State Leg Report (2011)

MICHAEL S.
LEE COMMITTEES:
UTAH
JUDICIARY
SPENCER F. STOKES
United States Senate

CHIEF OF STAFF ENERGY AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4404
JOINT ECONOMIC
COMMITTEE
To the Utah State Legislature:
In many ways, 2011 was a transitional year for the country. The American people, tired
of broken promises, ushered in a wave of new faces into Congress and expected them to
begin immediately addressing the nation’s most pressing problems.
With a clear message from the people of Utah, we began working on fixing systemic flaws
in congressional procedure even before I was officially sworn in. I wrote a letter to Senate
Leadership in December of 2010 that ultimately lead to the earmark ban. That momentum
carried me into my first year in office when I began researching and developing solutions
to problems associated with Congress’s out-of-control spending, our mounting national
debt, the federal government’s overregulation of individuals and businesses, the
administration blocking access to America’s domestic energy resources, our inefficient
and lengthy immigration process, and a host of other national and Utah priorities.
Along the way, I visited with literally hundreds of Utah groups, associations, elected
officials, individual constituents, representatives from Utah’s schools and colleges, and
many others with interests before the U.S. Senate. We held town halls all over the state,
began a Mobile Office program to visit every county at least twice, and responded to
thousands of letters and phone calls.
This 2011 Annual Report is intended to chronicle the activities of my office over the past
year. I believe you will see we have been hard at work representing the people of Utah.
The Annual Report includes all of the legislation I have sponsored and cosponsored;
executive summaries of the work from the committees on which I sit; published press
releases, blogs, and other forms of communication; and many other items showing just
how we are working to improve the prosperity and liberty of Utahns.
Thank you for allowing me to serve you in Congress.
Michael S. Lee
United States Senator
316 Hart Senate Office Building • (202) 224-5444 • (202) 228-1168 Fax
Battleforthe
Balanced Budget
Amendment
Uni
tedSt
atesSenat
or
Mi
keLe
e
IIA
112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
S. J. RES. 5
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States requiring
that the Federal budget be balanced.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 3, 2011
Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. KYL, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. BURR, Mr. DEMINT, Mr.
GRAHAM, Mr. PAUL, Mr. RISCH, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. THUNE, Mr. TOOMEY,
Mr. VITTER, Mr. CRAPO, and Ms. AYOTTE) introduced the following joint
resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United
States requiring that the Federal budget be balanced.
1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled
3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol-
4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con-
5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all
6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when
7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
8 States:
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:20 Feb 04, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ5.IS SJ5
2
1 ‘‘ARTICLE —
2 ‘‘SECTION 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall
3 not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year.
4 ‘‘SECTION 2. Total outlays shall not exceed 18 per-
5 cent of the gross domestic product of the United States
6 for the calendar year ending prior to the beginning of such
7 fiscal year.
8 ‘‘SECTION 3. The Congress may provide for suspen-
9 sion of the limitations imposed by section 1 or 2 of this
10 article for any fiscal year for which two-thirds of the whole
11 number of each House shall provide, by a roll call vote,
12 for a specific excess of outlays over receipts or over 18
13 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States
14 for the calendar year ending prior to the beginning of such
15 fiscal year.
16 ‘‘SECTION 4. Any bill to levy a new tax or increase
17 the rate of any tax shall not become law unless approved
18 by two-thirds of the whole number of each House of Con-
19 gress by a roll call vote.
20 ‘‘SECTION 5. The limit on the debt of the United
21 States held by the public shall not be increased, unless
22 two-thirds of the whole number of each House of Congress
23 shall provide for such an increase by a roll call vote.
24 ‘‘SECTION 6. Any Member of Congress shall have
25 standing and a cause of action to seek judicial enforce-
•SJ 5 IS
3
1 ment of this article, when authorized to do so by a petition
2 signed by one-third of the Members of either House of
3 Congress. No court of the United States or of any State
4 shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.
5 ‘‘SECTION 7. The Congress shall have the power to
6 enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
7 ‘‘SECTION 8. Total receipts shall include all receipts
8 of the United States except those derived from borrowing.
9 Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States
10 except those for repayment of debt principal.
11 ‘‘SECTION 9. This article shall become effective begin-
12 ning with the second fiscal year commencing after its rati-
13 fication by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
14 States.’’.
Æ
•SJ 5 IS
II
Calendar No. 97
112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
S. 1340
To cut, cap, and balance the Federal budget.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 7, 2011
Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. TOOMEY, Mr. PAUL, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. JOHNSON
of Wisconsin, Mr. HATCH, Ms. AYOTTE, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. BLUNT, Mr.
BOOZMAN, Mr. COBURN, Mr. CORKER, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. ISAKSON, Mr.
PORTMAN, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. THUNE, Mr.
VITTER, and Mr. WICKER) introduced the following bill; which was read
the first time
JULY 11, 2011

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
A BILL
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Cut, Cap, and Balance

5 Act of 2011’’.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:22 Jul 11, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1340.PCS S1340
2
1 TITLE I—CUT
2 SEC. 101. REDUCTION OF 2012 SPENDING.
3 Fore purposes of section 302(a) of the Congressional

4 Budget Act of 1974, the estimated allocation of the appro-
5 priate levels of budget totals for fiscal year 2012 for the
6 Senate Committee on Appropriations shall be—
7 (1) $1,137,000,000,000 in total new budget au-
8 thority; and
9 (2) $1,277,000,000,000 in total budget outlays.
10 TITLE II—CAP
11 SEC. 201. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
12 It is the sense of Congress that Congress should

13 enact comprehensive tax reform that lowers marginal
14 rates, broadens the base, and simplifies the tax code to
15 increase economic growth while generating revenues that
16 are in line with the historical average of 18% of GDP.
17 SEC. 202. MODIFICATION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET
18 ACT.
19 Title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

20 is amended by inserting at the end the following:
21 ‘‘SEC. 316. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING LIMITS.
22 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

23 House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any
24 bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that
•S 1340 PCS
3
1 includes any provision that would cause the discretionary
2 spending limits as set forth in this section to be exceeded.
3 ‘‘(b) LIMITS.—In this section, the term ‘discretionary
4 spending limits’ has the following meaning:
5 ‘‘(1) For fiscal year 2012—
6 ‘‘(A) for the defense category (budget
7 function 050), $575,790,000,000 in budget au-
8 thority; and
9 ‘‘(B) for the non-defense category,
10 $435,000,000,000 in budget authority.
14 thority; and
20 thority; and
•S 1340 PCS
4
3 thority; and
9 thority; and
15 thority; and
21 thority; and
•S 1340 PCS
5
3 thority; and
9 thority; and
15 thority; and
18 ‘‘(c) ADJUSTMENTS.—After the reporting of a bill or
19 joint resolution relating to oversees deployments described
20 in subsection (d), or the offering of an amendment thereto
21 or the submission of a conference report thereon—
22 ‘‘(1) the Chairman of the Senate Committee on
23 the budget may adjust the discretionary spending
24 limits provided in this section, the budgetary aggre-

25 gates in the concurrent resolution on the budget
•S 1340 PCS
6
1 most recently adopted by the Senate and the House
2 of Representatives, and allocations pursuant to sec-
3 tion 302(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of
4 1974, by the amount of new budget authority in
5 that measure for that purpose and the outlays flow-
6 ing there from; and
7 ‘‘(2) following any adjustment under paragraph
8 (1), the Senate Committee on Appropriations may
9 report appropriately revised suballocations pursuant
10 to section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of
11 1974 to carry out this subsection.
12 ‘‘(d) OVERSEAS DEPLOYMENTS.—If a bill or joint
13 resolution is reported making appropriations for fiscal
14 year 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, or 2017 that provides
15 funding for overseas deployments and activities under-
16 taken as a result of a declaration of war or Congressional
17 authorization of force, the allowable adjustments provided
18 for in subsection (c) shall not exceed the following:
19 ‘‘(1) For fiscal year 2012, $126,500,000,000 in
20 budget authority.
•S 1340 PCS
7
2 budget authority.
4 budget authority.
6 budget authority.
7 ‘‘(e) POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.—
8 ‘‘(1) WAIVER.—The provisions of this section
9 shall be waived or suspended in the Senate only—
10 ‘‘(A) by the affirmative vote of two-thirds
11 of the Members, duly chosen and sworn; or
12 ‘‘(B) in the case of defense budget author-
13 ity, if Congress declares war or authorizes the
14 use of force
15 ‘‘(2) APPEAL.—Appeals in the Senate from de-
16 cisions of the Chair relating to any provision of this
17 section shall be limited to one hour, to be equally di-
18 vided between, and controlled by, the appellant and
19 the manager of the measure. An affirmative vote of
20 two-thirds of the Members of the Senate, duly cho-
21 sen and sworn, shall be required to sustain an ap-
22 peal of the ruling of the Chair on a point of order
23 raised under this section.
•S 1340 PCS
8
1 ‘‘SEC. 317. CERTAIN MANDATORY SPENDING LIMITS.

5 includes any provision that would cause total on-budget
6 mandatory spending, except as excluded in subsection (b),
7 to exceed the limits specified in subsection (c).
8 ‘‘(b) EXEMPT FROM SPECIFIED LIMITS.—The man-
9 datory components of the following functions are exempt
10 from the limits specified in subsection (c):
11 ‘‘(1) Social Security, function 650.
12 ‘‘(2) Medicare, function 570.
13 ‘‘(3) Veterans Benefits and Services, function
14 700.
15 ‘‘(4) Net Interest, function 900.
16 ‘‘(c) LIMITS ON REMAINING MANDATORY SPEND-
17 ING.—The total combined budget authority for all manda-
18 tory spending not exempted in subsection (b) shall not ex-
19 ceed the following limits:

•S 1340 PCS
9
2 budget authority.
4 budget authority.
6 budget authority.
8 budget authority.
13 ‘‘(10) For fiscal year 2021, $588,162,000,000
14 in budget authority.
15 ‘‘(d) POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.—
17 shall be waived or suspended in the Senate only by
18 the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Members,
19 duly chosen and sworn.

•S 1340 PCS
10
4 ‘‘SEC. 318. LIMITS FOR SOCIAL SECURITY.

8 includes any provision that would cause total mandatory
9 spending for Social Security (function 650) to exceed the
10 limits specified in subsection (b).
11 ‘‘(b) LIMITS.—
12 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this sec-
13 tion the limits are as follows:
14 ‘‘(A) For fiscal year 2012, total outlays
15 shall be $760,356,000,000.
16 ‘‘(B) For fiscal year 2013, total outlays
17 shall be $798,614,000,000.
18 ‘‘(C) For fiscal year 2014, total outlays
19 shall be $841,440,000,000.
20 ‘‘(D) For fiscal year 2015, total outlays
21 shall be $887,837,000,000.
22 ‘‘(E) For fiscal year 2016, total outlays
23 shall be $938,547,000,000.
24 ‘‘(F) For fiscal year 2017, total outlays

25 shall be $995,325,000,000.
•S 1340 PCS
11
1 ‘‘(G) For fiscal year 2018, total outlays
2 shall be $1,057,552,000,000.
3 ‘‘(H) For fiscal year 2019, total outlays
4 shall be $1,123,629,000,000.
5 ‘‘(I) For fiscal year 2020, total outlays
6 shall be $1,193,747,000,000.
7 ‘‘(J) For fiscal year 2021, total outlays
8 shall be $1,265,566,000,000.
9 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTION.—If the Congressional Budget
10 Office determines that projected outlays are expected
11 to exceed the limits specified above due to changes
12 in cost-of-living adjustments contained in present
13 law subsection (c) shall not apply.
14 ‘‘(c) POINT OF ORDER IN THE SENATE.—

•S 1340 PCS
12
3 ‘‘SEC. 319. LIMITS FOR MEDICARE.

8 spending for Medicare (function 570) to exceed the limits
9 specified in subsection (b).
10 ‘‘(b) LIMITS.—For purposes of this section the limits
11 are as follows:
12 ‘‘(1) For fiscal year 2012, total outlays, exclud-
13 ing offsetting receipts, shall be $488,060,000,000.

•S 1340 PCS
13
5 ‘‘(10) For fiscal year 2021, total outlays, ex-
6 cluding offsetting receipts, shall be
7 $858,830,000,000.
22 ‘‘SEC. 320. LIMITS FOR MANDATORY FUNCTION 700 SPEND-
23 ING.

•S 1340 PCS
14
3 spending for Veterans Benefits and Services (function
4 700) to exceed the limits specified in subsection (b).
5 ‘‘(b) LIMITS.—For purposes of this section the limits
6 are as follows:
7 ‘‘(1) For fiscal year 2012, total outlays shall
8 not exceed $69,400,000,000.
10 not exceed $69,400,000,000.
12 not exceed $71,350,000,000.
14 not exceed $73,300,000,000.
16 not exceed $80,500,000,000.
18 not exceed $77,310,000,000.
20 not exceed $74,250,000,000.
22 not exceed $81,600,000,000.
24 not exceed $83,830,000,000.
•S 1340 PCS
15
2 not exceed $86,100,000,000.
16 raised under this section.’’.
17 SEC. 203. STATUTORY ENFORCEMENT OF SPENDING CAPS
18 THROUGH SEQUESTRATION.
19 The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control

20 Act of 1985 is amended by inserting after section 253 the
21 following:
22 ‘‘SEC. 253A. ENFORCEMENT OF DISCRETIONARY AND MAN-
23 DATORY CAPS.
24 ‘‘(a) ANNUAL REPORT AND SEQUESTRATION

25 ORDER.—
•S 1340 PCS
16
1 ‘‘(1) REPORT.—Not later than 30 calendar
2 days following the start of each fiscal year, the Of-
3 fice of Management and Budget shall make publicly
4 available and cause to be printed in the Federal
5 Register an annual report containing expected budg-
6 et authority and outlays for the categories and limits
7 established in sections 316 through 320 of the Con-
8 gressional Budget Act of 1974. The limits estab-
9 lished in such sections shall be enforced without re-
10 gard to the waiver of such limits by either House.
11 ‘‘(2) ORDER.—If the annual report issued by
12 OMB, as required by paragraph (1), shows any cat-
13 egory exceeding specified spending caps, OMB shall
14 prepare and the President shall issue and include in
15 that report a sequestration order that, upon
16 issuance, shall reduce budgetary resources by an
17 amount sufficient to bring spending in line with that
18 category’s statutory cap.
19 ‘‘(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The sequestration
20 order shall take effect no later than 60 days after
21 completion by the OMB.
22 ‘‘(b) CALCULATING A SEQUESTRATION.—
23 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—OMB shall calculate the
24 uniform percentage each program within a category

25 that has exceeded its spending cap shall be reduced
•S 1340 PCS
17
1 to bring that category’s budget authority and/or out-
2 lays in line with the limits referred to in subsection
3 (a)(1).
4 ‘‘(2) IMPLEMENTATION.—The sequesters shall
5 be implemented as follows:
6 ‘‘(A) For the discretionary limits in section
7 316 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974,
8 pursuant to the section 251 with each category
9 sequestered separately.
10 ‘‘(B) For the mandatory limits in section
11 317 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974,
12 pursuant to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act
13 of 2010, except that section 7 of such Act shall
14 not apply.
15 ‘‘(C) For the Social Security limits in sec-
16 tion 318 of the Congressional Budget Act of
17 1974, the Social Security Administration shall
18 modify the program so that all benefits and ad-
19 ministrative expenses are reduced in a uniform
20 fashion by a percentage sufficient to allow the
21 program to operate under its cap.
22 ‘‘(D) For the Medicare limit in section 319
23 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
24 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

25 (CMS) shall modify the program so that all
•S 1340 PCS
18
1 outlays are reduced by a uniform percentage
2 sufficient to bring the program under its cap.
3 ‘‘(E) For the Veterans Benefits and Serv-
4 ices limit in section 320 of the Congressional
5 Budget Act of 1974, the Secretary of Defense
6 and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall
7 modify the program so that the program oper-
8 ates under its spending cap.
9 ‘‘(c) MODIFICATION OF PRESIDENTIAL ORDER.—
10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—At any time after the Di-
11 rector of OMB issues a sequestration report, Con-
12 gress may override the order through the passage of
13 a law that either waves or supersedes the spending
14 limitations for that category of federal spending for
15 that fiscal year.
16 ‘‘(2) SENATE.—In the Senate, any motion to
17 move to consideration of a bill to waive, modify, or
18 in any way alter a sequestration order shall be sub-
19 ject to a point of order that can only be waived
20 through an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the
21 Members, duly chosen and sworn. This point of
22 order shall not apply to defense spending while the
23 nation is engaged in a conflict which has been justi-
24 fied through a declaration of war or a Congressional

25 authorization of force.’’.
•S 1340 PCS
19
1 TITLE III—BALANCE
2 SEC. 301. REQUIREMENT THAT BBA BE SUBMITTED TO
3 STATES.
4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury

5 shall not exercise the additional borrowing authority under
6 subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States
7 Code until the date that the Archivist of the United States
8 transmits to the States S.J. Res. 10 as introduced on
9 March 31, 2011, a balanced budget amendment to the
10 Constitution, or a similar amendment provided it requires
11 that total outlays not exceed total receipts, that contains
12 a spending limitation as a percentage of GDP, and re-
13 quires that tax increases be approved by a super-majority
14 vote in both houses of Congress, for their ratification.
15 (b) AMENDMENT TO TITLE 31.—Effective on the
16 date that the Archivist of the United States transmits to
17 the States S.J. Res. 10, a balanced budget amendment
18 to the Constitution, or a similar amendment provided it
19 requires that total outlays not exceed total receipts, that
20 contains a spending limitation as a percentage of GDP,
21 and requires that tax increases be approved by a super-
22 majority vote in both houses of Congress, for their ratifi-
23 cation, subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United
24 States Code, is amended by striking the dollar limitation
•S 1340 PCS
20
1 contained in such subsection and inserting
2 $16,700,000,000,000.
•S 1340 PCS
Calendar No. 97
112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION S. 1340
A BILL
JULY 11, 2011

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
Vote No. 30
PATENT REFORM/Balanced Budget Amendment
SUBJECT: Patent Reform Act of 2011, S. 23. Lee/Manchin amendment

No. 115.
ACTION: Amendment Rejected, 58-40

IN BRIEF:
The Lee amendment would express the sense of the Senate that Congress
should pass and the States should agree to an amendment to the
Constitution requiring a Federal balanced budget.
CONTEXT:
1) As of February 7, the national debt was $14.104 trillion. The national debt
includes both debt held by the public and debt that the Government owes to
itself, mostly to trust funds.
2) Debt held by the public places a burden on the economy because the
Government borrows scarce private capital to incur and service such debt. If
credit markets tighten, borrowing costs climb. If the debt gets too high the
Government will have to monetize it or default. Debt owed to trust funds
represents a future obligation to spend at least the amount in the funds--it
does not involve borrowing from the public.
3) Debt held by the public stayed under 40 percent of GDP under President
Bush for 6 years. Democrats then gained control of Congress and increased
spending. They expanded their majorities in the 2008 elections and won the
presidency. Borrowing and spending grew greatly in 2009. Under President
Obama, debt held by the public is on course to double in 4 years and triple in
10.
4) Deficits from FYs 2004-2008 were as follows: $412 billion, $318 billion,
$248 billion, $162 billion, and $455 billion (due in part to the 2008 stimulus
bill). The FY 2009 deficit was $1.413 trillion, for FY 2010 it was $1.294
trillion, and for FY 2011 it is projected to be $1.480 trillion (as estimated by
the CBO in February) or $1.645 trillion (as estimated in the President's FY
2012 budget).
5) Democrats suffered historic losses in the mid-term elections (6 Senate

seats and over 60 House seats) due in large part to voter anger over massive
deficit spending by Democrats.
YEAs ---58
Alexander (R-TN) Ensign (R-NV) McConnell (R-KY)
Ayotte (R-NH) Enzi (R-WY) Moran (R-KS)
Barrasso (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Murkowski (R-AK)
Begich (D-AK) Grassley (R-IA) Nelson (D-FL)
Bennet (D-CO) Hatch (R-UT) Nelson (D-NE)
Blunt (R-MO) Hoeven (R-ND) Paul (R-KY)
Boozman (R-AR) Hutchison (R-TX) Portman (R-OH)
Brown (D-OH) Inhofe (R-OK) Risch (R-ID)
Brown (R-MA) Isakson (R-GA) Roberts (R-KS)
Burr (R-NC) Johanns (R-NE) Rubio (R-FL)
Carper (D-DE) Johnson (R-WI) Sessions (R-AL)
Chambliss (R-GA) Kirk (R-IL) Shelby (R-AL)
Coats (R-IN) Kohl (D-WI) Snowe (R-ME)
Coburn (R-OK) Kyl (R-AZ) Thune (R-SD)
Cochran (R-MS) Lee (R-UT) Toomey (R-PA)
Collins (R-ME) Lieberman (ID-CT) Udall (D-CO)
Corker (R-TN) Lugar (R-IN) Vitter (R-LA)
Cornyn (R-TX) Manchin (D-WV) Wicker (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID) McCain (R-AZ)
DeMint (R-SC) McCaskill (D-MO)
NAYs ---40
Akaka (D-HI) Harkin (D-IA) Reid (D-NV)
Baucus (D-MT) Inouye (D-HI) Rockefeller (D-WV)
Bingaman (D-NM) Johnson (D-SD) Sanders (I-VT)
Blumenthal (D-CT) Kerry (D-MA) Schumer (D-NY)
Boxer (D-CA) Klobuchar (D-MN) Shaheen (D-NH)
Cantwell (D-WA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Stabenow (D-MI)
Cardin (D-MD) Leahy (D-VT) Tester (D-MT)
Casey (D-PA) Levin (D-MI) Udall (D-NM)
Coons (D-DE) Menendez (D-NJ) Warner (D-VA)
Durbin (D-IL) Merkley (D-OR) Webb (D-VA)
Feinstein (D-CA) Mikulski (D-MD) Whitehouse (D-RI)
Franken (D-MN) Murray (D-WA) Wyden (D-OR)
Gillibrand (D-NY) Pryor (D-AR)
Hagan (D-NC) Reed (D-RI)
Not Voting - 2
Conrad (D-ND) Landrieu (D-LA)

Vote No. 116
CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE/Motion to Proceed
SUBJECT: Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011, H.R. 2560. Reid motion
to table the Reid motion to proceed.
ACTION: Motion to Table Agreed to, 51-46

IN BRIEF:
This House-passed bill will cut spending by setting FY 2012 discretionary
and direct spending caps (with exclusions for Social Security, Veterans, and
Medicare), will quickly reduce total outlays as a percentage of GDP to normal
levels and will cap them through FY 2021, and, if Congress first passes a
balanced budget constitutional amendment and sends it to the States for
ratification, will raise the debt limit to $16.7 trillion, as requested by the
President.
CONTEXT:
1) Financial markets nearly collapsed late in 2008 due to bad mortgage debt.
Democrats then won the presidency and gained large majorities in Congress.
Their gains were largely due to voters believing that Republicans had been
overspending. Democrats immediately began a spending spree.
2) Democrats said their spending would keep the unemployment rate from
climbing above 8 percent; it rose to 10.1 percent and has yet to fall under 8
percent (it is now 9.2 percent). The economy and housing market were weak
before this spending spree began. They remain weak.
3) The FY 2010 Obama budget planned on doubling the debt held by the
public in 5 years and tripling it in 10; it has been growing more rapidly. Debt
held by the public has grown from 40 percent of GDP in 2008 to a projected
69 percent of GDP in 2011. The CBO March baseline projects a $1.4 trillion
FY 2011 deficit. Many experts predict a debt crisis will occur within the next
few years if deficit spending is not substantially reduced.
4) Democrats adjourned for the 2010 elections without having passed any of
the FY 2011 appropriations bills (funding was provided on a series of short-
term resolutions) or even a budget. They suffered historic losses and control
of the House in those elections. House Republicans have passed a budget this
year; the Senate Budget Committee, under Democrat control, has not
reported a budget. It is required by law to do so by March 31 of each year. On
May 19, the Majority Leader said it would be "foolish" to produce a budget
now.
5) The debt limit was reached on May 16. The Treasury Department projects
it will be able to use existing authorities to preserve borrowing authority
without breaching the limit until August 2. Negotiations on the terms under
which the limit will be raised are ongoing. The Vice President was
representing the Administration.
6) The President joined the negotiations after an impasse was reached in late
June because Democrats suddenly insisted on raising taxes. The President
has argued for roughly $1 trillion in new taxes with the promise that roughly
$3 trillion in unspecified spending cuts will be made over an unspecified time
frame.
7) Democrats have expressed support for higher taxes on millionaires,

Republicans have sought passage of the pending bill, and a bipartisan group
of Senators (the "Gang of 6") has issued a deficit-reduction outline calling for
large immediate cuts followed by more cuts and a large net tax increase over
the current policy baseline.
Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---51
Akaka (D-HI) Hagan (D-NC) Nelson (D-FL)
Baucus (D-MT) Harkin (D-IA) Nelson (D-NE)
Begich (D-AK) Inouye (D-HI) Pryor (D-AR)
Bennet (D-CO) Johnson (D-SD) Reed (D-RI)
Bingaman (D-NM) Klobuchar (D-MN) Reid (D-NV)
Blumenthal (D-CT) Kohl (D-WI) Rockefeller (D-WV)
Boxer (D-CA) Landrieu (D-LA) Sanders (I-VT)
Brown (D-OH) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Schumer (D-NY)
Cantwell (D-WA) Leahy (D-VT) Shaheen (D-NH)
Cardin (D-MD) Levin (D-MI) Stabenow (D-MI)
Carper (D-DE) Lieberman (ID-CT) Tester (D-MT)
Casey (D-PA) Manchin (D-WV) Udall (D-CO)
Conrad (D-ND) McCaskill (D-MO) Udall (D-NM)
Coons (D-DE) Menendez (D-NJ) Warner (D-VA)
Durbin (D-IL) Merkley (D-OR) Webb (D-VA)
Feinstein (D-CA) Mikulski (D-MD) Whitehouse (D-RI)
Franken (D-MN) Murray (D-WA) Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs ---46
Alexander (R-TN) Enzi (R-WY) Moran (R-KS)
Ayotte (R-NH) Graham (R-SC) Murkowski (R-AK)
Barrasso (R-WY) Grassley (R-IA) Paul (R-KY)
Blunt (R-MO) Hatch (R-UT) Portman (R-OH)
Boozman (R-AR) Heller (R-NV) Risch (R-ID)
Brown (R-MA) Hoeven (R-ND) Roberts (R-KS)
Burr (R-NC) Hutchison (R-TX) Rubio (R-FL)
Chambliss (R-GA) Inhofe (R-OK) Sessions (R-AL)
Coats (R-IN) Isakson (R-GA) Shelby (R-AL)
Coburn (R-OK) Johanns (R-NE) Snowe (R-ME)
Cochran (R-MS) Johnson (R-WI) Thune (R-SD)
Collins (R-ME) Kirk (R-IL) Toomey (R-PA)
Corker (R-TN) Kyl (R-AZ) Vitter (R-LA)
Cornyn (R-TX) Lee (R-UT) Wicker (R-MS)
Crapo (R-ID) Lugar (R-IN)
DeMint (R-SC) McConnell (R-KY)
Not Voting - 3
Gillibrand (D-NY) Kerry (D-MA) McCain (R-AZ)

Vote No. 229
BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT/Rejection

SUBJECT: Joint resolution proposing a balanced budget amendment
to the Constitution of the United States, S.J. Res. 10. Passage.
ACTION: Joint Resolution Defeated, 47-53

IN BRIEF:
This resolution sponsored by Senate Republicans proposes an amendment to
the Constitution to require a balanced budget each year beginning 5 years
after ratification; under the proposal, spending in a year will not exceed 18
percent of GDP, two-thirds majority votes in each House will be required to
raise taxes or deficit spend (lower thresholds will apply during declared wars
or military conflicts), and three-fifths majority votes will be required to raise
the debt limit.
CONTEXT:
1) In 1995, the House approved a balanced budget constitutional amendment
but the Senate fell one vote shy of doing the same after 6 Senate Democrats
who had supported an identical proposal the previous Congress changed their
votes (see 104th Congress, first session, vote No. 98). The national debt at
that time was less than $4.9 trillion. It is now over $15 trillion; $4.5 trillion of
this amount has been accumulated since President Obama took office.
2) More than $4 trillion of the $4.5 trillion increase under this President has
been in debt held by the public, which has reached $10.4 trillion (the
remainder is intragovernmental debt, which represents future promises to
spend but does not require borrowing from either non-Federal entities or the
Federal Reserve). Federal debt as a percentage of GDP is approaching the
level at which other deeply indebted governments have defaulted.
3) The debt limit was reached in May but the Treasury Department used
existing authorities to avoid breaching it until a compromise was reached and
enacted on August 2 to increase the limit and cut deficit spending (see vote
No. 123). The compromise includes a section requiring each House to vote on
passage of a balanced budget constitutional amendment no later than
December 31, 2011. Constitutional amendments require two-thirds majority
votes of Members present and voting in each House and ratification by three-
fourths of the States.
4) The House failed to pass a balanced budget constitutional amendment

proposed by Republicans by a vote of 261-165 on November 18. House
Republicans had weakened their proposal in an attempt to gain Democrat
support. They gained the votes of 25 Democrats and lost the votes of 4
Republicans.
5) The Senate has agreed by unanimous consent to consider and vote without
amendment on two balanced budget constitutional amendments, the first of
which is sponsored by Republicans and the second of which is sponsored by
those Senate Democrats who say they favor a constitutional balanced budget
requirement but oppose the spending limits and restrictions on tax hikes in
the Republican proposal.
YEAs ---47
Alexander (R-TN) Enzi (R-WY) McConnell (R-KY)
Ayotte (R-NH) Graham (R-SC) Moran (R-KS)
Barrasso (R-WY) Grassley (R-IA) Murkowski (R-AK)
Blunt (R-MO) Hatch (R-UT) Paul (R-KY)
Boozman (R-AR) Heller (R-NV) Portman (R-OH)
Brown (R-MA) Hoeven (R-ND) Risch (R-ID)
Burr (R-NC) Hutchison (R-TX) Roberts (R-KS)
Chambliss (R-GA) Inhofe (R-OK) Rubio (R-FL)
Coats (R-IN) Isakson (R-GA) Sessions (R-AL)
Coburn (R-OK) Johanns (R-NE) Shelby (R-AL)
Cochran (R-MS) Johnson (R-WI) Snowe (R-ME)
Collins (R-ME) Kirk (R-IL) Thune (R-SD)
Corker (R-TN) Kyl (R-AZ) Toomey (R-PA)
Cornyn (R-TX) Lee (R-UT) Vitter (R-LA)
Crapo (R-ID) Lugar (R-IN) Wicker (R-MS)
DeMint (R-SC) McCain (R-AZ)
NAYs ---53
Akaka (D-HI) Hagan (D-NC) Nelson (D-FL)
Baucus (D-MT) Harkin (D-IA) Nelson (D-NE)
Begich (D-AK) Inouye (D-HI) Pryor (D-AR)
Bennet (D-CO) Johnson (D-SD) Reed (D-RI)
Bingaman (D-NM) Kerry (D-MA) Reid (D-NV)
Blumenthal (D-CT) Klobuchar (D-MN) Rockefeller (D-WV)
Boxer (D-CA) Kohl (D-WI) Sanders (I-VT)
Brown (D-OH) Landrieu (D-LA) Schumer (D-NY)
Cantwell (D-WA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Shaheen (D-NH)
Cardin (D-MD) Leahy (D-VT) Stabenow (D-MI)
Carper (D-DE) Levin (D-MI) Tester (D-MT)
Casey (D-PA) Lieberman (ID-CT) Udall (D-CO)
Conrad (D-ND) Manchin (D-WV) Udall (D-NM)
Coons (D-DE) McCaskill (D-MO) Warner (D-VA)
Durbin (D-IL) Menendez (D-NJ) Webb (D-VA)
Feinstein (D-CA) Merkley (D-OR) Whitehouse (D-RI)
Franken (D-MN) Mikulski (D-MD) Wyden (D-OR)
Gillibrand (D-NY) Murray (D-WA)

