url,title,date,year,month,party,chamber,state,member_name,bioguide_id,domain,scraper,source,date_source,text,has_text,collected_at,updated_at https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=a2e3a569-1203-4933-b3d5-353d4d64048a,Enzi: New Congress in new year brings hope,2014-12-23,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"In a recently recorded video, U.S Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., expressed his optimism that the new Senate majority in the 114th Congress would bring real progress on important issues. Enzi also reflected on the importance of spending time with family and friends around the holidays. Click the picture above to watch a special end-of-the-year message from Senator Enzi. The full transcript from the video is included below. “As we come to the end of the year, it’s time again to look back and be thankful for all the wonderful moments that we were blessed to be a part of. It’s been a challenging year at times, but things are looking up for our country. “Only a few days after the holidays season ends, Congress will come back to work with a new Senate majority ready to take action and seriously address the pressing issues facing our country. I am optimistic that we will be able to make some real progress on the issues that matter. It is an honor to serve our state in the United States Senate for the next six years. “As Diana and I prepare to celebrate the holiday season with our family in Wyoming, we send our best wishes to all those who are spending this special time of year with their loved ones. Being back home means so very much to us. There’s no greater family tradition than being home for the holidays.  “We want to thank our veterans and those currently serving overseas, who continue to protect and preserve our way of life. The holidays can be difficult for those separated from their families and we pray that when they have completed their service God will bring them all safely home again. “Wherever you are spending your holiday season, Diana and I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. The sound of those special words always help to brighten the day and lift my spirits. God Bless.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=93c016f9-723b-4186-a827-863d53287044,"The Enzi Insider December 22, 2014",2014-12-22,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored or Cosponsored Boys Town Commemorative Coin Bill – authorizes the U.S. Mint to produce commemorative coins with a design emblematic of Boys Town’s 100 year history in 2017. Bill is sponsored by Senators Mike Johanns (R-NE) and Deb Fischer (R-NE). Letters Enzi Signed Opposed Northern Long-Eared Bat Listing – expressed concerns to the Department of the Interior over plans to list the Northern Long-Eared Bat in Northeastern Wyoming. Led by the Wyoming Delegation to the Interior Secretary Sally Jewell. Onerous home loan restrictions – expressed concerns to the  Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) about a proposed rule imposing stringent and unreasonable requirements for Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) membership. Letter is led by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) to FHFA Director Mel Watt. President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief Letter to Appropriations Committee – requested that strong funding for the President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (PEPFAR) be sustained. Letter is led by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Christopher Coons (D-DE) and was sent to Senate Appropriations Chairman Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Ranking Member Richard Shelby (R-AL).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=27104645-9796-4c4f-80ea-8f52590f13fe,"Barrasso, Schatz Bill to Help Address Aging Federal Water Facilities Passes Senate",2014-12-17,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Water and Power Subcommittee Chairman Brian Schatz (D-HI), praised the Senate for unanimously passing their bipartisan legislation to help improve aging water delivery systems and Bureau of Reclamation facilities across the country. The Bureau of Reclamation Transparency Act (S. 1800) requires the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to complete an Infrastructure Needs Assessment Report every two years listing major repairs and rehabilitation needs at BOR facilities. Were now one step closer to making sure Wyoming and the West continue to have a clean, abundant and reliable supply of water, said Barrasso. Under our bipartisan bill, we will finally be able to identify the maintenance requirements and repairs needed to keep our aging Bureau of Reclamation water facilities operating safely and effectively. I want to thank Senator Schatz for working with me to help address this critical issue. Every community needs access to safe, clean water, said Senator Schatz, Chairman of the Water and Power Subcommittee. Our legislation will make sure the Bureau of Reclamation has the detailed information it needs to make the necessary repairs to our aging water infrastructure. I am proud to work with Senator Barrasso on this important legislation that will help keep water flowing and people safe in Wyoming and across the West. The Bureau of Reclamation Transparency Act was unanimously passed by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on June 18, 2014. Background: The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) is responsible for maintaining water delivery systemsincluding reservoirs, canals, etc. throughout the West. A majority of these systems are over 50 years old and in need of repair. Despite repeated requests made by Senator Barrasso, the Department of Interior has failed to provide adequate details on the depth and scope of our maintenance backlog at BOR facilities. The Bureau of Reclamation Transparency Act would force the BOR to do an Infrastructure Needs Assessment Report every two years as part of the BORs existing Asset Management Plan reporting process. This Infrastructure Needs Assessment Report would be available to the public on BORs webpage. The report would include: 1) An itemized list of major repair and rehabilitation needs at all federally managed BOR facilities and projects. 2) A cost estimate of the expenditures needed to address those repairs. 3) A categorical safety rating, using BORs own existing categorical system, of the importance of addressing each item. S. 1800 would also require similar reporting requirements to be implemented for privately managed, but federally owned, BOR facilities and projects. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=33043d91-e5d3-4786-b0a7-196be8d5c991,Senate GOP Leaders: Americans Deserve to Know Impact of King v. Burwell Decision,2014-12-17,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C.Today, U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) was joined by Senate Republican leaders, including Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), Conference Chairman John Thune (R-South Dakota), and Conference Vice Chairman Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) in calling on the Obama Administration to inform Americans how an upcoming Supreme Court case of King v. Burwell could potentially affect their out of pocket share of premiums, tax liabilities, and coverage options. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell, the senators write: Obamacares tax credits were important for the administration since they obscure the true cost of the laws many mandates and regulations by passing these expenses to taxpayers. Although the tax credits in federal exchanges may therefore be the Administrations preferred policy, they are unambiguously inconsistent with the law. Already, two lower courts have concluded that the IRS rule is not in accordance with the law.Without the tax credits, millions of people will be confronted with Obamacares true cost and will face much higher premiums. Some could see their coverage cancelled. It is imperative that people understand this risk as they contemplate signing up for coverage. The Senate leaders specifically request that Secretaries Lew and Burwell use their departments (FY) 2016 budget submission to inform Congress and the American people of how the Administration plans to respond to a possible Supreme Court ruling that finds IRS's tax credit rule is at odds with the law. The full leadership letter is included below: December 17, 2014 The Honorable Jacob J. Lew Secretary Department of Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20220 The Honorable Sylvia M. Burwell Secretary U.S. Department of Health & Human Services 200 Independence Avenue SW Washington, D.C. 20201 Dear Secretary Lew and Secretary Burwell: On November 7th, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of King v. Burwell. The issue before the Court is whether the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rule extending tax credits under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to people purchasing coverage in states that do not establish and operate their own exchange is legal.[1] While PPACA, commonly referred to as Obamacare, instructs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish exchanges in states that opted not to create their own, the law only allows the tax credits for people purchasing coverage in an Exchange established by the State.[2] We write to ask about the Administrations preparations in the event the Court agrees with the plaintiffs that the IRS rule at question is improper and inconsistent with the statute. Obamacares tax credits were important for the administration since they obscure the true cost of the laws many mandates and regulations by passing these expenses to taxpayers. Although the tax credits in federal exchanges may therefore be the Administrations preferred policy, they are unambiguously inconsistent with the law. Already, two lower courts have concluded that the IRS rule is not in accordance with the law.[3] Based on a plain reading of the law, IRSs decision to extend the tax credits to federal exchanges increases taxes and spending by hundreds of billions of dollars beyond what Congress authorized. The Supreme Court ruling could eliminate the tax credits in states that participate in the federal exchanges. Moreover, the tax credits could end immediately after the ruling. Obamacare would then require many credit recipients to repay some or all of the credit amount already received. Without the tax credits, millions of people will be confronted with Obamacares true cost and will face much higher premiums. Some could see their coverage cancelled. It is imperative that people understand this risk as they contemplate signing up for coverage. On December 9, 2014, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Marilyn Tavenner testified that the administration does not plan to inform federal exchange enrollees that they could face much higher tax bills and higher premiums next year should the Court find that the IRS was improperly providing the tax credits.[4] Without this information, many families could turn down more-secure coverage options (e.g., through a different employer) in favor of less-secure Obamacare coverage. We urge you to reconsider this position and to ensure that these Americans have all available information as they make decisions about health insurance coverage next year. We also are concerned that the IRSs interpretation of the law may be inappropriately subjecting individuals and businesses to excessive taxes and mandates. Since the tax credits trigger the tax penalties under the laws employer mandate and individual mandate, the IRSs rule extends those penalties to people and employers in states that opted not to create a state exchange. One expert estimated that 57 million people residing in states participating in the federal exchanges would otherwise be exempt from these mandates.[5] Furthermore, while the Administration has decided not to inform people about the potential ramifications of King, the administration has protected insurers, at their request, from a ruling that strikes down the IRS rule.[6] According to an October report, at the request of insurers, the contracts between CMS and insurers include a new clause assuring issuers that they may pull out of the contracts, subject to state laws, should federal subsidies cease to flow. The language in the clause says that CMS acknowledges that the issuer has developed its products for the FFM based on the assumption that (advanced payment tax credits) and (cost-sharing reduction payments) will be available to qualifying (e)nrollees.[7] In the House hearing, Administrator Tavenner testified that CMS negotiated these contracts with insurers over the summer and that every contract has the same clause.[8] It is troubling that the administration decided to protect insurers from a King ruling that restricts the laws tax credits to state exchanges while at the same time failed to inform people enrolled or considering enrolling in federal exchanges of the potential consequences of such a decision. Given the enormity of the financial stakes involved, we request that you use your departments fiscal year (FY) 2016 budget submission to inform Congress of how the Administration plans to respond to a possible ruling in King that recognizes that the IRSs rule is at odds with the law. We also urge you to inform all current federal exchange enrollees and all visitors to HealthCare.gov about the King suit and how a ruling against the administration could affect them. Finally, please provide information on any actions that the Administration is preparing to ensure that people inappropriately subjected to Obamacares individual and employer mandates and associated tax penalties are not punished further. ### ________________________________________ [1] Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit, 77 Fed. Reg. 30377 (May 23, 2012). [2] Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Pub. L. No.111-148, 1311(b)(1), 124 Stat. 119, 173 (2010) [3] Jacqueline Halbig, Et Al., Appellants v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell, in her official capacity as U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Et Al., Appellees; State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Scott Pruitt, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Oklahoma v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell, in her official capacity as U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Jacob J. Lew, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of the Treasury. [4] Marilyn Tavenner testimony, House Oversight and Government Reform hearing entitled Examining Obamacare Transparency Failures, (December 9, 2014). [5] Michael Cannon, Halbig v. Burwell Would Free More Than 57 Million Americans From the ACAs Individual and Employer Mandates, Forbes, (July 21, 2014). [6] Amy Lotven, CMS Assures Issuers They May Terminate Plans if FFM Subsidies End, http://insidehealthpolicy.com/login-redirect-no-cookie?n=79559&destination=node/79559 [7] Id. [8] Marilyn Tavenner testimony, House Oversight and Government Reform hearing entitled Examining Obamacare Transparency Failures, (December 9, 2014).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=c7434cea-8838-4df3-9331-cec4d3bbc92c,Barrasso Congratulates Enzi on Budget Committee Chairmanship,2014-12-17,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement congratulating Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) on becoming the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee in the 114th Congress: Mike is going to be an excellent chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. As a former state legislator, mayor, small businessman and accountant, he has the perfect experience and expertise for this position of a lifetime. I know Mike is excited to lead by cutting wasteful spending and protecting hardworking Americans tax dollars. His promotion is good news for the people of Wyoming and America. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=ac3d385b-bc5c-4035-843b-2f032a3b65f3,Enzi statement on federal funding bill vote,2014-12-17,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., issued the following statement after the Senate passed a bill to fund the government on December 13.   ""The process that this last-minute funding bill went through is the result of those in the out-going Senate majority not doing their job. It's the wrong way to appropriate, but be that as it may it is still Congress' job to ensure our government has enough funds to continue to operate. There was no opportunity to amend or go back and do this the right way. It was a take it or leave it choice and I chose to take it. What unfortunately seems to be getting lost in the discussion about this bill and the process is that this bill actually contains some really great legislation for Wyoming. ""There are prohibitions against a taxpayer bailout of Obamacare and cuts to funding for the EPA and IRS. These and other reasons are why many Democrats opposed the bill. This bill contains prohibitions against some gun control, listing the sage grouse, school lunch mandates and more. It includes funding for payments in lieu of taxes and keeps ICBMs in ready status.  This bill gives us a lot of what we've been working very hard to get.  Sometimes we have to take ""yes"" for an answer.” A partial list of what Enzi said were wins for Wyoming include:  Guns – Prohibits funds to enforce the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act except for the operation of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NCIS). The bill also contains a funding prohibition on implementing any provision of the UN Arms Trade Treaty.  Payment in Lieu of Taxes – The bill provides $372 million for Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) funds for FY 2015.   EPA – Cuts the EPA by $60 million below the fiscal year 2014 level. Overall, EPA funding has been reduced by $2.2 billion – or 21% – since 2010. Also includes:  A prohibition on funding for the EPA to regulate lead content in ammunition or fishing tackle; Exemptions for livestock producers from greenhouse gas regulations; Requirements for the Administration to report to Congress on federal agency obligations and expenditures on climate change programs; A directive to enhance congressional oversight of EPA’s review of mining permits; Provisions restricting the application of the Clean Water Act. Domestic Energy Production – The bill encourages domestic energy production to further the nation’s goal of energy independence and to reduce energy costs for consumers. Energy Programs – The bill includes $571 million for research and development to advance coal, natural gas, oil, and other fossil energy technologies. Coal – The bill prohibits the administration from changing the definition of fill material. Such a step, while not in the administration's public plans, could make it tougher for strip coal and hardrock mining.  A related policy directive speeds up Clean Water Act Section 404 dredge-and-fill permits for coal mines.  It would roll back new policies by the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corp. meant to limit funding for power plant projects overseas.  It provides $150 million for the Office of Surface Mining, including $69 million in state grants to allow states to implement programs without increasing fees on the mining industry. ICBMs – The language prohibits funds for reducing or preparing to reduce the number of deployed ICBMs.  C-130 Modernization – Helps provide flexibility for the Avionics Modernization Program.    Sage Grouse ESA Listing Prohibition – The bill imposes a restriction on allowing the Department of Interior from going forward with writing a proposed rule listing the Greater Sage Grouse under the Endangered Species Act. It could block the effort into 2016.  Obamacare – The bill provides no new funding for Obamacare and holds the line on funding for the IRS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).  The bill stops any taxpayer bailout health insurance companies, blocks the Prevention and Public Health Fund from being used as an Obamacare slush fund and requires a report on improper payments of Obamacare tax subsidies. Animal Health – $1.5 million for sheep program, 40 percent state match of federal funds for the brucellosis eradication program. School Nutrition – Allows states to opt out of Michelle Obama’s healthier school meal standards. International Monetary Fund (IMF) – The legislation includes no funding for the IMF.  Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – Rescinds $25 million from the SEC “reserve fund” – a slush fund.  Dodd-Frank Act – Includes language amending Dodd-Frank banking law requirements to protect farmers from having to put down excessive collateral to get a loan. Includes a requirement to report the costs to the government of the Dodd-Frank Act. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) – The bill freezes funding for the FCC at $340 million.  This is the fourth consecutive year funding has been frozen for the FCC. Small Business Administration (SBA) –The bill fully funds business loans.  The bill also fully funds the disaster relief program for small businesses.  Pro-life provisions – Maintains all existing pro-life policy including the Hyde Amendment and allows states increased access to abstinence education funding.  Includes new language directing the HHS Secretary to increase the transparency of abortion coverage within federal exchange health care plans. IRS – Provides $10.9 billion for the IRS – a reduction of $345.6 million below fiscal year 2014. This level will bring the IRS below its fiscal year 2008 total. The bill also does not provide any additional funds for the IRS to implement Obamacare.  Also contains several important oversight and policy provisions related to inappropriate videos and conferences, language t stop targeting of organizations for regulatory scrutiny based on their ideological beliefs or for exercising their First Amendment rights. Department of the Interior – The legislation contains $1.1 billion – $27 million above the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. This funding will help manage, develop, and protect the water resources of Western states. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) – The bill continues a provision intended to stop the NLRB’s harmful anti-business regulations related to the implementation of “e-Card Check,” which could promote coercion in union elections. Department of Education – The bill funds the Department of Education at $70.5 billion. This is $133 million below the fiscal year 2014 enacted program level. VA Medical Services – The bill includes $209 million to help address new costs related to the Veteran access. Disability Claims Processing Backlog – To assist the VA in meeting its goal of ending the disability compensation claims backlog by the end of 2015, the bill includes $2.5 billion for the costs of processing disability claims.        State & Foreign Operations – The bill maintains U.S. commitments to Israel and provides $624 million in support for Ukraine to counter Russian aggression. It includes restrictions on foreign assistance for several countries.  Transportation – The bill fully funds the MAP-21 programs, reduces AMTRAK operations funding and blocks a new airline passenger fee. Enzi statement on government funding bill point of order The Senate passed a bill December 13 to keep the federal government open through Fiscal Year 2015 (September 30, 2015) for all departments except Homeland Security. The bill funded Homeland Security through February 27, 2015. A point of order was brought against the funding bill.  U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., voted against the point of order.     Enzi released the following statement in relation to the point of order vote.  “I agree with the anti-amnesty sentiment of the effort, but the point of order didn’t make practical sense and wouldn’t help achieve the objective of preventing President Obama’s executive amnesty.  It was like a player in a close basketball game throwing up a three-point shot just before the buzzer, but shooting at the wrong basket. The amendment in essence declared funding the government unconstitutional.  Funding the federal government is unquestionably constitutional so I could not support the amendment.  “The point of order was about amnesty, but it wouldn’t have eliminated amnesty.  The point of order made a statement, but it's more important that we make a difference.  What we've needed in Congress in order to be able to solve federal problems has been more conservative voters in Congress.  We already have the good ideas. In January we will have more votes.  We will challenge President Obama on his immigration policy and I will make every effort to ensure we are successful.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b2deb2b2-def7-4f8b-9cc7-61f8fe1005f1,Enzi statement on Budget Committee chairmanship,2014-12-17,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., and Budget Committee Ranking Member Senator Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., have come to an agreement regarding chairmanship of the panel in the 114th Congress. Pending a committee vote and GOP Caucus approval, Enzi will chair the committee and Sessions will take on a significant role in reforming welfare spending and identifying and eliminating wasteful federal spending. Enzi issued the following statement. “Jeff is an outstanding leader and an outstanding speaker. If this were football, Jeff would be an all-star linebacker, corner, and safety all at the same time. He is our first line of defense on many issues. The team needs him and Jeff will be right there with his expertise taking the lead on welfare reform and, where we will miss Senator Coburn, Jeff will be there eliminating duplication and waste. He will also be eliminating reports of little value and forms that don't produce significant results. He will handle those and other critical parts. “I look forward to working with Jeff and the rest of the Budget Committee members on a budget that cuts spending, targets executive overreach, and reduces the size of government. We have an incredible opportunity to do something great for our country and Jeff will play an integral role in this. He has a love for this country that is hard to rival. He speaks his mind and takes a stand for our principles even in the face of daunting opposition. He’s been an amazing friend for over 18 years and I can’t think of a better partner to work with on so many issues in the next Congress than him.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=e4843b58-ff8c-488c-ab58-56c995347cde,"Barrasso: Surgeon General Should Have History of Focusing on Patients, Not Politics",2014-12-15,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) called on the Senate to defeat the nomination of Dr. Vivek Murthy to serve as U.S. Surgeon General. Barrasso specifically points out that this important position should be served by a qualified, strong and professional leader not an inexperienced, unqualified, political appointee. Excerpts of his remarks: I rise today to oppose the nomination of Dr. Dr. Vivek Murthy to be Surgeon General of the United States. The Surgeon General is known as America's doctor. Americans have great respect for this important position. They expect their Surgeon General to be someone who has substantial experience in helping patients, helping them improve their health and in helping them reduce their risk of illness and injury. This important position has been vacant since July of 2013, so about a year and a half. It's far too long, and it's been completely avoidable. Now, we have seen how the Obama administration has struggled in response to important health issues like the Ebola crisis. America should have had an experienced doctor in the job as Surgeon General to lead our fight against Ebola. And to take on other serious health challenges as well. Dr. Murthy is a smart man, very well educated, has an undergraduate degree from Harvard, an M.B.A. From Yale, an M.D. From Yale school of medicine. These are impressive academic credentials and I'm sure he will be a fine doctor. They are simply not sufficient qualifications for this important job. Is Dr. Murthy a renowned expert in treating patients or researching diseases? No, not at all. He's not. Has he actually built a career teaching medicine or leading public health organizations? No, not yet. In fact, Dr. Murthy only completed his medical training, his residency, in 2006, just eight years ago. Now, I speak as someone who has actually practiced medicine for 25 years, who has been an instructor of surgery at Yale Medical School that Dr. Murthy attended. And I saw that being a doctor is about much more than going to school. Doctors learn more and more as they progress through their careers, and they spend more time with their patients, listening to patients and the patients' families. Dr. Murthy has just not had the time to develop these kinds of skills. So what qualifies him to be Surgeon General of the United States? Well, in 2008, just two years out of his residency, he founded a group called doctors for Obama. The purpose? To elect a president. The majority of his career has been spent not as a doctor treating patients but as an activist, an activist focused on gun control and political campaigns. Even former Surgeon General Richard Carmona has said that Dr. Murthy doesn't have the medical experience to serve in such an important position. Let me point out, Dr. Carmona is a Democrat. He wrote an article for The Huffington post on December 4th. It was titled In search of a Surgeon General. I want to read a little bit about what he wrote. He says we don't appoint doctors early in their career to be a university dean or chairman. He said graduate business students at the top of their class don't become instant C.E.Os. Top law graduates of elite law schools don't get nominated to be U.S. Attorney general or a Supreme Court justice. He asks, why should the U.S. Surgeon General are any different? He concludes by asking the question, is the health, safety and security of the nation any less important? Well, no. The health, safety, and security of the nation are not less important and the job of Surgeon General is not less important. Americans want the same thing from a Surgeon General that they all want from their own doctors. People want honest and straightforward advice about medical dangers like cancer, like heart attacks, like stroke. They don't want an inexperienced, unqualified political appointee. Patients don't want a doctor who might let political ideology get in the way of treatment and their best interest. Americans don't want a Surgeon General who might use this position of trust to promote his own personal campaign against the second amendment of the constitution. This is just another example of President Obama giving someone an important job based solely on their support of the President's political career. Just like his nomination of a soap opera producer to be ambassador to Hungary or the President's nomination of a man to be ambassador to Norway when the person didn't know the first thing about the country. Now, of course, both those nominations to be ambassadors had funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to the President's campaigns. Well, those nominations were embarrassing. And so is this nomination, to be Surgeon General. This office of Surgeon General is not just an honorary title. It is not just a figurehead position. The Surgeon General commands the entire commissioned corps of the uniformed public health officers. There are 6,700 people that the Surgeon General commands. It is one of the key positions leading America's public health efforts. America has a long history of qualified and talented people filling this job. When President Bill Clinton nominated David Satcher in 1998 he had already searched as president of a medical school and as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. C. Everett Koop had spent 35 years as a leading world renowned pediatric surgeon. They were substantial candidates who brought serious experience to the job. The responsibilities of being America's Surgeon General require a strong professional leader, and the American people deserve a qualified nominee. Now, there's a long list of capable doctors who could meet those requirements. The President should pick one of them. We've seen over the years that when the President nominates qualified people for this position, the Senate has approved their nominations on overwhelmingly bipartisan votes. Now, when President Obama nominated Regina Benjamin to be Surgeon General, she was confirmed unanimously. So was Richard Carmona when President Bush nominated him. Now, today even Democrats have objected to the nomination of Dr. Murthy. So why are we wasting the Senate's time talking about this now? Well, if President Obama thinks Dr. Murthy is qualified, why haven't we voted on him? He was nominated more than a year ago. We've had no Surgeon General, weve had the Ebola crisis. He was nominated more than a year ago. His confirmation in the committee was last February. The majority leader could have brought this up for a vote at any time in the past nine months but he didn't do it. Why? Because he knew this nominee, this unqualified nominee, this partisan nominee, didn't have the votes, couldn't get the votes on the democrat side of the aisle, and the nomination would have been an embarrassment before the election. Now is not the right time for this nomination, and it is not the right job for Dr. Murthy. The Ebola problem and the other health crises facing our nation are enormous challenges. They require skills, they require talents that this nominee has simply not had time to develop. And which he has so far not demonstrated in his career. Now, I want to close by quoting from a letter that former Surgeon General Carmona sent to all the members of this Senate earlier this month, sent it to each and every one of us. This is what he wrote about Dr. Murthy. This is a former Surgeon General, Democrat, about this current Surgeon General nominee who we're going to vote on later today. Dr. Carmona writes: his partisanship and lack of qualifications for the job of Surgeon General gives this nomination the scent of political patronage. That's from someone who has actually served as Surgeon General, a Democrat, who knows what it takes to do the job well. Dr. Carmona added in his letter to all the members of the United States Senate, he said his confirmation would undermine the credibility and the authenticity of the office of Surgeon General. Undermine the credibility and the authenticity of the office of Surgeon General. While demeaning, demeaning the selfless service of qualified career uniformed officers who merit consideration. That's who the President of the United States has chosen to nominate. Someone who would undermine the credibility and the authenticity of the office of Surgeon General while demeaning the selfless service of qualified career uniformed officers who merit consideration. Americans deserve a Surgeon General who has substantial experience in managing complex crises and delivering patient care. The American people deserve a Surgeon General who has proven throughout his or her career that their main focus is a commitment to patients, not a commitment to politics. Dr. Murthy has time to learn, time to gain experience, and that may make him a fine Surgeon General someday, but that day is not today. I call on the Senate to defeat the nomination of Dr. Murthy for Surgeon General of the United States. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=7cb2a9c2-27dc-4fa1-90a2-811798bcf074,"Senate, House Pass Barrasso Grazing, Hydropower Legislation",2014-12-12,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) announced his Grazing Improvement Act and the Bureau of Reclamation Conduit Hydropower Development Equity and Jobs Act were included in a public lands package in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that passed the Senate today. The House of Representatives passed the NDAA on December 4, 2014 and the bill is now on its way to the President. Barrassos Grazing Improvement Act provides greater certainty and stability to the livestock grazing community. It allows the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service to continue issuing grazing permits while an environmental analysis is being completed. Livestock grazing on public lands has a strong tradition in Wyoming and in the West. For too long, our ranching families have been the target of anti-grazing litigation that puts their grazing permits in jeopardy, said Barrasso. By streamlining the permitting process, my bill will finally give Wyomings ranching families, and the local communities they support, the stability they need to keep their operations running strong. The Bureau of Reclamation Conduit Hydropower Development Equity and Jobs Act was introduced by Senator Barrasso in February and is the companion bill to Representative Steve Daines (R-MT) bill (H.R. 1963). Their bill eliminates red tape that currently prevents conduit hydropower development at eleven Bureau of Reclamation projects in the West. Increasing hydropower development at Bureau of Reclamation facilities is a great opportunity to create rural jobs and lower electricity prices for American families, said Barrasso. I want to thank Representative Daines for working with me to finish the job of developing all our renewable small hydropower resources at these facilities. I look forward to the President signing this bill into law soon so we can fully embrace hydropowers potential. Background on Barrassos Grazing Improvement Act (Section 3023 of NDAA) Under current law, livestock grazing permits are valid for 10 years. After 10 years, new environmental analysis is required before a permit can be renewed. However, agencies cannot complete the backlog of required environmental analysis due to lawsuits filed by extreme environmentalists intended to delay the permitting process. In September, the BLM had a backlog of approximately 5600 permits in need of renewal. For over a decade, grazing permit holders and public land management agencies have relied on Congress to temporarily grant the continued use of these grazing permits every year. The Grazing Improvement Act fixes this by allowing the BLM and Forest Service to continue issuing grazing permits while an environmental analysis is being completed. It also provides the land management agencies with more flexibility concerning the priority and timing for completion of environmental analysis, issuing grazing permits, and other needed reforms. Background on Barrasso-Daines Bureau of Reclamation Conduit Hydropower Development Equity and Jobs Act (S. 2010): In 2013, the House and Senate passed S. 306/H.R. 678 (Barrasso/Tipton) to promote conduit hydropower development at Reclamation facilities. S. 306/H.R. 678 applied to hundreds of Reclamation facilities that are covered under the authorities of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939. The Barrasso-Daines bill (S. 2010) applies to the remaining 11 Reclamation facilities, all of which are governed under the different and more complex authorities and terms of the Water Conservation and Utilization Act (WCUA) of 1939. The bill specifically removes statutory impediments by authorizing non-federal hydropower development at these conduits and provides administrative and regulatory reforms necessary to foster such development. This bill will help pave the way for non-federal hydro-power development on all facets of these projects, including dams. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=e268601e-4789-49e9-a665-423361abf3fa,"Udall, Barrasso Energy Bill Passes Senate, Heads to Presidents Desk",2014-12-12,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Today, U.S. Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and John Barrasso (R-WY) welcomed the Senates passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which included their bill to permanently reauthorize and reform a pilot program that has helped the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) balance complex demands, including oil and gas permitting and environmental management, in New Mexico, Wyoming and other parts of the West. The bipartisan BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act of 2014 (S. 2440), which passed the Senate by unanimous consent on September 16, 2014, was subsequently included as section 3021 of the NDAA. The Act extends a pilot program from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 which has helped the BLM reduce a backlog of oil and gas permit applications and streamline the permitting process in BLM offices in Farmington and Carlsbad, N.M., and Rawlins and Casper, WY, and other states. The NDAA passed the House of Representatives on December 4, and following todays vote, is headed to the Presidents desk for his signature. The BLM permit processing bill is good for New Mexico, which relies on the revenue associated with oil and gas development to support our economy and create jobs, Udall said. By providing the resources for environmentally responsible development, this section will provide certainty to industry and the BLM, support our nations energy independence, and promote a do it all, do it right energy policy. Senator Barrasso, Senator Heinrich, and our bipartisan group of cosponsors have been great partners in moving these provisions forward, and I look forward to seeing the President sign this bill. Our local BLM offices play a vital role in making sure Wyoming remains a leading energy producing state. With todays vote, these offices will now have the resources they need to ensure oil and gas permits are processed in a timely manner, said Barrasso. Our bipartisan bill will help increase energy production on federal lands, create good-paying jobs and help support local economies throughout Wyoming and the West. Id like to thank Senator Tom Udall and our bipartisan group of co-sponsors for working together to get this legislation across the finish line and on its way to the President. Authorization and funding for the pilot program is set to expire next year on September 30, 2015. The BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act permanently reauthorizes the pilot program and provides the Interior Secretary with greater flexibility to designate additional pilot offices based on shifting oil and gas production trends. In addition, the Act sets a $9,500 fee (indexed to inflation), to take effect in FY 2016, for applications for permits to drill (APDs) and mandates that at least 75 percent of revenues collected from the APD fees remain with the BLM offices in the states where the APDs were submitted. Finally, the Act prohibits the Secretary from raising the APD fee through a rulemaking. The BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act was cosponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.); Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.); John Hoeven (R-N.D.); Mike Enzi (R-WY); Mark Udall (D-CO); Dean Heller (R-NV); John Walsh (D-MT); James Inhofe (R-OK); Jon Tester (D-MT); Mike Lee (R-UT); Orrin Hatch (R-UT); and Michael Bennet (D-CO). The BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act has been endorsed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, Independent Petroleum Association of America, American Petroleum Institute, Western Energy Alliance, Western Governors Association, National Association of Counties, and numerous municipalities, trade associations, and oil and gas companies. In a July 29 hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Western Energy Alliance, Concho Resources, Campbell County (Wyoming) Board of Commissioners, and Bureau of Land Management all testified in strong support of the legislation. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=b97060d4-8163-4c5a-ac55-fa4e35dc2ff6,Controversial labor rule a handout to political allies,2014-12-12,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The National Labor Relations Board is resurrecting its controversial rule that would speed up union elections, giving workers little time to gather information on joining a union before being requiring a vote. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., believes this rule doesn’t serve workers, it serves the unions who are looking for a quick fix to their declining membership. It’s a political handout before the holidays at the end of a Congressional session, according to Enzi. “When you propose giving workers less time to learn about an issue before forcing them to make a decision it becomes more about the organization than the needs that organization is supposed to fulfill. Workers and employers deserve adequate time and information to help them make important decisions,” said Enzi. “We’ve been down this rabbit hole before. The National Labor Relations Board has changed from an impartial arbiter between businesses and organized labor to a highly-partisan pusher of labor unions’ priorities. Union elections should be open, transparent, and not rushed. I believe Congress should look at legislation to reform the board and to restore the impartiality that was envisioned when the board was created.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=dc9d9790-b449-40bd-b980-670821cdd1b2,Barrasso Responds to Sebelius Suggestion to Change the Name of Obamacare,2014-12-10,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"People have been hit by higher costs, higher co-pays, higher premiums, higher deductibles, many of them can't continue to see the doctor that treated them in the past. So no matter what the Democrats and Kathleen Sebelius want to call it, the law remains very unpopular because it is unworkable and it's unaffordable. WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) responded to former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius suggestion that changing the name of Obamacare would make the law more popular. He also explained in detail how Americans who have enrolled in the Obamacare exchange are paying higher costs and still cannot access quality care. Excerpts of his remarks: Earlier today the former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, said that there was a way to fix Obamacare. She said, change the name. That was her solution. That's not something she just told a friend. It's something she told many as she was participating in Politicos Lessons from Leaders events. Leaders don't blame the failure of a bad product on a name. You can blame it on a lot of things but the name is not it. After all, the President said he was fond of the name Obamacare. Apparently, Kathleen Sebelius is taking a play from the playbook of Professor Gruber, about underestimating the intelligence of the American people. This law isn't unpopular because it was named after the President, the law is unpopular because it doesn't work. Its unpopular because it doesn't deliver what the President promised the American people it would. So Democrats can rename this health care system whatever they want and people all across the country are still going to know that the law is failing them. People have been hit by higher costs, higher co-pays, higher premiums, higher deductibles, many of them can't continue to see the doctor that treated them in the past. So no matter what the Democrats and Kathleen Sebelius want to call it, the law remains very unpopular because it is unworkable and it's unaffordable. As we head into the middle of December, next week, December 15th, is the deadline for people to sign up on healthcare.gov. If they want to have their healthcare coverage starting next January, January the 1st, just a few weeks from now. That's for people living in the 37 states that use the federal health care exchange. A lot of people still haven't signed up, and they may learn over the next few days if they do go to the website to sign up that their health care and their insurance premiums are actually more expensive next year than they were this year. That's what people continue to see -- health care rates going up in spite of the President's promise. You know, when President Obama was selling his health care law to the American people, he promised them they would save money. He actually went so far as to say that people would save $2,500 per year per family under his plan. And Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House, she actually went on Meet the Press and at one point she said, everyone's rates would go down. Well, that didn't happen. Now the Obama Administration finally admits that people are paying more, not less. Americans buying health insurance through the federal exchange will see their premiums go up and the Administration finally admits it. That's according to a new report by the Department of Health and Human Services, it came out last Thursday. Democrats said prices would go down. The President promised they'd go down. Nancy Pelosi said, down for everyone. Instead, the prices keep going up. Here's what one person in Syracuse, New York, wrote to his local newspaper last week: Lawrence Petty wrote to the Syracuse post standard last Monday, December 1st, he wrote that he has a plan that he bought through the state Obamacare exchange. This year the cost was about $664 a month for the couple. Next year, going on the exchange, the rate for the same plan because the President said if you like your plan, you can keep it is going up from $664 a month to $773 a month. That's over $1,300 extra a year. He asked the newspaper in Syracuse, New York, so what gives? The average increase across the country is less than that. But this man in Syracuse, New York, is looking at a price hike of more than 17%. Every Democrat in the Senate voted for the President's health care law. Every one of them. The Democratic senator from New York voted for the health care law. It's the very state where this man writing to his newspaper in Syracuse, New York. What do they have to say to this man in Syracuse whose insurance premiums are going up 17% next year? How do they respond to this man who was writing to the paper in New York, what gives? Maybe his question has something to do with what the senior senator from New York said a couple of weeks ago at the national press club when he admitted that the health care law, in his words, wasn't the change we were hired to make. And its not just premiums. Theyre not the only problem here. The health care law has added so many Washington mandates, so many things that people didnt want, cant afford, arent interest in, dont need, that other costs have gone up as well. That includes the money people have to pay out of pocket for things like co-pays, their deductibles. Now, some people have actually had to delay their medical care because of all these additional expenses. According to a new Gallup poll last month, 33% of Americans say that over the past year they've put off getting medical treatment because of the cost. Now, Gallup has been asking this same question all the way since 2001, well before the health care law had ever been passed. And this year it is the highest number ever. This is after the President's health care law has been signed into law and has taken effect and the exchanges are in effect. Highest ever of people not getting care because of the cost. Those people, two-thirds of them say they have put off treatment for a serious condition. One is woman named Patricia Wanderlich. Now shes 61 years old. She works part-time at landscaping company outside of Chicago. The President's home state. She told The New York Times that she has a small brain aneurysm that needs monitoring. She tells her story in an article the New York Times published on October 17 under the headline: Unable to meet the deductible or the doctor. Patricia has a health insurance plan through Obamacare that has an annual deductible of $6,000. So, she has to pay for most of her medical expenses up to that amount. Because of that, she says she is skipping this year's brain scan and hoping for the best. She says, a $6,000 deductible that's just staggering. This is the kind of person that Obamacare was supposed to help. And changing the name of Obamacare, as Kathleen Sebelius has recommended today, isn't going to solve the problems for this patient with a $6,000 deductible. She got the insurance, she got the coverage, but she still cannot get care. And that is a fundamental problem with this health care law. The other thing this New York Times article points out is that people can't meet their deductibles and they also can't meet their doctor. Patricia told the newspaper that if she switches to a policy with a lower deductible next year, she will get a smaller network of doctors, which means she will lose access to the specialists who are taking care of her. A lot of people are finding that they're in the same situation, losing access to their doctors. Sometimes it's because the insurance has these narrow networks of health care providers. Sometimes it is just because the doctors are so overburdened that you can't get an appointment. There was an Associated Press report that came out over the weekend. The title was, Health law impacts primary care doc shortage. We already knew there was a shortage of primary care doctors in the country. Also a shortage of specialists, also a shortage of nurses. The President's health care law has made it worse. The Associated Press article quoted an insurance agent in California named Anthony Halby who says that he has clients tell him that their Obamacare plan made it extremely difficult for them to find primary care doctors. As he says, coverage does not equal access. He is advising his clients to skip Obamacare next year and pay more for insurance with a broader network so they can at least get to see the doctors they want, the doctors they choose, the doctors that they need. He tells people the premiums are going to be higher because there is no subsidy, however, it is going to guarantee you actually get to see your doctor and keep your doctor. So people are finding that they're paying more when they were promised by President Obama, by the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, that they would pay less. But she is the same one who said first you have to pass it before you get to find out what's in it. So people are having to put off care that they need because Washington says they have to pay for things they don't want, they don't need and they can't afford. People are finding out that the coverage isn't the same as care, and millions of people are finding out they can't meet their deductible or their doctor. That's not what the American people wanted from health care reform. People wanted access to the care they need from a doctor they choose at lower cost. That's what they wanted. Instead what they got are all these new Washington mandates, all these new expenses, all these new problems. But what was the President's solution to that? He said put more people on Medicaid. He told governors around the country expand the Medicaid program. Make sure people have gotten on Medicaid. We know that that is a system that has been broken for a long time. And the question that we continue to ask is, can somebody who's gotten a Medicaid card printed up and given to them or sent to them, can they actually see a doctor? The Department of Health and Human Services says don't worry about that. What did the Inspector General say this week? Yesterday, New York Times: Half of doctors listed as serving Medicaid patients are unavailable, investigation finds. And who did the investigation? The Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. So even though Health and Human Services says, oh, all of these doctors are available to take care of Medicaid patients, their own Inspector General within the Department says not true. Only half of the doctors listed as serving Medicaid patients are available. That's what we're dealing with. That's why Republicans are going to vote to repeal the entire health care law. Meanwhile, we'll also vote to strip away the worst and most destructive parts of the law. Things like the arbitrary 30 hour workweek. It's been damaging to part-time workers across the country. Things like the unfair medical device tax that sends American jobs overseas, threatens lifesaving innovation. Republicans are going to talk about finally giving people choices. That is what people want with health care. They want choices, they want availability, they want affordability. That is what they're looking for. Available, affordable care and choices. Not more Washington mandates. And finally, giving access to the health care people wanted all along. Kathleen Sebelius may give a lecture on lessons of leadership, changing the name of this health care law from Obamacare to anything else isn't going to make it any better for the people across this country who are finding out that the President's promises were empty promises, that they have been intentionally deceived as the way that this health care law was presented and passed. And now they find out that their insurance is less affordable, their cost of care is going up, and the availability of that care is going down, and they have lost their choices. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=34b6fa4b-6499-48e6-9aef-5a7013fda306,IRS botched payments cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars,2014-12-10,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The IRS has improperly paid out more than $20 billion in tax credits, according to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report released Tuesday. “Twenty billion dollars would pay a lot of military salaries.  It would build a few miles of road, fix some bridges or help better maintain some of our national parks.  It could even go toward our massive debt, but instead the IRS continues to blunder its way forward,” U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said.  “Not only is the IRS not able to manage the tax credit payment programs it is responsible for now, but the Administration is doubling and tripling down through Obamacare and executive amnesty.  The IRS will now be responsible for evaluating the eligibility of millions and millions more people.   These are massive wealth redistribution programs and they are being mismanaged.” The Treasury inspector report said an estimated 24 percent of all Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) payments made in Fiscal Year 2013, or $14.5 billion, were paid in error.  The treasury inspector report also estimated that potential improper payments for Fiscal Year 2013 for the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) totaled between $5.9 billion and $7.1 billion, a potential improper payment rate between 25.2 percent and 30.5 percent. The IRS disagreed with the bulk of Treasury inspector’s recommendations for reducing the risk of improper payments, according to the report. “While the IRS has developed processes to identify improper EITC payments and their root causes, it has not developed processes to quantify or identify the root causes of improper ACTC payments,” according to the report.  Enzi, Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Taxation and IRS Oversight, said he’s eager for the new Congress to begin. “This is what happens when a Senate majority shirks its oversight responsibilities.  We get bad programs being run badly,” Enzi said.  “We need to look at tax credit eligibility from top to bottom and we need to audit the auditor.  The IRS must be held accountable.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=0bce89ed-6331-4ca2-8b80-7900b8036132,"Enzi answers your questions on immigration, EPA ozone limits",2014-12-04,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"In a new video recorded this week, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., answered constituent questions on President Obama’s most recent executive overreaches that granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants and an EPA proposed rule on ozone limits. The questions and comments are from Wyoming constituents sent to Enzi during the past couple weeks through Facebook and Twitter, from phone calls to his D.C. and Wyoming offices, and from email and written letters. President Obama’s Illegal Immigration Amnesty “This president has just granted amnesty to over 4 million people with the stroke of the pen, not a single vote from congress and that's wrong. Why haven't we counteracted this? We don't have the votes. After the first of the year we're going to have a majority of Republicans and that will make a difference, it better make a difference. “But we can’t have the president circumventing Congress and there are ways for a majority to be able to stop those things and part of that is through the appropriations process, cutting off the money for the things that are done illegally.” EPA Proposed Ozone Limits “I've seen a map of the United States and this ozone Rule isn't going to go anywhere because the whole east coast of the Mississippi River and all across the southern part of the United States, they have much higher ozone unattainment at the present time than Wyoming does. We have some isolated spots where we're having a problem and again that is largely where there's a concentration of population or concentration of work and I think we'll have a lot of help in overcoming this ozone rule, which will be devastating. So I hope people will comment on it, get their comments in, that does make a difference.” Senator Enzi records “Collecting Common Sense from Wyoming for Washington” videos periodically when the Senate is in session. He encourages Wyoming residents to continue sharing their thoughts, ideas, and questions. For individual responses, constituents should email him through his web page – www.enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/video?ContentRecord_id=90e30415-683f-4b79-90f0-f5198bbff853,"Enzi answers your questions on immigration, EPA ozone limits",2014-12-04,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"In a new video recorded this week, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., answered constituent questions on President Obama’s most recent executive overreaches that granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants and an EPA proposed rule on ozone limits. The questions and comments are from Wyoming constituents sent to Enzi during the past couple weeks through Facebook and Twitter, from phone calls to his D.C. and Wyoming offices, and from email and written letters. President Obama’s Illegal Immigration Amnesty “This president has just granted amnesty to over 4 million people with the stroke of the pen, not a single vote from congress and that's wrong. Why haven't we counteracted this? We don't have the votes. After the first of the year we're going to have a majority of Republicans and that will make a difference, it better make a difference. “But we can’t have the president circumventing Congress and there are ways for a majority to be able to stop those things and part of that is through the appropriations process, cutting off the money for the things that are done illegally.” EPA Proposed Ozone Limits “I've seen a map of the United States and this ozone Rule isn't going to go anywhere because the whole east coast of the Mississippi River and all across the southern part of the United States, they have much higher ozone unattainment at the present time than Wyoming does. We have some isolated spots where we're having a problem and again that is largely where there's a concentration of population or concentration of work and I think we'll have a lot of help in overcoming this ozone rule, which will be devastating. So I hope people will comment on it, get their comments in, that does make a difference.” Senator Enzi records “Collecting Common Sense from Wyoming for Washington” videos periodically when the Senate is in session. He encourages Wyoming residents to continue sharing their thoughts, ideas, and questions. For individual responses, constituents should email him through his web page – www.enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=d512cad2-f109-4c6e-b7df-13b9a235d4b4,Enzi disappointed in new high mark for national debt,2014-12-03,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"One of U.S. Senator Mike Enzi’s, R-Wyo., biggest concerns is our nation’s debt and he was unhappy with the news that the national debt topped $18 trillion last week. “Before he became our president, President Obama said it was irresponsible to add $4 trillion to the debt. Since he took over, about $7.4 trillion has been added,” Enzi said. “We still will have an executive in the White House next year who promotes unsustainable spending, but I am hopeful we can make progress on the deficit with new leadership in the Senate.” Enzi has authored a spending plan that would cut overall spending by 1 percent for three years and cap federal spending at 18 percent afterwards to balance the budget. He has also sponsored biennial appropriations legislation that would allow appropriations bills to be taken up over a 2-year period to allow for more time to conduct oversight and eliminate waste. Other proposals Enzi has advocated include the Dollar-for-Dollar Deficit Reduction Act , which would require any formal presidential request to increase the public debt limit to be accompanied by proposed legislation to reduce spending by an equal amount; the REFUND Act, which would allow states to return unwanted funds to the Treasury to reduce the federal debt; the Bonuses for Cost-Cutters Act, which would provide awards to federal employees who disclose waste, fraud, or mismanagement that results in cost savings; and a resolution proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution (S. J. Res. 7).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=8f64caa7-8e30-45b6-93c7-3cc5f86e13de,Barrasso: Ozone Regulation Proves President Obama is Still Focused on The Wrong Problem,2014-12-02,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) spoke out against President Obamas recently proposed ozone regulation that will put more Americans out of work and make it even harder for our economy to grow. Excerpts of his remarks: Last Wednesday Americans all across the country were preparing for Thanksgiving. They were traveling, many of them going to visit friends and family, places around their communities, their state, or their country. So what did the Obama Administration do, when it thought nobody was actually paying attention? It snuck out a huge new regulation that imposes job-crushing environmental restrictions. Politico ran an article of it later that day. The headline was The Most Expensive Regulation Ever. Obama rolls out a major E.P.A. Rule. Why would the president do that? Why would he put out a major rule from the Environmental Protection Agency affecting millions of Americans and do it right before a holiday? If these regulations are such a good idea, you would think that the Administration would put it out in a way that people would be paying attention. I want to know why the Administration did this in a way to hide the regulations from the American people. Well, president Obama actually didn't say a word about it that day. Instead he pardoned a Turkey. The turkey got a better deal than the American people did last week. They're the ones who are going to be paying for the president's expensive and destructive regulation. Here's what's happening. The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a new rule that would dramatically slash the limits of ground-level ozone. In 626 pages, then you add on the appendix, another over 500 additional pages in the appendix, so here's what the Wall Street journal had to say about the new rule. They had an editorial on it Friday with a headline Highway to the danger ozone. It says, like so many other such rules, this one twists decades old air pollution laws to restructure the U.S. energy industry and gradually ban fossil fired power. So you have fossil fuel fired power gradually being banned as this Administration tries to restructure the U.S. Energy industry. It says coal is the first target, the article also adds but natural gas is next. The current limit on ozone is 75 parts per billion. The Environmental Protection Agency wants to cut that number down to 70 or 65 or 60 parts per billion. The Agency estimates the new rule could cost nearly $17 billion every year. $17 billion a year in costs. Most of the country would fail to meet Washington's tough new standards if they were in place today. As much as 95% of the country would be unable to comply with the new regulations if they go down to 60 parts per billion. States, counties, cities, they'd all have to curb their energy production and limit manufacturing, it would mean less economic growth, fewer people working, it would raise the cost of everyday living, it would destroy middle-class jobs. Theres no question about it. This rule will undermine energy reliability, it will stall manufacturing investment, it will smother economic opportunity for middle-class families. It costs too much and there is very little benefit. It doesn't matter the extreme environmentalist wing of the Democratic party who support it. The Obama Administration is once again turning a deaf ear to the American people, people who want Washington to focus on jobs. That's what we saw in the election earlier this past month, the people of this country want the Administration to focus on jobs. The Administration claims that its tough new rule will lead to health benefits. What about the health damage done to people who lose their jobs because of the rule? In March of 2012, the Committee of Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety issued a report titled Red tape making Americans sick. A new report on the health impacts of high unemployment. According to the testimony and scientific research reviewed by the Subcommittee, unemployment caused by excessive regulation, like the new ozone rule, increases the likelihood of hospital visits, illnesses and premature deaths. Well that raises health care costs. It hurts the health of children and the well-being of families. The Obama Administration doesn't want to hear it and certainly doesn't want to talk about it. Bipartisan majorities in Congress have rejected the president's energy policies. Senate Democrats wouldn't even bring up his cap-and-trade plan for a vote in this body. So what does the president do? Does he learn the lesson that the American people don't want his enormously expensive job-crushing policies? Does he listen to the voters in the most recent elections? People who sent a clear message that they weren't happy with the direction the country is headed. No, not president Obama. He goes ahead and does it anyway. People are concerned about jobs. They're concerned about the economy. The president is focused, though, on making it tougher for the private sector to create jobs and tougher for the economy to grow. He purposely is going around the American people and their representatives in Congress and taking this drastic step on his own. Why? Because he knows even Democrats in Congress don't support him. So what do the Democrats who control the Senate right now going to do about it? If history is any indication, they're not going to do anything. Democrats in Congress are just going to roll over and accept another destructive policy by president Obama. That's what they did with the health care law, a terrible law. And Democrats in Congress pushed it through anyway because president Obama told them to do it. Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House at the time. She said, first you have to pass the bill before you get to find out what's in it. Well, now even Democrats are admitting it was a bad idea, as their learning more and more what was in this bill that they voted for. The senior senator from New York said the other day that the health care law wasn't the change we were hired to make. He said, with the economy in bad shape, it was a focus on the wrong problem. Now, that's from a senator who voted for the health care law. Today the senator is right when he says it was a focus on the wrong problem. With this new ozone regulation, the president is still focused on the wrong problem. He should still be looking for ways to grow America's economy, not ways to tie it up with more red tape. President Obama has made the wrong choice time and time again, adding more regulations, more rules, more bureaucracy. He continues to push extreme policies that he knows the American people reject. The president is using unelected and unaccountable czars to go around Congress and the public. His latest executive action show his presidency is failing and floundering. President Obama is not even waiting to try to work with Republican Congress when the Republicans take the majority in January. Hes acting on his own right now In January, Republicans in Congress will listen to Americans and focus on the priorities of the American people. We will hold the Obama Administration accountable for its destructive overreach. We will listen to people struggling under Obama red tape and suffering because of it. We will do everything possible to stop this regulation and help Americans have better job opportunities in the future. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=d785289b-0663-4d9c-863e-59d6044c0eb7,"The Enzi Insider November 20, 2014",2014-12-02,2014,2014-12,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi Sponsored or Cosponsored No Social Security for Nazis Act – would end a decades old deal in which the Department of Justice promised to pay Social Security benefits to Nazis who voluntarily left the United States to avoid government threatened deportation. The bill was introduced by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). Rural Health Resolution – resolution modifies original resolution from 2013 recognizing that access to hospitals and other health care providers for patients in rural areas of the United States is essential to the survival and success of communities in the United States. Original resolution was led by Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) and was approved by the Senate on November 20. Congressional Letters Enzi Signed Sheep Special Procedures – asked the Department of Labor to work with the sheep industry to enact a final rule for sheepherders within a temporary worker program in response to a federal court order. Letter was led by Senator Enzi, Representative Lummis and five other members of Congress to Department of Labor Secretary Thomas Perez. Supporting Funding for Payment in Lieu of Taxes – letters supporting funding for payment in lieu of taxes (PILT). First letter was led by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) to Senate leadership. Second letter was led by Senators Tom Udall (D-NM) and Mike Crapo (R-ID) to Senate leadership. Concerns Reconfiguring the Black Hills VA– expressing concern about the reconfiguring of the Veterans Affairs Black Hills Health Care System. Letter was led by Senator John Thune (R-SD) and Representative Kristi Noem (R-SD) to Secretary  of Veterans Affairs Robert A. McDonald. Iran Negotiations – expressing concern to President Barack Obama about the Administration’s negotiations with Iran and encouraged the president to work with Congress. Letter was led by Senators Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=44dfa263-e5f1-4feb-bdb5-4a64e1699201,Barrasso Spends Thanksgiving with Wyoming Troops in Qatar,2014-11-27,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Senator Barrasso serves Thanksgiving dinner to MAJ Leanna Thomas of Carpenter. Click HERE to see more photos from the visit. QATAR U.S. Senator John Barrasso(R-Wyo.) shared Thanksgiving dinner with Wyoming National Guard airmen serving in Qatar. Barrasso visited with members of the 187th Airlift Squadron, who support airlift operations out of Al Udeid Air Base. Wyoming has about 100 Air National Guard airmen deployed in Qatar and they are doing an outstanding job, said Barrasso. I was honored to share Thanksgiving with them and have the opportunity to speak with them about home. We talked about Cowboy football, their families and the weather back home. I made sure they knew how much folks back in Wyoming miss them and how proud we are of their service. Barrasso served Thanksgiving dinner to the service members, toured the 187th facilities, and was briefed by military officials about the operations in the Middle East. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=3F8810AE-CFBE-5DB9-5F4F-7932EE8003BB,Barrasso Statement on EPA's Proposed Ozone Rule,2014-11-26,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso: Tax Reform Bill Repeals Obamacare’s Individual Mandate WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor on how under the Senate tax relief plan, people would no longer have to pay a tax penalty if they don’t want, or can’t afford, expensive health insurance. Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=12f593ec-ed54-48e9-b115-3a0351a27cdd,Barrasso Statement on EPAs Proposed Ozone Rule,2014-11-26,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding the Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) proposed ozone regulation: The rule is more proof the Obama Administration is turning a deaf ear to Americans who want Washington to focus on job creation. The most expensive regulation ever is going to put more Americans out of work and make it even harder for our economy to grow. And once again, the EPA is completely ignoring the very serious health impacts of unemployment that will result because of its rule. As Ive said before, the two months after the election will set the tone of the next two years. The Obama Administration continues to push policies that are not supported by the American people. In January, Republicans in Congress will listen to Americans and focus on their priorities. Well do everything possible to stop this regulation and help Americans have better job opportunities. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=76a466db-5427-41f9-959f-415e229968dc,Barrasso Statement on Iran Nuclear Talks,2014-11-24,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding the Obama Administrations decision to once again extend the interim agreement with Iran (Joint Plan of Action). The Iranians are only offering the American people more broken promises and instability in the Middle East. The negotiating table has become a symbol of deception and inaction. Now the Iranians want even more time to talk and the President has unwisely offered it. His decision undercuts his promise that he would not negotiate indefinitely. A year ago, he told us that sanctions relief provided to Iran would be limited and temporary. And in his 2014 State of the Union Address, President Obama promised he would be the first to call for more sanctions if Iran failed to complete an agreement. Instead of endless discussion, we need security. President Obama should immediately call on Congress to impose increased sanctions on Iran before the end of the year. We stand ready to increase sanctions and stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20150110140451/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=df2a7018-ffbc-989e-c5f4-8a02568907fa,Barrasso Statement on Iran Nuclear Talks,2014-11-24,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senate GOP Leaders: Americans Deserve to Know Impact of King v. Burwell Decision WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) was joined by Senate Republican leaders, including Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), Conference Chairman John Thune (R-South Dakota), and Conference Vice Chairman Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) in calling on the Obama Administration to inform Americans how an upcoming Supreme Court case of King v. Burwell could potentially affect their out of pocket share of premiums, tax liabilities, and coverage options. Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=ec81bb35-8443-4ebe-a296-326dfe06c9ce,Statement of Senator Enzi Regarding Executive Amnesty,2014-11-21,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, I rise today to express my opposition to the President’s plan to grant executive amnesty to four to five million illegal immigrants residing in the United States. By circumventing Congress on immigration and instituting his will through executive actions, President Obama is eroding the very foundation of our country and form of government. This sets a dangerous precedent where future presidents can flout any law they happen to disagree with and alter the law without going through Congress. Each branch of government is to act as a check against the others and not sit idly by as one exercises authority it does not have. A constitutional law professor should know that. I think we all agree that our immigration system is broken - both the legal system which allows individuals to visit and work in our country and the failures which continue to allow others to reside illegally within our borders.  The first step we need to take to fix our system is to secure our borders and bolster interior enforcement.  We cannot reduce illegal immigration without better border security and entry/exit enforcement measures.  We also need to ensure that we have a strong, workable employment verification system in place because if Congress can ensure that only authorized job seekers gain employment in this country, then we remove the incentive for illegal immigration.  But in fixing our immigration system, we cannot grant those who are here illegally amnesty. Yet this week the President intends to circumvent the will of Congress by illegally granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.  This cannot stand.  The American people don’t want it, some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have advocated against it, and the President himself has said more than twenty times that he does not have the authority to take this action.  I am certain that the Republicans in the Senate will take action on this issue next year when we become the majority, and I look forward to being a part of that cause. But I must be clear: this is part of a much larger fight. I know all of my colleagues remember the unconstitutional NLRB recess appointments the President made in 2012.  In that case, the Supreme Court rejected his move, but it hasn’t stopped the President from pushing forward in other ways.  This year he proposed a cap and tax proposal through regulation that Congress has already rejected, and I know my colleagues from coal producing states intend to fight that EPA rule with me.  I also know my colleagues from Western states intend to join me in fighting the EPA’s proposed rule that could allow the Administration to regulate all bodies of water, no matter how small, and regardless of whether the water is on public or private property. These are just a few examples of this President’s executive overreach, and this week’s action is the latest step too far. I will continue to fight executive overreach, including amnesty by executive order, whether by targeting rampant, unaccountable federal spending, working to reverse illegal executive orders with legitimate federal laws, or using the Congressional Review Act to reject the President’s actions.  I will be looking closely at every option. Thank you, Mr. President, I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f8fdcde9-cc0e-4f67-b84d-f1d4aa64a143,Barrasso Statement on President Obamas Announcement on Executive Amnesty,2014-11-20,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding President Obamas announcement on executive amnesty: President Obamas announcement on executive amnesty flies in the face of his promises to follow the law, deliver fairness and help jobless Americans. His reckless and unlawful decision makes it even harder for Washington to solve our immigration challenges. It didnt have to be this way. Republicans have made it clear that we support responsible immigration reform that would secure our borders and modernize our broken system. Instead of reaching across the aisle after the election, President Obama has shut down the opportunity for common ground. In the aftermath of the Presidents decision to ignore Americans, Congress will act. We are listening to Americans and we will stand up for them. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20150110144026/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1faf7ff8-e991-ecad-443c-410ec3b49343,Barrasso Statement on President Obama's Announcement on Executive Amnesty,2014-11-20,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senate GOP Leaders: Americans Deserve to Know Impact of King v. Burwell Decision WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) was joined by Senate Republican leaders, including Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas), Conference Chairman John Thune (R-South Dakota), and Conference Vice Chairman Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) in calling on the Obama Administration to inform Americans how an upcoming Supreme Court case of King v. Burwell could potentially affect their out of pocket share of premiums, tax liabilities, and coverage options. Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=768e0b83-7728-44ea-98fa-1ee8b15d8ee5,"Sidestepping Congress on immigration erodes the very foundation of our country, form of government",2014-11-20,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"President Obama announced unilateral changes to America’s immigration policies today by use of executive orders. These orders will grant amnesty to at least 4 million people without a single vote in Congress. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., who has opposed previous attempts at providing amnesty for illegal immigrants, opposes the president’s plan and said the president is acting outside of his authority.            “By circumventing Congress on immigration and instituting his will through executive actions, President Obama is eroding the very foundation of our country and form of government,” said Enzi. “This sets a dangerous precedent where future presidents can flout any law they happen to disagree with and alter the law without going through Congress. Each branch of government is to act as a check against the others and not sit idly by as one exercises authority it does not have. A constitutional law professor should know that.” Sidestepping the constitution should be an issue that both Republicans and Democrats can agree is not in the best interests of the nation, according to Enzi. “The new Republican majority the American people just elected should not stand idle. I am an opponent of amnesty, but this is part of a much larger fight. We’ve seen the damage done over the past six years because of Obamacare and rogue agencies like the IRS and EPA. I will continue to fight executive overreach, including amnesty by executive order, whether by targeting rampant, unaccountable federal spending, working to reverse illegal executive orders with legitimate federal laws, or using the Congressional Review Act to reject the President’s actions. I will be looking closely at every option,” said Enzi.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=7f6b00cb-a5fb-4d56-84d8-60f3595f8c7a,Congress wont accept a bad nuclear deal with Iran,2014-11-20,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Accountability is a key to any negotiated agreement.  Unfortunately, according to U.S. Senator Mike Enzi and some of his colleagues, the Obama Administration seems inclined to ignore this in its pursuit of a nuclear agreement with Iran as the Nov. 24th deadline fast approaches. “An agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on if those who sign it won’t live up to the terms or there are no negative consequences for breaking those terms,” Enzi said.  “We’ve got members of both parties in Congress warning the president not to go off on his own and creatively abandon the clear requirements of U.N. Security Council resolutions.  I hope for our sake and the sake of our allies he listens.” Enzi joined Senators Mark Kirk, R-Ill., Robert Menendez, D-N.J and others in writing to the Administration  this month asking President Obama to remember that the purpose of a nuclear agreement with Iran is not simply to get an agreement, but rather to actually get Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear arms. “The negative consequences of a bad deal to the United States are immense, and will impact the security and safety of Americans and send a message of U.S. weakness to our allies and partners in the Middle East and beyond, including Israel,” the senators wrote. Enzi also joined Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. and Menendez in sponsoring the Nuclear Weapons Free Iran Act about a year ago.  The bill would impose new sanctions if Iran does not hold to its agreement, but the bill has been blocked by the now outgoing Senate leadership.  An interim deal that temporarily provided Iran some relief from sanctions in exchange for freezing its nuclear program expires Nov. 24.  That is also when a more permanent agreement is to be reached. Enzi believes that both remaining and new lawmakers will not accept a deal that doesn’t meet the goal of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=c87f9f09-7971-40ae-8a71-b6e63f2ac9a9,"The Enzi Insider November 13, 2014",2014-11-20,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi sponsored or cosponsored Transparency in Education Act – would require the secretary of education to complete an analysis of the impact the proposed gainful employment rule would have on all students eligible for federal financial aid. The bill was introduced by Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ). Faster Approval of Treatment Drugs for Ebola – would amend the tropical disease voucher program regarding Ebola to allow for faster approval of treatment drugs developed by private industry. The bill is cosponsored with Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Tom Harkin (D-IA) and other members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. Acknowledging National Park Donors – would allow the National Park Service (NPS) to visibly acknowledge donations to parks like pathways and stairways to help encourage donations to reduce maintenance backlog. The bill was introduced by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). Congressional Letters Enzi Signed Supporting Country of Origin Labeling – asked the Senate Appropriations Committee not to take action on Country of Origin Labeling  (COOL) until the Word Trade Organization (WTO) appeals process is exhausted. Letter was led with Senator Jon Tester (D-MT). Returning Authority to Wyoming Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) – asked Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack specific questions about when certain administrative authorities will be returned to the Wyoming Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) office in Casper. Letter was led with Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). Supporting Franchise Business Models – criticized an agency order by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that treats franchisors as joint employers. Letter was led by Senator Rob Portman (R-OH). Companion Exemption Rule – expressed concerns about the Department of Labor’s rule that would require wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act to apply to certain companion care providers who provide personal care services. Letter was led by Senator Mike Johanns (R-NE) and Representative Tim Walberg (R-MI-07). Opposition to Waters of the United States rule – opposed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed Waters of the United States (WOTUS). Letter was led by Senators John Barrasso (R-WY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX). Iran Sanctions – requested Secretary of State John Kerry to clarify the Administration’s position on several components of any potential deal with Iran. Letter was led by Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL). Challenging Congressional Member and Staff Health Benefits – supported Senator Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) challenge to the rule, running contrary to the president’s health care law, giving members of Congress and their staff access to an employer contribution for health insurance on the Washington, D.C. exchange. Considerations for Rural Health Providers – requested additional details on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ rulemaking process and its impact on rural health providers. Insurance Bailout in Obamacare’s Risk Corridors – requested Speaker John Boehner consider options in the House appropriations process that will address potentially unlimited payments to health insurers. Letter was led by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) adoption – requested that DRC parliamentary leaders pass adoption reform legislation and resume inter-country adoptions, including issuing exit permits to children who have been adopted by American families.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=b44da6b3-54e9-4898-a413-93a3727571ef,Barrasso: Obamacares Increased Costs and Decreased Access to Care Continues to Harm Americans,2014-11-19,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) spoke about how millions of Americans are learning that their health care coverage under Obamacare will substantially increase for 2015 while access to care continues to decrease across the country. Excerpts of his remarks: This past Saturday, the open enrollment period for the Obamacare healthcare law opened in terms of the health exchanges. People who bought health insurance through Healthcare.gov, or through their states exchange, theyre finally allowed to see how much their insurance is going to cost next year. You know, things were pushed back beyond the election so people wouldnt be able to find out before the election what it was going to cost. So the Obama Administration had all this information for a while but they intentionally kept it secret until after Election Day. Well, now people get to see the prices, and many people across the country are absolutely in shock with the increased costs of the healthcare law. Millions of Americans are learning that their health insurance is going to cost them a lot more. And, as a matter of fact, when the exchanges opened November 15, front-page New York Times: Cost of Coverage Under Care Act Set To Increase. If you read the article, it shows that: The Obama administration on Friday unveiled data showing that many Americans with health insurance bought under the Affordable Care Act could face substantial price increases next year in some cases as much as 20 percent. Substantial price increases. Twenty percent. Now, for some people, its going to be even higher than that. The Wall Street Journal took a look at it, and they had a large story with a picture on Friday and the headline is: Consumers Still Confused Ahead of Health Care Sign-Ups. The article talks about a man named Bob Sorey, whos a real estate sales person in Mount Juliet, Tennessee. He had a plan through Blue Cross Blue Shield, and he says that his premiums are going up nearly 25 percent next year. Told the newspaper, he said, I just cant absorb this. President Obama promised the American people that they would save $2,500 per year, per family, under his health care law. Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker of the House, went on Meet the Press at one point and said that everyones rates would go down. Everyone, she said. What does the President have to say now? What will he tell those people whose rates have continued to go up? What does he say to this real estate broker in Tennessee who cant absorb a 25 percent increase? Its not just Tennessee, in Anchorage, Alaska, a typical plan is going to cost 28 percent more next year. Now thats for the second-cheapest silver plan what they call the benchmark plan. In Minneapolis, rates are going up almost 19 percent. And thats just for the premiums. For many people, their co-pays are going up, their deductibles are going up as well. In some parts of Georgia, 70 percent of the plans sold on the exchange have deductibles of at least $2,500. Now how is that affordable for people? Millions of Americans, paying more in premiums, as well as more out of their pocket. Millions of people like Bob Sorey, the real estate broker in Tennessee, who, as he says just cant absorb the cost. These skyrocketing premiums may explain why the Presidents health care law is more unpopular, right now, than ever before. According to the latest Gallup poll, only 37 percent of Americans approve of the law. It was supposed to get more popular thats what Democrats on this floor told the people across the country and told us. Instead, the opposite has happened. People see how much their costs have increased because of the law and many people are learning that having coverage under the law is not the same as having care. There is a difference between coverage and care. Thats what USA Today found out. They had a front-page article last Friday with the headline, Rural hospitals in critical condition. So not just the cost of coverage under the care act set to increase, but rural hospitals are in critical condition. Obamacare critics say loss speeding up demise of facilities, of rural hospitals. Thats the problem. The article talks about a small hospital in Georgia that had to close this spring, the spring of last year, because of all the new burdens of the health care law. People in that town now have to travel many miles to get to another hospital in another town. One of those people was Bill Jones. He was a peanut and cotton farmer who lived about nine miles away from the old hospital. According to the article, Bill suffered a heart attack about a month after the hospital had to close. An ambulance had to take him to another hospital in a town further away. I can tell you as a doctor who practiced medicine for 25 years, when someone has a heart attack, every minute counts. Well, Bill Jones didn't survive his heart attack. Maybe he wouldn't have survived a trip to a closer hospital. We won't know that. But the hospital is gone now, and it's gone because of the Presidents health care law. For people living in rural states like Georgia and my own state of Wyoming, this is a terrifying prospect. Now, the article says that since January of 2010, more than 40 rural hospitals have closed across the country. Now, there's a map of the country, of all the places where hospitals have closed. Now, Ezekiel Emanuel, who worked on the health care law, says that 40 hospitals, that's not enough. He's one of the architects, of course, of the Presidents health care law and he says that over the next six years, more than a thousand hospitals will close. More than a thousand. In more than a thousand American communities, people will be further away from medical care. Now, that's precious lost time for people who have heart attacks or for women with high-risk pregnancies who are further from the help that they need to deliver a healthy baby. They may have coverage under the Presidents health care law but that's not the same as getting the care they need. And we're also seeing this for people who the law has pushed into Medicaid, because Medicaid, of course, which the Presidents goal was to push more and more people into Medicaid, that pays less for services than traditional insurance companies pay. A lot of doctors and other providers can't afford to take new Medicaid patients. And there was a front-page story in the Wall Street journal last Friday that says, As more join Medicaid, health systems feel strain. As more join Medicaid -- the Presidents goal -- health systems feel the strain. The article says that about a third of all primary care physicians aren't taking new Medicaid patients. One of them is Dr. Holly Abernathy. She's a family physician in Farmington, New Mexico, and she says that she just can't afford to take any new patients under the program. She says I would love to see every Medicaid patient that comes through my door. She says, If you give people coverage, they should be able to utilize it. Premiums are going up, out-of-pocket costs are going up, hospitals are closing, doctors are having to turn away patients -- all because of the Presidents health care law. Obamacare was too long, too complicated, too expensive and it took away too much from the people who liked the care and the coverage they had before the law was passed. That's why Republicans are going to vote to repeal the entire health care law. Meanwhile, we will also vote to strip away the worst and most destructive parts of the law. Things like the employer mandate, the arbitrary 30-hour workweek. That has been devastating to part-time workers across the country. Things like the unfair medical device tax that sends American jobs overseas and that threatens life-saving innovation. Republicans are going to keep fighting for Americans who have been harmed by the Presidents health care law. We're going to keep offering the real solutions that people wanted all along -- access to the care they need, from a doctor they choose, at lower cost. That's what the American people are demanding and that's what they deserve, and it's what republicans are going to give them. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141205223900/http://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-statements?ContentRecord_id=1e4b9618-9d5e-43d5-89d1-1d2ae003f290,Statement by Senator Mike Enzi on Marketplace Fairness Act,2014-11-19,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Mr. President, I rise today to voice my continued support for enactment of the Marketplace Fairness Act this year. Last year the Senate passed this bill with a strong, bipartisan vote of 69 Members, and I believe that now is the time to get this issue done. I have been working on this sales tax fairness issue since joining the U.S. Senate in 1997 because as a former state legislator, mayor and small business owner, I believe it is important to level the playing field for all retailers – in-store, catalog, and online – so an outdated rule for sales tax collection does not adversely impact small businesses and Main Street retailers.  Right now, thousands of local businesses are forced to do business at a competitive disadvantage because they have to collect sales and use taxes and remote sellers do not, which in some states can mean a 5 to 10% price advantage.  We should not be subsidizing some taxpayers at the expense of others.  All businesses and their retail sales should be treated equally.    Additionally, sales taxes go directly to state and local governments, which brings in needed revenue for maintaining our schools, fixing our roads and supporting local law enforcement, fire departments, and emergency management crews.  If Congress fails to let states collect tax on remote sales this year, we are implicitly blessing a situation where states will be forced to raise other taxes - such as income or property taxes - to offset the growing loss of sales tax revenue.  Do we want this to happen?  Now is the time for Congress to complete action on this issue by enacting the Marketplace Fairness Act this year, and today I want to spend a few minutes debunking some of the myths and allegations that have been raised against my bill. First, some opponents argue that the bill unfairly burdens on-line retailers by forcing them to comply with various sales tax rates across the country.  In response, I would first note that the Marketplace Fairness Act includes a “small seller exception” set at $1 million in remote sales each year, which means the bill would not affect any business that makes less than $1 million in on-line or other remote sales each year.  Moreover, the Marketplace Fairness Act requires states to provide to sellers software free of charge that can calculate sales and use taxes due on each transaction at the time the transaction is completed, file sales and use tax returns, and be updated to reflect rate changes.  The software is required to be capable of filing sales and use taxes in all states that choose to exercise collection authority.  This software is available from a number of providers and is already being used by some retailers across the country to accurately collection and remit state and local sales and use taxes.   In addition, opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act argue that our bill violates states’ rights by setting tax rates.  In fact, our bill does not change State law and does not require states to do anything.  The bill does not create new taxes or increase existing taxes, it simply gives states the ability to enforce their own sales and use tax laws.  Our bill is a states’ rights bill, which is why the National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Counties, and National League of Cities support the bill. Opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act also suggest it benefits big business at the expense of small online retailers, but last year a Small Business Administration study determined the small seller exemption included in MFA would exempt 99.96% of all sellers from the bill’s requirements.  And, opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act suggest that it creates a massive new tax requirement.  The truth, Mr. President, is that the bill that passed the Senate with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of more than two thirds of the Senate last year does not create any new taxes.  Consumers already owe sales and use taxes on the goods they purchase if they reside in a state that has a sales tax, whether those purchases are made over the phone, by mail, or via the Internet.  Unfortunately, most consumers are unaware they are required to pay this tax when the retailer does not collect it at the time of purchase.  The Marketplace Fairness Act provides states the authority to reduce the burden of self-reporting from consumers, allows states to enforce existing state and local sales and use tax laws and eliminates the competitive advantage currently enjoyed by many remote retailers at the expense of local businesses. Additionally Mr. President, the Marketplace Fairness Act does not tax Internet use and it does not tax Internet services.  For many years, I have worked with all interested parties to find a mutually agreeable legislative package to enact.  This Congress, Senators Durbin, Alexander, Heitkamp and I worked together with 26 of our Senate colleagues to produce a bipartisan bill that helps sellers and state and local governments to simplify sales and use tax collection and administration.  We are working with our House supporters – including Representatives Steve Womack, Jackie Speier, Peter Welch, and John Conyers – and have found common ground on this important issue that is supported by more than 200 groups.  I want to publically commend all of my Senate and House colleagues in taking a leadership role in working on this important policy issue, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the goals of states’ rights and a level playing field for all businesses by pushing for enactment of the Marketplace Fairness Act this year.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=24b71a70-381a-4de6-bbc6-4da0b07661e0,Enzi votes to authorize Keystone pipeline,2014-11-19,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A majority of Senate Democrats defeated a bill to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline Tuesday evening. The Senate voted 59-41 for the bill, but 60 votes were required for adoption. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., supported approval of the pipeline. “The Keystone XL Pipeline was right six years ago when the issue came up and it is right now. I’m hopeful when the new majority takes over the Senate will finally do the right thing and approve this project,” said Enzi. “In Wyoming we know the importance of energy projects. They create jobs and help keep energy prices affordable for our nation. This pipeline is an important and overdue step toward lessening our dependence on not-so-friendly countries for our energy needs.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=e871dd4f-7988-41d8-8c32-fa824a8e575d,Enzi calls on Congress to act on sales tax inequality,2014-11-19,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., spoke on the Senate floor today calling on Congress to finally address the issue of sales tax fairness by passing the Marketplace Fairness Act. Enzi responded to the concerns and inaccurate claims of opponents of the legislation and highlighted how this states’ rights bill will level the playing field for all retailers – in-store, catalog, and online – so an outdated rule for sales tax collection does not adversely impact small businesses and Main Street retailers. Enzi’s full statement is included below. *** Marketplace Fairness Act Floor Statement U.S. Senator Michael B. Enzi November 19, 2014   “Mr. President, I rise today to voice my continued support for enactment of the Marketplace Fairness Act this year. Last year the Senate passed this bill with a strong, bipartisan vote of 69 Members, and I believe that now is the time to get this issue done. “I have been working on this sales tax fairness issue since joining the U.S. Senate in 1997 because as a former state legislator, mayor and small business owner, I believe it is important to level the playing field for all retailers – in-store, catalog, and online – so an outdated rule for sales tax collection does not adversely impact small businesses and Main Street retailers.  “Right now, thousands of local businesses are forced to do business at a competitive disadvantage because they have to collect sales and use taxes and remote sellers do not, which in some states can mean a 5 to 10% price advantage.  We should not be subsidizing some taxpayers at the expense of others.  All businesses and their retail sales should be treated equally.    “Additionally, sales taxes go directly to state and local governments, which brings in needed revenue for maintaining our schools, fixing our roads and supporting local law enforcement, fire departments, and emergency management crews.  If Congress fails to let states collect tax on remote sales this year, we are implicitly blessing a situation where states will be forced to raise other taxes - such as income or property taxes - to offset the growing loss of sales tax revenue.  Do we want this to happen?  “Now is the time for Congress to complete action on this issue by enacting the Marketplace Fairness Act this year, and today I want to spend a few minutes debunking some of the myths and allegations that have been raised against my bill. “First, some opponents argue that the bill unfairly burdens on-line retailers by forcing them to comply with various sales tax rates across the country.  In response, I would first note that the Marketplace Fairness Act includes a “small seller exception” set at $1 million in remote sales each year, which means the bill would not affect any business that makes less than $1 million in on-line or other remote sales each year.  Moreover, the Marketplace Fairness Act requires states to provide to sellers software free of charge that can calculate sales and use taxes due on each transaction at the time the transaction is completed, file sales and use tax returns, and be updated to reflect rate changes.  The software is required to be capable of filing sales and use taxes in all states that choose to exercise collection authority.  This software is available from a number of providers and is already being used by some retailers across the country to accurately collection and remit state and local sales and use taxes.   “In addition, opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act argue that our bill violates states’ rights by setting tax rates.  In fact, our bill does not change State law and does not require states to do anything.  The bill does not create new taxes or increase existing taxes, it simply gives states the ability to enforce their own sales and use tax laws.  Our bill is a states’ rights bill, which is why the National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Counties, and National League of Cities support the bill. “Opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act also suggest it benefits big business at the expense of small online retailers, but last year a Small Business Administration study determined the small seller exemption included in MFA would exempt 99.96% of all sellers from the bill’s requirements.  “And, opponents of the Marketplace Fairness Act suggest that it creates a massive new tax requirement.  The truth, Mr. President, is that the bill that passed the Senate with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of more than two thirds of the Senate last year does not create any new taxes.  Consumers already owe sales and use taxes on the goods they purchase if they reside in a state that has a sales tax, whether those purchases are made over the phone, by mail, or via the Internet.  Unfortunately, most consumers are unaware they are required to pay this tax when the retailer does not collect it at the time of purchase.  The Marketplace Fairness Act provides states the authority to reduce the burden of self-reporting from consumers, allows states to enforce existing state and local sales and use tax laws and eliminates the competitive advantage currently enjoyed by many remote retailers at the expense of local businesses. “Additionally Mr. President, the Marketplace Fairness Act does not tax Internet use and it does not tax Internet services.  “For many years, I have worked with all interested parties to find a mutually agreeable legislative package to enact.  This Congress, Senators Durbin, Alexander, Heitkamp and I worked together with 26 of our Senate colleagues to produce a bipartisan bill that helps sellers and state and local governments to simplify sales and use tax collection and administration.  We are working with our House supporters – including Representatives Steve Womack, Jackie Speier, Peter Welch, and John Conyers – and have found common ground on this important issue that is supported by more than 200 groups.  I want to publically commend all of my Senate and House colleagues in taking a leadership role in working on this important policy issue, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to support the goals of states’ rights and a level playing field for all businesses by pushing for enactment of the Marketplace Fairness Act this year.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=829002e0-de2f-4286-9429-09af8daa6a8a,GOP Senators Press Burwell on Recouping Taxpayer Dollars Spent on Failed State Exchanges,2014-11-18,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON In a letter today, U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and John Barrasso, M.D., (R-Wyoming) asked Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell to clarify the Departments position on recovering taxpayer dollars used to implement state-based exchanges (SBE) that have since failed. Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), more than $1 billion was allocated to create state-based exchanges. After numerous failed exchanges, some states opted to join the federal exchange, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars in waste. Secretary Burwell testified before the Senate Finance Committee during her confirmation hearing that HHS would use the full extent of the law to get those funds back for the taxpayer. Months later, Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), testified at a House Oversight and Government Relations hearing that the recoupment of funds is a state matter. The full text of the letter is below: November 18, 2014 The Honorable Sylvia M. Burwell Secretary U.S. Department of Health & Human Services 330 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20201 Dear Secretary Burwell: We are writing to inquire about the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) position on taxpayers dollars used to implement state-based exchanges (SBE) under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). Over $1 billion was allocated to build successful websites for SBEs, but that sum was not provided with effective oversight parameters. Website development issues and a general lack of usability have caused many states to seek a different avenue for website technology for the 2015 open enrollment period. With states scrambling to prepare for the November 15 start date, some have even opted to join the federal exchange via HealthCare.gov because of their broken systems. This equates to hundreds of millions of dollars in government waste, and this issue needs to be addressed swiftly. During your confirmation hearing this past May with the Senate Finance Committee, Ranking Member Hatch asked you specifically about this issue. To protect the taxpayers from improper expenditures, he asked whether you believe that these states that have so negligently managed their funds should be required to reimburse taxpayers for their incredible failures? If you could say yes or no, I'd appreciate it. In response to this, you replied that where the federal government and the taxpayer have had funds misused, we need to use the full extent of the law to get those funds back for the taxpayer. This initially placated our concern for oversight of misspent funds, but there has not yet been any federal action to recoup those funds back to the taxpayers. More recently, Marilyn Tavenner, Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), testified at a House Oversight and Government Relations hearing on September 18 that the recoupment of funds is a state matter. For example, when asked about Oregons spending over $200 million on their website before abandoning it in favor of the federal infrastructure from HealthCare.gov, Administrator Tavenner stated I think Oregon has very actively gone after their contractor and I think that's been in the press. But I'm happy to get you more details. Pressed further, she did not elaborate on the role of the federal government, instead arguing that these were actually grants awarded to states, and so the contract is between the state and the contractor, so the states were working that initially. This response varies drastically from yours in May, as it reflects an administrative position that the recoupment of funds is now a state matter rather than one of federal jurisdiction and import. Over the past several months, members have sought additional clarification from you regarding this topic. Accordingly, please answer the following questions: 1. Who bears responsibility to the taxpayers for the distribution of federal taxpayer dollars to build websites that were abandoned just months after the first open enrollment period? 2. What is the perspective of Administrator Tavenner and CMS in regards to recovering misspent federal taxpayer dollars spent on SBE websites, and does it align with yours? If not, please explain why. 3. Does HHS plan to take any action to recoup the federal taxpayer dollars provided to the states that abandoned the SBE model for the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace model? If yes, please describe those actions. If no, please explain why not. 4. Several states, including Oregon, Nevada, Massachusetts, and Maryland, received grants from the federal government to create state exchanges. These states have all abandoned their original exchanges and are now either moving to the federal exchange or using technology from other states. Did CMS conduct a cost/benefit analysis to determine what would be the most cost effective way to address failed state exchanges? 5. What is the estimated cost in additional federal funds will be needed to either move failed state exchanges to the federal marketplace or transition failed exchanges to other technology platforms? 6. During your confirmation hearing in the Senate Finance Committee, members of this committee inquired as to where the federal taxpayer dollars went, why some were misused, and how contracts allow for such lax oversight standards. What oversight methods can you commit to developing to ensure that no taxpayer dollars are abused and wasted on expensive systems that are never utilized? 7. What steps will you take to increase the transparency of CMS contractor allocation systems in the future? If none, please explain why not. We would appreciate responses to these questions no later than Friday, November 14, 2014. Sincerely, ___________________________ ___________________________ Senator Orrin G. Hatch Senator Charles E. Grassley ___________________________ Senator John A. Barrasso ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=84400c56-6435-475a-8bae-20086f30c855,"Barrasso: The Time is Now for Keystone XL Jobs, Energy",2014-11-18,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) spoke on the floor of the U.S. Senate about his support for todays vote on legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline. Barrasso called on the Senate to pass it and send it to President Obama immediately. Excerpts of his remarks: I come to the floor today to express my support for the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. This is bipartisan legislation. The House passed this bill with 31 Democrats voting for it. Last week, Senate Republicans welcomed the news that the outgoing Senate Majority Leader had finally decided to let the Senate vote on this legislation. And the vote is finally going to take place today. For years, House and Senate Republicans have been pushing legislation to approve the Keystone XL pipeline. But until now, the outgoing Senate Majority Leader wouldnt even let the Senate vote on this measure. It was all part of the Majority Leaders efforts to protect the President and the Presidents agenda. The Majority Leader had hoped that the American people would forget about the Senate. He had hoped that theyd be satisfied with President Obamas job approval. Well, two weeks ago, the American people made it clear that they have not forgotten about the Senate. The American people made it clear that they are not satisfied with President Obama and his policies. Instead, the American people want the President to work with the Senate to enact bipartisan legislation to grow our economy and to create jobs. Now President Obama and Senate Democrats can do that today by supporting the bill that were approaching to approve the Keystone XL pipeline. This pipeline is going to create thousands of jobs right here at home. Its not just my view. Its the view of President Obamas own State Department. According to the State Department, the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline would support over 42,000 jobs. 42,000 jobs. Now, thats the reason why many of the nations largest labor unions support the construction and approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. In addition, the pipeline will facilitate American crude oil production. Specifically, this pipeline will ship up to 100,000 barrels of oil each and every day from North Dakota and Montana. Currently, there is insufficient pipeline capacity to ship oil out of North Dakota. As a consequence, oil producers must rely on railroads to ship oil out of state. Now shipping crude oil by rail is more expensive than shipping it by pipeline. The Keystone XL pipeline would provide oil producers a cheaper shipping method and in turn, encourage production of more American energy. This pipeline will also increase our nations energy security. Specifically, the pipeline will provide additional access to Canadian oil. Now we should welcome access to Canadian oil. Canadian oil is a far better alternative to oil from Venezuela, the Middle East, or West Africaareas of the world which dont share our values, and too often work against our American interests. In contrast, Canada is a strong ally. Canada is Americas top trading partner. And Canada already provides the United States with reliable and secure sources of energy. Now is the time for President Obama to make a decision on the Keystone XL pipeline. As the senior Senator from Delawarea member of the Presidents own party said last week, We have waited not just months but years for a decision on Keystone. He said, This is too long. In factthe permit for the Keystone XL pipeline has been pending for over six years. During this time, the State Department has conducted five environmental reviews of the project. Each of the reviews has been positive. Now I say to President Obamatime is up, and the excuses have run out. It is time for you Mr. President to make a decision. President Obama shouldonce again acknowledge that elections have consequences. Specifically, he should signal to the American people that he has heard the message that voters across this country sent just two weeks ago. Their message of support for bipartisan legislation that grows our economy, that creates jobs, that puts people back to work. Their message of support for legislation like the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=389f4c3a-eff6-46ea-aed8-cac30d74ddaf,Disaster relief should help those most in need,2014-11-18,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"When helping a community respond to a natural disaster, relief should be directed to those who need it the most. That was the message of U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., during a U.S. Senate Finance Taxation and IRS Oversight Subcommittee hearing held today examining current and proposed tax relief for areas affected by natural disasters. Recalling his time as a former mayor, Enzi spoke on the lessons he learned helping his hometown and surrounding communities recover from a variety of disasters. “I have always believed that responses to disasters should be guided and directed by those closest to the folks back home -- their elected officials on the local and state level,” said Enzi. “They are the ones who know best how to respond to a disaster in a way that is both supportive for those affected and mindful of our limited financial resources.” Enzi said that along with ensuring that corresponding tax benefits go to those who need it, most tax changes should also only exist for a limited period of time and should come with standards of accountability so expenses can be tracked and monitored both in how they are being used and their effectiveness. “A sound response requires that we balance on the one hand our limited government resources with the needs of the community. We strive to preserve this equilibrium to make sure that the government over time can respond equitably to those having suffered losses now or in the future, in a sustainable pattern,” said Enzi. Click here to watch a video from the hearing.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/save/https:/www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.NewsClips&ContentRecord_id=12FAC50E-DF83-AC82-F10D-90B68EFCFA8C,Barrasso re-elected chariman of GOP policy committee,2014-11-14,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=abdf22f5-822e-4d37-a82f-b2f5212b6183,Barrasso Reelected Chairman of the Republican Policy Committee,2014-11-13,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after he was reelected to serve as Chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee: I am grateful that my colleagues have given me this opportunity to serve as Chairman of the Policy Committee. Our Republican majority of new and returning Senators will bring innovative ideas and fresh solutions to the challenges facing Americans. We will offer reforms that will help our party grow and our nation succeed. In the New Year, we will have the important responsibility of passing legislation and sending it to President Obama for his approval. Republicans will be focused on what the American people are focused on. We will present our ideas, fully debate them and pass bills that make it easier for people to find good jobs, quality healthcare, and affordable energy. We will also work to strengthen our national security and protect our homeland. It is our duty to reflect the will of voters and get the policy right. Barrasso is the 15th U.S. Senator, the first from Wyoming, to serve as Chairman of Senate Republican Policy Committee since its inception in 1947. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141113190814/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a20dc365-b39d-38b5-5b41-42a4af283a81,Barrasso Reelected Chairman of the Republican Policy Committee,2014-11-13,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Reelected Chairman of the Republican Policy Committee November 13, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement after he was reelected to serve as Chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee:   “I am grateful that my colleagues have given me this opportunity to serve as Chairman of the Policy Committee.  Our Republican majority of new and returning Senators will bring innovative ideas and fresh solutions to the challenges facing Americans. We will offer reforms that will help our party grow and our nation succeed.   “In the New Year, we will have the important responsibility of passing legislation and sending it to President Obama for his approval.  Republicans will be focused on what the American people are focused on.  We will present our ideas, fully debate them and pass bills that make it easier for people to find good jobs, quality healthcare, and affordable energy.  We will also work to strengthen our national security and protect our homeland.  It is our duty to reflect the will of voters and get the policy right.”   Barrasso is the 15th U.S. Senator, the first from Wyoming, to serve as Chairman of Senate Republican Policy Committee since its inception in 1947. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/video?ContentRecord_id=87c51bd4-a167-43cc-b02a-de246bea16fc,Touring Admiral Beverages,2014-11-13,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"First opened in 1947 with only two types of soda and two full time employees, Admiral Beverages in Worland is a true Wyoming success story. They now employ 500 employees in Wyoming alone, along with producing and/or distributing Pepsi, Dr Pepper and MillerCoors products across eight states. Thanks to A.J. Jenness for showing Diana and I the bottling facility on October 20. It was interesting to see the state of the art bottling techniques they are using.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=4ab870e4-18fb-4606-8216-fa9b900d6257,Barrasso Opposes Obamas One-sided Carbon Plan,2014-11-12,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding the Obama Administrations carbon emissions agreement with China: While this is a terrible deal for Americans, its a great deal for the Chinese government and the Chinese economy. This agreement forces Americans to drastically decrease our emissions immediately - yet allows China to let their emissions continue to rise for the next 16 years. Once again, this Administration is putting American workers and our economy at a tremendous disadvantage to the rest of the world. President Obamas and Secretary Kerrys focus on building their international legacy shouldnt be at the expense of the American people. After basking in applause on the world stage, the President and the Secretary should immediately come home and visit the communities that will be hardest hit by this unbalanced plan. They need to hear directly from people in energy producing communities who will lose their jobs and find it harder to put food on the table because of this deal. Republicans agree that we should make American energy as clean as we can, as fast as we can, without increasing electricity bills for hardworking Americans and costing thousands of jobs. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=8b904865-8865-4fc6-9189-8be27ae6139d,House Unanimously Passes Teton County Courthouse Conveyance Bill,2014-11-12,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington D.C.-Legislation to transfer the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse to Teton County has now passed both Houses of Congress and is headed to the White House for final signing. The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill (S. 1934) returns the courthouse in Jackson back to the county and allows the federal court system to lease space to continue holding hearings in the building. U.S. Senator John Barrasso introduced the legislation in the Senate after the Teton County Commission requested the move in order to safeguard continuity of use for the county. After negotiations with the General Services Administration (GSA) and Commission members, the legislation passed the Senate and was sent on to the House. Today, after U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis ensured that the Senate bill would be passed by voice vote, the bill passed the House unanimously. It took an act of Congress to return this land to Wyoming hands, but Im glad we were able to ensure that Teton County would be able to continue to benefit from having the Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse as a resource for the community and the state, said Sen. Enzi. I thank Senator Barrasso, Rep. Lummis, and all those involved for their leadership on this issue. Restoring this land to Teton County was the right thing to do. Todays vote is great news for Teton County, the people of Wyoming and others who rely on the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse as an important public meeting place, said Sen. Barrasso. This agreement would not have been possible without the efforts of Teton County, especially Chairman Phibbs, and the GSA. Id also like to thank Representative Lummis for her leadership and help in getting this bill across the finish line. I look forward to it being signed into law soon so we can finally secure the future of the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse. The Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse in Jackson is on land that was given to the federal government free of charge and Senator Barrassos bill enables the return transfer of the land back to the county, said Rep. Lummis. Now the county is assured continuing use of the land and the building while room is also assured for federal hearings, all while reducing federal overhead cost. This is a win-win situation and I thank the Teton County Commissioners for working with us on this land transfer. Background: In 1986 the Board of County Commissioners of Teton County conveyed a parcel of land to the federal government as part of an agreement between Teton County and the Wyoming Federal Court for the construction of a United States District Court in Jackson. The conveyance was made without any payment for the land as the commissioners felt that the construction of the federal courtroom on the property was a major public benefit. The high cost of full time staffing has caused the federal courts in Wyoming to terminate their lease of the property from the General Services Administration (GSA), and the GSA decided to dispose of the Courthouse property. Three GSA officials from Denver met with Teton County officials to discuss the disposition of the Courthouse. They acknowledged that the County had given the land for the Courthouse for at no cost to the federal government, but stated that they could not give the land back to the County absent legislation granting them such authority. The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill fixes this by explicitly conveying the land that was originally donated by Teton County to the Federal Government for the Courthouse and returning it to Teton County for nominal consideration ($1). Teton County will have to purchase the building for fair market value and maintain the property for public use for the next 20 years. The County will be allowed to credit against the purchase price, costs related to maintenance and operations the County has already undertaken at the Courthouse and any income the County would otherwise receive for providing the Federal Courts access and use of the building. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141112191342/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7039fa4b-9d0b-2bf2-e146-0d034d37120c,Barrasso Opposes Obama's One-sided Carbon Plan,2014-11-12,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Opposes Obama’s One-sided Carbon Plan “While this is a terrible deal for Americans, it’s a great deal for the Chinese government and the Chinese economy.” November 12, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement regarding the Obama Administration’s carbon emissions agreement with China:  “While this is a terrible deal for Americans, it’s a great deal for the Chinese government and the Chinese economy. This agreement forces Americans to drastically decrease our emissions immediately - yet allows China to let their emissions continue to rise for the next 16 years. “Once again, this Administration is putting American workers and our economy at a tremendous disadvantage to the rest of the world. President Obama’s and Secretary Kerry’s focus on building their international legacy shouldn’t be at the expense of the American people. “After basking in applause on the world stage, the President and the Secretary should immediately come home and visit the communities that will be hardest hit by this unbalanced plan.  They need to hear directly from people in energy producing communities who will lose their jobs and find it harder to put food on the table because of this deal.  “Republicans agree that we should make American energy as clean as we can, as fast as we can, without increasing electricity bills for hardworking Americans and costing thousands of jobs.”                                                                ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141113190816/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7d7f2eac-cd58-d708-bb1f-5c1cc78d69fc,House Unanimously Passes Teton County Courthouse Conveyance Bill,2014-11-12,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"House Unanimously Passes Teton County Courthouse Conveyance Bill The legislation goes to the President’s desk for signing. November 12, 2014 Washington D.C.-Legislation to transfer the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse to Teton County has now passed both Houses of Congress and is headed to the White House for final signing.  The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill (S. 1934) returns the courthouse in Jackson back to the county and allows the federal court system to lease space to continue holding hearings in the building. U.S. Senator John Barrasso introduced the legislation in the Senate after the Teton County Commission requested the move in order to safeguard continuity of use for the county. After negotiations with the General Services Administration (GSA) and Commission members, the legislation passed the Senate and was sent on to the House. Today, after U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis ensured that the Senate bill would be passed by voice vote, the bill passed the House unanimously. “It took an act of Congress to return this land to Wyoming hands, but I’m glad we were able to ensure that Teton County would be able to continue to benefit from having the Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse as a resource for the community and the state,” said Sen. Enzi. “I thank Senator Barrasso, Rep. Lummis, and all those involved for their leadership on this issue. Restoring this land to Teton County was the right thing to do.” “Today’s vote is great news for Teton County, the people of Wyoming and others who rely on the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse as an important public meeting place,” said Sen. Barrasso. “This agreement would not have been possible without the efforts of Teton County, especially Chairman Phibbs, and the GSA. I’d also like to thank Representative Lummis for her leadership and help in getting this bill across the finish line. I look forward to it being signed into law soon so we can finally secure the future of the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse.” “The Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse in Jackson is on land that was given to the federal government free of charge and Senator Barrasso’s bill enables the return transfer of the land back to the county,” said Rep. Lummis. “Now the county is assured continuing use of the land and the building while room is also assured for federal hearings, all while reducing federal overhead cost. This is a win-win situation and I thank the Teton County Commissioners for working with us on this land transfer.” Background: In 1986 the Board of County Commissioners of Teton County conveyed a parcel of land to the federal government as part of an agreement between Teton County and the Wyoming Federal Court for the construction of a United States District Court in Jackson. The conveyance was made without any payment for the land as the commissioners felt that the construction of the federal courtroom on the property was a major public benefit. The high cost of full time staffing has caused the federal courts in Wyoming to terminate their lease of the property from the General Services Administration (GSA), and the GSA decided to dispose of the Courthouse property. Three GSA officials from Denver met with Teton County officials to discuss the disposition of the Courthouse. They acknowledged that the County had given the land for the Courthouse for at no cost to the federal government, but stated that they could not give the land back to the County absent legislation granting them such authority. The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill fixes this by explicitly conveying the land that was originally donated by Teton County to the Federal Government for the Courthouse and returning it to Teton County for nominal consideration ($1). Teton County will have to purchase the building for fair market value and maintain the property for public use for the next 20 years. The County will be allowed to credit against the purchase price, costs related to maintenance and operations the County has already undertaken at the Courthouse and any income the County would otherwise receive for providing the Federal Courts access and use of the building.                                                                  ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=99aa2f31-06f8-42c9-8ec9-fd388bff93fa,Veterans protect the rights and freedoms that make us Americans,2014-11-10,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Take the time to thank veterans for their willingness to serve. That was the message of U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., and his wife Diana as they join our nation in paying tribute to America’s veterans. The Enzi’s issued the following statement to commemorate this special day.    “Each year on Veterans Day we take a moment to reflect upon the blessings we have received as citizens of this great nation. One of our greatest gifts – our American way of life – comes to us from the words of our Founding Fathers and the actions of our veterans. Without them both we would have never been able to experience the rights and freedoms that make us Americans. “Our Founding Fathers knew what a difficult and dangerous path they had taken with their decision to establish the United States of America. They knew that their future – and ours – would forever rest in the ability of those brave Americans who would be called upon to defend us from our enemies and keep us safe from harm. “Down through the years our veterans have established a proud legacy with their service. Their mission to keep our country strong and free has taken them all over the world. Now the torch of freedom that our veterans have so proudly carried has been passed to a new generation of heroes – those who currently serve in our military. What our Founding Fathers wrote in proud, bold terms continues to be protected and defended by our veterans so it will be available to current and future generations of Americans. “That’s why this is a good day to thank all the veterans you know for their willingness to serve. Because of them we have grown and prospered as a nation – and we will continue to do so.  We join with the people of Wyoming and all Americans in expressing our great pride in all those who serve – or have served – in our armed forces. God bless them and their families.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=7dec7849-7bf6-409d-b8d8-f9a45be1e63f,Enzi thankful to all who take part in electoral process,2014-11-05,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is pleased he will start his fourth term in January in a Senate majority, but he commended all who have made sacrifices trying to improve how our country is governed. “I commend everyone who takes the time to help our country make important decisions on leadership at every level- local, state and federal.  I especially commend all those who have the courage to put their name on a ballot.  It takes real courage to make your ideas and yourself open to intense public scrutiny.  I appreciate the passion of the candidates and their supporters no matter how they finish because we all want to make the world a better place, even if we may disagree on how to achieve that goal.  “I was so pleased to see people in other states saying the same thing I believe Wyoming people have been saying for a long time. They want a functional Senate.  They want people who care more about governing than staying in government.  They are sending representatives to Washington and state halls who have promised to send back some of the power and freedoms that have been taken. “The people of Wyoming have given me their confidence once again and I will not only work hard, but I will continue to work smart to continue to earn their support.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141105191443/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=ee5ecf93-cdfa-99c8-8efc-5c62ae12e61f,Barrasso Statement on Republican Senate Majority,2014-11-04,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Statement on Republican Senate Majority “Americans expect us to govern – and that’s what we are going to do.” November 4, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement on the American people’s decision to elect a Republican Senate Majority:    “Americans supported Republicans today because they want Washington to end the gridlock and start solving problems.  After years of delay, obstruction and partisan political stunts, the Senate is about to finally function again. This election has been good for our country and good for the American people.  Americans expect us to govern – and that’s what we are going to do.   “In the new year, Senate Republicans will take immediate action on jobs, energy, healthcare, trade and national security.  We will pass important bills and send them to President Obama to make consequential decisions. The President has two years left in office to finally deliver the change people so desperately want in our country. A Republican Congress will ensure that Washington starts leading on issues impacting families, workers and small businesses across America.”                                                                    ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141114192303/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.NewsClips&ContentRecord_id=b0a9e120-db73-8b3f-011c-27ae2998b82a,"Congressional delegation: Farmers, ranchers right to distrust the EPA",2014-11-01,2014,2014-11,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Congressional delegation: Farmers, ranchers right to distrust the EPA November 1, 2014 Casper Star Tribune: Congressional delegation: Farmers, ranchers right to distrust the EPA November 01, 2014 11:45 am By: Sens. Mike Enzi, John Barrasso and Rep. Cynthia Lummis Environmental Protection Agency officials want to put a good face on their recently proposed water rule that would give the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers virtually unlimited regulatory authority over state and local waters. We recently read an opinion piece from a deputy assistant administrator in this very publication (""Clean water proposal aims to help farmers,"" Oct. 21) who sought to convince people that this EPA proposal is harmless. The fact is, the EPA under this administration is following a pattern of saying a proposal has very limited effects when it really has far reaching and potentially devastating impacts, especially to states’ rights and family businesses. Even if the EPA doesn’t intend to obstruct farming and ranching, this proposal opens the door for it and other federal regulators to do just that. Federal agencies under this Administration have operated under the assumption that the only way to do their job is to have absolute power over everything, regardless of what local government and those closest to the problem have done to address an issue. They would have us believe that Washington knows best and we should trust them implicitly. Instead of giving even more power to the EPA, we believe we should protect and reinforce states’ and private land owners’ jurisdiction over their water and land. After all, the EPA’s record of extreme actions and excessive regulation shows that we cannot trust it to act responsibly. The EPA has been in the business of putting coal out of business. It has fought our state’s regional haze plan that was developed with input from all stakeholders. It has sought the power to garnish private citizens’ wages without first obtaining a court order. It has even interjected itself into long-established tribal boundaries. We aren’t willing to take the EPA’s assurances that it won’t use the Clean Water Act to tell private land owners what they can or cannot do on their property just because water ran through their property at some point. The American Farm Bureau called these recently proposed water regulations “…a serious threat to farmers ranchers, and landowners” that would cause a “tremendous new roadblock to ordinary land use activities.” The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association said, “An expansion of jurisdiction would actually hamper the ability to maintain clean waters. Federal agencies are already struggling to handle a backlog of tens of thousands of water permit requests.” They support maintaining the appropriate federal-state balance. When asked to explain its regulatory actions or account for the economic costs of its regulations the EPA refuses to answer with real data. People in Wyoming and across the country deserve to hear an honest and up front analysis from the administration on how this rule could impact their jobs, property and livelihoods. Until the administration commits to leveling with the American people and working with the folks on the ground most affected by this rule, we will continue to call on the EPA to withdraw this flawed and misguided rule.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.OpinionEditorials&ContentRecord_id=004C8EA6-DD55-E7EA-2385-397D88994EC2,The Only Way to Break Washington Gridlock: A Republican Senate,2014-10-28,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=6c449cea-4e7c-4b3f-b4c3-2980c38f5f7d,Barrasso Statement on Judge Clarence Brimmer,2014-10-24,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"CASPER, WY Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) released the following statement regarding the passing of Judge Clarence Brimmer: Bobbi and I join all of Wyoming in mourning the passing of perhaps the greatest federal jurist our state has known - Judge Clarence Brimmer. Judge Brimmer is a giant. If you knew Bud, giant isn't the first word that comes to mind. But for those who watched him in the courtroom, studied his consequential opinions, knew the impact he has had on Wyoming and the West, that is exactly what he was. No other federal judge in Wyoming history was more respected for his tenacity, intellect, and wit than Judge Brimmer. It was a reputation that rewarded all of us, like the orchids he loved to grow, so gracefully through decades of service. Bud's passing is a tremendous loss to our state. However, his opinions will continue to shape our land and our legal system for generations to come, and all of us will live freer and better for them. We extend our sincere condolences to his children Geraldine, Andrew, Philip and Liz and their families. You have so much of which to be proud. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141026184535/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a83172b2-a4f8-8bbf-6add-3b9bea2f343f,Barrasso Statement on Judge Clarence Brimmer,2014-10-24,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Statement on Judge Clarence Brimmer October 24, 2014 CASPER, WY – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) released the following statement regarding the passing of Judge Clarence Brimmer: “Bobbi and I join all of Wyoming in mourning the passing of perhaps the greatest federal jurist our state has known - Judge Clarence Brimmer.    “Judge Brimmer is a giant.  If you knew Bud, giant isn't the first word that comes to mind.  But for those who watched him in the courtroom, studied his consequential opinions, knew the impact he has had on Wyoming and the West, that is exactly what he was.  No other federal judge in Wyoming history was more respected for his tenacity, intellect, and wit than Judge Brimmer.  It was a reputation that rewarded all of us, like the orchids he loved to grow, so gracefully through decades of service.    “Bud's passing is a tremendous loss to our state.  However, his opinions will continue to shape our land and our legal system for generations to come, and all of us will live freer and better for them. “We extend our sincere condolences to his children – Geraldine, Andrew, Philip and Liz —and their families.  