent rounds of QE, I think did more harm than good. In the long run, we'll know the answer to that for sure. High time they started. This is basically symbolic, because it's really not that big in the scheme of things. Larry Kudlow: Periodically as Budget Chair you've held hearings on the Fed. Let me ask you now, with the changing of the guard, does Janet Yellen have your confidence? Paul Ryan: I think we went to a more dovish Fed Chair with Janet Yellen. Ben ended up becoming a dove from my perspective – less of a sound money guy, more of a deflation fighter instead of an inflation hawk. More dovish. She’s clearly in the dove category. She’s a Keynesian. So, I don't expect much difference from her from where we are right now. Larry Kudlow: Let’s go directly to the spending. You've raised the spending caps from sequestration in 2014-2015, I think the number sums to $65 billion. What do you say to people, particularly conservatives, and you’ve heard this. Conservatives who are saying budget caps, spending caps, sequestration, which was a signature Republican achievement, is dead? Is that true? Are the caps dead? Is the spending discipline dead? Paul Ryan: No, not at all, actually. The Democrats came into these negotiations wanting to get rid of the caps all together – 100% of the caps. Well, we just got them to agree, in the next year and a half, to 70% of the caps. 70% of the sequester is still in place for the next year and a half. The 30% sequester relief we gave, $63 billion of spending, is paid for with $85 billion of permanent entitlement changes, permanent savings that results in deficit reduction, so that exceeds the Budget Control Act requirement of a one for one replacement, so we actually go farther than the law requires. More to the point, Larry, 92% of the sequester is left intact over the lifetime of the sequester with this agreement. So, what we like from a fiscal conservative standpoint, is we do give relief to the sequester now, particularly because the defense hawks in our conference would not support where this was going to go. We did not have the votes to stick to that $967 number, so we got excess savings to make us have more deficit reduction, and we prevent two government shutdowns from happening in the next year, which we think is a good thing for lots of reasons - for the country, for certainty, for economic growth. We want to focus on Obamacare and Obamacare oversight. We want to focus on tax reform. We want to focus on a pro-growth agenda. We don’t want to have two government shutdown scenarios, and we think this is that step in the right direction. Larry Kudlow: Another one, the feud with the tea party, Speaker Boehner took a few whacks at the Tea Party. I’ve had many of them on The Kudlow Report. They wanted the full sequester, it's not an unreasonable request. How is your relationship to the Tea Party? What do you have to say to the Tea Party, which is kind of up in arms now because it seems like a lot of Republicans are attacking them? Paul Ryan: Well, look, I have nothing but good things to say about the Tea Party. We wouldn't be here if it weren’t for the Tea Party. Look, when I started my budgets back in 2008, I had eight other members of Congress who were willing to co-sponsor and put their name on it. Eight. And because of the Tea Party, because of those grassroots conservatives out in America, I was able to pass it in 2011 with I think 233 votes. I was able to pass three budgets now because of these grassroots conservatives, these fiscal conservatives, which balances the budget and pays off the debt. There’s no way I could have passed these kinds of budgets if it weren't for them that’s why I credit them with this great success. Now, you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. In divided government, you have to look at the situation as it is, and not as you wish it would be, and keep moving the ball in the right direction even if it’s incrementally. I would prefer that these so-called feuds are in the family and not out in the public. Larry Kudlow: You report to the Wall Street Journal that you want to be the Ways and Means Committee Chairman in 2015. Why? What’s your agenda? Paul Ryan: Look, you know me, Larry. There’s nothing new here than what I’ve always said. This has been my career trajectory in the House. People ask me if I want to be Speaker. I don't. And this is the next logical step, but what I’m really focused on right now to be honest with you Larry, is helping Dave Camp with the Ways and Means Committee. He’s our quarterback, he’s our chairman. My dream for 2014 is that the Camp-Baucus Tax Reform Act of 2014, which reduces tax rates across the board in a pro-growth way to grow the economy, becomes law. I want to help Dave do that. Then after this election, after 2015, this is really no secret, this is not a newsworthy item, that is the natural progression of how I saw things. That’s the way I’ve always planned it. And there's nothing really new here. Larry Kudlow: Are you leaving the Presidential door open for 2016? You just had a big poll in Iowa. You had the best numbers of all the Republican candidates. A lot of people are saying, ‘you know, look how he negotiated this budget. He can cut across party lines and get things done.’ You stopped the shutdown. Some people are saying you saved the Republican Party from itself because you stopped the shutdown. So is the door open for a 2016 Presidential run, I ask you, Paul Ryan? Paul Ryan: Well, I'll answer you, Larry Kudlow, that I’m going to make my mind up on that issue later on. I’m just trying to do my job right now. The people here in Wisconsin elected me to represent them. My colleagues asked me to chair the Budget committee, so I’m doing that job the best I can. I’m not going to let future ambition or career moves cloud my judgment today, and what I decided, my wife and I decided, is let's get through this session and then I’ll make my mind up down the road. I haven't foreclosed any opportunity, I haven't made a decision one way or the other. Right now, I’m just sincerely focused on doing my job. Larry Kudlow: All right. We've known each other a long time and if I may so, happy holy Merry Christmas and New Year's and thanks for coming on. Paul Ryan: Awesome. Merry Christmas, Larry. Good to see you.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221182856/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364619,Federal Judge: NSA’s Metadata Collection Program Likely Unconstitutional,2013-12-16,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon today issued a decision, ruling that the NSA’s metadata collection program is likely unconstitutional.   Questioning the constitutionality of the collection program, Judge Leon wrote: “The Government, in its understandable zeal to protect our homeland, has crafted a counterterrorism program with respect to telephony metadata that strikes the balance based in large part on a thirty-four year old Supreme Court precedent, the relevance of which has been eclipsed by technology advances and a cell phone-centric lifestyle heretofore inconceivable.” He also stated: “The Government does not cite a single instance in which analysis of the NSA’s bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the Government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive in nature.” Leon granted “an injunction and enter[ed] an order that (1) bars the government from collection, as part of the NSA’s Bulk Telephony Metadata Program, any telephony metadata associated with their personal Verizon accounts and (2) requires the Government to destroy any such metadata in its possession that was collected through the bulk collection program.” Leon will stay his order pending an appeal. “In doing so, I hereby give the Government fair notice that should my ruling be upheld, this order will go into effect forthwith.” Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner: “Judge Leon’s decision further highlights the need to pass the USA FREEDOM Act. The slow trickle of revelations that began in June about NSA spying have exposed the most intrusive and secretive programs in American history. From the onset, I have been extremely critical of the government’s dragnet collection of Americans’ data.  I am encouraged by the district court’s ruling. It will add to the growing momentum behind the USA FREEDOM Act, which has garnered support from a large, diverse bloc of my colleagues and the business community. The Executive Branch should join Congress to institute meaningful reform.” Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security Subcommittee, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced the USA FREEDOM Act on October 29. This legislation would restore Americans’ privacy rights by reining in the dragnet collection of data by the NSA and other government agencies, increase transparency of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), provide businesses the ability to release information regarding FISA requests and create an independent constitutional advocate to argue cases before the FISC. The USA FREEDOM Act currently has 115 cosponsors in the House of Representatives and 18 in the Senate. It also has the support of tech giants AOL, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Mozilla and others.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/want-to-make-sure-youre-aware-of-this,want to make sure you're aware of this,2013-12-15,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"During this season of family gatherings and gift giving, it is sometimes easy to forget about the people in our own community who do not have a home to gather in, or the means to prepare a holiday meal. Often when we think of hunger and homelessness we imagine urban, high population centers like Madison or Milwaukee, but it is a very prevalent problem in rural communities across America and the 7th Congressional District is no exception.    According to the Wisconsin Food Security Project, 13.5% of all households in the 7th CD experienced food hardships, meaning they did not have enough money to buy the food they needed at times during the past year. Additionally, over 2,000 individuals received documented care from shelters. Most concerning, these numbers have been trending upward in Wisconsin in recent years despite a decline nationally. The increase in families suffering from hunger and homelessness requires us to no longer simply manage the problem, but to solve the problem. This shift to what has been termed the “New Approach” has produced results elsewhere and is catching on nation-wide. We see it here in our own backyard through the tireless work and dedication from organizations like the Marathon County Housing & Homelessness Coalition and the Marathon County Hunger Coalition. In addition to bringing more partners to the table through coalition building, this “New Approach” also advances a more systemic strategy with individuals and organizations – both public and private – working in a coordinated manner. Not only is this “New Approach” more efficient and a big step forward from the previous practice of serving people somewhat haphazardly through a collection of disconnected programs, the numbers also show it is working. Recent data show that the number of chronically homeless declined by 30% between 2005 and 2007 and has declined an additional 13% since. Overall, homelessness declined nation-wide by 9.2% between 2007 and 2013. This “New Approach,” also termed “housing-first,” efficiently reduces homelessness and improves the lives of no-longer-homeless individuals and families and the quality of our communities. Furthermore, it often brings net savings to taxpayers since preventing homelessness is less expensive than the cycle of emergency services that can be the daily existence of homeless individuals and families. Before communities can fully engage in this “New Approach,” however, its members need to fully understand the extent of the suffering, its root causes, and develop empathy for the individuals and families suffering from hunger and homelessness. This Wednesday, December 18, leaders from communities across the 7th CD are gathering in Wausau to learn about hunger and homelessness and its impacts on our communities, what different communities and coalitions are doing to address these problems, and to brainstorm and share ideas on how we can continue to work to solve these problems. We look forward to the summit, the various presentations, and the discussions on Wednesday. Rep. Sean Duffy co-wrote this piece with Steve Berg, Vice-President for Programs and Policy at the National Alliance to End Homelessness. It appeared in the Sunday, December 15, 2013 edition of The Wausau Daily Herald.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364581,Ryan Defends Reduction to Cost-of-Living Adjustments for Early Military Retirees,2013-12-15,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By John McCormack, The Weekly Standard The two-year budget deal crafted by Republican congressman Paul Ryan and Democratic senator Patty Murray sailed through the House of Representatives on a 332-94 vote last Thursday, just two days after it was introduced. If cutting a bipartisan deal is so easy, why couldn't Republicans and Democrats have reached an agreement before October 1 and skipped the government shutdown altogether? ""I think the pressure of divided government has come full force, and I think the specter of one or two more government shutdowns concentrated our minds to make this divided government work,"" Paul Ryan said on Saturday afternoon, speaking with THE WEEKLY STANDARD by phone from his hometown of Janesville. ""It's very clear that without this deal two things would happen: The military would have borne the full force of these cuts starting in January. And we would have at least one more government shutdown drama.” “We think that's bad,” Ryan said during a break between games at his son's basketball tournament. “We think that's not in our interest. We want 2014 to be a year where we don't keep cutting the military, and we focus on Obamacare, we focus on the conservative reforms we want to roll out, and we win the next election so we can start saving this country."" But the Ryan-Murray deal is not without its critics. In the Senate, a growing number of Republicans have objected to bill's provision to reduce the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) by one percentage point for military retirees under the age of 62. Senators Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma have all cited the issue as a dealbreaker for them. Ryan defended the provision on Saturday as a modest reform that's part of a broader plan to save the military from devastating cuts. ""We give them a slightly smaller adjustment for inflation because they're still in their working years and in most cases earning another paycheck,” Ryan said. ""Our goal here is to make sure that no other country comes close to matching the U.S. military, and the stress on the budget in the future brings that whole entire notion into question. We still have a Pentagon budget that is not where it needs to be."" Under the 2011 Budget Control Act, about $1 trillion was cut from the defense budget over 10 years--roughly $500 billion by the law's spending caps and another $500 billion through automatic sequestration cuts, which exempted personnel. The Ryan-Murray deal relieves $31.5 billion in sequestration cuts to defense over the next two years. ""From my conversation with just Chuck Hagel and General Dempsey recently, the biggest relief this gets is military readiness,"" Ryan said. ""The statistics are very, very concerning about our readiness."" The COLA reduction for military retirees, which doesn't take effect until January of 2016, would save an additional $6 billion over 10 years in the defense budget. ""The defense community asked us to look at compensation and their entitlement spending within the Pentagon. We knew we couldn't put back into the Pentagon's budget as much as we'd like to, and these reforms help them with their budget,"" said Ryan. ""The savings stays with the Department of Defense and that comes on top of the money we're giving back through the sequester."" The savings ""can go to anything,"" said Ryan. ""It can go to readiness, it can go to troops, it can go to brigades, buying equipment."" But why not grandfather benefits for current servicemembers, like Ryan does for Americans over the age of 55 in his plan to reform Medicare?  Ryan replied that grandfathering wouldn't achieve the savings the military needs, and he emphasized the pension reform only affects servicemembers who have served the 20 years necessary to qualify for a pension (just 20 percent of all veterans) and retired before the age of 62.  The bill has a ""catchup provision"" so that at age 62 the retiree's pension goes up to where it would have been without the COLA reduction. ""I don't think people know there's a catchup provision,"" said Ryan. ""Once they hit the age of 62, this provision recalculates their benefits so they get the full adjustment for inflation and their pension pay goes up as if nothing had happened. And from then on they have full inflation protection.""  According to House Budget Committee staff, a man who enlisted at age 18 and retired at 38 as a Sergeant First Class in the Army would see approximately a 6 percent overall reduction in lifetime retirement pay because of the COLA reduction--that is, he would receive about $1.626 million in lifetime retirement pay instead of $1.734 million. Earning $108,000 less in retirement pay over a lifetime certainly isn't chump change, but Ryan points out that the budget deal achieves the same amount of savings over ten years from federal civilian employees' pensions ($6 billion) by requiring new employees to make higher contributions. ""This is still far more generous than civilian retirees who receive absolutely no COLA before the age of 62,"" Ryan said. ""We still kept the military retiree in a far better position than the civilian because we think that's the way it ought to be."" Ryan also noted that the deal gives Congress time to come up with a better way to achieve the same savings. ""We delayed this provision so that it doesn't take effect until the year 2016, which gives Congress and the military community time to address the broader compensation issue, including this provision, if people believe there's a better way to solve this problem,"" he said.  The problem is that there's no way to painlessly cut $1 trillion (or close to it) from the military's budget. Defense secretary Chuck Hagel said in a November speech that because of budget cuts only 2 of the Army's 43 brigade active-duty combat teams are ready for combat, and Marine Corps units that are not going to Afghanistan are getting 30 percent less funding. At one point this summer, only 8 warplanes were ready to respond to an emergency away from front-lines operations. Simply structuring cuts more intelligently doesn't make it much better. Republican senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma introduced a proposal in 2009 to cut $1 trillion from defense as part of a plan to cut $9 trillion from the federal budget. Among other defense cuts, Coburn's plan called for closing down elementary schools on military bases, making veterans pay more for their health care, canceling the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, eliminating 1 of the nation's 11 aircraft carriers, and shrinking the Army by 65,000 soldiers. Anyone who thinks it's possible to save $1 trillion from defense by simply cutting ""waste, fraud, and abuse"" is mistaken. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ryan-defends-reduction-cost-living-adjustments-early-military-retirees_770921.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=7aed87ac-5909-4183-b818-d494f9b18458,Senator Ron Johnson Will Support The Ryan/Murray Budget Deal,2013-12-15,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – On Sunday, Senator Ron Johnson released the following statement on the Ryan/Murray budget deal. “Funding the federal government through successive continuing resolutions is a bad idea that only results in greater inefficiencies, waste and economic uncertainty. It is a practice that should end. The budget deal struck by Paul Ryan and Patty Murray is no “grand bargain,” but I credit Paul with understanding that a grand bargain is not possible at this point in time.  “This is a limited agreement that prevents government shutdowns through fiscal year 2015 that would hurt economic growth and new job creation. It also provides executive agencies and congressional committees the opportunity to prioritize spending and eliminate duplicative programs – which is long overdue.  “Although I disagree with a number of provisions in the bill, on balance the good outweighs the bad. As long as the Senate does nothing to worsen the bill, I intend to support it.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364321,House Passes the Bipartisan Budget Act,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, the House of Representatives passed the Bipartisan Budget Act. Written by House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan and Senate Budget Committee chairman Patty Murray, the bill will provide $63 billion in temporary sequester relief and $85 billion in mandatory savings. It will eliminate waste, cut corporate welfare, and make needed reforms to autopilot spending. On net, the bill will reduce the deficit by $23 billion over the next ten years. The Senate will take it up next week. Upon passage of the legislation, Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin made the following statement: “I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for supporting this bill. It reduces the deficit—without raising taxes. And it does so by cutting spending in a smarter way. It doesn’t go as far as I’d like, but it’s a firm step in the right direction. “This agreement will stop Washington’s lurch from crisis to crisis. It will bring stability to the budget process and show both parties can work together. “I want to thank Senator Murray for her hard work on this agreement. And I’m confident her colleagues in the Senate will pass this bill.” Click here to learn more about the Bipartisan Budget Act.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364400,Ryan responds to questions and concerns about the Bipartisan Budget Act,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Ryan responds to questions and concerns about the Bipartisan Budget Act f t # e December 12, 2013 f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364401,Ryan: “This is a modest step in the right direction.”,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Ryan: “This is a modest step in the right direction.” f t # e December 12, 2013 MSNBC’s Morning Joe   f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364418,Paul Ryan: “You can’t shoot for the moon every time.”,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Paul Ryan: “You can’t shoot for the moon every time.” f t # e December 12, 2013 CNBC’s Squawk Box Click to play video ""We decided to focus on where is the common ground when negotiating the budget deal,"" said House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, (R-WI), discussing how he and Sen. Patty Murrary, (D-Wa), were able to reach a deal on the budget. ""This is a small but modest step in the right direction."" http://www.cnbc.com/id/101267406   f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364509,Rep. Paul Ryan's budget deal: modest but smart,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board Reuters House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) shake hands after a news conference to introduce The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 on Tuesday. The two-year federal budget deal that passed the House Thursday is notable because it got done. It is not notable because of what got done. It has been years since a divided Congress forged a budget agreement, and this one was negotiated amiably. Style points to U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin Republican, and Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat. But are we really supposed to cheer when the best the political leadership can do is promise that the government probably won't shut down again? (Not to worry, fans of brinkmanship; there's always the debt ceiling confrontation likely coming in March). This deal leaves untouched most of the important issues. Entitlements. Nothing done. The nation's byzantine tax code. Still byzantine. We know why. There just isn't much common ground in Washington, D.C., and Ryan and Murray are crowded onto a tiny patch of land. Conservative groups heckled the agreement and tried to scuttle it. Even before it was announced, Heritage Action, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation, and the Koch brothers-funded Americans for Prosperity opposed it. The libertarian Cato Institute called it a ""huge Republican cave-in."" Some liberals complained, too, arguing that an extension of unemployment benefits should have been part of the deal. But it's the conservatives who were most belligerent. Republican pollster Glen Bolger nailed it when he said that Republicans are at a watershed moment: ""We are either a party that is serious about governing when control of Washington is split, or we are an unserious party that doesn't care about realistic incremental gains, only caring about unrealistically getting the whole ball of wax, which will never happen as long as there is a Democratic president and a Democratic majority leader,"" Bolger told The Washington Post. The GOP has too many members who would rather preach than govern. Ryan wants to govern. He deserves credit for standing up to the reactionaries in his party (so does House Speaker John Boehner). ""Look, as a conservative, I deal with the situation as it exists. I passed three budgets in a row that reflect my priorities and my principles,"" and none of the budgets passed the Senate, Ryan said. ""We're in divided government...So I'm not going to go a mile in the direction I want to go to, but I will take a few steps in the right direction."" The $85 billion agreement is the first time in years that the two parties have negotiated anything other than a stopgap measure. The proposal cuts the mindless ""sequester"" in half and cuts spending and deficits by $20 billion over the next 10 years. That's not a lot, but it's something. Yes, the additional revenue comes from fees (including on airline tickets) and gimmicks, but we'll take it for now. The nation needs more from its elected officials. It needs a real discussion about Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and the long-term deficit, which over time, must be brought under control. Austerity, no. Sanity, yes. But as Ryan said, for now it's about taking a few steps in the right direction. http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/rep-paul-ryans-budget-deal-modest-but-smart-b99162103z1-235605091.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-applauds-budget-agreement-thanks-chairmen,"Duffy Applauds Budget Agreement, Thanks Chairmen",2013-12-11,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"""Now that we've shown the American people that we can have these conversations in Washington, we need to have more of them, and I believe we will."" Washington D.C. - U.S. Congressman, and Budget Committee Member, Sean Duffy (WI-07) offered praise and thanks to the Chairmen of the House and Senate Budget Committees for their efforts to  break through Washington gridlock and bring forth a Budget agreement that will give much needed certainty to Wisconsin job creators, businesses and families:",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364157,A Firm Step Forward,2013-12-11,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By Paul Ryan Yesterday, Senator Patty Murray and I introduced the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013. It’s the first budget agreement of its kind since 1986, and I’m proud to support it. This bill will reduce the deficit by $23 billion. It won’t raise taxes. And it will cut spending in a smarter way. It doesn’t go as far as I’d like. But it’s a firm step in the right direction. First, let’s remember how we got here: In 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act. The law tasked a twelve-member “supercommittee” with cutting at least $1.2 trillion from the federal deficit. And to spur them to action, the law essentially made a threat: If the committee couldn’t come to an agreement, the law would order arbitrary, across-the-board cuts — known as the sequester — to get those savings. It would make half of the cuts in defense programs and the other half in domestic programs. In other words, the alternative to an agreement would be so painful that the supercommittee would just have to reach one. Unfortunately, the committee couldn’t come to an agreement. And this year, the sequester took effect. Now, House Republicans wanted to keep these savings. In fact, we wanted to save more. But we didn’t think our troops should bear the brunt of these cuts. The Defense Department warned it would have to shrink our armed forces and make serious cuts to training, readiness, and modernization. Members of both parties quickly realized there was a better way to cut spending. When Senator Murray and I started these negotiations, we agreed on some ground rules. We knew if we tried to force each other to violate one of our core principles, we’d never get anywhere. I wasn’t going to raise taxes. She wasn’t going to change major entitlements. Instead, we looked for common ground. There was some overlap between the budget she proposed in the Senate and the budget I proposed in the House. We knew we wouldn’t resolve all our differences. So we found some commonsense ideas both parties could support. Here’s what we came up with: The Bipartisan Budget Act will provide $63 billion in sequester relief — split evenly between defense programs and other domestic priorities — in exchange for $85 billion in savings elsewhere in the budget. In other words, this bill will reduce the deficit by an additional $23 billion, without raising taxes. And most important, it will cut spending in a smarter way. How do we cut spending? First, we eliminate waste. We stop paying Medicaid bills that dead-beat dads should cover. That alone is a $1.4 billion cut. We stop sending unemployment checks to criminals. And we stop sending government checks to dead people. There’s no reason to tolerate fraud. Second, we cut corporate welfare. For instance, we repeal a government research program for private energy companies. A profitable industry shouldn’t rely on taxpayers to pay for its research. Third, we make real reforms to the real problem: autopilot spending. The federal government makes trillions of dollars in empty promises to retirees. And these empty promises don’t only drive the national debt; they threaten these retirees’ security. We don’t solve all these problems, but we make a good start: We make sensible reforms to federal-employee and military-retirement programs. We ask new federal employees to contribute a little bit more to their retirement, so taxpayers don’t have to pick up the full tab. And for younger military retirees, we trim their cost-of-living adjustments just a bit. It’s a modest reform for working-age military retirees, many of whom have second careers after leaving the armed forces. Finally, we don’t think taxpayers should have to bail out private companies’ pension benefits. So we ask these companies to cover more of the cost of guaranteeing their benefits. That will protect taxpayers and save $7.9 billion. These are real cuts that will become law immediately. If we pass this bill, we’ll eliminate waste — right now. We’ll cut corporate welfare — right now. And new government employees will start paying a fairer share. These savings will build up over time. But they will be even greater than what we’d save by doing nothing. That’s why this is a good deal. We haven’t squandered the gains from the Budget Control Act. We build on them. Our agreement preserves 92 percent of the sequester cuts — even though Democrats wanted none of them. We don’t get rid of this fiscal discipline — we get more and do so in a smarter way. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that this bill doesn’t solve the problem. I’ve passed three budgets in the House, all three of which would have fully paid off our debt without raising taxes. This bill doesn’t go nearly far enough. But in divided government, you don’t get everything you want. You have to work with the other side. And when you get the chance to take a step forward — however small — you take it. Here’s what we’ve accomplished: We’ve cut spending in a smarter way. And we’ve made it clear: Tax hikes aren’t an option. We’ve said budget talks should be about how Washington can live within its means, not how families should pay more. For conservatives, this agreement shows we can make Washington work — and on our own terms. It’s not perfect. But it’s a start. And I ask all my colleagues in the House to support it. — Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) is chairman of the House Budget Committee. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/366050/firm-step-forward-paul-ryan",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364444,Some Thoughts on the Budget Deal,2013-12-11,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By Yuval Levin, National Review The actual text of the Ryan-Murray budget deal came out late last night, so it’s only now possible to really consider the particulars and see how it looks. It seems to me that the details look a fair bit better than the general outline that had been reported in the press over the past week or so, particularly on the question of whether the entitlement cuts that would replace some discretionary sequester cuts could be expected to actually materialize.  As it stands, this strikes me as more or less a very small-scale version of the sort of thing that Republicans hoped might be made possible by the sequester but Democrats insisted could not be: a trade of discretionary savings for mandatory savings without real tax increases. The latter point depends on your view of user fees—I generally think funding government services through user fees is much better than doing so through general revenue, so I take a move toward (slightly) greater reliance on such funding in a few programs to be a reduction in the burden on taxpayers in general without an increase in the size of government. That’s a good thing, but it’s certainly not unreasonable to describe such user fees as targeted taxes either. What the Democrats didn’t get is what they want and have insisted they would not do without: income tax increases.  This deal would amount to the Democrats accepting the implications of their misjudgment in abiding the Budget Control Act in 2011: accepting discretionary spending levels below BCA levels (and below even the original Ryan budget levels) and cementing the precedent of trading discretionary for entitlement cuts and of making budget deals without higher tax rates. And by avoiding another government shutdown fight, it robs the Democrats of one of the few escape routes they might have from the political nightmare that Obamacare’s rollout has been and will continue to be for them. It’s not exactly a deal to be celebrated, because it’s a very tiny step and does nothing to address the horrendous fiscal problems of our entitlement system. But the Democrats have made it abundantly clear that those won’t get addressed while they control the Senate and the White House, and under the circumstances this strikes me as a good deal worth voting for.  