Why we need a balanced-budget amendment - Op-Eds - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=cb4930...
Mike Lee, United States Senator for Utah

Op-Eds
Mar 04 2011
Why we need a balanced-

budget amendment
Turning rhetoric into reality
By Mike Lee
As originally published by the Washington Post
Amending the Constitution is not easy, nor should it be. That the
Constitution has been amended just 27 times demonstrates that the process is
reserved for only the most important circumstances. Our nation's critical
need to balance the federal budget rises to that level.
Any effort to amend the Constitution will start in the Senate Judiciary
Committee. So far, five other Republican members of the committee, on
which I serve, have introduced or co-sponsored a balanced-budget
amendment.
This week, 58 senators - including all 47 Republicans, 10 Democrats and

Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent - recognized this urgent need and
expressed support for a balanced-budget requirement. I have put forward a
proposal that would require a balanced budget every fiscal year; limit federal
spending to 18 percent of gross domestic product; and require a two-thirds
vote in Congress to increase taxes, raise the debt limit or run a specific
deficit.
A similar measure in the House has more than 120 co-sponsors.
This is a vital issue and one on which I am committed to lead the effort in
the Senate.
The vast majority of states have constitutional or statutory mandates to
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:20 PM
balance their budgets each fiscal period. Even during this tough economic
climate, most states have been able to prioritize their obligations and make
tough choices. The federal government should be expected to do the same.
First, a balanced-budget requirement will ensure we do not continue to drive

our country further into debt by trying to do all things for all people. There
are some programs we simply cannot afford, but deficit spending makes it
too easy not to say no.
When Republicans and Democrats are forced to spend only what we take in,
Congress will not be able to sidestep tough decisions about our national
priorities.
Second, balancing our budget today will avoid even tougher choices
tomorrow. Proponents of investments in areas such as education,
infrastructure and energy should welcome a balanced-budget amendment
because it will help make money available in the future for these priorities.
Under the president's recent budget proposal, which runs a deficit every year,
payments on the national debt will quadruple over the next decade, crowding
out important resources.
Delaying the inevitable only increases the severity of the cuts to important
programs.
Finally, a structural budget restraint is necessary to overcome Congress's

insatiable appetite to spend. Both parties deserve blame for irresponsible
spending. A balanced-budget amendment is the only way to ensure that
Congress acts in the best interest of the country, regardless of who is in
power.
Critics worry that an amendment that requires a two-thirds vote to

circumvent under any circumstance may prove problematic in the case of an
emergency. But history shows that in real emergencies, it is not difficult for
Congress to produce a supermajority.
Three days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the House passed an
emergency supplemental spending bill, 422 to 0. The Senate passed it 96 to
0.
In contrast, Americans were told that President Obama's stimulus bill was a
necessary response to an economic emergency. After passing on pure
party-line votes in the House (246 to 183) and Senate (60 to 38), the bill
failed to create the kind of job growth the president promised. The stimulus
would not have passed had it been held to the standards of our proposal,
which required a two-thirds vote, and that would have saved taxpayers
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:20 PM
nearly $1 trillion.
I am ready and willing to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
to see that a balanced-budget amendment clears the Judiciary Committee and
receives a full vote on the floor of the Senate. My proposal is strict,
enforceable and holds the federal government to a necessarily higher
standard.
Other senators have good ideas, and I am open to considering and

incorporating additional proposals as long as a meaningful balanced-budget
amendment remains in effect.
The federal government has run out of excuses. I agree with the president
that the federal government can and should live within its means. A
balanced-budget amendment will turn that rhetoric into a reality.
The writer is a Republican senator from Utah.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/why-we-
need-a-balanced-budget-amendment
3 of 3 2/3/12 1:20 PM
Reforms, Not Just Cuts, Needed Before Debt-Ceiling Increase -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=f84350...

Op-Eds
Apr 25 2011
Reforms, Not Just Cuts, Needed

Before Debt-Ceiling Increase
In response to the Obama Administration’s efforts to force a debt-ceiling
increase, a number of Republicans and even a few Democrats have
demanded spending cuts. Reducing short-term spending is important and
enjoys widespread support among the American people, but raising the debt
ceiling without fundamental, structural spending reforms would be a
mistake.
Like many conservatives, I was disappointed by the spending cuts agreed to

as part of the most recent continuing resolution. I was of course pleased that
we were talking about how much to cut rather than whether to cut.
Nevertheless, the final deal perpetuated our country’s debt problem, reducing
spending by just $38 billion (much less than that, according to the
Congressional Budget Office) in the face of a $1.65 trillion annual deficit.
Worse, it did nothing to address the underlying reasons for our ballooning
debt.
By some estimates, we would have to raise the debt ceiling by $738 billion
in order to fund government at current levels through the end of this fiscal
year. Even an additional $40 to $50 billion in spending cuts would be trivial
when compared to our current deficit and our almost-$15 trillion debt.
Those who insist that we have no choice in this matter ignore the grave risks
associated with raising the debt ceiling yet again without making any serious
effort to address the underlying problem. It would therefore be irresponsible
to raise the debt ceiling without first adopting a reliable, binding mechanism
—i.e., a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget—to end its
perpetual expansion.
For that very reason, I will oppose any and every effort to raise the debt
ceiling until Congress passes a balanced budget amendment and presents it
to the States for ratification. I invite members of both political parties and
both houses of Congress to join me (and a growing list of others) in making
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:20 PM
Reforms, Not Just Cuts, Needed Before Debt-Ceiling Increase -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=f84350...
this pledge. Only by passing a balanced budget amendment can Congress

credibly assure the American people that they won’t have to endure a repeat
performance of the debt-ceiling charade every few months for the rest of
their lives. Such fundamental reform would, moreover, send a positive
signal to financial markets, help reaffirm the value of our currency, and put
us on a path toward more meaningful and permanent spending reductions.
Now is the time to pass a balanced budget amendment. The amendment I

have cosponsored with Senator Orrin Hatch has the support of the entire
Senate Republican Conference. In March, a sense of the Senate resolution
expressing the need for a balanced budget amendment attracted all 47 GOP
Senators, plus 11 votes from Democrats, leaving us just 9 votes short of the
67 needed to pass a constitutional amendment.
A House version of the Hatch-Lee amendment is gaining momentum and,

with a strong Republican majority in the House, the odds are good that it
would receive significant support if brought to the floor for a vote.
Americans overwhelmingly favor a constitutional amendment requiring a
balanced budget. And unlike another short-term spending bill, it would not
be subject to a presidential veto.
Some insist that we simply must raise the debt ceiling, and that a decision
not to do so would be unthinkable. If those making that assertion really
believe it, then they should be willing to make significant concessions in
order to secure the votes of those who—like me—are equally convinced that
the truly unthinkable consists of blindly extending the debt limit without
permanently restricting Congress’s deficit-spending authority. The only way
to do that is through a balanced budget amendment. I will continue to
oppose any effort to raise the debt ceiling until Congress passes a balanced
budget amendment. If every Republican will make the same pledge, we will
pass a balanced budget amendment this year, effectively ending the era of
perpetual deficit spending.
Mike Lee is a U.S. Seantor from Utah.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/4/reforms-
not-just-cuts-needed-before-debt-ceiling-increase
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:20 PM
Breaking the Debt-Ceiling Cycle - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mik... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=66cb4e...

Op-Eds
Apr 27 2011
Breaking the Debt-Ceiling Cycle

"We will raise the debt limit. We always have. We will do it again.” — Pres.
Barack Obama
President Obama’s words highlight the charade that surrounds the recurring
debate over whether it is in America’s best interest to increase the debt
ceiling. The president articulates a simple sentiment that pervades his
administration: Business in Washington is best when it’s business as usual.
The pattern of pretending to debate the factors contributing to Washington’s

debt addiction is a rehearsal of rhetoric that, while increasingly circular,
produces one-directional results. As the arguments for and against raising
the debt ceiling make their way back and forth between the White House and
Congress, continuing this exercise without a balanced-budget amendment in
place means that the debt ceiling will perpetually move in only one
direction: up.
With the political will for debt reform gaining momentum — propelled by
the nation’s declining credit rating, rising oil prices, and high unemployment
— it is clear that the status quo can no longer be king. The debt-ceiling
charade must come to an end, and the federal government must implement
binding, permanent, structural spending reforms — most important, a
balanced-budget amendment.
Blindly raising the debt ceiling yet again carries significant risk — indeed, a
risk that easily rivals that associated with not raising it. In the last three
years, gross federal debt has grown from 64 percent to 93 percent of GDP.
Debt of this magnitude crowds out much-needed private investment and
could lead to reduced private-sector growth, persistent unemployment, a
devastating fiscal crisis (think of Greece), and skyrocketing interest rates.
The financial shortfalls created by such conditions could seriously impair
Congress’s ability to fund everything from defense to entitlements.
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Too often in the current debate, Washington overlooks these daunting threats
to our economy that will result from perpetually increasing our national debt.
Instead of acknowledging those threats and trying to address them, the
establishment uses scare tactics that have proven reliable in the past.
For example, Treasury secretary Tim Geithner, following the lead of past
administration officials, presents only the doomsday scenario in which the
economic consequences of not raising the debt ceiling would be
“catastrophic.” Having abdicated its duty to develop a responsible fiscal
policy, the federal government forces the American taxpayer to choose
between taking on more debt and facing the “unthinkable.”
As history suggests, the strategy of creating a debt-ceiling boogeyman works

every time, and, without a balanced-budget amendment in place to stop it,
the cycle continues. Elected officials who have grown dependent on
perpetual deficit spending will again quickly reach the limit on each credit
card the taxpayers reluctantly give them. Having maxed out one card, they
habitually demand another, using threats of fiscal Armageddon to extort
taxpayers into giving them “just one more.”
Unfortunately, as the president reminds us, they will do it again — that is,
unless we insist that this time be different. This time, the American people
should refuse to let Congress raise the debt ceiling without first passing a
balanced-budget amendment, one that would compel Congress to hold the
line on future spending. And considering that Americans overwhelmingly
oppose raising the debt ceiling but overwhelmingly support the idea of
balanced-budget amendment, it shouldn’t be too difficult for members of
Congress — especially those who agree that refusing to raise the debt ceiling
would be “unthinkable” — to commit to passing a balanced-budget
amendment before (and as a means of gaining public support for) raising the
debt ceiling.
Recently, all 47 Senate Republicans signed on to Senate Joint Resolution 10,

a balanced-budget amendment proposal sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch and
me that would prohibit Congress from spending more than it collects each
year unless two-thirds of the members of both houses voted to authorize a
limited deficit for a specified purpose. It would likewise prohibit Congress
from spending more than 18 percent of annual GDP, raising taxes, or raising
the debt ceiling without a supermajority vote in both houses. Similar
legislation, introduced just a few days ago by Rep. Joe Walsh of Illinois, is
gathering momentum in the House. Under this proposal, a simple majority of
Congress couldn’t impulsively raise the debt ceiling to accommodate
perpetual spending increases.
As this debate moves forward, I will aggressively oppose efforts to raise the
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
debt ceiling until both the Senate and the House pass the Hatch-Lee
Balanced Budget Amendment. I invite my colleagues in both parties and in
both houses of Congress to do the same. Those who fail to do so will render
prophetic President Obama’s words: “We will raise the debt limit. We always
have. We will do it again.”
This Article was Originally Published in the National Review Online
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/4/breaking-
the-debt-ceiling-cycle
3 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Cut, Cap, and Balance - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mike Lee, Unit... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=3839d6...

Op-Eds
Jun 27 2011
Cut, Cap, and Balance

by Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee
It’s been called the most preventable disaster in American history.
The coming debt crisis is so predictable it’s difficult to find a single

economist, expert, politician or American taxpayer who doesn’t warn of the
consequences of spending and borrowing ourselves into oblivion.
A recent publication from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office

called America’s debt problem “daunting”. The debt-to-GDP ratio has just
crossed 90%, a threshold linked to lower average economic growth. If left
unchecked, our ballooning debt will almost certainly lead to the country’s
long-term economic decline.
Fortunately, the solution is basic and one that is followed by most

responsible state and local governments, families and business owners.
When faced with tough times they know they must eliminate spending on
the things that aren’t absolutely essential. Then they make a budget for the
things they need and have the discipline to stay within that budget. Finally,
they stop borrowing and spend no more than they take in.
These steps are the common-sense force behind a bold new proposal in
Congress that will put the country on a fiscally sustainable path and
fundamentally change the way Washington spends money. It’s called “Cut,
Cap, and Balance.”
First, Congress must make immediate spending cuts that will significantly
reduce the deficit. Next, it must enact spending caps that put the federal
government on a glide path toward a balanced budget. And finally, Congress
must pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution that forces
Congress to spend no more than it takes in each year, limits spending as a
percentage of the gross domestic product, and requires a supermajority to
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Cut, Cap, and Balance - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mike Lee, Unit... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=3839d6...
increase taxes or raise the debt ceiling.
Cut, Cap, and Balance is a common-sense proposal for dealing with the most
significant economic and fiscal crisis since the Great Depression. It directly
addresses the fundamental problems of a system that encourages
overspending and unsustainable borrowing. The hard choices can no longer
be put off. We must take action immediately.
To that end, we have both signed the Cut, Cap, and Balance Pledge, which
commits signers to oppose any increase in the nation’s debt ceiling until all
three of the plan’s conditions have been satisfied. We believe the federal
government should not plunge the country deeper into debt unless it first
directly addresses the underlying problem and makes fundamental structural
changes to the way Washington spends taxpayer money.
To date, not a single Democrat in Congress has signaled support for the Cut,
Cap, and Balance approach. Instead, they have called for more reckless
spending and irresponsible job-killing tax increases. We will continue to
press our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to sign the pledge, support a
balanced budget amendment, and pass debt ceiling legislation consistent
with Cut, Cap, and Balance.
We know what needs to be done; we just need the will to act. Now is the
time to cut the deficit, cap future spending, and balance our budget to
preserve the prosperity of the next generation.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/cut-cap-
and-balance
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Obama's "Recovery" Worst in Modern Times - Op-Eds - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=1da6f8...

Op-Eds
Jul 08 2011
Obama's "Recovery" Worst in

Modern Times
The evidence that President Obama’s economic policies have failed
continues to mount.
The unemployment rate notched up to 9.2 percent in June. The Bureau of

Labor Statistics reported that the labor force fell by more than a quarter of a
million workers, dropping the labor force participation rate to 64.1 percent -
the lowest rate of labor force participation in nearly 30 years.
While no one expected our economic problems to be solved “overnight,”

there was the reasonable expectation that our bounce back from the
downturn that began in 2007 would proceed along the lines of previous
recoveries after recessions. History tells us that today, more than three years
after the recession began, things should be getting better. But they aren’t.
Every economic statistic, from the housing market to economic growth to

employment, indicates a struggling, depressed economy—not one on the
rebound.
Take unemployment. In the 28 months since the signing of an $814 billion

“stimulus” bill—which White House economists claimed would prevent
unemployment from reaching even 8 percent—the unemployment rate has
remained stubbornly above 9 percent, and 4.2 percent higher than it was at
the beginning of the recession. That compares to an average increase of only
1.1 percent in past recessions.
Even more worrisome, at the same point in past recoveries total employment
had grown by 3.9 percent; in the Obama “recovery” total employment has
fallen more than 5 percent. Instead of getting back to work, Americans are
dropping out of the workforce.
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Or look at housing. Despite unprecedented amounts of federal spending and

a host of tax credits aimed at reviving the faltering housing market, the bust
continues. In the estimation of most analysts, the real estate market collapse
was the primary driver of the downturn, and most believe that a moderate
recovery in home prices is a prerequisite for a sustainable recovery.
Yet foreclosures remain extremely high, and a record 28 percent of

homeowners are now underwater on their mortgages. The median single-
family home price has declined 15.5 percent since the start of the recession;
over the same period in previous recessions, the average home price
increased 24.1 percent.
If we turn our eyes to economic growth, we see the same story. In the first
quarter of 2011, the economy grew at an anemic 1.9 percent. Since the
recession began, real GDP has risen by less than 1 percent, compared to an
average increase of 9.9 percent after past recessions.
Simply put, the approach of the Obama administration to get this economy
on its feet again has been a patent failure. All the money spent trying to
“stimulate” the economy has turned out to be counter-productive, sucking
resources and capital out of the private sector and pouring them down the
black hole of the federal government, while reducing individuals’ and
businesses’ spending and hiring out of fear over rising debt and taxes.
This is unquestionably the worst recovery in modern times. Still, the

President continues to push for policies like tax increases that will further
weaken our economy. The better approach to raising revenue is to grow our
economy, not by raising taxes on America’s job creators.
Along with 20 of my colleagues, I have proposed the “Cut, Cap, and

Balance” Act, legislation aimed at growing our economy by reigning in
government spending. The bill would reduce total spending next year by
$142 Billion, set caps on spending over the next decade, and require
Congress to pass a balanced budget amendment before it can raise the debt
ceiling. Reducing our annual deficit and national debt will accomplish at
least two things to help get our economy back on track: (1) decrease the
“dead weight loss” of tax receipts as interest payments swallow an
increasing larger share of total budget outlays and (2) lessen the
“crowding-out” of private investment by large amounts of federal spending.
It is past time to turn the page on the failed Keynesian approaches of this
administration and reverse course. If we make a concerted effort to deal with
the deficit by getting government spending under control once and for all,
the American economy will come roaring back, as it always has in the past.
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
This Op-Ed Originally Appeared in The Hill
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/obama-
s-recovery-worst-in-modern-times
3 of 3 2/3/12 1:21 PM
Washington doesn't know best - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mike Le... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=b4de66...

Op-Eds
Aug 29 2011
Washington doesn't know best

President Barack Obama recently called the 16 months leading up to the
2012 election a critical period to “debate [our respective] vision[s] for
America.” He noted that much of the debate will focus on government’s role
“in creating the kind of growth that we need.”
The president seems to think he will win that debate. I say — and I hope
every Republican candidate for president says: Bring it on.
It’s well past time to have a spirited debate over the proper role of
government, and the proper reach of government into our lives. Clearly,
there are two very different visions for what this role should be.
One vision assumes that government is the problem-solver of first, and last,
resort. Every issue we face as individuals and as a nation should be
addressed, controlled, regulated, overseen and “fixed” by the government.
Under this paradigm, we can restore economic prosperity only by

maintaining or expanding the federal government’s current spending levels
— even if it means we engage in perpetual, large-scale deficit spending.
The other vision rests on the opposite assumption: the firm conviction that
individuals have sovereign rights and responsibilities to control their actions
and their fate.
This vision holds that the private sector, not government, is the source of
innovation, competition, growth and jobs. It holds that economic conditions
will not improve until we take affirmative, deliberate steps to restrict
Congress’s borrowing and spending practices.
Federal spending and government interference has so run amok that such
steps must include a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to
balance its budget and spend no more than a fixed percentage of gross
domestic product.
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Washington doesn't know best - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mike Le... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=b4de66...
Proponents of each vision can be found in both political parties.
The first approach has become familiar to us over many decades; many
prefer it for that very reason. For incumbent federal office holders, this also
has the added allure of protecting Washington’s existing power structure.
Members of Congress are more powerful when they can borrow and spend
unlimited sums of money — and therefore have a built-in reason to prefer
the status quo.
The second approach, in contrast, would significantly limit the power

wielded by each member of Congress and otherwise upset the status quo.
Americans either love it or hate it for that very reason.
Most love it. According to a recent CNN poll, 75 percent of American voters
agree that we need a balanced budget amendment.
This statistic is not just a statement by the American people about budgeting.
It derives from the deeply held, deeply American dedication to self-reliance
and responsible stewardship.
Balancing the national “check-book” is merely a symbol of a much larger

responsibility: to prioritize; to understand that progress requires hard work
and sacrifice, and to make the tough choices.
When faced with a crisis, Americans have a remarkable track-record for

choosing well. We chose independence over British tyranny. We chose
emancipation over slavery. We chose freedom over fascism. We chose
equality over segregation.
The time has come for us to make another choice. To do that, we should ask
ourselves: Has the “Washington knows best” approach, which inexorably
leads to excessive borrowing and spending, made jobs more plentiful?
Enhanced economic activity in America? Strengthened the dollar and our
own purchasing power? Led to robust economic growth and expansion?
Improved our outlook for future prosperity? Or not?
Never have freedom and prosperity been so thoroughly intertwined. Never

have both of them been more threatened. We have a chance to save them
both. Let’s not waste it.
This article originally appeared in Politico
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/washington-
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Congress Needs Structural Reform - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=0e10b9...

Op-Eds
Aug 30 2011
Congress Needs Structural

Reform
There is very little accountability in Washington when it comes to how the
federal government spends taxpayer money. Having watched how things
work from the outside, I was frustrated at the obvious waste and abuse of
Americans’ hard-earned dollars. The system looked like it was intentionally
set up so Congress and the President could continually find ways to put off
difficult decisions.
After almost eight months in the trenches, it is still challenging to get much
done that will begin to solve our problems, but I’m a little more optimistic.
That’s because the reformers who were sent to Congress in 2010 have not
simply tried to impose a different ideology on national policy. Instead, we
have begun to push for changes to the process itself.
Even before being sworn in earlier this year, I and several of my new
colleagues demanded Congress end the use of earmarks. Though these
special projects didn’t usually come with a high price tag when compared to
a $3 trillion budget, earmarks were the grease that pushed through
outrageous spending bills the country could not afford.
Now, without earmarks, legislators have not been able to dangle these in
gifts in front of members of congress in order to win their votes. The result
has been more senators and congressmen willing to vote in the best interest
of the country, rather than their own political interest.
Additionally, after more than 15 years, a balanced budget amendment to the

constitution is again part of the national debate. If passed by Congress and
ratified by the states, the amendment would be an incredibly significant
structural reform that would begin to solve our debt problem immediately.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Congress Needs Structural Reform - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=0e10b9...
With a balanced budget amendment in place, Congress wouldn’t be able to

just focus on what to spend money on. They would be forced to explain
how the government is going to pay for it and be held accountable if the
numbers didn’t add up.
The push for structural changes also includes political “third rail” issues like
Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare, as well as reforming the tax code
and defense spending. There is greater enthusiasm to take on these
enormous challenges because, as we saw with our credit rating being
downgraded, the consequences of ignoring them are too great.
When Congress returns, I plan on continuing to work on these issues and

more to make sure this isn’t the first generation in history to leave things
worse then we found them.
As part of the August recess, I am holding several town halls around the
state so Utahns can voice their concerns to me directly. I will be at the
Fairview City Hall on August 30 at 6:00 pm and invite everyone in Sanpete
County to attend. I’d like to hear everyone’s ideas on how to get our country
back on track and share some of my experiences since being elected your
Senator.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/congress-
nees-structural-reform
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:22 PM
A Pro-Growth Jobs Agenda - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mike Lee... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=1a8606...

Op-Eds
Sep 21 2011
A Pro-Growth Jobs Agenda

President Obama began and ended his speech last Thursday by correctly
identifying America's unemployment problem as a crisis that deserves urgent
action by Congress. After two and a half years, it's encouraging that the
President finally recognizes the true magnitude of our job shortage.
Unfortunately the President's proposal was a predictably disappointing
iteration of the failed economic prescriptions he offered in 2009.
The President gave several similar speeches during his recent round of
taxpayer-funded campaign stops. When those speeches received a less-than-
enthusiastic response, the President took the unusual step of calling for a
joint session of Congress—apparently hoping to create the perception that he
had formulated a new approach to promoting job creation.
Those wanting to hear something other than a tax-and-spend agenda were

surely disappointed. In fact, it's difficult to believe that much thought went
into the jobs speech beyond copying his 2009 address, which outlined the
failed $800 billion stimulus package. In 2009, the President insisted that
Congress devote nearly a trillion dollars to a stimulus package designed to
create new jobs in construction, green energy, and rail projects, while giving
hiring incentives to employers.
The President now claims once again that more spending will lead to new
jobs for construction workers, as well as (this time) teachers and veterans.
He also promised there would be similar incentives for businesses that hire
new employees.
The President was wrong in 2009. Americans understandably have little

confidence that pursuing the same failed policies will work this time.
Adding a trillion dollars to our staggering national debt hasn’t significantly
affected the employment rate, and short-term tax incentives do not create the
kind of certainty employers need to create jobs. A small, short-lived bump
in employment may give rise to a comparably small, short-lived bump in the
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:22 PM
President's approval rating, but will have little if any lasting influence on the
overall health of our economy. We need real solutions now.
Instead of lecturing Congress to pass yet another stimulus package “right

away,” the President should be focusing on ways to minimize the federal
government's burden on individuals and job creators, giving them more
money in their pockets and more freedom to invest, save, innovate, and
prosper. A pro-growth jobs agenda would include:
(1) Enforceable spending restrictions. Immediate spending cuts will

reduce the deficit and national debt, and signal to businesses, investors
and the credit-rating agencies that the federal government is serious
about balancing its budget. It will also significantly reduce our
debt-service costs, which over the next decade are expected to balloon
to $1 trillion per year. Whatever one's vision of government may be –
vast and expansive or limited and defined – interest payments of this
magnitude will severely limit our ability to finance current government
programs.
The Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, which I sponsored in the Senate and
was later passed in the House, proposes the most comprehensive and
serious spending reform in the last two decades. Passage of the CCB
Act would create the kind of certainty the market needs to create jobs
across the economy.
Furthermore, fiscal discipline will encourage improved monetary policy

and help reverse the ruinous trend of a rapidly depreciating currency.
(2) Restrictions on regulatory overreach. While all Americans

expect clean air, clean water and competitive business practices, very
few believe it is necessary (much less desirable) to have 165,000 pages
of regulations to achieve those goals. Such regulations cost businesses
$1.75 trillion annually and have a chilling effect on economic growth
and job creation. Congress should immediately pass S. 1438,
the Regulation Moratorium and Job Preservation Act, and S. 299, the
REINS Act. The former would place a moratorium on all new
regulations until unemployment reaches 7.7%, the rate at which
unemployment stood when the President took office.
The latter would restrict Congress’s pernicious practice of delegating its

authority to unelected, unaccountable executive branch bureaucrats
from assuming the power of legislators. Regardless of how competent
these public servants might be, individuals who are neither elected by
nor accountable to voters cannot be entrusted with the sensitive task of
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:22 PM
making major rules and regulations carrying the force of federal

law—at least not without Congress's explicit approval.
(3) Encourage domestic energy production. The President should

reverse his assault on the productive sector of our domestic energy
industry and remove excessive barriers to increased energy
production. America has vast quantities of untapped oil and gas
resources primarily because the regulations surrounding their
development require an unnecessarily prolonged and restrictive federal
regulatory approval process. Congress should act on legislation such as
S. 706, the Domestic Jobs, Domestic Energy, and Deficit Reduction Act,
to encourage on- and off-shore energy exploration.
Enacting another stimulus package would be the wrong approach to

promoting job growth. We need bold, transformative proposals to get
Americans working again. By focusing on getting government out of the
way of those who actually create jobs, Congress may pursue a more
promising and prosperous agenda than what the President outlined in his
speech.
Click here to read article as originally published in Roll Call
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/9/a-pro-
growth-jobs-agenda
3 of 3 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Obama's unserious plans are losing the future - Op-Eds - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=8e9980...