You have so much of which to be proud.”                                                                                ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=2c0afa97-e0a8-4c04-8c3e-d5f51f11644e,Enzi statement on passing of Judge Clarence Brimmer,2014-10-24,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., issued the following statement on the passing of U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Brimmer. “Diana and I were so saddened to hear about the passing of Judge Brimmer. He will be missed. He has been a joy to visit and learn from. I have always appreciated his knowledge of the law and the way he blended that with common sense, able to get to the heart of the matter. He made some decisions in court cases involving the federal government and Gillette while I was mayor that made a difference for our community. He kept working, all the while helping to make Wyoming and our country a better place. “Diana and I send our thoughts and prayers to Judge Brimmer’s family and to all the people who knew him and appreciate the wonderful person he was.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141024000304/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=70d359d3-c01c-f0ad-3d60-07df29046e81,Obama Administration is Intentionally Misleading Americans on Proposed Water Rule,2014-10-23,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Obama Administration is Intentionally Misleading Americans on Proposed Water Rule Senators respond to Administration’s biased campaign to downplay negative impacts proposed rule will have on jobs, the economy and private landowners. October 23, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-WY), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member David Vitter (R-LA) led a group of 24 senators in calling out the Obama Administration for intentionally misleading Americans about the negative impacts of the proposed “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule.   With few exceptions, this proposed rule would give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) virtually unlimited regulatory authority over all state and local waters, no matter how remote or isolated such waters may be from truly navigable waters. The Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy (SBA) recently reported this rule will result in a “direct and potentially costly impact on small businesses.”   In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Secretary of the Army John M. McHugh, the senators outline and respond to some of the Administration’s misleading talking points about the rule.   “Undoubtedly, there is a disconnect between regulatory reality and the Administration’s utopian view of the proposed ‘waters of the United States’ rule. We believe this reflects the EPA’s and the Corps’ refusal to listen to the thousands of Americans who have asked that the proposed rule be immediately withdrawn. Indeed, there have been several examples of bias against the proposed rule’s critics.  For the record, we note here the ways in which the Administration has manipulated this rulemaking in ways that appear to be designed to prejudge the outcome:,” the Senators wrote.   The Senators respond in detail to:   • The Obama Administration claims that the proposed “Waters of the United States” rule responds to prior requests for a Clean Water Act rulemaking. • The Obama Administration insinuating that opposition to the proposed rule is equivalent to opposition to clean water. • EPA’s attempt to delegitimize questions and concerns surrounding the proposed rule. • EPA and the Corps blatant misrepresentation of the impacts of  increased Clean Water Act jurisdiction. • EPA’s social media advocacy in favor of the proposed “Waters of the United States” rule prejudices the rulemaking process.   In addition to Barrasso, Cruz, McConnell, and Vitter, the letter was signed by Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS), Mike Enzi (R-WY), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jim Risch (R-ID), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Tim Scott (R-SC), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Rand Paul (R-KY), Johnny Isakson (R-GA) and Mike Lee (R-UT).   Full text of the letter below: October 23, 2014   The Honorable Gina McCarthy                      The Honorable John M. McHugh Administrator                                                  Secretary of the Army Environmental Protection Agency                 101 Army Pentagon 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW                    Washington, D.C.  20310-0101 Washington, DC  20460   Re:      Proposed Rule to Define “Waters of the United States”             Docket ID No. EPA-HW-OW-2011-0880   Dear Administrator McCarthy and Secretary McHugh,   Despite numerous requests for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to withdraw the proposed “waters of the United States” rule, the Administration has shown it intends to pursue this unprecedented executive overreach, regardless of the consequences to the economy and to Americans’ property rights.  The proposed rule would provide EPA and the Corps (as well as litigious environmental groups) with the power to dictate the land use decisions of homeowners, small businesses, and local communities throughout the United States.  With few exceptions, it would give the agencies virtually unlimited regulatory authority over all state and local waters, no matter how remote or isolated such waters may be from truly navigable waters.  The proposed rule thus usurps legislative authority and Congress’s decision to predicate Clean Water Act jurisdiction on the law’s foundational term, “navigable waters.”   Because the proposed “waters of the United States” rule displaces state and local officials in their primary role in environmental protection, it is certain to have a damaging effect on economic growth.  Increased permitting costs, abandoned development projects, and the prospect of litigation resulting from the proposed rule will slow job-creation across the country.  Similar concerns led the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy (SBA) to recently call for the withdrawal of the proposed rule.  As SBA observed, the proposed rule will result in a “direct and potentially costly impact on small businesses,” and the “[t]he limited economic analysis which [EPA and the Corps] submitted with the rule provides ample evidence of a potentially significant economic impact.”[1]  We join SBA and continue to urge EPA and the Corps to withdraw the proposed rule.   Undoubtedly, there is a disconnect between regulatory reality and the Administration’s utopian view of the proposed “waters of the United States” rule.  We believe this reflects the EPA’s and the Corps’ refusal to listen to the thousands of Americans who have asked that the proposed rule be immediately withdrawn. Indeed, there have been several examples of bias against the proposed rule’s critics.  For the record, we note here the ways in which the Administration has manipulated this rulemaking in ways that appear to be designed to prejudge the outcome:   Bias Factor #1:    The Obama Administration Claims That the Proposed  “Waters of the United States” Rule Responds to Prior Requestsfor a Clean Water Act Rulemaking.   EPA has repeatedly claimed that the proposed “waters of the United States” rule responds to various requests for the agency to clarify the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction.  Likewise, the Administration stated last month that the proposed rule “is responsive to calls for rulemaking from Congress, industry, and community stakeholders as well as decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court.”[2]   Such assertions are wholly misleading.  A request for a regulatory clarification does not provide a license to run roughshod over the property rights of millions of Americans. Yet the Obama Administration has used prior rulemaking requests as an excuse to unilaterally advance a regulatory agenda that defies the jurisdictional limits established by Congress when it enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972.   In fact, the proposed rule would harm the very landowners, small businesses, and municipalities that expressed interest in working with EPA and the Corps to address Clean Water Act jurisdictional issues.  Thus, rather than respond to requests for a rulemaking, the proposed rule serves as an example for why so few Americans trust EPA.   Bias Factor #2:    The Obama Administration Insinuates That Opposition to the Proposed Rule Is Equivalent to Opposition to Clean Water.   When EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announced the proposed “waters of the United States” rule last March, she professed that the proposed rule “clarifies which waters are protected, and which waters are not.”[3]  Similarly, EPA’s Office of Water has suggested that those who “choose clean water” should support the proposed rule.[4]   These statements insinuate that the proposed rule’s critics oppose clean water.  This is an insulting ploy that belies the numerous efforts made in recent years by agriculture, industry, and local officials to improve water quality throughout the country.  It ignores the fact that nonfederal waterbodies are subject to local and state water quality regulations.  Moreover, the Clean Water Act’s emphasis that “[i]t is the policy of the Congress to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and rights of States to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution” negates the canard that choosing clean water requires acceding to unlimited federal regulatory authority.[5]   Bias Factor #3:    EPA Has Attempted to Delegitimize Questions and Concerns Surrounding the Proposed Rule.   Administrator McCarthy has described certain questions regarding the proposed rule as “ludicrous” and “silly.”[6]  Stakeholders have also observed how EPA officials have responded to concerns over the proposed rule with misrepresentations and a “knock on their intelligence.”[7]   EPA’s disparaging of the proposed rule’s critics serves no one.  If EPA believes concerns with the proposed rule are unwarranted, the appropriate course of action would be for the agency to respond formally in the context of the notice and comment procedures accompanying the current rulemaking.  Belittling the proposal’s critics only furthers the impression that EPA has predetermined the outcome of the “waters of the United States” rulemaking.   Bias Factor #4:    EPA and the Corps Have Blatantly Misrepresented the Impacts of  Increased Clean Water Act Jurisdiction.   EPA and the Corps have attempted to downplay the substantial outcry over the proposed “waters of the United States” rule as well as the prospect of federalizing thousands of ditches, ponds, streams, and other waterbodies.  They have done so by claiming that the impacts associated with increased Clean Water Act jurisdiction are insignificant.   For example, EPA claims the proposed rule “would not infringe on private property rights,” and that the Clean Water Act “is not a barrier to economic development.”[8]  The Corps has also stated that “when privately-owned aquatic areas are subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction . . . [that] results in little or no interference with the landowner’s use of his or her land.”[9]   These assertions strain credulity.  Given the history of regulatory and land use issues associated with the Clean Water Act (including numerous congressional hearings, Supreme Court cases, and real world examples of costs and hardship resulting from affirmative jurisdictional determinations), it is astonishing that any federal agency would claim that a designation of private property as “waters of the United States” does not affect the landowner’s property rights.   That such statements have come from EPA and the Corps suggests that the agencies either don’t appreciate the real-world impacts of the law they’re charged with administering, or they are intentionally trying to minimize the effect of the proposed rule.  It is likewise not surprising that SBA, an expert agency charged with representing the views of small entities before federal agencies and Congress, has also critiqued the manner in which EPA and the Corps have estimated the proposed rule’s impacts.[10]   Bias Factor #5:    EPA’s Social Media Advocacy in Favor of the Proposed “Watersof the United States” Rule Prejudices the Rulemaking Process.   EPA staff are asking the public to influence the agency’s view of the proposed “waters of the United States” rule.  In fact, the Twitter account for EPA’s Office of Water is now essentially a lobbyist for the proposed rule.  A few months ago, EPA established a website called “Ditch the Myth,” which declares that the proposed rule “clarifies protection under the Clean Water Act for streams and wetlands that form the foundation of the nation’s water resources.”[11]  The agency has now gone so far as to solicit others to seek to influence EPA regarding the proposed rule, urging social media users to “show their support for clean water and the agency’s proposal to protect it.”[12]  These actions raise serious questions about compliance with the Anti-Lobbying Act.[13]   The integrity of the rulemaking process is in jeopardy, if not already tainted.  EPA’s social media advocacy removes any pretense that the agency will act as a fair and neutral arbiter during the rulemaking.  Why should any landowner believe that EPA will seriously and meaningfully examine adverse comments regarding the proposed rule’s impact on ditches, for example, when the agency has already pronounced that the proposed rule “reduces regulation of ditches”?[14]  Why should state officials believe that their concerns with the proposed rule will be fully considered, when EPA has already determined that the proposed rule “fully preserves and respects the effective federal-state partnership . . . under the Clean Water Act”?[15]   EPA’s social media advocacy is a firm indicator that adverse comments will receive scant attention during the rulemaking period.  We question whether the “waters of the United States” rulemaking can be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and its objective that agencies “benefit from the expertise and input of the parties who file comments with regard to [a] proposed rule” and “maintain a flexible and open minded attitude towards its own rules.” [16]   We are dismayed that the Administration has failed to adhere to its impartial obligations      under the law.  Moreover, this bias has been reflected in comments from NGOs as well.  Based on similar statements from groups such as Organizing for Action, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Clean Water Action, it is as though the Administration and its environmentalist allies are of one mindset, eager to paint the proposed rule’s critics as anything other than concerned citizens.   At the same time, although the above groups are entitled to have a misguided and flawed perspective on the proposed “waters of the United States” rule, the Administration owes the American people a higher level of discourse.  To date, however, this rulemaking has been plagued by administrative bias and prejudicial grandstanding.   It is therefore incumbent on EPA and Corps to reverse course, withdraw the proposed rule, and commit to working more cooperatively with interested stakeholders in future regulatory proceedings.                                                                                ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=5b3c33b2-99ce-4c65-9cde-44ed2fb5f2d8,Obama Administration is Intentionally Misleading Americans on Proposed Water Rule,2014-10-17,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-WY), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Ranking Member David Vitter (R-LA) led a group of 24 senators in calling out the Obama Administration for intentionally misleading Americans about the negative impacts of the proposed Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. With few exceptions, this proposed rule would give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) virtually unlimited regulatory authority over all state and local waters, no matter how remote or isolated such waters may be from truly navigable waters. The Small Business Administrations Office of Advocacy (SBA) recently reported this rule will result in a direct and potentially costly impact on small businesses. In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Secretary of the Army John M. McHugh, the senators outline and respond to some of the Administrations misleading talking points about the rule. Undoubtedly, there is a disconnect between regulatory reality and the Administrations utopian view of the proposed waters of the United States rule. We believe this reflects the EPAs and the Corps refusal to listen to the thousands of Americans who have asked that the proposed rule be immediately withdrawn. Indeed, there have been several examples of bias against the proposed rules critics. For the record, we note here the ways in which the Administration has manipulated this rulemaking in ways that appear to be designed to prejudge the outcome:, the Senators wrote. The Senators respond in detail to: The Obama Administration claims that the proposed Waters of the United States rule responds to prior requests for a Clean Water Act rulemaking. The Obama Administration insinuating that opposition to the proposed rule is equivalent to opposition to clean water. EPAs attempt to delegitimize questions and concerns surrounding the proposed rule. EPA and the Corps blatant misrepresentation of the impacts of increased Clean Water Act jurisdiction. EPAs social media advocacy in favor of the proposed Waters of the United States rule prejudices the rulemaking process. In addition to Barrasso, Cruz, McConnell, and Vitter, the letter was signed by Senators Pat Roberts (R-KS), Mike Enzi (R-WY), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jim Risch (R-ID), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Tim Scott (R-SC), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Rand Paul (R-KY), Johnny Isakson (R-GA) and Mike Lee (R-UT). Full text of the letter below: October 23, 2014 The Honorable Gina McCarthy The Honorable John M. McHugh Administrator Secretary of the Army Environmental Protection Agency 101 Army Pentagon 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20310-0101 Washington, DC 20460 Re: Proposed Rule to Define Waters of the United States Docket ID No. EPA-HW-OW-2011-0880 Dear Administrator McCarthy and Secretary McHugh, Despite numerous requests for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to withdraw the proposed waters of the United States rule, the Administration has shown it intends to pursue this unprecedented executive overreach, regardless of the consequences to the economy and to Americans property rights. The proposed rule would provide EPA and the Corps (as well as litigious environmental groups) with the power to dictate the land use decisions of homeowners, small businesses, and local communities throughout the United States. With few exceptions, it would give the agencies virtually unlimited regulatory authority over all state and local waters, no matter how remote or isolated such waters may be from truly navigable waters. The proposed rule thus usurps legislative authority and Congresss decision to predicate Clean Water Act jurisdiction on the laws foundational term, navigable waters. Because the proposed waters of the United States rule displaces state and local officials in their primary role in environmental protection, it is certain to have a damaging effect on economic growth. Increased permitting costs, abandoned development projects, and the prospect of litigation resulting from the proposed rule will slow job-creation across the country. Similar concerns led the Small Business Administrations Office of Advocacy (SBA) to recently call for the withdrawal of the proposed rule. As SBA observed, the proposed rule will result in a direct and potentially costly impact on small businesses, and the [t]he limited economic analysis which [EPA and the Corps] submitted with the rule provides ample evidence of a potentially significant economic impact.[1] We join SBA and continue to urge EPA and the Corps to withdraw the proposed rule. Undoubtedly, there is a disconnect between regulatory reality and the Administrations utopian view of the proposed waters of the United States rule. We believe this reflects the EPAs and the Corps refusal to listen to the thousands of Americans who have asked that the proposed rule be immediately withdrawn. Indeed, there have been several examples of bias against the proposed rules critics. For the record, we note here the ways in which the Administration has manipulated this rulemaking in ways that appear to be designed to prejudge the outcome: Bias Factor #1: The Obama Administration Claims That the Proposed Waters of the United States Rule Responds to Prior Requestsfor a Clean Water Act Rulemaking. EPA has repeatedly claimed that the proposed waters of the United States rule responds to various requests for the agency to clarify the scope of Clean Water Act jurisdiction. Likewise, the Administration stated last month that the proposed rule is responsive to calls for rulemaking from Congress, industry, and community stakeholders as well as decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court.[2] Such assertions are wholly misleading. A request for a regulatory clarification does not provide a license to run roughshod over the property rights of millions of Americans. Yet the Obama Administration has used prior rulemaking requests as an excuse to unilaterally advance a regulatory agenda that defies the jurisdictional limits established by Congress when it enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972. In fact, the proposed rule would harm the very landowners, small businesses, and municipalities that expressed interest in working with EPA and the Corps to address Clean Water Act jurisdictional issues. Thus, rather than respond to requests for a rulemaking, the proposed rule serves as an example for why so few Americans trust EPA. Bias Factor #2: The Obama Administration Insinuates That Opposition to the Proposed Rule Is Equivalent to Opposition to Clean Water. When EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announced the proposed waters of the United States rule last March, she professed that the proposed rule clarifies which waters are protected, and which waters are not.[3] Similarly, EPAs Office of Water has suggested that those who choose clean water should support the proposed rule.[4] These statements insinuate that the proposed rules critics oppose clean water. This is an insulting ploy that belies the numerous efforts made in recent years by agriculture, industry, and local officials to improve water quality throughout the country. It ignores the fact that nonfederal waterbodies are subject to local and state water quality regulations. Moreover, the Clean Water Acts emphasis that [i]t is the policy of the Congress to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and rights of States to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution negates the canard that choosing clean water requires acceding to unlimited federal regulatory authority.[5] Bias Factor #3: EPA Has Attempted to Delegitimize Questions and Concerns Surrounding the Proposed Rule. Administrator McCarthy has described certain questions regarding the proposed rule as ludicrous and silly.[6] Stakeholders have also observed how EPA officials have responded to concerns over the proposed rule with misrepresentations and a knock on their intelligence.[7] EPAs disparaging of the proposed rules critics serves no one. If EPA believes concerns with the proposed rule are unwarranted, the appropriate course of action would be for the agency to respond formally in the context of the notice and comment procedures accompanying the current rulemaking. Belittling the proposals critics only furthers the impression that EPA has predetermined the outcome of the waters of the United States rulemaking. Bias Factor #4: EPA and the Corps Have Blatantly Misrepresented the Impacts of Increased Clean Water Act Jurisdiction. EPA and the Corps have attempted to downplay the substantial outcry over the proposed waters of the United States rule as well as the prospect of federalizing thousands of ditches, ponds, streams, and other waterbodies. They have done so by claiming that the impacts associated with increased Clean Water Act jurisdiction are insignificant. For example, EPA claims the proposed rule would not infringe on private property rights, and that the Clean Water Act is not a barrier to economic development.[8] The Corps has also stated that when privately-owned aquatic areas are subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction . . . [that] results in little or no interference with the landowners use of his or her land.[9] These assertions strain credulity. Given the history of regulatory and land use issues associated with the Clean Water Act (including numerous congressional hearings, Supreme Court cases, and real world examples of costs and hardship resulting from affirmative jurisdictional determinations), it is astonishing that any federal agency would claim that a designation of private property as waters of the United States does not affect the landowners property rights. That such statements have come from EPA and the Corps suggests that the agencies either dont appreciate the real-world impacts of the law theyre charged with administering, or they are intentionally trying to minimize the effect of the proposed rule. It is likewise not surprising that SBA, an expert agency charged with representing the views of small entities before federal agencies and Congress, has also critiqued the manner in which EPA and the Corps have estimated the proposed rules impacts.[10] Bias Factor #5: EPAs Social Media Advocacy in Favor of the Proposed Watersof the United States Rule Prejudices the Rulemaking Process. EPA staff are asking the public to influence the agencys view of the proposed waters of the United States rule. In fact, the Twitter account for EPAs Office of Water is now essentially a lobbyist for the proposed rule. A few months ago, EPA established a website called Ditch the Myth, which declares that the proposed rule clarifies protection under the Clean Water Act for streams and wetlands that form the foundation of the nations water resources.[11] The agency has now gone so far as to solicit others to seek to influence EPA regarding the proposed rule, urging social media users to show their support for clean water and the agencys proposal to protect it.[12] These actions raise serious questions about compliance with the Anti-Lobbying Act.[13] The integrity of the rulemaking process is in jeopardy, if not already tainted. EPAs social media advocacy removes any pretense that the agency will act as a fair and neutral arbiter during the rulemaking. Why should any landowner believe that EPA will seriously and meaningfully examine adverse comments regarding the proposed rules impact on ditches, for example, when the agency has already pronounced that the proposed rule reduces regulation of ditches?[14] Why should state officials believe that their concerns with the proposed rule will be fully considered, when EPA has already determined that the proposed rule fully preserves and respects the effective federal-state partnership . . . under the Clean Water Act?[15] EPAs social media advocacy is a firm indicator that adverse comments will receive scant attention during the rulemaking period. We question whether the waters of the United States rulemaking can be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and its objective that agencies benefit from the expertise and input of the parties who file comments with regard to [a] proposed rule and maintain a flexible and open minded attitude towards its own rules. [16] We are dismayed that the Administration has failed to adhere to its impartial obligations under the law. Moreover, this bias has been reflected in comments from NGOs as well. Based on similar statements from groups such as Organizing for Action, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Clean Water Action, it is as though the Administration and its environmentalist allies are of one mindset, eager to paint the proposed rules critics as anything other than concerned citizens. At the same time, although the above groups are entitled to have a misguided and flawed perspective on the proposed waters of the United States rule, the Administration owes the American people a higher level of discourse. To date, however, this rulemaking has been plagued by administrative bias and prejudicial grandstanding. It is therefore incumbent on EPA and Corps to reverse course, withdraw the proposed rule, and commit to working more cooperatively with interested stakeholders in future regulatory proceedings. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=8c6311f3-2f26-4d5f-814f-d3617169b326,Barrasso: Americans Deserve an Experienced Surgeon General,2014-10-16,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) called on President Obama to withdraw Dr. Vivek Murthys nomination to serve as U.S. Surgeon General and nominate a more qualified medical professional to serve in this position. Americans are justifiably worried about the spread of Ebola and concerned that it could reach their families. In the middle of growing uncertainty, President Obama and his team need to do everything possible to give the American people more confidence that their government is working effectively to prevent any more people from contracting this deadly virus. Now more than ever, our Nation needs to have an experienced and effective Surgeon General to help coordinate the governments Ebola strategy. It has been clear for almost a year that the Presidents nominee Dr. Vivek Murthy is not the right person for this consequential job. His nomination has stalled in the Senate for months because members from both sides of the aisle are concerned that Dr. Murthy is primarily known for his advocacy for gun control and his fundraising capabilities on behalf of the President. These qualifications will not solve the wide range of public health problems currently facing Americans. It is now time for President Obama to immediately withdraw Dr. Murthys nomination and promptly nominate an experienced professional who can help prevent the spread of Ebola and tackle other serious health challenges. Americans deserve a Surgeon General who has substantial experience in managing complex crises and delivering patient care. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141017003359/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=04a170d1-e457-529c-0612-3c92dc8cfe2c,Barrasso: Americans Deserve an Experienced Surgeon General,2014-10-16,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso: Americans Deserve an Experienced Surgeon General Calls on President Obama to Withdraw Murthy Nomination October 16, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) called on President Obama to withdraw Dr. Vivek Murthy’s nomination to serve as U.S. Surgeon General and nominate a more qualified medical professional to serve in this position.   “Americans are justifiably worried about the spread of Ebola and concerned that it could reach their families. In the middle of growing uncertainty, President Obama and his team need to do everything possible to give the American people more confidence that their government is working effectively to prevent any more people from contracting this deadly virus.   “Now more than ever, our Nation needs to have an experienced and effective Surgeon General to help coordinate the government’s Ebola strategy. It has been clear for almost a year that the President’s nominee Dr. Vivek Murthy is not the right person for this consequential job. His nomination has stalled in the Senate for months because members from both sides of the aisle are concerned that Dr. Murthy is primarily known for his advocacy for gun control and his fundraising capabilities on behalf of the President. These ‘qualifications’ will not solve the wide range of public health problems currently facing Americans.  “It is now time for President Obama to immediately withdraw Dr. Murthy’s nomination and promptly nominate an experienced professional who can help prevent the spread of Ebola and tackle other serious health challenges. Americans deserve a Surgeon General who has substantial experience in managing complex crises and delivering patient care.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20141024000055/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.NewsClips&ContentRecord_id=39a0d122-e495-7a82-3ed5-94259e21c580,Barrasso Visits Highland Park,2014-10-15,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Visits Highland Park October 15, 2014 Sheridan Media: Barrasso Visits Highland Park By Pat Blair on Wed 10/15/2014 05:22pm Senator John Barrasso visited Sheridan's Highland Park Elementary this week in honor of the school being named one of Wyoming's newest Blue Ribbon Schools, and the fourth school in Sheridan to earn that honor. In a talk to students and faculty Wednesday morning, the U.S. Senator said several Sheridan people have served in the U.S. Senate. He told students that any of them could one day be a senator, or could in fact be elected president. In an interview with Sheridan Media reporter Pat Blair before his talk to the students, the senator praised the Sheridan school system. He extended that praise to include the entire Sheridan community and a community to commit to education and young people. He added the opportunities for education continue with the Hathaway Scholarship that allows students to continue through college.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=481c0893-a6fc-4368-8f4f-e37e609c04d7,Enzi accepting applications to fill spring 2015 page position,2014-10-15,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is encouraging Wyoming juniors in high school to apply to be a Senate page for the spring session in Washington, DC. There are a total of 30 page positions in the United States Senate each session and the deadline for spring applications is Wednesday, November 5.  “I am fortunate to have the opportunity to sponsor a young adult from Wyoming to serve in one of these positions,” Enzi said. “The page program allows students to have a front row seat during debates in the U.S. Senate and will provide experiences that participants will carry with them for the rest of their lives.” Page duties consist primarily of delivering correspondence and legislative material at the Capitol. Other duties include preparing the Senate chamber for sessions and carrying bills and amendments to the appropriate people on the Senate floor. Pages attend classes at the Senate Page School from 6:15 a.m. until 9:45 a.m. and then work until 4:00 p.m. or until the Senate adjourns for the day. The Senate Page School provides a rigorous academic course of studies and the necessary requisites for a junior year course of study. Spring page eligibility is limited to juniors in high school who will be 16 or 17 years old on or before the date of appointment.  Applicants must have a minimum grade point average of 3.0. Pages live in Webster Hall located near the Capitol and receive a stipend to cover the cost of the residence. Breakfast and dinner are provided each day.  The spring  session runs from January 20, 2015 – June 5, 2015.  The application and additional information can be found by going to www.enzi.senate.gov. Further questions can be directed to Dianne Kirkbride in Senator Enzi’s Cheyenne office at 307-772-2477 or Dianne_Kirkbride@enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=feaa3e30-39fe-409a-a629-0c2e2de0c131,Spring internship opportunities for Senator Enzis office,2014-10-08,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is encouraging college students and graduates to apply for an internship in his Washington, D.C. office this spring. The deadline for applications is November 6. The internship offers experience in the direct operations of our nation’s government. Interns have the ability to network, develop job skills and gain knowledge to further their education and future career choices, according to Enzi. “An internship in my office is rich with opportunity and provides students with firsthand knowledge and experience,” Enzi said. “Interns are an important part of the office. They also have the chance to meet some remarkable people, work on projects and experience the dynamic of living in Washington, D.C.” Typical intern duties include giving Wyoming constituents Capitol tours and conducting research for legislative aides, in addition to administrative and clerical tasks. Interns also have the opportunity to attend committee hearings and lectures and observe floor proceedings. Senator Enzi provides a monthly stipend of $1,600 for his interns and many colleges typically offer school credit for internship programs. Senator Enzi encourages candidates to look into specific programs provided by their schools and take full advantage of their time in his office. The spring internship for 2015 runs from January 12 to May 22. Priority is given to students and graduates from Wyoming, or those studying in Wyoming, who have achieved at least a sophomore status at an accredited university or college. Individuals interested in an internship with Senator Enzi’s office should apply online at www.enzi.senate.gov. Select the “Students” tab and click on “Internship Information.” For additional information, contact Enzi’s Internship Coordinator Alec Hinojosa at (202) 224-3424 or at intern_coordinator@enzi.senate.gov.