What follow are a few reflections on the contours of the deal, on its benefits, and on its risks and costs.  Most simply stated, the agreement would raise the discretionary spending levels set by the sequester by about $45 billion in 2014 and by about $20 billion in 2015, in each case divided evenly between defense and non-defense discretionary increases. That basically amounts to half of the sequester cuts that were supposed to take spending below the BCA spending caps in 2014 and a quarter of those that were supposed to do so in 2015. This sequester relief (i.e. increased spending) would then be entirely offset, and about $22 billion in additional deficit reduction would be achieved over 10 years, by (very) modest entitlement reforms that take effect over a longer period, by increasing user fees on a few government services paid for directly by people who use them, and by essentially extending the mandatory-spending portion of the sequester an additional two years.  The entitlement savings would come almost entirely from non-health entitlements—there are some modest Medicaid savings in the deal but no major reform, and nothing on Medicare or Obamacare. There is also nothing on Social Security. Instead, the cuts come from things like increasing the contributions federal employees have to make to their pension fund, changing rules to reduce fraud in the unemployment insurance system, repealing some relatively small corporate giveaways, and raising the premiums paid by companies with federally guaranteed pensions. Such small potatoes can add up to a deal here because the change to the sequester is also quite small.  These sorts of modest “other entitlement” reforms have been around as part of assorted Republican and Democratic sequester-replacement proposals for several years. They have generally been included in those proposals along with other, much larger ideas—structural reforms of the major entitlements for Republicans and tax increases for Democrats. What Murray and Ryan have done here is take all the little ideas that have long been basically agreed on by both parties and put them together without the bigger ones that divide the parties.       Indeed, what stands out most as a general matter about this proposed agreement is how very small it is—for good and bad. It involves about $65 billion over the next two years (a bit less than nine-tenths of one percent of projected federal spending over that period). It doesn’t much change the terms reached in the original Budget Control Act and sequester deal, and essentially cements the Democrats’ loss and miscalculation in that deal. The Democrats’ hope, given that they control both the White House and the Senate, was to replace the sequester with some combination of tax increases and more palatable spending cuts. The Ryan-Murray deal would say instead that about 30 percent of the sequester over the next two years will be replaced with modest (and much more sensible) longer-term entitlement savings and other small reforms, and that’s it. 70 percent of the sequester remains in place in those two years, and after those two years the entire sequester remains in place. A comparison of discretionary spending in the absence of the sequester, with the sequester, and under the proposed Ryan-Murray deal, would look like this: That the Democrats would accept a deal like this is a pretty striking indication of how the Republican House has changed the conversation on the spending front since 2010. Think of it this way: In their first budget after re-taking the majority—the FY 2012 Ryan budget, passed in 2011—the House Republicans wanted discretionary spending to be $1.039 trillion in 2014 and $1.047 trillion in 2015. These budgets were of course described by the Democrats and the political press (but I repeat myself) as some reversion to humanity’s barbaric past. Yet this proposed deal with the Democrats would put discretionary spending at $1.012 trillion in 2014 and $1.014 trillion in 2015—in both cases below that first House Republican budget.  The risk and worry for conservatives in a deal like this is that it replaces some near-term discretionary cuts with entitlement cuts that mostly happen in the out-years. That’s the argument some of the critics of this proposal have made as its general outlines have been reported in the last few days. But the details of the deal should at least in large part put those concerns to rest. The basic difference between discretionary and mandatory spending, after all, is that while discretionary spending has to be legislated anew each year, mandatory spending essentially functions by rule and remains in place until that rule is changed. This is part of the problem with our larger entitlements, of course: They run on autopilot, and building the political will to change course has proven extremely difficult. But in this case, that works in favor of the possibility that these cuts will survive. Because they touch on relatively low-salience mandatory programs, these changes would have to be actively undone to be reversed, and it’s not easy to see the circumstances under which, say, the amount paid by federal workers into their pensions would become a high enough priority for the Democrats that they would fight to lower it in a future budget deal. Mandatory spending out-year cuts have a much better record of actually materializing and remaining in place than discretionary spending out-year cuts. That’s no guarantee that these cuts would remain in place, of course, and there could never be any such guarantee. But if you look at them individually, it certainly looks pretty likely that they will, and therefore that the downward effect on overall federal spending will have a good chance of persisting through and beyond the budget window and so that over the coming decade, though not in this next year, this deal looks reasonably likely to result in slightly lower rather than higher overall federal spending than we were on a course to achieve without it.  And to be sure, that course was not likely to be sustained in any case. The Republicans’ dirty little secret in this process has always been that their own appropriators hate the sequester almost as much as the Democrats do. In the absence of a deal like this, it’s not all that likely that the sequester could have held for another year or two, and from the point of view of conservatives one of the key benefits of this kind of deal, if it does get enacted, would be to sustain the lower spending levels over the budget window despite the lack of majority support for the sequester in Congress. Of course, that lack of support for lower spending levels among some Republicans is a source of great (and justified) irritation and anger for conservatives, in and out of Congress. The Republican appropriator class is a problem to be solved, without a doubt. But the idea that forcing that problem into the open at this point by forcing another budget showdown would help the conservative cause just doesn’t make much sense to me—not only from the point of view of electoral politics but also from the point of view of conservative goals.      The goal of conservatives in national politics can’t just be to have less of the same: the liberal welfare state at a slightly lower cost. That is basically what a sequester approach to the budget amounts to, after all—no reform of anything, just a small bit of across the board spending pressure. The goal, rather, should be to transform American government along conservative lines, into a government that works to sustain and expand the space between the individual and the state, to strengthen the market economy and make its benefits accessible to more Americans, to help the poor not with an empty promise of material equality but with a fervent commitment to upward mobility, to strengthen the middle class by lifting needless burdens off the shoulders of parents and workers, and to put an end to the cronyism and corporatism that have come increasingly to characterize the relationship between the private and public sectors. Such a government would certainly cost less, would have little room for the way of thinking embodied by Republican appropriators (and all the more so by congressional Democrats of course), and could help avert the fiscal catastrophe we face if our major entitlement programs are not reformed, but it would do far more than that.   Republicans have used their House majority (very much including the budgets they have passed) to set out some elements of such an agenda, but they know they cannot make much progress while Democrats control the Senate and the White House. Their goals while that remains the case should be to make what modest gains they can, to develop that agenda further (and much work remains to be done on that front), and to improve their chances of winning future elections.  A government shutdown fight, which would easily play into the Democrats’ hands and allow them to distract the public from the ongoing failures of Obamacare (among their other troubles), would surely be a setback for this cause. And we have after all seen very recently that congressional Republicans are not in good shape to make meaningful gains in such a fight at this point. By now even the people who argued most fervently for insisting on defunding or repealing Obamacare in the last budget battle have acknowledged they didn’t really believe that could happen in such a fight. Simply doing it over won’t change the players or the circumstances, however much we might wish we could change both, and won’t advance the conservative cause. A deal that keeps in place 92 percent of the sequester, replaces the rest (and adds more savings) with fairly durable mandatory savings and other small reforms, and avoids the tax increases the Democrats want would, I think, advance that cause a little.  There’s not much to celebrate here, and there won’t be until the Democrats no longer control the Senate and the White House, but there’s not much to bemoan either, and this deal would make it more likely that the Democrats will lose that control.  http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/366034/some-thoughts-budget-deal-yuval-Levin",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364517,Paul Ryan’s ride,2013-12-11,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By A.B. Stoddard, The Hill Leaders aren’t necessarily those we find in the highest office, or those who campaign for it, or those we see on television the most. True leaders make unpopular choices. They have the guts to take the heat for tough decisions but also to call out those who take easy cheap shots from the sidelines. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Budget Committee, 2012 vice presidential nominee, author of “The Roadmap” for fiscal solvency, chief doer among talkers, got slapped around this week for doing something. The bipartisan budget he helped draft, which would fund the government for two years, remove the threat of shutdowns and reduce the deficit without any new taxes, made him the latest punching bag Wednesday among Tea Party conservatives who deemed the deal a sellout. Ryan didn’t touch entitlement reforms or roll back the debt he has sworn in the past would soon create a permanent crisis, and the budget deal doesn’t resemble his “Roadmap” or previous budgets he’s drafted and the House has passed that would balance the budget in 10 years. But Ryan led, governed, compromised, kept the government running and took away the threat of shutdown, so the business community could have certainty, and the U.S. government could take a step back from becoming a laughing stock as well as a liability to the global economy.  Clearly he did something wrong. Heritage Action, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks and the Club for Growth all oppose the deal, along with Republicans in the running for president. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) was the first out blasting the deal. Ryan responded Tuesday night on Greta Van Susteren’s show “On The Record” on Fox News Channel by calling Rubio a friend. “I don’t know that he’s seen the contents of it. I do expect some people may vote against it for their various political reasons,” he said. It wasn’t as if Ryan was surprised. When he voted a year ago for the “fiscal-cliff” deal to extend most of the Bush tax cuts, conservatives in the House opposed it in droves and criticized both Ryan and Speaker John Boehner for supporting it. When asked about criticism of Ryan’s new deal on Wednesday, Boehner (R-Ohio) accused critics from outside groups of “using our members and the American people for their own goals.” Boehner’s unprecedented outburst shows, after a shutdown the party never wanted, how much further GOP leaders are willing to push back against insurgent conservatives than they ever have been before. “We’ve got to find a way to make divided government work,” said Ryan Wednesday, throwing a lit match at the smoldering Republican divide. With that, he might have constrained his political future — not only as a presidential prospect but even as a potential Speaker of the House, a position numerous Republican members hope he would aspire to in years to come. “In divided government, you don’t always get what you want,” Ryan said. “That said, we can still make progress to our goals.” As the chorus of complaints grows louder, Ryan believes he is making quiet progress toward conservative goals and that the deal he cut doesn’t require either side to “violate a core principle.” In 16 years in the House, the young Ryan has never stopped working toward fiscal solvency, even during years in the minority. In early 2010, when it became clear the GOP could take back the House that fall, Ryan told me: “I figure, try and be a Paul Revere on the fiscal situation. I might get knocked off my horse, but at least I’ll sleep well.” Unlike a lot of would-be leaders in the GOP, Ryan should be getting some good sleep.  Stoddard is an associate editor of The Hill. http://thehill.com/opinion/ab-stoddard/192857-paul-ryans-ride",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364090,Inside the proposed bipartisan budget deal: Rep. Paul Ryan - It 'moves the ball in the right direction',2013-12-10,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"This is a rush transcript from Fox News' ""On the Record,"" December 10, 2013. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: This is a FOX News alert. A bipartisan budget deal on Capitol Hill. House Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan and Senate Budget Committee Chair Senator Patty Murray hammering out the agreement. Congressman Paul Ryan joins us. Nice to see you, sir. REP. PAUL RYAN, HOUSE BUDGET COMMITTEE CHAIR: Hey. Good to be back with you, Greta. VAN SUSTEREN: You must be happy tonight. You hammered out this deal with Senator Murray? RYAN: I am. I am. It's a deal that moves the ball in the right direction. It cuts the deficit without raising taxes by cutting spending in smarter ways than the across-the-board approach. All of our members were worried about all the defense cuts. We are stopping the military from getting cutting further and we are cutting spending in smarter ways on auto pilot programs that have been untouched for years by Congress. And we're doing it in a way to make sure that there is no tax increases and that we actually lower the deficit versus doing nothing. So if you take a look at -- (CROSSTALK) RYAN: Do you want me to walk it through it a little bit I'm happy to do that. If you take a look at this chart, this shows you what we call discretionary spending, spending on government agency budgets. The blue line on the top here shows you the agreement we had a year ago under the Budget Control Act. The sequester is the red line. That ended up cutting spending. What this green area does is it reflects what we are doing, which is by preventing the military from getting cut any further, we're putting a little bit of money back in the sequester here and we're paying for it by cutting spending in other areas of government. For instance, we're asking public employees to pay a little bit more for their pensions. Our argument is that hard-working taxpayers pay for their pensions in the first place and their benefits are on average better than the taxpayers who pay for them in the first place. We have got a number of reforms that are permanent, that actually save more money and pay for some relief of ""The Sequester."" We also see that this puts us in the right direction because, the numbers down here, a year ago when I was passing a budget in the House, we were hoping for a trillion, $19 billion in total discretionary spending. We won't hit that spending level until the year 2017 with this agreement. So we are well ahead of schedule and we are getting more deficit reduction in spending cuts in areas that we have never been able to get before. That's why I think this is a good agreement and it makes divided government work and prevents government shutdowns, which we think is a good idea as well. VAN SUSTEREN: I love any deal bipartisan in this city is a really good sign. I like the fact that it's two years so there is some level of certainty for the business community. Because that's what's been so painful the continuing resolutions no one know what was going to happen so they couldn't make business decisions. Other than asking the federal workers to pay more for pensions, where else? RYAN: We are opening up a little bit of the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling, 172 million barrels of oil, 302 billion cubic feet of natural gas in an area that had been closed off now is going to be open up. We are saying that deadbeat dads who don't pay for their kids' Medicaid payments need to pay for them. Making sure we don't send prisoners checks from the IRS in prison that they shouldn't be getting. VAN SUSTEREN: Hallelujah. RYAN: We are making sure that people can't rip off dead people's identities so they don't keep getting checks to go to somebody else. There is a lot of fraud, waste. We also go after corporate welfare. Research and development program for energy companies that are subsidizing with public taxpayer dollars -- I mean, public spending for private taxpayer dollars. The point I'm trying to say is shouldn't be development costs. That's a program we get rid of. A lot of things like that. VAN SUSTEREN: If Senator Pattie Murray was sitting right here what would see say she was happiest about? PAUL: Stop government shutdowns and have the Congress actually appropriate money and don't do continuing resolutions anymore. Some relief from the sequester. VAN SUSTEREN: You like that too though. PAUL: She wanted relief from the sequester. VAN SUSTEREN: You wanted relief from the sequester. RYAN: So long as we paid for it and we paid for it with more deficit reduction. I didn't want to net out to zero. I wanted -- whatever we did, I wanted to make sure it was a step in the right direction towards fiscal conservatism towards deficit reduction. She wanted relief from the sequester. That's where we were able to find common ground. The way we decided to do these negotiations was I had core principles that I was not going to compromise. I'm not going to raise taxes and I'm going to lower the deficit. She had some core principles she wasn't going to compromise. VAN SUSTEREN: Like? RYAN: She wanted relief from the sequester. She wanted 50 percent go to domestic spending and 50 percent to go back to defense spending. VAN SUSTEREN: Did she get that? RYAN: She did get that and so what we did is found where is common ground. We looked at our budget passed in the house. Her budget she passed for the first time in three years in the Senate and the president's budgets. We looked at those areas of common ground, common understanding. We negotiated that and that's what this result is. The way I look at this is you don't have to require another person to violate a core principle to get things done. You have common ground. This isn't the greatest agreement of all time. We have a long ways to go to get this deficit under control. This is a step in the right direction. VAN SUSTEREN: This has obviously nothing to do with tax reform, right? RYAN: It doesn't deal with taxes. VAN SUSTEREN: It only deals with the whole budget. All right, one of the things that the Democrats want was to extend unemployment benefits. RYAN: We didn't do that so there are a number of things that they asked for we wouldn't agree to. That's one of them. VAN SUSTEREN: Did you ask for anything that they didn't agree to? RYAN: Yes, I wanted to means test Medicare benefits. I wanted to have higher income seniors to pay more of their premiums for Medicare. They would not agree to that. VAN SUSTEREN: Have you spoken to Speaker Boehner? Has he been part of this? RYAN: He has been part of this. Our leadership team, I have spoken to dozens of colleagues in the House, talking them, getting their ideas, getting input, speaking with a lot of members in the Senate. Pattie Murray has done the same thing as well. I'm trying to get input from our colleagues. We haven't had a bipartisan budget agreement where both parties since 1986. So putting something like this together is not easy to do. It allows for give and take. As far as I'm concerned, I think this is a step in the right direction. It advances our principles of fiscal conservatism. More importantly it stops the government from shutting down in January and stops the government from possibly shutting down in October. And we think government shutdowns are not in our interest. I think some people would like to seat political distraction of a government shutdown. We would like to focus on doing oversight of the executive branch, oversight on Obamacare and oversight on the IRS and not focus on government shutdowns. VAN SUSTEREN: Does this have any impact at all, directly or indirectly, on the fact that we going to likely hit the debt ceiling in the spring. RYAN: This does not deal with that issue. Just like it doesn't touch taxes or tax reform. By limiting it in scope to spending in deficits, we're able to -- it's kind of an agreement. VAN SUSTEREN: All right, in terms of getting it passed in the House, you are going -- I suspect you are going to need some Democrats. RYAN: It's a bipartisan agreement. So we anticipate that as well. VAN SUSTEREN: You are going to lose Republicans in the House. RYAN: I anticipate that some people will not vote for it for various reasons. But, as far as a conservative Republican principle is concerned, we are lowering the deficit without raising taxes by cutting spending in smarter ways we have permanent spending cuts to pay for some temporary sequester relief. We are not turning the sequester off. We are giving short-term relief for the sequester and keeping it. I think as far as conservatism is concerned we are advancing the ball. The problem is we didn't get everything we want I didn't pass my budget. My balances the budget in 10 years and pays off the debt. I know with this divided government I can't get that so I want to get this. VAN SUSTEREN: All right, so you're going to lose some Republicans in the House, you get to pick up some Democrats. That's why I asked about the issue about extending the unemployment because that would have been a way to pick them up. RYAN: It is but it's something that we weren't prepared to do. Democrats weren't interested in paying for it. That cost $20 billion to $25 billion. We also think that there is a big economic case to make with the fact that long-term unemployment is propped up. People are more induced to staying long term unemployed. That's what a lot of studies are showing by extending emergency unemployment insurance from 2008. VAN SUSTEREN: Your press conference ended, I think, about 6:20, or 6:25. At 6:33, Senator Marco Rubio, Republican in the Senate had already issued his press release to everybody in the media saying he was opposed? RYAN: Well, I haven't talked to Marco about it. I don't know that he has seen the contents of it. I do expect some people may vote against it for various political reasons. He has his reasons. In the minority you don't have to pass things. That's a luxury or not. That people have in the Senate. Marco is a very good friend of mine. I'm a big fan of his. I wish he would support it. But, if he doesn't, that's fine. For me, I'm cutting the deficit without raising taxes and I'm getting permanent spending cuts from an area of spending that we haven't been able to touch for years. I think that's a good step in the right direction. VAN SUSTEREN: What's Senator Murray's biggest problem? RYAN: They don't like federal employees, the idea that we were going to ask federal employees to pay more for their pensions. VAN SUSTEREN: Is Congressman Van Hollen -- he has a lot of federal employees. He is a big mover and shaker in the House. He has had a lot of federal employees. RYAN: He had a hand in how we did this. I was willing to negotiate on how we treated federal employees. Not if we made them pay more for their pensions. He had a very substantial involvement in how this policy works. What we basically want to do is make sure that federal employees had their benefits more in line with the hard-working taxpayers that pay for them. This is something we dealt with in Wisconsin. States are dealing with this all over the country. We really think it's time we deal with this at the federal level. I didn't get every policy I wanted on this. We got a substantial down payment on this. Senator -- and Congressman Van Hollen was a part of that. VAN SUSTEREN: I actually think that the certainty is such an important element of this. No one gets what he or she wants. The uncertainty is so important for economy, any time we get give it a shot. You know, that that helps. RYAN: I think the idea of a government shutdown in January and then the idea of another government shutdown in October, and getting rid of that is good. VAN SUSTEREN: To jump all over. RYAN: I think there are a lot of people who would like the distraction of a government shutdown for one reason or the other. The administration is not really high on the Obamacare focus that is occurring in this country. VAN SUSTEREN: Did they like the shutdown? RYAN: Completely unraveling. VAN SUSTEREN: Do you think they like the shutdown? RYAN: I don't know. I wouldn't say that they like shutdowns, but I think they like to get off ObamaCare and by not turning the government down, we are not get off ObamaCare. Keep speaking truth to power. We are going to keep doing shining the light on the problems of the law. And that to us, gives us a good position. The last point I would make is this retains the power of the purse in Congress, the legislative branch. We are supposed to set spending. We are supposed to prioritize funding. We were supposed to exercise the power of the purse. For the last three years we have been doing these things continuing resolutions where we delegate that power to the executive branch. I want Congress to reclaim that power from the administration doing something like this, guarantees that we do that. VAN SUSTEREN: Vote likely on Thursday? RYAN: Yes. VAN SUSTEREN: All right, Congressman, thank you. And congratulations to both you and Senator Murray. Good luck. RYAN: Appreciate it.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364100,Murray and Ryan Introduce Bipartisan Budget-Conference Agreement,2013-12-10,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Two-year budget agreement would avoid government shutdown in January, provide certainty to businesses and families, and return budget process to regular orderBipartisan agreement would provide sequester relief for defense and domestic priorities—fully offset by concrete savings and reforms—and further reduce the deficitShort-term agreement breaks through partisan gridlock and can serve as foundation for continued bipartisan work WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, Senate Budget Committee chairman Patty Murray (D-WA) and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) announced that they have reached a two-year budget agreement in advance of the budget conference’s December 13th deadline. “I’m proud of this agreement,” said Chairman Ryan. “It reduces the deficit—without raising taxes. And it cuts spending in a smarter way. It’s a firm step in the right direction, and I ask all my colleagues in the House to support it.”   “This agreement breaks through the recent dysfunction to prevent another government shutdown and roll back sequestration’s cuts to defense and domestic investments in a balanced way,” said Chairman Murray. “It’s a good step in the right direction that can hopefully rebuild some trust and serve as a foundation for continued bipartisan work.” The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 would set overall discretionary spending for the current fiscal year at $1.012 trillion—about halfway between the Senate budget level of $1.058 trillion and the House budget level of $967 billion. The agreement would provide $63 billion in sequester relief over two years, split evenly between defense and non-defense programs. In fiscal year 2014, defense discretionary spending would be set at $520.5 billion, and non-defense discretionary spending would be set at $491.8 billion. The sequester relief is fully offset by savings elsewhere in the budget. The agreement includes dozens of specific deficit-reduction provisions, with mandatory savings and non-tax revenue totaling approximately $85 billion. The agreement would reduce the deficit by between $20 and $23 billion. The House of Representatives is expected to take up the Bipartisan Budget Act first, followed by the Senate. If this bill is signed into law, the appropriations committees will then be able to work on spending bills at an agreed-upon level in advance of the January 15th deadline.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364455,Good Deal,2013-12-10,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By William Kristol, The Weekly Standard The budget deal announced today is a good deal for conservatives and Republicans. From the point of view of policy, the deal is a modest achievement—which is all that can be expected, given the unfortunate fact that Barack Obama is president and Democrats control the Senate. The trade-off in the deal of minor mandatory cuts for relatively small domestic discretionary increases is basically a wash. That leaves the defense increase, which, while insufficient, is an important step in the right direction. That alone would make the deal worthwhile. But the restoration of the normal appropriations process will also have a good effect, allowing Republicans to argue for reforms and articulate priorities in several domestic policy areas, rather than being the party of a mindless sequester that does little to cut spending, nothing to advance conservative ideas, and discourages efforts at reform. From the point of view of politics, the budget deal is a significant achievement. It averts a meltdown scenario next month, in which it would have become clear that House Republicans don't in fact have the votes in their own conference to insist on the budget caps and sequester. So the real alternative to the deal isn't a more fiscally conservative outcome achieved by Republican unity; it's GOP political disarray and policy defeat. The deal saves Republicans from this fate, while allowing for a focus throughout the next year and in the 2014 election season on Obamacare and other Obama administration failures, rather than on intra-GOP wars and possible government shutdowns. So the deal will be a small but significant step toward strengthening our national defense, and should help produce a Republican and conservative electoral victory in November. Critics can say that such a result is Mickey Mouse. I could retort that the critics are Goofy. But I won't. Instead, I'll just say that if this deal is Mickey Mouse, it's time to join the Mickey Mouse Fan Club. After all, it's made for you and me. http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/good-deal_770730.