Op-Eds
Sep 27 2011
Obama's unserious plans are

losing the future
In consecutive weeks, President Obama has presented two painfully
unserious and economically misguided proposals. The first, his $450 billion
"American Jobs Act," is another stimulus proposal, based on the
ill-conceived notion that more government spending is the answer to what
ails the economy. The second is the president's plan to raise taxes by $1.5
trillion on American job creators. Both plans are a far cry from "winning the
future," as the president claims on the campaign trail.
Like the president's last stimulus, which cost nearly $1 trillion and failed to
turn the economy around, Stimulus 2.0 assumes that massive government
spending on feel-good projects (with the administration picking the
economic winners and losers) will result in job creation and jolt the economy
out of its doldrums. This assumption is already a proven loser.
Stimulus 1.0 ended in bad investments, massive corporate welfare, wasteful

spending and more debt. What was supposed to keep unemployment below
8 percent, create millions of new jobs and hasten the economic recovery
instead stands as a textbook example of the failed liberal notion that we can
spend our way out of an economic hole.
The most egregious failure of the first stimulus is the now-infamous case of
Solyndra, a California solar energy company, which received a $535 million
stimulus loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. At the time, Obama
said such investments were "leading the way toward a brighter, more
prosperous future." Vice President Biden said, "We are not only creating jobs
today, but laying the foundation for long-term growth in the 21st century
economy."
Solyndra has now filed for bankruptcy and more than 1,000 jobs have been
lost, sadly emphasizing the disastrous consequences of economic meddling
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Obama's unserious plans are losing the future - Op-Eds - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=8e9980...
by the federal government.
President Obama then followed up his poor jobs plan with an equally
unserious and overtly political deficit reduction proposal. It relies heavily on
enormous tax increases at a time when the economy can least afford them.
Worse, Obama all but ignores entitlement spending, the greatest driver of our
deficit. His plans makes no mention of Social Security -- which can be made
solvent for the next 75 years with just a few relatively easy adjustments --
and would reduce Medicare and Medicaid spending by just 3 percent over
the next decade. The president's tax plan will allow entitlements to balloon
out of control, threatening not only the solvency of those programs, but our
entire economy.
Obama's focus on small-ticket spending items, like ending subsidies for

corporate jet owners, reveals he is much more concerned about election-year
talking points than positive reforms to create jobs and make the economy
grow.
Rather than waste our time debating these plans, or engaging in political
gamesmanship over the deficit, Congress should now focus on how to get
the federal behemoth out of the way so that American companies and
workers can thrive. We should push for enforceable spending restrictions
(like the Cut, Cap and Balance Act and the Balanced Budget Amendment)
that would significantly reduce our debt service costs and make it easier to
finance our current obligations. We should put a moratorium on new federal
regulations, which are strangling economic growth and job creation. And we
should encourage domestic energy production, reducing our dependence on
foreign oil and reversing this administration's assault on our domestic energy
industry.
Two years after the passage of the first failed stimulus, we have little to show
for it other than an increase in our federal debt. Yet this administration
appears to have learned anything useful about how the economy works.
Congress should reject Obama's new attempt to tax and spend our way out of
an economic hole, and instead get to work paring away the taxes and
regulations that stand in the way of job creation.
>>Read original article in the Washington Examiner
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/9/obama-
s-unserious-plans-are-losing-the-future
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:22 PM
Senators Lee and Kyl Release Balanced Budget Amendment - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jan 27 2011
Senators Lee and Kyl Release

Balanced Budget Amendment
WASHINGTON, DC—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Senator Jon Kyl
(R-AZ) today introduced a Balanced Budget Amendment to the United
States Constitution.
The amendment includes three pillars: (1) requiring a balanced budget for
each fiscal year, (2) limiting federal spending to no more than 18 percent of
GDP, and (3) requiring a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress in order
to increase taxes, raise the debt ceiling, or run a specific deficit in a particular
year.
Senator Kyl stated, “We can’t wait any longer to ensure Congress will rein in
wasteful Washington spending. This balanced budget and spending limit
amendment will do just that.”
“The federal government is too big and too expensive and the temptation for
Congress to continue to spend billions and even trillions of dollars it does
not have is simply too high. Again and again, even well-intentioned efforts
to restrain deficit spending through the normal budget process have failed,”
said Senator Lee. “A balanced budget amendment is the only certain method
to ensure that the federal government consistently lives within its means.
This past November’s election made clear that the American people will no
longer tolerate reckless government spending and ever-expanding federal
debt. The amendment that Senator Kyl and I have introduced is the essential
first step in putting the nation’s fiscal house in order.”
In addition to Senator Lee and Senator Kyl, the number two Senate
Republican leader, the amendment has received broad support from
conservative leaders including Senators Jim DeMint, Rand Paul, David
Vitter, Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio and John Thune as original co-sponsors as
well as endorsements from conservative organizations like the Club for
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:19 PM
Senators Lee and Kyl Release Balanced Budget Amendment - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
Growth, Americans for Tax Reform, FreedomWorks, and Americans for a

Balanced Budget Amendment.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/1/senators-
lee-and-kyl-release-balanced-budget-amendment
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:19 PM
Lee: Don't Hit Taxpayers, Show Fiscal Restraint - Press Releases... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Feb 22 2011
Lee: Don't Hit Taxpayers, Show

Fiscal Restraint
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee of Utah released the following
statement ahead of next week’s budget debate and amid accusations of a
potential government shutdown:
“The question remains whether Senate Democrats will follow President

Obama in penalizing the American people with massive tax increases, or
whether they will instead take responsibility for years of excess and make
sensible spending reductions in the current budget. Frankly, American
taxpayers are not to blame for our massive deficit and we should not look to
balance our budget on their backs. Americans are overtaxed as it is. The
charge lies with Congress to show some fiscal restraint.
“Further, the threat from Democrats to shut down the government in order to
protect excessive spending is utterly disappointing. That threat is
unnecessary, irresponsible, and unwarranted. Republicans have suggested
closing a mere fraction of our $1.5 trillion deficit, and this suggestion
deserves serious consideration without resorting to talk of panic. This is
another unfortunate reminder of why we need a procedural restraint, such as
the Lee-Kyl proposal for a Balanced Budget Amendment, so we can avoid
the kind of politics that could endanger our prosperity.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/2/lee-don-t-hit-
taxpayers-show-fiscal-restraint
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:20 PM
Lee Pushes Vote on Balanced Budget Amendment - Press Relea... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Feb 27 2011
Lee Pushes Vote on Balanced

Budget Amendment
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee of Utah introduced legislation
that would signify the level of support in the Senate for a Balanced Budget
Amendment to the Constitution. Added as an amendment to a patent reform
bill being debated today, Lee’s “sense of the Senate” stipulates that
“Congress should pass and the States should agree to an amendment to the
Constitution requiring a Federal balanced budget.” Lee said it was important
to get all Senators on the record before the Senate votes on a continuing
resolution to fund the government or an increase in the debt limit.
“The debate over America’s fiscal future must begin with a vote on a
Balanced Budget Amendment,” said Lee. “The American people should
know whether or not the Senate is serious about getting spending under
control and reducing the national debt before we vote on even a short-term
extension of current spending. While I will continue to push for a full vote
on the Lee-Kyl Balanced Budget Amendment, the ‘sense of the Senate’
motion is a reasonable place to start.“
Though Senator Lee does have a specific Balanced Budget Amendment

proposal, the motion does not stipulate the details of any particular
amendment. The purpose of the motion is to gauge support for a strong
structural restraint on spending that will hold Congress accountable.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/2/lee-pushes-
vote-on-balanced-budget-amendment
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:20 PM
Lee Delivers Maiden Speech, Urges Balanced Budget Reform -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 01 2011
Lee Delivers Maiden Speech,

Urges Balanced Budget Reform
WASHINGTON—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today delivered his first official
speech on the Senate floor, focusing on the need to pass a Balanced Budget
Amendment to the Constitution. Lee has been a staunch advocate for
structural budgetary restraints that will hold Congress accountable for how it
spends taxpayer resources. The speech included a call to move past the
traditional partisan divides over spending and make the tough choices to
reduce the country’s massive national debt.
“In the past there has been a great debate between, on the one hand, some
Republicans who have been unwilling to cut some programs - to consider in
any context cuts in the area of, say, national defense. You've had others who
perhaps from the other party have been unwilling to consider any cuts to any
entitlement program.
“But we're now faced with a scenario in which both sides of the aisle can
understand that our perpetual deficit spending habit places in jeopardy every
single aspect of the operations of the federal government.
“We now face a moment when both liberals and conservatives, Republicans
and Democrats, regardless of what they most want to protect most in their
federal government, have to realize that what they most want to protect is
placed in grave jeopardy by our current spending practices.
“I'm troubled by the fact that as we approach debate surrounding a

continuing resolution, this week a continuing resolution is likely to operate
for just a few weeks to keep the government funded, we're still talking about
adding on an annualized basis to our national debt at $1.5 trillion a year.
“I think the American people deserve better. I know that they demand better.
And some of the things that we saw in the 2010 election cycle portends
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:21 PM
Lee Delivers Maiden Speech, Urges Balanced Budget Reform -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
something greater than what we're going to see in the 2012 election cycle.
Americans want Congress to balance the budget and they want us to do
something about it, more than just talking about it.
“Benjamin Franklin used to say, ‘He'll cheat without scruple, who can
without fear.’ I think the congressional corollary to that might be that
Congress, which can continue to engage in perpetual deficit spending, will
continue to do unless or until the people require that Congress to put itself in
a straitjacket. That's the straitjacket we need. That's why I'm proposing this
[Balanced Budget] Amendment.”
Senator Lee has recently introduced a “sense of the Senate” amendment to a

bill being debated in the Senate today that would put Members on record as
supporting or opposing a nonspecific Balanced Budget proposal.
Lee’s specific constitutional amendment, SJ Res 5, cosponsored by Senator

Jon Kyl of Arizona, includes the following three pillars: (1) requiring a
balanced budget for each fiscal year, (2) limiting federal spending to no more
than 18 percent of GDP, and (3) requiring a two-thirds vote in both Houses
of Congress in order to increase taxes, raise the debt ceiling, or run a specific
deficit in a particular year.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/lee-delivers-
maiden-speech-urges-balanced-budget-reform
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:21 PM
Lee to Oppose Spending Proposal - Press Releases - Press Office... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 02 2011
Lee to Oppose Spending

Proposal
WASHINGTON - Today, Senator Mike Lee of Utah announced that he
would vote against a proposed spending bill intended to fund government
activity for two weeks. The Senator said the continuing resolution did not
reflect the message the American people sent last year to make significant
cuts to government spending and reduce the national debt.
"The proposal is a disappointing failure on the part of both parties to

seriously address the economic meltdown we face from our massive deficit
and growing national debt," said Lee. "While some have been patting
themselves on the back for proposing $4 billion in so-called ‘cuts’, in reality,
this bill fully funds billions upon billions of dollars in wasteful, duplicative
programs that should be eliminated, reduced, or reformed.
"Support for the ‘continuing resolution’ means continuing Congress's

unfortunate record of driving this country into debt. If a $1.6 trillion deficit
and $15 trillion national debt do not force this Congress into bold action,
then I have little patience for procedural games that kick the can an inch or
two down the street.
"This is not the kind of legislation the people of Utah sent me to Washington
to support and I cannot in good faith do so."
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/lee-to-
oppose-spending-proposal
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:21 PM
Lee: Support for CR is a ‘Losing Strategy’ - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 15 2011
Lee: Support for CR is a ʻLosing

Strategyʼ
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee of Utah announced he would
continue to oppose any continuation of current spending that did not
seriously address our deficit and debt, and lacked structural spending
reforms. Lee said he plans to vote against the ‘continuing resolution’ that is
expected to come to the Senate floor this week because the so-called
spending ‘cuts’ in the bill are inadequate and it does not take steps to prevent
future overspending.
“It is unfortunate that Members of Congress in both parties are supporting a

losing strategy, rather than doing what is right for the country,” said Lee.
“The continuing resolution maintains unsustainable spending levels despite
widespread agreement that we need meaningful reductions. The question
before the Senate is whether we are going to take bold action now to reduce
our deficit and control spending, or keep putting it off and drive the country
further into debt.
“I am pleased to see a growing number of Members beginning to see the

budget debate in these terms and have pledged to oppose additional
continuing resolutions. My hope is that we attract enough support to finally
put an end to this short-sighted tactic and forge a long-term agreement that is
right for the American people.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/lee-support-
for-cr-is-a-losing-strategy
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:24 PM
Lee, Hatch, Senate GOP Back Constitutional Amendment to Res... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 31 2011
Lee, Hatch, Senate GOP Back

Constitutional Amendment to
Restrain Spending
WASHINGTON – Today, with the full backing of the Senate GOP Caucus,
Senator Lee introduced an amendment to the Constitution to balance the
federal budget. Sponsored by fellow Utah Senator Orrin Hatch and four
others as principle cosponsors, the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment
is one of the most significant pieces of legislation introduced this year aimed
at putting the country on a path to fiscal sustainability.
The central component of the bill states that total spending for the fiscal year
must not exceed total receipts and must not exceed more than eighteen
percent of the economy, as measured by gross domestic product.
Only a two-thirds vote by the House and Senate would allow Congress to
run a deficit for a “specific excess” or raise taxes. Additionally, the
amendment stipulates that a three-fifths vote would be necessary to increase
the debt limit.
Two other very limited exceptions to the amendment allow spending in

excess of receipts during a national security emergency or during a time of
war. Three-fifths of Congress would be required to vote for a specific excess
during a military conflict declared to be an imminent and serious military
threat to our national security; and a just a simple majority vote would be
needed during a declared war. The law becomes effective five years after
ratification.
“When it comes to spending, Congress has proven it cannot be trusted to live

within its means or spend only what the federal government takes in,” said
Senator Lee. “Our annual deficit approaching $1.7 trillion and national debt
of almost $15 trillion are a significant threat to our economy, job growth, and
future prosperity. Only a structural restraint on spending, like a constitutional
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:26 PM
amendment, will force Congress to make the tough decisions about our
national priorities and prevent digging the country deeper in debt.”
Once the bill is voted on and approved by two-thirds of Congress, it must

then be ratified by three-fourths of all state legislatures to become an
amendment to the Constitution. A bill earlier this year sponsored by Senator
Lee expressing support for a balanced budget amendment received 58 votes
in the Senate. All 47 Senate Republicans are supporting the amendment.
Communications Director
Brian Phillips
Brian_phillips@lee.senate.gov
(202) 224-5444
Press Secretary
Emily Bennion
Emily_bennion@lee.senate.gov
(202) 224-3904
Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=191073197591048
Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYJk5vHB1Rg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGd7Urb5iU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCcI4h95J2U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs7Ug1nlxmM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFtZ4smOGU8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZxFSwgNp-0
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7LI_76oawk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reiWPWJWjVQ
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/lee-hatch-
senate-gop-back-constitutional-amendment-to-restrain-spending
3 of 3 2/3/12 12:26 PM
Lee Statement on President's Deficit Reduction Speech - Press ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Apr 13 2011
Lee Statement on President's

Deficit Reduction Speech
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee responded to the President’s
speech on deficit reduction:
“While it is encouraging the President has finally decided to participate in

the deficit debate, it is disappointing that he has offered a so-called
framework that ignores the destructive, burdensome long-term costs of
entitlements and reversed his position on increasing taxes on the American
people.
“What the President calls ‘savings’ won’t scratch the surface of our annual
deficit and, without a plan to balance the budget, the President continues to
increase the national debt to unfathomable and irresponsible levels, which
threatens our future prosperity.
“His calls to reduce our most bloated entitlement programs by roughly $30
to $40 billion per year are woefully inadequate to address an annual deficit
approaching $1.7 trillion. The President completely ignores Social
Security’s contribution to the deficit in the coming years.
“Most disappointing is that the President no longer believes tax relief is

important to protect our economic recovery. In December of last year, the
President said extending the Bush-era tax cuts ‘will spur our private sector to
create millions of new jobs, and add momentum that our economy badly
needs.’
“Less than five months later, the President’s framework proposes historic tax
increases on the very segment of our economy on which we are depending to
create those new jobs.
“This is not just a political flip-flop. It’s a reversal that will create greater
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:27 PM
Lee Statement on President's Deficit Reduction Speech - Press ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
instability in our economy and threaten to turn around the small gains we’ve
made in employment.
“Republicans in Congress have submitted dozens of ideas to reduce our

deficit, balance our budget, restrain spending, and create jobs. Many of us
stand willing to work with the President and together make the difficult
choices to put the country on a fiscally responsible path.
“The President has proposed only symbolic spending ‘cuts’ and higher taxes
for Americans. His speech today shows he is simply not serious about real
deficit reduction.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/4
/lee-statement-on-president-s-deficit-reduction-speech
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:27 PM
Lee Backs Balanced Budget Proposal - Press Releases - Press Of... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
May 10 2011
Lee Backs Balanced Budget

Proposal
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee spoke in support of a budget
proposal that will balance the federal budget over 10 years, save Medicare,
enact real tax reform, and put the country on fiscally sustainable path.
Senators Jim DeMint (SC), Tom Coburn (OK), David Vitter (LA), Marco
Rubio (FL), Richard Burr (NC), James Risch (ID), and Ron Johnson (WI)
joined the measure, principally authored by Senator Pat Toomey of
Pennsylvania. In support of the budget, Senator Lee released the following
statement:
“The most important challenge we have as a country is getting our fiscal

house in order and Senator Toomey has developed a responsible plan to
address it,” said Senator Lee. “While the President has proposed a budget
that never balances and creates deficits and debt as far as the eye can see,
Senator Toomey’s proposal moves the country in a fiscally responsible
direction, balances the budget over a reasonable amount of time, simplifies
and reforms our complex tax code, and significantly reduces spending to a
manageable percentage of GDP.
“This budget represents yet another set of good ideas from Senate
Republicans while our friends across the aisle have still not offered a budget
of their own, despite a legal requirement to submit one. I applaud Senator
Toomey for his leadership and look forward to debating his and other budget
plans.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/lee-backs-
balanced-budget-proposal
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:27 PM
Senator Lee, Republican Colleagues Call on Administration to ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
May 26 2011
Senator Lee, Republican

Colleagues Call on
Administration to Produce
Budget
Senator Mike Lee (UT-R) and 22 of his Republican colleagues on
Wednesday signed a letter to President Obama, calling attention to the
failure of the democrats to produce a budget in 756 days. Lee and others are
urging the Administration to work with budget experts to develop plans to
allocate spending within a $2.6 trillion Debt Ceiling Budget.
"We believe it is irresponsible to spread panic instead of taking responsible

action to calm the markets. We believe it is irresponsible to ignore the
broken political system and the very real possibility that the debt ceiling
might not be raised in time. And we believe it is irresponsible not to develop
robust contingency plans now – just in case.
"We are calling on your Administration to immediately begin working with

budget experts in Congress to allocate spending within a $2.6 trillion Debt
Ceiling Budget. All agency heads should then be instructed to develop plans
to make sure essential services would be funded on a priority basis."
"Finding real solutions is the preferred course of action. All spending

programs must be on the table to achieve the structural reform necessary to
avert a real debt crisis. We stand ready to be your willing partners in
developing these solutions.
"This is no time to play politics. The American people are depending on all
of us."
The full letter can be accessed below.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:29 PM
Senator Lee, Republican Colleagues Call on Administration to ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/senator-
lee-republican-colleagues-call-on-administration-to-produce-budget
Related Files
Obama Letter.pdf (420.9 KBs)
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:29 PM
Lee Signs Cut, Cap, Balance Pledge - Press Releases - Press Off... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 22 2011
Lee Signs Cut, Cap, Balance

Pledge
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee announced his support for a
plan that would fundamentally change the way the federal government
spends taxpayer money. Known as “Cut, Cap, and Balance,” the proposal
seeks to significantly reduce the annual deficit, place a statutory cap on
federal spending at 18% of GDP, and pass the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget
Amendment out of both houses of Congress, all before allowing a vote on
raising the nation’s debt ceiling.
Cut Cap Balance Press Conference
“Cut, Cap, and Balance is the single most significant reform package
Congress has seen in decades,” said Senator Lee. “It forces Washington to
balance its books with strict, enforceable fiscal restraints and will cut
spending significantly and immediately to improve our economy and create
jobs.”
Earlier in the week, Senator Lee became the first Member of Congress to
sign the Cut, Cap, Balance Pledge, which was announced at a press
conference today. The pledge signifies a commitment to passing all three
provisions of the plan before a vote to increase the nation’s debt ceiling takes
place.
“We cannot continue to rack up debt without first addressing the underlying
problems that cause Washington to overspend,” Lee added. “Supporters of
the pledge are saying we want to fix the problem before it gets any worse.
Opponents believe we can keep piling up debt and just hope Washington
changes on its own. We owe future generations more than that and have a
responsibility to do the right thing for them today.”
###
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:31 PM
Lee Signs Cut, Cap, Balance Pledge - Press Releases - Press Off... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/lee-signs-
cut-cap-balance-pledge
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:31 PM
Lee, GOP Senators Push for Balanced Budget Amendment - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 29 2011
Lee, GOP Senators Push for

WASHINGTON – Today, the Senate Republican Caucus began a
coordinated effort to push for passage of the S. J. Res 10, the Hatch Lee
Balanced Budget Amendment. Senator Mike Lee, a lead cosponsor of the
bill, has consistently championed the need for binding, structural spending
reforms like a constitutional amendment, even before joining the Senate. The
bill would force Congress to balance its budget each year, limit spending to
no more than 18% of GDP, and require a supermajority vote in both the
House and Senate before raising taxes or increasing the nation’s debt ceiling.
“To truly fix the spending problem in Washington, we have to fundamentally

change the rules that govern Congress,” said Lee. “If we want to eliminate
deficits, reduce the national debt, get control of spending, preserve our
constitutional priorities, and save our economy, it starts with the balanced
budget amendment. It is the only solution that guarantees future reforms
will be enforced.”
A number of GOP Senators, including Lee, spoke in support of the

amendment this morning on the Senate floor. They will also hold a press
conference at 11:30 am near the Ohio Clock outside the Senate Chamber.
Floor speeches on the balanced budget amendment will continue tomorrow,
with Members planning to carry the message into the July 4th recess.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/lee-gop-
senators-push-for-balanced-budget-amendment
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:32 PM
Lee, Romney Talk Economy - Press Releases - Press Office - M... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 29 2011
Lee, Romney Talk Economy

WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee met with Governor Mitt
Romney to discuss issues relating to the economy and getting the country
moving in the right direction.
“I appreciate Governor Romney taking the time to meet with me today,” said
Sen. Lee. “I expressed my view that we are currently dealing with the
critical fiscal issues of this generation and that we need strong leadership on
these issues. I was happy to hear that Gov. Romney supports the Cut, Cap
and Balance Pledge including a Balanced Budget Amendment—one of my
top priorities—and that his focus remains on growing the economy to create
good jobs for our country.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/lee-romney-
talk-economy
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:32 PM
Lee: After Vote, President Has Some Explaining to Do - Press R... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 19 2011
Lee: After Vote, President Has

Some Explaining to Do
WASHINGTON – In anticipation of the House vote on the “Cut, Cap, and
Balance Act,” Senator Mike Lee released the following statement:
“After the House passes the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, as I expect them to
do, the President will have to explain to the American people why he, Harry
Reid, and Senate Democrats are blocking the increase in the debt ceiling
they requested. So far, we have heard that the President opposes immediate
spending cuts and a constitutional amendment that requires the federal
government to balance it budget, which puts him directly at odds with the
majority of Americans.
“Republicans have proposed a realistic compromise that gives the President

what he has asked for in return for immediate spending cuts, reasonable
deficit reduction over the next decade, and structural reforms that require
Congress to balance its budget. We currently have 39 co-sponsors in the
Senate for this compromise, all Republicans. It takes just a small number of
Democrats and the President to do the right thing, protect the economy, and
move past this stalemate. After the House vote, it will be up to them.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/lee-after-
vote-president-has-some-explaining-to-do
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:33 PM
Lee: Cut, Cap, and Balance is Plan A, B, and C - Press Releases... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 20 2011
Lee: Cut, Cap, and Balance is

Plan A, B, and C
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Lee released the following statement as a
strong endorsement of the recently passed “Cut, Cap, and Balance” Act in
the House of Representatives:
“Cut, Cap, and Balance is Plan A, B, and C because it is the only plan that
will, a, protect the U.S. triple-A bond rating, b, balance the budget, and, c,
raise the debt ceiling with Republican support,” said Senator Lee.
“Senate Democrats should stop wasting time we don’t have fiddling with
plans that won’t work. The House did the right thing. Now it’s time for
Senate Democrats and the President to do their part and pass the ‘Cut, Cap,
and Balance Act’.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/lee-cut-
cap-and-balance-is-plan-a-b-and-c
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:34 PM
Poll Shows 66% of Americans Support Cut, Cap, Balance - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 21 2011
Poll Shows 66% of Americans

Support Cut, Cap, Balance
Today, Senator Mike Lee highlighted a new CNN poll that shows two-thirds
of the American people support the “cut, cap, and balance” approach to
solving the nation’s debt crisis.
Using language that closely mimics Senator Lee’s “Cut, Cap, and Balance
Act”, respondents were asked whether they favored or opposed only raising
the debt ceiling if Congress first passed a balanced budget amendment to the
Constitution and substantial spending cuts and caps on future spending were
approved. A full 66% said they were in favor.
Additionally, the poll shows three out of four Americans (74%) favor a
constitutional amendment to require a balanced federal budget.
Senator Lee reacted to the poll results: “The survey backs up what we have
been saying all along: the American people are with us. They want
Congress to cut spending and balance the budget. We have a plan to do that
called “Cut, Cap, and Balance.” The responsibility is now on The President
and Senate Democrats to follow the will of the American people and pass
this legislation.”
The poll included interviews with 1,009 adult Americans conducted by

telephone on July 18-20, 2011
Full poll results can be found here
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/poll-shows-
66-of-americans-support-cut-cap-balance
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:35 PM
Lee: Blocking 'Cut, Cap, and Balance' Vote is Shameful and De... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 22 2011
Lee: Blocking 'Cut, Cap, and

Balance' Vote is Shameful and
Despicable
WASHINGTON – Following a procedural vote to prevent the “Cut, Cap,
and Balance Act” from coming to the Senate floor, Senator Mike Lee
released the following statement:
“Today, Majority Leader Harry Reid used procedural tactic to prevent a vote
on a bill that is supported by two-thirds of the country. It is shameful,
despicable, and an abuse of this chamber. We weren’t even allowed
sufficient time to debate the one bill in Congress that would address the
country’s most immediate challenges.
“The Democrats have blocked a vote for now, but the fight is not over. I will
continue to make sure ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance’ receives a proper up or down
vote in the Senate.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/lee-blocking-
cut-cap-and-balance-vote-is-shameful-and-despicable
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:35 PM
Debt Proposals are "Typical Washington Answers" - Press Rele... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 25 2011
Debt Proposals are "Typical

Washington Answers"
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee released the following
statement on the debt proposals released by Speaker John Boehner and
Majority Leader Harry Reid:
“Both plans represent typical Washington answers to the federal

government’s out-of-control spending problem. They add trillions to the
national debt in the short-term while making hollow promises to cut
spending in the long-term. Neither of the proposals fundamentally reform
the way Washington spends money, require the federal government to
balance its budget, or protect our triple-A credit rating.
“The right solution is immediate cuts, enforceable spending caps, and

structural reform, including a balanced budget amendment, not empty
promises, unaccountable commissions, and business as usual.
“Republicans have already put forward a plan that grants the President’s
unprecedented request on the debt ceiling. The House passed it and every
Republican in the Senate voted for it. If we reach August 2 without a
meaningful deal, it will be because the President and Senate Democrats
refused to take Washington’s spending problem seriously.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/debt-
proposals-are-typical-washington-answers
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:35 PM
Budget Control Act is a 'Disappointing Failure' - Press Releases ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Aug 02 2011
Budget Control Act is a

'Disappointing Failure'
“The Budget Control Act represents a disappointing failure on the part of
this Congress. We have squandered the best opportunity we had to
fundamentally reform the way Washington spends money and put the nation
on a sustainable path toward a balanced budget. Instead, this bill increases
our national debt by more than $2 trillion and cuts spending by only $7
billion over the same time period. There is no reliable enforcement
mechanism for future spending reductions. We only have the hollow
promises from a Congress that created the mess in the first place. The Act
contains neither a balanced budget amendment nor any other structural
spending reform to end the federal government’s fiscal irresponsibility.
Worse, it creates a ‘Super Congress’ with the power to submit legislation that
cannot be amended and could raise taxes on the American people. This is
not at all what we were elected to do.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/budget-
control-act-is-a-disappointing-failure
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:36 PM
Heller, Lee , Four Senators Demand Transparency from Joint ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Aug 04 2011
Heller, Lee , Four Senators

Demand Transparency from
Joint Committee
Letter to Senate leadership requests open,
public meetings
(Washington, DC) –Today, U.S. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) and a group
of five Republican Senators wrote a letter to Senate leadership asking that all
meetings of the new joint congressional committee created by the Budget
Control Act be open to the public and available for television broadcast. The
Senators also expressed concern about the closed-door nature of the joint
committee meetings.
Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), John Boozman (R-AR), Ron Johnson

