url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at https://web.archive.org/web/20140221052521/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364981,MEDIA ADVISORY: Wilson to Unveil Legislative Agenda for 2014,2013-12-20,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) will hold five press conferences on Friday, January 3rd, across South Carolina’s Second Congressional District to unveil his legislative priorities for 2014: 2014 Legislative Agenda Press Conferences Friday, January 3, 2013 8:45AM* Aiken Newberry Hall – 117 Newberry Street   10:00AM North Augusta North Augusta Chamber of Commerce – 406 West Avenue   12:00PM Barnwell Barnwell County Library – 40 Burr Street   2:00PM Columbia Columbia Chamber of Commerce, Richland Northeast Location 110-2 Forum Drive, Village of Sandhills   3:30PM Lexington Lexington Chamber of Commerce – 311 West Main Street       *Congressman Wilson’s press conference will take place immediately following the conclusion of First Friday hosted by the Aiken Chamber of Commerce.  Media is invited to attend both events.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-rice-cosponsors-bill-to-protect-military-retiree-benefits,Congressman Rice Cosponsors Bill to Protect Military Retiree Benefits,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C.— Congressman Tom Rice (SC-07) today cosponsored legislation that would replace the budget plan’s reductions to military retiree benefits by closing a commonly-abused loophole in the tax code.  H.R. 3788, introduced by Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-8), could still achieve the $6 billion in savings accomplished in the budget plan.   “The government made a contract with our veterans and it must honor this contact,” said Congressman Rice.  “Our military retirees and their families have sacrificed so much for our country; the government should not sacrifice their promised benefit for the sake of savings. I am proud to cosponsor this bill because it closes an egregious loophole in our tax system.  We must continue to look for additional ways to curb government spending, but not at the expense of our veterans.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221034837/http://gowdy.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364870,Members Call for DOJ Investigation of National Intelligence Director Clapper for Lying to Congress,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBERS CALL FOR DOJ INVESTIGATION OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DIRECTOR CLAPPER FOR LYING TO CONGRESS  WASHINGTON. D.C. – Today, Representatives Darrell Issa (CA-49), Jim Sensenbrenner (WI-5), 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.”  To read the text of the letter, please click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221052039/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364920,Wilson Cosponsors Bill Protect Military Benefits,2013-12-19,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following statement after signing on as an original cosponsor to the H.R. 3788, legislation that removes the adjustments to military retirement benefits included in the bipartisan budget agreement. Funding for this measure would be found by closing a loophole found in the Child Tax Credit.  “By supporting last week’s bipartisan budget agreement, I chose the lesser of two evils,” Congressman Joe Wilson said. “Without the passage of this bill, our military would be subject to additional sequester cuts.  Hollowing out our military and failing to adequately provide for our brave men and women serving to keep us safe is not in the best interest of American families. “We must honor our commitments previously made to those who risked their lives to defend our freedoms. I am very pleased that my colleagues and I have joined Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-08) in attempting to reform our tax code to ensure accountability. Fraud and abuse run rampant within our federal government and it must be stopped. Our veterans should not be forced to suffer due to Washington's fiscal irresponsibility.” *Congressman Wilson also signed on as an original cosponsor to two additional bills addressing this very same issue.  *On December 12, 2013, the House of Representatives voted to approve H.J. Res. 59, the “Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013”, by a vote of 332 to 94.  This resolution, negotiated by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (WI-01) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray (WA), establishes a Fiscal Year 2014 (FY14) budget and the Senate subsequently voted to approve the measure on December 18, 2013 by a vote of 64 to 36. Included in Section 403 of this resolution is a provision, which makes a change to the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for military retired pay and retainer pay for retired members of the Armed Forces under the age of 62.  Each fiscal year, the COLA is based upon the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the previous fiscal year.  Under this recently passed agreement, members and all former members of the military under 62 years of age will receive an annual COLA equal to inflation (CPI) minus one percent.  Once an individual reaches the age of 62, their retired pay will return to the full adjustment equal to the CPI and will continue to receive a full COLA from then on.  This provision does not alter the COLA for disability compensation or health care benefits for disabled veterans and does not affect military retirement base pay, which is determined by rank and years of service.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221053252/http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=51d452e4-0764-631e-a456-5bf32859902d,Graham Votes Against Budget Deal,2013-12-18,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Graham Press Releases Contact: Lorcan Connick (202) 224-5972 or Kevin Bishop (864) 250-1417 Date: 12/18/2013 Graham Votes Against Budget Deal Passes Senate 64-36 and will now go to President Obama WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) voted against the budget deal because it cuts retirement benefits for current and future military retirees. The legislation passed the Senate by a vote of 64-36 and will now go to President Obama. ""I find it ironic that a few years ago the Senate was forced to stay in Washington and vote on Obamacare on Christmas Eve,"" said Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. ""Yet now we won't stay a few extra days to fix this injustice to our military retirees."" ""President Obama, above everyone else, has the responsibility as Commander in Chief to take care of those who honorably serve our nation in uniform,"" said Graham. ""He should not sign this severely flawed legislation into law. Instead, he should show leadership and send Congress back to work to fix this problem."" Graham noted while the budget agreement includes cuts to retirement benefits for current and future military retirees, all current civilian federal employees are protected from an increase in the contribution rate for the Federal Employees Retirement System - the increase would only apply to new federal employees hired after January 1, 2014. Graham said it was unacceptable to ask our men and women in uniform - including those who are currently serving - to take a disproportionate cut in retirement benefits. The Pentagon confirmed yesterday that the provision also would cut retirement benefits of service members forced to retire due to medical reasons-including injuries in combat. ""If budgets and legislation reflect our nation's priorities, what would it say about us if we pass a bill that turns to our veterans and says ""thank you for deploying to war and enduring the hardships of military life-but we are going to need you to sacrifice again and give back $72,000 of the retirement you have earned,"" concluded Graham. ##### You will need to have Real One Player installed on your computer to be able to listen or watch the clips above. Real One Player is free software that lets you play audio and video files. Download Real One Player",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-rice-invites-constituents-to-town-hall-meetings-tomorrow,Congressman Rice Invites Constituents to Town Hall Meetings Tomorrow,2013-12-17,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Tom Rice (SC-07) today invited constituents to two town meetings on Wednesday, December 18.  The purpose of these meetings is to recap the first session of the 113th Congress and discuss priorities for the second session.  Aynor Town Hall Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 18th Time: 10:30-11:30 AM Location: Aynor Town Hall 600 S Main Street, Aynor, SC   Loris Town Hall Meeting Date: Wednesday, December 18th Time: 1:00- 2:00 PM Location: Loris Public Safety Building 3909 Walnut Street, Loris, SC   Both meetings are free and open to the public. For more information, please call my Grand Strand Regional Office at 843-445-6459.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221030017/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-negotiations-encouraging-unable-support-budget-proposal,"Senator Tim Scott: Negotiations Encouraging, but Unable to Support Budget Proposal",2013-12-17,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott: Negotiations Encouraging, but Unable to Support Budget Proposal Contact: 202-224-2718   Washington, DC – United States Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) made the following statement about his vote on the proposed budget agreement: “I have long said that Washington’s method of budgeting from crisis to crisis is no way to run a business, much less the federal government. That kind of short-term, band-aid budgeting was at the root of October’s government shutdown and it certainly isn’t the best way for Congress to responsibly manage taxpayer dollars. “That’s why I was encouraged that Republicans and Democrats were able to sit down and negotiate a long-term budget agreement that actually makes tough choices. A two-year plan provides predictability during uncertain times, but the details of how we get there are just as important. “This proposal asks too much from the men and women of our military, who would be forced to sacrifice thousands of dollars from their retirement funds. One estimate says that a 42-year old retiring as an enlisted E-7 could lose over $70,000 and a 42-year old retiring at the rank of Lt. Colonel would lose nearly $110,000. These heroes defend our freedom day after day and we shouldn’t ask them to sacrifice even more. “I’m also skeptical about the way this plan structures new spending and savings. We will see two years of new spending up front offset by savings spread over a decade. That makes it all too easy for Congress to undo those measures a few years down the road after the new spending is already out the door. Without any guarantee that those savings will actually materialize, the price tag for this proposal can easily increase. “I’m encouraged by the willingness we’ve seen from both sides to sit down and negotiate a budget agreement for the first time in years, but the details of this plan make me unable to support it.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055151/http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=0dc074bc-f238-80c4-0e12-2b1ec78320e6,"Graham, Ayotte, Wicker Urge Colleagues to Protect Military Retirees from Disproportionate Cuts",2013-12-17,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Graham Press Releases Contact: Lorcan Connick (202) 224-5972 Date: 12/17/2013 Graham, Ayotte, Wicker Urge Colleagues to Protect Military Retirees from Disproportionate Cuts WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), and Roger Wicker (R-MS), members of the Senate Armed Services and Budget Committees, today urged their Senate colleagues to find alternative savings to replace a provision in the budget agreement that cuts retirement benefits for current and future military retirees by approximately $6 billion. In a letter sent today to all Senators, Graham, Ayotte, and Wicker urged Republican and Democratic colleagues to work together to identify a $6.3 billion offset to replace the troubling provision - adding that they were prepared to support the budget agreement if the provision is replaced with acceptable alternative savings. ""While we appreciate the hard work of Chairman Ryan and Chairman Murray, as it is currently written, we cannot support the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 due to the legislation's provision that disproportionately and unfairly targets those who have put their lives on the line to defend our country,"" they wrote. ""Although the legislation is far from perfect and does not address the long-term drivers of our debt, if the ‘pay for' is changed, we are prepared to support it to provide budgetary certainty and sequestration relief for our nation's critical defense programs."" While the budget agreement includes cuts to retirement benefits for current and future military retirees, all current civilian federal employees are protected from an increase in the contribution rate for the Federal Employees Retirement System - the increase would only apply to new federal employees hired after January 1, 2014. The Senators said it was unacceptable to ask our men and women in uniform - including those who are currently serving - to take a disproportionate cut in retirement benefits. On Wednesday, the Military Coalition-which represents more than 5.5 million current and former service members and their families and survivors-expressed strong opposition to the budget agreement, saying that it ""seeks to penalize current and future military members who have served our nation for over twenty years."" The Coalition is comprised of more than 30 military and veterans groups, including the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Military Officers Association of America, and the National Guard Association of the United States. GRAHAM-AYOTTE-WICKER LETTER TO SENATE COLLEAGUES: Dear Colleagues, As members of the Senate Armed Services and Budget Committees, we are eager to support a budget deal that provides much-needed fiscal certainty, offers sequestration relief, and restores military readiness. While we appreciate the hard work of Chairman Ryan and Chairman Murray, as it is currently written, we cannot support the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 due to the legislation's provision that disproportionately and unfairly targets those who have put their lives on the line to defend our country. Although the legislation is far from perfect and does not address the long-term drivers of our debt, if the ‘pay for' is changed, we are prepared to support it to provide budgetary certainty and sequestration relief for our nation's critical defense programs. As you know, in order to achieve approximately $6.3 billion in savings, the legislation currently includes a provision that requires a one percent reduction in cost of living benefits for many military retirees under age 62. As a matter of principle, we do not believe it is right to ask our veterans to sacrifice again for our country when we have not had the courage to address the primary long-term drivers of our debt. To cite one example, under this provision, a 42 year old Sergeant First Class retiree-who has served our country for two decades and most likely deployed multiple times to war-would lose approximately $72,000. Under the proposal, the contribution rate for the Federal Employees Retirement System for new federal employees hired after January 1, 2014, is increased, but all current federal employees are grandfathered and protected from the increase in contributions. Unfortunately, our current and future military retirees were not provided with similar protections that current civilian federal employees are receiving under this act. If budgets and legislation reflect our nation's priorities, what would it say about us if we pass a bill that turns to our veterans and says ""thank you for deploying to war and enduring the hardships of military life-but we are going to need you to sacrifice again and give back $72,000 of the retirement you have earned."" That is unacceptable and we cannot support legislation that sends such a message to our current military retirees and future retirees currently protecting our country and serving in harm's way in Afghanistan and around the world. We stand ready to work expeditiously with our colleagues in a bipartisan manner to identify an alternative $6.3 billion offset to replace this troubling provision. ### You will need to have Real One Player installed on your computer to be able to listen or watch the clips above. Real One Player is free software that lets you play audio and video files. Download Real One Player",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-negotiations-encouraging-but-unable-to-support-budget-proposal,"Senator Tim Scott: Negotiations Encouraging, but Unable to Support Budget Proposal",2013-12-17,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | December 17, 2013 Senator Tim Scott: Negotiations Encouraging, but Unable to Support Budget Proposal Senator Tim Scott: Negotiations Encouraging, but Unable to Support Budget Proposal Contact: 202-224-2718 Washington, DC -United States Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) made the following statement about his vote on the proposed budget agreement: ""I have long said that Washington's method of budgeting from crisis to crisis is no way to run a business, much less the federal government. That kind of short-term, band-aid budgeting was at the root of October's government shutdown and it certainly isn't the best way for Congress to responsibly manage taxpayer dollars. ""That's why I was encouraged that Republicans and Democrats were able to sit down and negotiate a long-term budget agreement that actually makes tough choices. A two-year plan provides predictability during uncertain times, but the details of how we get there are just as important. ""This proposal asks too much from the men and women of our military, who would be forced to sacrifice thousands of dollars from their retirement funds. One estimate says that a 42-year old retiring as an enlisted E-7 could lose over $70,000 and a 42-year old retiring at the rank of Lt. Colonel would lose nearly $110,000. These heroes defend our freedom day after day and we shouldn't ask them to sacrifice even more. ""I'm also skeptical about the way this plan structures new spending and savings. We will see two years of new spending up front offset by savings spread over a decade. That makes it all too easy for Congress to undo those measures a few years down the road after the new spending is already out the door. Without any guarantee that those savings will actually materialize, the price tag for this proposal can easily increase. ""I'm encouraged by the willingness we've seen from both sides to sit down and negotiate a budget agreement for the first time in years, but the details of this plan make me unable to support it."" ### Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/newsletters/budget-deal,Budget Deal,2013-12-14,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Why is it that spending always seems to win in any government? Jefferson warned two hundred years ago that the normal course of things was for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield, and unfortunately yesterday’s Ryan-Murray budget deal was another data point in support of our third President’s hypothesis. I voted against the deal because it raised spending while shattering Washington’s only current platform for financial constraint. This is not to say that its authors weren't trying to fix a problem, they were and I applaud them. They even had some steps toward reining in spending that suggested important bipartisan compromise. It is just that their fix will prove most expensive for us as taxpayers. Leaving spending aside for one moment, I have been struck since returning to Congress, after a 13 year absence, with the disappearance of the budget process in our nation’s Capitol. What were once yearly debates on each of the 12 categories of government spending, have now devolved to the point that the operations of our government are run on automatic pilot. In Washington they are called “Continuing Resolutions” and they simply fund the portions of government under Congress’s yearly oversight as they were funded the year before. It’s bad for the taxpayer and disastrous for the aspects of government that we fund because it neither rewards, nor penalizes, the parts of government that do and don’t work. The question we had to ask in this debate was should a return to the correct budget process in Washington cost $63 billion? More precisely the question is should we spend $63 billion for the promise of going back to that process for the guarantee of just a year, or if we were lucky 24 months? Even if we got a return to the normal budget process in Washington, the bill still had glaring deficiencies in raising spending and adding yet a bit more in taxes. On spending it did what Washington always does, increase it now and promise to pay it back later. So the $63 billion of new spending comes overwhelmingly in the first year, and the promise to repay comes overwhelmingly after ten years. It means the deficit would go up by $41 billion in just the next 24 months. Even more frightening was that minutes after we took the vote, the deal began to prove anything but binding. We won’t have to wait for ten years to see if Congress will abide by the new spending limits; they were broken within ten minutes! It’s ridiculously hard to believe, but literally the next vote we took after the budget deal was the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. It overwhelmingly passed and authorized spending levels for defense at $31.6 billion higher than the cap in the Ryan-Murray budget deal. So let’s think about this. Congress passes a law to hold the line on spending. This bill on Thursday breaks that law for a new deal that will hold the line on spending, and within about ten minutes Congress has already laid the course for breaking that law. As if all this were not enough, this bill would raise taxes. They are not called taxes, but if it involves money leaving my wallet and heading to Washington, it’s sure a first cousin. In this case the fees we pay to fly will be going up. We might have passed the “clean” Continuing Resolution the President, and House and Senate Democrats were calling for a month ago, and taken some time to consider all these things. Sometimes no deal is the better deal, and Thursday night it struck me that there was something to what Jefferson articulated. At minimum, hanging onto any spending restraint one can find in Washington is important, because the only budget you can count on is this year’s.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140523091408/http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/editorials/post-and-courier-budget-agreement-clears-way-for-more-spending,Post and Courier: Budget agreement clears way for more spending,2013-12-14,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Note: This piece originally ran in the Post and Courier on December 14th, 2013. Why is it that spending always seems to win in any government? Thomas Jefferson warned 200 years ago that the normal course of things was for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield, and unfortunately the Ryan-Murray budget deal was another data point in support of our third president's hypothesis. I voted against the deal because it raised spending while shattering Washington's only current platform for financial constraint. This is not to say that its authors weren't trying to fix a problem - they were and I applaud them. They even had some steps toward reining in spending that suggested important bipartisan compromise. It is just that their fix will prove most expensive for us as taxpayers. Leaving spending aside for one moment, I have been struck since returning to Congress, after a 13-year absence, with the disappearance of the budget process in our nation's capital. What were once yearly debates on each of the 12 categories of government spending have now devolved to the point that the operations of our government are run on automatic pilot. In Washington they are called ""Continuing Resolutions,"" and they simply fund the portions of government under Congress' yearly oversight as they were funded the year before. It's bad for the taxpayer and disastrous for the aspects of government that we fund because it neither rewards, nor penalizes, the parts of government that do and don't work. The question we had to ask in this debate was: Should a return to the correct budget process in Washington cost $63 billion? More precisely the question is: Should we spend $63 billion for the promise of going back to that process for the guarantee of just a year, or if lucky, 24 months? Even if we got a return to the normal budget process in Washington, the bill still had glaring deficiencies in raising spending and adding yet a bit more in taxes. On spending it did what Washington always does - increase it now and promise to pay it back later. So the $63 billion of new spending comes overwhelmingly in the first year, and the promise to repay comes overwhelmingly after 10 years. It means the deficit would go up by $41 billion in just the next 24 months. Even more frightening was that minutes after we took the vote, the deal began to prove anything but binding. We won't have to wait for 10 years to see if Congress will abide by the new spending limits; they were broken within 10 minutes! It's ridiculously hard to believe, but literally the next vote we took after the budget deal was the 2014 National Defense Authorization Act. It overwhelmingly passed and authorized spending levels for defense at $31.6 billion higher than the cap in the Ryan-Murray budget deal. So let's think about this. Congress passes a law to hold the line on spending. This bill on Thursday breaks that law for a new deal that will hold the line on spending, and within about 10 minutes Congress has already laid the course for breaking that law. As if all this were not enough, this bill would raise taxes. They are not called taxes, but if it involves money leaving my wallet and heading to Washington, it's sure a first cousin. In this case the fees we pay to fly will be going up. We might have passed the ""clean"" Continuing Resolution the president and House and Senate Democrats were calling for a month ago and taken some time to consider all these things. Sometimes no deal is the better deal, and Thursday night it struck me that there was something to what Jefferson articulated. At minimum, hanging onto any spending restraint one can find in Washington is important, because the only budget you can count on is this year's.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-releases-public-schedule-for-december-16th-20th,Sanford Releases Public Schedule for December 16th - 20th,2013-12-13,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Monday, December 16th, 2013       5:30PM   North Charleston Neighborhood Office Hours     Moe’s Southwest Grill, 7800 Rivers Avenue     North Charleston, SC       Tuesday, December 17th, 2013       5:30PM   Lowcountry Orphan Relief Christmas Party and Fundraiser     Molly Darcy’s Irish Pub, 235 East Bay Street     Charleston, SC       Wednesday, December 18th, 2013       10:30AM Visit Charleston Birth Place     Charleston Birth Place, 9133 Timber Street     North Charleston, SC       2:00PM   Drop by Water Missions International     Water Missions International, 1150 Kinzer Street, Building 1605     North Charleston, SC       Thursday, December 19th, 2013       10:00AM Meeting with the Island Packet Editorial Board     The Island Packet, 10 Buck Island Road     Bluffton, SC       4:00PM   Bluffton Neighborhood Office Hours     Farmers Market of Bluffton, Calhoun Street and Carson Cottages     Bluffton, SC       Friday, December 20th, 2013       10:30AM Tour of Meeting Street Academy     Meeting Street Academy, 642 Meeting Street     Charleston, SC       7:00PM   Joint 9/12 Christmas Party     Harbour Lake Baptist Church, 1056 Red Bank Road     Goose Creek, SC",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055205/http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=ec81c228-c90c-a21b-6cd3-88ac4f8b87b0,Nativity Scene at Shaw AFB Restored,2013-12-13,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Graham Press Releases Contact: Kevin Bishop (864) 250-1417 Date: 12/13/2013 Nativity Scene at Shaw AFB Restored WASHNGTON -- U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott, along with 5th District Congressman Mick Mulvaney, today made this statement on the Nativity scene at Shaw Air Force Base in Sumter, South Carolina.""We are pleased the Nativity scene has been restored at Shaw Air Force Base. From the start, our offices have been in touch with Shaw officials expressing our concerns about this matter. We appreciate the Air Force for listening to our complaint, keeping the Nativity scene on base, and moving it to the Chapel."" ##### You will need to have Real One Player installed on your computer to be able to listen or watch the clips above. Real One Player is free software that lets you play audio and video files. Download Real One Player",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=ec848d95-92fa-94cc-ff24-4444169effcd,Graham to Oppose Budget Agreement,2013-12-13,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-releases-statement-on-budget-deal,Sanford Releases Statement on Budget Deal,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   SANFORD RELEASES STATEMENT ON BUDGET DEAL   WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Representative Mark Sanford released the following statement regarding the announcement that Paul Ryan and Patty Murray had come to a budget agreement:   “Coming to any sort of agreement is never easy in Washington, and accordingly I want to thank Chairman Ryan and Senator Murray for all they did in preparing this deal,” said Sanford.    “While I appreciate that change in politics comes by degree, I think this deal comes up short. It sets federal spending levels for the next two years at just over $1 trillion per year – an increase of $63 billion from the levels Congress passed into law in 2011. Then it goes on to offset that higher spending by raising taxes,” Sanford continued. “For instance, fees for airline travel will more than double from the current $5 per round trip to $11.20 per round trip. This provision, along with others, results in $63 billion in increased revenues for the government - which most of us would call $63 billion in higher taxes, given that it’s a transfer of money from the taxpayer’s pocket to Washington.”   “It doesn’t need to be this way, given that as recently as October the $967 billion level of funding that was set by the 2011 Budget Control Act was widely accepted in Washington. With that in mind, I joined 32 other conservatives in sending a letter written by fellow South Carolina Representative Mick Mulvaney expressing our preference for a “clean” budget agreement, or one that simply upholds current law,” added Sanford. “I believe Congress needs to preserve the small victories it has already made for financial discipline – not add $63 billion in higher spending and increased taxes with only future promises of savings to show for it.”    ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221045406/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364337,Wilson Statement on Passage of the Bipartisan Budget Agreement,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) released the following statement after the House passed a bipartisan budget resolution to fund the government.  This legislation provides two years of budget certainty for the federal government. In years past, the federal government has operated under continuing resolutions. “When I was elected to Congress, I promised to help make a difference. The status quo is not working,” Congressman Joe Wilson said.  “Government overspending while racking up trillion-dollar deficits is irresponsible, especially when we know that our children and grandchildren will be faced with the burden. “House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan was able to reduce spending from its current levels to help pay down our debt without raising taxes.  For years, House Republicans have spent the better part of December in battles with Washington Democrats in hopes of not raising taxes so that the American people could keep more of their hard-earned paychecks. “Additionally, President Obama’s sequester, which targets the military, has already limited our Armed Forces’ abilities to protect themselves and defend our freedoms.  Military installations across South Carolina and the Savannah River Site have faced challenges, which undermine our national security.  I have warned against the horrible impacts sequestration would impose and have done my best to advocate for those who are suffering within South Carolina’s Second Congressional District.  I am very pleased that Chairman Ryan was successful in finding common-sense reforms to replace sequestration that will not place families at risk.  “The road ahead will be difficult as budget debates continue for years to come.  However, we must remain hopeful that we can achieve spending reductions while promoting limited-government solutions that create jobs and spur economic growth.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221045438/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364338,Wilson Statement on the National Defense Authorization Act,2013-12-12,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel Chairman Joe Wilson (SC-02) released the following statement in regards to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013, legislation to be voted under suspension today. “Congress has a responsibility to protect our brave men and women serving in uniform, veterans, and military families. The substantial reforms and priorities achieved in the 52nd consecutive National Defense Authorization Act would not be possible without the tireless leadership of House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon.  As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, I am very grateful for the progress made to combat criminal sexual assault in the military. When this bill hopefully becomes law, the victims of these hateful crimes will be better protected and the accused will be brought to justice for their actions. Additional requirements will allow us to honor the commitments we’ve made to our service members. Their unwavering service to our nation continues to keep American families safe and our freedoms preserved,” Congressman Joe Wilson said.  List of provisions: ·  Over 30 reforms to combat criminal sexual assault in the military: Strips commanders of their authority to dismiss a guilty finding by a court martial; Significantly limits commanders’ ability to modify court-marital sentences; Establishes minimum sentences for sexual assault related offices and eliminates the five-year statute of limitations on rape and sexual assault; Reforms the Article 32 process to properly focus on probable cause and protects the victim from destructive fishing expeditions; Provides dedicated legal assistance to victims through Special Victims’ Counsels and whistleblower protection to victims of sexual assault.  These provisions are necessary to better protect those who risk their lives to protect us. ·  Authorizes funds to keep the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) at the Savannah River Site on its path to completion.  This project, which turns plutonium from nuclear bombs into energy, is essential in protecting our national security and honoring our international obligations. ·  Rejects the Administrations request to force military retirees to pay more for healthcare by raising TRICARE enrollment fees. ·  Supersedes the Administrations refusal to honor our fallen military heroes by awarding the victims of Fort Hood, Texas, and Little Rock (Arkansas) Recruiting Station shootings the Purple Heart. Chairman Joe Wilson also delivered a floor speech in support of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013.  Click here to view the speech in its entirety.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/icymi-rep-jeff-duncan-questions-sec-kerry-administrations-iran-nuclear-deal,Congressman Jeff Duncan Questions Secretary John Kerry on Iran Nuclear Deal,2013-12-11,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Today, Congressman Jeff Duncan (SC-03) questioned Secretary John Kerry on the Administration’s possible nuclear deal with Iran. During a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing, Congressman Duncan raised concerns about Iran still being a state sponsor of terrorism, Iran’s active presence in the Western Hemisphere, and the similarities between the Administration’s possible agreement and a previous nuclear non-proliferation treaty with North Korea that failed to reach its objectives. Watch here:   https://youtu.be/ILkDxdSx6wY ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221045619/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=364012,Wilson Questions Secretary Kerry About Iranian Foreign Policy,2013-12-10,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following statement after the House Foreign Affairs Committee concluded a hearing at which Secretary of State John Kerry testified about the interim agreement the United States recently finalized with Iran regarding its nuclear program.  “Allowing Iran to continue enrichment and thus develop a nuclear weapon threatens the safety of the United States, our Allies, and stability across the Middle East.  The Iranian government has consistently ignored United States and international pressure to discontinue its nuclear capabilities and production for decades. The Administration’s decision to make an initial nuclear deal with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, one that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vocalized strong opposition towards, suggests that President Obama is turning a deaf ear to our Greatest Ally in the Middle East. “Further action must be taken to ensure Iran ceases its nuclear activities that pose international security risks. The United States must stand firm by working with our Allies in the region to ensure that Iran halts nuclear production. I urge Secretary John Kerry to reconsider a new path forward because ignoring years of successful foreign policy norms have created international friction and placed the United States and Israel’s security at risk,” Congressman Joe Wilson said.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-satellite-office-hours-0,Sanford Announces Satellite Office Hours,2013-12-09,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD ANNOUNCES SATELLITE OFFICE HOURS SCHEDULE   WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford announced that his staff will be conducting satellite office hours in Hilton Head Island, Sun City, St. Helena, and Bluffton in December, per the schedule below.   Satellite office hours are conducted around the district by the Representative’s staff in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Additionally, anyone wishing to express an opinion or ask a question is welcome to stop by.   Note: Representative Sanford is not scheduled to be in attendance at these events.    Tuesday, December 10 11:00AM – 1:00PM Hilton Head Island Satellite Office Hours     Hilton Head Island Library     11 Beach City Road     Hilton Head Island, SC 29926       Tuesday, December 10 12:00PM – 2:00PM Sun City Satellite Office Hours     Coosaw Room     Hidden Cypress Building     671 Cypress Hill Drive     Bluffton, SC 29909       Thursday, December 12 11:00AM – 1:00PM St. Helena Satellite Office Hours     St. Helena Branch Library     6355 Jonathan Francis Sr. Road     St. Helena Island, SC 29910       Thursday, December 12 11:00AM – 1:00PM Bluffton Satellite Office Hours     Bluffton Community Library     120 Palmetto Way     Bluffton, SC 29910   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=d82d1304-a34f-7bf0-d84c-b158ac1aace7,"Graham Will Enroll in Obamacare South Carolina Exchange, Decline Taxpayer Subsidy for Members of Congress",2013-12-09,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/new-study-shows-drilling-jobs-sc,New Study Shows Drilling = Jobs for SC,2013-12-06,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC- A new study released today takes a deep dive into what energy exploration off the Atlantic coast would mean for South Carolina. The study’s findings: more jobs, more investment, and more revenue. If the federal government would allow South Carolina to pursue energy exploration off its coast the state could expect over 35,500 jobs, $2.7 billion in annual economic activity, and potentially $3.7 billion in cumulative state revenue by 2035. The findings are even more optimistic than a 2012 report by the Palmetto Agribusiness Council which projected 7,500 new jobs, an annual $2.2 billion statewide economic impact, and an estimated $87.5 million in new annual state revenue. The study was prepared by Quest Offshore Resources, Inc. for the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA). Earlier this year, Congressman Jeff Duncan’s legislation to open South Carolina’s coast for production passed the House as part of the Offshore Energy and Jobs Act. Today, Congressman Duncan cited the study’s findings as further evidence of the major economic benefits of pursuing North American energy independence. “The findings by Quest Offshore Resources really put in perspective what I have been fighting for in South Carolina. Energy exploration and production is a win, win, win for our state. It creates economic opportunity and jobs, propels our nation towards energy independence, and could help pay down our national debt. South Carolina energy production is not only an economic boon for our state, it also creates a path forward to improve our infrastructure, roads, and bridges. The critical next step forward is to complete the long-delayed Environmental Impact Statement to allow seismic testing in the Atlantic. This will allow us to make science-based decisions on future activities with accurate data.” “Today less than 3% of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) is leased for production. The impact of expanding production to the Atlantic OCS is too great of an opportunity to pass up. Pursuing energy independence in our own backyard, instead of relying on foreign sources of energy, will make South Carolina a safer, more prosperous state to earn a living and raise a family. If the Atlantic OCS is opened by the end of this decade, South Carolina and the country as a whole will benefit greatly.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/congressman-jeff-duncan-issues-statement-senator-harry-reid%E2%80%99s-decision-exempt-members,Congressman Jeff Duncan issues statement on Senator Harry Reid’s decision to exempt members of his staff from ObamaCare,2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC—Congressman Jeff Duncan issued the following statement on Senator Harry Reid’s decision to exempt key members of his staff from the requirement of purchasing insurance through the DC Health Exchanges: “Harry Reid’s decision to exempt certain members of his staff from ObamaCare sums up everything that’s wrong with Washington today. Harry Reid rammed a partisan healthcare bill through the Senate that most Americans didn’t want, and now it seems that members of his own staff don’t want ObamaCare either. I have made it very clear that I think ObamaCare is damaging our economy, hurting families, and lowering the overall quality of care. Despite my fierce opposition to the bill, I signed up for insurance through the exchanges and instructed my staff do the same. I signed up through the exchange because no elected official or staff member should be above the law. Members of Congress and their staffs should be the first to feel the negative consequences of poorly written legislation, not the last. When I signed up, I saw my deductibles and monthly premiums increase. I suspect that’s the reason why Mr. Reid decided that certain members of his staff should be exempt.” “If Harry Reid respects his oath of office, he will immediately reverse his decision and require every member of his staff to sign up for the substandard insurance that he helped create. Furthermore, I’m still waiting for President Obama to sign up as well.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rice-subcommittee-analyzes-post-recession-small-business-lending,Rice Subcommittee Analyzes Post-Recession Small Business Lending Environment,2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House Small Business Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Tax and Capital Access, under the chairmanship of Rep. Tom Rice (R-SC), today held a hearing to examine the current state of lending for small businesses and their access to functional capital. Recently, there has been an increase in the number of small loans issued, with 1.7 million more loans under $1 million issued in the second quarter of 2013 than the same time period in 2011, but overall, the number of small loans has not returned to pre-recession levels. According to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the number of banking institutions in the U.S. has fallen to its lowest level since at least the Great Depression, and many of the smallest banks have merged or closed. “This hearing provided a great dialogue about the various factors and economic trends affecting levels of lending to small businesses,” said Chairman Rice. “The fact of the matter is that small businesses can’t expand and create jobs if they don’t have access to working credit. Some of the reasons for this is market demand and fluctuating credit levels. However, Washington’s increased regulatory scrutiny is also proving to be a major factor to dwindling access to credit. Thankfully, new lending alternatives have become available for small businesses, but as our nation attempts to fully rebound from the recession and improve our global economic competitiveness, Washington must pull back on the onslaught of financial regulations, so that small businesses can access the credit they need to grow and create jobs.” Notable Quotes: Fred L. Green, III, President and CEO, S.C. Bankers Association, Columbia, SC, said, “Banks understand regulation is necessary, but they also understand that burdensome regulation ultimately means they have fewer dollars to lend, which means less opportunity for businesses to grow and create new jobs. As a result local economies suffer and the national economy suffers along with them.” Ann Marie Wiersch, Policy Analyst, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH, said, “At the same time that fewer small businesses are able to meet lenders’ standards for cash flow, credit scores, and collateral, bankers have increased their credit standards, making even fewer small businesses appropriate candidates for bank loans than before the economic downturn. According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s Survey of Credit Underwriting Practices, banks tightened small business lending standards in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. “Bank consolidation has reduced the number of banks focused on the small business sector, and small business lending has become relatively less profitable than other types of lending, reducing some bankers’ interest in the small business credit market.” Jeff Stibel, Chairman and CEO, Dun and Bradstreet Credibility Corp., Malibu, CA, said, “Given that in past economic cycles, small businesses were the primary driver of employment growth, we can infer from our results that the disconnect between business success and job growth is one of the reasons for the ‘jobless recovery.” Renaud Laplanche, CEO, Lending Club, San Francisco, CA, said, “While traditional sources of capital have pulled back, alternatives are on the rise. Alternative lenders such as online lenders and merchant cash advance providers are the fastest-growing segment of the small business loan market – recording a 64% growth in originations in the last 4 years.” Materials from the hearing are available on the Committee’s website HERE. ### This release was prepared by the House Small Business Committee Communications Team.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-releases-public-schedule-for-december-6th-7th-8th,"Sanford Releases Public Schedule for December 6th, 7th, 8th",2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Contact: Chloe Rockow Main: (202) 225-3176 Mobile: (202) 295-7180 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SANFORD ANNOUNCES PUBLIC SCHEDULE FOR DECEMBER 6th, 7th, 8th WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-01) announced his schedule for December 6th, 7th, and 8th: Friday, December 6th, 2013   • 6:00PM               28th Annual A Night on the Town                              Bay Street, Beaufort, SC   Saturday, December 7th, 2013   • 12:30PM              Beaufort Republican Party Annual Christmas Brunch                               Dataw Island Club, Dataw Island, SC   Sunday, December 8th, 2013   • 2:30PM              Lowcountry Immigration Coalition Town Hall                             Holy Family Catholic Church, 24 Pope Avenue, Hilton Head Island, SC   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221030104/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-statement-passing-nelson-mandela,Senator Tim Scott Statement on Passing of Nelson Mandela,2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott Statement on Passing of Nelson Mandela Dec 5, 2013 Charleston, SC – U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) made the following statement in response to reports that former South Africa President Nelson Mandela has passed away:   “Nelson Mandela was a transformational figure, a man who truly changed the world. He walked a long road to freedom and embraced the fundamental human belief in equality. After his release from prison, his tireless work to reconcile a nation torn apart by centuries of tension and hostility made him one of history’s greatest statesmen. All freedom-loving people mourn his passing.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221034843/http://gowdy.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363486,Gowdy talks IRS investigation and Obamacare's broken promises with Bill Bennett,2013-12-05,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Gowdy talks IRS investigation and Obamacare's broken promises with Bill Bennett f t # e Washington, Dec 5, 2013 Congressman Gowdy discussed Obamacare's broken promises and the latest on the IRS investigation with Bill Bennett on ""Morning in America.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-statement-on-passing-of-nelson-mandela,Senator Tim Scott Statement on Passing of Nelson Mandela,2013-12-04,2013,2013-12,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Wednesday | December 4, 2013 Senator Tim Scott Statement on Passing of Nelson Mandela Charleston, SC - U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) made the following statement in response to reports that former South Africa President Nelson Mandela has passed away: ""Nelson Mandela was a transformational figure, a man who truly changed the world. He walked a long road to freedom and embraced the fundamental human belief in equality. After his release from prison, his tireless work to reconcile a nation torn apart by centuries of tension and hostility made him one of history's greatest statesmen. All freedom-loving people mourn his passing."" Related Issues: Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-rice-encourages-participation-in-small-business-saturday,Congressman Rice Encourages Participation in Small Business Saturday,2013-11-26,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C.— Congressman Rice (SC-07), member of the House Committee on Small Business, released the following statement regarding Small Business Saturday: “As a member of the House Committee on Small Business, I recognize the vital role that small businesses play in our local economies,” said Congressman Rice. “With about 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs created by small businesses, it is important to support the businesses that make our community great. These stores, owned and operated by our neighbors and our friends, make our areas unique. I am asking constituents in the Seventh District to Shop Small this Thanksgiving weekend and support Small Business Saturday.  Many of our small businesses have supported our communities for decades and it is time for us to show our support for them” Small Business Saturday is a day dedicated to uplifting small businesses across the county. Since small businesses make up communities and employ about half of all private sector jobs, Small Business Saturday was created after Black Friday in an effort to encourage people to support their local stores. “We are fortunate that Horry County is home to many diverse local businesses,” said Brad Dean, President and CEO of Myrtle Beach Chamber of Commerce. “These businesses could not thrive without the support of our community. Small Business Saturday provides the perfect opportunity for people to support their local stores during their Holiday shopping.” “More than 70 percent our members are small businesses,” said Tom Marschel, President of Greater Florence Chamber of Commerce. “They are the backbone of our membership and community. We proudly promoted Small Business Saturday last year and heartily endorse participation this year.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033708/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-senate-republicans-file-supreme-court-amicus-brief-president%E2%80%99s,"Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President’s Unconstitutional “Recess” Appointments",2013-11-26,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President’s Unconstitutional “Recess” Appointments ‘Last year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,’ Sen. McConnell said. ‘The President was dismissive of the Constitution’s constraints on his power, saying he would “refuse to take no for an answer.” Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power.  They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President’s attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed “recess appointments” to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President’s recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found.’ Read the full amicus brief here.  Contact: (202) 224-2718 WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) announced today that he and 44 of his Senate colleagues filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in a challenge (NLRB v.Noel Canning) to the constitutionality of President Obama’s so-called “recess” appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012. Earlier this year a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously ruled that the President’s so-called 2012 “recess” appointments to the NLRB are invalid, and the Supreme Court is hearing the Administration’s appeal of that decision. The Supreme Court argument has been scheduled for January 13, 2014. As they contended in an earlier amicus brief in the D.C. Circuit, the 45 senators argue in their brief that by declaring the Senate to be in a continual period of recess when it had determined to be in session regularly, the President usurped the Senate’s authority to determine the rules of its own proceedings. By purporting to “recess appoint” political allies to the NLRB without the Senate’s advice and consent, the senators argue, the President took away the Senate’s right and responsibility to review executive nominations—claiming to himself the unilateral appointment power that the Framers deliberately withheld from the Office of the Presidency. “Last year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,” Sen. McConnell said. “The President was dismissive of the Constitution’s constraints on his power, saying he would ‘refuse to take no for an answer.’  Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power.  They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President’s attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed ‘recess appointments’ to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President’s recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found.” The challenge to the recess appointments is being brought by Noel Canning, a local, family-owned business in Washington State that bottles and distributes soft drinks. The company is challenging the NLRB’s determination that it must enter into a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union. In its January 2013 ruling, the D.C. Circuit Court said, “Allowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution’s separation of powers.” The Court determined that: “An interpretation of ‘the Recess’ that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law.” Senate Republicans retained former Assistant to the Solicitor General Miguel Estrada to file the amicus brief in the Supreme Court as he did in the D.C. Circuit in this case. Mr. Estrada is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and serves as Co-Chair of the firm's Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group.   ####",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-senate-republicans-file-supreme-court-amicus-brief-on-presidents-unconstitutional-recess-appointments,"Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on Presidents Unconstitutional Recess Appointments",2013-11-26,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | November 26, 2013 Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President's Unconstitutional Recess Appointments Senator Tim Scott, Senate Republicans File Supreme Court Amicus Brief on President's Unconstitutional ""Recess"" Appointments 'Last year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,' Sen. McConnell said. 