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221183350/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363872,"Tech giants' demand for NSA reform 'a major game-changer', advocates say",2013-12-09,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senior figures behind efforts to curtail the powers of American spy agencies have seized on the decision by the world’s largest tech companies to call for radical surveillance reform, saying the unexpected intervention is a potential “game-changer”.In an open letter published jointly on Monday, eight tech giants, including Apple, Google and Facebook, said disclosures by the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that basic rights and freedoms were being undermined. The companies – which also include Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL, LinkedIn and Twitter, and have a combined value of $1.4tn – called for widespread changes that, if enacted, would end many of the current programs through which governments spy on citizens at home and abroad. ""This is a major game-changer,” Leslie Harris, president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, an advocacy group, told the Guardian. She said the letter was certain to get the attention of the White House and Congress, not least because the often-cautious tech companies wrote the letter in unison, accompanied by personal statements from the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, and his counterpart at Google, Larry Page. Tech giants usually leave public lobbying to the dozen or so industry associations in Washington. It is unprecedented for the major tech giants to put their names to a single political statement of this kind. “These are companies that have been deputised to be in the middle of a new, massive, systematic collection regime, against their will,” Harris said. “They are being told they can’t tell their users about it; they are losing business around the world and discovering that their data centres are being broken into. And I think they’re ready to fight back.” Harris said senior executives in tech companies had coalesced around a set of political demands closely aligned with those called for by the internet freedom community, including her organisation. The Center for Democracy and Technology receives some funding from all eight tech giants behind the letter, but is a non-profit advocacy group. The letter comes at a critical juncture. In six days, President Barack Obama will receive the findings of an independent review panel, consisting of five top-level experts appointed by the White House to propose a raft of possible reforms. The make-up of the group, which includes Richard Clarke, a former White House counter-terrorism chief, and Michael Morell, the previous deputy director of the CIA, has been criticised as being too close to the intelligence community, but the administration insists its work has been independent and robust and will inform Obama's thinking about surveillance reform. Next month, Congress is expected to debate competing legislation that will either substantially change how the NSA and partner agencies do business – for example, by rendering illegal the current practice of collecting phone records in bulk – or make only a few marginal changes. The US intelligence community and its supporters on Capitol Hill are advocating only superficial changes that would leave their powers untouched and even codify practices that some legal experts argue are unconstitutional. This sets up a major legislative battle in the new year, which observers say could go either way. The position the White House takes in the debate could prove crucial. A key barometer of change will be whether the phone records collection program survives. In their letter, the eight internet companies pointedly said governments should “limit surveillance to specific known users for lawful purposes” and “should not undertake bulk data collection”. The letter also does not distinguish between citizens and non-citizens, revealing, perhaps, that executives at the companies are acutely aware of the potential for NSA revelations to damage their business abroad. Justin Amash, the House Republican whose amendment to end the mass collection of American citizens’ phone records was only narrowly defeated in July, said the tech companies' statement would galvanise support for the USA Freedom Act, the bill which is proposing to end bulk collection. “Businesses increasingly recognise that our government's out-of-control surveillance hurts their bottom line and costs American jobs,” Amash said in a statement. The legislation, which is authored by Republican Jim Sensenbrenner in the House and Democrat Patrick Leahy in the Senate, and has 120 bipartisan co-sponsors in both chambers, has become the rallying point for advocates of reform on Capitol Hill. Sensenbrenner said on Monday that tech companies were among those “directly impacted by the NSA’s overreach”. The open letter, he added, “helps add to the growing momentum for much-needed reform”. Leahy, in a statement emailed to the Guardian, pressed the case for reform in the wake of the letter. “The global competitiveness of the American technology industry has been undermined by revelations of massive dragnet surveillance programs,"" Leahy said. ""We need to make substantial reforms to our surveillance laws to address the privacy concerns of innocent people whose information has been swept up in these programs, and to rebuild confidence in the US technology industry.” Zoe Lofgren, a Democratic congresswoman whose California district includes part of Silicon Valley, said it was too early to determine the extent to which the intervention would alter the debate in a significant way. She pointed out that while the tech industry has a large and growing influence in Washington, and includes major donors to Obama’s re-election campaign, “they’ve not always, or even often, got their way on policy issues”. “It is my perception that the spy agencies are pretty much oblivious to the impact on the country when it comes to the economy, credibility and the like,” she told the Guardian. “I don’t know if this is going to convince them.” Lofgren is close to the tech industry; earlier this year she introduced legislation to enable tech firms to disclose the nature of government surveillance orders they receive – a proposal that was incorporated into the USA Freedom Act and was among the demands in Monday’s open letter. She said that irrespective of whether Congress implemented the kind of reform advocated by the likes of Google, Yahoo and Microsoft, those companies already recognise “the potential economic harm to overseas business is substantial”, and are taking defensive action. That involves hiring the best cryptologists they can find in what Lofgren described as a developing “encryption race” between the private sector and government. “All of these companies are scrambling to increase security in order to prevent surveillance from their own government,” she said. “It is very clear that the technology companies are not going to wait for Congress. They are going to amplify and deploy additional measures to protect the privacy of their users.” View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221183405/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363871,"Twitter, Facebook and more demand sweeping changes to US surveillance",2013-12-09,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"The world's leading technology companies have united to demand sweeping changes to US surveillance laws, urging an international ban on bulk collection of data to help preserve the public's “trust in the internet”.In their most concerted response yet to disclosures by the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, LinkedIn, Twitter and AOL have published an open letter to Barack Obama and Congress on Monday, throwing their weight behind radical reforms already proposed by Washington politicians. “The balance in many countries has tipped too far in favour of the state and away from the rights of the individual – rights that are enshrined in our constitution,” urges the letter signed by the eight US-based internet giants. “This undermines the freedoms we all cherish. It’s time for change.” Several of the companies claim the revelations have shaken public faith in the internet and blamed spy agencies for the resulting threat to their business interests. “People won’t use technology they don’t trust,” said Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel. “Governments have put this trust at risk, and governments need to help restore it.” The chief executive of Yahoo, Marissa Mayer, said: “Recent revelations about government surveillance activities have shaken the trust of our users, and it is time for the United States government to act to restore the confidence of citizens around the world."" Silicon Valley was initially sceptical of some allegations about NSA practices made by Snowden but as more documentary evidence has emerged in the Guardian and other newspapers detailing the extent of western surveillance capabilities, its eight leading players – collectively valued at $1.4tn – have been stung into action amid fears of commercial damage. “We understand that governments have a duty to protect their citizens,” they say in the letter. “But this summer’s revelations highlighted the urgent need to reform government surveillance practices worldwide.” A separate list of five “reform principles” signed by the normally fiercely competitive group echoes measures to rein in the NSA contained in bipartisan legislation proposed by the Democratic chair of the Senate judiciary committee, Patrick Leahy, and the Republican author of the Patriot Act, Representative Jim Sensenbrenner. Crucially, Silicon Valley and these key reformers in Congress now agree the NSA should no longer be allowed to indiscriminately gather vast quantities of data from individuals it does not have cause to suspect of terrorism in order to detect patterns or in case it is needed in future. “Governments should limit surveillance to specific, known users for lawful purposes, and should not undertake bulk data collection of internet communications,” says the companies' new list of principles. They also argue that requests for companies to hand over individual data should be limited by new rules that balance the “need for the data in limited circumstances, users’ reasonable privacy interests, and the impact on trust in the internet”. This places them in direct conflict with Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who is sponsoring a rival bill that would enshrine the right of security agencies to collect bulk data. Feinstein, who represents California, has been accused by critics of being a cheerleader for Washington's intelligence committee but now faces opposition from her state's largest industry. The companies also repeat a previous demand that they should be allowed to disclose how often surveillance requests are made but this is the first time they have come together with such wide-ranging criticism of the underlying policy. The industry's lobbying power has been growing in Washington and could prove a tipping point in the congressional reform process, which has been delayed by the autumn budget deadlock but is likely to return as a central issue in the new year. The Feinstein and Leahy/Sensenbrenner bills agree with technology companies that there should be greater transparency of court rulings regulating surveillance and more opportunity for privacy advocates to argue against intelligence agency requests. The eight technology companies also hint at new fears, particularly that competing national responses to the Snowden revelations will not only damage their commercial interests but also lead to a balkanisation of the web as governments try to prevent internet companies from escaping overseas. “The ability of data to flow or be accessed across borders is essential to a robust, 21st century, global economy,” the companies argue in the list of reform principles. “Governments should permit the transfer of data and should not inhibit access by companies or individuals to lawfully available information that is stored outside of the country. Governments should not require service providers to locate infrastructure within a country’s borders or operate locally.” And they argue foreign governments need to come together to agree new international standards regulating surveillance, hinting at legal disputes and damage to international trade otherwise. “In order to avoid conflicting laws, there should be a robust, principled, and transparent framework to govern lawful requests for data across jurisdictions, such as improved mutual legal assistance treaty – or “MLAT” – processes,” say the companies. “Where the laws of one jurisdiction conflict with the laws of another, it is incumbent upon governments to work together to resolve the conflict.” Official responses to the Snowden revelations have been angriest in countries subject to US surveillance such as Germany and Brazil, but more muted in countries such as Britain and Australia, whose governments are close partners of the NSA. Martha Lane Fox, who recently resigned as the British government's digital champion, responded to the new letter by expressing concern at the lack of understanding of both the scale and complexity of the surveillance story within Britain's government. ""We do have an issue in this country among the corporate world, the political establishment and the general population where we have a shortage of skills and understanding for the digital age,"" she told the Guardian. ""There is an absence of a clear, coherent debate around this subject in this country and it's a very big issue that will only become more frequent the more technologically dependent we become."" She pointed to comments made by the former Conservative home office minister Lord Blencathra and the Labour peer Lord Soley, who both expressed concern at the scope of surveillance by the security services. ""[The government] needs to listen to people, to examine whether their policies are fit for the digital age. It's not that people aren't used to their data being collected, but what it is being collected for, and there needs to be a distinction between the average person and a security threat."" The eight internet companies behind the new letter also acknowledge that business also has a responsibility to protect privacy. “For our part, we are focused on keeping users’ data secure, deploying the latest encryption technology to prevent unauthorised surveillance on our networks, and by pushing back on government requests to ensure that they are legal and reasonable in scope,” they conclude. “We urge the US to take the lead and make reforms that ensure that government surveillance efforts are clearly restricted by law, proportionate to the risks, transparent and subject to independent oversight.” Google, Twitter, Yahoo and last week Microsoft have all responded to public concerns over surveillance by increasing the security of their products, introducing “perfect forward secrecy” encryption to protect information travelling on their internal systems. ""The security of users' data is critical, which is why we've invested so much in encryption and fight for transparency around government requests for information,” said Google's chief executive, Larry Page. “This is undermined by the apparent wholesale collection of data, in secret and without independent oversight, by many governments around the world. It's time for reform and we urge the US government to lead the way.” View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/real-problems-require-real-solutions,Real problems require real solutions,2013-12-08,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends,   Although the legislative year is winding down, we are not slowing down. There is still much work to be done. We’re going to spend the entire month of December working to bring relief for so many Americans who continue to experience daily hardships. Whether immediate fixes to the healthcare law, regulatory fixes for our rural communities or bringing job seekers and job holders together under one roof, read on for more about ways I am working on your behalf to make life a little easier, and hopefully a whole lot better, for our 7th District community. Real problems require real solutions: The number of Americans losing their health insurance continues to climb with estimates reaching tens of millions and some going up to 100 million. This week on the Floor of the House, I again talked about Denise, who is in need of a kidney transplant. I would prefer to fully repeal this law and replace it with an alternative, such as the one I introduced, but in the mean time, millions of Americans, like Denise, need a more immediate solution. I recently introduced H.R.3621. This bill would provide access to health insurance coverage of life-sustaining treatments furnished by certain providers and could mean the difference between life and death for many Americans in situations similar to Denise’s. To watch a clip of my Floor remarks from PBS News Hour click on the image:  Here are the jobs! I hear so many people tell me I don't have the opportunity to get a good - better paying - job. And then I hear employers say I can't find good, skilled labor to fill the spots I have open. Monday’s job fair in Wausau will bring those looking for jobs and those who are looking for employees under the same roof. Click on the image for more:    Help our rural Wisconsin communities: In the Financial Services Committee this week, we discussed legislation that would amend the CFPB’s QM rule to more accurately determine rural communities in America:   “I live in rural America…a lot of dairy there, a lot of farms in Central and Northern Wisconsin. If you look at the CFPB’s QM rule in regard to balloon loans…we have Douglas County in the northwest tip of Wisconsin…outside of that little county where Superior is located, the whole county is rural. It is farms. [Under this rule] it is designated non-rural. The industry, the agriculture is all the same, but you only get these kinds of rules from bureaucrats in Washington who have no idea about our Wisconsin communities, our makeup, and how our economies work. When you have bureaucrats in Washington making decisions you see maps like the ones we have for the balloon loans that don’t make sense.” To watch my full remarks from the hearing, click on the image:   Thanks for taking the time to catch-up on the week that was. Check out the column on the right for details on tomorrow's job fair. For the latest on all my work on your behalf, please follow me on Facebook and Twitter Have a great week,      Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221193143/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363891,Patriot Act author: Obama’s intel czar should be prosecuted,2013-12-06,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Rep. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the original author of the Patriot Act, says Director of National Intelligence James Clapper should be prosecuted for lying to Congress.""Lying to Congress is a federal offense, and Clapper ought to be fired and prosecuted for it,"" the Wisconsin Republican said in an interview with The Hill. He said the Justice Department should prosecute Clapper for giving false testimony during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in March. During that hearing, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked Clapper whether the National Security Agency (NSA) collects data on millions of Americans. Clapper insisted that the NSA does not — or at least does ""not wittingly"" — collect information on Americans in bulk. After documents leaked by Edward Snowden revealed that the NSA collects records on virtually all U.S. phone calls, Clapper apologized for the misleading comment. The intelligence director said he tried to give the ""least untruthful"" answer he could without revealing classified information. Sensenbrenner said that explanation doesn’t hold water and argued the courts and Congress depend on accurate testimony to do their jobs. ""The only way laws are effective is if they're enforced,"" Sensenbrenner said. ""If it's a criminal offense — and I believe Mr. Clapper has committed a criminal offense — then the Justice Department ought to do its job."" Shawn Turner, a spokesman for Clapper, declined to comment. Sensenbrenner also said President Obama should fire Clapper and NSA Director Keith Alexander in the wake of the revelations about the spying programs. View online, here. He argued that, because members of the military are naturally more concerned with national security, both jobs should be filled with civilians. ""The successor of both Clapper and Alexander ought to be civilians,"" Sensenbrenner said. ""I think that civilians would be able to have a better balance in seeing the distinction between security and civil liberties."" Alexander is a four-star Army general, while Clapper is a retired lieutenant general in the Air Force. Senior White House officials are considering whether the next NSA director should be a civilian, as The Hill first reported last month. The NSA has been led only by military officers since its founding in 1952. Alexander has said he will retire in the spring. Sensenbrenner, a former chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is pushing the USA Freedom Act, which would limit the NSA's power, tighten oversight and end the bulk collection of phone records. He was the original author of the Patriot Act in 2001, which the NSA has cited when filing secret court requests to conduct surveillance. But Sensenbrenner claims that the NSA is overstepping the law and violating the Constitution.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221203142/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363717,Sensenbrenner Disappointed by EPA’s Lack of Transparency,2013-12-06,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Sensenbrenner Disappointed by EPA’s Lack of Transparency f t # e Washington, Dec 6, 2013 Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and several other members of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee today sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy expressing concerns with the EPA’s lack of transparency in its public outreach process regarding proposed greenhouse gas regulations for power plants.Congressman Sensenbrenner: “People around the country deserve an opportunity to weigh in on policies that directly affect their lives. But instead of conducting an honest discussion, the EPA’s listening session tour amounted to nothing more than a publicity stunt. The EPA’s proposed regulations on carbon emissions will have damning effects on jobs, energy costs and the economy – especially in states like Wisconsin that rely on coal-fueled power plants. But not one listening session was held in Wisconsin. The EPA’s disingenuous attempt at transparency is a slap in the face to all Americans who will be directly affected by its regulatory power grab.”   f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-to-host-wausau-jobs-fair,Duffy to Host Wausau Jobs Fair,2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"90 local businesses expected Wausau, WI – U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) is hosting a jobs fair, in conjunction with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, for anyone seeking a job or a new career path. Ninety local businesses are expected to take part. The employment opportunities run the gamut from industrial and clerical positions to home healthcare and financial planners and range from internships to hourly and salaried positions. This event is free of charge and open to the general public and media:Monday, December 9, 2013 9:00 AM – 2:00 PM University of Wisconsin-Marathon County Field House 600 South 7th Avenue, Wausau Admission is free! To register, or for more information for job seekers, click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=db926bb4-5302-45b3-83ae-ee5d7ada4793,MEDIA ADVISORY: Senator Johnson to Host Town Hall Meeting in Milwaukee,2013-12-04,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, WI – U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson will host a town hall meeting at Milwaukee’s City Hall.  Sen. Johnson will give his State of the Nation presentation, which highlights the fiscal challenges our country faces today. Following his presentation, Sen. Johnson will take questions from the audience. What:              Sen. Johnson Town Hall When:             Friday, Dec. 6 at 3 p.m. Where:            Milwaukee City Hall, 200 E. Wells St., Room 301-B, Milwaukee Note:               Members of the media are invited to attend    ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=fd8cd3f5-3a74-4e67-9816-85b18a3c5bca,Johnson Comments on Obama Administration's New Obamacare Sales Attempt,2013-12-03,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Johnson made the following remarks on President Obama’s re-sale attempt. “Today, President Obama takes his show on the road again to re-sell Obamacare.  He will find that the American public is not quite as gullible as he hopes, and Wisconsinites and Americans across the country will see this campaign for what it is – an attempt to distract from the failed policy and incompetent management that have been hallmarks of Obamacare.  Obamacare has put America's health care system in jeopardy, and apparently the best President Obama can do is spend more taxpayer money on a public relations campaign. ""But Americans are smarter than that and they will see through his rhetoric.  The president and Democrats in Congress need to admit that Obamacare doesn’t work and begin working with Republicans to find real health care solutions.""   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=de36a41f-3508-4817-8443-578cd63e1639,Johnson Announces Staff Mobile Office Hours,2013-12-02,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, Wisconsin – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) announced today that his staff would be available for mobile office hours at the dates and locations listed below. These office hours allow constituents to meet with the Senator’s staff to request assistance with a federal agency or regarding other federal matters. Tuesday, Dec. 10th, 10:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.  Solon Springs Community Center 11523 South Business Highway 53, Solon Springs, 54873 Wednesday, Dec. 11th, 9:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.  Bayfield City Hall 125 South First Street, Bayfield, 54814 Wednesday, Dec. 11th, 1:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.  Glen Flora Village Hall N5746 Cedar Street, Glen Flora, 54526 Wednesday, Dec. 11th, 3:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.  Augusta City Hall, Council Chambers 145 West Lincoln Street, Augusta, 54722 Thursday, Dec. 12th, 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.  West Bend City Hall, Council Chambers 1115 South Main Street, West Bend, 53095 Friday, Dec. 13th, 11:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m.  Melvina Village Hall 604 Central Drive, Cashton, 54619 Friday, Dec. 13th, 11:00 a.m.- 12:00 p.m.  Walworth Town Hall W6741 Brick Church Roadd, Walworth, 53184 Friday, Dec. 13th, 1:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.  Williams Bay Village Hall 250 Williams Street, Williams Bay, 53191 Friday, Dec. 13th, 1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m.  Lynxville Village Hall 362 Spring Street, Lynxville, 54640",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/thanks-and-giving,Thanks and Giving,2013-12-01,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"December 1, 2013     Dear friends,   This past Thursday, Rachel and I sat down for our traditional Thanksgiving dinner surrounded by our six little turkeys (Lucia and Paloma pictured on the left), as well as a few additional friends and family, and were again thankful for the many blessings in our lives. As we now enter the official season of giving and prepare to brave the shopping mall and toy stores to find the perfect gifts, it’s worth remembering that often the most memorable gifts do not come in shiny packages with ribbons and bows. Sometimes it is the gift of our time or talent that can mean the most to a person in need – and often leave a sizable impression on us as well. The 7th District is vibrant with groups, organizations and businesses that are at the ready to give of their time and talents to help those in need in our community. This month my office is teaming up with many of them for several events and we hope you will join us! Whether lending an ear to a Veteran who may be telling his or her story for the first time, offering food and shelter to a family who has fallen on hard times, or giving council to someone in search of a new job or career path, we all have our talents and we hope you can lend a bit of your time during this busy holiday season to join us at one – or all – of the events below:   Veteran History Project Workshops Wausau   Friday, December 6, 2013  8:00am   Marathon County Historical Society   410 McIndoe Street   Wausau, WI 54403 Superior Saturday, December 7, 2013  9:30am   Richard I. Bong Veterans Historical Center  305 Harbor View Parkway  Superior, WI 54880 Job Fair Monday, December 9, 2013   9:00am   University of Wisconsin-Marathon County Field House   600 South 7th Avenue, Wausau, 54401 Hunger & Homelessness Summit Wednesday, December 18, 2013 8:30am   Northcentral Technical College   1000 W. Campus Drive, Wausau, 54401 For more information about any of these events, click here  or call our Wausau office, (715) 298-9344.  Rachel, the kids, and I wish you, and your family, a safe and blessed holiday season. I hope to see you at one of the upcoming events, in the mean time, have a great week.           - Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=a3896d27-6f15-49cf-a7a1-639add93b32e,Johnson Comments on Latest Sign of Obama Administration Incompetence,2013-11-27,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Earlier today Senator Johnson made the following remarks on the new delay in Obamacare. ""The delay of online enrollment for small businesses is yet another example of this administration's ineptitude and the damage Obamacare is inflicting on job-creating small businesses. The sooner we pull the plug on Obamacare, the fewer people will be harmed by this massive governmental overreach. The federal government is not even capable of doing what thousands of large and small businesses do day in and day out -- creating and operating a functioning website. We simply can't allow it to become even more involved in our health care system or our personal medical decisions."" ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-announces-64-million-in-state-federal-funding-for-sawyer-county-airport,Duffy Announces $6.4 million in State & Federal Funding for Sawyer County Airport,2013-11-26,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Wausau, WI --- U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) today announced the approval of over $6.4 million in local, state and federal funding to improve and expand operations at Sawyer County Airport in Hayward. This funding includes a $4,561,868 grant from the Federal Aviation Administration that Rep. Duffy's office helped secure. This project will include the addition of state-of-the-art navigational equipmentas well as a full-length parallel taxiway to the primary runway. Rep. Duffy offered the following comments:“I am excited about these upgrades for Sawyer County. These modernizations will provide greater opportunities for businesses in Hayward and nearby communities. Additionally, it will ensure critical air transport services at Hayward Memorial Hospital – even in the worst of weather. This is a great partnership between all levels of government. I am glad the local, state and federal levels could each do our part to make this a reality.” Sawyer County Clerk, Kris Mayberry added, “Sawyer County is grateful to Congressman Sean Duffy and his staff for their assistance in securing funding for the Sawyer County Airport improvement project.  The improvements to the Airport will provide residents and visitors alike with a safer, more accessible airport, including for medical patient evacuations.  The updated airport is important in keeping Sawyer County’s infrastructure competitive for purposes of economic development and job retention and creation.” Picture from Left to Right: Hal Helwig (County Chair), Kris Mayberry (County Clerk), Walt Jaeger (Airport Property Committee), Patty and Dan Leslie (Hayward Airport managers), Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07)",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221180824/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363238,Help Me Reform the NSA & Hold the Government Accountable,2013-11-25,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"The NSA's overreach has infringed on American civil liberties, damaged diplomatic efforts with our allies and tarnished the integrity of the intelligence community. Of course, this debate over the NSA's bulk collection of phone records is no longer simply a discussion about balancing national security and privacy. Americans' personal information, constitutional rights and livelihoods are at stake. Citizens and businesses of Wisconsin's Fifth District and around the country have been very clear: the indiscriminate, bulk collection of Americans' data must be stopped. Congress has an obligation to hold the NSA accountable and deliver effective reforms that strengthen personal privacy safeguards and individual control over our most sensitive information. That’s why I joined with Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to introduce the USA FREEDOM Act, which would end bulk collection, reform the secret FISA Court, increase transparency and protect our constitutional right to privacy. With over 100 bipartisan cosponsors and the support of businesses, our friends abroad and advocacy groups ranging from the ACLU to the NRA, I am confident that the USA FREEDOM Act is the most responsible approach to reform American surveillance. This bill is largely about accountability and transparency. And in that spirit, I’m gathering as much input as possible from my constituents.  Your questions, ideas and opinions will help me deliver reforms that work best for you and your neighbors in the Badger State. Thanks to a new online tool named Madison, we can have an open and constructive debate on the USA FREEDOM Act. Click here to sign up for Madison. Together we can strengthen your privacy rights through this comprehensive bill. I look forward to working with you in this interactive forum.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=89cbf898-2b3b-40a0-b805-4f1a7cd7661a,Johnson Announces Staff Mobile Office Hours,2013-11-25,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, Wisconsin – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) announced today that his staff would be available for mobile office hours at the dates and locations listed below. These office hours allow constituents to meet with the Senator’s staff to request assistance with a federal agency or regarding other federal matters. Monday, Dec. 2nd, 9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. Tennyson Village Hall 101 Bunker Hill Street, Potosi, 53820 Monday, Dec. 2nd, 9:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. Rock Springs Public Library 101 1st Street, Rock Springs, 53961  Monday, Dec. 2nd, 10:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. North Freedom Village Hall 105 North Maple St., North Freedom, 53951 Monday, Dec. 2nd, 11:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Mount Hope Fire House 127 E. Main Street, Mount Hope 53816 Monday, Dec. 2nd, 1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. Gratiot Community Center 5895 Main Street, Gratiot, 53541 Thursday, Dec. 5th, 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. Mattoon Village Hall 31 Slate Street, Mattoon, 54450 Thursday, Dec. 5th, 11:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. Eland Village Hall W19141 Maple Street, Eland, 54427 Thursday, Dec. 5th, 1:50 p.m. - 2:50 p.m. Hewitt Village Hall 7640 McLean Dr., Hewitt, 54441 Friday, Dec. 6th, 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. VFW Post 9336 514 Willow St., Arena, 53503 Friday, Dec. 6th, 1:00 p.m. - 2:00 p.m. Linden Village Hall 332 Church St., Linden, 53553",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/when-saying-sorry-isnt-enough,When saying sorry isn't enough,2013-11-23,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, The President apologized for misleading the American people about his healthcare law. However, his apology does not change the reality that his law has forced millions of Americans to lose the healthcare plans they presumably liked. It does not change the fact that Denise may not have coverage she needs when the time comes for her to receive a kidney transplant. His apology certainly doesn’t help Warren, who had a doctor a few miles away from his home, but thanks to the President’s law, he will now need to drive up to 70 miles each way. However, it is not enough to just talk about the harmful impact of this law, we have to be resolved to do something about it. This week I re-introduced my prescription plan that would bring much needed relief to my constituents and the many Americans who have found themselves inconvenienced by this law.  A few key points from, The Patient Centered Healthcare Savings Act of 2013: ·      Allow consumers to purchase health insurance across state lines, which will increase choices for all Americans and ensure competition which will bring down healthcare costs. ·      Expand the usefulness of Health Savings Accounts by removing restrictions on contributions, and permit expenditures for premiums and additional preventive health services. ·      Ensures adequate coverage for all individuals by: strengthening state high risk pools, requiring coverage for pre-existing conditions, and allow those up to age 23 to stay on their parents’ plans, and permitting association health plans. ·      Roots out Medicare waste, fraud and abuse by cracking down on unlawful durable medical equipment (DME) providers. Join the Energy Revolution: This week the House passed, and I was glad to support, three bills that would bolster our energy production and create jobs. Today, thanks to the private sector, the United States is poised to become a global energy leader, decreasing our dependency on hostile foreign governments in the Middle East and creating hundreds of thousands of great paying jobs.  