(R-WI), Mike Lee (R-UT), and David Vitter (R-LA) co-signed the letter.
“The American people have a right to know what their government is going
to do with their tax dollars. Not only do closed door meetings by this
Committee prevent the public from knowing how their dollars are being
spent, but these meetings also have the potential to promote deals with
special interests. Open door proceedings will allow the public to be their
own advocates, rather than relying on games of inside baseball that too often
dominate today’s Washington,” said Senator Heller.
All of the letter’s co-signers are also original co-sponsors of the Budget
Control Joint Committee Transparency Act (S.1501), legislation Senator
Heller introduced in the Senate yesterday. This bill mandates that
proceedings of the Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction be transparent and
open to the public.
Full text of the letter below:
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:36 PM
August 3, 2011
The Honorable Harry Reid The Honorable Mitch McConnell
Democratic Leader Republican Leader
United States Senate United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510
Dear Majority Leader Reid and Minority Leader McConnell:
The Budget Control Act (S.637) signed into law on August 2, 2011, creates a
new joint congressional committee entrusted with recommending and
ultimately crafting legislation to reduce our deficit by at least $1.2 trillion.
We support addressing our national debt and warding off what has been
called the “most predictable economic crisis” in our nation’s history.
However, we are united in our concern about the authority granted to this
committee.
As we understand it, this Committee essentially has the ability to craft their
list of recommendations without any joint committee jurisdictions and
without an open committee process. Furthermore, these recommendations
are not subject to debate or an amendment process afforded the majority of
legislation considered in the Senate.
We remain concerned that all aspects of the federal budget, including

revenue increases, could be subject to the Committee’s recommendations. If
our colleagues wish to raise taxes or propose spending cuts, the American
people have a right to see that process unfold.
We ask you, as two of the appointers of the Committee, to ensure that all
meetings and hearings are done in a transparent manner through advanced
public notification, public attendance and live television broadcasts.
Meetings will include any time a quorum of members are present to discuss
committee related matters whether it be in person, over the phone or via
teleconference.
All Americans should have the ability to see how the Committee crafts a
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:36 PM
concrete plan for our fiscal future. As original cosponsors of the Budget
Control Joint Committee Transparency Act (S.1501), we stand firm in our
belief that the public should understand how their tax dollars are being spent,
which requires an open process rather than a series of closed-door
meetings.
We recognize the very serious dangers posed by our nation’s debt and share
your commitment to addressing it. As you begin to craft the Committee, we
ask that you allow this process to unfold before the American people through
an open debate. We remain committed to this issue and hope that it will be
resolved prior to consideration of S. 1501.
In order to meet our nation’s financial obligations, this body must meet its
obligation to the American people to do the work we were sent here to do.
We look forward to your response to this request.
Sincerely,
U.S. Senator Dean Heller
U.S. Senator David Vitter
U.S. Senator Mike Lee
U.S. Senator Kelly Ayotte
U.S. Senator John Boozman
U.S. Senator Ron Johnson
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/five-senators-
demand-transparency-from-joint-committee
3 of 3 2/3/12 12:36 PM
U.S. Senator Mike Lee Responds to S&P Downgrade of United ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Aug 05 2011
U.S. Senator Mike Lee

Responds to S&P Downgrade of
United States
Lee lays out path back to AAA rating and
American greatness
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mike Lee responded to S&P lowering the
long held AAA rating for the United States saying, “This downgrade
confirms what we have known was coming, but have chosen to ignore, for a
long time. This downgrade further confirms that the true threat to our
country, our economy and our way of life is our debt and the continued
deficit spending Washington and the current administration are pursuing.”
For the first time ever the United States does not hold a AAA rating. The
impact could be felt in numerous ways including higher interests rates for
car, home or student loans along with credit card rates. Lee then stated,
“Unfortunately, when it comes to the significant financial challenges this
country faces, we have been swatting at the branches and symptoms instead
of attacking the root and core causes. Never has there been a greater need for
a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution – to ensure we get our
fiscal house in order, reduce our debt, and get Washington to live within its
means.”
Calling on his colleagues in the House and Senate along with the
Administration and Americans across the country Lee said, “The answer to
our economic challenges lies within a simple concept most Americans and
most states understand and live by – balance your checkbook and don’t
spend more than you bring in. This is not a liberal or conservative issue, it
isn’t a Democrat or Republican issue – it is an American issue. If ever there
were a time for Americans and members of Congress to have an open debate
and dialogue about the future of our country, that time is now. I invite
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:37 PM
U.S. Senator Mike Lee Responds to S&P Downgrade of United ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
everyone to begin to understand where we are as a nation and what it will

take to restore both our AAA rating, and more importantly, our strength and
greatness as a country.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/u-s-senator-
mike-lee-responds-to-s-p-downgrade-of-united-states
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:37 PM
Lee Statement on President's Upcoming Speech - Press Releases... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Sep 07 2011
Lee Statement on President's

Upcoming Speech
WASHINGTON - Today, Senator Mike Lee outlined several policy
proposals that he would like to see the President support in his speech on
Thursday night.
“The President’s agenda for the past two and half years has been a failure.
From persistent unemployment to the first credit downgrade in our country’s
history, President Obama’s economic policies are making Americans worse
off. For the good of the country, the President should advocate proposals
that will get the federal government off the backs of the country’s job
creators and incentivize investment in our economy.”
Senator Lee noted five objectives the President should support in his speech:
Structural, binding spending reforms, such as a balanced budget

amendment to the constitution, that would reduce the national debt and
end the practice of perpetual deficit spending
Support for sound monetary policy that will prevent further collapse of
the dollar, including opposing another round of quantitative easing and
additional bailouts of failing banks
Regulatory reform, including a moratorium on all new regulations until
the unemployment rate reaches 7.7% (S. 1438, the Regulation
Moratorium and Job Preservation Act sponsored by Sen. Ron Johnson
(WI))
Reforming the tax code to make American businesses more competitive
and put more money in the hands of consumers and investors
Accelerating development of America’s energy resources by reducing
delays and bureaucratic hurdles
“The President has asked to speak directly to Congress on Thursday night. If

he continues to push more spending, more borrowing, and more debt, it will
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:37 PM
Lee Statement on President's Upcoming Speech - Press Releases... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
be a wasted opportunity. I sincerely hope that will not be the case.”
/lee-statement-on-president-s-upcoming-speech
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:37 PM
Lee to Offer Motion to Cut Spending - Press Releases - Press Of... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 19 2011
Lee to Offer Motion to Cut

Spending
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee will offer a motion to keep
2012 spending levels on certain appropriations at 2011 levels. Submitted as
a motion to recommit on the “minibus” spending bill – which funds areas in
agriculture, transportation, and commerce, among others – Senator Lee’s
motion would save tax payers $10 billion next year.
“There’s no question this would save taxpayers just a drop in the deficit-
spending bucket,” said Senator Lee. “However, I am committed to pursuing
immediate spending reductions at every opportunity. While a lot of Senators
talk about fiscal responsibility, here’s an opportunity to show they really
mean it – even in a small way.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/10/lee-to-offer-
motion-to-cut-spending
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:40 PM
Lee: Failed Motion Shows Commitment to Big Spending Remai... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 01 2011
Lee: Failed Motion Shows

Commitment to Big Spending
Remains
WASHINGTON—Today, Senator Mike Lee’s motion to maintain certain
2012 spending appropriations at 2011 levels was voted down. The motion
would have affected legislation that will authorize funding for several
departments, including agriculture, commerce, and transportation.
“My motion to reduce current 2012 spending by roughly $10 billion should
have easily passed at a time when the country is running an annual deficit of
$1.3 trillion and is saddled with a national debt as large as the entire annual
output of the economy. Instead, today’s vote shows that too many members
of the Senate are still committed to fighting every attempt to enact even the
smallest amount of savings.
“Worse still, today’s appropriations package will achieve its increased

spending levels through accounting tricks and gimmicks that allow the true
numbers to be hidden from the American public.
“I will continue to do whatever I can to make the federal government smaller

and more transparent.”
Before the vote, Senator Lee made the following comments on the Senate
floor:
“Mr. President, I filed this motion to recommit HR 2112 with instructions to

send this ‘minibus’ back to the committee on appropriations for one simple
reason.: it spends more for the same set of expenditures in fiscal year 2012
than it did in 2011 to the tune of about $10 billion. I understand that there are
reasons for this excess. I understand that when we look at individual
components of the 2012 provision, there may be some cuts in there.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:42 PM
Lee: Failed Motion Shows Commitment to Big Spending Remai... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
“But the overall picture, the entire pie, is about $10 billion more than what
we had in FY 2011. Unless we can be open and transparent with the
American people and acknowledge the fact that we are, in fact, spending
more, I think this is a problem. We've got to get this fiscal house in order.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/lee-failed-
motion-shows-commitment-to-big-spending-remains
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:42 PM
Lee Co-Sponsors Reform to Eliminate Budget Gimmicks - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 02 2011
Lee Co-Sponsors Reform to

Eliminate Budget Gimmicks
WASHINGTON - Today, Senator Mike Lee will co-sponsor legislation that
eliminates the most common budgetary gimmicks used by Congress to hide
hundreds of billions of dollars in spending. In the past six years alone, the
tricks addressed in the Honest Budget Act (S.1651) have enabled Congress
to spend over $350 billion, money that the country simply doesn’t have.
“For too long, Washington has been using budgetary tricks and gimmicks to
hide the real cost of government spending,” said Senator Lee. “The federal
budget is often nothing more than a shell game: a sleight-of-hand hoax that
leaves Americans wondering where the real numbers are hidden. This is not
how a transparent, responsible government functions. The people deserve
better.”
The Honest Budget Act will put an end to disingenuous practices such as
phony rescissions, abuse of the “emergency spending” designation, and
certain types of automatic pay increases, as well as require a supermajority
vote to proceed to a spending bill without a budget in place.
In total, the HBA will eliminate nine different gimmicks that have been
abused as part of ‘business as usual’ in Washington.
“This legislation is a significant step forward toward reforming how

Washington works and putting the country on a fiscally sustainable path.”
For more information, please visit:
http://budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/honest-budget-act
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/lee-co-
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:42 PM
Lee Statement on Failure of Super Committee - Press Releases -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 21 2011
Lee Statement on Failure of

Super Committee
Even after the failure of the Super Committee, Congress still has an
obligation to cut spending, balance the budget, and make the necessary
reforms to restrain its ability to do significantly greater damage to our
economy. I still believe the principles established in the Cut, Cap, and
Balance legislation I introduced earlier this year provide the way forward for
Congress to achieve these goals, get its fiscal house in order, and regain
our triple-A credit rating. The American people overwhelmingly support
the bill and it has already passed the House. The Senate should do the
same and the President should sign it. Playing around at the margins and
cutting a few percentage points off our national debt over the next decade
may be politically suitable, but doesn¹t fix the problem.²
/lee-statement-on-failure-of-super-committee
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:45 PM
Lee Urges Senate to Pass Meaningful Spending Restriction - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 12 2011
Lee Urges Senate to Pass

Meaningful Spending
Restriction
WASHINGTON – Ahead of this week’s vote in the Senate on two
competing versions of a balanced budget amendment, Senator Lee urged his
colleagues to support S. J. Res 10, the only version that will lead to
meaningful spending restraint.
“After three straight years of record deficits, a national debt now larger than
our entire economy, and losing our triple-A credit rating, Congress still
hasn’t woken up to the seriousness of our situation,” said Senator Lee, a
member of the Judiciary Committee. “By allowing spending to go
unchecked, the opponents of a strong, structural spending restraint are
threatening the future prosperity of every American.”
On Wednesday, the Senate will vote on Senator Lee’s balanced budget

amendment and a version authored by Senate Democrats that allows
Congress to easily circumvent any constitutional restrictions and avoid
spending discipline.
Despite all the talk about spending cuts over the last year, Congress actually
spent $145 billion more in fiscal year 2011 than it did in the previous year,
according to the Congressional Budget Office. Lee said this proves the need
for an external, structural spending restraint like S.J. Res 10, the Hatch-Lee
Balanced Budget Amendment, to get the country’s annual fiscal deficit and
national debt under control.
“Every day we wait to do the right thing means making tougher and tougher
choices later. If we start the process of balancing the budget now and begin
prioritizing what we spend over the next seven to ten years, we can avoid the
dramatic and draconian cuts that will occur as a result of doing nothing.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:46 PM
Lee Urges Senate to Pass Meaningful Spending Restriction - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
“All of us know that spending is the problem. A balanced budget

amendment to the Constitution that keeps Congress and the President in
check is the only real solution.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/lee-urges-
senate-to-pass-meaningful-spending-restriction
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:46 PM
Lee Statement on BBA Vote - Press Releases - Press Office - Mi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 14 2011
Lee Statement on BBA Vote

“Though it was no surprise that getting the requisite two-thirds vote on either
amendment was a tough hill to climb, I am shocked that more than sixty
percent of the Democrat caucus could not support either version. It sends a
strong signal that the majority of Democrats in the Senate do not view
Congress’s out-of-control spending to be a problem, and the American
public should be appalled. Despite all the warnings from economists and
experts on both sides that we are headed for a fiscal meltdown if we don’t
control spending, the majority of Democrats in Congress are content to do
nothing about it and choose instead to fight political battles aimed at the next
election.
“The silver lining is that with 47 Republican votes for SJRes 10 and 20
Democratic votes for SJRes 24, we have a total of 67 Senators who are
officially on record supporting a constitutional amendment to require the
federal government to balance its budget. Americans should find some relief
in the fact that Congress has the votes to pass a balanced budget amendment
so long as we can find consensus on a bill. I look forward to continuing to
work with my colleagues on this issue.”
/lee-statement-on-bba-vote
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:46 PM
The Seeds of Shutdown - Blog - Press Office - Mike Lee, United... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=6b87ffd6...

Blog
Apr 07 2011
The Seeds of Shutdown

I could not agree more that we should not have a government shutdown. I
could not agree more that we need to take steps to protect and improve our
economy. And, I could not agree more that we need to take steps to make
sure that our brave uniformed men and women are fairly compensated and
otherwise treated.
I must, however, express my profound, albeit respectful, disagreement with

my colleague, the junior senator from New Jersey. This is not a possible
shutdown that we're facing as a result of the Republican party or the Tea
Party.
As a life-long Republican and a founding member of the Tea Party caucus, I

can tell you there is not one member of this body, nor is there one member of
the senate Tea Party Caucus who wants a government shutdown.
Republicans have, from the outset of this, attempted to bring forward

proposals to make sure that we don't get into a shutdown. The question we
need to ask ourselves, is why does the President of the United States,
President Barack Obama, want a government shutdown?
Let's ask a few questions:
Why was it that a few months ago, after the election, but before the new
congress tookover, when the president had both houses of congress under the
control of his party, why did he opt not to pass a full budget for fiscal year
2011?
That was the first seed that he sowed in the direction of a government
shutdown.
I submit that it was one that was either irresponsible on the one hand or
deliberate and malicious on the other intending to bring about a sequence
of events that would culminate in agovernment shutdown.
1 of 5 2/3/12 12:52 PM
Number two, even after the new congress convened, after the balance of
power shifted in the House of Representatives and after a number of seats in
this body shifted, the new Congress convened in January of this year. The
President didn't bring forward something that could attract both houses of
congress to approve and that he could fund the government with for the
balance of the year. He, instead, chose to operate on a series of continuing
resolutions. We're now moving again with what I believe will be our seventh
continuing resolution if it's passed.
What we have from the president is radio silence in the direction of what we
need to do to move forward. A number of us have suggested all along in this
process that at a point in time in America when we have a national debt
approaching $15 trillion, at a point in time when we're adding to that debt at
a staggering $1.7 trillion a year, it doesn't make sense and it isn't responsible
to continue even in small increments perpetuating that degree of reckless
deficit spending.
So what we want to see more thananything, isn't any specific set of social
issue legislation. It's not any specific degree of spending cuts. It is, instead, a
plan that will move us in the direction of a balanced budget. That will put us
on track so that we might once again enjoy the benefits of a balanced budget.
So we might again enjoy the day and age when we don't have a debt to GDP
ratio well inexcess of 90%. Because we know when we have a ratio in
excessof 90%, which we do now, it slows economic growth in this country
by more than half,costing our economy as many as a million jobs every
single year.
2 of 5 2/3/12 12:52 PM
This is ultimately about jobsbecause our sprawling debt kills jobs and
economic growth necessary to create jobs. So, no, this is not a quixotic quest
for perfection.
This is simply a quest for that which will suffice to get us back on track
towards fiscal responsibility.
Now, I mentioned two seeds that the president has planted to lead to a
shutdown. The first being his refusal to push through a budget for the entire
year for fiscal 2011.
The second being his reliance on continuing resolutions. The third seed he
sowed, one that I'm not sure we're going to be able to get around this time,
much as we would like to is his threat, just in the last hour or two -- his
threat, his promise to veto the continuing resolution that the house is
expected to be passing this afternoon and that it may have passed just
moments ago. He's threatening to veto that before it even gets over here.
One must wonder, why does the president want a shutdown? We have to
remember, these are not drastic changes that have been proposed. In fact,
3 of 5 2/3/12 12:52 PM
they're not even sufficient in my opinion to get us back on track so that we

can say, this heads us in the direction of an eventual balanced budget.
These are minor cuts and yet the president insists on moving us inevitably,
inexorably in the direction of a shutdown. Now, while we're on the subject of
addressing a false blame that has been placed on the Republican party and
on the Tea Party, I care to address the accusation that has been made by
various of my colleagues, an accusation that I believe was made in ignorance
and, in any event, is manifestly incorrect.
With regard to the Tea Party, this is a movement whose views are not
extreme.
What is extreme is a $15 trillion debt that we're adding to by $1.7 trillion a
year.
That is extreme!
With what has happened in the last few years, including the government
takeover of everything from our banking industry to our auto manufacturing
industry, to our health care industry. Those things are extreme.
The tea party movement is something that is shared by many Americans,

regardless of whether they ever appear at a rally of any kind. It's a
spontaneous grass-roots political phenomenon that simply recognizes that
our federal government has grown too big and has become too expensive,
and we need to do something about that.
Many of us who consider ourselves part of a tea party movement believe that
the best solution, perhaps the only solution to this is to return to that
223-year-old founding document we call the U.S. Constitution. Look to
those tasks, those powers that are identified as something within the
exclusive power, control of the federal government.
The more we do that the more we can turn to constitutionally limited
government of the sort that can operate on a balanced budget.
This is not necessarily even a politically conservative movement. It is neither

conservative nor liberal. At the end of the day, it need not be either
Republican or Democratic.
It is simply American.
It recognizes that this country is founded upon the principle that national
governments, as they become large and powerful,have a certain tendency
toward gaining an excess of power, and spending an excess of money, and to
4 of 5 2/3/12 12:52 PM
tyranny. A national government can function best when it has limited,

enumerated powers of the sort we granted the federal government a couple
of centuries ago.
Powers including things like national defense, establishing a uniform system

of weights and measures, regulating trademarks, copyrights, patents and so
forth. Included in that list you won't find anything about a government
takeover of health care or manufacturing industries or banking industries.
This is neither liberal nor conservative.
It's neither Republican nor Democratic.
And it certainly isn't extreme.
It is simply american.
It is what makes us great.
It is part of what has created-- it is part of what has created the strongest
economy and the greatest civilization the world has ever known.
At the end of the day, as those who have planted, quite deliberately, the
seeds for an inevitable shutdown seek to blame others, we have to remember
the seeds that they have sown and we have to be willing to cast blame where
blame is due. The blame here cannot, and as long as I'm standing, will not be
placed at the feet of the Republican party or the Tea Party.
We do not want a shutdown and we'll do everything we can to fight against

it.
If we have one, it will be because the President of the United States and
members of the other party in this august body have refused to put forward a
palatable, defensible budget.
Thank you.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/4/the-seeds-
of-shutdown
5 of 5 2/3/12 12:52 PM
Oppose the Debt Limit Until We Pass the Hatch-Lee BBA - Blog... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=d2b15e6b...

Blog
May 10 2011
Oppose the Debt Limit Until We

Pass the Hatch-Lee BBA
As the debate over the nation’s debt ceiling heats up, many are wondering
not only whether Congress will support an increase, but also what measures
will the opponents of an increase demand in return for lifting the limit. I
stand firmly behind a proposal that, in return for allowing a vote on the debt
ceiling, will begin to fundamentally change the way Washington spends
money.
In a letter distributed last week, I asked my Republican colleagues in the

Senate to join me in opposing any increase in the debt ceiling unless or until
both houses of Congress have passed the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget
Amendment. The amendment would cap future spending at 18% of GDP
and require a supermajority in both houses to run an annual deficit for a
specific purpose, raise the debt ceiling, and increase taxes.
To borrow from Churchill, to get spending under control, a balanced budget

amendment is the worst solution except all the others that have been tried.
And Congress has tried several.
Previous Congresses have attempted to restrict spending through statutory

restrictions such as the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act, more commonly known as Gramm-Rudman, and the Budget
Enforcement Act. Both failed to control spending long-term because of each
of the laws’ built-in limitations and the ease with which subsequent
Congresses were able to reform, repeal, dismantle and ultimately ignore the
restrictions.
The debt ceiling itself is some measure of a spending restraint, but, again,
because it only requires a majority vote to increase the cap, lifting the limit
has been little more than a formality from year to year.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:53 PM
Oppose the Debt Limit Until We Pass the Hatch-Lee BBA - Blog... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=d2b15e6b...
The worst solution of all has been to do nothing and simply trust that the
President and Congress will produce fiscally responsible budgets and
spending bills. From unenforced debt limits, to enacting new entitlements,
to “emergency” spending bills loaded with pork, Washington has proven that
it cannot be trusted to act responsibly in the short-term to ensure the
country’s long-term prosperity. It would be gross fiscal negligence not to
impose some structural, binding, and permanent spending restraint on
Congress at a time when our national debt threatens to collapse our
economy.
Back to Churchill, several proposals have been floated as possible bargains

for increasing the debt limit. Unquestionably the “best worst” solution,
indeed the only one that has a real chance of permanently changing the way
Washington spends money, is the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment.
It is the very nature of a constitutional amendment that makes the proposal a
highly effective limitation on Congress’s insatiable appetite to spend.
Unlike other statutory reforms that have failed because they needed only a
simple majority to dismantle, an amendment to the Constitution would
require overwhelming support from Congress and the American people to
return to the country to the status quo.
I will continue to encourage my colleagues to oppose an increase in the debt

limit unless and until we pass the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment.
For anyone serious about preserving the long-term prosperity of our country,
it should be an easy stand to take.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/oppose-
the-debt-limit-until-we-pass-the-hatch-lee-bba
Related Files
2011-05-04 Letter Debt Limit.pdf (682.5 KBs)
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:53 PM
Cut, Cap, Balance - Giving the President What He Wants and W... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ece32405...

Blog
Jul 19 2011
Cut, Cap, Balance - Giving the

President What He Wants and
What He Needs
President Obama has officially signaled that he is not on the side of the
American people.
Today, the House will vote on a common-sense, reasonable compromise to

raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion. In giving the President every penny of
debt ceiling he has requested, Republicans have asked for immediate
spending cuts and a multi-year framework to balance the federal budget.
Even before the House has begun debate on the measure, the President
announced he planned to veto the bill if it came to his desk. One has to
wonder why the President believes that spending cuts and balanced budgets
are “unrealistic policy goals”.
He’ll tell you it’s because the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” Act cuts Medicare
and Medicaid. But that is false. Nowhere in the text of the language does it
call for specific cuts to specific programs.
The intent of the bill is to set reasonable spending limits based on what we
can afford. If future Congresses can reform the budget so we can live within
our means and make no changes to entitlements, then so be it. Under the act,
Congress is free to structure programs however they wish, so long as we are
staying under the caps and over the next decade or so balance our budget.
So why the hyperbole and misinformation?
The only answer is that the President is not serious about cutting spending
and has no desire to ever balance the budget.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:00 PM
Cut, Cap, Balance - Giving the President What He Wants and W... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ece32405...
For further evidence, look no further than his own budget. It never balances
and adds trillions to the national debt. He is pained to suggest a single
entitlement reform he would support, even though they are the biggest
drivers of spending in our budget.
If the President will not take our fiscal challenges seriously, Republicans are
right to move forward with a plan that raises the debt ceiling while making
immediate spending cuts, limiting future spending, and requiring a balanced
budget amendment to the Constitution.
It is the only plan that raises the debt ceiling with significant Republican
support. We have put a plan on the table that will cut spending, balance the
budget, help our economy and create jobs.
It is now the President’s job to explain why he opposes the goals the
American people support.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/cut-cap-
balance-giving-the-president-what-he-wants-and-what-he-needs
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:00 PM
Accept no Imitations: Senator Lee Outlines the Necessary Requ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=f125d655...

Blog
Dec 08 2011
Accept no Imitations: Senator

Lee Outlines the Necessary
Requirements of an Effective
Senator Lee: Mr. President, I stand today to urge my colleagues to support
efforts to bring forward a balanced budget amendment, one that can be
passed out of both houses of Congress and submitted to the states for
ratification.
Article 5 of the Constitution gives us the power to change the Constitution

from time to time, to modify our law of laws, that 224-year-old document
that has fostered the development of the greatest civilization the world has
ever known. We have done this 27 times. We have done it at times when in
order to protect and preserve the nation that our ancestors fought so valiantly
to create and later again to defend. We have to modify our government, the
manner in which we do business in order to preserve that system, in order to
make it strong, in order to ensure that it will continue to be strong for future
generations.
We made it stronger when, for example, we added the Bill of Rights shortly
after the ratification of the Constitution. We made it stronger again when, for
example, we added the so-called civil war amendments, the 13th, 14th, and
15th amendments, ending slavery and the incidents thereof. We made it
stronger when we made it clear that women must always be given the right
to vote. We made it stronger a number of times.
The time to make it stronger has come yet again. It's time to modify the
Constitution to limit, to restrict Congress' current power granted by article 1,
section 8, clause 2 of the Constitution, to borrow money on credit of the
United States.
1 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
The reason we need to do this is because this power has been so severely
abused over such a prolonged period of time that it's causing devastating
consequences for our economy and for our ability to fund the operations of
government. We have now accumulated over $15 trillion in debt as a
country. That works out to about $50,000 for every man, woman and child in
America. It works out, arguably, to about $120,000 to $150,000 for every
taxpayer in America. This is a lot of money.
It also represents about 90%, between 90% and 100% of our gross domestic
product annually depending on whose statistics you follow. This is troubling
given that once a country's debt to GDP ratio crosses the significant 90%
threshold -- which we have now done -- economic growth tends to slow,
tends to slow to a point that an economy as large as ours can expect to lose
as many as a million jobs a year. We can't afford to lose jobs, especially
when we know what one of the major causes is, our national debt.
It's time that we change the way we do business. It's time to change the
manner in which Congress acquires new debt. This is no longer an issue that
is either Republican or democratic, that's either liberal or conservative. It is
simply American.
I remind my colleagues that whether you're most concerned on the one hand
about preserving America's leading edge, its ability to fund its national
defense program, or on the other hand if you're most concerned about
funding entitlement programs, you should want a balanced budget
amendment because this is what we need to do, this is what we have to do in
order to protect our ability to fund both of those things, and everything else
that we do.
You see, because by the end of this decade, according to the White House's
own numbers, we will be paying close to a trillion dollars every year just to
pay the interest on our national debt, just the interest alone. We're currently
spending a little over $200 billion a year on interest. Still, a lot of money,
but about $800 billion lower than what we're likely to be spending by the
end of this decade. Where will that additional $800 billion every single year
come from? This isn't a discretionary sum. This is money that we have to
pay. It's the first thing that we have to pay. Where will that $800 billion
difference be made up? At that point, we can't expect simply to raise taxes to
make up that difference. I'm not aware of any tax increase plan that could
bring in that much additional revenue every year without stagnating our
economy to the point that we might within a year or two bring in less
revenue rather than more, certainly not $800 billion more. Nor am I aware of
any plan whereby we could simply borrow an additional $800 billion just to
pay that interest, because doing so, of course, would cause our interest rates
to skyrocket, grow out of control, and our interest payments would be even
2 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
more significant at that point, thus further impairing our ability to fund
everything from defense to entitlements.
So at that point, the only option on the table would be dramatic, severe,
abrupt, even draconian cuts to everything from defense to entitlements and
everything in between. We don't want this, there is a better way, and the
better way forward that consists of a permanent structural spending reform
that can be achieved only through a balanced budget amendment.
Now, let me explain what I mean by that. More importantly, let me explain
what I don't mean by that. We have to beware of things that masquerade as
balanced budget amendments, things that will actually do the job instead of
purporting to do the job, distracting the public's attention away from the
need to do this, while in effect doing nothing.
We need to be aware of what I sometimes call the Trojan horse balanced

budget amendment proposal.
So there are a few hallmarks of what a real effective balanced budget

amendment would accomplish. First and foremost, it has to apply to all
spending in requiring Congress to provide a supermajority vote for any
borrowing authority. There are some that have suggested that we should
have a balanced budget amendment that exempts certain categories of
entitlement spending, but of course as we all know, it's entitlement spending
that it continues to consume a larger and larger share of our national budget
each and every year. It's entitlement spending that is anticipated to have
shortfalls for sums that will have to be expended for people, Americans alive
today, could range anywhere from $50 trillion to $60 trillion to $110 trillion
in unfunded entitlement liabilities.
So simply exempting out entire categories of entitlements is one of these

hallmarks of a Trojan horse balanced budget amendment. We can't do that.
We need it to apply to all federal outlays, all federal spending.
Second, an effective balanced budget amendment must cap spending at the

average historical level of federal revenue. Over the last 40 years, our
average take, our average income as a percentage of GDP has been about,
18% to 18.5% of our gross domestic product. So we need to make sure that
we're not spending more than that, that Congress can't without a
supermajority vote spend more than 18% of GDP in any given year.
Otherwise, we run the risk that Congress will find a way through tricky
accounting schemes to circumvent the restrictions to make sure that it's not
spending more than it takes in.
Third, the supermajority requirement must apply to the votes in both houses
3 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
of Congress every single time Congress wants to spend more than it takes in.
Any balanced budget amendment proposal that allows for a simple majority
to bring about an exception to these spending limitations is one that
Congress can and will use to circumvent the amendment entirely.
Let me explain what I mean. We have had in the past certain statutory
legislative limitations on Congress' spending and borrowing power. Some of
these have been known as the Graham-Rudman-Hollings legislation. Also
the PAYGO rules. But because Congress makes those laws and because they
haven't been reduced to a Constitutional amendment, just as Congress
giveth, Congress taketh away and it sees fit to exempt itself out of those
rules.
A balanced budget amendment even while enshrined in our Constitution

becomes no more effective than those statutory or internal rules unless every
time Congress wants to get around those limitations, it is required to cast a
supermajority vote to justify that excess.
Finally, an effective balanced budget amendment must require that Congress

cast a supermajority vote any time we raise the debt limit. This will give us
an additional guarantee that tricky accounting mechanisms won't be used to
circumvent some of these most important restrictions.
Without these restrictions, Mr. President, Congress will continue to spend