'The President was dismissive of the Constitution's constraints on his power, saying he would ""refuse to take no for an answer."" Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power. They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President's attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed ""recess appointments"" to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President's recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found.' Read the full amicus brief here. Contact: (202) 224-2718 WASHINGTON, D.C. -U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) announced today that he and 44 of his Senate colleagues filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court in a challenge (NLRB v.Noel Canning) to the constitutionality of President Obama's so-called ""recess"" appointments to the National Labor Relations Board in January 2012. Earlier this year a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously ruled that the President's so-called 2012 ""recess"" appointments to the NLRB are invalid, and the Supreme Court is hearing the Administration's appeal of that decision. The Supreme Court argument has been scheduled for January 13, 2014. As they contended in an earlier amicus brief in the D.C. Circuit, the 45 senators argue in their brief that by declaring the Senate to be in a continual period of recess when it had determined to be in session regularly, the President usurped the Senate's authority to determine the rules of its own proceedings. By purporting to ""recess appoint"" political allies to the NLRB without the Senate's advice and consent, the senators argue, the President took away the Senate's right and responsibility to review executive nominations-claiming to himself the unilateral appointment power that the Framers deliberately withheld from the Office of the Presidency. ""Last year, the President made an unprecedented power grab by placing political allies at a powerful federal agency while the Senate was meeting regularly and without even trying to obtain its advice and consent,"" Sen. McConnell said. ""The President was dismissive of the Constitution's constraints on his power, saying he would 'refuse to take no for an answer.' Three federal appeals courts have rejected this and similar abuses of power. They have reaffirmed what Republicans and job creators around the country have been saying: the President's attempt to circumvent the Senate with supposed 'recess appointments' to the NLRB was unconstitutional. It will now be up to the Supreme Court to decide whether the President's recess appointments violated the Constitution, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and two other federal appeals courts have found."" The challenge to the recess appointmentsis being brought by Noel Canning, a local, family-owned business in Washington State that bottles and distributes soft drinks.The company is challenging the NLRB's determination that it must enter into a collective bargaining agreement with a labor union. In its January 2013 ruling, the D.C. Circuit Court said, ""Allowing the President to define the scope of his own appointments power would eviscerate the Constitution's separation of powers."" The Court determined that: ""An interpretation of 'the Recess' that permits the President to decide when the Senate is in recess would demolish the checks and balances inherent in the advice-and-consent requirement, giving the President free rein to appoint his desired nominees at any time he pleases, whether that time be a weekend, lunch, or even when the Senate is in session and he is merely displeased with its inaction. This cannot be the law."" Senate Republicans retained former Assistant to the Solicitor General Miguel Estrada to file the amicus brief in the Supreme Court as he did in the D.C. Circuit in this case. Mr. Estrada is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and serves as Co-Chair of the firm's Appellate and Constitutional Law Practice Group. #### Related Issues: Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/newsletters/newsletter-november-2013,Newsletter: November 2013,2013-11-25,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Stay up to date on our work in Congress by signing up for our newsletter here.   Message from Mark    Things in Washington have slowed a bit since October, but in many ways this is but the calm before the storm - so there is no shortage of information on which to update you and accordingly I offer a few thoughts.   The Affordable Care Act has been making headlines, but it seems to me to be a part of a much bigger budget drama in Washington, which is worth delving into before I offer thoughts on the recent news.   First, I may have beaten the budget battle to death over the last month with a number of newsletters about the shutdown (which you can read here), but this issue isn’t in the rear view mirror yet. The next deadline for agreement in Washington on the budget is December 13th; Paul Ryan from the House and Patty Murray from the Senate have been charged with coming to a deal on this front and at this point progress seems slow. We will see what comes next, however regardless of what they do or don’t produce, January and February will see significant deadlines on the Continuing Resolution and the debt ceiling.   The tug of war on any budget solution will involve two major issues. First is dealing with the driver of the national debt, entitlement spending, and at this point there seems to be little appetite to address this elephant in the budget room. Which leaves a second elephant, the sequester. As you may recall during my race this spring, folks in Washington exchanged raising the debt ceiling for a cap in non-entitlement spending. It’s not the big part of the budget, but important just the same given that it capped some kind of spending in Washington. This is a big deal as real caps in Washington spending come along about as often as the probability of your neighbor getting struck by lightning or you dying of a spider bite tonight. It just doesn’t happen a lot. I think many conservatives, “the right,” would like to bust the budget caps imposed by the sequester because of their impact on military spending. Many liberals, “the left,” would like to do the same for the way this type of spending funds many interests important to their political coalition. So I suspect if there is any sort of deal between Ryan and Murray it will lie in raising spending now (the caps on domestic discretionary) in exchange for future cuts in entitlement spending. I will be appropriately open minded, but suspicious, of any such deal because that is the way of Washington - increase spending now in exchange for illusory cuts in the future.   Though the message never got through, and was certainly drowned by the back and forth on fund vs. don’t fund the Affordable Care Act, the reason I think there was legitimacy to Republicans awkward attempts to draw a line in the sand on spending is because the government shutdown fireworks are so theatrical when measured against the reality of our spending problem. We have a profound spending addiction, and if not dealt with all of us will see even more profound consequences in terms of the value of the dollar, future inflation and our way of life. James Hamilton of the University of California made news in August by arguing that the real national debt was actually $70 trillion. Lawrence Kotlicoff from Boston University has long argued the national debt is actually over $200 trillion. David Walker, former Comptroller of the United States, has argued a number between the two. Regardless of where you end up, all these numbers are far above the $17 trillion everyone now talks about in Washington, and they beg the larger need for action. These numbers are relevant particularly in the current debate on the deficit, where the President and others have argued that deficits are coming down. It means that real deficits are closer to $5 to $7 trillion a year and growing.   Washington’s inability thus far to react to these numbers remains unsettling because even in the recent debt ceiling increase the debt limit was actually suspended, rather than raised, and since the October deal the debt has jumped by more than $300 billion! I won’t belabor my opposition to this method of handling the debt ceiling, but I say all this to remind you that February 7th is approaching quickly and without a budget deal that addresses the long term drivers of our debt, I am concerned Congress will give the President another blank check to further raise the debt limit.   Going back to the news of the day – it’s obviously centered on the problems associated with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. To state the obvious, it’s been a disaster, and in its wake I think several things stand out.   One, the so called “Obamacare disaster” may change the tenor of the debt and Continuing Resolution debates in January and February. In politics, the quickest way of changing the debate lies indeed in changing the discussion. Harry Reid and the President are likely to want to deflect from the Affordable Care Act debate by instead moving to a new discussion on these two issues. Politically it would make sense, so I would not be surprised to see new wrinkles on those upcoming budget related debates.   Two, people like choice. Though we have come a long way from a market based economy over the last 50 years...still ingrained in the American way is the notion of an individual’s choice superseding government’s choice on something so personal as heath care. The administration seemed to have underestimated this reality.   Three, given the ways in which young people have not enrolled, as could have easily been anticipated, the costs on this new entitlement are going to sky rocket. This means particularly bad things for a country already struggling with too much debt.   Finally, once again words matter in politics. The President has said since the beginning that those who wanted to keep their insurance would be able to under the new law (you can even check it out here). It has proven and will continue to be a real problem given the degree to which so many are now unhappy with their new plan. As I am sure you know, even President Clinton came out saying that this shouldn’t be so, and that the President should honor his original promise to let individuals keep their plans if they like them. To make matters worse, we now know that the White House knew that many Americans purchasing individual insurance would be unable to keep their plan, but decided to keep it a secret. As reported in the Wall Street Journal, White House aides knew they had a problem, but decided to stick with the promise that everyone could keep their plan because they didn’t want to “clutter the president’s message.” The President has come in with a new delay, but again all this begs the larger Constitutional question of whether or not the executive branch has the right to unilaterally change law. So we have a serious mess brewing on this one in Washington.   In 12 short years, if Congress continues to avoid cutting our deficit and making real reforms to spending, our debt problems will reach a point where we can afford nothing but interest on our debt and funding entitlement programs and each day we approach the financial point of no return. All this makes efforts here in Washington that much more important and accordingly I am really humbled by the chance to try and make a difference in this vital debate.   The next few months will be a crucial time in getting us on a sustainable path and I am sure there will be plenty of fireworks along the way.  I’d love to hear more of your thoughts on the financial problems confronting our nation or your personal experiences with the Affordable Care Act – you can do so by clicking here.   Take Care,       Mark Sanford     RECENT LEGISLATION    The National Security Agency    As new and additional revelations regarding the scope of the NSA’s activities continue, Rep. Sanford introduced H.R.  3436: The NSA Inspector General Act of 2013, in order to provide a more independent IG office to ensure oversight of the agency’s activities is occurring. Rep. Sanford gave the following statement explaining why he introduced the legislation:   “Right now, the IG is appointed by the Director of the NSA, which curbs their oversight effectiveness because the Director can remove them. It’s a real simple concept, if someone’s ability to make the mortgage is determined by the person they are charged with evaluating, their assessments will be less than totally independent because their finances certainly are not independent of their bosses decisions. As recently noted in an op-ed by the former IG of the CIA, Britt Snider, this lack of independence creates an environment where employees of the IG’s office worry about their careers if their findings and conclusions are critical of the agency.”   “There are a number of reforms that need to be made at the NSA to ensure the Agency is not violating the privacy of Americans, but without a robust IG office, these reforms will lack the teeth they need to be enforced. In this vein, I feel this legislation is a reasonable and necessary step that will help bring positive change to the Agency.”   More information on this bill can be found here.   Flood Insurance   Many in the Lowcountry are seeing the cost of their insurance increase as the Biggert-Waters legislation reforming flood insurance goes into effect. Rep. Sanford has signed on as a cosponsor to H.R. 3370, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, in order to enact a delay until the affordability of these reforms is considered. Rep. Sanford explained his support for the bill by saying:   “I decided to co-sponsor the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act because the Biggert-Waters legislation that passed last year, while well intended, is flawed. I wasn't there during its passage, but in this case you have a bill that puts the cart before the horse. It allows government to set new premiums now and charge more without disclosure of how they are deriving their new rates. As a conservative it seems reasonable to say why and how, when government just says ‘trust me,’ and the degree to which the original bill is flawed is highlighted by the fact that even Maxine Waters, who authored the Biggert-Waters bill, has now cosponsored this bill that amends her bill.”   “A ‘time-out’ and delaying implementation of Biggert-Waters accordingly makes sense to me. Change will come in time to all these programs, but it should be done in a business-like manner that allows markets and people the ability to respond and plan in a way that the current bill does not.”   Investigating Benghazi    Recently Rep. Sanford signed on as a cosponsor to H.R. 36, which creates a select committee to investigate last year’s attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya which resulted in the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his staff. Rep. Sanford released the following statement regarding his decision to cosponsor it:   “The question now is whether or not a breakdown in the chain of command occurred, or if the decision was made not to intervene, which would be even more alarming. While we cannot change what happened, we can learn from it and I believe the families of slain American personnel, as well as the American people, deserve to know what occurred.”     RECENT VOTES   Below are a few notes on recent votes Rep. Sanford has taken:   HR 2189:   Rep. Sanford voted against H.R. 2189, which came before the House on Tuesday, October 29, and passed 404-1 saying, “I don’t want it to be misinterpreted that I don’t think things should not be done to improve the quality of care for those who have faithfully served our nation, but as the only former Governor in the Congress, I think I have a valuable and unique perspective on the importance of doing so in a way that does not undermine prerogatives that have rested with states for the last 200 years.”   The Congressman released the following statement on the bill:   “The bill at first brush looked good because it creates a committee to address the backlog of disability claims at the VA, but I wound up being the dissenting vote against it for reasons I’ll offer in just a moment. Before doing so let me say that taking care of our veterans is something that’s deeply important to me – the federal government made a commitment to them when they commissioned or enlisted, and it’s disgraceful that over 900,000 veterans are still waiting for timely care and attention to their benefits applications. I’ve voted several times in the few months I have been in Congress for measures to reduce this backlog, and while this task force would have been another positive step forward, one provision of this bill violated 10th Amendment states’ rights, and that is ultimately why I cast my vote against it – and that I’d like to address.   “In order to speed up the process of evaluating medical claims, this bill will allow doctors contracted by the VA to travel across state borders and perform medical exams in any state, as long as they are licensed in one state. There’s no doubt that we need more physicians performing exams to determine if a veteran is eligible for disability benefits, but the problem here lies with how we license doctors in this country. We’ve established a system where each state sets their own licensing standards for physicians practicing within their state – South Carolina might have very different requirements of their physicians than California, and so on. Allowing a physician to practice in any state, even if it is for the good purpose of helping our veterans, would trample on the ability of states to determine who is eligible to practice within their own boundaries. Unfortunately doing so breaks the concept of federalism the founding fathers believed was so important to maintaining liberty because their premise was that power was to be divided in as many ways as possible. At the federal level horizontally, as it was allotted between the executive, legislative and judicial branches - but they also believed it should be vertically split between the federal government and state and local governments. In this they even went so far as to say in the Constitution, that those powers not specifically enumerated for the federal government were to be left to local governments and the people. So I support the underlying goals of reducing the backlog of disability claims, and want our veterans to be treated with respect and timely attention, but I believe we could have created a task force to examine the problems here without also violating the Constitution.”   Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA)   A few weeks ago, Rep. Sanford voted in favor of the Water Resources Reforms Act, which passed the House by a vote of 417-3. The Congressman had this to say on his vote:   “It represents an important step forward for Charleston and businesses not only in our region, but across the state, as it is vital to ensuring Charleston’s Post-45 harbor deepening stays on schedule. But I think that in addition to the economic impact back home, the cost cutting measures and the provisions to increase efficiency, ultimately there’s a bigger consideration here which is a constitutional question on the balance of power.”   “This bill is about reclaiming authority that many contended was ceded to the Executive Branch. I applaud the fact that this bill contains no earmarks, yet preserves the role of the Congress in determining spending priorities, rather than abdicate that responsibility to the Executive Branch. In too many ways it seems to me we are moving towards an imperial Presidency without traditional checks and balances. Beyond the necessity of funding national infrastructure, this bill’s greatest accomplishment may well be its work in maintaining the balance of power.     MEDIA APPEARENCES     Also during the shutdown, Rep. Sanford appeared on Fox and Friends concerning his decision to bring back furloughed workers after the House unanimously passed a bill to pay furloughed workers, saying at the time that doing any less would result in a taxpayer subsidized vacation. You can watch the interview here. Rep. Sanford also appeared on Morning Joe and you can watch it here.   Recently, Rep. Sanford was on the Rocky D show to comment on Secretary Sebelius’s testimony about the rollout of the Affordable Care Act exchanges, which you can listen to here.     GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN FOLLOW-UP   After the recent 16-day government shutdown, Rep. Sanford released the following statement regarding donating his pay:   “A number of you have asked where I would be donating following the 16 day government shutdown...just to follow-up, I have decided to donate $5,000 in total to the Spanish Moss Trail, the Lowcountry Open Land Trust, Nemours Wildlife Foundation, the local Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, MUSC Children’s Hospital, Volunteers in Medicine, the ALS Association of South Carolina and the Lowcountry affiliate of Susan G. Komen. These groups are of particular importance to me and fulfill a variety of worthwhile missions here in the Lowcountry.”     IN THE DISTRICT   Satellite Office Hours   Rep. Sanford’s Beaufort office is busy conducting satellite office hours around the county, in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Recently, they held satellite office hours in Sun City, Bluffton, Hilton Head Island and St. Helena. To get more information about upcoming office hours, please call the Beaufort Office at 843-521-2530.   Neighborhood Office Hours    Rep. Sanford is continuing to hold Neighborhood Office Hours across the district, with the last session being held the first Tuesday in November at the Piggly Wiggly in Moncks Corner. These informal gatherings allow constituents to ask questions and hear the Congressman’s comments on what is happening in Washington.   Open Door After 4   Rep. Sanford held an “Open Door After 4” office hours on Thursday, November 7th, and met with a number of constituents in his district office. These events are informal ""open house-style"" meetings where constituents can drop by the office and discuss the issues important to them with the Congressman.   Stay up to date on our work in Congress by signing up for our newsletter here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=8174c8b3-ca1b-d735-95f0-a4744b63254e,Graham Opposes Senate Democrats Rule Change,2013-11-22,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/sc-delegation-asks-department-of-energy-to-work-with-them-regarding,SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington– U.S. Senator Tim Scott led members of South Carolina’s Congressional delegation in sending a letter to the Department of Energy (DOE) asking the department to work with the delegation regarding funding levels for liquid radioactive tank waste remediation at the Savannah River Site. Scott was joined by Senator Lindsey Graham, and Representatives Joe Wilson, Jeff Duncan, Tom Rice and Mark Sanford. The delegation wrote, “DOE has greatly reduced funding for the liquid radioactive tank waste at SRS which penalizes the important remediation progress that has been achieved at SRS over the past four years. The 37 million gallons of high level radioactive waste that has been sitting in aging waste tanks for decades, which are beyond their design life, are South Carolina’s greatest potential health risk to the people, community and environment.” … “We ask that the Department work with the South Carolina delegation to find a path toward restoring funding to the liquid waste mission. This will ensure the critical environmental cleanup continues at SRS and will save taxpayers millions of dollars.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-releases-statement-on-senate-vote,Sanford Releases Statement on Senate Vote,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD RELEASES STATEMENT ON SENATE VOTE   WASHINGTON, DC –Today, Representative Mark Sanford released the following statement regarding the Senate vote to invoke the “nuclear option”:    “The Senate Democrats’ vote today to end filibusters for most presidential nominees is an unprecedented action, and another example of how the political process in Washington is breaking down,” Sanford said.    “For one, the Senate has had a tradition of careful deliberation that’s been around for over 200 years. It’s a slow moving process that can be frustrating at times, but ultimately the rules have worked for every single Congress for the last two centuries. The idea that Senate Democrats in 2013 can decide to change the rules written in 1787 just because they don’t like what’s happening is incredibly troubling.”   “Second, we’re increasingly seeing a top-down system taking over in Washington. The entire point of the Senate is to listen to the views of the minority… yet removing the right of the minority to filibuster means that their views matter less than those controlling the debate. There are real concerns here no matter who’s in power, and I think we can’t take those concerns lightly.” “Today’s vote seems to me to be part of a larger problem with the political process in Washington. Whether it’s the recent abuses of power by the executive branch, or the tendency to budget via Continuing Resolution, the overall trend is concerning. I think we ought to carefully consider how these actions are affecting the underlying political process.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221034852/http://gowdy.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=363484,"Gowdy joins Josh Kimbrell to talk jobs data, government accountability, and Healthcare.gov rollout",2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Gowdy joins Josh Kimbrell to talk jobs data, government accountability, and Healthcare.gov rollout f t # e Greenville, SC, Nov 21, 2013 Listen to Congressman Gowdy's interview with Josh Kimbrell on ""Common Cents"" online. f t # e",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221052147/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=362526,Wilson: House Votes on Series of Bills to Increase Energy Production and Create Jobs,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) released the following statement after the House passed three energy bills that promote and expand American energy production, create jobs, and lower energy costs. Congressman Wilson said, “Our nation has an abundance of energy resources. President Obama claims to support an “all-of-the-above energy plan,” but continues to wage his war on energy consumers and providers.  Since 2009, the President and his Administration have stalled projects, increased regulations, and created obstacles that limit energy production. “Our economy can receive the growth spurt it needs by increasing our access to energy exploration and production. With new technological advancements within the natural gas and shale oil industry, we have opportunities to strengthen our energy independence and create jobs in an environmentally friendly manner. By expanding access to production, consumer prices will decrease, allowing American families to keep more money out of their hard-earned paychecks.” Energy package includes: H.R. 1965, The Federal Lands Jobs and Energy Security Act – This bill protects and expands onshore American energy production, streamlines permitting processes, and reduces bureaucratic red tape and regulations.  H.R. 2728, The Protecting States’ Rights to Promote American Energy Security Act – This bill prohibits the Interior Department from enforcing federal hydraulic fracturing regulations in any state that already has regulations.  It also recognizes states’ authority to regulate this type of activity. H.R. 1900, The Natural Gas Pipeline Permitting Reform Act – This bill expedites the federal review process for natural gas pipeline permit applications.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033751/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-scott-statement-nuclear-option,Senator Scott Statement on Nuclear Option,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Nov 21, 2013 Senator Scott Statement on Nuclear Option Contact: (202) 224-2718 Washington – U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) released the following statement after Senate Democrats changed the rules of the Senate today using what has become known as the “nuclear option."" “This unprecedented power grab to change the rules of the Senate simply to try and shift people’s attention away from the disastrous Obamacare rollout is short sighted, and it carries implications Democrats are going to have to live with when Republicans retake the Senate. It is also unfortunate that Senator Reid and Senate Democrats have developed amnesia in regards to how they acted when Republicans were in the majority. While they held up nominations for up to a thousand days under President Bush, Democrats have now decided to invoke the nuclear option over nominees for a court that doesn’t even have the workload to keep the judges it has busy.