However, bureaucratic regulations and red tape are standing in the way of our ultimate success. These bills support energy industries in the 7th District such as sand mining.  It's time for the President to get out of the way, and join the Energy Revolution as well.  Read more here. The “Ultimate Consumer Protection”: Three of my Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) reform bills cleared the Financial Services Committee this week. Among them H.R. 2571, the Consumer Right to Financial Privacy Act of 2013. When the Federal government collects and monitors information on Americans, especially when there is little or no justification for it, it really makes Americans mad. If the CFPB wants to collect, retain and monitor information on Americans, they have to get our permission. This bill is the ultimate consumer protection giving Americans direct control of our information when it relates to the government. Read more about all three bills here.  These are just a few things I did on your behalf this week with the hope of making life a little better for all of us. I’m looking forward to celebrating Thanksgiving (and hopefully a Packer win) with Rachel and the kids this Thursday. As we gather around our table to give thanks for the many blessings in our lives, I remain grateful for the privilege of being your Representative in Congress. I hope you, and your family, have a very happy, safe and blessed Thanksgiving.  Have a great week,    Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/community-government-team-up-to-work-towards-end-to-hunger-homelessness,Community & Government Team-Up To Work Towards End to Hunger & Homelessness,2013-11-22,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Duffy to host Summit December 18th in Wausau   Wausau, WI – U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07)utilizes the commemoration of National Hunger & Homelessness Awareness Week to announce his plans to host a “Hunger & Homelessness Summit” in an effort to bring community and government organizations together to tackle hunger and homelessness in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District. Full details about the upcoming event are below. Rep. Duffy also offered the following comments: “There is still much work to do to reduce homelessness and hunger in our communities throughout the 7th Congressional District. The December 18th summit will bring together local government officials, economic development associations, non-profits, religious organizations, and government agencies to foster what I hope will be a productive discussion about ways we can work together to curb this issue in our own backyard.” Rep. Duffy emphasized the importance of a public and private partnership adding, “Addressing and solving these issues will take whole communities and many different partners at the table. I look forward to learning more about these issues and our neighbors who are impacted by them, ways to address them in our communities, and learning about what other communities are doing to address these issues.” In 2011 and 2012, 13.5% of homes in the 7th Congressional District faced food hardships, including 22.7% of our children. Additionally, over 2,000 individuals received documented care from homeless shelters, not to mention the thousands that did not receive care or live “couch-to-couch. This event is open to members of the media and will include media availability. To RSVP and receive updates about the event itinerary, please email Cassie Smedile.   WHAT Hunger & Homelessness Summit hosted by CONGRESSMAN SEAN DUFFY   WHEN WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18 8:30 AM – 5:00 PM WHERE Northcentral Technical College 1000 W. Campus Drive, Wausau REGISTER Register online at duffy.house.gov Or call 715-298-9344",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffys-office-to-host-veteran-history-workshops,Duffy's Office to Host Veteran History Workshops,2013-11-22,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Wausau, WI –Following the success of the first workshop in Hudson, the office of U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) is hosting two additional Veteran History Project training workshops in Wausau and Superior. The Veterans History Project of the American Folklife Center collects, preserves, and makes accessible the personal accounts of American war Veterans so that future generations may hear directly from Veterans and better understand the realities of war. These recordings are entered into the collection in the Library of Congress, where they will serve as a permanent reminder of the sacrifices these men and women made defending our country.  During the workshop, interested volunteers will learn interview techniques and staff will help connect  them with a Veteran to conduct future interviewsfor the project. Anyone who knows a Veteran who is interested in telling their story, or simply wants to learn more about the project is invited to attend. For more information about the project,  and to register, click here. These workshops are open to the public and media. Details for both workshops are below:",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-privacy-bill-ultimate-consumer-protection,Duffy Privacy Bill "Ultimate Consumer Protection",2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington D.C. - Three bills from U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07)  were considered during a House Committee on Financial Services markup this week. All of the bills considered focused on reforms to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), including H.R. 2571, the Consumer Right to Financial Privacy Act of 2013. Rep. Duffy released a statement following committee passage of the bills: ""When the Federal government collects and monitors information on Americans, especially when there is little or no justification for it, it really makes Americans mad."" Rep. Duffy continued, ""If the CFPB wants to collect, retain and monitor information on Americans, they have to get their permission.""   Rep. Duffy further emphasized the need for his legislation calling it, ""the ultimate consumer protection"", saying that the agency should, ""allow Americans to have direct control of their information when it relates to their government."" H.R. 2571 passed committee Thursday morning. During that same markup, two additional bills from Rep. Duffy were also considered and approved. H.R. 2385, CFPB Pay Fairness Act of 2013 would reform from the current bloated pay scale structure to a more traditional federal pay model, and also, H.R. 3193,  Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2013 would give financial regulators better ability to overrule CFPB regulations that might be harmful to Wisconsin’s community banks and credit unions.  To watch a clip of Rep. Duffy's remarks during consideration of H.R. 2571, click here.   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/time-for-president-to-join-energy-revolution,Time for President to Join Energy Revolution,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington D.C. – U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) released the following statement after joining his colleagues in the House to pass multiple pieces of legislation that would bolster our energy production and create jobs: ""It's time for the President to get out of the way, and join the Energy Revolution"", says Rep. Sean Duffy.  ""Today, thanks to the private sector, the United States is poised to become a global energy leader, decreasing our dependency on hostile foreign governments in the Middle East and creating hundreds of thousands of great paying jobs.  Sadly, President Obama and his Administration have been far from partners in this game-changing energy revolution.""   Duffy touted his votes this week for three bills to support energy industries in the 7th District such as sand mining.  ""This is something we can do right now to lower energy costs for families and businesses in these difficult economic times.""   ""Beholden to special interest environmental groups, President Obama has stubbornly ignored scientific and economic reality.  It's what led him to reward his 'friends' and  invest taxpayer dollars in industry lemons like Solyndra.""  Duffy continues, ""As the President blocks common sense energy policies to pursue his 'alternative energy only' plan, I believe we need an 'all of the above' energy policy. I'm proud that Congress and the private sector will continue to work together to pursue policies that will lower energy costs, create jobs, and make us an energy independent nation.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221203149/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=362544,"Broad Coalition Of Tech Companies, Nonprofit Groups Offers Support For The Leahy-Sensenbrenner USA FREEDOM Act",2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), coauthors of the USA FREEDOM Act to end dragnet collection of Americans’ phone records, Thursday welcomed the support of a broad coalition of technology companies, trade associations and nonprofit organizations that advocate “privacy protections, oversight and accountability mechanisms that govern” surveillance authorities. In a letter to Leahy and Sensenbrenner, the group of nearly 60 signees including Hewlett-Packard, Dropbox and Tumblr outline their priorities to address privacy and transparency concerns raised by revelations of sweeping surveillance use. They call for legislation to allow companies to disclose surveillance requests, to provide greater transparency on government use of surveillance authorities, to focus intelligence gathering on foreign powers, and to protect constitutional and human rights. A copy of the letter is below and available online. The USA FREEDOM Act, which Leahy and Sensenbrenner introduced last month, would end the dragnet collection of Americans’ phone records under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and ensure that other authorities cannot be used to justify similar dragnet collection. The bill also provides more safeguards for warrantless surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act. The bill includes other significant privacy and oversight provisions, provides for the creation of a Special Advocate to focus on the protection of privacy rights and civil liberties before the FISA Court, and requires more detailed public reporting about the number and types of FISA orders that are issued. The USA FREEDOM Act has over 115 cosponsors in the House and Senate and is supported by dozens of groups and businesses crossing the political spectrum.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=008e6167-3ff1-4ebf-b16e-6831df685e20,Sen. Harry Reid Breaks the Rules to Change the Rules,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Ron Johnson made the following remarks today regarding Majority Leader Harry Reid’s actions on the Senate floor. “Democrats are quickly losing the support of Americans across the nation.  Today, responding to that voter backlash to his extreme agenda that is undermining our economy and health care, Majority Leader Harry Reid reversed Senate rules to distract public attention away from the failure of Obamacare and to make it easier to pack the federal courts with ideologically extreme judges who will rubber stamp the radical agenda of the Democratic Party.  Senator Reid is a power-driven, cynical politician.  He and his Democrat colleagues have proved today that they will say anything or do anything to keep an iron grip on power.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221182959/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=362284,The NSA overreach poses a serious threat to our economy,2013-11-20,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"By Jim SensenbrennerPublished on November 20, 2013Technology companies revolutionized the global economy by creating an interconnected, high-speed international marketplace. Internet and telecommunication companies empower businesses to conduct complex transactions and connect with customers, clients and governments across the globe, placing a premium on privacy, accountability and transparency.  These principles are the currency of their success, because as private citizens, we entrust these companies with very personal information. The overreach by the National Security Agency (NSA) does more than infringe on American civil liberties. It poses a serious threat to our economic vitality. Reports from the business community are clear: indiscriminate collection of data by the NSA damages American companies' growth, credibility, competitive advantage and bottom line. US companies seeking to expand to lucrative markets in Europe and Asia will find regulatory environments much less receptive to mergers and acquisitions because of NSA programs. German regulatory officials have made it clear, for instance, that AT&T, a massive American telecommunications company that provided customer telephone numbers to the NSA as ordered by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (known as the Fisa court), would undergo intense scrutiny to ensure it complies with German privacy laws before it can acquire a German telecommunications company. This mandate would certainly impede efforts to expand its presence in the region. Of course, US tech companies do not exist in a vacuum, free from competition. Companies like Google, which exhibit clear dominance in the United States, compete intensely with foreign competitors around the world. American businesses will lose considerable market share if foreign competitors and regulators paint them as pawns of the US intelligence community. Cisco Systems warned that its revenues could fall by as much as 10% because of the level of uncertainty or concerns engendered by NSA operations. Cisco saw its new orders fall by 12% in the developing world, 25% in Brazil and 30% in Russia. This is in contrast to the 8% growth Cisco saw in the previous quarter. The cloud computing industry will also suffer. Since many industries rely heavily on this technology, any disruption would ripple across all segments of the national economy. According to the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the US cloud computing industry could lose between $22 and $35bn (pdf) over the next three years because of the NSA's overreach. And smaller cloud service providers that partner with U.S. companies have already cancelled contracts. After the revelations of abuse surfaced in June, I knew Congress must act to mitigate the negative effects on our civil liberties and economy. With these concerns in mind, I introduced the USA Freedom Act with Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (Democrat from Vermont). As part of its business provisions, the USA Freedom Act increases transparency by giving internet and telecom companies the ability to publicly disclose the number of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa) orders and national security letters they received, as well as how many orders they complied with. It will also allow companies to divulge how many users or accounts on whom information was demanded under the Fisa orders and national security letters. In a joint letter, Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, AOL, Google and LinkedIn wrote: ""Transparency is a critical first step to an informed public debate, but it is clear that more needs to be done.  Our companies believe that government surveillance practices should also be reformed to include substantial enhancements for privacy protections and appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms for those programs."" Mozilla praised the Freedom Act as ""an important step toward rebuilding user trust by adding limitations on government collection of data in the name of national security. The idea is simple. The NSA should not have a blank check to access user data from technology companies."" The Software Alliance understood the international implications of the legislation, explaining, ""It is critical that we restore the public's trust by improving transparency and showing the world that the United States is striking the right balance between national security needs and individual privacy."" These endorsements send a clear message: transparency and privacy are paramount for internet and telecommunication companies. It is the bedrock of their credibility and stability as corporate entities. Unfortunately, on 31 October, the Senate Intelligence Committee – created to conduct oversight on these programs – abdicated leadership and responsibility by voting for the first time in our country's history to allow unrestrained spying on innocent Americans. But with over 100 cosponsors covering the political spectrum, my colleagues and I will continue to work pragmatically towards the balanced approach supported by the American people, businesses and our friends abroad. Genuine reform is a Constitutional and economic necessity. If the USA Freedom Act is brought to the floors of Congress for an up or down vote, I am confident it will pass with strong bipartisan support. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=ab49eb7e-cac3-4258-bd1c-4c662d8ba04a,Johnson: I am just talking about the truth of what promises were made,2013-11-20,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Ron Johnson questioned witnesses Wednesday at a Small Business Committee hearing held to examine the Obamacare rollout and its direct effect on small businesses.    JOHNSON – I am just talking about the truth of what promises were made here – and we were promised that the health care law would actually decrease costs but all the added costs, all the added coverages, all the added mandates have increased costs, correct? HICKEY – Sir, if I could point out to you that 25% of the premium that you pay today goes to cover the uninsured and to cover the services they get from wherever they get it from. So, that, I think, is where the opportunity, once those people get covered – the insurance companies will have a major opportunity to lower the costs. Johnson commented afterward: ""We now know Obamacare is a death sentence to millions of health plans Americans like and can afford.  Senator Landrieu's ‘fix’ only addresses individual insurance coverage and ignores the plight of millions of Americans destined to lose their employer-sponsored coverage or to see those costs skyrocket. Likewise, the president's recently announced political ‘fix’ attempts to redirect the blame and is merely a temporary stay of execution for a limited few.  What Americans really need and deserve is full pardon from Obamacare. My bill, the ‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep Your Health Plan Act,’ is not temporary and is the first step in achieving that full pardon."" ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221182853/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=362072,Sensenbrenner Delivers Keynote Address on NSA/FISA Reform at Georgetown Law,2013-11-19,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Sensenbrenner Delivers Keynote Address on NSA/FISA Reform at Georgetown Law f t # e Washington, Nov 19, 2013 Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee, presented the keynote address on surveillance and foreign intelligence gathering in the United States at the Georgetown University Law Center. His prepared remarks can be viewed here.    Congressman Sensenbrenner and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced H.R. 3361/S. 1599, the USA FREEDOM Act, which seeks to restore Americans��� privacy rights by ending the government���s dragnet collection of phone records and requiring greater oversight, transparency and accountability with respect to domestic surveillance authorities.  The comprehensive USA FREEDOM Act has over 100 bipartisan cosponsors in the House and Senate and has been endorsed by groups ranging from the NRA to the ACLU. It also has garnered the support of technology companies such as Apple, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, LinkedIn and Mozilla.   f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=362223,"Paul Ryan, GOP’s budget architect, sets his sights on fighting poverty and winning minds",2013-11-18,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By Lori Montgomery, the Washington Post Paul Ryan is ready to move beyond last year’s failed presidential campaign and the budget committee chairmanship that has defined him to embark on an ambitious new project: Steering Republicans away from the angry, nativist inclinations of the tea party movement and toward the more inclusive vision of his mentor, the late Jack Kemp. Since February, Ryan (R-Wis.) has been quietly visiting inner-city neighborhoods with another old Kemp ally, Bob Woodson, the 76-year-old civil rights activist and anti-poverty crusader, to talk to ex-convicts and recovering addicts about the means of their salvation. Ryan’s staff, meanwhile, has been trolling center-right think tanks and intellectuals for ideas to replace the “bureaucratic, top-down anti-poverty programs” that Ryan blames for “wrecking families and communities” since Lyndon B. Johnson declared a war on poverty in 1964. Next year, for the 50th anniversary of that crusade, Ryan hopes to roll out an anti-poverty plan to rival his budgetary Roadmap for America’s Future in scope and ambition. He is also writing a book about what’s next for the GOP, recalling the 1979 tome that detailed Kemp’s vision under the subtitle, “The Brilliant Young Congressman’s Plan for a Return to Prosperity.” Ryan “has always been more than the budget guy. His vision is much broader than that,” said Bill Bennett, a conservative political theorist who worked with Kemp at Empower America, where Ryan got his start. “You can’t be the governing party unless you offer people a way out of poverty.” Advisers say Ryan’s immediate goal is to become chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee when Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.) steps down in 2015. That would give him an ideal perch to advance an expanded agenda that combines an overhaul of the tax code and federal health and retirement programs with kinder, gentler policies to encourage work and upward mobility. But Ryan has not ruled out a run for president, according to his closest advisers. On Saturday, he delivered the keynote address at the annual birthday bash of Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad (R). And last week, he told the Des Moines Register that he will give the race a “hard look” after the 2014 midterms. “Washington has gummed up the works,” Ryan told the Iowa crowd. “It’s made it harder for people to get ahead, and the idea of upward mobility, of equal opportunity, is slipping farther and farther away from people who haven’t seen it for generations. . . . We can restore America as the party of equal opportunity to show how these ideas can prevail.” All this has left the Washington budget battle feeling like an afterthought in Ryan’s life, even as he takes center stage on a panel tasked with preventing another politically damaging government shutdown in January. Democrats hope Ryan will agree to targeted tax hikes and establish himself as a pragmatic leader. But Ryan has rejected that idea. Pete Wehner, a longtime informal adviser, said Ryan is unlikely to abandon a principle — no new taxes — that remains at the heart of his philosophy. “Paul’s not a dealmaker,” Wehner said. “And the next budget deal is not going to be a central element of Paul’s legacy.” Ryan’s new emphasis on social ills doesn’t imply that he’s willing to compromise with Democrats on spending more government money. His idea of a war on poverty so far relies heavily on promoting volunteerism and encouraging work through existing federal programs, including the tax code. That’s a skewed version of Kempism, which recognizes that “millions of Americans look to government as a lifeline,” said Bruce Bartlett, a historian who worked for Kemp and has become an acerbic critic of the modern GOP. “They want to care,” Bartlett said of Ryan and modern Republicans. “But they’re so imprisoned by their ideology that they can’t offer anything meaningful.” Ryan has explained the difference by noting that the national debt has grown enormously since Kemp ran for president in 1988, nearly doubling as a percentage of the economy. GOP targets perceptions Ryan’s interest in poverty dovetails with a larger effort to revamp the GOP, which has lost the popular vote in five of the past six presidential elections. Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus commissioned an autopsy of the 2012 campaign that identified “the perception that the GOP does not care about people” as “a major deficiency,” and recommended a renewed effort to “be the champion of those who seek to climb the economic ladder.” Since then, the search has been on for a conservative response to rising income inequality and the record 15 percent of Americans who live in poverty. At the Capitol last week, the conservative Heritage Foundation held a day-long anti-poverty forum to examine the historic rise in food-stamp dependency since the recession and methods of prison rehabilitation. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who led the push to defund Obama’s new health-insurance initiative, gave the keynote address, arguing for a revival of “civil society,” volunteerism and charity. “The focus on limiting government spending will continue to be important, but it’s not enough,” Lee said afterward. With Democrats in control of the Senate and the White House, “it’s easy for us to get stuck in the ‘no’ position. But the fact is we have to have a policy agenda.” That shift may be particularly critical for Ryan, 43. He rose to prominence as the author of an austere budget blueprint that calls for privatizing Medicare and sharply slowing federal spending on the poor. Then he joined the GOP ticket with Mitt Romney, who was cast by Democrats as an out-of-touch plutocrat. Romney’s characterization of lower-income Americans — the “47 percent” — as “victims,” “dependent upon government” and unwilling to “take personal responsibility and care for their lives” was particularly devastating. Priebus, a fellow Wisconsinite who has known Ryan since their College Republican days, said that image will not stick to the affable, down-to-earth Ryan. “Paul’s his own person. He can be at the Kenosha County fair drinking Miller Lite in shorts and a T-shirt,” Priebus said. Fighting dependence and improving opportunity “were always things that were on his agenda.” “Perhaps there were things stirred in the election that brought things to the top of the list for him,” Priebus conceded. “But now he’s got an elevated platform that gives him more horsepower to see some of these things through.” Ryan has tightly controlled his public statements since the election, and he declined to be interviewed for this story. However, four advisers who worked with him on the campaign said he was mortified by Romney’s 47-percent remarks. Two of those advisers said Ryan spoke directly to Romney about it in mid-September 2012, soon after Mother Jones posted a video of the $50,000-a-plate Florida fundraiser where Romney seemed to write off nearly half the population as unreachable by Republicans. “I think he was embarrassed,” Woodson, the civil rights activist, said of Ryan. “And it propelled him to deepen his own understanding of this.” Kemp’s influence Unlike Romney, Ryan is no child of privilege. His dad died when he was 16, and he paid for college with a mix of Social Security survivors checks and maxed-out student loans, according to his brother, Tobin Ryan. During a semester in Washington, he went to work on Capitol Hill and found his way to Empower America, working directly for Kemp. In the mid-1990s, crime and poverty were hot national issues. Kemp was a font of innovative ideas for reviving inner-city commerce, rebuilding public housing and overhauling the welfare system. He was pro-immigration, pro-equal opportunity and, above all, pro-tax cuts, which he viewed as government’s primary tool for promoting growth. Unlike other Republicans, Kemp also frequently visited black and Hispanic voters and asked them directly for their votes. Two days after Ryan was introduced as Romney’s running mate, he pushed to do the same. Advisers recall Ryan in workout clothes in a Des Moines Marriott, telling campaign officials in Boston that he had two requests: First, to meet the staff in person. And second, to travel to urban areas and speak about poverty. No one said no. But with Romney focused relentlessly on Obama’s failure to improve the economy for middle-class Americans, the idea always seemed off-message. “We struggled to find the right timing to dovetail it into our messaging schedule,” Romney strategist Ed Gillespie said via e-mail. Ryan adviser Dan Senor said Ryan argued that “47 million people on food stamps is an economic failure.” But Ryan did not get clearance to deliver a speech on poverty, his sole policy address, until two weeks before the election. Ryan had “frustration during the campaign for obvious reasons. His message, which was more than jobs and business, was secondary, subsidiary. So you didn’t get the full Ryan,” said Bennett, who vacationed with Ryan and his family in Colorado this summer. When the campaign was over, Ryan found himself “wanting to say more about who he was and introducing that broader agenda.” Ryan had sought Woodson’s help with his poverty speech. The two reconnected after the election and began traveling together in February — once a month, no reporters — to inner-city programs supported by Woodson’s Center for Neighborhood Enterprise. In Milwaukee, Indianapolis and Denver, Woodson said, Ryan asked questions about “the agents of transformation and how this differs from the professional approach” of government social workers. Like Woodson, the programs share a disdain for handouts and a focus on helping people address their own problems. In Southeast Washington, Ryan met Bishop Shirley Holloway, who gave up a comfortable career in the U.S. Postal Service to minister to drug addicts, ex-offenders, the homeless — people for whom government benefits can serve only to hasten their downfall, Holloway said. At City of Hope, they are given an apartment and taught life skills and encouraged to confront their psychological wounds. They can stay as long as they’re sober and working, often in a job Holloway has somehow created. “Paul wants people to dream again,” Holloway said of Ryan. “You don’t dream when you’ve got food stamps.” Trips to Newark and Texas are slated for later this month. Woodson said Ryan has also asked him to gather community leaders for an event next year, and to help him compare the results of their work with the 78 means-tested programs that have cost the federal government $15 trillion since 1964. The takeaway for Ryan, a Catholic, has been explicitly religious. “You cure poverty eye to eye, soul to soul,” he said last week at the Heritage forum. “Spiritual redemption: That’s what saves people.” How to translate spiritual redemption into public policy? So far, Ryan’s speeches have been light on specifics. Scott Winship, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute who has been advising Ryan’s staff, said his task is tricky. Conservative anti-poverty prescriptions tend either to promote broad economic growth, which is nothing new for the GOP, or to place new controls on existing government programs — which, he said, “makes Republicans look like they’re just punishing poor people.” The key, Winship said, will be coming up with incentives “that are consistent with conservative values about personal responsibility and smaller government.” One idea: giving poor parents vouchers or tax credits to invest in their kids’ educations. “There’s definitely a feeling that conservatives need to get in this arena,” Winship said. Otherwise, “the voices on the left are going to have the entire conversation to themselves.” Paul Kane contributed to this report from Iowa. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/paul-ryan-gops-budget-architect-sets-his-sights-on-fighting-poverty-and-winning-minds/2013/11/18/5c024888-4da8-11e3-9890-a1e0997fb0c0_story.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221203200/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361936,Sensenbrenner Questions EPA Administrator McCarthy on E15,2013-11-18,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Sensenbrenner Questions EPA Administrator McCarthy on E15 f t # e Washington, Nov 18, 2013 Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy today following her November 14th testimony before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. The subject of the hearing was “Strengthening Transparency and Accountability within the Environmental Protection Agency.” Congressman Sensenbrenner questioned Administrator McCarthy on E15. Congressman Sensenbrenner: “There have been several tests highlighting E15’s harmful effects on engines, but they have all been dismissed by the EPA. However, I am encouraged that Administrator McCarthy feels “additional research that’s done credibly and transparent is always welcome,” because my bill requires just that. Americans using gas-powered machinery should not be put in danger due to faulty fuel that has not been adequately vetted. I expect a timely response from Administrator McCarthy and encourage her to endorse H.R. 875.” Congressman Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 875, which would repeal the EPA’s waiver decision approving the use of E15 and the authority of the agency to grant further decisions until the EPA seeks an independent scientific analysis. f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/do-you-like-your-healthcare,Do you like your healthcare?,2013-11-17,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, The predictably disastrous rollout of Obamacare, and the President’s unilateral decision to ignore parts of his law, show us what happens when government tries to play too big a role in our lives. However, this week we also saw examples of the positive impact it can have when the proper legislative avenues are utilized. Keep reading for a wrap-up of the week that was. #KeepYourPlanAct: The President broke his promise to the American people, but this week the House acted to give a voice to the millions of Americans receiving cancellation notices, including many here in Wisconsin. I was proud to co-sponsor the “Keep Your Plan” Act and went on Fox & Friends to discuss how this bill may help many of my constituents. I hope the President will consider it. Click on the link to watch the interview:   Access to Capital + Small Businesses = Jobs! ""Small companies that go public increase employment by 156% on average. This is how the Googles and the Apples, the Twitters and the Facebooks of the world started.  