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/the-enzi-insider?ContentRecord_id=6575f69d-0d97-43fb-aec7-63f5f69b0a1c,The Enzi Insider September,2014-10-03,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Legislation Enzi sponsored or cosponsored: Small Airport Regulation Relief Act – would ensure that smaller airports can continue to receive FAA Airport Improvement Program funds for important safety enhancements, efficiency improvements, facility upgrades and other air service infrastructure projects. The Small Airport Regulation Relief Act, S. 2848, was introduced by Senator Mike Enzi. Stopping Automatic Re-enrollment of Beneficiaries for Health Insurance Exchange Plans with Increased Costs - would put a hold on automatic reenrollment for more costly exchange plans from 2014 to 2015, ensuring that adequate information is available for enrollees about their options and health insurance costs. The Health Care Consumer Choices Preservation Act, S. 2801, was introduced by Senator Mike Enzi. Reduce Influx of Alien Minors Crossing Border– would reduce the influx of unaccompanied alien minors crossing the southern border. S. 2743. The Protecting Children and America’s Homeland Act was introduced by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX). National Labor Relations Reform Act – would reform the National Labor Relations Board by ending partisan advocacy, rein in the general counsel and encourage timely decision-making. The National Labor Relations Reform Act, S. 2814, is led by Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Passed the National Bison Day Resolution – on September 17th the Senate passed S.Res 543, which designates November 1, 2014 as National Bison Day. The measure was introduced by Senator Mike Enzi. National Character Counts Week Resolution – would designate the week of October 19, 2014 as “National Character Counts Week.” The resolution calls the nation's attention to the benefits of good character and character education, with the hope that children across the nation will participate in character building activities in their schools. S. Res 272 is led by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Small Business Saturday Resolution – would designate November 29, 2014 as Small Business Saturday. Resolution was led by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Jim Risch (R-ID). National Save for Retirement Week Resolution – would express support for the goals and ideals of National Save for Retirement Week (week of October 19, 2014), including raising public awareness of the various tax-preferred retirement vehicles and increasing personal financial literacy. S.Res 222 is cosponsored with Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD). Congressional Letters Enzi signed: Comment Period Extension for Power Plant Rule – asked Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy to extend the comment period on the greenhouse gas performance standards for existing power plants for at least 60 days. Letter was led by Senators Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) and Deb Fischer (R-NE). Requesting Information on the Disciplinary Actions Taken Against VA Employees - requested the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) office of the inspector general to release the reports that led to the disciplinary actions against employees at the Cheyenne VA Medical Center and the VISN 19-VA Rocky Mountain Network. Letter was cosigned by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and Representative Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). Designating Russian Separatist Groups in Ukraine as Terrorists - requested President Obama to designate separatist groups in Ukraine suspected of shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 as foreign terrorist organizations. Requested a Plan on ISIS fighters Holding US Passports - requested the Administration provide a plan and additional information on ISIS fighters holding U.S. passports or visas. Letter led by Senator John Thune (R-SD) and Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) to Secretary of State John Kerry and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson. Concern with Compliance for Educational Disability Programs - expressed concern and requested information about the U.S. Department of Education’s recent decision to base determination of a state’s compliance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in part on the performance and participation rate of students with disabilities on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Letter was led by Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and sent to the U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Supporting Flexibility in Programs of All Inclusive Care for the Elderly -  endorsed flexibility in site and program function for the Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) to allow them to be more efficient and reach more of their target population, many of whom are dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid. Letter was led by Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Bob Casey (D-PA) to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Marilyn Tavenner. Voicing Concern about Cuts to Physician Reimbursement for Cancer Treatment – highlighted concerns about a proposed change in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policy regarding how specialized radiation oncology vault systems are accounted for in provider reimbursement. Letter was led by Senators Richard Burr (R-NC) and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) to CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner. Supporting Community Health Centers - expressed support of continued funding for the Community Health Centers to the leaders of both parties in the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Letter was led by Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO) and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). Requested FCC Attention to Rural Broadband Needs – requested the Federal Communication Commissions (FCC) consider lengthening the time to implement new broadband speeds since the FCC changed the order from 4 Mbps to 10 Mbps, but did not extend the timeframe for this increase above the original five years. Also requested the FCC carefully reassess and target their maps to accurately show serviced areas during the Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II implementation, a program to expand broadband to rural areas. Letter was led by Wyoming’s U.S. Senators Mike Enzi, John Barrasso and Representative Cynthia Lummis. Advocating Last In First Out Inventory Accounting Method – advocated for preserving the Last In First Out (LIFO) inventory accounting method, a way in which a taxpayer with inventory may determine the value of his inventory and his cost of goods sold for tax purposes. Letter was led by Senator Mike Enzi and Senator Joe Donnelly (D-IN) to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. Call Completion Letter to FCC – urged the Federal Communication Commissions to complete its work on an order it approved unanimously in October 2013 to address and better identify call completion problems. The commission solicited comments and feedback on the order, but has not followed through to complete the process since the comment period ended. Letter was led by Senator Mike Enzi. Recognizing Art Everywhere US – letter to colleagues to bring attention to a unique national art show in August called Art Everywhere US. Included in the exhibit was a piece titled “Green River Cliffs, Wyoming” by Thomas Moran. Other Legislatives Activities: Floor Speech on Penny Plan and Biennial Budgeting - delivered a floor statement on the need to pass legislation providing for the Penny Plan and biennial budgeting. Floor Statement Recognizing the 47th Anniversary a Portable Classroom Program – submitted for the record a floor speech recognizing Dr. John Arnold and the 47th anniversary of Project Portable Practical Educational Preparation, a program that teaches English and basic education from portable arenas, such as buses.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=F6B94E1B-D307-41BF-009F-5A318D5C8FAB,Barrasso Statement on Anniversary of Launch of Obamacare Exchange,2014-10-01,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=b227fcd6-397e-4fd9-978a-4cfdf9cb231d,Barrasso Statement on Anniversary of Launch of Obamacare Exchange,2014-10-01,2014,2014-10,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement on the one year anniversary of the launch of the Obamacare exchange: Senate Democrats and President Obama like to pretend that the majority of Obamacares failures surrounded the disastrous launch of the website a year ago today. The reality is that the $2 billion website fiasco was the tip of the iceberg of Obamacare problems. Since the exchange launched, millions of Americans have seen their coverage canceled, their premiums skyrocket, their insurance denied by health care providers, and their freedoms eroded because of Obamacare. Families should now brace themselves for 2015 when their premiums will get even more expensive and their provider networks will get even smaller. Its telling that Democrats and Washington bureaucrats have used every trick possible to hide these negative side effects until after the 2014 elections. Theres a reason why the law remains unpopular and thats because its not working like the President promised it would. If Republicans control the Senate next year, we will do everything we can to help people who have been hurt by the law, lower costs and improve care for all Americans. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=0b33456c-9c9c-463e-b8c2-3b075033abf5,"Wyden, Barrasso: Forest Service Photo Rule Must Not Trample First Amendment Rights",2014-09-30,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. Senators Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and John Barrasso, R-Wyo., today called for the immediate withdrawal of a misguided U.S. Forest Service rule, which would require permits and fees potentially up to $1,500 from reporters and bloggers who take photographs or videos in wilderness areas. In a joint letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Wyden and Barrasso wrote that the proposed rule clearly violates the Constitutions First Amendment protections for press freedom. The proposed directive is a direct violation of American First Amendment rights and likely unconstitutional, the senators wrote. This creates a serious litigation risk for the Forest Service, while providing no clear benefits for wilderness management. Furthermore, the creation of a potentially expensive and burdensome permitting process for those who wish to document the beauty of natural places runs directly counter to the spirit of the Wilderness Act. It is especially galling that the agency would propose these rules on the 50th anniversary of that landmark law. These lands are meant to be enjoyed by all Americans, not kept from them, Wyden and Barrasso wrote. The ability to photograph, experience and learn about these places should not be unduly restricted. The full letter is available here. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=c6c34d76-9075-47d4-b657-16e6101af6e5,WY Delegation Announces Service Academy Information Session in Sheridan,2014-09-30,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"CHEYENNE U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis invite junior high and high school students and their parents to attend a service academy information session in Sheridan on October 11, 2014. The information session has been organized to help students, their parents and youth influencers across Wyoming better understand the nomination and appointment process. Representatives from the U.S. Air Force Academy and Wyoming congressional offices will be on hand to reveal the opportunities at our nations military service academies (Air Force, West Point, Naval, Coast Guard and Merchant Marine) and the two-pronged process for application and nomination to these universities. Service academy listening session will occur at the following time and location: Saturday, October 11th 11:00 am 1:00 pm MT Edward A. Whitney Academic Center Room W153 Sheridan College 3059 Coffeen Ave. Sheridan, WY 82801 For more information and to RSVP, please call Senator Barrassos Cheyenne office at (307) 772-2451. Additionally, information on Congressional nominations and academy applications may be found on the delegations websites: www.enzi.senate.gov/ www.barrasso.senate.gov/ www.lummis.house.gov ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=84e690b1-8521-49f0-a83c-7a71764d90ea,"Delegation compliments award-winning schools in Powell, Cody and Sheridan",2014-09-30,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The U.S. Department of Education has chosen three Wyoming schools, one each in Powell, Sheridan and Cody, as National Blue Ribbon Schools for 2014. Wyoming’s Congressional delegation praised Southside Elementary School in Powell, Highland Park Elementary in Sheridan and Glenn Livingston Elementary School in Cody. U.S. Senators Mike Enzi, John Barrasso and Representative Cynthia Lummis, all R-Wyo., said the hard work, dedication to learning and innovative approach to education in these schools is shared in schools throughout the state and the delegation is pleased these northern Wyoming elementary schools have been nationally recognized. U.S. Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan has invited two representatives from every Blue Ribbon school for a Nov. 10 and 11 recognition ceremony in Washington, D.C. The Blue Ribbon Schools award honors schools which have achieved high levels of performance or made significant improvements in closing the achievement gaps among student subgroups. More information about the Blue Ribbon program can be obtained at: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/nclbbrs/2014/index.html.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=a0a9c3ed-17af-47fb-837b-84ca45e7c1c9,"Barrasso on Fox News Sunday: Discusses ISIS, Syria, Iraq and Holder",2014-09-29,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C.U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) appeared on Fox News Sunday this morning to talk about American and international efforts to combat the terrorist group ISIS in Syria and Iraq. He also said that the Senate should not confirm a new Attorney General during a lame-duck session of Congress.Below are key excerpts of the interview: On Congressional Authority: Well, I think the president has an obligation to call us back tomorrow to start this debate. We have been adjourned now until after the elections, this is the earliest Congress has adjourned in over 50 years. I don't think Harry Reid wants this debate or the vote. I think we have an obligation, the Prime Minister of Britain called the British Parliament back. No member of Congress should be left off the hook. The Constitution is clear, Article I, Section 8, powers vetted in Congress to declare war. If you go back to the founding documents of this nation, the decision of going to war was to be made by people closest to the ground, the elected officials, to make those decisions. I think that the public deserves it, they should be demanding it. The president is putting together an international coalition. It's time to put the coalition together at home as well. On Arming and Training Syrian Rebels: Absolutely. I've been calling for the support of the Syrian rebels for years. I met with a number of them in Germany a couple years ago. I don't know how many of them are still alive. So, I absolutely want to do that. We need to do it all. I believe that the president is right when he calls to degrade and destroy ISIS, the bombing will only go so far to degrade, but will not destroy. So yes, arm the Kurds, help the Iraqi army, help with training the Syrians, but you have to face reality here. Over the next year, the best they can do with vetting and training, equipping, is to get you to about 5,000 members of the Free Syrian Army against a bloodthirsty group of over thirty thousand, two thousand with European passportsanother 100 with American passports. I think the president needs to work more closely with his generalstheyve got to get rid of this distrust that is between the two of them. On Attorney General Nomination: It does need to wait. I do oppose any vote on a successor during the lame-duck session. If it happens it would be the first time since the civil war that we've had a vote on an attorney general in a lame-duck when parties switched. But this shows the desperation, and how the Democrats feel threatened that theyre going to lose control of the Senate. And if this happens, this would be Harry Reids final act in a tragic play that has been his legacy in Harry Reid's lead in leadership. Specifically with Holder, I mean to me he has been a political protector, a partisan protector of the president. We need an attorney general for the people, not a presidential protector and a puppet of the administration. And if they try to do this in the lame-duck session, this will clearly poison the well, and will define what we're going to see for the next two years, the final two years of the presidency of Barack Obama. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=ab45bf83-65ad-4df3-8e70-1b5a0d429d0c,"At energy rally in Gillette, Enzi calls on community supported by coal to give support to coal",2014-09-29,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"At an affordable energy rally in Gillette on Thursday, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., called on folks to speak out against the outdated myths that portray coal as a bad energy source for America.   “The problem with myths is that they go around the world twice while the truth is getting its tennis shoes on. And so we’ve got to be a part of the truth squad and get that straightened out. It’s a huge job. We need your help on it. Talk to your friends, your neighbors, your relatives, especially in other states,” Enzi said. Enzi said Gillette is the energy capital of the nation and he emphasized that when it comes to keeping energy prices from rising and supporting manufacturing jobs at home, America needs to support all of its affordable energy, including coal. “As the cost of power goes up, manufacturing leaves this country. It is essential for almost everything we touch that there be some form of energy used to create it. As (anti-energy policies) drive those prices of energy up, we are driving businesses overseas. The president just wants to pass a law that they can’t go overseas. That’s not the answer. Make it beneficial for them to be in the United States and we won’t have a problem,” Enzi said. “The president says that jobs are important. But what he says and what he does are a lot different, because he hinders jobs at every turn. His regulations are putting us in a hole.” http://www.gillettechamber.com/events/Affordable-Energy-Rally-4176/details",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=807b8feb-0f81-4cec-8450-ad80fa51b16f,Senators target rural call completion issues,2014-09-26,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. -- All Americans should have access to reliable telephone service. Unfortunately, chronic call completion issues exist for too many rural American families and businesses, affecting commerce, public safety, and even connecting with family and friends. To address this issue, U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., and a group of western and rural serving senators sent a letter to the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today asking the commission to take the necessary steps to address call completion issues. The senators urged the FCC to complete its work on an order it approved unanimously in October 2013 to address and better identify the call completion problem. Since that time, the commission solicited comments and feedback on the order, but has not followed through to complete the process since the comment period ended on February 28. The senators noted that, Americans in rural areas will continue to experience subpar service without the commissions commitment to move the order forward. Call completion issues range from calls that are extremely poor in quality, to frequently dropped calls, to calls that simply do not complete. The eight Republican senators who also co-signed the letter include: John Thune, R-S.D., Pat Roberts, R-Kan., James Inhofe, R-Okla., Jerry Moran, R-Kan., John Boozman, R-Ark., John Hoeven, R-N.D., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Deb Fischer, R-Neb. Click here to read the full letter. -end-",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=99bed43a-85d5-41a1-92cc-5ea57b6152aa,Senators target rural call completion issues,2014-09-26,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"All Americans should have access to reliable telephone service. Unfortunately, chronic call completion issues exist for too many rural American families and businesses, affecting commerce, public safety, and even connecting with family and friends. To address this issue, U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., and a group of western and rural serving senators sent a letter to the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) today asking the commission to take the necessary steps to address call completion issues. The senators urged the FCC to complete its work on an order it approved unanimously in October 2013 to address and better identify the call completion problem. Since that time, the commission solicited comments and feedback on the order, but has not followed through to complete the process since the comment period ended on February 28. The senators noted that, “Americans in rural areas will continue to experience subpar service without the commission’s commitment to move the order forward.” Call completion issues range from calls that are extremely poor in quality, to frequently dropped calls, to calls that simply do not complete. The eight Republican senators who also co-signed the letter include: John Thune, R-S.D., Pat Roberts, R-Kan., James Inhofe, R-Okla., Jerry Moran, R-Kan., John Boozman, R-Ark., John Hoeven, R-N.D., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Deb Fischer, R-Neb. Click here to read the full letter.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=0d319d07-69ac-4f2b-ab24-3fbf572438cf,Enzi statement on Eric Holder resignation,2014-09-25,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., issued the following statement today following the announcement that Attorney General Eric Holder will resign in the coming months. “I’ve always expressed my concerns with Eric Holder being the attorney general. I did not support his confirmation in 2009 and have repeatedly called on him to resign due to his willingness to obstruct everyone, even Congress, when questioned about controversial decisions he has made. “The Department of Justice is supposed to be the chief law enforcement entity of government, not a shield from transparency and accountability. Hopefully Eric Holder leaving his post will lead the way for needed changes at the department that will help restore America’s faith in the notion that no one is above the law, even those in government.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=A0111437-B63F-B708-49B1-3A29CC94E011,Delegation response to reinstatement of federal management of wolves,2014-09-24,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f6e58e5e-0452-42c6-a8ba-22e02e2232c9,Delegation response to reinstatement of federal management of wolves,2014-09-24,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Washington, D.C. A recent decision by a federal judge in Washington, D.C. will reinstate protections for the gray wolf in Wyoming under the Endangered Species Act. The decision came after Wyomings state wolf management plan was challenged by environmental groups. Wyomings congressional delegation, U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, were disappointed by parts of the ruling but encouraged by Wyomings decision to keep fighting to manage its own wildlife. Ever since the federal government decided to reintroduce wolves into Wyoming, our state has had to fight for the right to manage these predators which are regularly a problem for outfitters, ranchers and game populations, said Enzi. This isnt a new issue. Its gone back and forth for decades. I trust Wyoming wildlife managers over environmental groups and Washington judges for how to best manage our states wildlife. Those closest to the problem have a better understanding of how to manage it, and Id encourage those who think wolves need more federal protections to spend a day in the field with ranchers and outfitters to see the impact of wolves up close and personal. Wyoming is in the best position to manage the wolf, not Washington, said Barrasso. Wyoming has honored its commitment and put together a solid and working plan to protect the states wolf population. I made that clear to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe today. I support the Governors efforts to address issues raised by the court, and look forward to working with the State to finally resolve this issue once and for all. Wyoming has a winning record on species management, including the wolf even after it was foisted upon Wyoming by the federal government,"" said Rep. Lummis. This record speaks volumes about the expertise and trustworthiness of Wyomings wildlife management and shows that there is no justification for the doubt that a Washington judge and animal rights groups have in Wyoming. The people who live in these places see and understand the issues far better than a judge thousands of miles away reading a piece of paper. I look forward to working with the rest of our delegation and our governor to protect Wyoming's balanced and science-based wolf management plan. These lawsuits and those who bring them, use the Endangered Species Act as a club to beat down state management plans that have been worked on and developed with input by all stakeholders. Its an abuse of the law and another clear example for why the Endangered Species Act needs to be fixed, added Enzi. -end-",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=beaa82b0-3f20-450e-aef2-ff1b77bb65c3,Delegation response to reinstatement of federal management of wolves,2014-09-24,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"A recent decision by a federal judge in Washington, D.C. will reinstate protections for the gray wolf in Wyoming under the Endangered Species Act. The decision came after Wyoming’s state wolf management plan was challenged by environmental groups. Wyoming’s congressional delegation, U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, and U.S. Representative Cynthia Lummis, were disappointed by parts of the ruling but encouraged by Wyoming’s decision to keep fighting to manage its own wildlife. “Ever since the federal government decided to reintroduce wolves into Wyoming, our state has had to fight for the right to manage these predators which are regularly a problem for outfitters, ranchers and game populations,” said Enzi. “This isn’t a new issue. It’s gone back and forth for decades. I trust Wyoming wildlife managers over environmental groups and Washington judges for how to best manage our state’s wildlife. Those closest to the problem have a better understanding of how to manage it, and I’d encourage those who think wolves need more federal protections to spend a day in the field with ranchers and outfitters to see the impact of wolves up close and personal.” “Wyoming is in the best position to manage the wolf, not Washington,” said Barrasso. “Wyoming has honored its commitment and put together a solid and working plan to protect the state’s wolf population. I made that clear to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe today. I support the Governor’s efforts to address issues raised by the court, and look forward to working with the State to finally resolve this issue once and for all.” “Wyoming has a winning record on species management, including the wolf even after it was foisted upon Wyoming by the federal government,"" said Rep. Lummis. “This record speaks volumes about the expertise and trustworthiness of Wyoming’s wildlife management and shows that there is no justification for the doubt that a Washington judge and animal rights groups have in Wyoming. The people who live in these places see and understand the issues far better than a judge thousands of miles away reading a piece of paper. I look forward to working with the rest of our delegation and our governor to protect Wyoming's balanced and science-based wolf management plan.” “These lawsuits and those who bring them, use the Endangered Species Act as a club to beat down state management plans that have been worked on and developed with input by all stakeholders. It’s an abuse of the law and another clear example for why the Endangered Species Act needs to be fixed,” added Enzi.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=ed3a411b-7120-4854-8bd9-72d71d84f478,The Best Jobs Creating Bill Youve Never Heard Of,2014-09-23,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"While travelling around Wyoming this August, I heard a recurring question from constituents, “When is Congress going to do something to help those without a job get back on their feet?”. Apparently good news doesn’t deserve good press. A jobs bill that I worked on for over a decade passed the Senate 95 to 3. This is very bipartisan and a very important bill that will help fill the hundreds of thousands of good jobs that are still open across the country because of a lack of folks with the skill set needed to perform those jobs. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) was signed into law by the president at the end of July. It will transform the sometimes bureaucratic federal job training system into a streamlined program that can help many more people by teaching them the skills needed to succeed. Through its job training programs, WIOA will help improve our currently stagnant economy and foster an economic environment for private sector job creation. If it works as it should, then hundreds of thousands of people will be able to move into available jobs that are vacant because folks don’t have the right skills. Local businesses will finally be able to find workers in their communities who have the particular skill sets they need to grow and expand their businesses. The job training programs that are included in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act are what will help get our economy going again. But it doesn’t just add programs. The bill is designed to eliminate 15 programs identified as ineffective or duplicative and 21 federal mandates on state and local workforce boards. It will also provide stronger accountability for taxpayer dollars by applying common performance measures for all programs with a focus on employment outcomes and employer satisfaction with trained workers. This law also gives authority back to state governments and equips them with tools to help small businesses. It provides governors and state workforce directors with what they told us they needed — flexibility to use money where it is most needed. With this reauthorization, states will be better able to meet regional economic demands and provide training for jobs where quality workers are in short supply. We can help people get back to work by offering training for the skills and services needed in our communities. State and local officials are in the best position to determine the labor and job training needs of communities across the nation and this law will allow them to make these determinations. It takes hard work and dedication to pass a good bill, and you can’t give up just because it’s difficult. Having a skilled workforce shouldn’t be a partisan issue. This should be an area where we can always find common ground and work together to ensure our workers have the skills they need to compete in the ever-changing global economy. This law sends a clear message that we are serious about helping our American workers and employers remain competitive, and that we are serious about closing the skills gap that is putting America’s long-term competitiveness in jeopardy. As our economy changes, this law goes a long way to ensuring our workforce will be better prepared.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=120926e9-6579-48ae-bb17-9354495d71aa,Enzi rejects catch-all lump spending deal,2014-09-19,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The U.S. Senate Thursday night followed the House’s passage of a continuing resolution that will fund the government through December 11. The price tag is at a rate of $1.1 trillion annually and includes authorization for the training and arming of certain rebels in Syria in hopes they will fight against the terrorist organization ISIS. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo. voted against the bill. “Less than a full day on the Senate floor. Spending beyond budget caps. Authorizations for our military to arm and train Syrian rebels, but no amendments, no meaningful debate. One vote. Take it or leave it. I’m not going to take it,” said Enzi. “This is not how Congress was designed to work.  It’s not how it should work. It’s not how it could work. These catch-all spending bills with no opportunities for amendments are part of the reason we have a country deep in debt and a Congress with an approval rating lower than root canals or colonoscopies.” Enzi continues to advocate for separate authorization and appropriation for the twelve areas of government. He has introduced biennial budget legislation that would force the federal government to budget over a two-year period, instead of the one-year window as it does now, giving Congress more time to scrutinize spending and eliminate duplication and waste. Enzi said the situation with ISIS in the Middle East is far too complex and important to stuff into an appropriations bill at the last minute. “ISIS has killed Americans in a brutal fashion and seeks to do us maximum harm. We need to destroy this group, but I still have concerns about how it’s done and think individual members of Congress should be able to offer their ideas not only for discussion, but actual votes,” Enzi said. Congress is set to go out of session this week until after the November elections. Enzi plans to spend the time in Wyoming visiting different businesses, attending civic events and meeting with individual Wyoming constituents.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=d4a4a4d3-3b0d-436c-bb69-7c0c72e9d773,Barrasso Calls Out Obama Administration for 6 Years of Keystone XL Obstruction,2014-09-18,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) delivered the following remarks at a press conference marking the sixth anniversary of TransCanadas original application for a presidential permit to build the Keystone XL pipeline: Excerpts of his remarks: First of all, I want to thank Senator Hoeven for his forceful, determined leadership on this project. It has always been bipartisan. You take a look at the number of people supporting itthis is bipartisan commitment to the jobs, to the energy that the American people want. Think about itits about energy security, economic growth. It is good for the country, it brings in additional tax revenue and makes us less dependent on energy from foreign sources. So here we are today, were in session for a total of what, two weeks, of a total of three months if you take a look August 1st all the way until election daytalking three months of timeand were in session two weeks. Yet Harry Reid will not allow a vote on this important thing. John had said, whats going on here? We know whats going on. President Obama and Harry Reid are held hostage by environmental extremists who do not want to vote on this piece of legislation. Thats whats really going on here. This is all about funding of the Democratic Party by liberal groups who are opposed to American energy production and American energy opportunities. And thats what were dealing with. Right now, today. It has been six years. Over a year and a half ago I asked President Obama during our lunch, when will we know about the Keystone XL Pipeline, and he said by the end of this calendar year. That was the year 2013. Were now in year 2014, and thats coming to an end, and still no vote on the Senate floor. Thats absolutely wrong. The American people know what they want. They want jobs, they want energy, they want action, were not getting it, we dont have the accountability that we need from this Administration and from this Majority Leader. If were fortunate enough to find ourselves in the Majority, what youre going to see is a Chairman of the Energy Committee named Lisa Murkowski from Alaska, and its not going to be any just show votes in the Committee that they know are not going to get to the floor, which is whats been happening now on the Energy Committee under the current Chairman. What youre going to see is actual votes being taken, cast, and the bills that are passed through the energy Committee getting to the floor of the United States Senate, and I believe well get bipartisan support and will end up on the Presidents desk. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=95e2836b-d925-426b-9ee7-f134499bf5c3,Transition key to any changes in energy tax policy,2014-09-17,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"If Congress were to suddenly change tax policy so homeowners could no longer deduct from their taxes the interest they pay on their mortgages, it would create major financial problems for a lot of people.  Though this is not something that he sees happening, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., used this example at a U.S. Senate Finance Committee hearing today on the energy tax code, to illustrate what would happen to oil and gas companies if, as some have proposed, Congress were to suddenly take away tax deductions important to them. “If we were to eliminate some of these things (deductions) overnight, we would create a real cash flow problem in the United States,” Enzi said. Well-thought-out, incremental changes with time built in for people and companies to adjust to the new policies is essential to any tax reform, according to Enzi, who worked as an accountant before being elected. Enzi said oil and gas development is as important as development of renewable energy and when discussing the alteration of energy tax policy for different sectors, great care needs to be made to ensure different deductions are being compared accurately. “One of the tax increases the Administration wants is changing the deductibility of intangible drilling and development costs…this is more comparable to amortization and depreciation so the loss of this deduction for producers would reduce their available capital immensely,” Enzi said.  Enzi believes this could mean less energy production, less energy and higher energy prices for everyone. Enzi and other members of the Finance Committee heard from representatives of the oil and gas industry, renewable energy sector, academics and others. To access testimony and video from the hearing click here.