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033844/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/sc-delegation-asks-department-energy-work-them-regarding-funding-levels-savannah-river,SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site Contact: (202) 224-2718 Washington – U.S. Senator Tim Scott led members of South Carolina’s Congressional delegation in sending a letter to the Department of Energy (DOE) asking the department to work with the delegation regarding funding levels for liquid radioactive tank waste remediation at the Savannah River Site. Scott was joined by Senator Lindsey Graham, and Representatives Joe Wilson, Jeff Duncan, Tom Rice and Mark Sanford. The delegation wrote, “DOE has greatly reduced funding for the liquid radioactive tank waste at SRS which penalizes the important remediation progress that has been achieved at SRS over the past four years. The 37 million gallons of high level radioactive waste that has been sitting in aging waste tanks for decades, which are beyond their design life, are South Carolina’s greatest potential health risk to the people, community and environment.” … “We ask that the Department work with the South Carolina delegation to find a path toward restoring funding to the liquid waste mission. This will ensure the critical environmental cleanup continues at SRS and will save taxpayers millions of dollars.” The full text of the letter is attached.   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/sc-delegation-asks-department-of-energy-to-work-with-them-regarding-funding-levels-at-the-savannah-river-site,SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Thursday | November 21, 2013 SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site SC Delegation Asks Department of Energy to Work With Them Regarding Funding Levels at the Savannah River Site Contact: (202) 224-2718 Washington - U.S. Senator Tim Scott led members of South Carolina's Congressional delegation in sending a letter to the Department of Energy (DOE) asking the department to work with the delegation regarding funding levels for liquid radioactive tank waste remediation at the Savannah River Site. Scott was joined by Senator Lindsey Graham, and Representatives Joe Wilson, Jeff Duncan, Tom Rice and Mark Sanford. The delegation wrote, ""DOE has greatly reduced funding for the liquid radioactive tank waste at SRS which penalizes the important remediation progress that has been achieved at SRS over the past four years. The 37 million gallons of high level radioactive waste that has been sitting in aging waste tanks for decades, which are beyond their design life, are South Carolina's greatest potential health risk to the people, community and environment."" ""We ask that the Department work with the South Carolina delegation to find a path toward restoring funding to the liquid waste mission. This will ensure the critical environmental cleanup continues at SRS and will save taxpayers millions of dollars."" The full text of the letter is attached. ### Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-scott-statement-on-nuclear-option,Senator Scott Statement on Nuclear Option,2013-11-21,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Thursday | November 21, 2013 Senator Scott Statement on Nuclear Option Senator Scott Statement on Nuclear Option Contact: (202) 224-2718 Washington - U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) released the following statement after Senate Democrats changed the rules of the Senate today using what has become known as the ""nuclear option."" ""This unprecedented power grab to change the rules of the Senate simply to try and shift people's attention away from the disastrous Obamacare rollout is short sighted, and it carries implications Democrats are going to have to live with when Republicans retake the Senate. It is also unfortunate that Senator Reid and Senate Democrats have developed amnesia in regards to how they acted when Republicans were in the majority. While they held up nominations for up to a thousand days under President Bush, Democrats have now decided to invoke the nuclear option over nominees for a court that doesn't even have the workload to keep the judges it has busy."" ### Related Issues: Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/us-house-votes-to-increase-oil-and-gas-development-on-federal-land,U.S. House Votes to Increase Oil and Gas Development on Federal Land,2013-11-20,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C.— Congressman Tom Rice (SC-07) today released the following statement regarding the House passage of H.R. 1965, the Federal Lands Jobs and Energy Security Act of 2013: “Last month, our country produced more oil than it imported for the first time in nearly two decades. This milestone was only obtainable due to onshore oil production on state-owned and privately-owned land—not federally-owned land.  The legislation my colleagues and I passed today would increase oil and gas development on federally-owned land by setting new permitting standards, cutting red tape, and expanding onshore energy production in the U. S. “American energy independence is paramount to American Competitiveness.  Expanding onshore oil and gas development would create jobs and drive down the cost of energy for businesses and consumers—ultimately saving you and your family money.  I encourage the Senate to take up this common-sense legislation because it would give our economy the jump-start it greatly needs in this period of sluggish recovery.” Click here for additional information on H.R. 1965.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=768b715e-fc84-f091-08e8-307f492eed63,Graham Responds to White House Call for South Carolina Medicaid Expansion,2013-11-20,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-statement-on-declassified-nsa-documents,Sanford Statement on Declassified NSA Documents,2013-11-19,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. – Late Monday night more than 1,000 pages of declassified files concerning the National Security Agency’s collection of American citizen’s phone records were released by the Obama Administration.  While heavily redacted, these files show that the government in part attributed their violations of surveillance rules to “poor management, lack of involvement by compliance officials and lack of internal verification procedures, not by bad faith.” There are many cures for this, and a vital one rests in someone indeed making sure there is compliance. H.R. 3436, Representative Sanford’s bill, would create an independent Inspector General’s office at the NSA, just as is the case at the CIA, Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security. Representative Sanford had this to say, “It’s not exactly surprising that if your career and work prospects aren’t in the hands of the person who you are attempting to assess, you can be more independent in your assessment. Only in government would someone think that an employee, a direct subordinate, should be charged with the job of assessing the work of the boss. It’s nice in theory, but when your ability to make the mortgage payment can be determined by the tenor of your findings, tenor changes and we see the results of doing so with this declassifying of files.” “Four years ago when the government knew that they had violated surveillance protocols, they blamed it on a lack of oversight, but they didn’t take the step of creating an independent Inspector General’s office at the NSA,” said Sanford. “Despite the fact that this process already exists in the other intelligence related agencies.” “Yesterday’s disclosures further reinforce the need for making this change at the NSA, to ensure that the Inspector General’s office is operating with independence and is conducting effective oversight,” said Sanford. You can read more about H.R. 3436 here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055711/http://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=71de6047-b736-724b-0544-0e0b1280dbc8,"Graham, Schumer, Menendez, McCain, Casey, Collins Urge Administration Not to Accept Iran Deal that Cuts Back Sanctions but Allows Iranian Nuclear Program to Continue",2013-11-19,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Graham Press Releases Contact: Lorcan Connick, 202-224-5972 Date: 11/19/2013 Graham, Schumer, Menendez, McCain, Casey, Collins Urge Administration Not to Accept Iran Deal that Cuts Back Sanctions but Allows Iranian Nuclear Program to Continue WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham, Charles E. Schumer, Robert Menendez, John McCain, Bob Casey and Susan Collins wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry, expressing their support for negotiations but cautioning the Administration against accepting a deal with Iran that would roll back economic sanctions without also rolling back progress towards nuclear weapons capability. According to media reports, Administration negotiators have considered accepting an agreement that would provide relief for the Iranian regime from the debilitating economic sanctions while only requiring the Iranians to halt their work towards a nuclear weapon, rather than undoing the progress they have already made. The senators wrote, ""We feel strongly that any easing of sanctions along the lines that the P5+1 is reportedly considering should require Iran to roll back its nuclear program more significantly than now envisioned. ""It is our belief that any interim agreement with the Iranians should bring us closer to our ultimate goal which is Iran without a nuclear weapons capability. We must ensure that the steps we take in the coming weeks and months move us towards a resolution that ultimately brings Iran in compliance with all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions, seeks to prevent Tehran from possessing any enrichment or reprocessing capability, and resolves any and all fears that Iran will develop a nuclear weapons capability."" Under the reported agreement, the P5+1 is prepared to permit Iran to continue enriching uranium at 3.5% for civilian use, to cap but not reduce the number of centrifuges, and to continue work near the Arak heavy water nuclear reactor. The senators argue that these steps may suggest Iran is willing to temporarily slow its pursuit of a nuclear weapon, but they would allow Iran to continue making some progress towards obtaining a nuclear weapon under the cover of further negotiations. In return, Iran would receive relief from economic sanctions, including access to previously-frozen assets. The senators said the reported agreement, ""does not give us confidence that Iran is prepared to abandon unambiguously its nuclear weapons pursuit altogether, as it must."" The full text of the letter appears below: Dear Secretary Kerry: We appreciate your continued efforts, in concert with our friends and allies, to negotiate with the Iranian regime. We also commend the efforts of your negotiating team to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability. Our negotiators have benefited from the effects of tough economic sanctions in bringing Iran to the table. Without the Administration, Congress, and our allies working together, we would not have arrived at this crucial point. Indeed, we support the concept of an interim agreement with Iran that would roll back its nuclear program as a first step to seeking a final settlement that prevents Iran from ever developing a nuclear weapons capability. At the same time, we are concerned that the interim agreement would require us to make significant concessions before we see Iran demonstrably commit to moving away from developing a nuclear weapons capability. It is our understanding that the interim agreement now under consideration would not require Iran to even meet the terms of prior United Nations Security Council resolutions which require Iran to suspend its reprocessing, heavy water-related and enrichment-related activities and halt ongoing construction of any uranium-enrichment, reprocessing, or heavy water-related facilities. For example, we understand that the P5+1 is prepared to permit Iran to continue enriching uranium at 3.5 percent albeit for civilian use, to cap but not reduce its number of centrifuges, and to continue work around or near the Arak heavy water nuclear reactor. While the interim agreement may suggest that Iran could be willing temporarily to slow its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability, it could also allow Iran to continue making some progress toward that end under the cover of negotiations. This does not give us confidence that Iran is prepared to abandon unambiguously its nuclear weapons pursuit altogether, as it must. Furthermore, it is our understanding that in return for certain Iranian actions, the P5+1 would allow Iran to gain access to considerable amounts of capital that have been frozen by our international sanctions. Some have estimated the value of this capital for Iran as much as $10 billion. We regard this as a major concession on our part that would not be justified by the concessions the Iranian regime would be required to make in return. If we are reducing sanctions, Iran should be reducing its nuclear capabilities. As you know, it is not just the sanctions themselves but the threat that they would continue to tighten that has brought the Iranians to the negotiating table. Easing sanctions now without real, tangible actions by Iran to roll back its nuclear program would not only diminish this threat of future pressure, it could make it more difficult to maintain the current sanctions regime at a time when many international actors are already eager to lessen their implementation of sanctions. We feel strongly that any easing of sanctions along the lines that the P5+1 is reportedly considering should require Iran to roll back its nuclear program more significantly than now envisioned. It is our belief that any interim agreement with the Iranians should bring us closer to our ultimate goal which is Iran without a nuclear weapons capability. We must ensure that the steps we take in the coming weeks and months move us towards a resolution that ultimately brings Iran in compliance with all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions, seeks to prevent Tehran from possessing any enrichment or reprocessing capability, and resolves any and all fears that Iran will develop a nuclear weapons capability. The upcoming round of negotiations could hardly be more important and we must be ever mindful of with whom we are negotiating. Iran has been the largest state sponsor of terrorism for over thirty years; its leaders routinely call for the destruction of Israel; and it arms and finances terrorist groups around the globe. We urge you and your negotiating team to fight for an interim agreement that demands as much or more of Iran as it does of the United States and our allies. We hope in the next few weeks we and our partners will redouble our efforts to gain greater proportionality and to finalize an agreement that demonstrates that Iran is moving away from the nuclear weapons path. ### You will need to have Real One Player installed on your computer to be able to listen or watch the clips above. Real One Player is free software that lets you play audio and video files. Download Real One Player",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/congressman-duncan-presidents-obamacare-change,Congressman Duncan on the President's ObamaCare Change,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Congressman Duncan (SC-03) released the following statement today regarding the President’s Administrative Change to ObamaCare: “Yesterday, President Obama announced that if you like your health plan you can keep it...for one more year...maybe. The President’s ‘administrative fix’ is an attempt to create a lifeboat for ObamaCare to get his party through the 2014-midterm elections. The President’s actions appear to be unconstitutional and don’t change the fact that he's still breaking his promise by not ensuring people can keep their health plans, and then only allowing people to keep their plans for another year. By only giving people a possible one year insurance extension, the President is showing that he cares more about winning the upcoming elections than he does about keeping his word. This isn't about a broken website, this is about broken promises and a healthcare law that simply doesn't work.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221052531/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361714,Wilson: House Passes Bill to Allow Families to Keep Their Healthcare Plans,2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) released the following statement after a bipartisan majority in the House passed H.R. 3350, the Keep Your Health Plan Act. This legislation allows the American people to escape the expensive premium increases and policy cancellations under Obamacare by allowing current available plans on the individual market today to be offered next year.  It also ensures that American families will be able to keep their current plans without penalty. Congressman Joe Wilson said, “President Obama has broken his promise to millions of Americans who have been notified that their healthcare policies will no longer be available next year. Millions more will face this same challenge in the coming months.   “Yesterday, the President made another unrealistic promise when he offered to provide a quick fix and allow families to keep their existing plans. At the same time, he also issued a veto threat for this overwhelmingly bipartisan legislation that allows him to legislatively follow through with his pledge.  “Common sense conveys that the President is putting politics over policy when it comes to implementing his signature piece of healthcare legislation.   His Administration is completely out of touch with the struggles American families are experiencing as a result of his destruction and intrusion into our healthcare system.  “The failed rollout of Obamacare is just the tip of the iceberg.  This unworkable law will erode the doctor-patient relationship, continue to increase premiums, and destroy jobs.  The only way American families can experience true relief from this law is if the President works with House Republicans to repeal and replace it with common sense solutions.”  *Congressman Wilson delivered a speech on the House floor yesterday sharing real-life scenarios constituents are experience as a result of Obamacare’s implementation.  Please feel free to share the video and speech. *Additionally, if constituents would like to share their stories of dealing with Obamacare, they can visit www.gop.gov/YourStory. *Rep. Tom Price (GA-06) has proposed H.R. 2300, the Empowering Patients First Act, which is a patient-centered alternative to Obamacare. Congressman Wilson is a cosponsor of this piece of legislation. For more information, click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223021750/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/scott-gop-senators-administration-no-union-carveouts-obamacare,"Scott, GOP Senators to Administration: No Union Carveouts from Obamacare",2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senators send letter opposing any regulation to give unions a break from Obamacare fee without giving the same to employers, charities, and faith-based organizations    WASHINGTON – Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) joined 20 of his Republican colleagues in urging the Obama administration against moving forward with a proposed regulation that would exempt unions from an Obamacare fee that applies equally to employers, charities, and faith-based organizations.   The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published a regulation on October 30, 2013, stating that the agency intends to propose further rulemaking which would aim to exempt certain Taft-Hartley union health plans from the reinsurance fee mandated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).   In a letter to Sylvia Burwell, director of the Office of Management and Budget, the senators write: “The [reinsurance] fee is undeniably expensive for unions, employers, charities and faith-based organizations whose health plans are not available in the new health insurance exchanges and will not see any of those dollars returned to them. For the year 2014, the fee is $63 per covered life—a multi-million dollar levy for larger organizations.”   They continue: “The regulation makes no justification as to why union members should be exempted from this fee while other similarly situated organizations (and, ultimately, their beneficiaries) must continue to pay it.   “It has been widely reported that labor unions recently sought an exemption from the reinsurance fee through Congress but were rightly rebuffed. To think that the Obama Administration would consider such an action that benefits one group over another can only be characterized as cronyism at its worst.   “Self-insured health insurance plans—whether or not they also self-administer—are all facing the same dilemma of being forced to subsidize insurance companies participating in the new exchange. The regulatory process is meant to implement the law as written, not as the Administration wishes it were. If the law will unfairly hurt certain groups, it should be repealed or amended through Congress.      The letter was also signed by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John Thune (R-SD), John Barrasso (R-WY), Richard Burr (R-NC), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), James Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mike Lee (R-UT), John McCain (R-AZ), and Pat Roberts (R-KS).   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/scott-gop-senators-to-administration-no-union-carveouts-from-obamacare,"Scott, GOP Senators to Administration: No Union Carveouts from Obamacare",2013-11-15,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Friday | November 15, 2013 Scott, GOP Senators to Administration: No Union Carveouts from Obamacare Senators send letter opposing any regulation to give unions a break from Obamacare fee without giving the same to employers, charities, and faith-based organizations WASHINGTON - Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) joined 20 of his Republican colleagues in urging the Obama administration against moving forward with a proposed regulation that would exempt unions from an Obamacare fee that applies equally to employers, charities, and faith-based organizations. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published a regulation on October 30, 2013, stating that the agency intends to propose further rulemaking which would aim to exempt certain Taft-Hartley union health plans from the reinsurance fee mandated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). In a letter to Sylvia Burwell, director of the Office of Management and Budget, the senators write: ""The [reinsurance] fee is undeniably expensive for unions, employers, charities and faith-based organizations whose health plans are not available in the new health insurance exchanges and will not see any of those dollars returned to them. For the year 2014, the fee is $63 per covered life-a multi-million dollar levy for larger organizations."" They continue: ""The regulation makes no justification as to why union members should be exempted from this fee while other similarly situated organizations (and, ultimately, their beneficiaries) must continue to pay it. ""It has been widely reported that labor unions recently sought an exemption from the reinsurance fee through Congress but were rightly rebuffed. To think that the Obama Administration would consider such an action that benefits one group over another can only be characterized as cronyism at its worst. ""Self-insured health insurance plans-whether or not they also self-administer-are all facing the same dilemma of being forced to subsidize insurance companies participating in the new exchange. The regulatory process is meant to implement the law as written, not as the Administration wishes it were. If the law will unfairly hurt certain groups, it should be repealed or amended through Congress. The letter was also signed by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John Thune (R-SD), John Barrasso (R-WY), Richard Burr (R-NC), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), James Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mike Lee (R-UT), John McCain (R-AZ), and Pat Roberts (R-KS). ### Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-rice-appointed-to-wrrda-conference-committee,Congressman Rice Appointed to WRRDA Conference Committee,2013-11-14,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C.— House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) today appointed Congressman Tom Rice (R-SC) to the bipartisan Conference Committee for the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA).   Last month, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed WRRDA with a vote of 417 to 3; sending the legislation to conference with the Senate-passed companion bill.  The House and Senate Conferees will soon meet to negotiate the differences in legislation passed by their respective chamber.  Having a staunch advocate for South Carolina’s ports and ports across the Southeast, will greatly benefit our region and ensure that South Carolina and the Southeast remain competitive. “I am humbled to have been selected as a WRRDA Conferee and look forward to working with my colleagues to improve our country’s water infrastructure,” said Congressman Rice.  “My district sent me to Washington to work on our infrastructure needs and the needs of the state.  Since joining the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I have made it my goal to do whatever it takes to champion South Carolina’s ports.  I am proud the House overwhelming passed this reform-focused legislation because it gives our nation’s infrastructure—including the Georgetown Port—the attention it needs for us to compete globally.” “Since joining the committee, Congressman Rice has clearly expressed the importance of water infrastructure and the invaluable role our ports play in the American economy,” said Chairman Bill Shuster (R-PA).  “Tom has advocated for making sure ports in South Carolina, the Southeast, and the United States are ready for post-Panamax container ships. Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to tour infrastructure in the Palmetto State with Congressman Rice, and I look forward to continue working with Tom on this Conference Committee as we work with the Senate to improve our country’s water infrastructure.” To view the full list of WRRDA Conferees, please visit Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure’s Facebook Page HERE.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221052150/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361441,Wilson Sends Letter to Budget Committee Conferees on Behalf of SRS and Fort Jackson,2013-11-14,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"This afternoon, Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) sent a letter to all members of the Budget Conference Committee, including House Chairman Paul Ryan (WI-01) and Senate Chairwoman Patty Murray (WA), regarding the upcoming fiscal negotiations as it pertains to sequestration. Because of current law established under the Budget Control Act of 2011, the Department of Defense and Department of Energy's budgets will experience further reductions in January. Congressman Wilson has taken a proactive approach to encourage his colleagues to find alternatives so that our national security and South Carolina’s economy remain protected. The letter reads, “As you continue negotiations over the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget, I commend you and your fellow budget-conference committee members for taking on the difficult task of working towards a budget solution.  It is my hope that a reasonable solution to the arbitrary sequestration cuts is found while providing a blueprint that will put our country on a more sustainable path. “As you and your fellow Committee Members begin the negotiations process, I ask that you make a concerted effort towards ensuring these essential cuts are made as strategically and responsibly as possible. I voted against the Budget Control Act because I knew that sequestration’s broad and indiscriminate cuts would decimate our military capability and strategic national security assets across the country. “In South Carolina’s Second Congressional District, we have seen the effects of the sequestration cuts firsthand. The Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site (SRS) provides the country with defense environmental cleanup efforts, nuclear weapons activities, and fulfills international non-proliferation agreements. SRS has been forced to furlough and layoff thousands of workers over the last year. The Site has also seen dramatic scaling back of vital national security missions that will drive up the overall costs of these projects. “One hundred miles northeast of Savannah River Site is Fort Jackson.  