This week I introduced H.R. 3448, “Small Cap Liquidity Reform Act”. This bill supports America's newest jobs creators by creating a pilot project to maximize their trading liquidity.  My hope is that this bill will give these emerging growth companies greater access to much needed capital so they can expand their businesses and create much needed American jobs. I was very glad to see it receive unanimous support in the Financial Services Committee and hope it will receive the same level of support when it comes before the full House of Representatives. For more information on this bill, click here.   Listening to our job creators: This week I held the first meeting of my manufacturers advisory council. It was great to hear from some of our area's top manufacturers about the issues facing that industry today. Manufacturers provide high-tech, high-paying jobs with good job stability. As the largest industry sector in Wisconsin, accounting for 19% of the Wisconsin Gross State Product, it is important for me to hear directly from manufacturers about the issues they face, specifically over-burdensome regulations, so that I can work with them on legislative options that will enable them to continue to grow their businesses and create jobs.  Want to be a job holder? The past few years have been tough for families in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District.  Whether you worked for the same company for 10, 15 or even 20 years and now find yourself exploring a brand new career path, a recent college graduate trying to figure out how to put your new degree to good use, or perhaps a Veteran returning home after serving our country, we want to help you in your search. Check out the panel on the right for details about our upcoming job fair! When the proper legislative avenues are utilized government can enable Americans to live their lives in a manner that works best for them. That is where I am going to continue to focus my efforts as your Representative in Congress and, as always, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to do that on your behalf. Have a great week,       Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/obamacare-top-topic-at-baldwin-coffee-w-your-congressman,Obamacare Top Topic at Baldwin "Coffee w/ Your Congressman",2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Hudson, WI – U.S. Representative Sean Duffy (WI-07) continued his popular “Coffee with your Congressman” series at the Orchard Restaurant in Baldwin on Tuesday morning.  The well attended coffee offered constituents in the area an opportunity to share their concerns and discuss issues of local and national significance. During the coffee, Congressman Duffy addressed several issues including loss of insurance coverage due to Obamacare and the expansion of rural telecom and broadband coverage. During the event, Congressman Duffy offered the following comments in regard to the healthcare exchanges:“Bureaucrats in Washington are telling us we have to have coverage, but a third of my district has access to only one exchange and I have heard from dozens of constituents who are concerned that this option does not meet their healthcare needs. The President made a promise to the American people and he needs to honor it.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=0e6b8ab7-1875-4dde-8eef-020200dec769,Johnson and Chaffetz Send Letter to DHS OIG Regarding USSS Culture Report,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Sen. Ron Johnson (WI) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (UT-3) released the following statement regarding a letter recently sent to the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Inspector General Edwards: Eighteen months ago the DHS OIG promised Congress it would conduct an independent review of the culture of the United States Secret Service (USSS). Just this week, we learned that one of the supervisors involved in investigating the sexual misconduct in Cartagena, Colombia last year has himself been disciplined for sexual misconduct. This type of misconduct threatens the security of the president of the United States. Our ongoing investigation has found that the DHS OIG has been inappropriately influenced to soften language in independent reports. We want to know when this report will be released and where it has been for the past year and a half. Senator Johnson made the following comments: “Yesterday we learned that two senior level United States Secret Service (USSS) agents assigned to the president’s detail were recently disciplined for sexual misconduct. According to whistleblowers, one of these men helped lead the USSS internal investigation of the sexual misconduct in Cartagena in April of last year. This is like the fox guarding the hen house. “Charles Edwards, DHS Deputy Inspector General, promised an independent review of the USSS culture 18 months ago. Since that time, my subcommittee has received information regarding similar sexual misconduct by USSS personnel in 17 countries. This type of behavior jeopardizes the security of the president of the United States and makes U.S. government personnel susceptible to coercion and blackmail. We can’t wait another 18 months for answers.” Representative Chaffetz commented: “Reported misconduct of senior-level US Secret Service agents is dangerous, irresponsible, unprofessional, and completely inappropriate. These agents are supposed to be the best of the best. We expect more from them. That those tasked to protect the President would jeopardize his security through such mindless behavior is totally unacceptable. Recent events shine a light on the inappropriate behavior permeating the culture of the USSS that must not be tolerated. A serious and robust investigation must include cooperation from the Administration in order to get to the root of the problem and implement proper reforms.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=45d04a6f-98e5-4f0b-9c71-933cc736a990,Senator Johnson to Visit Merrill,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh – Senator Ron Johnson will meet with community members today in Merrill to give an update on the national economy and other important issues facing our country.  He will take questions from the audience after his remarks.  When:             Friday, Nov. 15, 2013 at 4:30 p.m. Where:            Merrill City Hall, Council Chambers, 1004 E. First St., Merrill, WI 54452  Note:               This event is open to the public. Members of the media are invited to attend. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=4a9971c8-4751-411f-ac7e-141262ca45b9,Senator Johnson Applauds Governor Walker's Response to Obamacare's Debacle,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. -- Sen. Ron Johnson on Friday lauded Gov. Scott Walker's response to the failure of Obamacare's implementation. ""I commend Gov. Walker for acting swiftly and decisively to protect Wisconsinites as the rollout of Obamacare becomes a disaster. ""The governor will ask the Legislature for a three-month delay in moving Wisconsinites on BadgerCare into the exchange and a three-month extension of Wisconsin's high-risk pool, a plan that works. Scott Walker continues to show Wisconsin and America what real leadership looks like. ""The governor is doing whatever he can to spare the citizens of our state from the consequences of the Obama administration’s failure. Similarly, I’m working at the federal level to let people keep coverage that they prefer and to protect freedom and consumer choice in our health care system.  As a Wisconsinite, I urge the Legislature to act swiftly on the governor’s request. As a senator, I urge the administration to work with both Gov. Walker and with me to limit the damage of Obamacare on people's lives."" ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=d25b172b-24a7-42a7-9632-0ddd7581bef6,Advisory: Johnson to Meet with Wisconsin Tourism Leaders,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, WI – Senator Ron Johnson will be in Green Bay this Saturday for a tourism roundtable to discuss a range of issues affecting the tourism and travel industry. Senator Johnson will be joined by Secretary of Tourism Stephanie Klett, Deputy Secretary David Fantle, Mayor of Green Bay Jim Schmitt and members of county tourism boards. What:              Roundtable on Travel and the Economy When:             Saturday, Nov. 16, 2013  at 11:20 a.m. Where:            MVP Box 4039 at Lambeau Field, 1265 Lombardi Avenue, Green                          Bay, WI 54304 # # #",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-carney-s-bipartisan-jobs-bill-sails-through-committee,Duffy & Carney’s Bipartisan Jobs Bill Sails Through Committee,2013-11-14,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Rep. Duffy commented, ""Small companies that go public increase employment by 156% on average.  This is how the Googles and the Apples, the Twitters and the Facebooks of the world started.  The bill that Mr. Carney and I have introduced supports America's newest jobs creators by creating a pilot project to maximize their trading liquidity.  Our hope is that our bill will give these emerging growth companies greater access to much needed capital so they can expand their businesses and create much needed American jobs."" Rep. Carney continued, “Small businesses are the engines of job creation in this country,” said Rep. Carney. “This bill encourages the investment community to take a closer look at small businesses and give them greater access to capital. This would make it easier for these businesses to continue to grow and create jobs once they’ve gone public. I’m encouraged by today’s bipartisan vote and was pleased to work across the aisle with Congressman Duffy to focus on the most important issue facing our country – creating jobs and growing the economy.”  Rep. Duffy also touted the bipartisan effort saying, ""Creating jobs should be a bipartisan cause and this bill is an excellent example of that. Rep. Carney has been a great partner on this legislation and we are both very glad to see so many of our colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, support it. We hope it will see the same level of support in the full House.""                                                               Attachment: Text of H.R. 3448, “Small Cap Liquidity Reform Act” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=2b1ec6f8-07c9-4118-bd6a-7497573d9532,Johnson Comments on President's ‘Fix It’ Speech,2013-11-14,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"“President Obama acknowledged Thursday that his promise, ‘If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan, period,’ which he repeated dozens of times, hasn’t worked out. It ‘ended up not being accurate,’ he said. “He said he understands the frustration of the 4.9 million Americans forced out of health plans they found satisfactory and affordable and forced into Obamacare plans that they do not want. ‘I'm willing to work with Democrats and Republicans to fix problems as they arise,’ the president said. “A good place to start would be to support the bill I introduced in the Senate called the ‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act.’ The president said that Obamacare’s grandfather clause was ‘not sufficient.’ He is right. His administration put such restrictions on that clause that it made it certain that insurers could not keep offering the plans their customers chose. My bill strips those restrictions so the grandfather clause really does let people keep plans if they find them satisfactory. “In contrast, the president’s latest idea has a crucial flaw: It is short-term. He proposes letting people keep their plans for one year only. After that, apparently, they’d again be forced onto costlier, less satisfactory Obamacare plans. People don’t need a health-care solution just for the next year. We need to think long-term. “Unfortunately, the implementation of Obamacare has ground on to the point that millions of plans that already have been cancelled cannot be reinstated. But the freedom of millions of Americans to keep the doctors, treatments and health plans they prefer can still be preserved if Congress acts swiftly and decisively.  I plan to introduce another bill called the ‘Preserve Freedom and Choice in Health Care Act.’ It will attempt to protect liberty and the rights of individuals to make their own health care decisions. “The real long-term solution is to repeal Obamacare. Dumping this top-down, Washington-style monstrosity is the only way to save our health care system from permanent damage. Until then, we can at least take steps to stop throwing people off the insurance they have. If the president is willing, my bill is waiting.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221203214/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361271,Sensenbrenner and Davis Introduce Legislation to Reduce Crime and Improve Communities,2013-11-13,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations, and Congressman Danny Davis (D-Ill.) today introduced H.R. 3465, the Second Chance Reauthorization Act, with the support of Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), Congressman Howard Coble (R-N.C.) and others. The Second Chance Act was passed by Congress with strong bipartisan support and signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2008. This legislation provides non-profit faith and community-based organizations with mentoring grants to develop support programs such as drug treatment, housing, job training, medical care and education. Re-entry services have been improved, which has resulted in a reduction in recidivism and helped ensure a successful return to society for prisoners who have completed their sentence. The Second Chance Reauthorization Act builds on the success of the original legislation and continues to authorize funding for both public and private entities to evaluate and improve academic and vocational education for offenders in prison, jails and juvenile facilities.   Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner: “As chairman of the Over-Criminalization Task Force, I am committed to strengthening our criminal justice system to ensure prisons serve as a deterrent and a place where people can be rehabilitated. There is overwhelming evidence that the Second Chance Act has been a resounding success by helping fully integrate prisoners back into society. Education and positive reinforcement are some of the most effective tools to prevent illegal behavior, and this law has improved re-entry services – not only saving taxpayer dollars, but changing lives, strengthening families and improving our communities. Reauthorization of these programs is important.” Congressman Danny Davis: “The second chance law has proven to seriously help reduce recidivism and provide hope for large numbers of individuals to turn their lives around and become productive citizens who can contribute to the well-being of society.” Congressman John Conyers: “Reauthorization of the Second Chance Act is critical to disrupting the prison pipeline which has plagued so many minority communities across the nation. By supporting community based re-entry programs, this legislation provides critical assistance to those emerging from our jails and prisons, allowing them to rebuild their families and become productive members of our society. I hope that this bipartisan effort will have success similar to our original effort in 2007, so that we can speed this to the President’s desk.” Congressman Howard Coble: “When we authored the Second Chance Act, it was a break with the past.  No longer would we just warehouse prisoners without any hope of offering these criminals a way to change their lives.  The Second Chance Act provides those convicted of crimes with the counseling, training and education that is needed before they are released from prison.  It is a concrete program to slow the rate of recidivism and it is working.”    Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Senator Rob Portman (R-Ohio) have introduced companion legislation in the Senate.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=2f8d3867-33bb-4370-b700-0d5efef74f45,Senator Johnson Statement on Nomination of James D. Peterson,2013-11-12,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, WI – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) released the following statement on the nomination of James D. Peterson to United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin: “I sincerely appreciate all the hard work and effort of those serving on our federal nominating commission.  I am pleased the bipartisan process resulted in the selection of a well-qualified jurist that will serve the nation and the people of Wisconsin’s western district well. I am happy to recommend James D. Peterson to the Senate for swift confirmation.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221182843/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360915,Sensenbrenner Testifies Before European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee,2013-11-11,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Sensenbrenner Testifies Before European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee f t # e Washington, Nov 11, 2013 Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), former Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and author of the USA PATRIOT Act, testified today in Brussels before the European Parliament’s Civil Liberties Committee.  Congressman Sensenbrenner: “I firmly believe the Patriot Act saved lives by strengthening the ability of intelligence agencies to track and stop potential terrorists, but in the past few years, the National Security Agency has weakened, misconstrued and ignored the civil liberty protections we drafted into the law. To address these issues, I have introduced the USA FREEDOM Act along with Senator Patrick Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to curtail surveillance abuses and restore trust in the US intelligence community.     “International cooperation is crucial to stopping terrorism, but trust is also integral.  I ask my friends in the European Parliament to work pragmatically with the United States to continue balanced efforts to protect our nations.  Together we can rebuild trust while defending civil liberties and national security on both sides of the Atlantic.” View prepared statement here.  f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=255cccdc-be6c-4794-9ee4-10185ce3054c,Senator Johnson Commemorates Veterans Day,2013-11-11,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, WI – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) released the following message commemorating Veterans Day: “It is an honor to thank the finest among us, the men and women who serve in our armed forces. They are keeping faith with the more than one million Americans who died while preserving this nation over more than two centuries. We and generations to come are the beneficiaries of their service - our gratitude is only the beginning of what we owe them. ""We should also take time today to thank the families of our servicemen and women who share in this selfless service and sacrifice.  “Our defenders took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. May we all dedicate ourselves to that goal, all doing our parts to keep our nation free. It’s the least we can do in thanks to our veterans and in remembrance of their sacrifices.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/thank-you,Thank you,2013-11-10,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, This week I appreciated the opportunity to hear from many job creators and job holders in our district. We talked a lot about the impact that burdensome regulations are having on our businesses and that Obamacare is having on many of our lives. When I return to Washington this week I will keep those conversations in mind and continue to pursue legislative options that will bring Americans much needed relief. This week our nation will also pay special tribute to our veterans. To show our thanks, keep reading to learn about a few things my office and I are doing to celebrate our veterans and ensure they receive the credit and care they deserve. Ensuring their legacy: The history of our nation has always included stories of our heroic men and women who have defended her. We have an opportunity and a duty to make sure their stories are preserved so that future generations may always know that the freedom they enjoy was not free. In partnership with the Library of Congress, the Veterans History Project of the American Folklife Center collects, preserves, and makes accessible the personal accounts of American war veterans so that future generations may hear directly from veterans. If you live in the Hudson area and would like to help a Veteran tell his or her story, please spend part of your Veterans’ Day with us at our Veteran Oral History Workshop. Click here or see the column on the right for more details. Hearing the call and answering the need: Roger, from Loyal, WI told me he has to drive ninety minutes each way to see a VA audiologist in Tomah. When his hearing aids quit, he was told they could not fit him in for six months. He couldn’t wait that long and needed the benefit of someone local. He went to a nearby hearing aid specialist and paid out-of-pocket for the hearing aids. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), both our aging veterans and younger veterans returning from the battlefield are seeking help from the VA for hearing loss more than any other disability facing them today. VA audiology clinics can’t keep up with the increased demand and frustrated veterans are living in a non-hearing world with no one to turn to. Roger, and veterans like him, earned these veterans benefits, and deserve better. In an effort to help reduce the backlog, I plan to introduce legislation that would allow the VA to begin utilizing hearing instrument specialists in addition to audiology doctors. This would allow VA audiologists to focus on more complex cases and our give our veterans increased access to the care they need. Keep Your Healthcare Plan Act: The President may have broken his promise to the American people, but House Republicans are working to make good on it. This week we will take up the “Keep Your Healthcare Plan Act” in an effort to ensure that millions of individuals who have received policy cancelation notices as a result of Obamacare could have the option to keep their policies in 2014. I am a cosponsor of this bill and will continue to keep you updated on its progress. Do you have a job opening? We still have a few booths available for December’s jobs fair in Wausau. If you are a job creator in our area, please click here for more details about how to get involved!  To all of our veterans and to the men and women who continue to serve our nation, Thank you. My family and I are always grateful for your service and will offer a special prayer of thanksgiving tomorrow. Thanks for reading this week’s update and for the continued honor of representing you in Congress. Have a great week,       Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=22428060-7211-40ea-85f2-ae95cd5bfac1,ICYMI: Sen. Johnson compares Obama's apology to running over someone's dog,2013-11-08,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"MILWAUKEE - Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson is reacting to President Obama's apology for people's health insurance being canceled. The president told NBC News he's sorry Americans are losing health insurance plans he said they could keep. Johnson told 620 WTMJ's Charlie Sykes that President Obama stopped short in his apology of saying he was sorry for making promises about people keeping their policies in the first place. ""It certainly wasn't an apology. When I heard it, the analogy I was thinking of was, you tell somebody, 'Boy, I'm really sorry your dog died,' but you refuse to acknowledge you ran over that dog with your car,"" Johnson said. ""Those are your tire tracks on that dog."" The senator continued by saying President Obama needs to accept responsibility for the problems with the implementation of the law. ""There is no accepting of responsibility,"" Johnson continued. ""There is sure some empathy for people in a tough situation, but again they're in a tough situation because if Obamacare, because he told falsehoods."" Interview Audio  ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/join-us-coffee-w-your-congressman-in-baldwin,Join us! Coffee w/ Your Congressman in Baldwin,2013-11-07,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Wausau, WI – U.S. Representative Sean Duffy (WI-07) is bringing his popular “Coffee w/Your Congressman” series to Baldwin. Rep. Duffy hosts these events across the 7th District to give constituents in the area an opportunity to grab a cup of coffee with their Congressman and discuss the important issues on the minds of Wisconsinites. These events are open to all 7th District constituents and the media: WHAT: “Coffee w/ Your Congressman” WHEN: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 7:00 – 8:00 AM WHERE: The Orchard: 571 US Highway 63, Baldwin, WI For more information, contact the Hudson office at 715-808-8160   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221180654/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361245,"NSA Abused Trust, Must Be Reined In",2013-11-06,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"It is impossible to forget the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And it is not easy to forget what followed: fear, anger and an upwelling of patriotism. Throughout our nation's history, we've fought in wars both at home and abroad, but until that day, most Americans felt invincible from an attack from the outside world.Following 9-11, the United States felt an unfamiliar vulnerability, but we also felt more unified than ever. Congress knew it had to act to enhance the tools the intelligence community needed to identify and track terrorists, but we never forgot what makes our country great: freedoms and liberties unlike anywhere else in the world. I led a bicameral group of legislators that came together and passed the USA Patriot Act with strong bipartisan support. President Ronald Reagan said, ""trust but verify."" After 9-11, with the country at risk and poised to enter its most intensive conflict since the Vietnam War, Congress extended the administration broader powers to help protect the American people. But the National Security Agency abused that trust. It ignored restrictions painstakingly crafted by lawmakers and assumed a plenary authority never imagined by Congress. Worse, the NSA has cloaked its operations behind such a thick cloud of secrecy that, even if our trust was restored, Congress and the American people would lack the ability to verify it. Our constitutional democracy was built to be accountable to the people. That principle can never be compromised. Earlier this year, Americans were rightly outraged to learn that the NSA is collecting in bulk the phone records of nearly every American. More recently, the media has revealed additional classified information that has added to our concerns. Since the revelation that the NSA is collecting the details of Americans' phone calls on an unprecedented scale, we have learned that the government searches the content of huge troves of emails, collects in bulk the address books from email accounts and social networking sites, at least temporarily collected geolocation data from our cellphones, committed thousands of privacy violations and lied to courts and Congress. This is not the America our founders envisioned. Not only do many of these programs raise serious legal questions, they have come at a high cost to Americans' privacy rights, business interests and standing in the international community. On Oct. 31, the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to give the NSA the authority to collect private data on innocent Americans. In an 11-4 vote, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) presided over the first congressional vote in our country's history to allow unrestrained spying on the American people. I am committed to a different approach. On Oct. 29, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and I came together to introduce the USA Freedom Act. The bill has co-sponsors in the Senate covering the political spectrum, and nearly 90 co-sponsors in the House — almost an even split between Republicans and Democrats. It also has been endorsed by groups ranging from the National Rifle Association to the American Civil Liberties Union and has the support of many of the tech giants, including AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. The USA Freedom Act restores Americans' privacy rights by ending the government's dragnet collection of phone records under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act and requires greater oversight, transparency and accountability with respect to surveillance authorities. The bill also provides more safeguards against warrantless surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act and includes significant privacy and oversight provisions, creates a special advocate to focus on the protection of privacy rights before the FISA Court and requires more detailed public reporting. In short, the USA Freedom Act ensures the law is properly interpreted, past abuses are not repeated and American liberties are protected. And over the coming weeks and months, as more revelations are brought to light and public outrage grows, I will be working to push this important legislation through the House Judiciary Committee and onto the House floor. There, members can cast their vote to restore trust and accountability to our intelligence community.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221183048/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360451,Spy games,2013-11-06,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Spy games f t # e Richmond Times-Dispatch Editorial, Nov 6, 2013 The scope of domestic spying conducted by the NSA has shocked and horrified many Americans, including one of the lawmakers who made it possible: Sen. James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin — one of the principal proponents of the Patriot Act. Federal authorities have stretched the language of the act to cover a host of activity Sensenbrenner says he never intended. Let that be a lesson to aspiring lawmakers everywhere.Now Sensenbrenner has joined Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy in sponsoring new legislation to roll back some of those excesses. Their USA Freedom Act would end the bulk collection of Americans’ telephone records. It also would add some transparency to activities conducted under the aegis of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, tighten restrictions on National Security Letters, and adds a special advocate who would argue on behalf of privacy rights before the FISA court. That provision is necessary because, at present, the court hears only one side: the government’s. As a result, it routinely grants approval to surveillance requests. This is a much better bill than its competitor, the FISA Improvements Act — which would codify current practices that should be reined in and, according to some privacy advocates, potentially make matters worse in other ways as well. The principal sponsor is Sen. Dianne Feinstein, an aggressive proponent of the surveillance state who probably wouldn’t shrink from putting a tracking collar on every U.S. resident if that were feasible. The debate illustrates a broader point about government generally, which not only tends to retain powers long after a crisis has abated, but also tends to push the boundaries of its legal authority — sometimes to the breaking point. View online, here. f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131224090522/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360333,"NSA's metadata program: End it, don't mend it",2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Five months after Americans learned that information about their telephone calls was being indiscriminately scooped up by the National Security Agency, Congress seems poised to place limits on the bulk collection of telephone ""metadata"" — information about the source, destination and duration of telephone calls but not their contents. That's a positive development.But there is a world of difference between the legislation approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee, which would make only minor improvements in the program, and a superior proposal by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.) that would bring the collection of phone records into compliance with the letter and the spirit of the 4th Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the head of the Intelligence Committee, rightly says that the committee's bill ""increases privacy protections and public transparency"" in the phone records program. But the protections are minimal, and in return for the minor changes, Congress would give its explicit approval for the wholesale acquisition of metadata by the government. By contrast, the Leahy-Sensenbrenner bill would allow the government to acquire phone data only as part of an investigation tied to a specific suspected terrorist or foreign agent or an individual in contact with him. Bulk collection would end. Obama administration officials insist that the metadata program is vital because it assembles a ""haystack"" that makes it possible for a computer search to extract the ""needle"" of evidence leading to the perpetrators of a terrorist plot. The government persuaded the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that such a dragnet was legal under a section of the Patriot Act authorizing the acquisition of records reasonably believed to be ""relevant to an authorized investigation"" of espionage or terrorism. (The FISA court also noted that the Supreme Court has afforded no privacy protection to information, such as phone records, that individuals turn over to ""third parties"" such as phone companies — an interpretation of the 4th Amendment that has been rendered obsolete by advances in electronic information-gathering.) It's easy, amid the legal and technical complexities, to lose sight of the question at the heart of this debate: whether the government should be able, without a showing of probable cause of a connection to terrorism, to obtain and store information that can often provide as wide a window on the private lives of Americans as the actual contents of phone calls. Feinstein and other defenders of the program emphasize that the database is searched or ""queried"" only when there is ""reasonable, articulable"" suspicion of a connection to terrorism. The Intelligence Committee bill would further discourage abuse by mandating an annual public accounting of the number of queries and limiting the number of people at the NSA who may authorize them. But the mere possession of such information by the government is unsettling, and there is no guarantee that some employees with access to private information won't betray their trust. On the other side of the ledger, claims that the metadata program led to the disruption of a significant number of terrorist attacks seem to have been greatly exaggerated. The metadata program intrudes on the privacy of virtually every American. It needs to be ended, not mended. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-to-host-veteran-history-workshop-on-veterans-day,Duffy to Host Veteran History Workshop on Veterans’ Day,2013-11-04,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Hudson, WI –This Veterans’ Day U.S. Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-07) is hosting a Veteran History Project training workshop. The Veterans History Project of the American Folklife Center collects, preserves, and makes accessible the personal accounts of American war veterans so that future generations may hear directly from veterans and better understand the realities of war. These recordings are entered into the collection in the Library of Congress, where they will serve as a permanent reminder of the sacrifices these men and women made defending our country.  On Monday, November 11, 2013, a trained Folklorist from the Library of Congress will teach volunteers interview techniques and help coordinate them with a veteran to conduct future interviews for the project. Anyone who knows a veteran who is interested in telling their story, or simply wants to learn more about the project is invited to attend. For more information about the project, click here. Details for Monday’s event are below and attached:",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/you-probably-cant-keep-it,You probably can't keep it...,2013-11-03,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends,As we “fall back” (one more reminder to change your clocks), I am very much looking forward to taking a little extra time this week to reconnect with my family, and with all of you. The government is doing a lot of things these days that are having a pretty major impact on all of our lives and I want to know how you feel about them. Please check out the column on the right for information about a couple places where you can find me. But before we get to this week, first, a quick round up of the week that was.If you like your healthcare, you probably can’t keep it: The Obama Administration continues to wave-off the claim that millions of Americans will be forced to change their healthcare plan because of Obamacare. This, even after The Washington Post gave the President’s now infamous line, “if you like your healthcare, you can keep it” four “Pinocchio’s. I asked my Facebook followers to #ShareYourStory. I heard from dozens of people about cancellation notices, doctor changes, or concern for how they would cover the higher premiums and deductibles. The healthcare system in our country is not perfect, but the President’s law is making it far worse, not better.For weeks my Republican colleagues and I have advocated for reasonable alternatives that would help bring relief to millions of Americans, namely to delay the individual mandate for a year. Several Democrats are now also calling for the delay. I am glad they are listening to their constituents, it is past due for the President to listen to his constituents – the American people –as well and delay the mandate. Or, move on from the law all together and work instead on reforms that will actually work for the American people.If it walks like a duck…it’s a bailout: On October 1st, while most of the country’s attention was on the predictably disastrous rollout ofhealthcare.gov, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) became the recipient of the latest Washington bailout -- funded courtesy of hardworking taxpayers -- to the tune of $1.7 billion. To be clear, FHA has helped many people in the 7th District achieve the American dream of home ownership. However, I have been concerned that this Agency has not been forthcoming about their fiscal standing. Now we find out that they are receiving this transfer of taxpayer dollars to cover their shortfall with no plan for paying it back. Click on the image to watch my exchange from this week’s hearing: Duty to defend religious freedom: Over the past year, I have become increasingly concerned about reports of religious freedom abuses throughout the Middle East, particularly in Egypt and Syria. The United States was built on religious freedom and tolerance, and this must continue to be a pillar of our foreign policy. I authored a letter, which seventeen of my colleagues signed, asking Secretary of State John Kerry, who made an unannounced trip to Egypt this weekend, to designate Egypt and Syria as Countries of Particular Concern for violations of religious freedom. Additionally, I also made an appeal on the Floor of the House. Click on the image to watch my short remarks.As always, thanks for taking the time to read this update and for the opportunity to represent you in Congress. I look forward to catching-up with some of you this week during my visits around the district.Have a great week,     Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221183033/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360259,Feinstein’s deception,2013-11-03,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congress enacted an affordable health care bill that's making a lot of people sick, requiring them to pay more for their insurance. It enacted a stimulus bill that put a wet blanket on the economy, and now it's considering a bill to ""reform"" the snoopery of the National Security Agency by increasing the agency's surveillance power.The Senate Intelligence Committee pulled this bait-and-switch maneuver last week, claiming to restrain domestic spying with legislation that actually gives legal cover for the constitutionally dubious collection of telephone calls, emails and metadata from millions of Americans. The bill ""prohibits"" metadata collection ""unless"" certain procedures are followed. Orders for collection can only be effective for 90 days, but can be extended as many times as the agency wants. The spies must cross their hearts and hope to die if they look at the private Facebook snapshots of celebrities or read the emails of an ex-wife. No gossips allowed. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who heads the intelligence panel and sometimes sounds skeptical of intelligence abuses, devised this defense of the spying enterprise. ""This program helps 'connect the dots,' the main failure of our intelligence before 9/11,"" she argued in an op-ed essay in USA Today. Had the NSA been recording everyone's telephone calls 12 years ago, she says, the hijackers would have been caught. Perhaps, but probably not. Domestic surveillance was abundant in April, yet Islamic extremists set off a bomb at the Boston Marathon, killing three and injuring 264 spectators. Mass surveillance is no guarantee of safety. Sen. Mark Udall, Colorado Democrat, actually opposes the domestic spy program. ""The NSA's ongoing, invasive surveillance of Americans' private information,"" he says, ""does not respect our constitutional values and needs fundamental reform — not incidental changes."" He's joined by a key Republican in the House, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, who proposes legislation to eliminate the bulk collection of emails and metadata, clarifying the Patriot Act provision that intelligence agencies cite to justify their snooping. The technology giants AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo joined Friday in backing this restraint. The companies have faced the wrath of customers upset that the firms have been colluding with the spy agencies to hand over private communications under court orders. The meaning and intent of the Fourth Amendment is straightforward; namely, that the government can only read the ""papers"" of a particular person if there is probable cause to believe an offense has been committed, and must have a warrant. Mr. Sensenbrenner's measure is the wise and honest way to compel government agencies into line with their constitutional duties. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140125130942/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360167,Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner's quest to rein in the NSA,2013-11-02,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Jim Sensenbrenner was the chief congressional architect of the USA Patriot Act, the sweeping anti-terrorism law that passed after the attacks in 2001 and gave broad new surveillance power to the federal government. He has been a fierce defender of his work.So give Sensenbrenner credit. A dozen years later, the Wisconsin congressman is now leading an admirable fight to end abuses of the law by the National Security Agency and other government offices. A bill he introduced last week along with Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont would take some of the wind out of the NSA's data vacuum, increase transparency of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and create an independent advocate to argue cases before the court on behalf of the public. The legislation has bipartisan support in both house of Congress and also from an interesting array of strange bedfellows that includes both the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union. We urge Congress to give this legislation careful consideration; it heads in the right direction. ""We have to make a balance between security and civil liberties,"" Sensenbrenner said recently. ""And the reason the intelligence community has gotten itself into such trouble is they apparently do not see why civil liberties have got to be protected."" In an interview last week with The Washington Post, Sensenbrenner said that if Congress had known what the NSA planned to do, the Patriot Act would not have passed — and he wouldn't have supported it. ""What the NSA has done, with the concurrence of both the Bush and Obama administrations, is completely forgotten about the guarantees of civil liberties that those of us who helped write the Patriot Act in 2001 and the reauthorization in 2005 and 2006 had written the law to prevent from happening,"" he said. Discontent with the NSA has been building for months after revelations in June by former government contractor Edward Snowden. We now know that the NSA monitored the phone calls of the heads of state of U.S. allies for years, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and that the NSA sucked up tens of millions of calls in France, Spain and many other countries. The agency appears to have improperly captured data from thousands of U.S. phone numbers and misrepresented its actions before the secret spy court. Just last week came the allegation that the agency also had tapped the fiber-optic cables that connected Google's and Yahoo's overseas servers and sucked out huge amounts of data. ""We do not provide any government, including the U.S. government, with access to our systems,"" David Drummond, Google' chief legal officer, said in a statement after that story broke. ""We are outraged at the lengths to which the government seems to have gone to intercept data from our private fiber networks, and it underscores the need for urgent reform."" And it's not clear that such activity was all that helpful. The NSA and its supporters says that it is, but when pressed at a recent Senate hearing, Gen. Keith Alexander, the agency's director, testified that only a handful of ""attacks thwarted"" had any connection to the United States. Stopping any terror plot saves lives. Preventing terrorism has to be a top priority for the federal government, and to do that the U.S. needs a robust intelligence network. Intelligence failures were part of the reason the government was unable to prevent the Sept. 11 attacks. But does the NSA really need to vacuum up tens of millions of phone calls, especially if those phones belong to U.S. citizens? We doubt it. And we also doubt there would be such a groundswell to rein in the NSA but for the disclosures by Snowden, who now is in exile in Russia. Time will whether Snowden is really more hero than traitor, but his actions have led to an overdue national conversation on intelligence and privacy. The Sensenbrenner/Leahy legislation would put a stop to the bulk collection of telephone records and force the NSA to only go after foreign suspects who are targets of terror investigations. It requires the government to filter for and throw out information about Americans that is collected by accident. It creates a public advocate to promote privacy interests before the FISA court and makes the court's work more transparent. The Obama administration has argued in the past that bulk data collection is permitted by Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Not so, says Sensenbrenner, but the new legislation would make certain of that. The bill also would force the government to get a court order to search for the communications of Americans in data that is scooped up abroad. Sensenbrenner's bill is in stark contrast to one approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee last week. That bill, championed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the committee chairwoman, would bless the NSA's domestic spying while offering the fig leaf of stronger privacy protections for Americans. No thanks. America needs a strong intelligence system, but it doesn't need to know that Angela Merkel just ordered solyankafor dinner. And it should not be randomly invading the privacy of millions of U.S. citizens. Protect the country. Protect privacy. We can do both. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221182947/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360168,"NSA abused trust, must be reined in",2013-11-02,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"By Jim Sensenbrenner Published on November 2, 2013 It is impossible to forget the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And it is not easy to forget what followed: fear, anger and an upwelling of patriotism. Throughout our nation's history, we've fought in wars both at home and abroad, but until that day, most Americans felt invincible from an attack from the outside world. Following 9-11, the United States felt an unfamiliar vulnerability, but we also felt more unified than ever. Congress knew it had to act to enhance the tools the intelligence community needed to identify and track terrorists, but we never forgot what makes our country great: freedoms and liberties unlike anywhere else in the world. I led a bicameral group of legislators that came together and passed the USA Patriot Act with strong bipartisan support. President Ronald Reagan said, ""trust but verify."" After 9-11, with the country at risk and poised to enter its most intensive conflict since the Vietnam War, Congress extended the administration broader powers to help protect the American people. But the National Security Agency abused that trust. It ignored restrictions painstakingly crafted by lawmakers and assumed a plenary authority never imagined by Congress. Worse, the NSA has cloaked its operations behind such a thick cloud of secrecy that, even if our trust was restored, Congress and the American people would lack the ability to verify it. Our constitutional democracy was built to be accountable to the people. That principle can never be compromised. Earlier this year, Americans were rightly outraged to learn that the NSA is collecting in bulk the phone records of nearly every American. More recently, the media has revealed additional classified information that has added to our concerns. Since the revelation that the NSA is collecting the details of Americans' phone calls on an unprecedented scale, we have learned that the government searches the content of huge troves of emails, collects in bulk the address books from email accounts and social networking sites, at least temporarily collected geolocation data from our cellphones, committed thousands of privacy violations and lied to courts and Congress. This is not the America our founders envisioned. Not only do many of these programs raise serious legal questions, they have come at a high cost to Americans' privacy rights, business interests and standing in the international community. On Oct. 31, the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to give the NSA the authority to collect private data on innocent Americans. In an 11-4 vote, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) presided over the first congressional vote in our country's history to allow unrestrained spying on the American people. I am committed to a different approach. On Oct. 29, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy and I came together to introduce the USA Freedom Act. The bill has co-sponsors in the Senate covering the political spectrum, and nearly 90 co-sponsors in the House — almost an even split between Republicans and Democrats. It also has been endorsed by groups ranging from the National Rifle Association to the American Civil Liberties Union and has the support of many of the tech giants, including AOL, Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. The USA Freedom Act restores Americans' privacy rights by ending the government's dragnet collection of phone records under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act and requires greater oversight, transparency and accountability with respect to surveillance authorities. The bill also provides more safeguards against warrantless surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act and includes significant privacy and oversight provisions, creates a special advocate to focus on the protection of privacy rights before the FISA Court and requires more detailed public reporting. In short, the USA Freedom Act ensures the law is properly interpreted, past abuses are not repeated and American liberties are protected. And over the coming weeks and months, as more revelations are brought to light and public outrage grows, I will be working to push this important legislation through the House Judiciary Committee and onto the House floor. There, members can cast their vote to restore trust and accountability to our intelligence community. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131112111401/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=360073,USA FREEDOM Act Draws Bipartisan Praise,2013-11-01,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), chairman of the Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee in the House, welcomed the broad support among stakeholders for legislation they introduced this week that would end the government’s dragnet collection of phone records and require greater oversight, transparency and accountability with respect to domestic surveillance authorities.  “The breadth of support for our bipartisan, bicameral legislation demonstrates that protecting Americans’ privacy not only cuts across the party divide, but also addresses concerns raised by the technology industry and other advocates,” Leahy and Sensenbrenner said in a joint statement. “The time is now for serious and meaningful reform. We are committed to working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to get this done so we can restore confidence in our intelligence community and protect the privacy rights of our citizens.” The USA FREEDOM Act has over 100 cosponsors in the House and Senate and dozens of supporters including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Rifle Association, the Project on Government Oversight and several technology companies including Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, AOL, Google, LinkedIn and Mozilla. Early Support For The USA FREEDOM Act “We are two veteran lawmakers who believe now is the time for that reform and for a meaningful discussion about protecting privacy and national security in the 21st century. We are not alone,” Leahy & Sensenbrenner op-ed (Politico, Oct. 29)•    “The Freedom Act takes an important step toward rebuilding user trust by adding limitations on government collection of data in the name of national security. The idea is simple. The NSA should not have a blank check to access user data from technology companies.” Mozilla (release) •    “Transparency is a critical first step to an informed public debate, but it is clear that more needs to be done.  Our companies believe that government surveillance practices should also be reformed to include substantial enhancements for privacy protections and appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms for those programs. ” Microsoft, Apple, Yahoo, Facebook, AOL, Google, and LinkedIn (letter) •    “BSA commends Chairman Leahy and Chairman Sensenbrenner for introducing this important legislation… It is critical that we restore the public’s trust by improving transparency and showing the world that the United States is striking the right balance between national security needs and individual privacy,” BSA | The Software Alliance (release) •    “The introduction of the USA Freedom Act is a vital and positive step forward in establishing a net set of policies to govern how the federal government collects data and the tech industry’s role in complying with government information requests,” Information Technology Industry Council (release) •    “We hope the upcoming legislative process will fill this void and provide the insights to undertake the major reforms that are now clearly necessary.  I commend the Leahy/Sensenbrenner legislation for this beginning. It is vital to reform and properly focus our current surveillance system,” Ed Black, the chief executive officer of the Computer & Communications Industry Association (release) •    “Is it really better for us to think that things have gone so far with the post-9/11 idea that any spying that can be done should be done and that nobody thought to inform President Obama about tapping the phone of one of the most important American allies?” New York Times editorial (Oct. 29) •    “Public outrage has only grown [as] Americans learned more about the shocking, unprecedented invasions of their privacy by their government. The Freedom Act is a critical first step to reign in the unchecked, unconstitutional excesses of our government,” Caledonian-Record editorial (Oct. 31) •    “It is noteworthy that protection of our privacy rights is a cause shared by liberals and conservatives. The supporters of Leahy’s bill include a spectrum of senators that stretches from Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, to Mike Lee, Republican of Utah,” Rutland Herald editorial (Nov. 1)",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=357107,Ryan Opening Statement: Budget-Conference Committee,2013-10-30,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Before I recognize Chairman Murray, I want to share a few thoughts. You’ll notice there are three senators for every congressman—so it’s an even match. I like to think quality beats quantity. But in all seriousness, we’ve got some important work ahead of us. And it’s not going to be easy. So today, I want to talk about why we’re here and what we need to do. We’re here because we want to get an agreement. We want to get something done. For too long, both parties have ignored our growing national debt—and the threat it poses to our country. Democrats didn’t create all these problems—and neither did Republicans. Everybody was part of the problem, so everybody has to be part of the solution. But you’ve got to make an accurate diagnosis before you can fill out a prescription. We’ve got to recognize what we’re dealing with. Debt held by the public has doubled in just five years. And it’s only getting worse. Ten thousand baby-boomers are retiring every day. Health-care costs are rising. Medicare and Social Security are going broke. The Congressional Budget Office says if we don’t act, we’ll have a debt crisis. And if that happens, the most vulnerable will suffer first and worst. This debt weighs down our economy even today. But right now, we’re not doing much about it. We can’t kick the can down the road anymore. We’ve got to get a handle on our debt—now. And from my perspective, taking more from hardworking families just isn’t the answer. I know my Republican colleagues feel the same way. So I want to say this from the get-go: If this conference becomes an argument about taxes, we’re not going to get anywhere. The way to raise revenue is to grow the economy. We need to write a tax code that encourages economic growth—not stifles it. And luckily, Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate are working together to do just that. Today, our tax code is full of carve-outs and kickbacks. We need to get rid of them—and those bipartisan talks are just the way to do it. So let’s do all we can to encourage that effort. And let’s focus our energy on the task at hand: a budget that cuts spending in a smarter way. Our goal isn’t to grow the federal budget; it’s to grow family budgets. And to do that, we need to help put people back to work. Over 90 million Americans are “on the sidelines.” Over a third of the unemployed haven’t had a job in over 6 months. Household income is down significantly. We may disagree over why the economy isn’t growing as it should. But I hope we can all agree the status quo is unacceptable. So let’s work together to provide some real relief for families. If we get control of our debt, we’ll help the economy grow. We’ll restore confidence in Washington—and in our economy. Today, the Federal Reserve is keeping interest rates unusually low. If we lock in structural reforms now, we will help keep interest rates low, which will boost our economy. But this opportunity won’t last forever. Once interest rates rise, debt payments will eat up a bigger slice of the federal budget. In fact, those payments might grow so large that they bankrupt us. Structural reforms are crucial to economic growth, and we should act now to get a down payment. Nobody has to abandon their principles. Instead, we need to find out where our principles overlap. We all agree Washington isn’t working. We all agree there’s a smarter way to cut spending. And we all agree our economy could be doing a lot better. We won’t resolve all our differences here. We won’t solve all our problems. But we can make a good start. And we should—because we owe it to the country. So let’s focus on achievable goals. Let’s find common ground. Let’s make a down payment on the debt. And let’s get this economy growing again. With that, I want to recognize Chairman Murray for her opening remarks.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=357105,CNBC: Ryan on Obamacare’s rocky rollout and the budget-conference committee,2013-10-29,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Earlier this week at the Jack Kemp Foundation Dinner in Washington, D.C., Wisconsin’s First District Congressman Paul Ryan spoke with CNBC’s Larry Kudlow about Obamacare’s rocky rollout and Wednesday’s meeting of the budget-conference committee. Video of the interview, which aired last night on CNBC, is accessible below. Excerpts of the interview follow. The problem with Obamacare “House Republicans passed and sent to the Senate defunding the law, delaying the entire law, delaying the individual mandate. They voted those down, so they’ve already made that choice. They decided not to do that, so this law is coming into place. Why is it that we advanced those ideas? Because the collateral damage is the American people. “The collateral damage are the people who are seeing huge premium increases. The collateral damage are the people who are losing their 40-hour work week, the people who are losing the job-based insurance they have, the health-care providers who are seeing IPAB and all this other stuff happen to Medicare, which is putting them out of business. That’s the collateral damage. But the point is, we already passed these in the House, and the Senate rejected them, so that’s over with. “So now we’re here learning to live with the law, and those of us who are in the majority in the House, who had oversight hearing after oversight hearing, all year long. We had Kathleen Sebelius come to our committee at Ways and Means. We have the CMS director tomorrow. . . . “The point is, they came and said: ‘Everything is fine. The law is going to be OK. We’re ready to roll it out. There won’t be any problems.’ They came to Congress and said, ‘No problem here,’ when we knew better—because we saw the same analysis that NBC News is now reporting. Yet they said, ‘We’re good to go. This is going to be fine. Everything is ready.’ And look what is happening. It’s more than a website. It’s because this law itself is born from an architecture, a foundation, that is just not workable.” The chance for a budget agreement “If we spend our time focusing on our differences, we won’t get anything done. And if we talk about some big, grand bargain—which to me means fundamental pro-growth tax reform, good energy policy, balancing the budget, and getting our debt under control by reforming our entitlements that are going bankrupt—that to me is a grand bargain. I don’t think we’ll get a grand bargain. And we’re not talking about getting a grand bargain because then one party will require that the other compromises a core principle, and we won’t get anything done. “Dealing with the entitlement programs that are the big drivers of our debt, that are hurting growth today—if we did something to deal with that, having smarter entitlement reforms to replace the sort of crude, across-the-board sequester, it would do a couple things: It would show the credit markets and the bond markets, it would show the world that America is getting ahead of its problems. We’re beginning to see a bipartisan consensus on getting tax rates down by broadening the base, [ending] the crony capitalism, and getting more competitive so the American economy can grow. Those things we think are encouraging, so we want to have an agreement that helps foster those things: common ground on spending cuts and entitlement reforms in place of what I call the crude, across-the-board cut. And then focus on pro-growth policies.” The need for pro-growth tax reform “We’re interested in reforming our tax code—not as a measure of raising tax revenues. We think you can get better revenues through more economic growth, through faster economic growth. That’s the kind of thing that we’re in favor of, but we also want to get at the drivers of our debt. So the Keynesians want up-front stimulus, which is not what we’re going to do because it didn’t work the last time, and we believe in pro-growth economics, not this Keynesian, sugar-high economics. Point one. Point two, the reason I liked the Budget Control Act is it did have spending caps. Now with the sequester, we’re going to even lower spending caps. The question is, in the interim, in this moment that we are in, can we actually get some smarter and better deficit reduction that actually helps us get the debt under control to help us grow the economy so we can launch another pro-growth agenda?” Jack Kemp’s legacy “I’ve been really clear about this, if people see this as an exercise to have tax increases to replace the spending cuts we already have. Why would we do that? Why are we doing this? “We’re doing this because we want to help improve people’s lives. And what does that mean? That means upward mobility. That means opportunity. That means economic growth. That means get out of the rut that we are in in this country. And if we can do that through this divided government, great. If we can’t do that in a divided government, then we in the minority party, the opposition party, owe it to the people of this country to show them how we would do that. What are our ideas? What are our ideas for fighting poverty, for prosperity, for economic growth, for reigniting the American idea as Jack Kemp so thoughtfully did. That is what we are all about.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131102222810/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356911,Leahy & Sensenbrenner Join To Introduce USA FREEDOM Act,2013-10-29,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), chairman of the Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee in the House, introduced on Tuesday legislation that seeks to restore Americans’ privacy rights by ending the government’s dragnet collection of phone records and requiring greater oversight, transparency, and accountability with respect to domestic surveillance authorities.  “The government surveillance programs conducted under the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act are far broader than the American people previously understood. It is time for serious and meaningful reforms so we can restore confidence in our intelligence community,” Leahy said. “Modest transparency and oversight provisions are not enough.  We need real reform, which is why I join today with Congressman Sensenbrenner, as well as a bipartisan group of 15 Senators, to introduce the USA FREEDOM Act.” “Following 9/11, the USA PATRIOT Act passed the judiciary committees with overwhelming bipartisan support. The bill has helped keep Americans safe by ensuring information is shared among those responsible for defending our country and by enhancing the tools the intelligence community needs to identify and track terrorists,” Sensenbrenner said. “But somewhere along the way, the balance between security and privacy was lost. It’s now time for the judiciary committees to again come together in a bipartisan fashion to ensure the law is properly interpreted, past abuses are not repeated and American liberties are protected.  Washington must regain Americans’ trust in their government. The USA FREEDOM Act is an essential first step. I would like to thank Congressmen Conyers and Amash, Congresswoman Lofgren, Chairman Issa and others for working with us to draft this important legislation and encourage all my colleagues to support it.” The USA FREEDOM Act would end the dragnet collection of Americans’ phone records under Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act and ensure that other authorities cannot be used to justify similar dragnet collection. The bill also provides more safeguards for warrantless surveillance under the FISA Amendments Act. The bill includes other significant privacy and oversight provisions, provides for the creation of a Special Advocate to focus on the protection of privacy rights and civil liberties before the FISA Court, and requires more detailed public reporting about the numbers and types of FISA orders that are issued. The bill has 16 cosponsors in the Senate including Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dean Heller (R-Nev.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), and Joe Schatz (D-Hawaii). The measure also has more than 70 bipartisan cosponsors in the House and enjoys the diverse support of groups ranging from the National Rifle Association to the American Civil Liberties Union. Leahy and Sensenbrenner’s joint op-ed on the USA FREEDOM Act, which Tuesday appeared in Politico, can be viewed here. An outline of the legislation can be found here, and text of legislation can be found online.