out of control because members of Congress tend to be rewarded when they
spend and they tend to be criticized when they cut, and political pressures
are such that I fear this spending will continue out of control in perpetuity
until that moment when we reach our natural mathematical borrowing limit,
not our statutory limit, our mathematical limit.
It's at that point, Mr. President, when the most abrupt, painful, draconian cuts
will have to be made. We can do this in a way that's sensitive to the needs of
the most vulnerable Americans, those who have become the most dependent
upon our entitlement state, those that have become dependent for their
day-to-day existence on these very programs. Those programs will have to
be cut abruptly in a most painful manner unless we take the necessary steps
right now and start moving on to a smooth glide path towards a balanced
budget amendment.
So the American people are paying for Washington's fiscal irresponsibility in

the form of job losses, in the form of increased prices for goods and for
services, and in the form of inflation.
4 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
It's likewise my experience with my state legislature, that they seem to be

very supportive of it. In fact, I have a document here signed by the
legislative leaders of my state, by Governor Gary Herbert, by Utah House of
Representatives Speaker Rebecca Lockhart and by Utah State Senate
President Michael Waddups. They say -- quote -- "we urge the United States
Senate and House of Representatives to pass a balanced budget amendment
and send it to the states for ratification. Additionally, we urge Congress to
make Utah's concurrent resolution part of the Congressional Record."
They also proceed to explain why they feel so strongly about this. They say
not only for our own sake but for future generations as well, the states must
now combine in an unwavering resolve with convincing action to put the
nation's financial house in order.
Passage of your own state's resolution urging the support for a balanced
budget amendment can help make this happen. Please join with Utah and
call upon Congress immediately to pass a balanced budget amendment. We
respectfully encourage you and urge your Congressional delegation to act in
your behalf. They're calling not only on Congress but also on their fellow
state legislators throughout the country to urge this same action from
Congress. And in the same breath they also adopted and they supported
whole heartedly the specific balanced budget amendment found in Senate
joint resolution 10.
I thank them for doing that and I think they reflect views of so many of our
state legislatures which balance their budgets every single year. Most of
them do. It's not news when they do it. It's not news because it's what's
expected. It's what's expected because that's what they do. I look forward to
the day and age when it's no longer news, when Congress balances its
budget.
Perhaps it is inherent in the institution itself, in the forces at play, that have
made Congress uniquely vulnerable to this kind of massive deficit spending.
But whatever the reason, we know that Congress isn't willing, isn't able or at
least in recent years has not been inclined except in rare, unusual
circumstances to balance its own budget.
That being the case, we can't assume that Congress will all of a sudden start
doing its job as those who have used this argument have insisted. Part of
Congress' job as Congress has come to perceive it is to engage in deficit
spending.
One of Congress' powers as members of Congress who read the Constitution
5 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
will point out, is to borrow money on credit of the United States. And so it
isn't enough simply to say Congress, do your job, because it has regarded
this kind of massive deficit as consistent with that mandate, consistent with
that injunction. Meanwhile, Congress continues to occupy a larger and larger
share of the American economy.
We have to remember that for the first 150 years or so of our Republic's
existence, at the federal level we were spending between 1% and 4% of
gross domestic product at the federal, national level with only two brief
exception, once during the civil war and one in the immediate aftermath of
World War I. But that all started to change in the 1930's when we broke into
double digits for the first time ever during peace time. We've never really
gone back, and now the federal government is spending about 25% of GDP
annually -- GDP annually. Roughly a quarter of every dollar that moves
through the American economy every year is taken out of the real economy
by Washington. It's absorbed within the federal morass that is our
government. That's a problem. That needs to change.
I fear, I suspect, I firmly believe that it will not change until we take this
power away, until we at least impose severe restrictions on Congress'
borrowing power because it has become part of Congress' nature to engage
in this kind of out-of-control deficit spending.
And I think it's important for us to remind our colleagues that because the
American people overwhelmingly support this, by a margin of about 75%,
according to a recent CNN poll, those who oppose it, those who are
members of this body or of our sister body, the US House of representatives
just down the hall, who choose not to support it will do so, will cast their
"no" vote at their own political peril. Because the American people are
standing up and they are demanding more.
They understand that in the words of Benjamin Franklin, “he'll cheat without
scruple who can without fear.”
When Congress is free to spend more than it takes in every single year
without political consequence, bad things happen. Congress starts to
manipulate more and more of the economy and that is something that the
American people understand is hurtful rather than helpful to them, to the
people on the ground, to the person who's unemployed and looking for a job,
for the person who's underemployed or underpaid for the work that he does.
Or the single mother who's just worried about taking care of their children.
For the grandparents who are worried about the future of their grandchildren,
worried about the fact that for the first time in American history, Americans
6 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
fear that they will enjoy a lower standard of living than what they have
enjoyed.
All of this is due to the fact that Congress has known no real boundaries to
its authority and recognized no real limits on its ability to spend your
hard-earned money. This has real consequences.
But we can forestall those negative consequences right now if we will act to
restrict on a permanent and structural basis Congress's ability to engage in
deficit spending.
Accept no imitations. Beware of the Trojan horse balanced budget

amendment, the one that can be circumvented easy by a simple majority
vote. Beware of the balanced budget amendment that doesn't limit as a
percentage of GDP Congress's ability to spend money. Look out for these
principles.
We get this balanced budget amendment passed, submit it to the states for
ratification, they will ratify it and we will find that our best days as
Americans are yet ahead of us. I urge my colleagues to cast a vote in favor
of senate joint resolution 10. Thank you, mr. President.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/accept-
no-imitations-senator-lee-outlines-the-necessary-requirements-of-an-
effective-balanced-budget-amendment
7 of 7 2/3/12 1:09 PM
Support in the States for the Balanced Budget Amendment - Blo... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ce183606...

Blog
Dec 12 2011
Support in the States for the

Legislative leaders from South Carolina to Missouri to Utah have signed a
letter in support of Congress passing a balanced budget amendment to the
Constitution that will restrain spending and reduce our national debt:
Dear Senator Lee:
You have my strong support for a Constitutional amendment to balance the

federal budget. I want you to know that if Congress sends us a Balanced
Budget Amendment to the federal Constitution, I will work to ensure that the
House votes to ratify the amendment.
It is vital that Congress pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. Much as the

states have been striving to get government spending under control, so, too,
should the federal government.
Without limits placed on Congress as they determine America’s spending,

this country will continue to spend itself into insolvency. We cannot afford to
mortgage our children’s future. To prevent the grave harm to our nation from
a debt crisis and to ensure that Congress spends no more than it takes in,
Congress and the state legislatures must act to amend the United States
Constitution to require a balanced federal budget.
I urge you to move quickly this year to pass a Balance Budget Amendment so
that I can begin working with my colleagues to secure ratification.
Sincerely,
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:09 PM
Support in the States for the Balanced Budget Amendment - Blo... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ce183606...
Jase Bolger, Speaker of the House, Michigan
Frank McNulty, Speaker of the House, Colorado
Kraig Paulsen, Speaker of the House, Iowa
Linda Upmeyer, Senate Majority Leader, Iowa
Art Wittich, State Senate, Montana
Phil Bryant, Lt. Governor, Mississippi
Tom Dempsey, Senate Majority Leader, Missouri
Russell Pearce, Senate President, Arizona
J. T. “Jabo” Waggoner, Senate Majority Leader, Alabama
Tony Ross, State Senate, Wyoming
Harvey S. Peeler, Jr., State Senate, South Carolina
Robert W. Harrell, Jr., Speaker of the House, South Carolina
Gary R. Hebert, Governor, Utah
Rebecca Lockhart, Speaker of the House, Utah
Michael Waddoups, Senate President, Utah
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/support-
in-the-states-for-the-balanced-budget-amendment
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:09 PM
Highlights from Today's Floor Debate on the Balanced Budget... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=276f48cd...

Blog
Dec 13 2011
Highlights from Today's Floor

Debate on the Balanced Budget
Amendment
Today, the Senate vigorously debated the details of a balanced budget
amendment. Below are comments from some of my colleagues, who agree
that we need a strong BBA that will truly force the federal government to
live within its means, rather than a Trojan horse BBA that will make
runaway deficits a permanent part of Washington’s books:
Senator Jim DeMint: “President Obama, as I said, proposed a budget that

doubled the national debt in the next ten years. That's not responsible
leadership at a time when we are already at an unsustainable debt level.
Despite all the bipartisan promises to cut spending, Washington is still
voting to make government bigger and more expensive than ever. And this
includes some Republicans joining the fray here to just increase spending.
Federal spending went up 5% in the first nine months of the year despite all
the hoopla about us cutting spending here. There's one way to judge if we're
cutting the budget or not despite all the Washingtonspeak: If we know if
we're spending more, we just have to ask ourselves, are we spending more
than we did last year? The answer is yes. And we're going to spend more
next year than we did this year, based on the bills we're passing this week
and next.… It's gluttony. It's political gluttony. Since Obama became
president, the debt limit has been raised four times. The debt is rising faster
and higher than ever. Yet the senate refuses to pass a budget or cut spending.
We must budget and balance the budget or we're going to bring down our
whole country.”
Senator Orrin Hatch: “For 2010, spending on interest on the national debt is
greater than the funding for most other federal programs. Just look at that. If
you can see in one year spending on interest is greater than most programs…
$414 billion for interest expense. $173 billion for the Department of Labor.
$129 billion for the Department of Agriculture. $108 billion for the
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:09 PM
Department of Veterans' Affairs. Just one other I'll mention, $92.9 billion for
the Department of Education. Well, the impact of this quickly escalating debt
burden could prove catastrophic for economic growth and for America's
families.… What happens if interest rates rise? Right now, they're at historic
lows. But that will not always be the case. And we're figuring on historic
lows right now as though they're going to continue…. We're spending at
historic highs and going higher and with interest on the debt taking up a
larger and larger share of spending, we need to be concerned we are entering
a debt spiral from which we will have a difficult time extricating ourselves.
For these reasons, Admiral Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, concluded that our national debt is ‘the biggest threat we
have to our national security.’”
Senator John Cornyn: “It's true as the senator from Maine has said, that the
basic conundrum we have in times when we passed deficit reduction
legislation like Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and the other is purely statutory
fixes are fine but they can't bind future Congresses. We need a constitutional
amendment that will make at this time law of the land that cannot be ignored
by future Congresses when we do, as I hope we will do, embrace our
responsibility to pass this constitutional amendment. Well, the facts show
that -- show that the time for a strong balanced budget amendment is now. It
is today. Joint Resolution 10 is a strong balanced budget amendment that
will protect the American people from runaway deficits and reckless
spending. If ratified by three quarters of the states, that's 38 states, it will
require a two-thirds supermajority of Congress in both chambers to approve
a deficit in any fiscal year. A supermajority would be needed in a time of
emergency to approve a deficit in any given year and it can't be open ended.
It has to happen each year that a deficit might be run. And we can imagine
that emergencies could occur, but it shouldn't be a routine matter as it is now
where we engage in deficit spending.”
Senator Rand Paul: “I rise today in support of the balanced budget

amendment. In fact, it's beyond me to imagine that anybody in this body
could oppose a balanced budget amendment. I ran my election last year
primarily on this fact, that government spending was out of control and that
debt was consuming our country and that we needed serious rules to bring
our budget into control. We tried in the past. This body passed Gramm-
Rudman-Hollings and immediately began to evade it. This body passed
PAYGO and then proceeded to disobey [its] own rules 700 times. We
wonder why 9% of the people approve of Congress? It's because we cannot
even obey our own rules. We need new rules. We need a balanced budget
amendment that would be an amendment to the Constitution because we do
not adhere to the rules that we pass. This body is literally out of control.
Now, the other side says, trust us. Trust us. We can balance the budget. This
other side hasn't even passed any budget this year or last year, not just a
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:09 PM
balanced budget, the other side can't pass any budget. So I think we really do
need new and stronger rules to force us to do what is right, what every
American family has to do and that's balance our budget. A nation is no
different.”
Senator David Vitter: “First of all, I hope it's perfectly clear that our debt,
our growing, unsustainable level of debt, is a clear and present danger and an
immediate danger to our republic, to our democracy, to our economy, to our
future. Debt, overspending has been a problem for quite a while in
Washington. It's been a problem under Republican and Democratic
administrations and Congresses. But forever it was a problem because we
were passing on these big debt figures, this big burden to our kids and
grandkids and we were kicking the can down the road. It was a problem for
the future, which we should correct now, but largely a problem for the
future. As Senator Paul said, that's not true anymore. It is an immediate
threat right now. It's not a question of just our kids and grandkids. It's a
question of next month, next year, whether we avoid a crisis as is brewing in
Europe which could be the biggest hit to our economy since the Great
Depression, bigger than what we went through in 2008. So this issue is an
immediate threat and it's not some esoteric issue about balance sheets.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/highlights-
from-today-s-floor-debate-on-the-balanced-budget-amendment
3 of 3 2/3/12 1:09 PM
One of the Most Important Pieces of Legislation to Come Befor... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=93ffc049...

Blog
Dec 14 2011
One of the Most Important

Pieces of Legislation to Come
Before Senate in Decades
Mr. President, I stand today to urge my colleagues to support one of the most
important pieces of legislation that has come before this body in decades:
Senate joint resolution 10, the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment
Balanced Budget Amendment proposal.
The reason why I insist this is so important is because of a crisis that we're
facing today. We've accumulated about $15 trillion in sovereign debt on
behalf of the united states. $15 trillion. It works out to about $50,000 for
every man, woman and child in America. This is an amount of money that
could represent an expensive car. It could represent a college education. It
could represent all kinds of things but it represents ultimately debt that
Congress has incurred that Congress can't afford to continue to incur at this
same rate which we're doing every day.
We're adding to that debt at an unsustainable rate of about $1.5 trillion every
single year. Here's why that's so distressing to me. As the White House itself
has acknowledged just a few months ago, we're now within about a decade,
perhaps much less, of owing about a trillion dollars a year just in interest on
our national debt. Currently we're paying a little over $200 billion a year in
interest. By the end of this decade, that number is likely to rise to an
astounding $1 trillion a year.
We could reach that number much sooner than that. It could happen perhaps
in half that amount of time if interest rates suddenly start to climb, as they
easily could do, particularly given the fact that we're about 350 basis points
below the historical average for yield rates on U. S. Treasury instruments,
the means by which our governmental debt is financed.
We have to get this problem under control now, because if we wait until
1 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
then, until we have to pay a trillion dollars a year just in interest on our
martial debt, it will be too late to do anything. By waiting, by postponing the
day of our accountability, we will have made a choice, a devastating choice
that will prove the signal, the downfall of the greatest economy the world
has ever known. We can't allow that to happen. Not now, not on our watch,
not when the stakes are this high.
If we have to make up that difference, the difference between the $200

billion a year that we're paying now and the trillion dollars a year that we'll
have to be paying in interest on our national debt just a few years ago, that
money has to come from somewhere. That money isn't something we can
expect simply to obtain through an increase in taxation.
Over the long haul, we've learned that our tax system is capable of
generating a revenue stream equaling a little over 18% of all the revenue that
moves through the American economy every single year. A little over 18%
of our gross domestic product.
As this chart shows, that percentage remains relatively constant. It's

remained that way for many decades, going back to at least 1960. It averages
out a little over 18% of gross domestic product.
Now, that remains true even when we go back 30 years or so, when our top
marginal income tax rates were approaching 90%. The economy finds a way
to produce no more than a little over 18% of GDP.
So we can't just raise taxes at that point in order to generate more revenue
because our income tax system, no matter how we tweak it, no matter how
high we raise top marginal rates, isn't capable of generating that much
revenue. What we do when we simply ratchet up those tax rates, if anything,
is we shrink the size of our economy, we chill economic growth to the point
where we're actually generating less revenue, not more.
So we can't just tax our way out of that problem, nor can we, at that point,
simply borrow our way out of that problem. In other words, we can't just
borrow an additional $800 billion a year on top of the present day $1.5
trillion a year that we're borrowing. Because if we did that, our interest rates
would go up that much more. That would make our decision that much more
crippling on our economy.
There are a lot of reasons why this matters. My colleague from Ohio, Mr.
Portman, acknowledged just a few minutes ago that this chills job growth
when we have this much debt. It's also true that this chills, this impairs our
ability to fund every conceivable government program, from defense to
entitlements, such that if we wait in order to make the necessary changes to
2 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
the way we spend money in Washington, we will wait at our own peril, we
will wait at the peril of those who have become dependent on those very
government programs that will have to have their budgets slashed
immediately, abruptly, severely. We can't afford to do that.
Those who have become dependent on Social Security, on Medicare, on

Medicaid, on other entitlement programs, on supplemental nutritional
assistance, would be devastated if all of a sudden we cut off funding for
those programs or we had to slash those budgets by 30%, 40%, 50%
overnight. It's these abrupt changes that prove more difficult for our
economy to absorb.
I've often said that it's something that we can analogize to being on top of a
large building. Let's say our $15 trillion debt can be compared to a 15-story
building. If you need to get down off of that building, you need to get to the
ground floor, if you want to do it really quickly, you could decide to jump. If
you decide to jump, it's not the fall that will kill you, it's the abrupt halt at the
end of that fall. So you need to do something to cushion the fall, to slow it
down a little bit so that it can be accomplished gradually, so that nobody gets
hurt.
That's where the Balanced Budget Amendment comes in. The Hatch-Lee
Balanced Budget Amendment, Senate joint resolution 10, would bring about
significant systemic changes but it would do so gradually so that the cuts,
while significant over the long haul, are not abrupt, so that the impact isn't
severe other than avoiding the severeness of the impact that would otherwise
occur.
We have to get down from that 15-story building, from that $15 trillion debt.
We do that through a Balanced Budget Amendment, one like Senate joint
resolution 10, which contains a five-year delayed implementation clause.
That would give us time to work out a phased-in glide path toward balancing
our budget.
That's what we need to do in order to protect and preserve our economic

stability, our jobs market, and our ability within the federal government to
fund everything from defense to entitlements.
Those who ignore the need for this amendment ignore the fact that our
spending continues to escalate. I want to talk about how much we've spent as
a country as a percentage of our overall economy, as a percentage of our
gross domestic product.
Between the early 1790's and the early 1930's, the federal government spent
on average between 2% and 4% of gross domestic product every single year
3 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
with only two notable exceptions -- once during the civil war and a second
time during and in the immediate aftermath of World War I. With those two
exceptions, Congress's spending was modest, between 2% and 4% of GDP.
That all started to change in the early 1930's when we reached the double
digits during peacetime for the first time in our history. We've, unfortunately,
never really retreated from that cycle. Federal spending today as a
percentage of GDP stands close to 25%, meaning that for every dollar that
moves through the American economy, a quarter of that goes to Washington,
is sucked in by the federal government and can't move on to help continue to
stimulate the economy.
That pattern of increased federal spending as a percentage of GDP is

expected to increase in the next few years. It's expected, based on data
provided by the Congressional Budget Office, to reach 26.4% of GDP within
the next ten years, by 2021.
Some say that that figure is too optimistic and that it could actually be much
higher than that, it could, in fact, be significantly higher than 30%. At a
minimum, we know that it will be 26.4% or more unless we take pretty
significant steps to control our spending.
And so I find it interesting that many are saying that we don't need to make
changes, that we can somehow just have Congress just do its job, that
Congress just needs to follow the Constitution and do its job and just balance
its budget.
Well, let me tell you the problem with that. First of all, there's nothing
currently in the Constitution that restricts Congress's power to borrow
money. Clause 2 of Article 1 of the Constitution gives us the power to do
that. And we've done it. We've done it again and again and again. We've
done it so many times in recent years that we've almost lost track.
Now, Congress first placed a statutory limit on the acquisition of new federal
debt in 1917, which was the second Liberty Bond Act. Since 1962, Congress
has altered the debt limit through 74 separate measures and has raised it ten
times just since 2001, just in the last ten years.
Since 1990, the debt limit has been raised by a total of $10.1 trillion. Nearly
half of that increase has occurred just in the last four years, since late 2007.
So this is not a situation in which we're just seeing the normal growth of
government spending, either in normal numbers, in numbers adjusted for
inflation, in numbers measured as a percentage of GDP. By any metric, the
amount of federal spending and the amount of debt acquisition has grown
exponentially, giving us this hockey stick-like curve in the acquisition of
4 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
federal debt. We can't continue this practice.
We especially can't continue it given the fact that we know that the natural
limit on our ability to receive revenue through the income tax system is a
little over 18% of GDP. So we have to have something in place that keeps us
from spending more than we take in.
That can't possibly be accomplished, in my opinion, without something that

ups the ante, something that make it structurally more difficult on a
permanent basis for Congress to engage in deficit spending. And to spend
more than 18% of GDP.
There are a few critical features in the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget

Amendment proposal that I think any viable Balanced Budget Amendment
proposal ought to have.
First, it needs to apply to all spending.
Second, it needs to cap spending at 18% of GDP.
It also needs to require a supermajority vote in order to exceed that

percentage of GDP Spending limit, in order to raise taxes or in order to raise
the debt limit.
Without these kinds of provisions, this kind of redundant protection against

the inexorable growth of federal spending generally and the in inexorable
growth of deficit spending in particular, our debt will crush the very
programs that we purport to be protecting.
Those who have fought against this say well, we can't limit spending to 18%
of GDP or else we will hurt program x., y, or z. While they are making this
argument, they are making it in reckless disregard of the fact that those same
programs will be jeopardized if we continue to borrow recklessly without
any structural spending restraint or reform on the horizon.
Others have argued that we don't need this because somehow it's
unenforceable. I'm not quite sure what they mean. Perhaps they don't know
what a court would do with it, but they are forgetting the fact that we have
other provisions in the Constitution that raise the vote threshold, which is
essentially what the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment does. In other
words, we have other provisions in the Constitution, provisions that are
followed routinely, without the need for litigation, just based on members of
Congress taking an oath to uphold the Constitution, as all of us are hired to
do pursuant to Article 6.
5 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
Those are complied with every day. For instance, we all know and none of
us really will dispute the fact that it takes a two-thirds supermajority vote in
both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto. It takes a two-thirds
supermajority vote in both houses of Congress to propose a Constitutional
amendment. It takes a two-thirds supermajority vote in the United States
Senate to ratify a treaty. We don't dispute the fact that these vote thresholds
exist. We don't have to wait for the courts to intervene or for them to enforce
them within Congress. We just follow them.
That's what this would do. This says that because Congress has the ability to
destroy itself, to destroy the economy, to destroy the very government that
we have created through reckless, indefinite, perpetual deficit spending, we
must protect Congress from itself. Perhaps better said, we must protect
people from Congress by requiring that Congress approve any amount of
money spent in excess of what Congress brings in or in excess of 18% of
GDP or in excess of the debt limit by a supermajority vote. We have to have
that. It will be followed and it's absolutely necessary.
Now, it's interesting. Few, if any, of my colleagues will dispute the fact that
Congress should balance its budget. There is perhaps a difference of opinion,
maybe even widespread difference of opinion, as to how best we should try
to close this gap, as to how best we should close the gap between the money
that Congress brings in each year through the tax system and the money that
it spends. There is widespread dispute about where cuts need to be made, but
I think all of us agree that we do need to balance our budget.
That begs the question if we all agree, as I think we all do, then why can't we
agree that we need to adopt a permanent structural mechanism that will be
embodied in the Constitution that will ensure that that actually happens.
This proposal remains agnostic as to where cuts will be made. All it says is
that if you're going to spend more than you take in or spend more than 18%
of GDP or raise taxes or raise the debt limit, you're going to do it by a
supermajority vote.
That's something that the American people support. In fact, 75% of the
American people support these basic principles that Congress should not, for
example, spend more than it takes in each and every year.
That brings me to the question of why it is that we should support Senate

joint resolution 10, the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment and not
another proposal.
For example, Senate joint resolution 24. Senate joint resolution 24, which I
might refer to alternatively as the Trojan horse Balanced Budget
6 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
Amendment or as the do-nothing amendment proposal, purports to be a

solution when, in fact, it is not, for one simple reason -- it gives Congress
unfettered discretion to exempt itself out of the budget balancing
requirement that it contains.
This would in effect, I am certain, render this amendment, were it to take

effect, virtually dead letter provision. We have seen what Congress does
when it has the option of simply exempting itself out of statutory spending
caps, in the PAYGO rules, in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Control
Act and in other statutory provisions like this. Congress giveth and Congress
taketh away.
Congress has become a walking, breathing waiver unto itself, and when
Congress is given the option of saying ‘I know we're supposed to balance
our budget but we don't feel like it today’, it ends up not doing that.
All Congress would have to do under Senate joint resolution 24, under the
do-nothing amendment proposal, is simply acknowledge that the United
States is involved in a military conflict, and by simple majority vote it can
exempt itself out of these provisions entirely.
By contrast, the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment proposal

acknowledges that in time of war or armed military conflict, it may be
necessary to spend more than we take in. But in the case of an armed
military conflict not amounting to a war, it requires a 3/5 supermajority vote,
and in either a war or another armed military conflict, it specifically provides
that in that war or conflict any overage, any amount spend above and beyond
what Congress brings in has to be limited to that required to prosecute that
war or that military conflict effort. That's a huge difference.
You can't simply give Congress the option of complying with the Balanced
Budget Amendment's provisions only when Congress feels like it. This is a
little bit like telling an alcoholic you have got to give up drinking while
leaving an open container of whiskey on the table and requiring that person
to walk past that bottle or even carry it around with him every single day. It
doesn't work. You have got to take it out of the house. You have certainly got
to take it out of the possession of the recovering alcoholic.
This is the challenge of our time, to figure out how to prevent Congress'
chronic abuse of its own borrowing authority from collapsing under its own
weight and from bringing about the economic collapse of the United States
of America.
We have to have these structural spending reform mechanisms because our

government is run by imperfect people. Benjamin Franklin has often been
7 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
quoted for the line that says “he will cheat without scruple who can without
fear.” I think when looking at Congress today, he might say Congress will
spend more money than it has whenever it possibly can, whenever it has the
option of spending more.
As Madison said, “if men were angels, no government would be necessary,

and if angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on
government would be necessary.”
We are, as human beings, not angels, and our government isn't run by angels
either. This is why we need these structural, permanent spending reform
mechanisms.
We cannot afford to accept a substitute here, a cheap imitation, a Trojan

horse Balanced Budget Amendment like Senate joint resolution 24, because
if we adopt something like that, we will create the illusion to the American
people that we are actually undertaking efforts to control our out-of-control
deficit spending problem when, in fact, we're doing nothing because it's
always the case that we're involved in a military conflict somewhere.
Congress will always be able to muster a simple majority, saying we can't be

expected to balance our budget right now because of that. We've got to draw
that line in the sand. We've got to stand for those who support everything
from defense to entitlements. We have got to stand up for our children and
our grandchildren and those who will come after them, those who are not yet
old enough to vote, those who have not yet been born, those whose parents
have yet to meet.
Those people aren't here to vote against us as we spend their money. This is
a particularly pernicious form of taxation without representation. We fought
a war over two centuries ago over that pernicious practice and we won that
war, and we shouldn't subject our children and their children and
grandchildren after them to that same practice. This is contrary to liberty, it's
contrary to economic prosperity, and we can't stand for it to occur anymore.
So we really have two choices. One choice involves supporting, passing and
submitting to the states for ratification the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget
Amendment proposal, putting some permanent restraint at long last on
Congress' self-destructive borrowing capacity.
The other option can take many forms. It can take the option of supporting
Senate joint resolution 24 which doesn't solve the underlying problem or it
can take the form of doing nothing at all.
You see, if we do nothing at all, we still made a choice, we have made a
8 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
devastating choice, a choice that will inure to the detriment of the American
people and of the federal programs that we all rely on, the federal programs
that people rely on to keep them safe, to protect them from the ravages of
nature, to protect them from the conditions of poverty that we seek to avoid
in this country.
It is, after all, the objective of all of us to seek for a better, more prosperous,
more safe country, but we jeopardize all of those interests the longer we
allow this practice of perpetual deficit spending to continue.
At the end of the day, we have to face our own constituents, those who
choose not to vote for the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment will
have to face their constituents and tell them why they were unwilling to
stand for a proposition so basic as we should balance our budget.
There is no excuse based on the fact that we can't do this oversight because
this has a delayed implementation clause. It won't take effect until five years
after it's been ratified by the states. In the meantime, we will be able to set in
motion a sequence of events, a series of implementing bills that will allow us
to put ourselves on a smooth glide path toward balancing our budget. We'll
be able to do that.
Those who vote against the Hatch-Lee Balanced Budget Amendment can't
look their constituents in the eye and tell them they did everything they
could do to get our out-of-control deficit spending habits under control.
I urge each and every one of my colleagues to do this, to do this for

themselves, for the programs that they want to save, to do this for their
children and grandchildren. Our prosperity, our success as Americans, our
survival as a nation and the success of our government require nothing less.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/one-of-
the-most-important-pieces-of-legislation-to-come-before-senate-in-decades
9 of 9 2/3/12 1:10 PM
Sampling of Balanced Budget Amendment Video Coverage
Find more @ www.youtube.com/senatormikelee