Fort Jackson is the Army’s largest basic combat training installation and is tasked with training new Army recruits with the basic yet essential combat skills that every Soldier must possess.  Sequestration has caused significant disruptions to training due to many Department of the Army civilians being furloughed, especially medical personnel.  Training budgets have also been reduced and threaten to degrade the quality of training that these Army trainees receive.  These budget cuts are already undermining our national security in the form of military readiness and threating the well being of our men and women in uniform.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055240/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361631,Actions Speak Louder Than Words,2013-11-14,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) delivered the following speech on the floor of the United States House of Representatives this afternoon to voice real-life scenarios his constituents are experiencing as a result of Obamacare’s failed implementation.   “Mister Speaker, Obamacare is a disaster! The President knows it; Congress knows it; and most importantly, the American people now know it. The President claims to be working with Congress to stop the train wreck the ACA is waging on American families. Actions speak louder than words. It’s time for him to engage with House Republicans to find a solution. “We must help Mary in Lexington, South Carolina, whose healthcare policy premium has already increased 275 percent since the beginning of this year. And Rebecca from Aiken, who will be forced to pay $600 more a month for the same coverage in January. And Alvin, an uninsured Veteran also living in Aiken, who has tried to purchase insurance on the government healthcare website, but can’t afford it because the premium will be higher than his mortgage, utilities, and Internet combined. “This is absurd.  For the sake of the middle class, we must replace Obamacare with common sense solutions that protects families, provides a safety net, and promotes jobs.  “In conclusion, God bless our troops and we will never forget September 11th in the Global War on Terrorism,” Congressman Joe Wilson said. Tomorrow, the House will vote on H.R. 3350, the Keep Your Health Plan Act. This legislation allows the American people to escape the expensive premium increases and policy cancellations under Obamacare by allowing available plans on the individual market today to be offered next year.  It also ensures that American families will be able to keep their current plans without penalty. *In addition, if constituents would like to share their stories of dealing with Obamacare, they can visit www.gop.gov/YourStory. *Video of the Congressman’s floor speech can be found here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/duncan-statement-obamacare-enrollment-numbers,Duncan Statement on ObamaCare Enrollment Numbers,2013-11-13,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Congressman Jeff Duncan (SC-03) released the following statement regarding the low enrollment numbers in ObamaCare: “The White House’s announcement that only 100,000 people have signed up for insurance through the healthcare exchanges proves what many Americans have been saying all along: that this law is bad for our nation. Even worse for supporters of the law, only around 27,000 of those who enrolled did so through the federal exchanges managed by the Obama Administration.” “The President’s team can try to twist the truth, but the fact remains that 50 times more people have lost their insurance as a result of the healthcare law than have been insured through ObamaCare.” “With millions of Americans losing the health plans they like, prices of premiums rising, and work hours and jobs being slashed, it is only going to get worse. It’s time for the President to acknowledge that ObamaCare was a terrible mistake and is an unworkable law. I will continue to push for repealing and replacing this misguided law and putting Americans, not the government, in charge of their health care.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055244/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=361328,Wilson Statement on Obamacare Enrollment Numbers,2013-11-13,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following statement after the Administration released the first set of enrollment numbers for the Affordable Care Act. “To say the Administration should be embarrassed by Obamacare’s failed rollout is a gross understatement.  Placing blame on a dubious, faulty website does nothing to address the problems American families are facing as a result of the unworkable law’s implementation.  “The Affordable Healthcare Act will not work. Period. The American people overwhelming have lost faith in the Administration’s ability to provide affordable insurance that does not drive up premium costs, cancel current healthcare policies, or limit access to the physicians we have relied upon for years. “Former supporters of the law and those who have warned of its harmful impacts agree something must be done to protect the American people from further abuse. The President must be willing to come to the table and work with House Republicans on a solution.  Arrogance and false claims will not insure the uninsured, give coverage to those who will lose their current plans, or create the thousands of jobs that have already been destroyed as a result of Obamacare,” Congressman Joe Wilson stated.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/guest-column-gop-saw-iceberg-obamacare,Guest column: GOP saw iceberg in Obamacare,2013-11-12,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Before you even elected me, I said that repealing Obamacare would be one of my top priorities. As a candidate, I spoke out strongly against the president’s healthcare law and put forward my own competing plan for what I thought reform should look like. As your congressman, I went a step further and co-sponsored bills that turned many of those same conservative proposals into legislation, while voting dozens of times to repeal, defund and delay Obamacare. If you haven’t heard much about conservative alternatives, it’s because they weren’t allowed to be part of the discussion in 2009 when Democrats controlled every branch of government. The debate that took place in Washington wasn’t between the conservative plan and the liberal plan for health care. The debate was between the liberal plan and the very liberal plan. Republicans were shut out of that debate, and when the dust settled, Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote. When Republicans took back the House in 2011, Obamacare was sacred for Democrats, and we were told that anything but extremely minor changes to the law was dead on arrival in the Senate. Obamacare got off to a bad start. Instead of working together in a spirit of bipartisanship and passing a bill we could all agree on, we got a law that some people loved, but most people hated. After the bill passed, Democrats were willfully blind to the law’s problems. Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised us that insurance premiums would go down, but for too many families the opposite happened. President Barack Obama promised us “if you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan,” but NBC, CBS, ABC, and the Washington Post have all debunked that statement as a lie. As of this writing, more than 2 million Americans have been told they won’t be able to keep their insurance policies. Even the promise that you would be able to keep your own doctor has been proven untrue in many circumstances. The examples of broken Obamacare promises are just too common to ignore. The Los Angeles Times reported on the story of Jennifer Harris, who was paying $98 a month for an individual insurance plan, but because of the new healthcare law will now be forced to pay $238 a month. Kirsten Powers, a former Democratic Party strategist and columnist for the Daily Beast reported that her insurance premiums will double as a result of Obamacare. A manufacturer in Anderson informed our office that its workers can expect to see premium increases of roughly 28 percent and 50 percent for the two plans they currently offer to their employees as a direct result of the healthcare law. In Oconee County, to comply with Obamacare the school district placed restrictions on the amount of hours a substitute teacher can work, taking money away from families who were counting on that source of revenue. To put it bluntly, Americans were lied to about the impact of Obamacare. Our country is in danger, and one of the greatest threats is from the direct and indirect costs of Obamacare. That’s why I’ve stood firm and used all the powers given to me by the people to try and stop this law from taking place. It’s not because it’s President Barack Obama’s law, and it’s not even because I disagree with most of what’s in the bill. I’m fighting with all my heart because I believe this law is poisoning America. Some pundits claim our push against the healthcare law hurt Republicans, but after the Obama administration showed they couldn’t even build a website properly let alone implement the largest healthcare reform in history, people are starting to realize why we had to have that fight. I think Americans will come to understand that Republicans spotted the iceberg long ago, and will thank us for trying to steer our country out of danger. If the examples I cited aren’t enough for you, I’d ask you to think about the future. How can we afford to borrow money to pay for a law that doesn’t even make healthcare more affordable for everyone? How are these increased costs and lost wages going to impact our families and our economy? And why do we continue to cheat our children and grandchildren by spending money we don’t have and make our country’s financial situation worse as a result? https://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20131109/opinion/311090009/gop-saw-iceberg-obamacare",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223033936/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-accepting-internship-applications,Senator Tim Scott Accepting Internship Applications,2013-11-12,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) is now accepting applications from South Carolinians interested in serving as interns in his Upstate, Midlands, Lowcountry, and Washington, D.C. offices for the spring and summer terms.   Senator Scott’s internships are designed to provide an educational opportunity, primarily for college juniors and seniors, to individuals who would like to learn first-hand more about our government, and to be part of a fast-paced Senate office.   In the Upstate, Midlands, and Lowcountry offices, interns will take an active role in the community working on state-based projects of importance, while also answering phones, completing research and other projects, and being an integral part of day-to-day office functioning.    In Washington, interns' responsibilities will be more varied. They will be asked to answer phones, research legislation for the Member and legislative staff, attend Congressional hearings and briefings and answer constituent letters on various issues.   Through their duties, interns learn about the legislative process and the many other functions of a Congressional office.  Although internships in all offices are unpaid, students gain invaluable work experience and will have the opportunity to work with professionals in both legislative and constituent services roles. Internship hours are flexible to accommodate students' hectic course schedules, but generally run 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.   Anyone interested in applying for an internship with Senator Scott’s office should contact the internship coordinator at internships@scott.senate.gov or (202) 224-6121.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-accepting-internship-applications,Senator Tim Scott Accepting Internship Applications,2013-11-12,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | November 12, 2013 Senator Tim Scott Accepting Internship Applications Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) is now accepting applications from South Carolinians interested in serving as interns in his Upstate, Midlands, Lowcountry, and Washington, D.C. offices for the spring and summer terms. Senator Scott's internships are designed to provide an educational opportunity, primarily for college juniors and seniors, to individuals who would like to learn first-hand more about our government, and to be part of a fast-paced Senate office. In the Upstate, Midlands, and Lowcountry offices, interns will take an active role in the community working on state-based projects of importance, while also answering phones, completing research and other projects, and being an integral part of day-to-day office functioning. In Washington, interns' responsibilities will be more varied. They will be asked to answer phones, research legislation for the Member and legislative staff, attend Congressional hearings and briefings and answer constituent letters on various issues. Through their duties, interns learn about the legislative process and the many other functions of a Congressional office. Although internships in all offices are unpaid, students gain invaluable work experience and will have the opportunity to work with professionals in both legislative and constituent services roles. Internship hours are flexible to accommodate students' hectic course schedules, but generally run 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Anyone interested in applying for an internship with Senator Scott's office should contact the internship coordinator at internships@scott.senate.gov or (202) 224-6121. Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/veterans-day-statement-0,Veterans Day Statement,2013-11-11,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Laurens, SC – Today Congressman Jeff Duncan (SC-03) released the following statement in celebration of Veterans Day: “We pause today to reflect on the sacrifices of our nation’s Veterans, who put their lives at risk to protect our freedoms at home and abroad.  From the advances of Nazi Germany to the shores of Korea and Vietnam, to Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghanistan, these brave men and women answered the call to protect our nation and the world from the evil forces who wish to do harm.  To those who serve, thank you for your courage, your strength, and your sacrifice to your country and family.  For those who have fallen, let us never forget their sacrifices which we will forever be indebted.” “I encourage everyone to thank a Veteran, not just today, but every day.  Seek out opportunities in the community to serve.  Find a way to participate in an Honor Flight to our nation’s Capitol.  We will never be capable of fully repaying these men and women for their service, and they command tremendous respect for the sacrifices they have made.” “Lastly, if you are a Veteran seeking help or access to your benefits, I am here to serve you.  Please contact my office to see how I can help you receive the benefits you earned and any assistance you may require.  Thank you for your service, and may God Bless.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-public-schedule-for-november-11th,Sanford Releases Public Schedule for November 11th,2013-11-08,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD RELEASES PUBLIC SCHEDULE FOR NOVEMBER 11th     WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-01) announced his schedule for November 11th:Monday, November 11th, 2013   11:00 AM                    VFW Post 445 Veterans Day Ceremony                                     VFW Post 445, 1639 Camp Rd., Charleston​   12:00 PM                    SCGOP Luncheon                                      Harbour Club, 35 Prioleau St., Charleston   6:00 PM                      Charleston Meeting                                     Harbour Club, 35 Prioleau St., Charleston                                        ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-satellite-office-hours-schedule-0,Sanford Announces Satellite Office Hours Schedule,2013-11-08,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) announced that his staff will be conducting satellite office hours in Sun City, Bluffton, St. Helena and Hilton Head Island November 12th – 14th, per the schedule below.   Satellite office hours are conducted around the district by the Representative’s staff in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Additionally, anyone wishing to express an opinion or ask a question is welcome to stop by.  Note: Representative Sanford is not scheduled to be in attendance at these events.  Tuesday, November 12th: 9:00AM – 11:00AM              Sun City Satellite Office Hours                                           Lakehouse, Dockside Room                                           1251 Sgt. William Jasper Blvd.                                           Bluffton, SC 29909 11:00AM – 1:00PM              Bluffton Satellite Office Hours                                           Bluffton Community Library                                           120 Palmetto Way                                           Bluffton, SC 29910   Wednesday, November 13th:   11:00AM – 1:00PM               Hilton Head Satellite Office Hours                                            Hilton Head Island Library                                            11 Beach City Rd.                                            Hilton Head Island, SC 29926     Thursday, November 14th:   11:00AM – 1:00PM               St. Helena Satellite Office Hours                                            St. Helena Branch Library                                            6355 Jonathan Francis Sr. Road                                            St. Helena Island, SC  29910",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=334fc324-eb10-8ba9-c57f-d6753d4b3ed3,Graham Introduces Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,2013-11-07,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131115041133/http://www.scott.senate.gov:80/press-release/senator-tim-scott-why-did-it-take-hearing-fix-health-care-website-privacy-issues,Senator Tim Scott: Why Did it Take a Hearing to Fix Health Care Website Privacy Issues?,2013-11-06,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Washington – Following his questioning of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) administrator Marilyn Tavenner in a Senate Health Committee hearing yesterday, Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) has received word that CMS has finally removed the personal information of a South Carolinian whose personal information was compromised on Healthcare.Gov.   “It is unfortunate that the Obama administration apparently required a Senate hearing with an Obamacare administrator in order to resolve such a dramatic breach of privacy,” Scott said. “While I am certainly pleased we were able to force a solution to this matter, it took CMS far too long to even determine if they could find a solution to this problem, much less put it in place.”   Scott continued, “HealthCare.Gov has become synonymous with failure, and this administration’s complete lack of accountability only continues to reinforce what we already knew – Obamacare is a disaster. Premiums are skyrocketing, millions of Americans are losing their current plans, contrary to the President’s promise, and now we have seen concrete evidence of the security issues in play on the website.”   Senator Scott was contacted by constituent Tom Dougall of Elgin, SC, who had created an account on Healthcare.gov early last month in order to research insurance plans. Last week, Mr. Dougall heard from another individual, Justin Hadley of North Carolina, who had done the same thing and found Mr. Dougall’s private personal information linked to his Healthcare.gov account. Mr. Dougall called the Department of Health and Human Services to have his account deleted and, after multiple attempts, was referred to another federal agency to have the issue resolved.   Scott was also assured by Tavenner in the hearing yesterday that CMS had reached out to Mr. Dougall, which was not true. Mr. Dougall did not first hear from the agency until after the hearing ended yesterday afternoon, and was contacted last night and informed that his information had been removed from the website, five days after his ordeal began. Mr. Dougall spoke with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News last night.   The full video of Scott questioning Ms. Tavenner can be viewed here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223034147/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-healthcaregov-privacy-breach-must-be-fixed,Senator Tim Scott: Healthcare.gov Privacy Breach Must Be Fixed,2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott: Healthcare.gov Privacy Breach Must Be Fixed Contact: (202) 224-2718   Washington – U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) addressed blatant violations of privacy on the Healthcare.gov website today in a committee hearing with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) administrator Marilyn Tavenner.                                                                                                               Click to play                                          Senator Scott addressed a report he received from Tom Dougall of Elgin, SC, who had created an account on Healthcare.gov  early last month in order to research insurance plans. Last week, Mr. Dougall heard from another individual, Justin Hadley of North Carolina who had done the same thing and found Mr. Dougall’s private personal information linked to his Healthcare.gov account. Mr. Dougall called the Department of Health and Human Services to have his account deleted and, after multiple attempts, was referred to another federal agency to have the issue resolved.   Senator Scott questioned CMS Administrator Tavenner on the privacy breach during a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee earlier today. He also addressed multiple administration memos warning that Healthcare.gov carried major privacy risks because the system had not been sufficiently tested for security vulnerabilities before the enrollment period began.   “We're told constantly that it's a secure system and it's not, obviously,” Mr. Dougall told WIS-TV in Columbia, SC.   Failing to receive a response from HHS, Mr. Dougall asked Senator Scott to assist in having his Healthcare.gov account deleted and his private information removed from the database. Senator Scott personally delivered the attached letter to Administrator Tavenner during today’s hearing in an effort to expedite the process.   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223034352/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/republican-health-committee-senators-confront-administration-about-obamacare-failures,Republican Health Committee Senators Confront Administration About Obamacare Failures,2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON – At a hearing of the Senate health committee today, Republican senators questioned Marilyn Tavenner, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, on the rollout of the health care law—specifically, canceled insurance policies, higher premiums, the broken website and related security issues.   On canceled insurance policies:   Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the committee’s senior Republican, said to Tavenner: “Let me suggest that a way to fix this problem of canceled policies in the individual market is to go to a website that does work pretty well. It still says: ‘If you like your plan you can keep it and you don’t have to change a thing due to the health care law.’ That’s the White House website. And those are the president’s words in 2009. So why don’t we put those words into law?”   Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) said: “On Saturday, 2,600 people in Wyoming had their policies cancelled. Three years ago I noticed that the rules were changing and that people would not be able to keep what they had been promised. We had a little debate on a resolution I introduced to repeal the rule that would prevent them from keeping the policy they like. It was voted down on party lines and I think some people will be paying for that in the next election.”   Enzi, an accountant by trade, also asked CMS to assure the HELP Committee that the firm responsible for the website would not be paid any additional money to fix its own mistakes to date.   On higher premiums:   Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said: “The tremendous failures of the Obamacare website are only the tip of the iceberg. This law presents far more problems and challenges, but the biggest ones of all are the premium increases for the people who can least afford them. For example, in rural Georgia, premiums are more than doubling in some cases and health care costs are going through the roof. On behalf of those Georgians, I demand that the administration address these problems. We need to make sure that requiring so much coverage does not have the unintended consequence of running people out of their coverage rather than providing them with the coverage they need and can afford.”   On security issues:   Senator Richard Burr (R-N.C.) asked Tavenner: “One of the requirements is end-to-end testing, but, again, you signed on September 27th the authority to operate the website and the memo noted this, and I quote, ‘from the security perspective, the aspects of the system that were not tested due to the ongoing development expose the level of uncertainty that can be deemed as a high risk for federally facilitated marketplace systems.’ Did you bring that security concern to the Secretary’s attention and the OMB’s attention?”   Tavenner responded, “I did not.”   Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) asked Tavenner: “We keep getting assurances from the administration that the data within the failed healthcare.gov website is secure and that patient privacy is protected, but where is the proof? They won’t share the data with us. What are the administration’s plans for protecting privacy? Why can’t they be transparent? Who is accountable for this mess?”   On the broken website:   Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said: “As of the 29th of October, Enroll Alaska confirmed that there were three Alaskans who had successfully enrolled.  There is nobody else who has stepped forward to say they successfully enrolled in the exchange from Alaska… One of the things that was troubling in that meeting was to hear that the three people who have enrolled have been given incorrect information.”   “Unlike what some might believe here, the sun does not rise and set over Washington, DC or in Eastern Standard Time. So when a family finishes up dinner, does the dishes and puts the kids to bed in Alaska, 9pm is 1am. At the time period when Alaskans can sit and move through any aspect of this exchange, you’re shutdown.  When will this site be available for all Americans to take a look at?”   Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) said in the hearing, ""This is a tale of two beltway bandits,"" referring to the contractors responsible for implementing healthcare.gov, CGI and QSSI. ""Taxpayers deserve to know the full details of where their money is going, particularly in light of this disaster."" He went further to ask if they can stop the next scheduled payment of $100 million to CGI Federal.   Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said: “We are now 30 days into one of the greatest website disasters in history. After nearly $400 million, healthcare.gov is synonymous with failure. The public trust has been broken.”   # # #",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/republican-health-committee-senators-confront-administration-about-obamacare-failures,Republican Health Committee Senators Confront Administration About Obamacare Failures,2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | November 5, 2013 Republican Health Committee Senators Confront Administration About Obamacare Failures WASHINGTON - At a hearing of the Senate health committee today, Republican senators questioned Marilyn Tavenner, the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, on the rollout of the health care law-specifically, canceled insurance policies, higher premiums, the broken website and related security issues. On canceled insurance policies: Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), the committee's senior Republican, said to Tavenner: ""Let me suggest that a way to fix this problem of canceled policies in the individual market is to go to a website that does work pretty well. It still says: 'If you like your plan you can keep it and you don't have to change a thing due to the health care law.' That's the White House website. And those are the president's words in 2009. So why don't we put those words into law?"" Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) said: ""On Saturday, 2,600 people in Wyoming had their policies cancelled. Three years ago I noticed that the rules were changing and that people would not be able to keep what they had been promised. We had a little debate on a resolution I introduced to repeal the rule that would prevent them from keeping the policy they like. It was voted down on party lines and I think some people will be paying for that in the next election."" Enzi, an accountant by trade, also asked CMS to assure the HELP Committee that the firm responsible for the website would not be paid any additional money to fix its own mistakes to date. On higher premiums: Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said: ""The tremendous failures of the Obamacare website are only the tip of the iceberg. This law presents far more problems and challenges, but the biggest ones of all are the premium increases for the people who can least afford them. For example, in rural Georgia, premiums are more than doubling in some cases and health care costs are going through the roof. On behalf of those Georgians, I demand that the administration address these problems. We need to make sure that requiring so much coverage does not have the unintended consequence of running people out of their coverage rather than providing them with the coverage they need and can afford."" On security issues: Senator Richard Burr (R-N.C.) asked Tavenner: ""One of the requirements is end-to-end testing, but, again, you signed on September 27th the authority to operate the website and the memo noted this, and I quote, 'from the security perspective, the aspects of the system that were not tested due to the ongoing development expose the level of uncertainty that can be deemed as a high risk for federally facilitated marketplace systems.' Did you bring that security concern to the Secretary's attention and the OMB's attention?"" Tavenner responded, ""I did not."" Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) asked Tavenner: ""We keep getting assurances from the administration that the data within the failed healthcare.gov website is secure and that patient privacy is protected, but where is the proof? They won't share the data with us. What are the administration's plans for protecting privacy? Why can't they be transparent? Who is accountable for this mess?"" On the broken website: Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said: ""As of the 29th of October, Enroll Alaska confirmed that there were three Alaskans who had successfully enrolled. There is nobody else who has stepped forward to say they successfully enrolled in the exchange from Alaska One of the things that was troubling in that meeting was to hear that the three people who have enrolled have been given incorrect information."" ""Unlike what some might believe here, the sun does not rise and set over Washington, DC or in Eastern Standard Time. So when a family finishes up dinner, does the dishes and puts the kids to bed in Alaska, 9pm is 1am. At the time period when Alaskans can sit and move through any aspect of this exchange, you're shutdown. When will this site be available for all Americans to take a look at?"" Senator Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) said in the hearing, ""This is a tale of two beltway bandits,"" referring to the contractors responsible for implementing healthcare.gov, CGI and QSSI. ""Taxpayers deserve to know the full details of where their money is going, particularly in light of this disaster."" He went further to ask if they can stop the next scheduled payment of $100 million to CGI Federal. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said: ""We are now 30 days into one of the greatest website disasters in history. After nearly $400 million, healthcare.gov is synonymous with failure. The public trust has been broken."" # # # Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-healthcaregov-privacy-breach-must-be-fixed,Senator Tim Scott: Healthcare.gov Privacy Breach Must Be Fixed,2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | November 5, 2013 Senator Tim Scott: Healthcare.gov Privacy Breach Must Be Fixed Senator Tim Scott: Healthcare.gov Privacy Breach Must Be Fixed Contact: (202) 224-2718 Washington -U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) addressed blatant violations of privacy on the Healthcare.gov website today in a committee hearing with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) administrator Marilyn Tavenner. Click to play Senator Scott addressed a report he received from Tom Dougall of Elgin, SC, who had created an account on Healthcare.gov early last month in order to research insurance plans. Last week, Mr. Dougall heard from another individual, Justin Hadley of North Carolina who had done the same thing and found Mr. Dougall's private personal information linked to his Healthcare.gov account. Mr. Dougall called the Department of Health and Human Services to have his account deleted and, after multiple attempts, was referred to another federal agency to have the issue resolved. Senator Scott questioned CMS Administrator Tavenner on the privacy breach during a hearing of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee earlier today. He also addressed multiple administration memos warning that Healthcare.gov carried major privacy risks because the system had not been sufficiently tested for security vulnerabilities before the enrollment period began. ""We're told constantly that it's a secure system and it's not, obviously,"" Mr. Dougall told WIS-TV in Columbia, SC. Failing to receive a response from HHS, Mr. Dougall asked Senator Scott to assist in having his Healthcare.gov account deleted and his private information removed from the database. Senator Scott personally delivered the attached letter to Administrator Tavenner during today's hearing in an effort to expedite the process. ### Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-why-did-it-take-a-hearing-to-fix-health-care-website-privacy-issuesd,Senator Tim Scott: Why Did it Take a Hearing to Fix Health Care Website Privacy Issues?,2013-11-05,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Tuesday | November 5, 2013 Senator Tim Scott: Why Did it Take a Hearing to Fix Health Care Website Privacy Issues? Washington - Following his questioning of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) administrator Marilyn Tavenner in a Senate Health Committee hearing yesterday, Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) has received word that CMS has finally removed the personal information of a South Carolinian whose personal information was compromised on Healthcare.Gov. ""It is unfortunate that the Obama administration apparently required a Senate hearing with an Obamacare administrator in order to resolve such a dramatic breach of privacy,"" Scott said. ""While I am certainly pleased we were able to force a solution to this matter, it took CMS far too long to even determine if they could find a solution to this problem, much less put it in place."" Scott continued, ""HealthCare.Gov has become synonymous with failure, and this administration's complete lack of accountability only continues to reinforce what we already knew - Obamacare is a disaster. Premiums are skyrocketing, millions of Americans are losing their current plans, contrary to the President's promise, and now we have seen concrete evidence of the security issues in play on the website."" Senator Scott was contacted by constituent Tom Dougall of Elgin, SC, who had created an account on Healthcare.gov early last month in order to research insurance plans. Last week, Mr. Dougall heard from another individual, Justin Hadley of North Carolina, who had done the same thing and found Mr. Dougall's private personal information linked to his Healthcare.gov account. Mr. Dougall called the Department of Health and Human Services to have his account deleted and, after multiple attempts, was referred to another federal agency to have the issue resolved. Scott was also assured by Tavenner in the hearing yesterday that CMS had reached out to Mr. Dougall, which was not true. Mr. Dougall did not first hear from the agency until after the hearing ended yesterday afternoon, and was contacted last night and informed that his information had been removed from the website, five days after his ordeal began. Mr. Dougall spoke with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News last night. The full video of Scott questioning Ms. Tavenner can be viewed here. Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-public-schedule-november-5th-7th,Sanford Releases Public Schedule for November 5th - 7th,2013-11-04,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD RELEASES PUBLIC SCHEDULE FOR NOVEMBER 5TH – NOVEMBER 7TH    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-01) announced his schedule for November 5th, November 6th, and November 7th:     Tuesday, November 5th:   8:30 AM         Sea Cow Eatery                         145 Jungle Road, Edisto Beach   4:00 PM         G-1 Mechanical, Inc. Roundtable                         255 N. Highway 52 Suite 3, Moncks Corner   5:00 PM         Neighborhood Office Hours                         Piggly Wiggly: 100 West Main St., Moncks Corner   7:00 PM         Lowcountry Conservatives in Action Meeting                         The Country Inn and Suites: 220 Holiday Dr., Summerville   Wednesday, November 6th:   6:00 PM         Lowcountry Young Republicans Event                         Charleston Country Club: 1 Country Club Dr., Charleston   Thursday, November 7th:   4:00 PM         Open Door After 4                          Constituents are asked to RSVP to 843-352-7572 at 9AM on Thursday                          morning to schedule a meeting slot.                                                 530 Johnnie Dodds Blvd., Mt. Pleasant       ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-public-schedule-november-2nd-and-november-4th,Sanford Releases Public Schedule for November 2nd and November 4th,2013-11-01,2013,2013-11,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD RELEASES PUBLIC SCHEDULE FOR NOVEMBER 2nd AND NOVEMBER 4th    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-01) announced his schedule for November 2nd  and November 4th:   Saturday, November 2nd:   9:00 AM         Berkeley County GOP Breakfast                         American Legion,116 Howe Hall Road, Goose Creek   1:00 PM         Citadel vs. Samford Homecoming Game                        Johnson Hagood Stadium, 68 Hagood Ave. Charleston   Monday, November 4th:   8:30 AM         Meeting with the Lowcountry Immigration Coalition                          Beaufort District Office, 903 Port Republic, Beaufort   9:30 AM         Coffee with Mark at Blackstone's                          Blackstone's Cafe, 205 Scott St., Beaufort   12:00 PM       State of the Region                         Marriott Resort and Spa, 1 Hotel Circle, Hilton Head   5:00 PM         Greater Bluffton Republican Club                        Corks, 14 Promenade St., Bluffton     ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/hanna-rice-michaud-introduce-bill-to-delay-hours-of-service-rule,"Hanna, Rice, Michaud Introduce Bill to Delay Hours of Service Rule",2013-10-31,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. – U.S. Reps. Richard Hanna (R-NY), Tom Rice (R-SC) and Mike Michaud (D-ME) want to delay a new regulation that began earlier this year on how many hours commercial truck drivers can spend on the road.   On July 1, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) enacted a new Hours of Service (HOS) rule, which is taking a toll on truck drivers and on the trucking industry – the lifeblood of the American economy. According a study completed by the American Transportation Research Institute, the new rule would result in an annual cost of $376 million to the trucking industry alone. Other businesses likely to be adversely impacted include construction firms, delivery services and fresh food distributors. Concerns have been raised that the new rules cause more congestion during peak morning travel and could push drivers to be more aggressive during the hours they do spend on the road.  This rule could cost businesses and consumers billions of dollars and it is plausible that it will actually decrease safety on the roads. Reps. Hanna, Rice and Michaud want to delay the regulation until an independent assessment of the rule is complete. That’s why they’ve introduced the TRUE Safety Act. Highlights of the TRUE Safety Act include: - Truckers would abide by the 34-hour restart rules that were in place before July 1, 2013. - The Government Accountability Office (GAO) would be required to conduct an independent assessment of the methodology FMCSA used to come up with the new 34-hour restart rule. - The new 34-hour restart rule could not be re-implemented until six months after GAO submits its assessment to Congress. Rep. Hanna said: “It is wrongheaded for the federal government to impose an arbitrary and capricious regulation that impacts almost every sector of the American economy without first finishing a study on its effectiveness.  Federal agencies should have an obligation to prove that new rules and regulations do not cause more harm than good - in terms of both safety and costs. “There are legitimate concerns that this new rule makes our roads less safe and hurts small business.  The TRUE Safety Act is a bipartisan effort to press the ‘pause button’ on this new rule while an independent assessment is completed to ensure the rule makes sense and will not actually harm the travelling public and American economy.” Rep. Rice said: “I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing this bipartisan legislation because our American truckers are being held to a new un-tested standard that limits their productivity and ultimately – their profitability. Congress required the FMSCA is to complete a comprehensive study before imposing new hours of service standards on our truckers. Instead, the agency has abused its authority and is requiring truckers to comply with one of the most stringent parts of its regulation prior to receiving their study’s findings. This legislation will rein in FMSCA and postpone the new un-tested hours of service regulation until its study is complete and require an additional study to ensure that our truckers are not being overregulated.”   Rep. Michaud said: “Many drivers plan their schedules to be on the road overnight so as to avoid traffic and other hazards during the day. I’m concerned that the new rules push drivers to get back on the road during the morning rush hour, increase road congestion and jeopardize safety. The independent assessment required by this bill will ensure the regulations are based on sound data in order to minimize costs and improve safety.” Reps. Hanna, Rice and Michaud are members of the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-introduces-hr-3436-the-nsa-inspector-general-act-of-2013,Sanford Introduces H.R. 3436: The NSA Inspector General Act of 2013,2013-10-31,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD INTRODUCES H.R. 3436: THE NSA INSPECTOR GENERAL ACT OF 2013     “With information continuing to drip out regarding activities at the NSA that at best raise questions about the legality of their conduct and at worst are in direct violation of the Constitution, yesterday I introduced legislation to help correct this behavior, by making the NSA Inspector General (IG) position a presidential appointment, to be confirmed by the Senate,” said Sanford. “This process already exists at the CIA, Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security.”   “Right now, the IG is appointed by the Director of the NSA, which curbs their oversight effectiveness because the Director can remove them,” added Sanford. “As recently noted in an op-ed by the former IG of the CIA, Britt Snider, this lack of independence creates an environment where employees of the IG’s office worry about their careers if their findings and conclusions are critical of the agency.”   “There are a number of reforms that need to be made at the NSA to ensure the Agency is not violating the privacy of Americans, but without a robust IG office, these reforms will lack the teeth they need to be enforced. In this vein, I feel this legislation is a reasonable and necessary step that will help bring positive change to the Agency.”   Representative Sanford was joined in introducing H.R. 3436 by the following original co-sponsors (listed in order of co-sponsorship):   1. Paul Broun (R, GA-10) 2. Mick Mulvaney (R, SC-05) 3. Alan Grayson (D, FL-09) 4. Kerry Bentivolio (R, MI-11) 5. Tom Rice (R, SC-07) 6. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D, DC) 7. Thomas Massie (R, KY-04) 8. Justin Amash (R, MI-03) 9. Trey Gowdy (R, SC-04) 10. Jeff Duncan (R, SC-03) 11. Joe Wilson (R, SC-02) 12. James Sensenbrenner (R, WI-05)   You can read H.R. 3436 here.   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://clyburn.house.gov/press-release/clyburn-opening-statement-opening-meeting-budget-conference-committee,Clyburn Opening Statement at the Opening Meeting of the Budget Conference Committee,2013-10-30,2013,2013-10,Democrat,House,SC,James Clyburn,C000537,clyburn.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON --  U.S. House Assistant Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn delivered the following statement today at the Opening Meeting of the Budget Conference Committee: ""The principal task of this Committee is to agree on a budget for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2014. While it would have been prudent to have had these negotiations last summer, I am pleased that we are now beginning these important discussions about our nation’s fiscal priorities. We must address the automatic spending cuts that are hurting our economy and undercutting important priorities like education, medical research and national security. And we must put our nation’s fiscal house in order and reduce our long term debt to a manageable level. But there are different ways to do this, and some are better than others. On the graph you see on the screens, there are two lines. The red line charts the deficit over the past 65 years.             The blue line charts the unemployment rate over the same period. The relationship is obvious: when unemployment goes down, the deficit goes down; when unemployment goes up, the deficit goes up. The reasons for this are clear. When you don’t have a job, you don’t pay taxes. When you don’t have income, you’re not paying payroll taxes and you’re more likely to need government assistance. Unemployment is a double whammy for the federal budget. To lower the deficit, we have to lower unemployment. Advocates for extracting deficit reduction from the most vulnerable by cutting benefits under Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, nutrition assistance, and other vital services, ignore the fact that when you cut essential benefits, you just shift the cost of these necessities onto senior citizens, parents, and low income hard working people. These cost shifts take money out of the pockets of consumers that would otherwise be spent in other parts of the economy, helping businesses grow and creating jobs. Cutting benefits, cuts jobs; and cutting jobs is not the way to reduce the deficit. Securing deficit reduction by cutting key investments in education, Pell Grants, infrastructure, job training, and research and development would hinder economic growth in the short and long term by depriving our nation of the physical and human capital we need to have a strong economy with a 21st century workforce. Cutting investment cuts jobs, and cutting jobs is not the way to reduce the deficit. We Democrats have a different approach. We fully recognize the importance of fiscal responsibility. But we know from the chart that any budget cuts that destroy jobs will be counterproductive. We know that cuts that fall disproportionately on our most vulnerable citizens make our economy more vulnerable as well. We know that a reasonable, balanced approach involving shared sacrifice is not only the fairest way to cut the deficit, it is the most effective. We also believe that higher levels of revenue are fully compatible with strong economic growth. We have seen that tax cuts for the wealthy have increased the deficit and do not create jobs. We know that much of our national debt is the result of two wars. And now that we have ended one and are winding down the other, significant savings have been generated which, I believe, should be used to eliminate the Sequester; and target funds to those communities that have been suffering disproportionately for the last thirty years.  This would generate economic growth and begin closing the wealth gap that is threatening family security and our nation's stability.  In a divided government, both sides have to make tough and sometimes uncomfortable choices.  I have long held that if there are five steps Between me and the other side, I do not mind taking three of them as long as the person on the other side will take the other two. I was very pleased to read last week that our colleague Mr. Cole - who I consider to be a good friend - said, “The reality is, you’re going to have to have a deal here. And a deal means everybody gives something up.” I agree with my friend and I look forward to working constructively towards a deal to grow our economy, protect our vulnerable and ensure that we remain on sound fiscal footing.""",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanfords-statement-on-testimony-of-hhs-secretary-sebelius-on-aca,Sanford's Statement on Testimony of HHS Secretary Sebelius on ACA Exchanges,2013-10-30,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"STATEMENT ON TESTIMONY OF HHS SECRETARY SEBELIUS ON AFFORDABLE CARE ACT EXCHANGES WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) released the following statement regarding the testimony of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. “This morning’s testimony from Secretary Sebelius confirmed for me that this administration is determined to meet their own political goals no matter how it harms Americans. It’s clear from this morning that the Affordable Care Act exchanges were in no way ready for primetime. The Secretary’s admission that the websites didn’t have enough testing and simply weren’t ready seems to fit a pattern we’ve seen from this administration,” said Sanford. “The website was rushed to meet self-imposed political deadlines, and the White House and the executive branch knowingly pushed what their own tests indicated was a flawed product.” “The exchanges are just one of many failures and shortcomings in the Affordable Care Act,” added Sanford. “All across the Lowcountry, people are facing higher premiums, losing the insurance plans they were promised they could keep, and watching as the administration struggles to answer questions about why they pushed so hard to launch a website and enforce a mandate when they knew it wasn’t ready.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://clyburn.house.gov/clyburn-opening-statement-at-the-opening-meeting-of-the-budget-conference-committee/,Clyburn Opening Statement at the Opening Meeting of the Budget Conference Committee,2013-10-30,2013,2013-10,Democrat,House,SC,James E. Clyburn,C000537,clyburn.house.gov,clyburn,https://clyburn.house.gov/press-releases/,scraper,"WASHINGTON — U.S. House Assistant Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn delivered the following statement today at the Opening Meeting of the Budget Conference Committee: “The principal task of this Committee is to agree on a budget for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2014. While it would have been prudent to have had these negotiations last summer, I am pleased that we are now beginning these important discussions about our nation’s fiscal priorities. We must address the automatic spending cuts that are hurting our economy and undercutting important priorities like education, medical research and national security. And we must put our nation’s fiscal house in order and reduce our long term debt to a manageable level. But there are different ways to do this, and some are better than others. On the graph you see on the screens, there are two lines. The red line charts the deficit over the past 65 years. The blue line charts the unemployment rate over the same period. The relationship is obvious: when unemployment goes down, the deficit goes down; when unemployment goes up, the deficit goes up. The reasons for this are clear. When you don’t have a job, you don’t pay taxes. When you don’t have income, you’re not paying payroll taxes and you’re more likely to need government assistance. Unemployment is a double whammy for the federal budget. To lower the deficit, we have to lower unemployment. Advocates for extracting deficit reduction from the most vulnerable by cutting benefits under Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, nutrition assistance, and other vital services, ignore the fact that when you cut essential benefits, you just shift the cost of these necessities onto senior citizens, parents, and low income hard working people. These cost shifts take money out of the pockets of consumers that would otherwise be spent in other parts of the economy, helping businesses grow and creating jobs. Cutting benefits, cuts jobs; and cutting jobs is not the way to reduce the deficit. Securing deficit reduction by cutting key investments in education, Pell Grants, infrastructure, job training, and research and development would hinder economic growth in the short and long term by depriving our nation of the physical and human capital we need to have a strong economy with a 21st century workforce. Cutting investment cuts jobs, and cutting jobs is not the way to reduce the deficit. We Democrats have a different approach. We fully recognize the importance of fiscal responsibility. But we know from the chart that any budget cuts that destroy jobs will be counterproductive. We know that cuts that fall disproportionately on our most vulnerable citizens make our economy more vulnerable as well. We know that a reasonable, balanced approach involving shared sacrifice is not only the fairest way to cut the deficit, it is the most effective. We also believe that higher levels of revenue are fully compatible with strong economic growth. We have seen that tax cuts for the wealthy have increased the deficit and do not create jobs. We know that much of our national debt is the result of two wars. And now that we have ended one and are winding down the other, significant savings have been generated which, I believe, should be used to eliminate the Sequester; and target funds to those communities that have been suffering disproportionately for the last thirty years. This would generate economic growth and begin closing the wealth gap that is threatening family security and our nation’s stability. In a divided government, both sides have to make tough and sometimes uncomfortable choices. I have long held that if there are five steps Between me and the other side, I do not mind taking three of them as long as the person on the other side will take the other two. I was very pleased to read last week that our colleague Mr. Cole – who I consider to be a good friend – said, “The reality is, you’re going to have to have a deal here. And a deal means everybody gives something up.” I agree with my friend and I look forward to working constructively towards a deal to grow our economy, protect our vulnerable and ensure that we remain on sound fiscal footing.”",1,2026-03-30T01:40:41Z,2026-06-27T22:39:21Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221034902/http://gowdy.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=359787,"Gowdy, Welch introduce bipartisan college affordability legislation",2013-10-30,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Today, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) introduced bipartisan college affordability legislation that will reduce college costs for students and their families. The Flexibility to Innovate for College Affordability Act is a two-pronged strategy that encourages the development of flexible pathways for students to more quickly, and therefore more economically, earn a college degree while eliminating unnecessary federal regulations that contribute to tuition hikes. “Most jobs in our economy now require postsecondary education, but the rising cost is putting college out of reach for many American families or strapping students with crippling debt,” Gowdy said. “I am proud to join Congressman Welch in introducing this legislation to reduce government regulations contributing to education expenses and give institutions more options to reduce costs for their students. We look forward to partnering with colleges and universities to accomplish these goals.” “A college education, the gateway to the American middle class, is slipping further and further from the reach of working families. Federal loans and grants are a lifeline for college students.  