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131106020742/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=357124,Freedom Act to End NSA Data Collection Introduced,2013-10-29,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Patriot Act author Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy , D-Vt., introduced the USA Freedom Act on Tuesday with the help of some co-sponsors previously opposed to the bill's goal of ending the bulk data collection by the National Security Agency.The Freedom Act would end the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' communications records by amending Section 215 of the Patriot Act, making numerous amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and creating a privacy advocate to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, who could argue civil liberties concerns and appeal court decisions. The full text of the bill is available online. Sensenbrenner was the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee when the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, occurred, and was one of the original authors of the Patriot Act. In a statement on Monday introducing the Freedom Act, Sensenbrenner said the surveillance powers granted to intelligence agencies in the Patriot Act have kept Americans safe ""but somewhere along the way, the balance between security and privacy was lost."" ""It's now time for the judiciary committees to again come together in a bipartisan fashion to ensure the law is properly interpreted, past abuses are not repeated and American liberties are protected,"" Sensenbrenner said. ""Washington must regain Americans' trust in their government."" Since former NSA contractor Edward Snowden began disclosing government phone and email surveillance practices in June, members of congress have introduced a stack of proposals calling for increased transparency and oversight of the agency. In a statement on Monday Leahy said ""modest transparency and oversight provisions are not enough."" ""The government surveillance programs conducted under the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act are far broader than the American people previously understood,"" Leahy said. ""It is time for serious and meaningful reforms so we can restore confidence in our intelligence community,"" The highly anticipated bill to end the NSA's dragnet collection of phone records, and increase oversight, transparency, and accountability on domestic surveillance, is poised to set off another showdown in Congress between privacy rights and the national security needs of data surveillance. The House defeated by 12 votes a proposed amendment to the defense appropriations bill in July that would have restricted the NSA's collection of phone records and metadata, known as the Amash amendment because it was introduced by Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich. The co-sponsors of the House version of the Freedom Act include eight members who voted against that Amash amendment, and two of the 12 members who did not vote on that amendment, which could increase the chances of a vote in the House to end bulk data collection. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., voted against the Amash amendment but on Monday he commended the introduction of the Freedom Act. ""With each revelation of the scope of NSA's intelligence gathering programs, it's increasingly clear that we need to take legislative action with regard to these programs to ensure that they adequately protect Americans' civil liberties and operate in a prudent manner,"" Goodlatte said. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., has defended the need for NSA data collection to fight organized crime and terrrorism, and voted against the Amash amendment in July. Rogers is also drafting his own legislation to reform the NSA, which would likely emphasize transparency on the FISA court rather than a push to end data surveillance. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has also defended the need for the NSA to maintain its data surveillance powers, and is expected to introduce a bill that would increase transparency but would maintain the agency's data collection powers. However, Feinstein called for increased scrutiny of government surveillance on Monday in the wake of reports that the NSA monitored U.S. allies including German Chancellor Angela Merkel. ""It is abundantly clear that a total review of all intelligence programs is necessary so that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are fully informed as to what is actually being carried out by the intelligence community,"" Feinstein said in a statement. To protect Americans from broad surveillance the new bill proposes FISA amendments including changes to section 702 of the act to restrict intelligence gathering to data directly relevant to terrorism investigations. The bill would also require the government to disclose FISC decisions that contain a significant construction or interpretation of the law. It would also increase the ability of Internet and telecom companies to disclose information about government requests. Advocacy groups which support the USA Freedom Act include the American Civil Liberties Union. The Freedom Act is ""far superior"" in addressing civil liberties compared with the bill that Feinstein is expected to introduce, according to a statement from Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel for the ACLU. ""Although the USA Freedom Act does not fix every problem with the government's surveillance authorities and programs, it is an important first step and it deserves broad support,"" Richardson said. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356814,Ryan discusses Obamacare’s rollout and the budget conference,2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Earlier today, First District Congressman Paul Ryan spoke with WLIP’s Bill Lawrence about the upcoming budget-conference-committee meeting and the botched rollout of HealthCare.Gov. Excerpts of the interview follow. Obamacare’s bungled rollout: “We have been sitting in these oversight hearings on Obamacare in Congress for months, seeing this train wreck coming, knowing that people are going to have huge premium increases—people are going to lose the insurance that they have and like, or people wouldn’t even be able to get on the insurance website.  They were given warnings. They—meaning the administration and the Department of Health and Human Services—[knew] that this thing wasn’t ready, yet they pressed ahead anyway. We gave them three or four opportunities to, at the very least, delay the law or delay the individual mandate. And they said no on each one of these things. I mean, right now, you’re going to have to pay a fine if you don’t have insurance. But their website is so bad that you can’t even buy the insurance. So why would you make somebody pay a fine?” Overseeing Obamacare’s implementation: “I’ve been trying for about two months to get Kathleen Sebelius to come testify [before the House Budget Committee], and she has refused. Congress is supposed to do its oversight of the executive branch. She finally agreed to come and testify to another committee, the Energy and Commerce Committee. We have the person who is the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services coming to testify tomorrow before the Ways and Means Committee. That’s one of the key people in charge of rolling out Obamacare, and she’s one of the people who was telling us earlier in the year and gave us all of these indications that this thing was ready. . . . “When I see a secretary of Health and Human Services seeing all this evidence that this isn’t going to be ready—that people are going to get confused, or people are going to lose insurance and they are going to have gap[s] in coverage—and then they proceed ahead anyway, that’s what was concerning to me. But more to the point, she said everything was going to be perfect, everything was going to be right. It was going to be on time, it was going to work, and she was given evidence to the contrary. And she misled Congress in that sense. That’s why I was concerned.” The prospects for a successful budget conference: “I don’t want to get ahead of ourselves or raise expectations too high because in this kind of divided government, to get a, really what I call a ‘grand bargain’—and a grand bargain to me is, ‘We are going to balance to budget, we’re going to pay off the debt, we’re going to make Medicare permanently solvent, we’re going to fix our big, fiscal problems’—it’s extremely clear to me that the President doesn’t want to do an agreement like that. If we try for an agreement like that, both sides are going to demand the other one compromises core principles, and we’ll just talk about our differences, and we’ll go into another food fight. “What I want to do is look for common ground, see where we can find those areas of understanding and agreement, and pass those. Meaning: Let’s take a chop at the tree of our fiscal problems. Let’s get a down payment on our debt and our deficit. “I would rather have smarter spending cuts than the sequester. We’ll take the sequester spending cuts if that’s all we have to get spending under control and get the deficit under control. But I’d rather do it in a smarter way. “That’s what I’m starting Wednesday with these budget talks. I’m hoping we can do that. I’m sure people will point fingers at each other. It’s Washington, so it’ll be a bit of a partisan show. But I like to think we can find that common ground—make a difference on the debt. I would love to see this divided government work a little bit, and that would be a confidence builder for the economy, for the country, for the credit markets.” Searching for common ground: “I put an editorial in the Wall Street Journal about ten days ago that said, ‘Here are the things in the President’s budget that we like. Here’s some common ground on things that we can do that we like.’ That’s what I was trying to do—[which] is, start the conversation as a Republican talking about the things the President proposed in his budget that we would agree to. I just wanted to go first with that kind of a move by showing where I think we can start looking for common ground, and let’s go do that. That’s basically the process I’m trying to get started here.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131102151928/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356937,The Case for NSA Reform,2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"By Sen. Patrick Leahy and Rep. Jim SensenbrennerPublished on October 29, 2013 In the days and weeks following Sept. 11, 2001, we were the primary authors of the USA PATRIOT Act — legislation that responded to those attacks by enhancing the government’s ability to gather information to prevent terrorism. Some checks and balances that were proposed then were included in the final bill; others were not. The PATRIOT Act has been much debated these past 12 years, and we have not always been on the same side of those debates. But whatever our differences may have been in the past, we strongly agree that the dragnet collection of millions of Americans’ phone records every day — whether they have any connection at all to terrorism — goes far beyond what Congress envisioned or intended to authorize. More important, we agree it must stop. Over the past five months, we have seen a slow trickle of additional disclosures that have only added to our concerns. Since the revelation that the National Security Agency is collecting the details of Americans’ phone calls on an unprecedented scale, it has come out that the government searches the content of huge troves of emails, collects in bulk the address books from email accounts and social networking sites, at least temporarily collected geolocation data from our cellphones, committed thousands of privacy violations and made substantial misrepresentations to courts and Congress. Not only do many of these programs raise serious legal questions, they have come at a high cost to Americans’ privacy rights, business interests and standing in the international community. It is time for a new approach. On Tuesday we will introduce bicameral, bipartisan legislation that will put an end to the National Security Agency’s indiscriminate collection of personal information. Our proposal, the USA FREEDOM Act, provides stronger privacy safeguards with respect to a range of government surveillance programs. While the USA FREEDOM Act ends the dragnet collection of telephone records, it preserves the intelligence community’s ability to gather information in a more focused way, as was the original intent of the PATRIOT Act. Our bill also ensures that this program will not simply be restarted under other legal authorities, and includes new oversight, auditing and public reporting requirements. No longer will the government be able to employ a carte-blanche approach to records collection or enact secret laws by covertly reinterpreting congressional intent. And to further promote privacy interests, our legislation establishes a special advocate to provide a counterweight to the surveillance interests in the FISA Court’s closed-door proceedings. Let us be clear: We do not underestimate the threats that our country faces, and we agree that Congress must equip the intelligence community with the necessary and appropriate tools to keep us safe. But Congress did not enact FISA and the PATRIOT Act to give the government boundless surveillance powers that could sweep in the data of countless innocent Americans. If all of our phone records are relevant to counterterrorism investigations, what else could be? The intelligence community has failed to justify its expansive use of these laws. It is simply not accurate to say that the bulk collection of phone records has prevented dozens of terrorist plots. The most senior NSA officials have acknowledged as much in congressional testimony. We also know that the FISA court has admonished the government for making a series of substantial misrepresentations to the court regarding these programs. As a result, the intelligence community now faces a trust deficit with the American public that compromises its ability to do its job. It is not enough to just make minor tweaks around the edges. It is time for real, substantive reform. We are two veteran lawmakers who believe now is the time for that reform and for a meaningful discussion about protecting privacy and national security in the 21st century. We are not alone — we have heard from Americans across the country who rightfully question the need for these intrusive programs and we are joined by lawmakers in both chambers from across the political spectrum. We both proudly serve on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, which have led the way in these important discussions for decades and will continue to do so in the coming months with public hearings and open debate. We hope other lawmakers will join us in our legislative efforts to ensure that such abuses are never repeated and that no false trade-off between freedom and security is allowed to be decided secretly, behind closed doors, ever again. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) is chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131106020737/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356939,The White House on Spying,2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"The White House response on Monday to the expanding disclosures of American spying on foreign leaders, their governments and millions of their citizens was a pathetic mix of unsatisfying assurances about reviews under way, platitudes about the need for security in an insecure age, and the odd defense that the president didn’t know that American spies had tapped the German chancellor’s cellphone for 10 years.Is it really better for us to think that things have gone so far with the post-9/11 idea that any spying that can be done should be done and that nobody thought to inform President Obama about tapping the phone of one of the most important American allies? The White House spokesman, Jay Carney, kept repeating that Mr. Obama ordered a review of surveillance policy a few months ago, but he would not confirm whether that includes the tapping of the cellphone of Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, or the collection of data on tens of millions of calls in France, Spain and elsewhere. It’s unlikely that Mr. Obama would have ordered any review if Edward Snowden’s leaks had not revealed the vacuum-cleaner approach to electronic spying. Mr. Carney left no expectation that the internal reviews will produce any significant public accounting — only that the White House might have “a little more detail” when they are completed. Fortunately, members of Congress have been more aggressive in responding to two broad disclosures. One, that both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations misinterpreted the Patriot Act to permit the collection of metadata on phone calls, emails and text messages of all Americans, whether they were international or domestic. And, second, that the 2008 amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act were being stretched to excuse the routine collection of data from 60 million telephone calls in Spain and 70 million in France over two 30-day periods. Legislation scheduled to be introduced on Tuesday by Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, would end the bulk collection of Americans’ communications data. The administration has said that such data collection is permitted by Section 215 of the Patriot Act, although Mr. Sensenbrenner, who wrote that section, has said it is not. The bill, the U.S.A. Freedom Act, would require that the “tangible things” sought through data collection are “relevant and material to an authorized investigation into international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities.” They would also have to pertain to a foreign power or its agent, activities of a foreign agent already under investigation or someone in touch with an agent. Currently, the government conducts metadata collection by periodically vaguely informing a federal court in secret that it is working on security-related issues. The bill would require a court order in order to search for Americans’ communications in data collected overseas, which falls under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and it would restrict “reverse targeting” — targeting a foreigner with the goal of getting information about an American. The bill would not address spying on foreigners, including such abuses as in the Merkel affair. Those activities are governed by a presidential order that is secret and certain to remain so. We are not reassured by the often-heard explanation that everyone spies on everyone else all the time. We are not advocating a return to 1929 when Secretary of State Henry Stimson banned the decryption of diplomatic cables because “gentlemen do not read each other’s mail.” But there has long been an understanding that international spying was done in pursuit of a concrete threat to national security. That Chancellor Merkel’s cellphone conversations could fall under that umbrella is an outgrowth of the post-9/11 decision by President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney that everyone is the enemy, and that anyone’s rights may be degraded in the name of national security. That led to Abu Ghraib, torture at the secret C.I.A. prisons, warrantless wiretapping of American citizens, grave harm to international relations, and the dragnet approach to surveillance revealed by the Snowden leaks. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131106031330/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=357127,NSA bills set up a choice in Congress: End bulk collection of phone records or endorse it,2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"After nearly five months of controversy and debate, members of Congress may face a clear choice over the National Security Agency’s program to collect the phone records of nearly every American: endorse it or shut it down.On Tuesday, lawmakers are expected to introduce the first comprehensive NSA legislation since the agency’s phone records program was disclosed in June. The proposal, from a bipartisan coalition in the House and the Senate, would effectively halt “bulk” records collection under the USA Patriot Act. Another bipartisan group of lawmakers is preparing legislation that would preserve the program while strengthening privacy protections. The dueling proposals are setting the stage for what could be a fierce political showdown over the NSA’s authorities. NSA Director Keith Alexander and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. — who are set to testify before Congress on Tuesday — have defended the phone records program as a vital counterterrorism tool. But privacy advocates and critics on Capitol Hill, led by a diverse group of liberal Democrats and libertarian conservatives, have described it as a gross infringement on civil liberties. “There’s no sugarcoating it. These two trains — one that codifies bulk collection and the other that outlaws it — are on a collision course,” said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy advocacy group. President Obama has called for reforms to restore Americans’ and foreign allies’ trust, including “appropriate” changes to the program collecting data from Americans. “Just because we can get information doesn’t necessarily always mean that we should,” he said at a news conference in Russia last month. White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said Monday that she could not comment on legislation that had not been introduced yet. But in general, she said, the administration supports changes to achieve “greater oversight, greater transparency and constraints on the use of this authority, as well as measures to enhance public confidence” in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (also known as the FISA court) process. “We are working closely with Congress on these important reforms.” In July, the House narrowly defeated a measure to defund the phone records collection program. Since then, fresh disclosures about the NSA’s activities and capabilities, based on leaks from former agency contractor Edward Snowden and declassified court opinions, have continued to spark controversy — and have built support for reining in the surveillance. The phone call database contains billions of records of numbers dialed, as well as the lengths and times of calls, but not their content. “This is going to be a huge battle because it is fundamentally about whether or not the oversight structure that we set up in the 1970s — to use Congress as a proxy for public oversight so we can have the secrecy of the programs — can be sustained,” said Paul Rosenzweig, who was a senior homeland security policy official in the George W. Bush administration. The two sets of legislation reflect different judgments about what the proper balance between security and privacy is and ought to be. On one hand, there is the approach taken by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman; Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), a former House Judiciary Committee chairman; and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. They would end the mass collection of phone data by requiring the government to prove to a court that it is seeking call records relevant to either an agent of a foreign power who is the subject of a terrorism investigation or someone with a link to that agent. Such a requirement would make bulk collection impossible, the proponents say. The legislation also would require a warrant to deliberately search for the e-mail and phone call content of Americans that is collected as part of a surveillance program targeting foreigners located overseas. “The government has not made its case that bulk collection of domestic phone records is an effective counterterrorism tool, especially in light of the intrusion on American privacy,” Leahy said at a hearing this month. Some experts say a viable alternative would be to have phone companies give the NSA data from searches based on phone numbers linked to terrorism. “This process could easily be automated to make it virtually instantaneous,” Edward W. Felten, a Princeton University computer science professor, said in a court brief filed Friday in an ACLU lawsuit challenging the phone program’s constitutionality. On the other hand, the approach taken by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, focuses on increasing transparency and privacy protections. The intelligence committee leaders have not introduced their respective bills, but Feinstein has outlined the changes under consideration. They include limiting access to the call database; codifying the requirement that analysts have a “reasonable articulable suspicion” that a phone number is associated with terrorism to query the database; requiring that the FISA court promptly review each such determination; and limiting the retention period for phone records, now five years. “This program is constitutional,” Feinstein said at a hearing on the issue last month. “It is legal. . . . I also believe that collecting timely and actionable intelligence is critical to our nation’s security.” The Intelligence Committee’s bill, she said, would also expand the NSA’s authority to allow it to continue intercepting for three days the phone calls and e-mails of an overseas foreign target who had entered the United States. That would give the government a chance to go to the FISA court to seek a traditional individual warrant to continue the collection. If the warrant was denied, the intercepts would have to be deleted. The bill would also require Senate confirmation of the NSA director and inspector general. Both approaches have at least one element in common: a recommendation, endorsed by Obama, that there be a special advocate to promote privacy interests before the FISA court. The proposal to end bulk collection, if it is allowed to reach the floor, could succeed in the House, where a similar effort failed by only 12 votes in July. At least eight lawmakers who voted against the July measure and two who did not vote on it are now in favor of Leahy and Sensenbrenner’s approach, congressional aides said. “The public is justifiably concerned about the fact that everybody’s phone calls apparently have been snared in this — even people who have no relationship to terrorism,” Sensenbrenner said in an interview. “But what has come out since the end of July, I think, is going to tip the scales in favor of a significant NSA reform.” Rosenzweig, for his part, said he thinks “the insurgent movement” will not succeed in ending bulk collection, “but I am quite sure that they are going to wind up getting changes — that something will happen.” View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/steps-in-the-right-direction,Steps in the right direction,2013-10-27,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends,Our Wisconsin businesses, and the people who work to keep them open, are among my top priorities as your Representative in Washington. This week I had the opportunity to work on two initiatives that will help these businesses that are so vital to both our local and national economies. Keep reading for a wrap-up of the week that was. Keeping our waterways clear and flowing: This week I voted in favor of the House’s Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA). As a co-chair of the Congressional Great Lakes Task Force, I am glad that provisions were included in WRRDA that will directly benefit our Great Lakes. Central among these is the designation of our Great Lakes waterways and ports – including Superior-Duluth – as a Navigation System, which will guarantee that our infrastructure and harbor dredging projects will be accurately prioritized.I offered an amendment, which would have further ensured that funding from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is only used to do just that – maintain our harbors – rather than being spent on unapproved projects elsewhere in the country.  While this amendment was not accepted in the final legislation, I will continue to fight for our Great Lakes and make sure they are taken care of.Another step for small businesses: America’s number one job creators – small businesses – still need help. Congress put aside partisan differences last year and passed the JOBS Act, which removed a number of barriers to raising capital to start a business. It’s only logical that the next step is to remove barriers that are keeping these smaller companies from going public and to raise additional capital to expand those businesses. I, and many others, believe giving emerging growth companies the opportunity to trade at bigger increments than the larger, Fortune 500 companies will give them the access to capital they need. However, the SEC, markets, and Congress do not have much data on that theory. My legislation, the Small Cap Liquidity Reform Act, will give us the data we need to move forward. We discussed my bill in a Financial Services hearing this week. Click on the image to watch my exchange: I will continue to do all that I can to ensure these bills, in addition to other pieces of legislation that also help our Wisconsin economy, move through Congress. As always, please continue to share your thoughts via myFacebook and Twitter pages. Have a great week,    Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=dac03716-ba8c-4997-b1ea-58c3ffca84ef,Johnson to Introduce Act to Allow Americans to Keep Their Health Care,2013-10-25,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. - Senator Ron Johnson will file legislation next week titled the “If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act.”  Senator Johnson said today: “One of the most important promises made by President Obama and Democrat congressional leadership to promote the Affordable Care Act was that Americans who were satisfied with their health plans could keep them.  That promise has been broken.  More than a million Americans have been notified that the plans they like with the coverage they have chosen have been canceled.  Millions more Americans will have the plans of their choice canceled in months to come.” ""Americans want the freedom to choose their own plans and want to be in control of their own health care.  They don’t want Obamacare destroying what they have and what they like.  They don’t want their personal choices regarding their health plans and their families’ health plans canceled by Obamacare. ""The ‘If You Like Your Health Plan, You Can Keep It Act’ will amend the law to make Obamacare live up to the promises of the politicians who sold the plan to the American public.  I will file the bill in the coming week and hope to garner support from fellow Senators of both parties who truly want to make sure President Obama honors his promise that every American has the freedom to keep his or her own health care plan.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-votes-to-keep-wisconsin-waterways-clear-flowing,Duffy Votes to Keep Wisconsin Waterways Clear & Flowing,2013-10-24,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington D.C. – Following his vote in favor of the House’s Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA), U.S. Representative Sean Duffy (WI-07) offered the following comments on what this legislation will mean for Wisconsin’s ports and waterways:  “As a co-chair of the Congressional Great Lakes Task Force, I am glad that provisions were included in WRRDA that will directly benefit our Great Lakes. Central among these is the designation of our Great Lakes waterways and ports – including Superior-Duluth – as a Navigation System, which will guarantee that our infrastructure and harbor dredging projects will be accurately prioritized. “I offered an amendment, which would have further ensured that funding from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is only used to do just that – maintain our harbors – rather than being spent on unapproved projects elsewhere in the country.  While this amendment was not accepted in the final legislation, I will continue to fight for our Great Lakes and make sure they are taken care of.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356148,Ryan: Americans Deserve Answers on Obamacare,2013-10-23,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON­—The Health and Human Services Department has yet to respond to repeated requests from the House Budget Committee for information about the implementation of the President’s health-care law. Now, HBC chairman Paul Ryan is asking for more information about President Obama’s “tech surge” to fix the dysfunctional HealthCare.gov website. “The American people have a right to know how HHS is spending their money,” said Chairman Ryan. “We were told we had to pass the health-care bill to find out what was in it. But it’s been three years, and we’re still in the dark.” On August 15, Chairman Ryan sent a letter to HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking her to testify on the department’s plans for implementation on September 11. HHS staff indicated that she wouldn’t be available on that date—or on three alternative dates. But her office never sent an official reply. On August 22, Chairman Ryan sent another letter to the secretary asking her to provide an organizational chart of the department’s implementation efforts. The letter also asked that the department produce a list of the offices involved in implementation, the number of full-time employees involved, and all relevant spending items. Chairman Ryan asked the secretary to provide the requested materials by September 11. On September 10, the department told HBC staff in a telephone conversation that it would reply to the committee’s request within the next two weeks. But HHS has yet to respond. On October 18, HBC staff followed up with the department via email—but received no reply. On October 22—two months after the original request—Chairman Ryan sent a follow-up letter to Secretary Sebelius. In his latest letter, Ryan writes, “Your continued silence on these important inquiries after refusing to testify raises serious questions about the administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability.” The letter also includes a request for more information about President Obama’s so-called tech surge to fix the law’s website, HealthCare.gov. It asks the secretary to provide the number of people hired, their compensation, and the aggregate costs of their repairs. Below is a timeline of the committee’s requests to the HHS department. On August 15, Chairman Ryan sent a letter to Secretary Sebelius asking her testify on September 11. HHS staff said the secretary was unable to testify that day—and on three alternative dates. The chairman sent a follow-up request for further information on August 22. On August 26, the committee asked officials from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO), and the Department of Labor (DOL) to testify. CMS said administrator Marilyn Tavenner was unavailable to testify on the initial date of September 11 and the alternatives dates of September 17, 18, and 19.  