Watch it here: http://youtu.be/xS5CyNubTSs

Watch it here: http://youtu.be/xRU7tUQzsto

Watch it here: http://youtu.be/TDLwDXrQ0mY

Watch it here: http://youtu.be/mJ4u0ke-‐oDo
Sen. Mike Lee: Greedy Politicians Don't Want Balanced
Budget
Wednesday, July 20, 2011 05:00 PM
By: Henry J. Reske and Kathleen Walter
Members of Congress oppose a balanced budget amendment simply because they do not want to
give up power that rightly belongs to the American people themselves, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah,
tells Newsmax.TV.
Lee, who introduced the "cut, cap, and balance" act in the Senate and is the author of “The
Freedom Agenda: Why a Balanced Budget Amendment is Necessary to Restore
Constitutional Government,” said some members of Congress are reluctant to support his
amendment even though polls show wide public support for a balanced budget amendment.
Why? “Because a balanced budget amendment would make politicians less powerful,” he said.
“It would make Congress as an institution less powerful. Anytime an institution has access to an
unlimited pool of money, especially if it is a lawmaking institution like Congress, it will be made
more power as a result of that.
“We need the balanced budget amendment to save the American people from this power," Lee
added. "Every time we expand the power of the federal government we run the risk of interfering
with the individual liberty of Americans.”
Lee said he was “elated” by the passage of the cut, cap and balance amendment in the House by a
vote of 234-190 and was working on Senate Democrats to support the measure even as he
acknowledged none had yet converted.
“We think that before we raise the debt limit we need to address the underlying problem,” he
said. “We need permanent structural and binding spending reform before we extend the credit of
the United States government once again.”
As to President Barack Obama’s assertion that a balanced budget amendment is not needed, Lee
said, “History tells us exactly the opposite.”
“When the president says Congress just needs to do its job rather than amend the Constitution I
can’t help but think about the fact that that hasn’t worked,” he said. “That’s how we got to the
point where we are now, where we’re almost $15 trillion in debt. We need Congress to bind
itself; we need it to be bound constitutionally. Not just in this Congress but in subsequent
congresses and the only way to do that is to amend our laws of laws, the only law that can’t just
be repealed by a future Congress and that is through an amendment to the Constitution.”
On other issues, Lee said:

• Congress must address changes to entitlement programs such as Medicare no matter how
difficult it may be because Medicare is headed for insolvency.
• He would “avoid like the plague” Sen. Mitch McConnell’s plan to give the president the
power to raise the debt ceiling. He said the proposal is “constitutional but the fact that it’s
constitutional doesn’t mean its good policy and it’s not good policy.”
• People are “understandably concerned” about the debate over the deficit and debt ceiling
be they “understand this is something that effects everything from job creation to what
they pay in interest rates on home mortgage and their auto loan, their ability to finance
every aspect of their lives, their ability to finance their own businesses. They are
concerned about this and we owe it the American people to handle this matter responsibly
in a manner that won’t continue the barbaric practice of burying our children and our
grandchildren, some who are not yet born, in a mountain of debt by spending money that
we don’t have.”
Hatch, Lee offer competing balanced budget plans
Senate • Hatch and Lee offer separate bills toward shared goal of requiring a balanced federal
budget.
By Thomas Burr
Published: January 31, 2011 03:10PM
Updated: March 22, 2011 11:26PM
Washington • Both of Utah’s senators are seeking to amend the U.S. Constitution to require
Congress to balance the federal budget every year, though freshman Sen. Mike Lee’s proposal
cuts deeper than his senior colleague’s plan.
Still, while Sen. Orrin Hatch’s bill and Lee’s differ, both say they are eyeing the same goal: rein
in spending and make the federal government live within its means.
Hatch formally introduced his bill this week that would bar Congress from passing a spending
plan that tops 20 percent of the gross national product, essentially a measure of how much the
nation produces in labor and goods in a given year.
Lee’s proposal, which he also offered this week, would set the limit at 18 percent of the GDP, a
threshold Hatch previously said he’d like to see but that isn’t politically viable.
And the two also differ on another major point: Hatch’s proposed amendment allows Congress to
override the balanced budget requirement if a majority of the House and Senate declare war or
says there is an imminent national security threat.
Lee says that’s a loophole in the amendment, and his bill doesn’t offer it.
Still, both Lee and Hatch see wiggle room in their proposals and argue it’s good to have divergent
points to debate. In the end, their measurers could be combined.
“At some point I strongly suspect that’s what will happen,” Lee says. “In the meantime, I think
it’s helpful to have competing versions so that different senators can debate the relative merits of
each one and try to achieve some consensus on what’s the best way to go.”
Hatch, too, doesn’t see it as competition between himself and his colleague.
“Mike made a commitment to the people of Utah that he’d fight for a balanced budget
amendment — and I’m glad he did,” Hatch said. “With this shared goal, I know we can make this
happen once and for all. The more people pushing for this absolutely critical constitutional
amendment, the more likely we are to actually get it through so we can finally bring some fiscal
sanity back to Washington.”
Hatch has attempted to add a balanced budget component to the Constitution a dozen times in the
past, coming close in 1997 but losing by one vote in the Senate. A constitutional amendment
requires approval by two-thirds of each chamber of Congress and then approval by three-quarters
of the state legislatures.
Opposition to the amendment, however, will be strong.
Some economists argue that a balanced budget amendment could wreak havoc on the federal
budget, impacting vital programs, and wouldn’t allow government to do what it needed to do in
times of economic downturn.
Charles Schultze, a senior fellow emeritus at the left-leaning Brookings Institution who has
testified about the balanced budget amendment before Congress, says such an amendment could
be disastrous for the country in that it would be extremely hard to get lawmakers to cut or get
two-thirds of Congress to raise taxes.
For example, before the economic crisis of the last two years, tax revenues were 18 percent of the
GDP, but that dropped to 15 percent during the downturn, leaving a $400 billion to $500 billion
gap that, under the amendment, would have just had to be cut, he said.
“You don’t know what you’re setting up by way of a deadlock,” said Schultze, a former chairman
of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Jimmy Carter.
He noted that such an amendment would bar things like the stimulus act that has been credited by
some with keeping America out of another Great Depression.
“You can debate how bad it would have been, but without it, we’d have been in a helluva lot
worse shape,” Schultze said.
Lastly, the economist says that in reality, passing such an amendment would just mean the federal
government would create “off-budget” authorities to borrow money, similar to how state and
local governments don’t count road and school construction projects in their annual budgets.
Hatch has lined up various groups backing his bill, including Americans for Tax Reform,
American Conservative Union, and the National Taxpayers Union.
Lee, too, has backing from ATR, as well as from the Americans for a Balanced Budget
Amendment and several tea party groups.
Alan Parks, the founder of Americans for a Balanced Budget Amendment, says he’s more a fan
of Lee’s proposal since it doesn’t have the so-called war opt-out and Congress would need two-
thirds of each body to go over the budget cap.
With a war loophole, Parks says, “they would be off the hook for years and years or even
decades. Look how long the war in Afghanistan has been going on. That would be the kind of
thing Congress would use to override the balanced budget amendment.”
Lee’s amendment proposal has attracted seven fellow GOP senators as co-sponsors; Hatch’s bill
now carries 23 Republican sponsors.
Sens. Orrin Hatch, Mike Lee pushing for Balanced Budget
Amendment
By Kelly McConkie Henriod , Deseret News
Published: Sunday, April 3 2011 11:51 p.m. MDT
WASHINGTON — Utah Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee and four other senate Republicans
came together last week to unveil the Senate Republican Balanced Budget Amendment. If
ratified, the amendment would mandate that budgetary outlays for any fiscal year do not exceed
total revenues, and would require that the president submit a balanced budget to Congress ever
year. Using the amendment as a loud statement about fiscal conservatism, Hatch and Lee hope to
send a message to Congress and the American people that they are dedicated to getting federal
spending under control.
"If we are fortunate enough to get this passed, this amendment is really going to put the screws to
excessive spending," said Hatch. "We need this amendment, because Washington is not going to
solve this crisis on it's own."
Lee, who ran a campaign full of promises to restrict federal spending, hopes that this amendment
will put an end to what he sees as dismal fiscal irresponsibility.
In a press release, Lee said: "When it comes to spending, Congress has proven it cannot be trusted
to live within its means or spend only what the federal government takes in. Our annual deficit
approaching $1.7 trillion and national debt of almost $15 trillion are a significant threat to our
economy, job growth, and future prosperity. Only a structural restraint on spending, like a
constitutional amendment, will force Congress to make the tough decisions about our national
priorities and prevent digging the country deeper in debt."
The measure was set to hit the Senate floor on March 17, but was barred from presentation at the
last minute by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., in hopes to garner the support of
all 47 members of the Senate Republican Caucus. Because of the strategic delay, the amendment
now has the official support of all Senate Republicans. Despite the unanimous Republican
support, the amendment faces a difficult road to passage — Republicans will have to recruit at
least 20 more votes from their Democratic colleagues in order to have two-thirds of the chamber
on board, the amount required for passage in both the House and the Senate. It would then need to
be ratified by three-quarters of the state legislatures before it could officially become the 28th
amendment to the Constitution.
Hatch, however, has been through this before. This amendment marks the fifth time that he has
sponsored or co-sponsored a balanced budget amendment that has reached the senate floor. The
most recent one he sponsored in 1997, was only one vote shy of passage. So while Hatch
understands the uphill battle this amendment faces in the Senate, he is confident that he and his
fellow cosponsors have a decent shot at pushing this through.
"The Founding Fathers made the Constitution very difficult to amend, and with good reason. We
don't want the Constitution to be able to be amended willy-nilly helter-skelter," explained Hatch.
"But with a bill like ours, that has the support of all the Senate Republicans, we hope that we can
get some Democrats to vote with us. This is important stuff, everyone realizes that."
Hatch explained that amendments like this one usually attract some Democratic dissenters — in
fact, he pointed out that in 1997, then-senator, now Vice President Joe Biden from Delaware
voted for his amendment. Hatch explained that Democrats should be attracted to this measure, as
it will free them from being beholden to personal-injury lawyers and unions.
"It would save Democrats a lot of grief if they could turn down these big spending groups by
saying that they can't give them as much money because of the balanced budget amendment,"
said Hatch.
Former Utah Sen. Bob Bennett has been openly critical of late of the balanced budget
amendment, calling them "dangerous."
Bennett recently told the Deseret News: "I voted for balanced budget amendments in the past, but
the wording of the amendment is the most important thing. If worded improperly, a balanced
budget amendment can be a source of great economic mischief."
He went on to say that amendments like this can potentially put Congress and the Federal Reserve
in an 'economic straight-jacket,' something he feels could be troubling down the road.
Hatch, who first explained that he and Bennett have been friends for a very long time, says he is
confident that if Bennett were still in office, he would be voting for the amendment along with his
fellow conservatives.
"If he [Senator Bennett] were here with me, I think he would vote for this amendment," said
Hatch. "He may not like the idea of an 'economic straight-jacket,' but considering the reality that
if we stay the current course, our country will be spending over 90 percent of our gross national
product, I think he would vote for it."
He explained that under the Obama administration, federal spending levels have reached over 25
percent of the national economy.
The amendment would cap federal spending at 18 percent GDP. Exceptions to this restriction
could only be made in times of war or national emergency, so long as two-thirds of both houses
of Congress agree to waive the limits.
Hatch explains that the specific limitations in the amendment are to ensure that excessive
spending cannot happen.
"The current administration absolutely refuses to make the necessary cuts. The responsible way to
cut spending is through a balanced budget amendment," he said. "Some might think a statute is
good enough, but a statute is only as good as the Congress that passes it. Democrats have kept
themselves in power by spending us into the ground, and without a balanced budget amendment,
they will continue to do so."
Currently there is no set timeline for when the amendment will be voted on, but in the meantime
Hatch and Lee will have to work tirelessly to convince their friends across the aisle this
amendment is what our country needs right now.
"Runaway spending has pushed spending to dangerous limits," said Hatch. "Families across
America have had to tighten their belts, it's time Congress does, too."
Lee: Scared Dems ducking votes
By: Tim Mak
December 13, 2011 07:54 AM EST
Sen. Mike Lee on Tuesday dared Senate Democrats to propose a budget that stood a chance of
passing and suggested they are looking to dodge as many votes as possible to protect themselves
in next year’s elections.
“They have 23 Democrats up for election in the 2012 cycle. I think they want to take as few votes
as possible. They want to view as few controversial things as possible because, for whatever
reason, they have concluded this inures to their political advantage,” Lee (R-Utah) said on
MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “I think in time they’ll see they’ve done this to their own peril.”
Lee claimed that Republicans had put forward substantive proposals but had been stymied by the
Democrats.
“At a time when we’ve gone 900 days without a budget, when we’ve had Republican proposals
put forward and voted down by the Democrats. … I’m not sure without a change of heart on the
part of the Senate Democrats what we can get done,” Lee said. “We’ve had exactly one
Democratic budget voted on in the Senate this year, and that was from the president – and it
received exactly zero votes.”
The Utah Republican said Americans should “encourage their Democratic senators to step
forward and put forward a budget and start moving things forward.”
For his part, Lee said he agreed with the Cut, Cap and Balance Act, and stressed the need for
statutory spending caps and a balanced budget amendment.
He even took some time to plug his book on the matter, “The Freedom Agenda.” “It’ll make you
weep as you read it,” the senator joked.
Lee's bill would cut, cap, balance
By Jamshid Ghazi Askar , Deseret News
Published: Thursday, July 7 2011 11:20 p.m. MDT
With few firm offers in play for increasing the federal debt ceiling in advance of the Aug. 2
deadline, Sen. Mike Lee opted Thursday to lead out by introducing the Cut, Cap and Balance Act
of 2011.
"There has been a surprising and somewhat disturbing absence of serious proposals on the table
(for raising the debt limit)," the Utah Republican said. "That is troubling to me on a number of
levels — most noticeably what happened a few months ago when we were going through a series
of continuing resolutions as we neared what almost became a government shutdown. We don't
want that same sort of thing to happen."
The Cut, Cap and Balance Act is like the mirror-image twin brother of the Cut, Cap and Balance
Pledge that Lee and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, endorsed last month. The pledge commits signees
against raising the debt limit unless and until Congress passes immediate spending cuts, statutory
spending caps and a balanced budget amendment; the new act Lee introduced Thursday takes the
affirmative side of the issue and promises to raise the federal debt ceiling once its three prongs of
cut-cap-balance are satisfied.
"I expect it to get a lot of support among Republicans in both houses of Congress," Lee said. "I'm
also hopeful that we'll get a number of Democrats signing on with us. So far we have not had
proposals that have taken off (in Congress)."
Hatch is one of 17 Republican senators co-sponsoring Lee's Cut, Cap and Balance Act.
"I think this is a great idea, a step in the right direction," Hatch told the Deseret News. "There will
probably be at least two or three versions (of Republican bills on this issue), and I suspect that
Sen. Mitch McConnell's will be the one that will advance. Even so, I commend Sen. Lee for
coming up with his version of this. … I suspect that we're going to be unified to try and make it
very clear that we've got to have real spending reductions and no tax increases or the debt
ceiling's not going to be lifted."
The group Pass the Balanced Budget Amendment is holding a rally Friday in downtown Salt
Lake City to promote the Cut, Cap and Balance Pledge. The event begins at 2 p.m. at Washington
Square, across the street from Matheson Courthouse.
"We want to bring people out, have them sign the pledge and make sure they get behind it," said
state Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman. "We don't have a lot of time. Our federal leaders are really
playing chicken with the clock, and we are on the precipice of financial disaster."
Senate GOP Unifies Over Balanced Budget Message
By Meredith Shiner
June 28, 2011, 8:25 p.m.
Republican Senators are set to kick off a media blitz to push a balanced budget amendment,
beginning Wednesday in D.C. and building up through their July Fourth recess next week, when
Members will flood local papers and airwaves with support.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) laid the groundwork for the campaign Sunday, when
he told ABC News that he would call for a mid-July vote. More than a dozen lawmakers will hold
a news conference Wednesday morning to reintroduce the bill they touted in March, followed by
colloquies on the floor Wednesday and Thursday and multiple television appearances throughout
the week.
McConnell will introduce a “broke or balanced” talking point that leaders hope will energize an
effort that has failed multiple times.
The timing of the campaign is deliberate: Republicans want to gain momentum for the
amendment over the July Fourth recess, when they believe they can accrue grass-roots support for
the provision, before returning to Capitol Hill and forcing a vote. They also think the political
climate is better now than it was in the spring, with Congressional and national attention focused
on the ongoing budget debate in the run-up to the Aug. 2 deadline to raise the debt ceiling.
“I think you’ll be seeing our Members slowly build up our echo chamber, taking this message
back to our constituents, working with local press, local groups, local outlets in a full-scale push
to get this done,” a senior GOP aide said. “We’re circumventing the traditional Beltway filters
and going straight to local markets.”
All 47 Members of the Republican Conference have united behind the balanced budget
amendment, a rare occurrence in a Conference that encompasses moderates such as Olympia
Snowe of Maine and tea party darlings like Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah.
The aides orchestrating the hometown push for the balanced budget amendment said most
lawmakers are slotted to write local opinion pieces, discuss the amendment in local TV
appearances, and address the topic in town halls and constituent meetings over the holiday break.
They touted a Mason-Dixon poll, published at the end of May, that found that 81 percent of
Republicans, 68 percent of independents and 45 percent of Democrats support the amendment.
Republicans think they can do a better job of separating themselves from Democrats on economic
issues if they do so at home, and they see the balanced budget amendment as the way to do it.
“If you take Nebraska, for example, I imagine people in Nebraska will be very interested in why
both their Senators talk about the need to reduce our debt but only one of them is doing anything;
same in Florida,” another GOP leadership aide said.
But Democrats aren’t biting on the balanced budget amendment bait.
“Given that Republicans just voted for a budget that increases the debt by $9 trillion, this is
nothing more than a hoax to mollify their right-wing base,” a Democratic leadership aide said.
“Republicans are rolling out the dog-and-pony show to try and turn this amendment into a
consolation prize for their base when their plan to end Medicare isn’t in the debt deal.”
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who chairs the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution,
Civil Rights and Human Rights, is planning a hearing on the amendment in response to a request
this month from Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). The hearing is timed to occur at roughly the same
time that McConnell wants a floor vote. Although Democrats say they will keep an open mind,
they insist that the Majority Leader sets the schedule and that the GOP push is futile, given that
such a measure is unlikely to pass the Democratic-controlled chamber.
The push to move the balanced budget amendment to the floor has a distinct tea party flavor,
although establishment Republicans are also championing the measure.
For instance, Paul campaigned on the issue and will be one of the Senators to address the media
Wednesday. His staff said he has spoken so much on the issue that he won’t take prepared
remarks for the news conference. His staffers are working on multiple opinion pieces to run
across the state over the July Fourth break, and Paul, who has widened his local media TV
outreach, will address the topic in upcoming interviews.
Coalescing around an issue is an opportunity that Senate freshmen have been restless about.
“I know it’s been frustrating for some of the new Senators who came in on this tide, to sit around
and have three or four votes on nominations each week instead of taking on serious issues,” Paul
spokeswoman Moira Bagley said. “The fact that you can get the entire Republican caucus to
agree on this is a pretty big move in itself.”
But the question still remains whether others, from outside groups to a handful of vulnerable
Democrats, will regard the GOP effort as attractive or even reasonable.
In March, 10 Democrats backed a “sense of the Senate” amendment offered by Lee in support of
a balanced budget amendment: Mark Begich (Alaska), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Sherrod Brown
(Ohio), Tom Carper (Del.), Herb Kohl (Wis.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Claire McCaskill (Mo.), Bill
Nelson (Fla.), Ben Nelson (Neb.) and Mark Udall (Colo.). Six of those Members are up for re-
election, and Kohl is retiring.
“America faces a choice — do we go broke or do we enact a balanced budget amendment to slash

our over $14 trillion debt? That’s why we are forcing this debate that Washington Democrats
don’t want to have, because we have to start living within our means,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-
Utah), who will lead the floor colloquy Wednesday.
Republicans Set Sights on Balanced Budget Amendment
By Jennifer Steinhauer
WASHINGTON — House Republicans, feeling they have scored significant fiscal victories, are
moving on to an even bigger challenge: persuading voters, state legislatures and Democrats to
alter the Constitution with a balanced budget amendment.
In a meeting with his conference on Monday, Speaker John A. Boehner told members that the
best thing they could do during the August recess was to sell their constituents on the idea that the
amendment — which essentially stipulates that government cannot spend more than it takes in —
is necessary and good.
Republican leaders on the Hill have pivoted from railing against Democrats about tax increases to
pressing for the amendment, which would require the acquiescence of two-thirds of each chamber
of Congress, and three-quarters of state legislatures. They point out that such a measure passed
the House in 1995, but then failed in the Senate by a single vote.
And if Congress passes a proposed amendment, it bypasses the president, going straight to the
states, where 26 legislatures are dominated by Republicans.
Getting Democrats to agree to such a measure now is likely to be an uphill battle. President
Obama has previously rejected the idea of a balanced budget amendment. And, after the nasty
debt-ceiling duel with Republicans, which left the country a cat’s whisker from default, most
Congressional Democrats are bruised and cranky, with little incentive to work with the other side.
Further, of the roughly 10 bills filed by House Republicans to create such an amendment, most
contain provisions, like setting a high bar for votes on future debt-ceiling increases, that few
Democrats in either chamber would abide. The nation’s fiscal situation is far worse than in the
1990s, when a balanced budget would have required much less drastic cutting than what would be
required today.
Opponents argue that an amendment could hamstring the government at times that it needs to run
deficits, comparing it, for example, to a situation in which families would be forbidden to get
mortgages to buy homes. Most of the versions being proposed this year in the House and Senate
do contain a provision that the amendment would be waived when the country is in a declared
time of war.
But for Democrats seeking to redefine themselves as careful fiscal stewards on the cusp of the
2012 campaign, the idea of a balanced budget amendment free of hard-line provisions is not an
impossible sell. Several Senate Democrats have said in the past that they support such an
amendment, and Senator Mark Udall of Colorado has already put forth his own measure.
“I think it is definitely achievable,” said Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of
Virginia, who has offered two balanced budget amendments, one far more conservative than the
other. “I have been talking to dozens of Democrats in the House about this, and there is a
tremendous amount of interest in this issue.”
Under the agreement to lift the debt ceiling approved by Congress and signed by President
Obama this week, a second, $1.5 trillion increase is contingent upon either the adoption of deficit
reductions recommended by a new Congressional “super committee” or Congressional passage of
a balanced budget amendment. If neither is done, large cuts to military spending and some social
programs would automatically be made. Nearly every state has some form of balanced budget
provision, though most are more flexible than those proposed for the federal government.
“It is almost so institutionalized now, though there is a variance in stringency,” said Brian Sigritz,
the director of state fiscal studies for the National Association of State Budget Officers.
In the House, the two measures that have gained the most traction are Mr. Goodlatte’s, which
prohibit outlays exceeding total receipts for that fiscal year, other than interest payments, unless
Congress says otherwise in a three-fifths vote of each chamber.
The more conservative version would require a two-thirds majority in the House and the Senate
to raise taxes and a spending cap of 18 percent of the gross domestic product, unless two-thirds of
each chamber of Congress provides for a specific increase above this amount. The measures
require a three-fifths roll call vote in each chamber to increase the public debt limit.
“The more tough version has broad Republican support,” Mr. Goodlatte said, “but it’s not going
to get the 290 votes needed.”
The other measure, similar to the amendment that passed the House in 1995, has support from
even those members who offered their own right-leaning options, he said.
In the Senate, Mr. Udall’s amendment faces significant hurdles with Republicans, largely because
it prohibits Congress from providing income tax breaks for people earning more than $1 million a
year, except during years of budget surpluses. Another senator, Mike Lee, Republican of Utah,
has his own measure, and the two men have been playing phone tag trying to set up a time to talk
about their proposals.
Many Democrats, even moderates, have raised skepticism about any balanced budget amendment
offered by a Republican.
“As someone who supported the 1995 balanced budget amendment, let me say that at this point in
time I would not support it,” Representative Steny H. Hoyer, the Democratic whip, said in a
recent meeting with reporters. Mr. Hoyer added, “I don’t have any confidence that even at a time
of great challenge, that there aren’t 40 percent-plus one in the House that would oppose doing
something necessary to assure the country was on a sound footing.”
Republicans have also expressed their doubts. In a recent speech on the floor of the Senate,
Senator John McCain of Arizona said: “I will take a back seat to none in my support of the
balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. I have voted for it 13 times. I will vote for it
tomorrow. What is amazing about this is some members are believing we can pass a balanced
budget amendment to the Constitution in this body with its present representation, and that is
foolish. That is worse than foolish.”
But none of this is likely to stop Republican supporters from pushing the issue, as they have with
all their fiscal policy hopes and dreams in the 112th Congress.
“House and Senate passage of the balanced budget amendment will make reckless borrowing a
thing of the past and will ensure that our children enjoy futures full of opportunity,”
Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader, said in a recent op-ed article. “Let
Democrats and Republicans join together to do the right thing and make a real difference for the
future.”
Sen. Lee: Obama's 'Class Warfare' Won't Solve Debt Problem
By Sean Hannity
Published July 26, 2011 | FoxNews.com
Watch the latest video at FoxNews.com
This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," July 25, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and
may be updated.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST: The stalemate on solving the debt crisis drags on. While the president
is attempting to get out in front of the issue with speeches and several meetings with
congressional leaders, well, the one thing we still have yet to see from "The Anointed One" is an
actual plan of his own.
Here with more reaction to tonight's big debt ceiling debate and the speeches by President Obama
and Speaker of the House John Boehner is Utah Senator Mike Lee.
Senator, good to see you, sir.
SEN. MIKE LEE, R-UTAH: Thank you. It's good to be with you, Sean.
HANNITY: One thing I've learned about this president, and I'm not patting myself on the back,
he's so predictable. Bumper stickers, slogans, he goes back to the 1970 playbook, class warfare,
scaring old folks, no plan of his own. And of course they have his poll-tested line, "balanced
approach."
The question is, will enough Americans see through his predictable propaganda and his little
talking points?
LEE: I think they will. Look, the man, as you pointed out, is stuck in the 1970s and he can't get
out. Class warfare, as much fun as it may be for the president, is not going to solve this problem.
What's going to solve this problem is when Congress finally imposes upon itself permanent
structural binding spending reform of the sort that we need and can obtain only through a
constitutional amendment restricting Congress's ability to borrow.
That's why I wrote the book "The Freedom Agenda," to point out that until Congress restricts its
own spending power through the Constitution, we are not going to get out of this mess.
HANNITY: Yes. What did you think specifically? I mean, he comes out of the box and he blames
President Bush. And I love how, you know, he got his budgets passed. Those were his budget
plans. He had both houses of Congress. He accumulated over $4 trillion in Obama debt,
unprecedented, any president in history. He didn't take any of the blame himself. He is still
blaming George W. Bush.
He said -- he described his spending as "emergency steps," because the recession caused us to
spend more. I mean, is he capable of taking any responsibility? Does he have to blame everybody
for his bad decisions?
LEE: Apparently so. Apparently he even has to blame the fact that he made it worse.
Unemployment has gotten worse. The availability of jobs, the availability of credit, the surplus of
homes on the market, the number of people going into foreclosure, all of this has gotten worse.
Why has it gotten worse? Because he made it worse.
Now he's telling us yet again that the solution to our problems, the problems caused by too much
government, is more government, more government funded by excess deficit spending. It has got
to stop somehow and it has got to stop right now.
HANNITY: Well, one of the things that -- I got very frustrated last week because I like the idea
of "Cut, Cap and Balance." I think that's a solution that deals with short-term problem, takes care
of Social Security recipients, pays for Medicare, raises the debt ceiling, which they say is so
necessary with this artificial deadline.
But it also dealt with structural issues in terms of how we got there. So I thought that was a --
they wouldn't even bring it up for a vote in the Senate. The president doesn't support it. Can you
tell me what his plan is? Because I have never read his plan. I have never seen his plan.
LEE: No one knows, Sean. It is for all of us just to imagine what his imperial majesty might
decide to cram down our throats next. But you are exactly right, we had a plan amid all this call
for compromise.
He refuses to acknowledge that it is Republicans, Tea Party Republicans, like myself, especially
who were behind the one and only legislative proposal to do this. I wrote the "Cut, Cap and
Balance" act and introduced it in the Senate with 40-some-odd co-sponsors, and saw it get passed
in the House a few days later.
We were ready to debate it, to discuss it, to subject it to full amendment processes and everything
else that a normal piece of legislation goes through. But then Harry Reid and the Democratic
caucus decided to kill it. They tabled it before it even had a single opportunity not just for a vote
on the merits, but for any debate discussion or amendment.
Now they want to convert this whole thing into a "super congress," into a bipartisan commission
setting aside the fact that 17 such commissions have failed in the past. We've got already two
perfectly good constitutionally empowered bipartisan commissions.
One is called the Senate, and one is called the House. They are trying to bypass this and cram
down the throats of the American people a precooked deal that their legislative elected leaders
won't have the opportunity to debate and discuss on the merits.
HANNITY: Yes. This is where I run into problems with Speaker Boehner's plan. And I like the
fact that they are going to get more in cuts than they're going to get in terms of raising the debt
ceiling. But I'm skeptical.
We've been burned before. We've been down this road before. I can't support a plan that 12
members of Congress are going to vote on by themselves. I just can't support that because I don't
have enough faith in those 12 members. I don't even know who the 12 members are.
LEE: Well, and no one does know. No one knows who are. No one knows who they will be. But
more importantly, this is a process that, again, will arrange for a precooked deal, one that will be
brought back to the actual Congress to vote on without opportunity for amendment.
HANNITY: All right. What the president -- it's interesting, half of Americans don't pay any
federal income tax, fully one half. We've got one in seven Americans on food stamps. The
president tries to make it corporate jets versus grandma and Social Security or Medicare. That's
how he's trying to frame this debate, half of Americans don't pay so he goes after the rich, the
wealthy, the successful. He said, well, if you make over $250,000, you won't pay. But that
includes every small business which creates about 65, 70 percent of the jobs in this country. So
he's really not being honest when he says that small businesses or people that don't make a lot of
money are going to get their taxes raised, right?
LEE: He's not being honest. And he's overlooking the fact that when you raise taxes on that group
of people, you are raising taxes on the very people that we need to rely upon to invest their money
to place it at risk so that we can create jobs in this country. That's the only way we are ever going
to create jobs. Moreover, the tax increases that he's talking about wouldn't even put a dent, not
even a scratch on a dent in the deficit problem that we have.
HANNITY: Will his fear-mongering have an impact with the American people? In other words,
America's credit rating is going to be downgraded -- by the way, it already has been. Standard &
Poor's already is saying in 90 days it is likely to happen, Moody's is saying the same thing in
large part because of his policies which he won't acknowledge.
But is any of the fear-mongering that interest rates will go up, the rich won't pay their fair share,
Social Security and Medicare, do you think that is going to resonate?
LEE: It may resonate with some. But at the end of the day, Sean, I believe that the truth will
prevail here. And the American people are starting to realize the fact that it is not just the
immediate debt limit increase vote that puts it us stake for a credit rating downgrade. What is
arguably an even greater risk and a more long-term pervasive systemic one is the risk associated
with cavalierly and reflexively raising the debt limit yet again without putting place a permanent
constraint.
HANNITY: Last question, Senator, what happens from here?
LEE: What happens from here is that conservatives in the House and the Senate continue to stand
their ground on the "Cut, Cap and Balance" act, which has passed the House, which is the only
legislative proposal introduced so far to actually address the debt limit issue. We have got to
place that emphasis here.
HANNITY: Sixty-four percent of the American people support it, 75 percent want a balanced
budget amendment. Seems like the most responsible, balanced plan. I would say that's a very
balanced plan. Anyway, Senator, good to see you.
LEE: Good to see you, Sean.
Content and Programming Copyright 2011 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED. Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United
States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or
broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any
trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.
Romney Heads to Capitol Hill Next Week for Lee Meeting
By David M. Drucker
June 24, 2011, 1:21 p.m.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is scheduled to meet with Sen. Mike Lee on
Wednesday on Capitol Hill, according to GOP sources.
The Utah Republican invited the former Massachusetts governor for a discussion on the debt
ceiling and plans to press him to support the “Cut, Cap, Balance” pledge jointly sponsored by
several conservative advocacy groups and supported by Members with tea party ties. The pledge
calls for Members to withhold support for increasing the debt ceiling unless the deal is coupled
with deep spending cuts, mandated spending caps and a balanced budget amendment to the
Constitution.
Lee, a freshman Senator elected with substantial tea party support last year, has put out similar
invitations to the rest of the GOP presidential field.
Four candidates have already announced their support for the pledge, including businessman
Herman Cain, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Rep. Ron Paul (Texas) and former Sen.
Rick Santorum (Pa.).
Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), set to formally launch her candidacy Monday in Iowa, is
considered the “big catch” by pledge supporters, one Republican source said.
“Her support would go a long way to making the movement successful,” this source said.
“Several of the coalition groups and Senators, including Lee, have reached out to her campaign
asking her to sign the pledge.”
Other supporters of the pledge include Republican Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.), Lindsey Graham
(S.C.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Dean Heller (Nev.), Jim Inhofe (Okla.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), Rand
Paul (Ky.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Pat Toomey (Pa.) and David Vitter (La.). About 20 House
Members have also signed the pledge.
Lee has yet to make an endorsement in the presidential race, although Hatch, who backed
Romney when he ran in 2008, is supporting the former Massachusetts governor again. As a
devout Mormon and through his reputation for saving the 2002 winter Olympics from
mismanagement, Romney has maintained strong ties to Utah. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman
(R) announced his presidential candidacy this week.
Committe
e
Assi
gnments
Uni
tedSt
atesSenat
or
Mi
keLe
e
Senator Mike Lee
Senate Committee on the Judiciary
2011 Summary
Senator Lee has been actively involved with his assignment to the Senate Judiciary Committee
throughout the year, beginning with his leadership in the crusade to enact a Balanced Budget
Amendment. He has played a key role in acting as a Constitutional scholar and defender,
looking out for ways in which the federal government encroaches on States’ rights and individual
liberties. Such efforts include his resistance to the powers granted the executive branch in the
PATRIOT Act reauthorization, the provision of the NDAA permitting detention of U.S. citizens,
the effort to ensure that the FBI Director’s extension followed the Constitution, and vigilantly
fighting against an expansive interpretation of the Commerce Clause.
Senator Lee has been active as the Ranking Member of the Antitrust Subcommittee, working to
prevent government intervention in mergers such as the AT&T/T-Mobile merger and the
ExpressScripts/Medco merger, as well as discouraging further government regulation in the
internet and the railroads.
While Senator Lee has been overwhelmingly accommodating to the nominations submitted by
President Obama, he has also been very vocal about his reservations with a few key nominees
who have then failed to garner enough support to be confirmed. Senator Lee led the opposition
against Goodwin Liu in committee and on the floor. He spoke out against the appointment of
Caitlin Halligan at a Republican policy lunch, which was pivotal in preventing her confirmation.
He led the opposition of Miranda Du in her hearing and in committee, even writing a letter
regarding her misstatement in that hearing.
Senator Lee is respected on the Committee as a constitutional scholar, courteous colleague, and
principled voter, and will certainly increase his already substantial influence throughout the
coming years.
Legislation Introduced or Co-Sponsored
• S. 533: Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2011