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=0485E179-9550-CBB3-EA8C-650CB9D5732E,Barrasso: GAO Report Confirms Healthcare.Gov Remains a Headache,2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=08c01058-a22b-4214-80b5-44a51bac35a5,Barrasso: Devastating Obamacare Side Effects Continue to Hurt Americans,2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) outlined how the Presidents health care law is leading to higher premiums, less access to care and lower take-home pay for people across the country. Excerpts of his remarks: I come to the floor today, as Republicans have come to the floor week after week, ever since the president's health care law was passed. Now, I have many concerns about the way this health care law is impacting families in my home state of Wyoming as well as families all across the country. In one state after another, people are feeling the devastating side effects of the health care law. President Obama says Democrats who voted for the health care law should, as he said forcefully defend and be proud of the law. I heard earlier today that Kaiser Family Foundation and their report being quoted what they said is that premiums have gone up on average $3,500 from 2009 for family workplace coverage, plus the deductibles are higher. So premiums are up $3,500 since 2009 for family workplace coverage and the deductibles are higher, higher money paid out of pocket. The President of the United States said they would go down by $2,500 per family. Nancy Pelosi said they would go down for everyone. She was Speaker of the House. She was the one who said, first you have to pass it before you get to find out what's in it. Americans have found out what's in it, and they don't like it. People do not like what they see with the president's health care law. It continues to be very unpopular. So I ask, is the president really proud that families all across the country are suffering because of his health care law and the many dangerous side effects that they're now having to live with? Let's look around the country a little bit and see what the new headlines are bringing and there are new headlines every day. In Virginia, a television station in Charlottesville, WVIR they reported on what's happening there. Last Wednesday they had a report that said nearly a quarter million Virginians will have to change their insurance plans this fall. The president said, if you like what you have, you can keep it. Not in Virginia. A quarter of a million Virginians will have to change their insurance plans this fall. It's because the plans don't include all of a very long list of things that Washington mandates say have to be offered. So, even if people have an insurance plan that worked well for their family, that met their needs, the president and Democrats in this body say, sorry, You can't keep it. The president said if you like your plan, you can keep it. What happened there? At least 27 Democrats stood on the floor of the United States Senate and said, if you like what you have, you can keep it. If you like your plan, they said, you can keep your plan. What happened? Was this intentionally to deceive the American people? Why are nearly a quarter of a million Virginians then losing their insurance plan? The head of the Virginia association of health plans says it's simple. He told the TV station, he said, we're not allowed to offer those plans anymore. The president said they could. Now these people are being told by the law they're not allowed to even offer the plans to people who want to buy them. It works for them. Are the Democrats in the Senate willing to forcefully defend the fact that 250,000 people in Virginia will have to buy new plans that they don't want, don't need, many can't afford? With all of these additional things that Washington says have to be included. To me, that's a very expensive and unnecessary side effect of the president's health care law. But its not just your health care plan. People are concerned about keeping their doctors keeping their hospitals that they go to in their own communities. Let's take a look at what happened in Connecticut in a report that came out, Hartford Courant: Five Connecticut hospitals could leave Anthem's Network on October 1. What about the people that go to those hospitals that get their health care coverage that way? What are those people supposed to do? The president said, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your hospital, you can keep your hospital. What about those people, insured this way, may be losing their hospital come October 1? Here's another side effect of the law that's hitting middle-class Americans in their wallet. Its the part of the law that says the workweek is no longer 40 hours. Now it's just 30 hours. That's what the law says. People who are working part-time, have had their hours cut to below 30 hours, and theyre getting lower take-home pay. Now I hear about this in Wyoming, I hear it from school district workers, from folks who have had their hours cut, who are having to get by with less pay because if they have their hours cut, their take-home pay goes down. Its another destructive side effect of this health care law. Its not just Wyoming, it's happening all around the country. Now in Louisiana last week there was a report by KNOE Television in Monroe, that was last Thursday. It said, 400 employees within Lincoln parish schools are getting their hours cut in half. 400 workers, one school district, Louisiana, half the hours, half the pay. The School Board where did they put the blame? They put it directly on the presidents health care law. They said they can't afford the Washington-mandated health insurance for all of their workers so they're cutting back on the hours for substitute teachers, cutting the hours for cafeteria workers, cutting the hours for custodians, for power professionals who work with the kids. Is that what the president envisioned? Is that what the president means when he says forcefully defend and be proud? Cutting back things for our children in our schools, is that the presidents solution for health care? Making it harder for kids to get an education, making it harder for teachers to teach. One custodian told the station that it's depressing knowing his pay is about to be cut. He said, it's rough the way it is, why make it harder to survive? That's my question to the president of the United States and to senators who come on the floor to talk about the health care law. Why make it harder to survive? Why, Mr. President? You said that people should forcefully defend and be proud of this law. Are you proud of that, Mr. President? That's what I need to know. That's what the American public wants to know. Is the president proud that these people are getting their hours cut in half specifically because of his law and school districts are pointing to that as the cause? Is the president proud he's making it harder for Americans to survive? Now, some people aren't just getting their hours cut. They can't get hired in the first place because of the health care law. Thats what one business owner said in an op-ed for The Charlotte Observer newspaper in Charlotte, North Carolina. The op-ed ran September 10th and was titled How Obamacare Jams a Stick in My Company's Wheels. Rodney Pitts who runs the Southern Elevator Company in North Carolina says that he wants to hire more elevator mechanics for his business, but he hasn't been able to hire anyone this year. Why? Well, he says that the main reason is because of the costs associated with the health care law and all of the requirements of the health care law. He says, thousands of businesses in Charlotte and in North Carolina are in the same holding pattern. So people all across the country who want to work, won't get that opportunity because businesses can't afford to take on all the extra costs of the president's health care law. That's an extremely destructive side effect of the law. It's hurting American families. This health care law is hurting our economy. Every democrat in the Senate voted for this health care law. Every one. Where are the Democrats willing to forcefully defend these alarming side effects of this health care law? Is the president ready to go to North Carolina and talk to this business owner? Is the president going to say that he's proud that his health care law is keeping the businesses from hiring more people in North Carolina and all across the country? This isn't the kind of health care reform the American people needed. It's not the kind of health care reform the American people wanted. People didn't want a law that forced them to get rid of the insurance that they had and liked and worked for them and for their families. They didn't want a law that forced their local schools to cut the hours of custodians and part-time teachers, cafeteria workers, people who look after their children. That's not how you help people in a community. These are the tragic side effects of the president's health care law. Republicans are going to continue to talk about patient-centered reforms, reforms that get patients and people all across the country the care they need from a doctor they choose at lower cost. We're going to talk about restoring people's freedom. Freedom to buy health insurance that works for them, for their families, because they know what works best for them. Not President Obama. We're going to talk about giving people choices, not Washington mandates. Republicans are going to keep offering real solutions for better health care without all of these intrusive and intolerable side effects. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=f81c8202-6709-44b1-8d8c-6c874ab4cce1,"Udall, Barrasso Hail Senate Passage of Bill to Streamline BLM Energy Permits",2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON Today, U.S. Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and John Barrasso (R-WY) announced that the Senate passed their bipartisan bill to extend a pilot program that has helped the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) balance complex demands, including oil and gas permitting and environmental management, in New Mexico, Wyoming and other parts of the West. The BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act of 2014, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent, permanently extends a pilot program from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that was designed to help the agency deal with a backlog of permit applications while balancing other duties. The program, which also established a dedicated fund, has helped streamline operations in BLM field offices in Farmington and Carlsbad, N.M., and Rawlins and Buffalo, WY, among others. This is a great step forward for our BLM offices in Carlsbad and Farmington to ensure they will have the necessary resources to balance the complex demands of oil and gas permitting and environmental management,"" Udall said. Oil and gas production is critical to New Mexicos economy and for our childrens education, and I thank Senator Barrasso, Senator Heinrich, and all of our cosponsors on both sides of the aisle for their commitment to keeping this program going. I am hopeful the House will act quickly to give the BLM and industry the certainty they need to produce for New Mexico. Todays vote is great news for Wyoming and other Rocky Mountain states who want to decrease permitting backlogs and increase oil and gas production on federal lands, said Barrasso. Thanks to Senator Tom Udall and our bipartisan group of cosponsors for teaming up to help advance this critical legislation. Our bill will give local BLM offices the resources they desperately need to ensure oil and gas permits are processed in a timely manner. Now its time for the House to act so we can get this bill signed into law as soon as possible. Funding for the pilot program is set to expire in 2015. The senators' bill permanently reauthorizes the Permit Processing Improvement Fund, and provides the Interior Secretary with greater flexibility to designate new pilot offices and proactively allocate resources based on shifting oil and gas production trends. Additionally, the bill revises the fee structure, and directs the proceeds to be retained by the BLM to support oil and gas permitting operations. The Permit Processing Improvement Fund provides approximately $18 million each year for the Secretary of Interior to distribute to pilot offices for reinvestment in additional staff and resources to help improve efficiency, and support BLM's diverse responsibilities, such as mineral leasing permits and wildlife and range conservation. The bill improves upon this program by providing the secretary with the flexibility to designate new project offices in response to shifts in industry demand while directing the BLM to consider public industry reports to reallocate resources more proactively. In order to pay for the extension of the pilot program, the Udall-Barrasso bill adjusts the interest rate that industry receives on overpayment of oil and gas royalties. In addition to permanently reauthorizing the pilot program, the bill sets a $9,500 fee, to take effect 2016, for applications for permits to drill (APDs). The BLM will retain the funding, which the bill locks in through 2026, to support the agency's base oil and gas permitting operations. Additionally, the bill prohibits the Secretary from raising this fee through a rulemaking, though the fee is indexed for inflation. The legislation further requires that at least 75 percent of funds to be distributed to the state offices where they were collected, and gives BLM the flexibility to allocate the remaining funds. The bill has been endorsed by the Independent Petroleum Association of America, American Petroleum Institute, Western Energy Alliance, Western Governors Association, U.S. Oil and Gas Association, and countless municipalities, trade associations, and oil and gas companies. In a July 29 hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Western Energy Alliance, Concho Resources, Campbell County (Wyoming) Board of Commissioners, and Bureau of Land Management all testified in strong support. The bill is cosponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.); Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.); John Hoeven (R-N.D.); Mike Enzi (R-WY); Mark Udall (D-CO); Dean Heller (R-NV); John Walsh (D-MT); James Inhofe (R-OK); Jon Tester (D-MT); Mike Lee (R-UT); Orrin Hatch (R-UT); and Michael Bennet (D-CO). ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140918194101/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=09f4980e-aff9-65c3-f522-de1a2d2286a7,"Udall, Barrasso Hail Senate Passage of Bill to Streamline BLM Energy Permits",2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Udall, Barrasso Hail Senate Passage of Bill to Streamline BLM Energy Permits September 16, 2014 WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and John Barrasso (R-WY) announced that the Senate passed their bipartisan bill to extend a pilot program that has helped the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) balance complex demands, including oil and gas permitting and environmental management, in New Mexico, Wyoming and other parts of the West. The BLM Permit Processing Improvement Act of 2014, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent, permanently extends a pilot program from the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that was designed to help the agency deal with a backlog of permit applications while balancing other duties. The program, which also established a dedicated fund, has helped streamline operations in BLM field offices in Farmington and Carlsbad, N.M., and Rawlins and Buffalo, WY, among others. “This is a great step forward for our BLM offices in Carlsbad and Farmington to ensure they will have the necessary resources to balance the complex demands of oil and gas permitting and environmental management,"" Udall said.  “Oil and gas production is critical to New Mexico’s economy and for our children’s education, and I thank Senator Barrasso, Senator Heinrich, and all of our cosponsors on both sides of the aisle for their commitment to keeping this program going.  I am hopeful the House will act quickly to give the BLM and industry the certainty they need to produce for New Mexico.” “Today’s vote is great news for Wyoming and other Rocky Mountain states who want to decrease permitting backlogs and increase oil and gas production on federal lands,” said Barrasso. “Thanks to Senator Tom Udall and our bipartisan group of cosponsors for teaming up to help advance this critical legislation. Our bill will give local BLM offices the resources they desperately need to ensure oil and gas permits are processed in a timely manner. Now it’s time for the House to act so we can get this bill signed into law as soon as possible.” Funding for the pilot program is set to expire in 2015. The senators' bill permanently reauthorizes the Permit Processing Improvement Fund, and provides the Interior Secretary with greater flexibility to designate new pilot offices and proactively allocate resources based on shifting oil and gas production trends. Additionally, the bill revises the fee structure, and directs the proceeds to be retained by the BLM to support oil and gas permitting operations. The Permit Processing Improvement Fund provides approximately $18 million each year for the Secretary of Interior to distribute to pilot offices for reinvestment in additional staff and resources to help improve efficiency, and support BLM's diverse responsibilities, such as mineral leasing permits and wildlife and range conservation. The bill improves upon this program by providing the secretary with the flexibility to designate new project offices in response to shifts in industry demand while directing the BLM to consider public industry reports to reallocate resources more proactively. In order to pay for the extension of the pilot program, the Udall-Barrasso bill adjusts the interest rate that industry receives on overpayment of oil and gas royalties. In addition to permanently reauthorizing the pilot program, the bill sets a $9,500 fee, to take effect 2016, for applications for permits to drill (APDs). The BLM will retain the funding, which the bill locks in through 2026, to support the agency's base oil and gas permitting operations. Additionally, the bill prohibits the Secretary from raising this fee through a rulemaking, though the fee is indexed for inflation. The legislation further requires that at least 75 percent of funds to be distributed to the state offices where they were collected, and gives BLM the flexibility to allocate the remaining funds. The bill has been endorsed by the Independent Petroleum Association of America, American Petroleum Institute, Western Energy Alliance, Western Governors’ Association, U.S. Oil and Gas Association, and countless municipalities, trade associations, and oil and gas companies.  In a July 29 hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Western Energy Alliance, Concho Resources, Campbell County (Wyoming) Board of Commissioners, and Bureau of Land Management all testified in strong support.  The bill is cosponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.); Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.); John Hoeven (R-N.D.); Mike Enzi (R-WY); Mark Udall (D-CO); Dean Heller (R-NV); John Walsh (D-MT); James Inhofe (R-OK); Jon Tester (D-MT); Mike Lee (R-UT); Orrin Hatch (R-UT); and Michael Bennet (D-CO).                                                                          ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=c849015d-462d-4473-93ff-da3431e177d9,"If youre going to complain, you better have solutions",2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Congress is getting ready to vote on another short-term continuing resolution to fund the government for a few more weeks. U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said it is time to stop this Band-Aid and bailing wire approach to budgeting that has become the norm. He presented his Penny Plan and biennial budgeting bill as realistic common-sense solutions to help put the government’s fiscal house in order and end deficit spending. Enzi emphasized that Congress should stop deal-making and start legislating to bring America’s budget process into the 21st century and guarantee a more secure future for the generations to come.  “Sometimes as lawmakers we seem to act as if this problem is too big to solve, but it’s not. Understanding how to reach and maintain financial health is not rocket science. It merely requires exercising common sense and commitment,” said Enzi. A simple and straightforward way to put our country back on the right fiscal path, the Penny Plan would cut a single penny from every dollar the federal government spends, balancing the budget in just three years and then capping spending at a reasonable level. Over a 10-year budget window, the bill would cut spending by about $7.6 trillion. “The Penny Plan steers us away from some of the controversy and political traps we’ve seen for spending reductions,” said Enzi. “At the onset, it does not identify the specific cuts that are necessary to achieve the one percent reduction in savings. Instead, such decisions are left for us to make. Its beauty is it puts a broad plan into action.” Similar to how the Wyoming Legislature works, Enzi’s biennial budget bill would force the federal government to budget over a two-year period, instead of the one-year window as it does now, giving Congress more time to scrutinize spending and eliminate duplication and waste. “We obviously don’t have time to look through the budget. We keep doing continuing resolutions and then we do an omnibus bill. We’re supposed to do those through 12 separate bills,” said Enzi. “Twelve separate bills that get debate, not just in committee, but on the floor of the senate with amendments. It has been a long time since we have done that. Biennial budgeting would allow us  to get into the nerve center of spending and get something done.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ContentRecord_id=e2c68a52-290c-4fb3-ad5c-fcc099ed4ace,Statement of Senator Michael B. Enzi On the Penny Plan and Biennial Appropriations,2014-09-16,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Mr. President, as we consider this continuing resolution to fund the federal government in fiscal year 2015 and debate how best to respond to escalating violence in the Middle East, I rise to voice concern about our nation’s spending and debt. At last count our country was more than $17 trillion in debt, and that number increases every single day. For fiscal year 2014, we expect to pay $231 billion in interest, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). And with our pattern of unsustainable spending, in 10 years we could pay close to $800 billion in interest. That’s more to our creditors than we currently spend on national defense. Our future interest payments will be even higher if interest rates go up more than CBO has predicted. The interest we pay on our debt doesn’t buy anything. A large portion of it just pays other countries for loaning us money. The federal government consistently spends billions more than it takes in, and CBO reported in August that if current laws remain unchanged, growing budget deficits over the long-term will push the debt even higher. Yet today, we are considering legislation to continue discretionary funding on autopilot. The continuing resolution funds federal programs through December 11, 2014, at the current annual rate of $1.012 Trillion. The legislation does nothing to address the CBO projection that our ratio of public debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will reach 74 percent by the end of this fiscal year – twice that of just 7 years ago and higher than any year since 1950.  We are doing nothing to reverse CBO’s projection that in 25 years, federal debt held by our constituents will exceed 100 percent of GDP.  The CBO notes that this trend, which I view as perilous, cannot “be sustained indefinitely.” I ask my Senate colleagues, what would happen if we as individuals adopted the same spending habits held by the government? I can tell you, with little doubt that over the long-term we’d face bankruptcy.  And that’s just the point. Sometimes it seems we have our heads buried in the sand. Are we in denial? Sometimes we act as if there are a different set of principles for the federal budget and the outcome of excessive personal spending. But I’m here to tell you, the same potentially dire consequences face the government that face individuals if we do not put our fiscal house in order. Our president often frames issues in the context of how it would affect his daughters. Like the president, at times, I’m up at night with concerns about how our country’s fiscal path will affect the lives of my children and grandchildren. I worry how our debt will harm families and generations to come. Sometimes as lawmakers we seem to act as if this problem is too big to solve, but it’s not. Understanding how to reach and maintain financial health is not rocket science. It merely requires exercising common sense and commitment. As individuals we learn to live within our means. If we spend too much, we tighten our belts, and work hard to ease our financial situation. The government should and can do the same. We cannot wait longer, it’s time for us to act. I’ve introduced the Penny Plan as a simple and straightforward way to put our country back on the right fiscal path. It reduces discretionary and mandatory spending (less net interest payments) by one percent - or one penny from every dollar - for each year of three years until total spending has reached approximately 18 percent of GDP.  Based on figures from the CBO, reducing spending this way would result in a balanced budget within three years. Total spending would then be capped at 18 percent of GDP for subsequent years, since that is the historic average level of government spending for the past several decades.         Importantly, the Penny Plan steers us away from some of the controversy and political traps we’ve seen for spending reductions. At the onset, it does not identify the specific cuts that are necessary to achieve the one percent reduction in savings. Instead, such decisions are left for us to make. Its beauty is it puts a broad plan into action.         Another step we can take to stop the autopilot spending path we’re on, passing CRs year after year, is to enact my Biennial Appropriations Act. The legislation we are considering illustrates once again why we need to pass my bill. In less than a month, the new federal fiscal year begins, yet once again, we have not passed a single of the 12 appropriations bills for the 2015 fiscal year. Our answer: another short-term continuing resolution. This is not the way the government should operate, nor does it meet the expectations of those who sent us to Washington to represent them. It’s no wonder our approval ratings sink perpetually lower. Congress should debate each individual appropriations bill, vote on amendments, and pass all 12 separate bills. However, the last time we passed all appropriations bills separately before the start of the fiscal year was 20 years ago in 1994.  When we do not follow regular order, we cannot adequately consider the details, including a line-by-line look at individual programs and an analysis of appropriate funding levels. Inevitably, we get the types of agreements reached in January, in which Congress was given one chance to vote on a $1.1 trillion bill. It’s time for this chronic and debilitating pattern to stop. We’ve got to start legislating and stop deal-making.  My biennial appropriations bill would allow for each of the appropriation bills to be taken up over a two-year period, with the more controversial bills taken up in a non-election year and the less controversial bills taken up in an election year. The defense appropriations bill would be taken up each year. This would allow us to scrutinize spending details and eliminate duplication and waste. This is an idea that both parties have endorsed. In 2000, former OMB Director and now Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told the House Rules Committee that the budget process took up so much time that there wasn’t as much time to devote to making programs better. He said: “I think biennial budgeting, if it is properly designed, could very much help alleviate these pressures.” Let’s move our budget and appropriations process into the 21st century, providing the prudent oversight and judgment of our budget and appropriations, while at the same guaranteeing a more secure future for the generations to come. Thank you Mr. President, I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=fd05060d-7ab2-4ced-b15c-2885cb4c9d34,"Enzi, Barrasso Join Senators in Introducing Bill to Stop EPA from Garnishing Americans Wages",2014-09-15,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., joined Senators Mike Johanns (R-Neb) and John Thune (R-S.D.) today in introducing a bill to stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from garnishing Americans wages without a court order. Enzi and Barrasso sent a letter on July 10th along with Senator David Vitter (R-LA) to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy calling on the agency to withdraw its direct final rule on administrative wage garnishment. On July 16th, the EPA formally withdrew its direct rule. The Johanns-Thune legislation will make sure the EPA cannot continue to pursue wage garnishment unless it receives a court order. This Administration has aggressively looked for every opportunity to expand its reach into our lives and pocketbooks, said Enzi. Executive power should have limits and requiring a federal agency to get a court order before garnishing Americans wages should be a no-brainer. The EPA can already fine individuals thousands of dollars for simply building a pond on their own landas we learned in the case of Uinta County resident Andy Johnson, said Barrasso. Now, in order to cover these excessive fines, the EPA is planning to go around the courts to force your employers to garnish your wages. This outrageous overreach must be stopped in its tracks. Our legislation will prevent the EPA from having this unprecedented authority that only hurts Americans who are trying to provide for their families. In addition to Senators Johanns, Thune, Enzi and Barrasso, Senators Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) are original cosponsors of the bill. The Johanns-Thune legislation specifically states EPA must receive a court order before taking any wage garnishment actions established by the 1996 Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA). The 1996 law gave federal agencies the authority to garnish up to 15 percent of a workers wages to pay debts owed to the federal government. Given the aggressive regulatory regime of this Administrations EPA, particularly as it applies to rural America and agriculture, a court order is necessary to prevent overreach. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=3b5feb02-09ee-4849-a436-e98324280d92,Enzi urges all senators to get on board with 2-year budget bill,2014-09-15,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., is continuing his quest to put America on a biennial budget. He drafted a letter seeking the support of every U.S. Senator for S. 625, the Biennial Appropriations Act. The bill would allow for each of the 12 appropriation bills to be taken up over a two-year period, with the more controversial bills taken up in a non-election year and the less controversial bills taken up in an election year. The defense appropriations bill would be taken up each year. This would allow Congress to scrutinize spending details and eliminate duplication and waste, according to Enzi. “In less than a month, the new federal fiscal year begins, yet we have not passed a single appropriation bill for the 2015 fiscal year. Our answer: another short-term continuing resolution. This is not the way the government should operate, nor does it meet the expectations of those who sent us to Washington to represent them,” Enzi wrote. Both parties have recognized the value of biennial budgeting, including Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush who endorsed the idea. Click here to read a copy of the letter.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=55fd4e77-dcfc-42d5-8157-0a9e11363e13,"Enzi, Barrasso Join Senators in Introducing Bill to Stop EPA from Garnishing Americans Wages",2014-09-15,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., joined Senators Mike Johanns (R-Neb) and John Thune (R-S.D.) today in introducing a bill to stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from garnishing Americans’ wages without a court order. Enzi and Barrasso sent a letter on July 10th along with Senator David Vitter (R-LA) to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy calling on the agency to withdraw its direct final rule on administrative wage garnishment. On July 16th, the EPA formally withdrew its direct rule. The Johanns-Thune legislation will make sure the EPA cannot continue to pursue wage garnishment unless it receives a court order. “This Administration has aggressively looked for every opportunity to expand its reach into our lives and pocketbooks,” said Enzi. “Executive power should have limits and requiring a federal agency to get a court order before garnishing Americans’ wages should be a no-brainer.” “The EPA can already fine individuals thousands of dollars for simply building a pond on their own land—as we learned in the case of Uinta County resident Andy Johnson,” said Barrasso. “Now, in order to cover these excessive fines, the EPA is planning to go around the courts to force your employers to garnish your wages. This outrageous overreach must be stopped in its tracks. Our legislation will prevent the EPA from having this unprecedented authority that only hurts Americans who are trying to provide for their families.” In addition to Senators Johanns, Thune, Enzi and Barrasso, Senators Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) are original cosponsors of the bill. The Johanns-Thune legislation specifically states EPA must receive a court order before taking any wage garnishment actions established by the 1996 Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA). The 1996 law gave federal agencies the authority to garnish up to 15 percent of a worker’s wages to pay debts owed to the federal government. Given the aggressive regulatory regime of this Administration’s EPA, particularly as it applies to rural America and agriculture, a court order is necessary to prevent overreach.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=03E7D9F1-0A67-C4EA-A098-D9CBE0573879,Senators Collins and Barrasso write to DOE IG on FERC enforcement process,2014-09-12,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=6008c748-4fb5-442d-9d2f-7aaf02768839,Barrasso Statement on Sherwood-Randall Nomination to be Deputy Secretary of Energy,2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, DC Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) delivered the following statement at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee business meeting after voting in favor of the nomination of Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall to be Deputy Secretary of Energy. The Committee voted to approve the nomination of Dr. Sherwood-Randall by voice vote. Excerpts of Senator Barrassos Statement: Thank you very much. Madame Chair. As you know, I did support the nomination of Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall to be Deputy Secretary of Energy. I believe the Department of Energy can use someone with her experience and her knowledge of Ukraine, Russia, and Eastern Europe. Over the course of her career, Dr. Sherwood-Randall has written extensively on these countries. She has also served in prominent roles at the Department of Defense and on the National Security Staff where she set policy related to these countries. If confirmed, she *would makeas her first order of businessthe timely approval of liquid natural gas exports. To date, the Department of Energy has given final approval to only two LNG export terminals. The second of which was approved yesterday. Meanwhile, over 30 other projects await approval. The Obama Administrations failure to permit LNG exports in a timely manner is nothing short of malpractice. Americas allies and strategic partners are imploring the Administration to signal that American LNG will be available for purchase in the near future. Our allies want alternatives to Russian natural gas. They want alternatives so they can stop funding a regime that threatens their freedom and the freedom of their neighbors. But the Obama Administration continues to delay. It continues to delay even though study after study show that American LNG exports would create thousands of jobs across the country; and reduce our nations trade deficit. It continues to delay even though Russias President, Vladimir Putin, is escalating the crisis in Eastern Europe. Yesterday, it was reported that Russia has reduced natural gas deliveries to Poland in order to punish Poland for providing energy to Ukraine. This is outrageous. If confirmed, Dr. Sherwood-Randall should use her knowledge of Eastern Europe and Russia and work with the White House to expedite LNG exports. She should work to ensure the Administration doesnt turn LNG exports into the next Keystone. LNG exports should not be held hostage by a small group of shrill extremists. There is much too much at stakefor the United States, for our allies, and the world. Thank you Madame Chairman. *Senator Barrasso intended to say should not would. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140911235556/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=fd1dc89a-9b88-f7b0-7448-b4ab710fac38,Barrasso Statement on Sherwood-Randall Nomination to be Deputy Secretary of Energy,2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Statement on Sherwood-Randall Nomination to be Deputy Secretary of Energy “If confirmed, Dr. Sherwood-Randall should use her knowledge of Eastern Europe and Russia and work with the White House to expedite LNG exports. She should work to ensure the Administration doesn’t turn LNG exports into the next Keystone.” September 11, 2014 Click here to watch Sen. Barrasso’s remarks.   