But students continue to lose ground because financial aid increases are being eaten up by college tuition increases,” Welch said.  “This legislation creates a partnership between the federal government and our college administrators to cut unnecessary federal regulatory costs and encourage cost saving innovations.”   The legislation would give students the freedom to use Federal grants and loans for accelerated degree completion, competency based learning, competency testing and dual enrollment. It would also create a Regulatory Reform Task Force charged with cutting unnecessary and burdensome federal regulations that contribute to college operating costs.   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140221055000/http://joewilson.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=357052,Wilson Statement on the Passing of Ike McLeese,2013-10-29,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Joe Wilson,W000795,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressman Joe Wilson (SC-02) issued the following statement on the death of former President and CEO of the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce, Ike McLeese. “Ike McLeese was a dear friend whom I had the privilege of working alongside over the past 19 years.  The Greater Columbia Chamber's success is attributed to Ike's tremendous leadership. Because of his efforts, South Carolina’s military installations, specifically Fort Jackson and McEntire Joint National Guard Base, have remained strongholds surviving the most recent BRAC. Our brave men and women who serve in uniform and their families have lost a champion who pledged unwavering support. Roxanne and I extend our deepest sympathy to his loving wife Sue and the rest of the McLeese family during this difficult time,” Congressman Wilson said.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-satellite-office-hours,Sanford Announces Satellite Office Hours,2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD ANNOUNCES SATELLITE OFFICE HOURS TOMORROW WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) announced that his staff will be conducting satellite office hours tomorrow in St. Helena, Bluffton, and Hilton Head Island, per the schedule below. Satellite office hours are conducted around the district by the Representative’s staff in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Additionally, anyone wishing to express an opinion or ask a question is welcome to stop by. NOTE: Representative Sanford is not scheduled to be in attendance at these events.   Tuesday, October 29th:   11:00AM – 1:00PM               St. Helena Satellite Office Hours St. Helena Branch Library 6355 Jonathan Francis Sr. Road St. Helena Island   11:00AM – 1:00PM Bluffton Satellite Office Hours Bluffton Community Library 120 Palmetto Way Bluffton   4:00PM – 6:00PM                  Hilton Head Satellite Office Hours Hilton Head Island Library 11 Beach City Rd. Hilton Head Island   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131031173048/http://gowdy.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=356776,"Gowdy, Mulvaney, Chaffetz Question Sebelius on Healthcare.gov Failures",2013-10-28,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressmen Trey Gowdy (R-SC), Mick Mulvaney (R- SC), and Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) today sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius requesting information on how healthcare.gov was tested and clarification for her recent comments blaming House Republicans for the website's failures. Text of the letter: October 28, 2013  The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius U.S. Department of Health & Human Services 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC  20201   Dear Secretary Sebelius: You have made a number of curious statements during your career in public life. Time and space do not allow for a full inventory. Most recently you are quoted as saying the abysmal Obamacare rollout—for which you had three years and more than $500,000,000 to prepare, test, and perfect—was the fault of House Republicans and the government shutdown. If memory serves, Obamacare was signed into law in March of 2010, when Republicans controlled precisely no branch of government. At a an event in Austin, Texas, on October 25th, you said: ""In an ideal world, there would have been a lot more testing . . . but we did not have the luxury of that with a law that says 'it's go time on October 1st.'"" You then—and in the interest of clarity we will edit—blame House Republicans and the government shutdown for your failure to provide a workable product. In light of this newest explanation for the failure to provide a workable product, could you provide some additional clarification of your remarks, particularly by answering the following questions:  1)   When did you first test the website healthcare.gov? 2)   When did you last test the website healthcare.gov prior to October 1, 2013? 3)   Who limited your ability to test the website as often as you judged necessary? 4)   In the ""ideal world"" you make reference to, how many testings would you have conducted? 5)   What ""law"" are you referencing that says ""it's go time on October 1, 2013""? 6)   Assuming arguendo you are able to cite said law, did you ask for an extension? 7)   Inasmuch as the website launched October 1 and the government shutdown began October 1, how precisely was the website launch affected by the shutdown? 8)   What changes did you make to the website from September 1, 2013, to October 1, 2013? 9)   Who, if anyone other than you, directed those changes be made? Your prompt response to these questions would be most appreciated and helpful to those of us who eagerly await your testimony before congressional committees of appropriate jurisdiction. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/duncan-introduces-equal-treatment-constitutional-amendment,Duncan Introduces Equal Treatment Constitutional Amendment,2013-10-24,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC - Today Congressman Jeff Duncan introduced a Constitutional amendment, H.J. Res 98, that would require Members of Congress, the Administration, and Judicial branch to abide by all laws just like the rest of the public. H.J Res. 98 is the companion legislation to Senator Rand Paul’s S.J. Res. 25. “This amendment is about fundamental fairness for the American people. Government officials should live under the law just like everyone else. I am proud to work with Senator Paul to bring transparency and accountability to all three branches of government. An important feature of this bill is that it also brings the Administration and the courts under the same laws as all other Americans.” “No one in government should be above the law. The Paul-Duncan effort will ensure that Congress lives under all the laws they write.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131214115402/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott-and-colleagues-urge-federal-government-allow-children-get-better,Senator Tim Scott and Colleagues Urge Federal Government to Allow Children to Get a Better Education,2013-10-24,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) was joined by 29 other senators in a call for Attorney General Eric Holder to explain why the Department of Justice has sued to trap needy children in failing public schools based on skin color alone.   “Regardless of race or background, every child deserves the opportunity to succeed,” Scott said. “I know firsthand the importance of empowering parents to provide their children with the best education possible. Parents should be able to choose a school based on the opportunity it provides. That flexibility is good for kids across the board.”   The Louisiana Scholarship Program, launched three years after Hurricane Katrina, grants poor children the opportunity to escape failing public schools and attend a different school chosen by their parents. Last year, the program helped over 5,700 needy children (91 percent of whom are minorities) and raised test scores -- all while saving taxpayers $18 million dollars.   The Department of Justice is suing to return 570 of these children tofailing schools, claiming that a school’s racial make-up is more important than providing opportunities for students. For example, the Department of Justice argues that six African-American children should be returned to a failing elementary school, to change the school from 29.2 percent to 30.1 percent African-American.   Last month, Senator Scott joined Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush to call on the Obama administration to halt the lawsuit and allow students the greatest chance to succeed.   The text of the Senators’ letter is included below.     October 24, 2013   The Honorable Eric Holder Attorney General Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW Washington, DC  20530-0001   Dear Attorney General Holder:   On August 22, 2013, the Department of Justice filed a petition with the federal district court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in the case of United States v. William J. Dodd, Civ. A. No. 71-1316 (E.D. La.). The petition asks the court to block 570 needy children from escaping failing public schools, solely on the basis of the children’s skin color. We are deeply concerned by the Justice Department’s petition. Specifically, we are concerned that the Department of Justice’s decision to prevent these needy children from obtaining a valuable education is not consistent with the pursuit of justice, but instead may be the result of improper, partisan motives.   In 2008, three years after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the city, New Orleans launched the Louisiana Scholarship Program. The program allowed poor students in failing schools to obtain a scholarship to attend a private school preapproved by the State. In 2012, Louisiana expanded the program statewide. 91 percent of scholarship children were minorities—86 percent African-American and 5 percent from other minority groups. Because the average scholarship equaled $4,500, some $3,000 less than the amount Louisiana’s public schools spend per child, the program saved Louisiana taxpayers $18 million in 2012 alone.   The program has been a remarkable success. Test scores have risen among scholarship students. More importantly, the program is lauded by those in the best position to determine what is best for Louisiana’s children: their parents. One mother wrote that at her son’s public school, the teacher “told me that she could not give him the attention and time he needed”; “my son could not hold a pencil or crayon and was treated by teachers and students alike as an outcast,” and “was labeled as disabled.” At his new scholarship school, “he has made tremendous progress and can now write his own name,” is “thriving,” and is “excited to work on [his] homework at night.” Another mother attested that she sought a scholarship for her six year-old son for one simple reason: “So he won’t be a statistic.” She explained that just a few months earlier, she laid her nephew to rest, and at the funeral could not help but ask, “If he would’ve had the same opportunity like my son has, who knows what he would have become?”   It seems to us that a program that rescues needy children from failing schools, gives families a chance to break the cycle of poverty and violence, and saves taxpayers millions of dollars each year is one that should be lauded by the federal government. Instead, the Justice Department is working to sabotage it. Shockingly, the Justice Department is doing so by targeting a small group of children based solely on the color of their skin.   During the days of Jim Crow, some Louisiana school districts were placed under desegregation orders. The Justice Department argues that allowing a few students to escape their failing schools will change the racial composition in these covered school districts. For example, the Justice Department asks the court to block six needy African-American students from escaping their failing school, because their departure would change the school’s racial make-up from 30.1 percent to 29.2 percent African-American. Similarly, the Justice Department argues that the desegregation orders may be violated if five poor white students obtain a better education, because the school would go from 29.6 percent to 28.9 percent white. In each case, the Justice Department is targeting the children solely on the basis of their skin color:    If the six African-American children were white, and the five white children were African-American, the Justice Department would not be trying to prevent them from receiving a good education. These children are not statistics. They are young kids, and every one of them deserves a safe, high-quality school and a chance at a bright future.   Louisiana’s Superintendent of Education has called it “ironic” that the Justice Department is taking the desegregation orders that were designed to provide African-American children with access to the best schools and using them to trap African-American children in failing schools based solely on their skin color. We agree with the Washington Post’s editorial board: “we think it is appalling.”   Congress is vested with oversight of the Justice Department in order to ensure political considerations do not trump the pursuit of justice and to verify that the Justice Department is making wise use of scarce taxpayer dollars. In our oversight capacity, we are requesting that you submit answers to the below questions as soon as possible, but no later than November 6, 2013. We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.   1.    In 2012, 5,766 needy children won the opportunity to escape a failing school through Louisiana’s Scholarship Program. The Justice Department’s petition seeks to block 570 of those children from obtaining a meaningful education, based solely on the color of their skin. Some children, the petition argued, should be trapped in failing schools because they are African-American; others because they are white. How is this consistent with the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection regardless of race?   2.    Justice Department officials have, on more than one occasion, appeared before Congress and testified that the Department’s resources are stretched thin, and prosecutors sometimes have to make decisions on how best to deploy those resources. Why is this litigation a wise use of scarce taxpayer dollars?   3.    The Justice Department argues in its petition that the loss of six black children from Cecilia primary school—which amounts to less than one percent of the student body—should be blocked. Imagine those six black children left Cecilia primary school for a reason other than the Louisiana Scholarship Program. Imagine that their parents’ found more lucrative jobs and were able to afford private school out of their own pockets. a.    Would the Justice Department have the legal authority to block these children from leaving Cecilia school in order to preserve the “racial balance” between the school and parish? b.    Would the Justice Department have the legal authority to ask the court to bus in six other African-American children into the failing school to restore its “racial balance”?   4.    The two examples the Justice Department cites in its petition, Cecilia primary school and Independence primary school, involve miniscule changes to the student population, 6 students (less than one percent of the student body) and 5 students (just over one percent of the student body). Is any change too small? What if only one black student received a scholarship from Cecilia? Would the Justice Department have the authority to block that student from a better school?   5.    Did anyone in the Justice Department take any account of politics or have any conversations concerning politics, including the positions of teachers unions, in deciding to file its petition?   Sincerely,",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scott-and-colleagues-urge-federal-government-to-allow-children-to-get-a-better-education,Senator Tim Scott and Colleagues Urge Federal Government to Allow Children to Get a Better Education,2013-10-24,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Thursday | October 24, 2013 Senator Tim Scott and Colleagues Urge Federal Government to Allow Children to Get a Better Education WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) was joined by 29 other senators in a call for Attorney General Eric Holder to explain why the Department of Justice has sued to trap needy children in failing public schools based on skin color alone. ""Regardless of race or background, every child deserves the opportunity to succeed,"" Scott said. ""I know firsthand the importance of empowering parents to provide their children with the best education possible. Parents should be able to choose a school based on the opportunity it provides. That flexibility is good for kids across the board."" The Louisiana Scholarship Program, launched three years after Hurricane Katrina, grants poor children the opportunity to escape failing public schools and attend a different school chosen by their parents. Last year, the program helped over 5,700 needy children (91 percent of whom are minorities) and raised test scores -- all while saving taxpayers $18 million dollars. The Department of Justice is suing to return 570 of these children tofailing schools, claiming that a school's racial make-up is more important than providing opportunities for students. For example, the Department of Justice argues that six African-American children should be returned to a failing elementary school, to change the school from 29.2 percent to 30.1 percent African-American. Last month, Senator Scott joined Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush to call on the Obama administration to halt the lawsuit and allow students the greatest chance to succeed. The text of the Senators' letter is included below. October 24, 2013 The Honorable Eric Holder Attorney General Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW Washington, DC 20530-0001 Dear Attorney General Holder: On August 22, 2013, the Department of Justice filed a petition with the federal district court for the Eastern District of Louisiana in the case of United States v. William J. Dodd, Civ. A. No. 71-1316 (E.D. La.). The petition asks the court to block 570 needy children from escaping failing public schools, solely on the basis of the children's skin color. We are deeply concerned by the Justice Department's petition. Specifically, we are concerned that the Department of Justice's decision to prevent these needy children from obtaining a valuable education is not consistent with the pursuit of justice, but instead may be the result of improper, partisan motives. In 2008, three years after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the city, New Orleans launched the Louisiana Scholarship Program. The program allowed poor students in failing schools to obtain a scholarship to attend a private school preapproved by the State. In 2012, Louisiana expanded the program statewide. 91 percent of scholarship children were minorities-86 percent African-American and 5 percent from other minority groups. Because the average scholarship equaled $4,500, some $3,000 less than the amount Louisiana's public schools spend per child, the program saved Louisiana taxpayers $18 million in 2012 alone. The program has been a remarkable success. Test scores have risen among scholarship students. More importantly, the program is lauded by those in the best position to determine what is best for Louisiana's children: their parents. One mother wrote that at her son's public school, the teacher ""told me that she could not give him the attention and time he needed""; ""my son could not hold a pencil or crayon and was treated by teachers and students alike as an outcast,"" and ""was labeled as disabled."" At his new scholarship school, ""he has made tremendous progress and can now write his own name,"" is ""thriving,"" and is ""excited to work on [his] homework at night."" Another mother attested that she sought a scholarship for her six year-old son for one simple reason: ""So he won't be a statistic."" She explained that just a few months earlier, she laid her nephew to rest, and at the funeral could not help but ask, ""If he would've had the same opportunity like my son has, who knows what he would have become?"" It seems to us that a program that rescues needy children from failing schools, gives families a chance to break the cycle of poverty and violence, and saves taxpayers millions of dollars each year is one that should be lauded by the federal government. Instead, the Justice Department is working to sabotage it. Shockingly, the Justice Department is doing so by targeting a small group of children based solely on the color of their skin. During the days of Jim Crow, some Louisiana school districts were placed under desegregation orders. The Justice Department argues that allowing a few students to escape their failing schools will change the racial composition in these covered school districts. For example, the Justice Department asks the court to block six needy African-American students from escaping their failing school, because their departure would change the school's racial make-up from 30.1 percent to 29.2 percent African-American. Similarly, the Justice Department argues that the desegregation orders may be violated if five poor white students obtain a better education, because the school would go from 29.6?percent to 28.9?percent white. In each case, the Justice Department is targeting the children solely on the basis of their skin color: If the six African-American children were white, and the five white children were African-American, the Justice Department would not be trying to prevent them from receiving a good education. These children are not statistics. They are young kids, and every one of them deserves a safe, high-quality school and a chance at a bright future. Louisiana's Superintendent of Education has called it ""ironic"" that the Justice Department is taking the desegregation orders that were designed to provide African-American children with access to the best schools and using them to trap African-American children in failing schools based solely on their skin color. We agree with the Washington Post's editorial board: ""we think it is appalling."" Congress is vested with oversight of the Justice Department in order to ensure political considerations do not trump the pursuit of justice and to verify that the Justice Department is making wise use of scarce taxpayer dollars. In our oversight capacity, we are requesting that you submit answers to the below questions as soon as possible, but no later than November 6, 2013. We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. 1. In 2012, 5,766 needy children won the opportunity to escape a failing school through Louisiana's Scholarship Program. The Justice Department's petition seeks to block 570 of those children from obtaining a meaningful education, based solely on the color of their skin. Some children, the petition argued, should be trapped in failing schools because they are African-American; others because they are white. How is this consistent with the Constitution's guarantee of equal protection regardless of race? 2. Justice Department officials have, on more than one occasion, appeared before Congress and testified that the Department's resources are stretched thin, and prosecutors sometimes have to make decisions on how best to deploy those resources. Why is this litigation a wise use of scarce taxpayer dollars? 3. The Justice Department argues in its petition that the loss of six black children from Cecilia primary school-which amounts to less than one percent of the student body-should be blocked. Imagine those six black children left Cecilia primary school for a reason other than the Louisiana Scholarship Program. Imagine that their parents' found more lucrative jobs and were able to afford private school out of their own pockets. a. Would the Justice Department have the legal authority to block these children from leaving Cecilia school in order to preserve the ""racial balance"" between the school and parish? b. Would the Justice Department have the legal authority to ask the court to bus in six other African-American children into the failing school to restore its ""racial balance""? 4. The two examples the Justice Department cites in its petition, Cecilia primary school and Independence primary school, involve miniscule changes to the student population, 6 students (less than one percent of the student body) and 5 students (just over one percent of the student body). Is any change too small? What if only one black student received a scholarship from Cecilia? Would the Justice Department have the authority to block that student from a better school? 5. Did anyone in the Justice Department take any account of politics or have any conversations concerning politics, including the positions of teachers unions, in deciding to file its petition? Sincerely,",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanfords-statement-on-wrrda,Sanford's Statement on House Passage of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act,2013-10-23,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"STATEMENT ON HOUSE PASSAGE OF THE WATER RESOURCES REFORM AND DEVELOPMENT ACT (WRRDA) WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) voted in favor of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA), which passed the House on a 417-3 vote: “I voted in favor of the WRRDA bill today because it represents an important step forward for Charleston and businesses not only in our region, but across the state, as it is vital to ensuring Charleston’s Post-45 harbor deepening stays on schedule,” said Sanford. “But I think that in addition to the economic impact back home, the cost cutting measures and the provisions to increase efficiency, ultimately there’s a bigger consideration here which is a constitutional question on the balance of power.” “This bill is about reclaiming authority that many contended was ceded to the Executive Branch,” added Sanford. “I applaud the fact that this bill contains no earmarks, yet preserves the role of the Congress in determining spending priorities, rather than abdicate that responsibility to the Executive Branch.” “In too many ways it seems to me we are moving towards an imperial Presidency without traditional checks and balances. Beyond the necessity of funding national infrastructure, this bill’s greatest accomplishment may well be its work in maintaining the balance of power.” Sanford also spoke on the House floor during general debate in favor of the bill, which you can view here: https://c-spanvideo.org/clip/4470056   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-satellite-office-hours-schedule,Sanford Announces Satellite Office Hours Schedule,2013-10-21,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD ANNOUNCES SATELLITE OFFICE HOURS SCHEDULE WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) announced that his staff will be conducting satellite office hours in Sun City and St. Helena, per the schedule below. Satellite office hours are conducted around the district by the Representative’s staff in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Additionally, anyone wishing to express an opinion or ask a question is welcome to stop by. NOTE: Representative Sanford is not scheduled to be in attendance at these events. Tuesday, October 22nd: 9:00AM – 11:00AM Sun City Satellite Office Hours The Coosaw New River Room, Hidden Cypress Building 673 Cypress Hills Drive Okatie, SC Tuesday, October 29th:   11:00AM – 1:00PM St. Helena Satellite Office Hours St. Helena Branch Library 6355 Jonathan Francis Sr. Road St. Helena Island, SC",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/sanford-announces-satellite-office-hours-schedule,Sanford Announces Satellite Office Hours Schedule,2013-10-21,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD ANNOUNCES SATELLITE OFFICE HOURS SCHEDULE WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) announced that his staff will be conducting satellite office hours in Sun City and St. Helena, per the schedule below. Satellite office hours are conducted around the district by the Representative’s staff in order to be as accessible as possible to constituents requiring assistance on issues related to the federal government. Additionally, anyone wishing to express an opinion or ask a question is welcome to stop by. NOTE: Representative Sanford is not scheduled to be in attendance at these events. Tuesday, October 22nd: 9:00AM – 11:00AM Sun City Satellite Office Hours The Coosaw New River Room, Hidden Cypress Building 673 Cypress Hills Drive Okatie, SC Tuesday, October 29th:   11:00AM – 1:00PM St. Helena Satellite Office Hours St. Helena Branch Library 6355 Jonathan Francis Sr. Road St. Helena Island, SC",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/newsletters/shutdown-conclusion-october-18-2013,"Shutdown Conclusion: October 18, 2013",2013-10-18,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Last night by a vote of 285-144 the House extended the Continuing Resolution through January 15th and raised the debt ceiling through February 7th.  