• S. 554: A bill to prohibit the use of Department of Justice funds for the prosecution in
Article III courts of the United States of individuals involved in the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attacks
• S. 569: Federal Judicial Fairness Act of 2011
• S. 671: Finding Fugitive Sex Offenders Act of 2011
• S. 723: Birthright Citizenship Act of 2011
• S. 1061: Government Litigation Savings Act
• S. 1196: Accountability Through Electronic Verification Act
• S. 1241: Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act
• S. 1697: Dairy and Sheep H-2A Act
• S. 1746: Visa Improvements to Stimulate International Tourism to the United States of
America Act
• S. 1857: Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act
• Amendment to S. 1867: National Defense Reauthorization Act that would prohibit
indefinite detention of American citizens on U.S. soil
• S.J. Res. 5: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution requiring that
the Federal budget be balanced
• S.J. Res. 10: Joint resolution proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution
of the United States
• S.J. Res. 11: A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
United States relative to limiting the number of terms that a Member of Congress may
serve to 3 in the House of Representatives and 2 in the Senate.
• S.J. Res. 145: A resolution designating April 15, 2011, as "National TEA Party Day".
Opposition
• PATRIOT Act – Led opposition to provisions that allowed inappropriate government

access to private information
• S. 49: Railroad Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2011 – Led negotiations and instituted hold
to prevent the bill from reaching the floor
• S. 968: PROTECT IP Act – Expressed concerns before and after markup, working with
the Committee members to adequately address those concerns
• S. 1867: NDAA – Voted against the bill because of the provision allowing the indefinite
detention of U.S. citizens on American soil
Hearings
• The Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act – Questioned Walter Dellinger,

suggesting that under the Commerce Clause as interpreted by the Affordable Care Act,
Congress could force Americans to set aside a portion of their income to purchase “leafy
vegetables.”
• The President's Request to Extend the Service of Director Robert Mueller of the FBI
Until 2013 – Senator Lee joined with Senator Coburn in asserting that the extension of
the Director’s term should be done in the manner most consistent with the Constitution,
which led to that manner being adopted in an amendment on the floor.
• Considering the Role of Judges Under the Constitution of the United States – Senator Lee
asked Justices Scalia and Breyer a series of questions regarding Constitutional
interpretation.
• Oversight of the Department of Justice – Senator Lee questioned Attorney General Eric
Holder about documents regarding Justice Kagan’s involvement in the Affordable Care
Act and about the failed operation Fast and Furious.
• The AT&T/T-Mobile Merger: Is Humpty Dumpty Being Put Back Together Again? –
Senator Lee worked to show the potential that allowing free markets has to improve
consumer welfare, eventually writing a letter to that effect to the FTC and DOJ.
• The Power of Google: Serving Consumers or Threatening Competition? – Senator Lee

encouraged Google to correct any potentially anti-competitive behavior in order to
forestall the need for government regulation.
• The Express Scripts/Medco Merger: Cost Savings for Consumers or More Profits for the
Middlemen? – Senator Lee led questioning regarding the effect of the merger on
community pharmacies in Utah and the potential efficiencies mergers create.
Speeches
• Heritage Foundation speech on the Congressional duty to interpret the Constitution

and on potential coordinate branch construction of the Constitution.
• Federalist Society Speech on the Congressional duty to interpret the Constitution and
on the unconstitutionality of ObamaCare.
Senator Mike Lee
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
2011 Summary
As a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (Committee)

and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Water and Power, Senator Lee has applied
his conservative and Constitutional principles to issues related to public lands, energy
development, water use, and other issues subject to the jurisdiction of the Committee.
The first bills sponsored by Sen. Lee that were passed by the Senate were two land
transfers from the federal government to the Utah cities of Alta and Mantua. Under the
legislation, Mantua will gain control of nearly 32 acres of land in Box Elder County that
was originally owned by Hans Rasmussen, an early settler of Mantua and who later
transferred the land to the federal government. The Alta bill will transfer several parcels
of land to Alta to support the growth of the town. The Mantua bill was passed into law,
and the Alta bill should be considered by the House of Representative in February and
passed into law thereafter.
In addition to these bills, Senator Lee has sponsored or introduced many other bills,
including:
• Good Neighbor Forestry Act (Original Co-Sponsor) (S.375) - A bill to

authorize the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to enter
into cooperative agreements with State foresters authorizing State foresters to
provide certain forest, rangeland, and watershed restoration and protection
services.
• Better Use of Light Bulbs Act (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 395) - A bill to repeal
certain amendments to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act with respect to
lighting energy efficiency.
• A bill to amend the Federal Power Act to ensure that rates and charges for
electric energy are assessed in proportion to measurable reliability or
economic benefit, and for other purposes (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 400)
• National Monument Designation Transparency and Accountability Act of

2011 (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 407) - A bill to amend the Act of June 8, 1906,
to require certain procedures for designating national monuments, and for other
purposes.
• Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act (Co-Sponsor) (S. 499) - A

bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate the development of
hydroelectric power on the Diamond Fork System of the Central Utah Project.
• South Utah Valley Electric Conveyance Act (Co-Sponsor) (S. 500) - A bill to
direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain Federal features of the
electric distribution system to the South Utah Valley Electric Service District, and
for other purposes.
• Disposal of Excess Federal Lands Act of 2011 (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 635)
- A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to sell certain Federal lands in
Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon,
Utah, and Wyoming, previously identified as suitable for disposal, and for other
purposes.
• A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to allow for prepayment of

repayment contracts between the United States and the Uintah Water
Conservancy District (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 808)
• A bill to amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to
clarify that uncertified States and Indian tribes have the authority to use
certain payments for certain noncoal reclamation projects and acid mine
remediation programs. (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 897)
• American Energy and Western Jobs Act (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 1027) - A
bill to provide for the rescission of certain instruction memoranda of the Bureau
of Land Management, to amend the Mineral Leasing Act to provide for the
determination of the impact of proposed policy modifications, and for other
purposes.
• Wilderness and Roadless Area Release Act of 2011 (Co-Sponsor) (S. 1087) -
A bill to release wilderness study areas administered by the Bureau of Land
Management that are not suitable for wilderness designation from continued
management as de facto wilderness areas and to release inventoried roadless areas
within the National Forest System that are not recommended for wilderness
designation from the land use restrictions of the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation
Final Rule and the 2005 State Petitions for Inventoried Roadless Area
Management Final Rule, and for other purposes.
• Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform Act of 2011 (Original Co-Sponsor) (S.
1153) - A bill to improve Federal land management, resource conservation,
environmental protection, and use of Federal land by requiring the Secretary of
the Interior to develop a multipurpose cadastre of Federal land and identifying
inaccurate, duplicate, and out-of-date Federal land inventories, and for other
purposes.
• A bill to prohibit the further extension or establishment of national

monuments in Utah except by express authorization of Congress (Original
Co-Sponsor) (S. 1182)
• A bill to clarify authority granted under the Act entitled “An act to define the
exterior boundary of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in the State
of Utah, and for other purposes”. (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 1209)
• Northern Arizona Mining Continuity Act of 2011 (Original Co-Sponsor) (S.

1690) - A bill to preserve the multiple use land management policy in the State of
Arizona, and for other purposes.
• County Payments Reauthorization Act of 2011 (Co-Sponsor) (S. 1692) - A bill

to reauthorize the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act
of 2000, to provide full funding for the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program, and
for other purposes.
• A bill to ensure that Federal Register notices submitted to the Bureau of

Land Management are reviewed in a timely manner. (Original Co-Sponsor)
(S. 1844)
• Wasatch Range Recreation Access Enhancement Act (Original Co-Sponsor)

(S. 1883) - A bill to provide for the sale of approximately 30 acres of Federal land
in Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Salt Lake County, Utah, to permit the
establishment of a minimally invasive transportation alternative called "SkiLink"
to connect 2 ski resorts in the Wasatch Mountains, and for other purposes.
• Scofield Land Transfer Act (Original Co-Sponsor) (S. 2056) - A bill to

authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain interests in Federal land
acquired for the Scofield Project in Carbon County, Utah.
Hearings
• National Commission Report of the BP Oil Spill

• Natural Gas Service Outages in New Mexico
• Energy Efficiency Standards
• Proposed Fiscal Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 For the Department of the Interior
• Carbon Capture and Sequestration Legislation
• Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 for the Department of Energy
• Charles McConnell and Rebecca Wodder Nominations
Opposition
• Response to Secretarial Order 3310 – In response to the Department of

Interior’s Secretarial Order 3310, which would have created additional, de-facto
wilderness areas without Congressional approval, Senator Lee sought Department
of Interior documents used in the formulation of Secretarial Order 3310. After a
thorough investigation by Republican lawmakers into the decision, and after Sen.
Lee placed a “hold” on the nomination of Dan Ashe as Director of the Fish and
Wildlife Service, Secretary Salazar ultimately reversed his decision on his “Wild
Lands” policy.
• Response to Changes in the BLM’s Master Leasing Plan (MLP) Process – In

July of 2011, Senator Lee expressed concern that the MLP process adopted by the
BLM to reform oil and gas leasing on public lands was obstructing responsible
exploration for oil and gas in the West. In letter to Secretary Salazar, Senator Lee
explained that the MLP policy may negatively impact the nation’s ability to
develop its own natural resources by creating a duplicative review process for oil
and gas. Please find a list of Senator Lee’s concerns regarding the MLP process in
the attached letter.
Speeches
• Address to the Utah Association of County Commissioner’s Convention

(November 2011) – Senator Lee discussed his policies regarding county lands
bills and various other issues with Utah county commissioners at the annual
convention.
• Western Caucus Weekly Address (January 2012) – Senator Lee addressed the
Western Caucus with a speech supporting domestic energy production, especially
on our underutilized public lands, and explained his opposition to President
Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline.
Senator Mike Lee
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
2011 Summary
As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC), Senator Lee engaged
in several issues that combined his commitment to the Constitution with his dedication to
national security. Senator Lee challenged the Obama Administration on its flawed
policy in military engagement in Libya and highlighted the Administration’s
abandonment of the War Powers Resolutions. Major issues the SFRC faced last year
included a discussion on the Constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution,
reauthorization of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, and
the proper role of the United States in Libya and Afghanistan.
Through his position on the Near East Subcommittee, Senator Lee confirmed his
commitment to Israel as our most important ally in the Middle East. He also served on
the Western Hemisphere and African Subcommittees and participated in the nominations
process for the appointment of United States Ambassadors to foreign countries.
• S.Res. 350: (Original Sponsor): Expressing Sense of Senate regarding the need
for fair presidential elections in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
• S. 1975: (Cosponsor): No More IMF (International Monetary Fund) Bailouts

Act.
• S. 1875: (Original Sponsor): United States Commission on International

Religious Freedom Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2011.
• S. 1048: (Cosponsor): Iran, North Korea, and Syria Sanctions Consolidation

Act of 2011.
• S. 1595: (Cosponsor): Solidarity with Israel Act.
• S.Res. 216: (Cosponsor): A resolution encouraging women’s political

participation in Saudi Arabia.
• S.Res. 185: (Cosponsor): A resolution reaffirming the commitment of the United

States to a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through direct
Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, reaffirming opposition to the inclusion of Hamas
in a unity government, etc.
• S.J.Res. 18: (Cosponsor) Prohibited the deployment of the United States Armed
Forces on the ground in Libya.
• S.Con.Res. 23: (Cosponsor): Declared the policy of the United States is to
support Israel in maintaining defensible borders.
• S.Res. 138: (Cosponsor): Called on the United Nations to rescind the Goldstone
report.
• S.Res. 148: (Cosponsor): Called on the President to submit to Congress a

detailed description of United States policy objectives in Libya.
• S.Res. 99: (Cosponsor): Declared the sense of the Senate that the primary
safeguard for the well-being and protection of children is the family.
Hearings
• Iraq: The Challenging Transition to a Civilian Mission

• Breaking the Cycle of North Korean Provocations
• Intelligence Update on Libya
• Afghanistan: Progress & Expectations
• Assessing U.S. Policy and Its Limits in Pakistan
• Libya and War Powers
• The State of Democracy in the Americas
• China’s Role in Africa: Implications
• U.S. Strategic Objectives Towards Iran
Speeches
• “Law of the Sea.” (September 15, 2011): At the Heritage Foundation, Senator
Lee gave a speech explaining that ratification of the 1982 U.N. Convention on the
Law of the Sea would jeopardize American security, rule of law, and prosperity.
President Reagan refused to sign the treaty in 1982, and we should still oppose it
today.
• AIPAC (July 2011): Senator Lee affirmed his support to Israel and concern that
Iran is gaining traction towards obtaining nuclear weapons.
• “School Choice.” (December 7, 2012): In a conference call which included

thousands of members of The National Society for Hebrew Day Schools, Senator
Lee affirmed his support for Hebrew Day Schools and other private schools in
America whose missions are to educate children and empower parents and
communities to influence that education.
Senator Mike Lee
Joint Economic Committee
2011 Summary
As a member of the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), Senator Lee has promoted free
market principles in the areas of fiscal, monetary, and regulatory policy. Each of these
policy areas has a significant impact on the health of the U.S. economy and is currently in
need of major reform.
Fiscal Policy
Since taking office in January of 2011, Senator Lee has been a strong advocate for a
balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, recognizing that a sound economy
depends on a government that lives within its means.
In 2011, the federal government ran a budget deficit of over $1.3 trillion (more than 8%
of GDP), and ended the year with gross federal debt of $15.5 trillion (more than 100% of
GDP). It should be noted that this figure does not include the more than $60 trillion in
unfunded liabilities of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Moreover, this marks
only the second time in U.S. history that the federal debt has exceeded 90% of GDP (the
other instance occurred in the period during and shortly after World War II.)

Gross Federal Debt as % of GDP

(Source: Office of Management and Budget)
130.0%
110.0% "Danger Zone"
90.0%
70.0%
50.0%
30.0%
1940
1943
1949
1952
1955
1961
1964
1967
1970
1973
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1999
2002
2005
2011
1946
1958
1976
1978
1996
2008

A study entitled “Public Debt and Some Consequences: A Discussion” by economists
Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff states, “there is no obvious like between
debt and growth until public debt reaches a threshold of 90 percent…[countries] with
debt-to-GDP over 90 percent have median growth roughly one percent lower than lower
debt [countries].” Debt of this magnitude poses several risks to our country, including
the following:
Deadweight Loss of Taxes Needed to Service Debt. All money borrowed must be
repaid with interest owed. All else being equal, this implies that taxes will eventually
have to be raised and the cost to society beyond the amount of revenue raised is
known as “deadweight loss”.
Need to Increase Taxes or Reduce Spending. More debt means higher interest
payments by the federal government. In order to make these higher interest
payments, higher revenues or larger spending reductions are necessary. Significant
increases in marginal tax rates decrease people’s incentive to work and save, leading
to lower incomes. In order to close the budget deficit in 2011, total federal outlays
would have to be reduced by approximately 40%, roughly the amount of all “Big
Three” entitlement programs combined, or taxes receipts would have to climb by
approximately two-thirds.
Reduced Growth and Job Creation in the Private Sector. High levels of
government borrowing crowd out private investment because private savings are
diverted to buy Treasury securities rather than productive capital stock. In other
words, a dollar borrowed by the government is a dollar no longer available for private
use. This leads to lower economic output than would otherwise lower relative output
and incomes in the long run and make future generations worse off.
Increased Likelihood of a Fiscal Crisis. Excessive debt increases the probability

that the country will face a fiscal crisis at some time in the future because holders of
federal debt may require higher interest payments to compensate them for the risk
that they might not be repaid or the value of their securities might be eroded by
inflation.
Reduced Ability to Respond to Emergencies. High debt levels limit policymakers’

ability to respond to needs and challenges that may arise in the future. For example,
large debts might give the government less flexibility to increase spending in order to
respond to events such as natural disasters, wars, or humanitarian crises.
Adverse Effect on Monetary Policy. High debt levels cause lenders to demand
higher rates of interest to compensate them for the increased risk of default. As an
enabler of government spending, the Federal Reserve System has the ability to
manipulate interest rates to lower levels than they would be in a free market, reducing
the value of the dollar and real interest rates. This is accomplished through monetary
policy tools at the Fed’s disposal, including discount window lending, open market
operations, and quantitative easing. These tools increase the money supply and result
in higher rates of inflation over the long term.
Diminished Political Independence and International Leadership. Transitioning

from a net creditor nation to a net debtor has a number of implications and
consequences. Today, approximately half of the nation’s public debt is held by
foreign creditors like China, Japan, and a number of Middle Eastern countries. This
fact can compromise U.S. strategic and diplomatic operations with these countries
and others.
While growth in public debt has been substantial in the last few years, the rate of increase
in deficit spending has been even more prolific. From 2007 to 2010, the deficit grew
from $161 billion to $1.3 trillion, representing a seven-fold increase in just three years.
The federal government cannot run budget deficits indefinitely without significant
economic and social consequences for the country. The U.S already experiencing some
of the effects of poor fiscal policy coupled with poor monetary policy in the form of
higher unemployment and higher prices paid by consumers for food, gas, energy,
clothing, and other products.
The poor and people on fixed incomes are most hurt by rising prices because they have
the least amount of flexibility in their budgets and these items make up a larger
percentage of their budgets overall. Those who claim to care about the economically
disadvantaged should have more interest in this issue than anyone else.
According to the CBO, its own baseline estimate of the deficit is highly sensitive to
factors such as real GDP growth, interest rates, and inflation rates. In the CBO’s Budget
and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2011 to 2021, the CBO estimates that if the growth
rate of real GDP is 0.1% lower per year, the deficit will increase by $310 billion in the
2011 to 2021 period. Also, if interest rates are 1% higher per year, the deficit will
increase by $1,292 billion in the 2011 to 2021 period. Finally, if inflation is 1% higher
per year, the deficit will increase by $867 billion in the same period. The sensitivity of
the deficit to these economic factors and the uncertainty inherent in long-term forecasting
highlight the wisdom and practicality of working to balance the federal budget in the near
term.
Experts like David Walker, Founder and CEO of the Come Back America Initiative and
former Comptroller General of the U.S., estimate that we may only have two to three
years before a major economic crisis unfolds in our country. This crisis will likely take
the form of a run on our nation’s currency and result in a substantially weaker dollar,
significantly higher interest rates, and a global economic depression.
We can avoid this crisis if we act now. With fiscal reforms including deficit reduction,
debt limits, and stronger fiscal governance, the U.S. can get on the path to fiscal
responsibility in relatively short order. Other nations that have faced financial challenges
in the recent past and have made the requisite changes (i.e., Australia and New Zealand)
are now some of the most fiscally sound and responsible countries in the world. There is
no reason we cannot do the same.
Monetary Policy
Monetary policy is another important area where Senator Lee focused significant
attention in 2011. Since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the U.S. dollar has lost over
95% of its value. Moreover, recent GAO reports have indicated that the Federal Reserve
has spent literally trillions of dollars bailing out failing banks in the U.S. and Europe. In
order to help address these issues, the Senator co-sponsored legislation like the Sound
Money Promotion Act and the Federal Reserve Transparency Act in 2011, which are
aimed at exposing the ruinous policies and actions of the Federal Reserve and ultimately
promote sound monetary policy.
Regulatory policy is an important economic consideration due to the effect onerous

administrative laws have on business and individual freedom. Last year, the Obama
administration added over 80,000 pages of new rules and regulations to the federal
register. This represents more than 20 times the number of pages of laws enacted by
Congress in 2011, highlighting the challenge an unelected, unaccountable bureaucratic
state poses economic growth and prosperity.
To counteract harmful administrative law growth, Senator Lee co-sponsored the REINS
Act, the Regulatory Responsibility for Our Economy Act, the National Right to Work
Act, and several bills repealing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act in whole and in part.
The following is a list of selected legislation related to fiscal, monetary, and regulatory
policy sponsored by Senator Lee in 2011:
• S.18 (Cosponsor): To repeal the expansion of information reporting requirements

for payments of $600 or more to corporations, and for other purposes.
• S.163 (Cosponsor): To require that the Government prioritize all obligations on

the debt held by the public in the event that the debt limit is reached.
• S. 202 (Cosponsor): To require a full audit of the Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks by the Comptroller
General of the United States before the end of 2012, and for other purposes.
• S. 299 (Cosponsor): To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide

that major rules of the executive branch shall have no force or effect unless a joint
resolution of approval is enacted into law.
• S. 358 (Cosponsor): Regulatory Responsibility for our Economy Act of 2011.
• S. 504 (Cosponsor): National Right-to-Work Act
• S. 609 (Cosponsor): To provide for the establishment of a committee to assess

the effects of certain Federal regulatory mandates.
• S. 706 (Cosponsor): To stimulate the economy, produce domestic energy, and
create jobs at no cost to the taxpayers, and without borrowing money from foreign
governments for which our children and grandchildren will be responsible, and
for other purposes.
• S. 712 (Cosponsor): To repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and

Consumer Protection Act.
• S. 726 (Cosponsor): To rescind $45 billion of unobligated discretionary

appropriations, and for other purposes.
• S. 746 (Cosponsor): To repeal provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform

and Consumer Protection Act.
• S. 1287 (Cosponsor): To treat gold and silver coins used as legal tender in the
same manner as United States currency for taxation purposes.
• S. 1316 (Cosponsor): To prevent a fiscal crisis by enacting legislation to balance

the Federal budget through reductions of discretionary and mandatory spending.
• S.1340 (Original Sponsor): To cut, cap, and balance the Federal budget.
• S. 1438 (Cosponsor): To provide that no agency may take any significant

regulatory action until the unemployment rate is equal to or less than 7.7 percent.
• S. 1523 (Cosponsor): To prohibit the National Labor Relations Board from

ordering any employer to close, relocate, or transfer employment under any
circumstance.
• S. 1651 (Cosponsor): To provide for greater transparency and honesty in the

Federal budget process.
• S. 2040 (Original Cosponsor): A bill to amend the Congressional Budget Act of

1974 to establish a point of order to prohibit an increase or other modification of
the public debt limit.
Hearings
• 04/01/11 - March Employment Report

• 05/25/11 - Innovation and Job Growth in the Life Sciences Industry
• 05/06/11 - April Employment Report
• 06/22/11 - Manufacturing in the USA: Why We Need a National Manufacturing
Strategy?
• 06/21/11 - Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy
• 07/27/11 - Maximizing America’s Prosperity: How Fiscal Rules can Restrain
Federal Overspending
• 07/12/11 - Manufacturing in the USA: Training America’s Workforce
• 08/05/11 - The Employment Situation: July 2011
• 09/21/11 - Manufacturing in the USA: How U.S. Trade Policy Offshores Jobs
• 09/20/11 - “What is the Real Debt Limit?”
• 10/06/11 - “Tax Incentives to Bolster Job Creation and Strengthen the Economy”
• 10/04/11 - “The Economic Outlook” with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben
Bernanke
• 11/17/11 - Could Tax Reform Boost Business Investment and Job Creation?
• 11/16/11 - the Impact of Infrastructure on the Manufacturing Sector
• 11/04/11 - October Employment Report Friday

Consti
tuent
Outreach
Uni
tedSt
atesSenat
or
Mi
keLe
e
OFFICE OF SENATOR MICHAEL S. LEE
State Office Summary

Utah State Director:
Boyd C. Matheson
Federal Building
125 South State Street, Suit 4225
Salt Lake City, Utah 84138
(801) 524-‐5933 (office)
(801) 960-‐6126 (cell)
boyd_matheson@lee.senate.gov

The State Office is responsible for serving constituents in Utah’s 29 counties as well
as acting as the Senator’s liaison to state, county and local officials. The year 2011
proved to be an extraordinary first year filled with transition, set up, service and
outreach. The bottom line for the State office is to connect the Senator to
constituents and constituents to the Senator.

The State Office Report for 2011 includes:

• Summary of Northern Utah Area Activities
• Summary of Southern Utah Area Activities
• Summary of Central Utah Area Activities
• Summary of Utah Mobile Office Activities
• U.S. Service Academy Nominations
• Summary of Casework for Constituents
• Summary of Official Appointments and Meetings

Looking forward to 2012 the State Office will continue to deliver excellent service to
constituents while deepening our connection with elected officials, business
executives and community leaders. Major areas of focus for 2012 will include:
reducing the burden of federal regulation on entrepreneurs, businesses and job
creators; continuing the fight for public lands; fostering energy independence and
opportunity in Utah and ensuring Utahns continue to support the actions required
to cut federal spending, balance the budget and reduce the debt.
Northern UTAH REPORT – 2011

Northern Utah Director
Larry Shepherd
125 South State Street STE 4225
Salt Lake City, UT 84138
(801) 524-‐5933 office
(801) 995-‐0102 mobile
(801) 524-‐5730 fax
larry_shepherd@lee.senate.gov

The geographic area of US Senator Mike Lee’s Northern Utah region encompasses
the following counties: Box Elder, Cache, Rich, Weber, Morgan, Davis, Tooele,
Summit, and Daggett.

This area includes several of Utah’s most rural counties where agriculture and
outdoor recreation are the major economic interests as well as the more urban and
economically diverse northern Wasatch Front counties.