WASHINGTON, DC –Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) delivered the following statement at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee business meeting after voting in favor of the nomination of Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall to be Deputy Secretary of Energy. The Committee voted to approve the nomination of Dr. Sherwood-Randall by voice vote.   Excerpts of Senator Barrasso’s Statement:   “Thank you very much. Madame Chair.   “As you know, I did support the nomination of Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall to be Deputy Secretary of Energy.   “I believe the Department of Energy can use someone with her experience and her knowledge of Ukraine, Russia, and Eastern Europe.   “Over the course of her career, Dr. Sherwood-Randall has written extensively on these countries.   “She has also served in prominent roles at the Department of Defense and on the National Security Staff where she set policy related to these countries.   “If confirmed, she *would make—as her first order of business—the timely approval of liquid natural gas exports.   “To date, the Department of Energy has given final approval to only two LNG export terminals. The second of which was approved yesterday.   “Meanwhile, over 30 other projects await approval.   “The Obama Administration’s failure to permit LNG exports in a timely manner is nothing short of malpractice.   “America’s allies and strategic partners are imploring the Administration to signal that American LNG will be available for purchase in the near future.   “Our allies want alternatives to Russian natural gas.   “They want alternatives so they can stop funding a regime that threatens their freedom and the freedom of their neighbors.   “But the Obama Administration continues to delay. It continues to delay even though study after study show that American LNG exports would create thousands of jobs across the country; and reduce our nation’s trade deficit.   “It continues to delay even though Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, is escalating the crisis in Eastern Europe.   “Yesterday, it was reported that Russia has reduced natural gas deliveries to Poland in order to punish Poland for providing energy to Ukraine. This is outrageous.   “If confirmed, Dr. Sherwood-Randall should use her knowledge of Eastern Europe and Russia and work with the White House to expedite LNG exports.   “She should work to ensure the Administration doesn’t turn LNG exports into the next Keystone.   “LNG exports should not be held hostage by a small group of shrill extremists.   “There is much too much at stake—for the United States, for our allies, and the world.   “Thank you Madame Chairman.”   *Senator Barrasso intended to say “should” not “would.”                                                                     ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140912001850/http://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-statements?ContentRecord_id=96fb30a9-f2f4-45c9-9174-b6dd95f5417e,Statement by Senator Mike Enzi on Constitutional Amendment Relating to Contributions and Expenditures in Elections,2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"I rise today to discuss a recent Senate vote which wages an unprecedented attack on a fundamental American freedom. The framers of our Constitution were clear when they stated in the Bill of Rights…”Congress shall make no law…..prohibiting the free exercise of speech.” However, this week, the Senate Majority has sought to undermine this fundamental freedom by offering a constitutional amendment to give Congress more control over the free speech rights of Americans. I opposed moving forward with this amendment because political speech is essential to the American way of life. Our nation was founded on those who openly criticized the monarch and argued for a better form of government. All branches of our government rely on the ability for Americans to passionately defend their interests. Additionally, when we elect candidates for office we the electorate rely on open dialog about why he or she ought to serve a particular community or state.  Political speech is exactly the type of expression the founders sought to protect when they adopted the Bill of Rights – however, this proposal completely forgets about that freedom. Giving the federal government the ability to regulate what we say is flat out dangerous. What is a reasonable limitation on political speech? The sponsors of this proposal can’t answer that and it’s reckless to assume that federal courts will determine the correct answer. What concerns me the most is where does this regulation stop? The answer is not clear and at the very end of the day this constitutional amendment limits the way in which Americans can voice their concerns about their elected officials. With all that the Senate needs to accomplish it’s an embarrassment that the Majority Leader would bring this up now, not allow amendments and expect this institution to forget about the very freedoms our founders sought to protect when they drafted our federal constitution. I yield the floor.",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=14ddeb20-d35c-423a-bd34-c71d39c2be85,"Enzi, Barrasso join call for 60-Day extension for public comment on EPA greenhouse gas rule",2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"U.S. Senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both R-Wyo., joined a bipartisan group of 53 senators this week in calling on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy to provide a 60-day extension for the public comment period on EPA’s proposed rule to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. The effort is led by Senators Deb Fischer, R-Neb., and Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D. The senators expressed that because the proposal is incredibly complex and broad in scope and would impact electric generation, use, and costs throughout the country, an additional 60 days is needed to provide more time for all stakeholders to fully review it and offer comments. In their letter to the EPA, the senators wrote, “This extension is critical to ensure that state regulatory agencies and other stakeholders have adequate time to fully analyze and comment on the proposal. It is also important to note that the challenge is not only one of commenting on the complexity and sweeping scope of the rule, but also providing an opportunity to digest more than 600 supporting documents released by EPA in support of this proposal.” In May, Enzi and Barrasso joined a similar effort by Fischer and Heitkamp to request the EPA grant at least 120 days for public comment on its new proposal on existing power plants. While the 120-day public comment period was granted, the senators heard immediately from a variety of parties in their states, including utilities, state regulators, regional generation and transmission organizations, and many more. These parties made it known that the rule is more difficult to analyze and assess than they had initially expected. Additionally, some of the issues posed by the new rule require discussions and collaboration with a variety of state, regional, and national officials to provide accurate and complete comments on the feasibility of the rule and options. The senators believe that the level of complexity of the proposal, volume of technical documents released, amount of coordination required, and magnitude of energy impacts of the rule warrant a 60-day extension of the public comment period. Full text of the senators’ letter is below. _____________________________________ The Honorable Gina McCarthy Administrator Environmental Protection Agency U.S. EPA Headquarters – William J. Clinton Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460   Dear Administrator McCarthy, We are writing to request that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provide a 60 day extension of the comment period for the “Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources:  Electric Generating Units.”  While we appreciate EPA granting an initial 120 day comment period, the complexity and magnitude of the proposed rule necessitates an extension. This extension is critical to ensure that state regulatory agencies and other stakeholders have adequate time to fully analyze and comment on the proposal. It is also important to note that the challenge is not only one of commenting on the complexity and sweeping scope of the rule, but also providing an opportunity to digest more than 600 supporting documents released by EPA in support of this proposal. The proposed rule regulates or affects the generation, transmission, and use of electricity in every corner of this country.  States and stakeholders must have time to fully analyze and assess the sweeping impacts that the proposal will have on our nation’s energy system, including dispatch of generation and end-use energy efficiency. In light of the broad energy impacts of the proposed rule, state environmental agencies must coordinate their comments across multiple state agencies and stakeholders, including public utility commissions, regional transmission organizations, and transmission and reliability experts, just to name a few.   The proposed rule requires a thorough evaluation of intra- and inter-state, regional, and in some cases international energy generation and transmission so that states and utilities can provide the most detailed assessments on how to meet the targets while maintaining reliability in the grid.   This level of coordination to comment on an EPA rule is unprecedented, extraordinary, and extremely time consuming. It is also important to note that the proposed rule imposes a heavy burden on the states during the rulemaking process.  If the states want to adjust their statewide emission rate target assigned to them by EPA, they must provide their supporting documentation for the adjustment during the comment period.  The EPA proposal provides no mechanism for adjusting the state emission rate targets once they are adopted based on the four building blocks.  So the states need enough time to digest the rule, fully understand it, and then collect the data and justification on why their specific target may need to be adjusted, and why the assumptions of the building blocks may not apply to their states.  This cannot be adequately accomplished in only 120 days. Thank you for your consideration of this request. # # #",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=8d7f7f10-63b5-4ca9-afc5-17e14f80f9f2,Enzi statement on 13th anniversary of 9/11,2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"As America remembers and reflects on the 13th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., commented on the importance of remembering all our nation’s heroes, past and present, who make our country safer and stronger. We must continue to value the sacrifices and challenges they overcame to protect the freedoms that make our country great. Enzi issued the following statement in observation of this solemn anniversary. “Today we remember the events of September 11 and honor the memory of all those who lost their lives during those terrorist attacks. In the end, what was supposed to divide us in fear instead brought us together as one, more strongly committed to the principles and values that made us the United States of America. “We remember in a special way the police, firefighters, emergency responders and all who lost their lives trying to come to the aid of others that day. They will never be forgotten. Their memory now serves to inspire the next generation of those who have dedicated their lives to keeping our families safe and secure by taking on the challenges of a difficult and very dangerous profession.   “We are also reminded of the great debt we will always owe our veterans and all those who currently serve in our armed forces at outposts and military bases all over the world. They are our first line of defense. Ever vigilant and constantly on the watch, they stand ready to respond to any threat from those who would try to harm our American way of life. “We remember them and all our nation’s heroes today. Their love for our nation was so strong that they were willing to make any sacrifice or endure any hardship to keep our nation strong and free. They took on the greatest challenge there is – making the world a better place – and they succeeded. For that and so much more they will always be in our thoughts and prayers.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://www.enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ContentRecord_id=ae936c30-dee3-45a9-acb0-53818de3313e,Enzi pleased Senate majoritys attempt to weaken Bill of Rights fails,2014-09-11,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,Michael Enzi,E000285,www.enzi.senate.gov,,,legacy,"The U.S. Senate majority failed in its bid to advance a proposal that U.S. Senator Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., criticized as a brazen attempt to rewrite the First Amendment and censor Americans’ free speech rights. “The Senate majority is attempting to censor political speech by rewriting the First Amendment. Their proposed amendment is designed to give Congress blanket authority to define what political speech qualifies as acceptable or not. Protecting the right of every American to speak their mind shouldn’t be a partisan issue,” Enzi said. Sixty votes were needed in order to pass Senate Joint Resolution 19. The vote was 54-42.  Ultimately, 67 votes would be required to pass the resolution on to the House. “What is a reasonable limitation on political speech? The sponsors of this proposal can’t answer that and it’s reckless to assume that federal courts will determine the correct answer. What concerns me the most is where does this regulation stop? The answer is not clear and at the very end of the day this constitutional amendment limits the way in which Americans can voice their concerns about their elected officials,”  Enzi said.  “It’s an embarrassment that the majority leader would bring this up now, not allow amendments and expect this institution to forget about the very freedoms our founders sought to protect when they drafted our Constitution.”",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140911235637/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=cbbd1857-01f5-3484-d7af-fb759f2e6dbe,Barrasso Discusses Republican Solutions to Help Americans,2014-09-10,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Discusses Republican Solutions to Help Americans Highlights GOP Jobs, Energy, & Health Care Ideas September 10, 2014 Click here to watch Sen. Barrasso’s speech.    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) spoke about Republican efforts to help Americans find good jobs, strengthen our energy security, improve our health care, and cut Washington red tape.  Excerpts of his remarks:  “The Senate is debating a plan, a plan by which Washington Democrats seek to restrict first amendment rights of American citizens, part of the Constitution.   “Under this proposal, certain people would no longer enjoy the same right to free speech, and the same right to express themselves. “I believe this amendment is a terrible idea, and it really has no chance of becoming law. “Majority Leader Reid wants the vote anyway. “He thinks that this outrageous amendment that he dreamed up will somehow help Democrats win elections this November. “The Majority Leader has come to the floor repeatedly to criticize, and to demonize, American citizens who don’t share his views.  “It’s nothing but political grandstanding and showboating. “Now President Obama was on ‘Meet the Press’ last Sunday.  “The president talked about what’s going on in Washington, the president said that ‘people want to get stuff done.’ “That’s what he says the American people want from their representatives here in Congress. “So if the American people want us to get stuff done, why are the Democrats in the Senate so determined to do nothing? “Why are they wasting time on political show votes? “Why are they not allowing amendments and debate on important bills? “Why are they blocking legislation that has passed the House of Representatives – with bipartisan support – and is right now sitting on Senator Reid’s desk waiting for a vote? “Our nation faces great challenges, many Americans are hurting. “Republicans have solutions that will create jobs while strengthening our energy security, improving our health care, and cutting government red tape. “New numbers came out just last week that show that America’s labor force participation rate is at just about the lowest level it’s been in decades.  “The House of Representatives – where Republicans are in charge of the schedule – well they passed more than 40 bills to help get Americans back to work. “Those bills are right now sitting in the Senate, waiting for a vote. “Is that what the president means when he says ‘people want to get stuff done?’ “There’s a headline in Politico, a local newspaper, on Tuesday morning and it read: ‘Majority says President Obama a failure.’ “A new poll found that 52 percent of Americans think that the Obama presidency has been a failure.  “So what do Washington Democrats do in response? “Absolutely nothing. “People want Washington to deal with the challenges that matter most in their lives, in their individual lives. “Now we could start by doing something about the president’s health care law, it is causing so much harm to people across the country.  “A bipartisan plan has already passed the House that would stop the employer mandate that businesses provide expensive Washington-mandated health insurance. “That part of the president’s health care law forces small businesses to cut hours – to cut hours – therefore cutting paychecks for the workers and is also holding back hiring.  “Now we should take up that legislation here in the Senate. “We should restore people’s freedom to buy health insurance that actually works for them, works for their families – because people know what works best for them. They don’t need Washington to tell them.  “We should replace the president’s health care law with reforms that actually get people the care that they need, from a doctor that they choose, at lower costs.  “The people that I talk with back home in Wyoming are also worried about energy costs – especially as it’s starting to get colder in much of the country. “Washington should be looking for ways to help Americans produce more affordable, reliable, and efficient energy right here at home. The opportunity is there. “Now that would mean jobs for American families, it would also mean energy security for our nation. “We could start right now by approving the Keystone XL pipeline it’s been six years since the applications been sitting waiting for action.  “A bill to do that passed the House of Representatives – again, with bipartisan support. Why aren’t we voting on that today in the United States Senate?  “The Obama Administration admits that the pipeline would actually support thousands of good American jobs. “The application to build the Keystone Pipeline has been stalled for six years – the administration should demand action today.  “Now, if the president won’t do it, Congress still could and should.  “Then Congress should pass legislation to speed up exports of liquefied natural gas.  “Our nation has abundant supplies of natural gas, and producers want to export it to customers around the world who are seeking it.  “The Obama administration has delayed the permits to let them do it – and Democrats right here in the Senate have delayed the bipartisan solution that’s already passed the House. “We should take a vote on that bill today and pass it.  “We should pass a bill that would reform the regulations blocking energy production on federal lands. “We should end the Obama administration’s pointless and destructive war on coal – and let the men and women across, this country, who work in that industry, get their jobs and their lives back. “American businesses are waiting to create jobs – the only thing standing in the way is the Senate majority leader.  “Senate Democrats don’t want to vote, they don’t want to vote to help the millions of Americans who are out of the labor force. “They would rather protect the Washington bureaucracy, a bureaucracy that slows down and stifles economic growth.  “Cutting through the red tape to help Americans get back to work is one of the top priorities of Republicans, and it should be the top priority of every Senator in this body. “We could do it by passing a bill – one that has already passed the House – that would rein excessive regulations that makes it tougher for small businesses to invest, to grow, and to hire.  “We could pass another bill from the House that helps businesses defend themselves against abusive patent lawsuits.  “Now that’s going to help small businesses hire more people and help them grow – and 130 Democrats in the House voted in favor of it. Why aren’t we voting on that today?  “It can’t get a simple up or down vote in the Senate. The majority leader will not bring it to the floor.  “Why won’t he allow it?  “Bill after bill, one bill after another that Republicans have offered, Republicans have passed in the House of Representatives, bipartisan bills, and the Senate Democrats don’t want to talk about them.   “They don’t want to talk about Republican ideas for tax reform. Tax reform that would lower tax rates, make the whole tax system simpler and more fair. “They don’t want to talk about Republican ideas to strengthen and stabilize entitlement programs – like Social Security, Medicare – to make sure they are there for future generations. “They certainly don’t want to talk about Republican ideas to address Washington’s out of control debt. “Those are the kinds of things we should be talking about today on the floor of the United States Senate.  “Those are the things Republicans have proposed, and that we’re going to keep fighting for in the Senate. “That’s what the American people are talking about when they say they want Washington to get stuff done. “They don’t mean more terrible ideas like the president’s health care law, and its multiple, damaging side effects. “They don’t mean job-killing red tape and Washington mandates. “They don’t mean political show votes that would restrict Americans’ freedom of speech.  “President Obama and Democrats in the Senate have turned their backs on middle-class families who are desperately in need of jobs.  “Democrats want to waste time while they’re trying to salvage their political careers. “Republicans want to help get Americans back to work.” ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140911235639/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=c793fffe-c777-5086-50d8-e1beefe39db9,Senate Passes Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse Conveyance Bill,2014-09-10,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Senate Passes Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse Conveyance Bill Transfer of U.S. Courthouse to Teton County is one step closer. September 10, 2014 WASHINGTON, DC – Transfer of the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse to Teton County is one step closer after the U.S. Senate unanimously endorsed a federal conveyance bill sponsored by U.S. Senators John Barrasso and Mike Enzi, both R-Wyo., late Tuesday. The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill (S. 1934) returns the courthouse back to the county and allows the federal court system to lease space to continue holding hearings in the building.   Barrasso introduced the legislation after the Teton County Commission requested the move in order to safeguard continuity of use for the county. After negotiations with the General Services Administration (GSA) and Commission members, the legislation moved forward.   “I’m really pleased we were able to team up with the Commission. We are one step closer to keeping the Clifford P. Hansen Courthouse open to the public and continuing to serve Wyoming as an important meeting place for federal and state hearings,” said Barrasso. “This bill will also help maintain the vital relationship that already exists between Teton County and the U.S. District Court in Wyoming. Chairman Phibbs and his colleagues did a heck of a job sticking with it and helping us reach an agreement.”   ""This is exciting news for our community,” said Hank Phibbs, Chairman of the Teton County Commissioners. “Ensuring that this courtroom will be in public ownership and available to meet our current and ever expanding needs is important. We thank Senator Barrasso and his staff for their hard work.""   Background:   In 1986 the Board of County Commissioners of Teton County conveyed a parcel of land to the federal government as part of an agreement between Teton County and the Wyoming Federal Court for the construction of a United States District Court in Jackson. The conveyance was made without any payment for the land as the commissioners felt that the construction of the federal courtroom on the property was a major public benefit.   The high cost of full time staffing has caused the federal courts in Wyoming to terminate their lease of the property from the General Services Administration (GSA), and the GSA decided to dispose of the Courthouse property. Three GSA officials from Denver recently met with Teton County officials to discuss the disposition of the Courthouse. They acknowledged that the County had given the land for the Courthouse for at no cost to the federal government, but stated that they could not give the land back to the County absent legislation granting them such authority.   The Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse Conveyance Bill fixes this by explicitly conveying the land that was originally donated by Teton County to the Federal Government for the Courthouse and returning it to Teton County for nominal consideration ($1).   Teton County will have to purchase the building for fair market value and maintain the property for public use for the next 20 years. The County will be allowed to credit against the purchase price, costs related to maintenance and operations the County has already undertaken at the Courthouse and any income the County would otherwise receive for providing the Federal Courts access and use of the building.                                                                                         ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.SecondOpinions&ContentRecord_id=C669D4E2-D07A-7391-2072-2FA318E11080,Barrasso: Obamacare Continues to Get Worse,2014-09-09,2014,2014-09,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"Barrasso on Passage of National Defense Authorization Act WASHINGTON, D.C.— Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) issued the following statement regarding his vote to support final passage of the conference report to accompany H.R.2810, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Learn More",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140904235854/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.OpinionEditorials&ContentRecord_id=8c831e17-0ad1-effe-887c-95f97aa4b15d,Barrasso: Six Threats Bigger Than Climate Change,2014-08-29,2014,2014-08,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso: Six Threats Bigger Than Climate Change “The greatest threat to Americans ""right now"" is not climate change. The greatest threat is people with the intent and capacity to do us harm—and the president's failure to lead the fight against them."" August 29, 2014 August 29, 2014 Secretary of State John Kerry said during his January 2013 confirmation hearings that he would be a ""passionate advocate"" on climate-change issues, and he's living up to that promise. In a speech this month in Hawaii, Mr. Kerry called climate change ""the biggest challenge of all that we face right now."" Not 10, 20 or 100 years from now—right now. If only Mr. Kerry were right. Unfortunately, America faces much bigger immediate challenges and threats than climate change. Our enemies around the world are intent on harming us—right now. America's secretary of state should worry more about them and less about the Earth's temperature decades from now. Here's a list of a few challenges, all of which pose a greater threat to the world than climate change. It might help the president and his colleagues understand why Mr. Obama's foreign-policy approval rating is about 36%, according to an August poll by Gallup. • Iraq is a greater challenge than climate change. While the president now likes to pretend that he didn't force a total withdrawal of U.S. troops, Americans remember his 2008 campaign promise to do exactly that. When the U.S. leaves a vacuum, others will fill it. The barbaric Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or ISIS, is trying to build a base of operations in Iraq and Syria from which to attack the U.S. and its allies. The recent beheading of American journalist James Foley showed how serious ISIS is about ""drowning"" our nation in blood, as the group said in the video of the murder posted on YouTube. • Afghanistan. The administration says it still intends to pull out the remaining 30,000 troops by the end of 2016. If it does, the country will quickly become a terrorist haven once again. As with Iraq, the timetable seems to be mostly about the political calendar. The Obama administration seems to have lost the will to win. The terrorists have not. • Russia. President Obama was so intent on ""resetting"" U.S. relations with the Kremlin that he telegraphed a lack of resolve. President Vladimir Putin has only become more aggressive. That's led to Russian troops in Ukraine and Russian-supplied weapons shooting a passenger plane out of the sky. • An Iranian nuclear weapon. America's enemies have shown they are content to stall for time, while President Obama gets distracted. That's what's happening as the president continues to negotiate indefinitely on Iran's illicit nuclear program. An Obama administration desperate to strike a deal is likely to strike a bad one. It could leave in place an enrichment program that would be a pathway to a nuclear-armed Iran. • Syria. It has been more than three years since President Obama said the time had come for President Bashar Assad to step aside. The administration drew a ""red line"" on the use of chemical weapons, then did nothing when Assad crossed that line last summer. ISIS already has strongholds in Syria, while the Free Syrian Army desperately needs more U.S. assistance. • North Korea. The North Koreans continue to test nuclear weapons. They have held multiple tests of missile technology designed to reach the continental U.S. President Obama has done nothing at all about this. The White House has said its foreign policy rule is ""don't do stupid stuff,"" but putting climate change ahead of global threats fails that simple test. The United Nations will hold yet another conference on climate change next month, while the world burns. The greatest threat to Americans ""right now"" is not climate change. The greatest threat is people with the intent and capacity to do us harm—and the president's failure to lead the fight against them. Mr. Kerry's fixation on climate change is one reason America's friends no longer trust us and our enemies no longer fear us. The world is growing more dangerous as a result. Dr. Barrasso, a Republican, is a U.S. senator from Wyoming. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=4bf257ba-af3c-4a3d-ad35-175019138458,Barrasso Statement on Obama Backdoor International Climate Change Pact Scheme,2014-08-27,2014,2014-08,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C.Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement in response to the news that the Obama Administration intends to go around Congress to pursue a new international climate change agreement: For someone who lectures so much about income inequality, its the height of hypocrisy that the President is pursuing climate pacts that will increase poverty and put more Americans out of work. Once again, the President is trying to go around Congress and ignore Americans who cannot afford more expensive, extreme energy regulations. Its time for the President to finally listen to Americans who are completely opposed to job crushing international climate agreements in any form. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news-releases?ID=a793a866-13a2-4ddc-8857-bc6284d13bcb,"Barrasso, Alexander: Americans Deserve to See New, Accurate Obamacare Enrollment Data",2014-08-27,2014,2014-08,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,www.barrasso.senate.gov,,,legacy,"WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, U.S. Senators John Barrasso (R-WY) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) called on the Obama Administration to provide Congress and the American people with new and accurate information about the number of people who are enrolled in Obamacare exchange coverage. The administration has not released information on exchange enrollment to the public since May. In their letter to the Administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Marilyn Tavenner, the senators request a detailed breakdown of the age of the individuals who enrolled in the Obamacare exchange, what type of plans they enrolled in, who paid and did not pay their premiums, and which individuals have cancelled coverage. The letter also highlights recent investigations that call into question the accuracy of the enrollment figures trumpeted by the Administration this past May. Since the last enrollment report issued by CMS, numerous investigations raise questions about the accuracy of the enrollment figures trumpeted by the Administration in May. For example, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General found that the marketplace could not resolve 2.6 million out of 2.9 million inconsistencies because the eligibility system created by your agency was not fully operationalWith the next open enrollment period set to begin on November 15, 2014, it is imperative that CMS provide Congress and the public with accurate information about the number of people who are enrolled in exchange coverage as well as the number of people who have cancelled coverage, the senators wrote. Full text of the letter below: August 27, 2014 The Honorable Marilyn Tavenner Administrator Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 7500 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21244 Dear Administrator Tavenner, We are writing to ask that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) update Congress and the public regarding enrollment in the health insurance exchanges. The last public update by CMS on enrollment numbers was on May 1, 2014. Numerous Administration officials touted the enrollment totals reported by CMS. Former Secretary Sebelius was quick to praise CMSs report and stated that the exchange enrollment exceeded expectations. Since the last enrollment report issued by CMS, numerous investigations raise questions about the accuracy of the enrollment figures trumpeted by the Administration in May. For example, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General found that the marketplace could not resolve 2.6 million out of 2.9 million inconsistencies because the eligibility system created by your agency was not fully operational. In addition, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report detailing the results of their secret shopper investigation which attempted to test Obamacares enrollment controls. The results were frightening as eleven out of the twelve fake applications created by GAO were approved. Finally, your own agency recently acknowledged that over 300,000 people have not responded to problems found with their immigration and citizenship status. Despite repeated efforts to contact these individuals, they have not provided the documentation to prove that they can legally receive plans through the exchanges. Unless these people can address this problem, their exchange coverage will terminate on September 30th. With the next open enrollment period set to begin on November 15, 2014, it is imperative that CMS provide Congress and the public with accurate information about the number of people who are enrolled in exchange coverage as well as the number of people who have cancelled coverage. Therefore, we request you provide the following information. 1. The number of individuals who selected an insurance plan through the health insurance exchanges from the beginning of the 2014 open enrollment period through August 15, 2014. 2. The number of individuals who selected an exchange insurance plan, but failed to pay their first months premium. 3. The number of individuals who selected an exchange insurance plan and paid their first months premium. 4. The number of individuals who selected an exchange insurance plan, paid their first months premium, but then failed to make subsequent payments and therefore are no longer enrolled in their exchange insurance plan. To ensure this information provides the most complete picture of the number of individuals who are currently enrolled in exchange insurance policies, please provide a breakdown of these answers based on the state, medal level, and age of the enrollees. Thank you in advance for your attention to this request. We would appreciate a response by September 9, 2014. ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z https://web.archive.org/web/20140829002006/http://www.barrasso.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=f2a34aeb-0e2c-78b9-ab06-ddd30a860b5f,Barrasso Statement on Obama Backdoor International Climate Change Pact Scheme,2014-08-27,2014,2014-08,Republican,House,WY,John Barrasso,B001261,web.archive.org,,,legacy,"Barrasso Statement on Obama Backdoor International Climate Change Pact Scheme August 27, 2014 WASHINGTON, D.C.—Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) released the following statement in response to the news that the Obama Administration intends to go around Congress to pursue a new international climate change agreement:   “For someone who lectures so much about income inequality, it’s the height of hypocrisy that the President is pursuing climate pacts that will increase poverty and put more Americans out of work. Once again, the President is trying to go around Congress and ignore Americans who cannot afford more expensive, extreme energy regulations. It’s time for the President to finally listen to Americans who are completely opposed to job crushing international climate agreements in any form.”   ###",1,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z,2026-03-30T12:14:52Z