I joined with 143 of my Republican colleagues and the rest of the South Carolina Republican delegation in opposing this measure that results in roughly another $500 billion in new debt, yet does not contain any reforms to reduce government spending, lower the increasing cost of entitlement programs or affect the Affordable Care Act.Back in January when I first announced for Congress I argued that debt-ceiling increases should be offset with spending cuts, that we need to pay as we go and that we cannot continue on the road that we are on without catastrophic financial consequences over the long run. At a time when government borrows approximately $0.40 for every dollar it spends, I don't think it makes sense to continue to kick the can down the road...always promising to reform spending habits in the future, yet postponing action until later. In many ways this deal actually goes in the opposite direction because the deal doesn’t just raise the debt ceiling – it suspends it! Typically debt ceilings are raised by a specific amount, up by $200 or $400 billion for example. In this case it suspends it for a time, which means Congress has given away its control of the purse strings to the President and the Treasury during this time period. To change or undo this new authority to borrow as the White House sees fit through February 7th would now take a two thirds vote from the House and Senate...and signature by the President! Obviously that’s not going to happen, so Congress has literally given a blank check to an administration that has already incurred more debt than any other as the national debt has risen from $10 trillion to $16.7 trillion during the last five years! Depending on one’s philosophical perspective, it was naturally the “other” side in this debate that was being obstinate, but in fact, the debate and the issues at play are more complex. The silver lining to the cloud of inaction in Washington over the last few weeks is the triumph of the American system. While the media has sensationalized the process and people have legitimately grown weary of all the back and forth, the reality is we have a system where the minority can attempt to advance their case, and where we can have strong disagreement without bloodshed. It was Winston Churchill who noted, “The beauty of the American political system was that it always did the right thing...after exhausting every other possible remedy.” While this debate has proceeded in ways that many disdain, I think the larger challenge confronting us means we have to resolve this. According to the Congressional Budget Office we are only 12 years away from reaching the point where every dollar the government spends goes to the national debt or entitlement programs. If now is not the time to get these numbers settled, then when is? So the shutdown is over, the government is up and running again and the system worked – but what did we learn? Three thoughts on this. One, while it may not have been done as we many would like, asking questions is the American way. This is particularly the case on Constitutional questions, and many members in the House had them about the President’s unilateral decisions in enforcing his own law. The Founding Fathers charged the executive branch with enacting whole laws, never parts of it at their discretion. The idea of corporations or members of Congress and their staffs being exempt from a law rubbed many of us the wrong way, and accordingly we fought on it. Two, over the last 35 years there have been 53 debt limit increases, and 17 government shutdowns – and with the exception of a handful of automatic debt extensions all were negotiated. The President clearly held the upper ground but was unusually dismissive when it came to negotiating. As a country we have differences, and lots of them - but we have sat down and ironed them out for over 200 years peaceably. While I ultimately opposed the final deal from the Senate because it didn’t contain reforms, negotiating between parties is the only way to break through these stalemates and deal with the spending issues our country faces. Three, it always comes back to the money. Washington is spending at a rate that is unsustainable, and spending problems don’t get better with time. The passage of a “clean” Continuing Resolution begs its ending date and that’s just 60 days away. At that point we will find ourselves right back where we have been over these past few weeks because we still haven’t tackled the underlying budget issues. Unfortunately the challenges that brought about the past few weeks and were debated through this shutdown still stand. If they are not resolved this event will serve as but a minor tremor to the larger financial shutdown that will ultimately ensue if both the financial and Constitutional issues debated over these weeks are not resolved. We have time between now and that next debate; let’s hope we use it wisely. Take care,",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov/media-center/newsletters/shutdown-conclusion-october-18-2013,"Shutdown Conclusion: October 18, 2013",2013-10-18,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"Last night by a vote of 285-144 the House extended the Continuing Resolution through January 15th and raised the debt ceiling through February 7th.  I joined with 143 of my Republican colleagues and the rest of the South Carolina Republican delegation in opposing this measure that results in roughly another $500 billion in new debt, yet does not contain any reforms to reduce government spending, lower the increasing cost of entitlement programs or affect the Affordable Care Act.Back in January when I first announced for Congress I argued that debt-ceiling increases should be offset with spending cuts, that we need to pay as we go and that we cannot continue on the road that we are on without catastrophic financial consequences over the long run. At a time when government borrows approximately $0.40 for every dollar it spends, I don't think it makes sense to continue to kick the can down the road...always promising to reform spending habits in the future, yet postponing action until later. In many ways this deal actually goes in the opposite direction because the deal doesn’t just raise the debt ceiling – it suspends it! Typically debt ceilings are raised by a specific amount, up by $200 or $400 billion for example. In this case it suspends it for a time, which means Congress has given away its control of the purse strings to the President and the Treasury during this time period. To change or undo this new authority to borrow as the White House sees fit through February 7th would now take a two thirds vote from the House and Senate...and signature by the President! Obviously that’s not going to happen, so Congress has literally given a blank check to an administration that has already incurred more debt than any other as the national debt has risen from $10 trillion to $16.7 trillion during the last five years! Depending on one’s philosophical perspective, it was naturally the “other” side in this debate that was being obstinate, but in fact, the debate and the issues at play are more complex. The silver lining to the cloud of inaction in Washington over the last few weeks is the triumph of the American system. While the media has sensationalized the process and people have legitimately grown weary of all the back and forth, the reality is we have a system where the minority can attempt to advance their case, and where we can have strong disagreement without bloodshed. It was Winston Churchill who noted, “The beauty of the American political system was that it always did the right thing...after exhausting every other possible remedy.” While this debate has proceeded in ways that many disdain, I think the larger challenge confronting us means we have to resolve this. According to the Congressional Budget Office we are only 12 years away from reaching the point where every dollar the government spends goes to the national debt or entitlement programs. If now is not the time to get these numbers settled, then when is? So the shutdown is over, the government is up and running again and the system worked – but what did we learn? Three thoughts on this. One, while it may not have been done as we many would like, asking questions is the American way. This is particularly the case on Constitutional questions, and many members in the House had them about the President’s unilateral decisions in enforcing his own law. The Founding Fathers charged the executive branch with enacting whole laws, never parts of it at their discretion. The idea of corporations or members of Congress and their staffs being exempt from a law rubbed many of us the wrong way, and accordingly we fought on it. Two, over the last 35 years there have been 53 debt limit increases, and 17 government shutdowns – and with the exception of a handful of automatic debt extensions all were negotiated. The President clearly held the upper ground but was unusually dismissive when it came to negotiating. As a country we have differences, and lots of them - but we have sat down and ironed them out for over 200 years peaceably. While I ultimately opposed the final deal from the Senate because it didn’t contain reforms, negotiating between parties is the only way to break through these stalemates and deal with the spending issues our country faces. Three, it always comes back to the money. Washington is spending at a rate that is unsustainable, and spending problems don’t get better with time. The passage of a “clean” Continuing Resolution begs its ending date and that’s just 60 days away. At that point we will find ourselves right back where we have been over these past few weeks because we still haven’t tackled the underlying budget issues. Unfortunately the challenges that brought about the past few weeks and were debated through this shutdown still stand. If they are not resolved this event will serve as but a minor tremor to the larger financial shutdown that will ultimately ensue if both the financial and Constitutional issues debated over these weeks are not resolved. We have time between now and that next debate; let’s hope we use it wisely. Take care,",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=cd505dad-f2d6-e594-30d1-4f7592fdfaf7,"Graham, Ayotte, Kirk Statement on Iran Sanctions",2013-10-18,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://clyburn.house.gov/press-release/clyburn-statement-bipartisan-senate-legislation,Clyburn Statement On The Bipartisan Senate Legislation,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Democrat,House,SC,James Clyburn,C000537,clyburn.house.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON --  U.S. House Assistant Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn released the following statement: “I am pleased the House is voting tonight on the bipartisan Senate compromise legislation to re-open the government, put people back to work, and pay the nation’s bills on time and in full.  Going forward, we must get beyond the repeated episodes of partisan brinksmanship that have been so costly to our country.  It is my sincere hope that this Congress will learn from this needless, manufactured crisis and work together to reach common sense solutions to our nation’s challenges and pass sound economic policies that create good jobs at good wages for hardworking people.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://jeffduncan.house.gov/press-release/duncan-statement-government-funding-debt-ceiling-legislation,"Duncan Statement on Government Funding, Debt Ceiling Legislation",2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Jeffrey Duncan,D000615,jeffduncan.house.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, DC — South Carolina Congressman Jeff Duncan issued the following statement in regards to the agreement that was reached between Republican and Democratic leaders to reopen the government and temporarily extend the nation’s debt ceiling: ""I voted against the agreement reached by Senate Republican and Democratic leaders to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling because it did not do enough to address the real problems at hand. Our country is perilously close to a precipice. Our debt is growing out of control, and the cost of ObamaCare is crippling American families and businesses. The easy thing to do is kick the can down the road. The right thing to do is address our country’s need for borrowing money and for the Administration to realize that the new healthcare law is not working.  Even President Obama’s former spokesman Robert Gibbs called the healthcare roll out “excruciatingly embarrassing” and suggested that someone within the Administration needed to be fired."" ""While I am disappointed in the outcome, I am even more ashamed at how President Obama and Harry Reid conducted themselves during the government shutdown. Had the President and Harry Reid been open to negotiating from the start of this, a shutdown never would have happened. Working with the elected representatives of the people is not optional. It is disappointing that it took a crisis situation for the President to realize that refusing to negotiate was not an option. I was also disturbed that President Obama went out of his way to make the shutdown more painful on the public than it needed to be by closing monuments that have never been closed before, threatening to delay payments to veterans – even though veterans benefits are fully funded – and rejecting clean, non-controversial, and bipartisan bills passed by the House to reopen portions of the government. This behavior of putting politics before people is the ultimate sign of leadership failure."" ""Now that the President has reversed his position and decided to once again work with the people’s representatives, it is my sincere hope that some type of resolution on the budget and the healthcare law can be reached in the months ahead. These are serious times. The President needs to acknowledge what most of America has already seen: that our country is suffering from a mounting debt crisis; and that the Affordable Care Act is seriously flawed."" ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://rice.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/washington-cannot-ignore-its-financial-problems,Washington Cannot Ignore Its Financial Problems,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tom Rice,R000597,rice.house.gov,,,legacy,"During my campaign, I made a promise to you and your family that I would not vote for a debt ceiling increase that did not address the financial problems crippling our country. Last night, the government was hours away from hitting its debt ceiling and weeks away from running out of money to pay our country’s bills. Instead of addressing our financial problems, Congress put forth a bill that merely postpones another fiscal calamity. Therefore, I could not support this bill because it allows the government to run up our nation’s credit card, ignore the ballooning cost of our entitlement programs, and does not make America more competitive.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/editorials/post-and-courier-congressional-deal-doesnt-end-the-larger-debate,Post and Courier: Congressional deal doesn't end the larger debate,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"CHARLESTON, SC - This Wednesday, December 6 and Thursday, December 7, the Office of Congressman Mark Sanford welcomes everyone to drop by to sign holiday cards to send to our troops, veterans, and their families. The signed cards will be delivered to the Red Cross as part of their Holiday Mail for Heroes program.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/press-releases/sanford-statement-on-house-passage-of-extension-cr-raise-debt-ceiling,"Sanford Statement on Senate Bill to Extend CR, Raise Debt Ceiling",2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD STATEMENT ON HOUSE PASSAGE OF SENATE BILL TO EXTEND CR, RAISE DEBT CEILING WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) voted against the Senate proposal, which extended the Continuing Resolution through January 15th and extends the debt ceiling through February 7th. This means the national debt will go up by roughly another $500 billion. The proposal did not include any provisions for long-term spending or entitlement reform. “I opposed the bill that came before me in the House tonight for one very simple reason: It does nothing to address our national debt or our spending trajectory. It doesn’t make progress towards confronting the ballooning deficits that await us around the corner. It raises the debt ceiling and funds the government without making any changes to the things that are causing the national debt to continue to expand,” said Sanford. “I think that this government shutdown is merely a preview of impacts to come down the road, which will be one hundred times worse, if Congress fails to get our financial house in order,” added Sanford. “At the end of the day two, beats one in politics and so here we see President Obama and Senator Harry Reid’s position win out, but there is a much larger takeaway regarding our need as a nation to have a conversation about changing the way Washington promises and spends.” “I have fought for nearly 20 years against the expansion of government spending and the necessity of confronting our financial reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office in only 12 years every penny government receives will go to entitlement programs or interest on our debt,” added Sanford. “12 years is a blink of an eye and things are going to get progressively more painful and difficult if we don’t start making progress now.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://sanford.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/sanford-statement-on-house-passage-of-extension-cr-raise-debt-ceiling,"Sanford Statement on Senate Bill to Extend CR, Raise Debt Ceiling",2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,sanford.house.gov,,,legacy,"SANFORD STATEMENT ON HOUSE PASSAGE OF SENATE BILL TO EXTEND CR, RAISE DEBT CEILING WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mark Sanford (SC-1) voted against the Senate proposal, which extended the Continuing Resolution through January 15th and extends the debt ceiling through February 7th. This means the national debt will go up by roughly another $500 billion. The proposal did not include any provisions for long-term spending or entitlement reform. “I opposed the bill that came before me in the House tonight for one very simple reason: It does nothing to address our national debt or our spending trajectory. It doesn’t make progress towards confronting the ballooning deficits that await us around the corner. It raises the debt ceiling and funds the government without making any changes to the things that are causing the national debt to continue to expand,” said Sanford. “I think that this government shutdown is merely a preview of impacts to come down the road, which will be one hundred times worse, if Congress fails to get our financial house in order,” added Sanford. “At the end of the day two, beats one in politics and so here we see President Obama and Senator Harry Reid’s position win out, but there is a much larger takeaway regarding our need as a nation to have a conversation about changing the way Washington promises and spends.” “I have fought for nearly 20 years against the expansion of government spending and the necessity of confronting our financial reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office in only 12 years every penny government receives will go to entitlement programs or interest on our debt,” added Sanford. “12 years is a blink of an eye and things are going to get progressively more painful and difficult if we don’t start making progress now.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://clyburn.house.gov/clyburn-statement-on-the-bipartisan-senate-legislation/,Clyburn Statement On The Bipartisan Senate Legislation,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Democrat,House,SC,James E. Clyburn,C000537,clyburn.house.gov,clyburn,https://clyburn.house.gov/press-releases/,scraper,"WASHINGTON — U.S. House Assistant Democratic Leader James E. Clyburn released the following statement: “I am pleased the House is voting tonight on the bipartisan Senate compromise legislation to re-open the government, put people back to work, and pay the nation’s bills on time and in full. Going forward, we must get beyond the repeated episodes of partisan brinksmanship that have been so costly to our country. It is my sincere hope that this Congress will learn from this needless, manufactured crisis and work together to reach common sense solutions to our nation’s challenges and pass sound economic policies that create good jobs at good wages for hardworking people.”",1,2026-03-30T01:40:41Z,2026-06-27T22:39:21Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131103081100/http://gowdy.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355764,Gowdy discusses end of Government Shutdown on Morning in America with Bill Bennett,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Gowdy discusses end of Government Shutdown on Morning in America with Bill Bennett f t # e Washington, Oct 17 Congressman Trey Gowdy discussed the end of the government shutdown and where we go from here on Morning in America with Bill Bennett. Listen here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20131103081105/http://gowdy.house.gov:80/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355787,Gowdy Update on End of Government Shutdown,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Trey Gowdy,G000566,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Gowdy Update on End of Government Shutdown f t # e Washington, Oct 17 Congressman Trey Gowdy voted against the deal to raise the debt deal and fund the government through January 15, 2014, saying, ""This agreement falls short of what we could have done and what we should have done; hence I could not support it. Nevertheless, issues related to fiscal responsibility and the systemic shortcomings of Obamacare will emerge again soon, and I trust we can be more persuasive in making our argument to the American people.""Gowdy discussed the end of the government shutdown and what is next on Morning in America with Bill Bennet. Listen here. To watch Gowdy's interview on the Kelly File about the National Park Service memorial closings and his vote in the House of Representatives on the shutdown watch here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140223034527/http://www.scott.senate.gov/press-release/senator-tim-scott%E2%80%99s-service-academy-nomination-application-deadline-november-1,Senator Tim Scott’s Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senator Tim Scott’s Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1 Senator Tim Scott’s Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1 Contact: (202)224-2718   North Charleston, SC– U.S. Senator Tim Scott's deadline for students to submit applications for a nomination to a U.S. armed forces service academy is November 1, 2013. “Our military academies produce some of the best and brightest leaders in the world,” Scott said. “I encourage any South Carolina student who is committed to serving their country and developing their leadership skills to apply for a nomination to one of our nation’s service academies.” For additional information or to learn more about the application process, contact Senator Scott’s North Charleston office at (843) 727-4525.                                                            ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140523092621/http://sanford.house.gov//media-center/editorials/moultrie-news-washington-politics-shutdown-negotiations,Moultrie News: Washington politics shutdown negotiations,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Mark Sanford,S000051,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Note: This piece originally ran in the Moultrie News on October 17th, 2013.  As I write, we are now over a week into this government shutdown and a quick resolution is not in sight. Most of us would like to see one, but each day that passes brings us closer to yet another Washington issue that needs resolving, the debt ceiling. In deciding how we fix these two storms at the Capitol, I’d ask you consider two things. First, we could pass a so called “clean” Continuing Resolution tomorrow, but without resolving the underlying budget issue we will find ourselves right back in the current impasse in a few weeks. The same is true of a “clean” debt ceiling raise, which would raise the limit on our “credit card,” but would do nothing to address the $17 trillion we already owe, or the growth of government spending. According to the Congressional Budget Office, in just 12 years there will only be enough money for interest and entitlement spending – and no other federal government spending - without borrowing, cutting or taxing significantly more. One can argue about the tactics and timing of this particular debate, the nexus here was Republicans’ question on whether we can afford another $1 trillion dollar entitlement, but it underscores the degree to which it’s past time for this debate. In many ways we are here because there has been an absolute breakdown of the funding process in Washington. Unlike when I left Congress 13 years ago, the annual debate on the 12 federal spending categories has devolved to funding government in one big bill, a so-called Continuing Resolution. Under these resolutions, government winds up simply funded at last year’s levels, and treating all spending the same doesn’t reward effort or excellence. In tackling Washington spending, the questions is if not now, then when? We sure can’t wait years to do so. Second, while I’m hardly a defender of process in Washington, the way things have been done offer some insight into how they will be done in the Capital city. Over the last 35 years there have been 53 debt limit increases, and 17 government shutdowns. Except in a handful of years where debt increases were automatic and therefore not debated, in every instance they have been subject to negotiation. Whether there were Democratic or Republican presidents, Senates, or Houses – every time there was negotiation. We have differences, and lots of them - but we have sat down and ironed them out for over 200 years. This change in perceived executive authority is particularly important given the Constitutional questions that are raised when the President decides unilaterally how his own law will be enforced, despite the fact that the Founding Fathers charged the executive branch with enacting whole laws, never parts of it at their discretion. Many friends in Mount Pleasant tell me newly claimed Presidential authority and Washington spending are issues worth confronting now…and I agree.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=c748e200-b253-3749-d786-a9d5183dc329,Graham To Support Senate Agreement to Reopen the Government,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Lindsey Graham,G000359,www.lgraham.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Toggle navigation Menu Home About Biography Awards Official Photo Services Flag Requests Casework Visiting D.C. Service Academies Internships Grants Federal Employment Federal Government Links Presidential Greetings FAQs Press Press Releases Op-Eds/Columns Videos Photo Gallery Blog Issues Key Issues Sponsored Bills Co-Sponsored Bills Committee Assignments Voting Record Bill Status Senate Schedule South Carolina Congressional Delegation Visiting South Carolina Students Lindsey's Kid Page Senate Facts Internships Contact E-mail Senator Graham Office Locations Search",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/senator-tim-scotts-service-academy-nomination-application-deadline-is-november-1,Senator Tim Scotts Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1,2013-10-17,2013,2013-10,Republican,House,SC,Tim Scott,S001184,www.scott.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Thursday | October 17, 2013 Senator Tim Scott's Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1 Senator Tim Scott's Service Academy Nomination Application Deadline is November 1 Contact: (202)224-2718 North Charleston, SC-U.S. Senator Tim Scott's deadline for students to submit applications for a nomination to a U.S. armed forces service academy is November 1, 2013. ""Our military academies produce some of the best and brightest leaders in the world,"" Scott said. ""I encourage any South Carolina student who is committed to serving their country and developing their leadership skills to apply for a nomination to one of our nation's service academies."" For additional information or to learn more about the application process, contact Senator Scott's North Charleston office at (843) 727-4525. ### Print Email Tweet Next Article",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z