CMS also said deputy administrator and director Gary Cohen was unavailable to testify on the initial date of September 11 and any day the following week. DOL said that assistant secretary for employee benefits Phyllis Borzi was unavailable to testify on the initial date of September 11. The committee made a follow-up request on September 9, and DOL said she was unavailable on the alternative dates as well. On October 22, Chairman Ryan sent a follow-up letter to Secretary Sebelius, expressing concerns over her department’s refusal to answer basic questions. Ryan also asked her to detail the costs of the administration’s so-called tech surge, “including the number of people hired, their compensation, and the aggregate cost of their repairs.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=d02f95b4-b36c-4d54-874b-238b4433a41f,Senator Johnson Announces Staff Mobile Office Hours,2013-10-22,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Oshkosh, Wisconsin – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) announced today that his staff would be available for mobile office hours at the dates and locations listed below. These office hours allow constituents to meet with the Senator’s staff to request assistance with a federal agency or regarding other federal matters.     Tuesday, October 29th, 11:00 am - 12:00 pm Endeavor Village Hall 400 Church Street, Endeavor, WI 53930 Wednesday, October 30th, 9:00 am - 10:00 am Poynette Village Hall 106 South Main Street, Poynette, WI 53955 Wednesday, October 30th, 11:00 am - 12:00 pm Shorewood Hills Village Hall 810 Shorewood Boulevard, Shorewood Hills, WI 53705 Wednesday, October 30th, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm Robert M. Smithbach Community Center 208 Benton Street, Cambridge, WI 53523 Wednesday, October 30th, 3:00 pm - 4:00 pm La Valle Town Hall 314 Highway 33/58, La Valle, WI 53941 Thursday, October 31st, 11:00 am - 12:00 pm Port Edwards Town Hall 2000 County Road G, Nekoosa, WI 54457 Thursday, October 31st, 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm Milladore Town Hall 3320 County Road P, Milladore, WI 54454 Friday, November 1st, 9:00 am - 10:00 am Blue Mounds Village Hall 11011 Brigham Avenue, Blue Mounds, WI 53517 Friday, November 1st, 9:00 am - 10:00 am Cascade Village Hall 301 First Street, Cascade, WI  53011 Friday, November 1st, 10:15 am - 11:15 am Adell Village Hall 508 Seifert Street, Adell, WI 53001 Friday, November 1st, 10:30 am - 11:30 am Cross Plains Town Hall 3734 County Road P, Cross Plains, WI 53528 Friday, November 1st, 10:30 am - 11:30 am Birchwood Village Hall 101 North Main Street, Birchwood, WI 54817 Friday, November 1st, 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm Haugen Village Hall 103 3rd Street, Haugen, WI 54841 Friday, November 1st, 12:30 pm - 1:30 pm Lime Ridge Village Hall E 4637 State Hwy 154, Loganville, WI 53942 Friday, November 1st, 2:30 pm - 3:30 pm Osceola Village Hall 310 Chieftain Street, Osceola, WI 54020 Friday, November 1st, 2:45 pm - 3:45 pm Merrimac Village Hall S6911 State Highway 13, Merrimac, WI 53561 Monday, November 4th, 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm Rockdale Village Hall 208 Benton Street, Cambridge, WI 53523 Monday, November 4th, 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm             Maribel Community Center 14905 Mulberry Street, Maribel, WI 54227  Monday, November 4th, 9:00 am - 10:00 am Reedsville Municipal Building, Village Hall 217 Menasha Street, Reedsville, WI 54230 Monday, November 4th, 10:15 am - 11:15 am St. Nazianz Village Hall 228 West Main Street, St. Nazianz, WI 54232 ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/the-crisis-that-didnt-have-to-be,The crisis that didn't have to be,2013-10-20,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, For nearly three weeks Americans have woken up to daily headlines denouncing the abject failure of the Obamacare roll out. What is more, you know things are not going well when some of the President’s own teammates and biggest cheerleaders are not showing up to his pep rally. One of President Obama’s most trusted advisers, Robert Gibbs, called the roll out, “excruciatingly embarrassing,” Washington Postcolumnist, Ezra Klein said it has been a “big failure” so far,  and CNN’s Wolf Blitzer admitted that, “Obamacare should have been delayed a year.” In Wisconsin we do not need pundits or polls to show us that this healthcare “reform” is not what we bargained for. The White House has not yet released any official numbers, but one story reported that fewer than fifty people in Wisconsin have been able to sign-up for the exchanges.  The website that cost taxpayers nearly half a billion dollars is rampant with errors, and those who have been able to get in are finding out that their premiums are going up and their choices are going down. One constituent told me recently that he only qualified for one exchange and it required him to trade in his neighborhood physician for one  thirty miles away. Even the President’s top Obamacare advisor, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, admitted this week that the site was not ready for prime time. The Wall Street Journal  cited the Secretary’s comments from a recent interview, “We didn’t have enough testing, specifically for high volumes, for a very complicated project.” The online insurance marketplace needed five years of construction and a year of testing, she said: “We had two years and almost no testing.” This is a crisis that didn’t have to be. The President has fought harder to keep his family and his Administration out of Obamacare than he has to fix it. He may not understand just how frustrating it has been for so many American families who tried to sign up for Obamacare on a website that didn't work because he exempted his own family and his Administration from the very healthcare program he has forced on the rest of America.  Republicans offered a very fair and reasonable alternative. We asked for the President and his Administration to be included in Obamacare and we also requested that individual Americans receive the same one year delay from the tax penalty that he gave to big businesses. Not only would this have given the American people a much desired reprieve, it would have given him, and his Administration, a much needed delay. There is still time for the President to take us up on our offer. I encourage him to take a step back, delay the mandate for a year and give himself the opportunity to fix his healthcare system, or better yet, cut his losses and move on. I agree that our healthcare system is not perfect, let’s work together to produce fairer and better reforms that will actually work for the American people.   Thanks for the continued opportunity to be your Representative in Congress. As always, please continue to share your thoughts and feedback via Facebook and Twitter.Have a great week,        Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=7ba2c09c-1d24-4ba5-b0b5-49d3064eb2d6,Senator Johnson's Office Comments on Pay During Shutdown,2013-10-18,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Johnson’s office made the following comment today on his pay during the partial government shutdown. “The federal government was shut down for 16 days.  Today, Senator Ron Johnson sent a personal check for  $7,627.40  to the Treasury to honor his promise to the voters of Wisconsin to return the congressional pay he received during the shutdown.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=27744acc-660a-482a-9773-2a8aa873a5bb,Senator Johnson Comments on Appointment to Budget Conference,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Johnson made the following comments on being appointed to work on the bipartisan budget conference committee. “I ran for office to do everything I can to help prevent the bankrupting of America. I appreciate being named to the budget conference committee, enabling me to continue my work defining and finding solutions for the enormous fiscal challenges we face.  My previous discussions with the White House on the debt and deficit, I hope, have helped lay some groundwork for a successful conference agreement.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/press-release/duffy-votes-against-raising-the-debt-ceiling-without-necessary-reforms,Duffy Votes Against Raising the Debt Ceiling Without Necessary Reforms,2013-10-16,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington D.C. – Following the House’s vote to increase the debt ceiling without including necessary spending reforms,U.S. Representative Sean Duffy (WI-07) released the following statement to explain his vote:  ""Raising the debt ceiling does not solve the fundamental problem that our federal government spends more money than it takes in. That is why I conditioned my vote to raise the debt ceiling on the inclusion of reforms to address our spending, specifically our ballooning entitlement spending, including the latest entitlement - Obamacare. That's the responsible, common sense thing to do. Since the bill being voted on tonight does none of these things, I cannot support it."" Rep. Duffy continued, ""I came to Washington to change the way things are done in this town. I still believe it is immoral for our government to continue living for today while saddling our children with the debt and inevitable tax increases to pay for it.""   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355757,Ryan on Washington’s Missed Opportunity,2013-10-16,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin issued the following statement on tonight’s vote: “Today’s legislation reopens the government and averts default. It rejects Democrats’ demands to increase spending. And it sets a precedent for further changes to Obamacare. “But it’s also a missed opportunity. To pay our bills today—and to make sure we can pay our bills tomorrow—we must make a down payment on the debt. Today’s legislation won’t help us reduce our fast-growing debt. In fact, it could extend the debt ceiling well into next year, further delaying any action. In my judgment, this isn’t a breakthrough. We’re just kicking the can down the road. “That said, I hope both sides will work together in the months ahead to pay down the debt, provide relief for families, and grow the economy. I look forward to convening the first conference on a budget resolution since 2009. And though a budget resolution by itself can’t resolve our spending problem, I’m committed to making a bipartisan budget conference a success.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=123543e8-3976-4b39-b1eb-672ce9aff0ec,Johnson Comments on Debt Ceiling Deal,2013-10-16,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Johnson made the following comments today on the continuing resolution and debt ceiling deal. “America and its future generations suffered a loss today.  President Obama and Harry Reid may claim a legislative victory, but they have proven, once again, they are more than willing to increase the debt burden on our children and grandchildren. They’re willing to do it without enacting any fiscal discipline or reforms to address America's long-term debt and deficit problem.  “I am not, so I voted no on this fiscally irresponsible legislation.  I will continue to work tirelessly with anyone willing to acknowledge the enormous fiscal challenges facing America and work with me in good faith to define and solve these problems.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355607,Paul Ryan Details Rejected House Offer,2013-10-14,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"In an interview with WTMJ's Charlie Sykes on Monday, Congressman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) detailed the provisions of the House Republicans' offer, which the White House rejected over the weekend. Highlights ""On Thursday, John Boehner, myself and other leaders of the House met with the President, in a lengthy meeting, where we put an offer on the table that said we’ll give you a six week debt limit extension to buy us time to enter budget negotiations to deal with entitlement reform, tax reform. You know, the things that are the drivers of the debt. To get ourselves out of debt, and get the economy growing. And then, we will immediately, starting that evening—Thursday night—negotiate with you throughout the weekend about the continuing resolution and Obamacare. Know that what we pushing for, our latest offer on Obamacare, were two really simple things, from my perspective. ""Number one: Don’t give anybody special treatment-- like Members of Congress. You probably have heard Ron Johnson talk about this. Don’t give members of Congress a special advantage, and members of the Administration a special advantage, that nobody else in the country has. ""Number two: you’ve already suspended the tax for businesses on the mandate. Suspend the same tax for individual mandate. Individuals can’t even sign up for Obamacare right now, so why would you tax somebody for not complying with a law they can’t comply with. ""Seems to me those are really reasonable points. We said we would negotiate how to do that, over the weekend. The President said,' I'm not going to say yes, I'm not going to say no. Let's just think about this.'  ""He spent the next day basically stalling us, only to call back John Boehner Friday night to say 'No deal, I won't do this. I won't sit down and talk to you guys.' ""What we later learned, was that he was working with the Senate that whole day trying to get them to have an agreement to send a bill to basically jam the House.""So it was clear to us, come Friday evening or Saturday morning, that the President stalled us. We were waiting, expecting to do negotiations, decided not to that and to try to work with the Senate to send something over to jam the House. And the Senate couldn't do that. Harry Reid walked away from the talks they had."" http://www.rightwisconsin.com/perspectives/227665861.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://duffy.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/tough-questions,Tough Questions,2013-10-13,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Sean Duffy,D000614,duffy.house.gov,,,legacy,"Dear friends, Did you see Jon Stewart’s interview with Sec. Sebelius on Comedy Central this week? He asked the Secretary a very simple question and that is where things got difficult. Her inability to offer a good answer lifted the veil on the hard truth which is that most members of the media have all but abandoned their responsibility to ask tough questions of this Administration. The day after that interview aired, I asked veteran news reporter Andrea Mitchell why it is that she and her colleagues had been giving the Administration a pass on the tough questions, she too found it difficult to answer. If you haven’t yet seen our exchange, click on the image below: The overwhelming response I received after this interview aired unearthed another truth that the Administration probably would have preferred stayed buried: when the tough questions are finally asked, the American people are not happy with the answers. For example, why is it that the President, his Administration and their families are not required to join Obamacare? Or, why is it okay for the President to delay the Obamacare tax penalty for a year for big corporations, but deny everyday Americans that same special treatment? These are reasonable requests and reasonable questions. If we cannot rely on the media to ask them, then we must do it ourselves. I am going to utilize every resource I have as your Representative in Congress to ask these questions and get them answered. What tough questions do you have for the Administration? Share them with me via Facebook and Twitter.  I am always grateful for the feedback I receive from constituents and that rings especially true this week. Thanks very much for taking time from your busy life to share your thoughts with me. Have a great week,          Sean",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=0c23558d-72a6-44ef-81d9-caecb6b6efca,Johnson Comments on Debt Ceiling Vote in U.S. Senate,2013-10-12,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Ron Johnson,J000293,www.ronjohnson.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – Senator Johnson made the following comments today on the debt ceiling vote in the U.S. Senate. ""Harry Reid's debt ceiling bill offered nothing to solve America's enormous financial challenges.  I voted no on the motion to proceed.  Anytime an American President demands the authority to increase the debt burden on our children and grandchildren, that request should be accompanied by a plan to address the serious problem of unsustainable spending.  President Obama has a historic opportunity to work with people like me that are willing to make the tough choices to put America back on a path to financial solvency.  All Americans will pay a heavy price if President Obama fails to seize this opportunity.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131106031324/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355538,Patriot Act author: ‘There has been a failure of oversight’,2013-10-11,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) authored the original Patriot Act after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and previously served as chair of the House Judiciary Committee. Recently, he has become a vocal critic of how that legislation has been used to justify broad National Security Agency spying powers since they came to light due to documents from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Sensenbrenner is introducing legislation called the USA FREEDOM Act with Sen.  Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) to try to reform those programs. I spoke to the congressman Thursday afternoon about the proposal, congressional oversight over the NSA, and how opposition to the spying programs is building alliances in a time of bitter partisanship. This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.  Andrea Peterson: What is the USA Freedom Act? Sensenbrenner: It does several things. First of all, it stops the collection of metadata by the NSA and has some restrictions on section 215 of the Patriot Act — essentially, the suggestions made by Senator Leahy in the 2005/2006 reauthorization act which were rejected during the negotiations. It restricts section 215 to bring it back to the original intent, which was that the Justice Department would identify a non-U.S. person who is engaged in a terrorist organization, get a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) order to be able to find out who that person was in contact with, and be able to try to spread that spiderweb to see who was involved in a plot that might target people either domestically or internationally. And it also deals with reforming the FISA Court?  The two other things are that we are proposing reform of the FISA Court, where we recognize there are things that have got to be classified. But if the FISA Court changes policy or attempts to reinterpret the law, we require the publication of that so it is not a secret decision when basically the FISA Court allows the NSA to shift gears. The other thing we do is create an office of public advocate to represent the public and privacy interests in particular — and also give the public advocate authority to appeal a decision of the FISA court the advocate feels does not comport with the law or comport with policies. One of the former FISA Court judges who is retired wrote an op-ed — I think it was in the Wall Street Journal, but I'm not sure about that. It said judges sit on the bench and they listen to advocates on both sides argue the case and then decide based upon the facts and the law is argued. But in the FISA Court, they only hear one side and they don't hear the other. I think the creation of the public advocate would allow a judge to be a judge rather than hearing one side of the argument and making a guesstimate of what the law and the regulations require. The other thing that the Freedom Act does is that it gives the Internet providers and phone companies the authority to petition the FISA Court not to release whose phone records have been ordered to be turned over to the NSA, but how many FISA orders or national security letters they have received and how many they have complied with. I know you had some very interesting, and I thought quite amusing comments, about other proposals at the Cato Institute event — I already reported on the ""fig leaf"" comment ... I read that. Do you have any other thoughts about the proposals? I have not seen the proposals, and I don't think that the Intelligence Committee people — and specifically Congressman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Senator Feinstein (D-Calif.) are as far along as we have been in terms of drafting legislation that would correct the abuses that have occurred in the NSA and have come to light in the last few months. Let me say that both of them have been very strong in their defense of what the NSA has been doing, and despite their advocacy I think that their arguments have gotten less and less support in Congress and among the American public as more and more abuses of the NSA have come to light — particularly during the august recess of Congress. I know you were a supporter of the Amash Amendment and spoke for it — do you think there's been enough of a shift in Congress since that vote that some of these more comprehensive reform packages might be successful? Well, there was an inspector general's report that showed that there have been thousands of violations of their own regulations that came out in August. And there were also published reports that NSA employees were actually getting into people's Facebook sites, particularly what their social status was.  And in my opinion that is outrageous, and I have found an awful lot of support for making sure that never happens again. Since you were the author of the Patriot Act, you were at least at one point supportive of greater powers going to the intelligence community. Were the programs it has now been revealed the Patriot Act was used to justify particularly surprising to you? How else did you expect it to be implemented? Clearly, they were very surprising to me. I can say that if Congress knew what the NSA had in mind in the future immediately after 9/11, the Patriot Act never would have passed, and I never would have supported it. We have to have a balance of security and civil liberties. What the NSA has done, with the concurrence of both the Bush and Obama administrations, is completely forgotten about the guarantees of civil liberties that those of us who helped write the Patriot Act in 2001 and the reauthorization in 2005 and 2006 had written the law to prevent from happening. What I can say is during my six years as chair of the Judiciary Committee, both Mr. Conyers and I were very vigorous in sending pointed letters to the attorney general, who under the FISA law is the official that sends petitions to the court for approval, to find out exactly what they were doing, and a couple times we had to act like crabby professors when students send incomplete answers and tell them to redo it. I think that things were relatively under control and along the spirit of the Patriot Act until I left in January of 2007 as chair of the Judiciary Committee. And looking at the timeline of when I think they rapidly expanded their powers was when they knew I would not be sending oversight letters. Do you agree with Rep. Amash's assertion that congressional oversight of the NSA is broken? Absolutely I do. The oversight that was contained in the Church Commission Reports not just by the Congress but by the FISA Court was designed to put brakes on potential abuses by the NSA that came to light in the '60s and '70s — I am specifically referring to the war in Vietnam as well as the COINTELPRO investigations that were going on at that time. Now, instead of putting the brakes on NSA excesses, both the FISA Courts and the two intelligence committees have stepped on the gas and there has been a failure of oversight. I think there needs to be much more rigorous oversight, which is something I tried to do when I was chair of the Judiciary Committee. It's been somewhat of a politically contentious time, especially with the shutdown and the looming debt ceiling debate, but do you see the surveillance issue as one that breaches that partisan divide? It certainly does. I'm going to be introducing this bill with Senator Leahy and Congressman Conyers. Maybe a few people have quarreled about my credentials as a conservative Republican and a few people have quarreled with their credentials as liberal Democrats. But the answer to the question is yes. While other people have been dealing with issues like the shutdown and the debt ceiling, we have been working on bipartisan and bicameral legislation which will hopefully be passed and signed into law. So while there's a lot of screaming across the aisles by others, there are some of us that have been working across the aisle so that once the current issues get past us we can work on something we genuinely think is necessary and is needed to protect the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens. View online, here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355490,Ryan Is Again in the Forefront for the G.O.P.,2013-10-10,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,Paul Ryan,R000570,paulryan.house.gov,,,legacy,"By JONATHAN WEISMAN, The New York Times WASHINGTON — Representative Paul D. Ryan may have temporarily receded into the Capitol shadows after his stinging vice-presidential defeat in November, but he remains a powerful presence among House Republicans, earning the respect of hard-line conservatives for his budget blueprint and the trust of anxious moderates for his pragmatism. Now, the impasse that has shuttered much of the government and steered the nation toward a default has offered the Wisconsin congressman a new opening to reassert himself — and suddenly a man who seemed in danger of being eclipsed as the face of his party has re-emerged as essential to its rescue. “I want to get to a budget agreement,” Mr. Ryan said bluntly on Thursday, after House Republican leaders latched onto his plan to offer a short-term increase in the debt ceiling as a way forward on deficit reduction and tax reform talks. “We think this takes us in the right direction.” Mr. Ryan, 43, has immense credibility with conservatives for his “Path to Prosperity” budget, which proposed politically risky Medicare changes and deep tax cuts. Moderates see Mr. Ryan, who has broken with some conservatives over immigration, as a lawmaker with some flexibility. In many respects, his standing exceeds that of the party’s titular leader, Speaker John A. Boehner. Perhaps most important, Democrats believe that when Mr. Ryan drafts a plan, he can actually deliver the votes. They hold no such confidence in Mr. Boehner. “He’s still the intellectual center of Republicans in the House,” said Representative Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma, who serves as Mr. Ryan’s bridge between the House Budget and Appropriations Committees. “He’s a guy who commands universal respect in the conference and the trust of leadership, and he has credibility with the other side.” Mr. Ryan’s association with the new urgency to find a way out of the fiscal crisis “quite frankly is a sign to Democrats that we’re awfully serious about this,” Mr. Cole said. Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Budget Committee, said her House counterpart’s low profile after last year’s loss reflected a pragmatic strategy of “not being the face of the flamethrowers” in the House. But now, Mr. Ryan suddenly is everywhere, as his party tries to resolve the impasse those “flamethrowers” brought about. An opinion piece he wrote in The Wall Street Journal this week laid out what has now become the House Republican plan: a debt ceiling increase tied to changes to Medicare and Medigap plans that would save more than enough money to ease some of the across-the-board cuts to domestic and defense programs; a fast track for the comprehensive simplification of the tax code; and a demand for immediate, serious and structured negotiations with the White House and Democratic Senate. The fact that Mr. Ryan’s plan quite obviously made no mention of the health care law as a bargaining chip quickly drew him scorn from some on the right, but to Democrats and more moderate Republicans, the sidelining of the health care fight immediately gave the plan credibility. He marketed his idea on Wednesday to the House’s hard-line conservatives in the Republican Study Committee, getting enough favorable reaction to pull in the Republican leadership. On Thursday, after Mr. Boehner presented it to the full Republican conference, it became the official Republican position. As Mr. Boehner laid it out to the public, Mr. Ryan stood silently behind him. On Friday, he will take his message to the Values Voters Summit, a meeting of social conservatives. But according to an advance text of his remarks, he will add words of caution: “This president, he won’t agree to everything we need to do. A budget agreement — with this president and this Senate — it won’t solve all of our problems.  But I hope it’s a start. I hope we can get a down payment on our debt.” Republicans and Democrats said Thursday that the success or failure of this new path forward will rest on Mr. Ryan’s shoulders. Republicans hope that with Mr. Ryan leading the charge, Washington will finally grapple with the true drivers of the federal budget deficit: entitlement programs like Medicare that are swelling as the population ages. Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, said conversations between Mr. Ryan and the senators he will need on his side had already begun. Democrats, closely examining the outlines of the Ryan plan, say he is showing a new modesty and a narrower vision than the one rejected by American voters in the 2012 presidential campaign. Back then, and even earlier this year, Mr. Ryan championed converting Medicare into a voucherlike program in which beneficiaries would be given fixed premium subsidies they would use to buy private health insurance. Now he is talking about means-testing Medicare to make richer beneficiaries pick up more of the tab and ensuring that taxpayers do not subsidize the private Medigap plans purchased by upper-income recipients to augment Medicare coverage. Versions of both of those proposals are in Mr. Obama’s budget for the current fiscal year. By not trying to do too much, Mr. Ryan may be able to do just enough, Ms. Murray said. In 2011, Mr. Ryan conspicuously declined to serve on a special select committee empaneled in the shadow of a debt ceiling fight that year to find a bipartisan path forward, worrying that the effort would tarnish his ambitions for higher office. After Mr. Ryan became the face of his party’s most ambitious — and to critics, most radical — fiscal plans during the 2012 campaign, Ms. Murray and other Democrats groaned late last year when Mr. Boehner made him the leadership’s point man to resolve the “fiscal cliff,” the automatic tax increases and spending cuts that were to take place Jan. 1 if Congress failed to act. “His vision was actually on the ballot, and Americans decided to go in a different direction,” Ms. Murray said in November. Ms. Murray and others have changed their assessment of the man after dozens of private meetings aimed at finding a bipartisan path forward. Democrats have been pressing for formal negotiations since April, when both chambers passed budget and tax policy blueprints that were starkly at odds. Ms. Murray and Mr. Ryan have believed for months that despite the vast policy gap, they could find common ground. The coming weeks may test whether that is true. “Patty and I have a good relationship,” Mr. Ryan said Thursday. “We don’t agree on much but we get along well.” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/11/us/politics/ryan-is-again-in-the-forefront-for-the-gop.html",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131023110539/http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355537,The USA Freedom Act: a look at the key points of the draft bill,2013-10-10,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,WI,F. Sensenbrenner,S000244,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Jim Sensenbrenner, the conservative Republican who co-authored the Patriot Act, is preparing to publish legislation that would significantly curtail the domestic surveillance powers afforded to the US intelligence agencies. The bill has a somewhat cumbersome title: the Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ending Eavesdropping, Dragnet-Collection and Online Monitoring Act. But it's one of those pieces of legislation that has been named for its acronym: the USA Freedom Act. Sensenbrenner, who worked with president George W Bush to give more power to US intelligence agencies after the September 11 terrorist attacks, said the intelligence community had misused those powers by collecting telephone records on all Americans, and claimed it was time ""to put their metadata program out of business"". The Guardian has seen a draft of the bill. Here are the key points: • Ending bulk metadata collection. Section 215 of the Patriot Act would be tightened to place more onus on intelligence agencies to show they are looking for specific suspects and do not inadvertently sweep up information on innocent Americans. They would have to show a Fisa court judge that the target was thought to be an agent of a foreign power, was engaged in activity that was the subject of an investigation, or was an individual in contact with an agent of foreign power. • Disclosure. The attorney general would be required to publicly disclose decisions by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (Fisa) court that contain a significant construction or interpretation of law, but may continue to classify confidential parts. Specific information on individuals would not be disclosed, but the policy changes would be. The intent is that the bill would end “secret laws” being made behind closed doors by the Fisa courts and the intelligence community. • Greater transparency. Internet and telephone companies that received Fisa court orders would be allowed to report the number of Fisa orders and national security letters complied with, and number of users on whom information was demanded. • Privacy advocate. The bill creates an office of special advocate within the Fisa court who would have standing to appear to represent the public and privacy concerns. They would be chosen from a list recommended by Obama's privacy and civil liberties oversight board but a Fisa court judge would appoint from that list. This judicial appointment would have the power to appeal Fisa court decisions. • Foreign loopholes. The bill amends section 702 (b) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to prevent intelligence agencies from “reverse targeting” that may allow them to intercept email and internet communications of Americans. It also calls on the US inspector general to investigate whether current minimization procedures adequately protect the constitutional rights of US persons and gives more legal powers to the privacy and civil liberties oversight board. • Other loopholes. Title 4 of Fisa, known as the pen register and trap-and-trace provisions, would be amended to make sure the government does not just rebuild its metadata dragnet using different authorities.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z