Outreach
During 2011, Senator Lee’s Northern Utah Director met directly with local elected
city and county officials on nearly 125 different occasions. Many of these meetings
were one-‐on-‐one visits to hear directly of the issues, concerns, and challenges that
these local leaders are experiencing in their interactions with the federal
government. Meetings with civic and business organizations, tours and ribbon-‐
cuttings provided helpful interactions with constituents in the business community.

Major issues:
Hill Air Force Base – In addition to being one of the largest employers in the state,
economic activity in and around Hill Air Force Base is a mainstay of the economy of
Northern Utah. The base is the engine of economic growth in the region and a
magnet for future business opportunity. Senator Lee views the announced
restructuring of the civilian workforce at Hill Air Force Base as a serious threat to
the economic health of the region and has committed significant time and resources
to mitigate the negative effects of the restructuring.

Flooding – Record-‐breaking snowpack and a wet, cool spring in Northern Utah
contributed to flooding that inundated thousands of acres of farmland and led to
tens of millions in property and crop damage. Senator Lee’s office closely monitored
the developing situation, toured flooded areas, and aided those affected by the
disaster in obtaining appropriate assistance.

Cache Pipeline -‐ On July 11, 2009 the 100-‐year-‐old canal above Canyon Road in
Logan failed, burying homes below in water, mud and rocks, and killing three
people. Other victims included water users who counted on the canal to deliver
irrigation for their crops. Throughout 2011, Senator Lee’s staff communicated with
all interested parties and closely monitored the negotiations that led to an
agreement for federal participation in a rerouted pipeline to carry water from Logan
Canyon to water users in Northern Cache County.

SOUTHERN UTAH REPORT – 2011

Southern Utah Director:
Ellen Schunk
285 W. Tabernacle
St. George, UT 84770
(435) 628-‐5514 (office)
(435) 201-‐2499 (cell)
ellen_schunk@lee.senate.gov

The Southern Utah area is comprised of 11 Counties: Beaver, Garfield, Grand, Iron,
Kane, Millard, Piute, San Juan, Sevier, Washington, and Wayne.

During 2011 we met with County Commissioners and Mayors in all 11 counties. We
gathered information on local concerns and issues, and provided reports on federal
activity.

The focus of this office is on constituent outreach -‐ staying in regular contact with
elected officials, government agencies and the general public. Staff from the
Southern Utah Office attended a host of regularly scheduled meetings ranging from
AOG, Veterans, Transportation, County Commission and NRC, to specific meetings
for State and Federal Agencies as well as Economic Forums.

We moved from temporary quarters to our current office in late June. This central
location, in historic St. George, provides easy access for constituents. The staff
consists of the Southern Utah Director, the Lands Policy Advisor, the Constituent
Liaison, and 1 Intern.

Daily phone calls are received from constituents, and people come into the Southern
Utah office each day. Since July 2011, we had approximately 200 constituents come
into our St. George office to express opinions or seek help with a problem.
Casework was started where appropriate.

An Open House was held in August, and a few hundred people from multiple
Counties attended. Senator Lee addressed the crowd, and people had an
opportunity to ask questions, share concerns, and talk “one-‐on-‐one” with the
Senator. People were encouraged to visit the office on a regular basis, and asked to
provide us with feedback.

Town Hall meetings were held during August in Beaver, Cedar City and St. George.
These were well attended and provided a great opportunity for good dialogue on
various issues.

November 7th marked the 70th Anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor. We
presented a special Certificate of Recognition from Senator Lee to each of the 6 Pearl
Harbor survivors who live in St. George. This was a very special occasion.

The Southern Utah office has spent considerable time in outreach and addressing a
myriad of issues. One example is the issue of the prairie dogs, which is having a
significant impact on Iron County in particular. Senator Lee personally toured the
Parowan Airport to see the effects of these animals, and also spoke with the Mayor
of Paragonah regarding prairie dogs at their cemetery. We are currently exploring
options to solve this problem.

We are also working on energy, land, mining, sawmills and other issues that are
being hampered by excessive federal regulations-‐ which in turn hurt economic
development in the State of Utah.

CENTRAL UTAH REPORT – 2011

Contact for Central Utah:
Deputy State Director Bill Lee,
Federal Building
(801) 524-‐4424 office,
(801) 854-‐8674 cell
william_lee@lee.senate.gov email.

There are 9 Counties in this area: Salt Lake, Utah, Juab, SanPete, Wasatch, Carbon,
Emery, Duchesne, Uintah.

One of the 2011 goals for this area was to reach out to all the Mayors,
Commissioners, State Senators and Representatives and make a personal contact
with them in their office. To also listen to the concerns and challenges that they are
facing and help in the federal issues. We kept in contact by phone and emails about
what Senator Lee was doing.

Another goal was to reach out to the constituent in this area we had three town halls
one in Draper, Provo and Fairview. With these and thousands of other emails we
send out Senator Lee's press releases to keep all who want to know what he is doing
involved.

We have been involved with the different Associations of Governments like Wasatch
Front Regional Council, Mountainland AOG, Uintah Basin AOG, Southeastern Utah
AOG, Uintah Basin AOG and Six County AOG. We have met with many of the County
Associations of Governments and also some of the City Councils. In these meetings
we provided updates on the Senator’s action and agenda as well as fielding
questions from the different groups on their particular issues.

Outreach in 2011 included a focus on issues, projects and tours. A sampling of those
we conducted over the past year include: Working with the counties on a process for
the county land bills to move forward, viewing the Narrows project in SanPete
county, touring a water treatment plant in Magna, visiting coal mines in Carbon
county and going through the FAA facility.

We have also worked with many different businesses and their leaders in addition
to attending open houses for companies ranging from entrepreneurial start ups to
expanding business like Nu Skin International. We participated in the grand
reopening of the Dinosaur National Monument in Uintah county, which followed and
long and significant remodeling project.

In light of the flooding issues during the year 2011 we worked with FEMA, Army
Corp of Engineers and Natural Resources Conservation Service to help minimize the
damage caused by the flooding.

We have help pass legislation for federal land transfer in Alta and Mantua. We are
currently working with the other congressional delegation on the land issue around
Scofield Reservoir in Carbon county. We continue to work with State agencies
regarding exports, land issues and transportation.

Working with the National Guard and the Army Corp of Engineers we have seen the
new Data Center between Salt Lake and Utah Counties rise up. We have been in
briefings and worked with the cities as questions and concerns came forward.

As part of our business community outreach we have been involved with the
various Chamber of Commerce chapters. We regularly sit in on some of the task
forces that they have dealing with both business and immigration needs. These task
forces have been used to generate ideas and explore possible legislation like the
DASH Act.

Overall our goal has been to Listen, Communicate and work together to continue to
make Utah the place to live and work.

UTAH MOBILE OFFICE REPORT – 2011

Utah Mobile Office:
Gary Beck
Federal Building
(801) 524-‐4424 office,
(801) 995-‐5714 cell
william_lee@lee.senate.gov email.

The Mobile Office for U.S. Senator Mike Lee officially began its community outreach
service to the State of Utah on 1 November 2011. At that time, Senator Lee said: “I
want my office to be open and available to all Utahns. The best way to achieve that
is by going directly to them. Utahns deal with a range of federal issues – from Social
Security to veterans benefits to navigating the bureaucracy of the federal
government – and I want to be there to help them get answers.”

Mobile Office Activities for 2011

In what well may be the first of its kind for a member of the United States Congress
from the State of Utah, Senator Lee's Mobile Office is a resource for constituents
across Utah who might not otherwise be able to meet with casework officers or
other staff at Senator Lee’s offices in Salt Lake City and St. George. The Mobile Office
travels throughout the State of Utah and opens a U.S. Senate Staff Office, on behalf of
Senator Lee, in all of Utah's counties—generally conducting "office hours" in the
morning and in the afternoon at pre-‐arranged and pre-‐advertised locations (usually
in Utah's cities, towns and communities at municipal or local governmental
buildings).

The Mobile Office essentially replaced three small senate staff offices operated by
Senator Bennett. The Mobile Office hours, dates and event locations are
regularly updated on Senator Lee’s website (please see: www.lee.senate.gov) under
the topic of “Mobile Office”. Additionally, Utah residents may use the website to: (1)
request, arrange and confirm a specific Mobile Office appointment for themselves at
a previously scheduled date, time and location; (2) recommend a future Mobile
Office visit, date, and time, to a location near them; [(and, in the process of
development and deployment,) (3) request an educational presentation on the U.S.
Constitution] by completing and submitting the Mobile Office form found on the
website.

November 2011 - December 2011 Mobile Office Statistical Report:

a. Counties Visited in 2011 (2 months): 16
b. Cities, Towns, Communities Visited in 2011 (2 months): 29
c. Constituents Contacted/Served (2 months): 168

4. November 2011 – December 2011 Mobile Office Detailed Summary Statistical
Report:

a. Counties/Cities or Towns or Communities (Constituents Contacted/Served)

BoxEdler County
Brigham City (6)
Tremonton (5)
San Juan County
Daggett County Monticello (4)
Manila (4) Blanding (3)
Dutch John (3) Bluff (5 – plus one elementary school
class of students)
Davis County
Farmington (9) Summit County
Bountiful (6) Coalville (2)
Park City (3)
Duchesne County
Roosevelt (10) Tooele County
Duchesne (4) Grantsville (8)
Tooele (5)
Cache County
Logan (4) Uintah County
Smithfield (4) Vernal (2)
Fort Duchesne (2)
Emery County
Green River (8) Washington County
Hurricane (9)
Grand County
Moab (8) Wayne County
Hanksville (22) [Note: This is about
Kane County 10% of the total population of
Kanab (5) Hanksville]
Orderville (5)
Weber County
Rich County Ogden (7)
Woodruff (1) Huntsville (3)
Randolph (11)

Mobile Office Plans for 2012:

January – March 2012: As a service to state legislators and constituents, the Mobile
Office will be open and available at the State Capitol every morning of the 2012 Utah
State Legislative Session (and it will also be working on enhancing public education
programs concerning the U.S. Constitution).

April – December 2012: The Mobile Office will again be scheduling and visiting
counties, cities, towns, communities, constituents, etc., throughout the State of Utah
(primarily using county, city, town and community buildings and facilities) and
working on enhancing public educational type programs dealing with the U.S.
Constitution.

U.S. Service Academy Nominations

Senator Lee has the opportunity each year to nominate outstanding Utahns to the
U.S. Service Academy Nominations. Those academies include the Air Force
Academy, Naval Academy, Military Academy at West Point, and the Merchant
Marine Academy. The Coast Guard Academy does not require a congressional
nomination.

Senator Lee utilizes his website at lee.senate.gov to provide information to
interested applicants. Letters introducing the senator’s nomination process were
sent to guidance counselors at each secondary school in Utah in May 2011. The
office sent posters to each secondary school and ROTC program in Utah in August
2011.

The 2011 application process was for applicants entering the academies in the
summer of 2012.

Application Available: May 10, 2011
Application Deadline: October 31, 2011

Total Applicants: 81

Counties represented: 13 of 29

Academy Interviews: November 14, 2011 (7:40 am – 12:20 pm)

Lee Staff: 13
Academy Liaisons: 10
Applicants attending: 70
Total number of interviews: 124

Total applicants nominated by Senator Lee: 45
Total number of Senator Lee applicants nominated from any source: 70

Final academy appointments will be determined during the first quarter of 2012.

Casework

Casework is the service Senator Lee provides to constituents who request
assistance. Constituents may include individuals, businesses/organizations, and
state and local governments. In cases where no official federal connection exists the
constituent liaisons work with the constituent to identify the next possible course of
action. Sometimes that is working directly with a state agency or forwarding the
case to the governor’s casework staff.

2011 Casework

5 Constituent Liaisons

Cases Opened: 331
Cases Closed: 223

The Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, State (Passports & Visas), and the
Veteran’s Administration make up close to 60% of overall casework.

Casework was received from constituents in 25 of Utah’s 29 counties.

The primary source of casework came from letters/emails.

Constituent liaisons made monthly visits to key casework related agencies, both
federal and state, and non-‐government organizations. The focus of the outreach in
2011 centered on building relationships with agency counterparts that would help
in the proficient resolution of casework.

Examples of casework in 2011 include:

Assisting a homeless veteran Washington County in obtaining his long-‐delayed
military retirement and securing temporary housing through the VA.

Arranging additional code training for a Box Elder County physician’s clinic being
audited by CMS due to the clinic’s unique rural medical practice.

Assisting two foreign-‐born small business owners in Utah County correct a mistake
in their USCIS paperwork allowing them to extend their investment visas and keep
their business open.

Working with the Department of Defense on behalf of two separate Utah Guard
members in Afghanistan who were denied their promised reenlistment bonuses
because their years of service included time away to serve religious missions.
Utah: Official Meetings

Counties: 11
1. Beaver 7. Sanpete
2. Box Elder 8. Sevier
3. Cache 9. Utah
4. Davis 10. Washington
5. Iron 11. Weber
6. Salt Lake

Cities: 27
1. American Fork 15. Orem
2. Alpine 16. Payson
3. Beaver 17. Provo
4. Cedar City 18. Richfield
5. Cedar Hills 19. Salina
6. Clearfield 20. Salt Lake
7. Draper 21. Sandy
8. Farmington 22. Saratoga Springs
9. Heber 23. South Jordan
10. Layton 24. Spanish Fork
11. Leamington 25. St. George
12. Logan 26. Tremonton
13. Magna 27. West Jordan
14. Midvale

Mayors: 16
1. Mayor John Curtis, Provo 9. Mayor Dan MacArthur, St.
2. Mayor James Hadfield, George
American Fork 10. Mayor Josh Mills, Herriman
3. Mayor Jerry Washburn, Orem 11. Mayor Jerry Taylor, Escalante
4. Mayor Mia Love, Saratoga 12. Mayor Karl Wilson, LaVerkin
Springs 13. Mayor G. Wayne Anderson,
5. Mayor JoAnn Seghini, Midvale Spanish Fork
6. Mayor Melissa Johnson, West 14. Mayor Steve Lauritzen,
Jordan Woodland Hills
7. Mayor Kent Money, South 15. Mayor Fred Jensen, Goshen
Jordan 16. Mayor Brian Wall, Mapleton
8. Mayor Rick Moore, Payson

Commissions/Council of Governments: 9
1. Commissioner Blackham, Utah 5. Box Elder County of
Department of Agriculture and Government
Food 6. Wayne County Commission
2. Utah County Commission 7. Sevier County Commission
3. Sevier County Commission 8. Piute County Commission
4. Cache County Council of 9. Washington County
Government Commission

School Visits: 6
1. Utah Valley University 4. ITT Tech
2. Lakeview Charter School 5. Utah State
3. Bingham High School 6. Southern Utah University

Legislators: 4
Rep. Wayne Harper
Sen. Wayne Niederhauser
Sen. Curt Bramble
Sen. Casey Anderson

Tours: 9
1. Kenworth Sales 6. Dannon Plant
2. Google Small Business 7. Magna Water Treatment Plant
3. Provo Watershed 8. Northup Grumman
4. Prairie Dog 9. Sufco Mine
5. Wilson Electronics

Community Events: 5
1. Alpine Memorial Day
2. Healing Field: 9/11 Memorial
3. St. George Office Open House
4. Salt Lake City Office Open House
5. Security Metrics Ribbon Cutting

Groups/Associations: 26
1. American Israel Public 14. Red Leaf Resources
Affairs Committee 15. Utah Food Industry
2. Rural water Association 16. Crohns and Colitis
3. Utah Humanities Council Foundation
4. Juvenile Diabetic Research 17. Amendment II, LLC
Foundation 18. Streamline Sales Tax
5. The American and Chinese 19. Dr. Sharyl Smith, Libraries
Promotion Society 20. American Cancer
6. American Podiatric Medical Committee
Association 21. Utah Fruit Growers
7. Utah League of Cities and Association
Towns 22. Domestic Violence Council
8. Salt Lake Chamber 23. Utah Veterans Advisory
9. St. George Chamber of Council
Commerce 24. Utah Society Radiologic
10. Rocky Mountain Power Technologist
11. Utah Valley Regional 25. Disability Rights Action
Medical Center Council
12. Overstock.com 26. Utah Broadcasters
13. Bill Barrett Corp. Association

Town Halls: 6
1. Fairview, Sanpete County
2. Beaver City, Beaver County
3. Cedar City, Iron County
4. St. George, Washington County
5. Draper, Salt Lake County
6. Provo, Utah County

Coming to a Town Hall Near You - Blog - Press Office - Mike L... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=5b043da6...

Blog
Aug 24 2011
Coming to a Town Hall Near You

During the final week of August, Senator Lee will be attending several town
hall events in southern Utah. Senator Lee looks forward to meeting with
Utah's citizens to discuss the important issues facing our nation. All are
invited to attend. You can find the time, date, and location of each event
below:
1 of 2 2/9/12 4:44 PM
Coming to a Town Hall Near You - Blog - Press Office - Mike L... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=5b043da6...
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/coming-
to-a-town-hall-near-you
2 of 2 2/9/12 4:44 PM
Recap of Beaver and Cedar City Town Hall Meetings - Blog - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=d1b06380...

Blog
Sep 01 2011
Recap of Beaver and Cedar City

Town Hall Meetings
Yesterday, I held two more town halls
in Southern Utah to hear from
residents about the issues they are
having in their communities. The
smaller event in Beaver turned into a
great dialogue about a range of issues
affecting Beaver County.
We started off discussing tax reform

and why it seems like the system is stacked against middle- and
working-class Americans. The tax code is an abomination and any
comprehensive plan to address our deficit and national debt must also
include fixing our tax code to make it easier to comply and less burdensome
on average Americans. I support both a flat tax and a national sales tax.
While there are different ways of implementing either of these reforms, they
would both be a step in the right direction for growing our economy.
Beaver County residents also discussed enforcing immigration laws,

defunding ObamaCare, Social Security reform, as well as land issues like
PILT and prairie dogs. At one point the mayor of Beaver stood up and said
that if towns like his were required to balance their budgets each year, so
should the federal government. I think that’s basic common sense.
From Beaver, I travelled to Cedar City for a town hall at Southern Utah
University. It was standing room only in the Church auditorium on campus
and I took more than two dozen questions during the 90 minute event. I was
glad to see a range of attendees, From seniors concerned about spending to
students afraid of our growing debt and veterans asking about our various
entanglements overseas, it was a robust and rapid-fire session on broad
topics concerning Utah and the country.
1 of 2 2/9/12 4:47 PM
Recap of Beaver and Cedar City Town Hall Meetings - Blog - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=d1b06380...
An SUU student asked an interesting question about bipartisanship in

Washington and why there wasn’t more of it. I said the best way to ensure
we come to bipartisan solutions is to focus on doing what is right rather than
what might be in the interest of one’s particular party affiliation. Neither
side has a monopoly on solutions, but there is a right and a wrong way to fix
a problem. Some times my party gets it dead wrong.
In Washington, some can become fixated on compromising for the sake of

compromise. But I will not compromise on doing what is right to reduce our
debt, end perpetual deficit spending, stabilize our economy, and reduce the
burden of the federal government on the lives of Americans. Standing on
principle is not the same as obstruction, and it is an important distinction to
make.
So far the town halls in Fairview, Beaver and Cedar City have been
incredibly productive. I have heard from directly from hundreds of Utahns
about the issues they care about most and I plan to take that back to
Washington and work on them.
I have a town hall in St. George tonight at the City Council Chambers (175
East 200 North). At 7:00 pm I hope to see you there.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/9/recap-
of-beaver-and-cedar-city-town-hall-meetings
2 of 2 2/9/12 4:47 PM
Fairview Town Hall Recap - Blog - Press Office - Mike Lee, Un... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=2733c4b2...

Blog
Aug 31 2011
Fairview Town Hall Recap

Last night’s town hall in Fairview presented an opportunity for the citizens
of Sanpete County and neighboring counties to come talk about the concerns
they are having in their communities and how we might work together to
solve them.
Around 150 people attended and the issues ranged from spending in
Washington to immigration to the Narrows project. I heard many people
voice concerns that Washington was not doing its job addressing illegal
immigration into our country. They said that state legislators in Utah had
tried to do something about the problem but that ultimately the federal
government would have to step up enforcement. I couldn’t agree more, and
would add that part of the problem is how difficult it is to come to this
country legally. By addressing the backlog of legal immigration we can
significantly reduce the motivation to come here illegally.
People are also very concerned about spending, but understand that the
federal government has made many promises it won’t be able to keep.
Particularly regarding entitlements, there was a good discussion on how to
reform programs like Medicare, which represent the bulk of our spending
over the next decade.
The truth is these programs are headed off a fiscal cliff if we don’t do
something now. It’s not whether or not the programs will see benefit
reductions, but how do we go about reforming the programs responsibly so
we can keep our promises to current beneficiaries and make it solvent for
those joining the programs in the future. I think we need to start addressing
those issues now, even if they are not politically popular, because it is the
right thing to do. We cannot wait until after the next election.
Tonight I have two more town halls in Beaver and Cedar City, and then one
tomorrow in St. George. I expect to see many of the same concerns in these
communities, as well as hear about the local issues on the minds of Utahns.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:03 PM
Sampling of Constituent Letters
from Across the State
February 9, 2011
Juab County
Topic: Pornography
Senator Lee,
I am writing to ask you to co-sign the letter authored by Sen. Orrin Hatch to Attorney
General Eric Holder urging that he vigorously enforce existing federal obscenity laws
which prohibit the distribution of hardcore, obscene pornography on the Internet, on
cable/satellite TV (including pay-per-view) and thus on hotel/motel television, through
the mail, and in retail outlets.
Porn harms people. Porn harms children - and with life-long effects. Porn harms society.
Addiction to obscene adult pornography is now an untreated pandemic and contributes to
the breakup of marriages, to sexual violence against women, to the demand for
prostitution and sex trafficking, to an increase in child pornography, to on-the-job sexual
harassment and to a decline in worker productivity because of time spent viewing internet
pornography.
The harms from pornography are now at crisis levels in the U.S. and we deserve to have
our existing obscenity laws enforced to curb this terrible harm.
Sincerely,
Travis
February 17, 2011

Utah County
Topic: Thank You Letter
Senator Lee,
I would like to thank you for dedication to the constitution and the liberties of Americans.
You have stuck to your guns and have done what you said you would. I was cautiously
optimistic when you won the election, and you are doing a good job at convincing me
that you are a true statesman rather than a politician. I especially want to thank you for
standing up for the 4th Amendment and civil liberties in opposing the extension of parts
of the (un) Patriot Act. I know that many modern "conservatives" believe that safety by
any means is necessary, but you seem to understand that your top priority is not to keep
us safe but to keep us free. Of course, safety is the main purpose of the government but
should not come at the violation of our rights.
Secondly, thank you for being dead serious about our economic problems. Thank you for
standing up against the establishment and doing all that is in your power to prevent the
debt ceiling from being raised. I hope it doesn't get that far, but I'll look forward to
watching your filibuster on CSPAN :)
I have done a lot of talking up of Mike Lee recently and trust you will continue to stay
true to the philosophy of liberty.
I'd like to encourage you to co-sponsor Rand Paul's Audit the Fed bill to be presented in
the near future.
I ran into you at CPAC last week (I'm from Eagle Mountain), and listened to your
speech. Great job. Keep preaching the truth and God Bless.
With gratitude,
Jonathan
March 4, 2011
Beaver County
Topic: USDA/GIPSA
Senator Lee,
I am writing to express my concerns with a proposed rule from USDA's Grain Inspection
Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) that will affect my ability to run my
pork operation. The proposed rule released by GIPSA last June is so vague and
overreaching that I worry about how my business will operate in the future. I raised these
concerns with USDA during the public comment period, but I'm not sure the agency
knows the costs this rule could have on my industry.
It is critical that USDA complete an economic analysis on the proposed rule. Such an
analysis was not conducted prior to the rule being proposed, which I don't understand
given that USDA called the regulation "the most aggressive change to the Packers and
Stockyards Act since its creation in the 1920s."
Recently, USDA stated that it will conduct a "cost-benefit" analysis, but it has given no
details about the process, the timeline or what such an analysis will entail. I know that a
"cost-benefit" analysis is not that same as an economic analysis, with the former simply
looking at actual costs of implementation of a rule compared with the subjectively
determined benefits of it, and the latter determining the costs throughout the economy.
I would like to see an analysis that shows the costs this rule will impose on me as a pork
producer; on all those working in the pork industry, including agricultural lenders,
packers, feed suppliers, etc.; and on the consumers buying pork in the grocery store.
These costs must be known before this "most aggressive" proposal becomes the law of
the land.
Regardless of the type of examination it conducts, it is imperative that USDA make

available for public comment the analysis and its results, including methodologies used
and sectors and processes examined.
Livestock industry analyses of the proposed rule found that if enacted as it has been
proposed, it will cost hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of lost jobs. I ask
you, as my elected official, to urge USDA to conduct a thorough economic analysis of the
rule before it is finalized and to question the agency about the process it used for the
analysis. I look forward to hearing your response.
Sincerely,
Dwight
March 8, 2011
Iron County
Topic: The Federal Budget
Senator Lee,
I am writing to encourage you to let the government shut down during the current budget
dispute.
Sincerely,
David

March 9, 2011
Tooele County
Topic: Banking
Senator Lee,
As your constituent, I am writing to urge you to stop the debit card interchange rule
before it harms debit card users like me. The only beneficiaries of this harmful rule are
retailers, who will take home an additional $14 billion in profits - and consumers will be
left to deal with the consequences. The rule does not require that retailers pass along even
one penny of their savings to customers. Meanwhile, banks, forced to lose money on
debit interchange transactions, will be forced to compensate by increasing fees for
deposit customers. The fact is that retailers receive tremendous benefits when they accept
debit cards for payment, including higher sales, lower costs and guaranteed payment.
That's why millions of retailers have chosen to accept debit cards - and that number is
growing. In effect, consumers like me will end up paying for a payments system that
provides retailers with extraordinary value. I don't want to be forced to pay higher fees,
give up my rewards, and lose my free checking account - just so retailers can have an
extra $14 billion in profits. Congress should be in the business of protecting consumers,
not forcing us to pay for the costs of giant retailers. Please repeal this harmful rule before
it's too late.
Sincerely,
Jeanne
March 11, 2011

Weber County
Senator Lee,
I applaud your steadfast efforts in pushing for REAL reforms and solutions to our
Nation's debt problems. I read the letter you and your colleagues sent to Sen. Reid and I
greatly appreciate that you have taken a firm position on solving this egregious problem.
Additionally, I have observed many of your interviews on various cable TV programs
and would like to thank you for representing Conservative values. Keep up the great
work!
Sincerely,
Thomas

March 14, 2011
Carbon County
Topic: Healthcare
Senator Lee,
As a constituent, I urge you to vote Yes on H.R. 1, the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health
Care Law" Act. Voters spoke loud and clear on Nov. 2nd: No government takeover of
health care. This is an unparalleled opportunity to show Americans that this Congress
means business and will stick to the promises made on the campaign trail, however
difficult they may be. We need to fully repeal ObamaCare because it will kill jobs,
bankrupt the government, drive up everyone's health insurance costs, put bureaucrats in
charge of our health care, and ruin the world's best health care system. Our government
can't afford the $2.6 trillion price tag - and our families can't afford the taxes and sky-
high insurance premiums that come with this massive bill. Congress needs to focus
sensible reforms like tax credit vouchers for the uninsured, and reforms to the individual
market. These are reforms that are affordable, and don't grow the size of government.
With 68% of Americans in opposition to ObamaCare, the time to repeal is now. Please
vote Yes on H.R. 1.
Sincerely,
Hal
March 29, 2011

Weber County
Senator Lee,
I'm writing to urge you to insist that both Planned Parenthood and NPR be defunded in
the next continuing resolution. Planned Parenthood performed over 324,000 abortions in
2008 while receiving $349.6 million in funds from American taxpayers, many of whom
find abortion morally objectionable. And NPR board member Sue Schardt has admitted
that NPR's core audience is "predominately white, liberal, highly educated, elite." Why
should Americans who are not white, liberal, or elite be forced to subsidize an
organization when it's core constituency is perfectly capable of funding it from their own
wallets if they believe its message is that important? It's time for fiscal sanity in
Washington, and the place to begin is by defunding Planned Parenthood and NPR in the
very next CR.
Sincerely,
Stephen
March 31, 2011
Washington County
Senator Lee,
As your constituent, I urge you to support full funding for public broadcasting in the
budget bills currently being debated in Washington. Federal funding for public
broadcasting supports 1,300 local stations, 21,000 local jobs and the 170 million
Americans who rely on public media each month. My local public television and radio
stations are critically important to me and my community. The small cost per person -
annually $1.35 per citizen - is far outweighed by the benefits we all get from having a
strong public broadcasting system to address our local community needs and provide
services unmet elsewhere. Public broadcasting is one of the most successful
public/private partnerships in America, with $6 in local support matching every $1
invested by the federal government. Cutting off federal dollars would have a cascade
effect that would be catastrophic to the millions of people like me who use public
broadcasting every day. There are more than 1,300 local public television and radio
stations in America, representing some of the last locally-owned, locally-staffed and
locally-programmed media outlets in this country. These stations are in every community
across the country and employ some 21,000 people. Public broadcasting is an essential
service to the American people. Without public broadcasting, our communities would
lose access to the safe-haven of children's non-commercial educational content, the in-
depth news and public affairs programming, access to the world of arts and cultural
locally, nationally and internationally, and the local voice that weaves the diverse
perspectives of our communities together. In addition to the unparalleled programming
offered by local public broadcasters, local stations are maximizing digital technology and
their universal reach to provide critical resources to local communities. For example,
public radio stations provide reading services for the blind, public television stations
partner with state and local departments of education to provide teachers with on-line
educational resources aligned with state standards, and both television and radio stations
provide critical and targeted emergency communications in the wake of a disaster.
Without federal funding, these critical resources will disappear, disenfranchising millions
of Americans who depend on these services. The minimal federal investment in public
broadcasting stations ensures free and universal access to a wide array of high quality,
educational, non-commercial content and services. These services are too valuable to
lose! As a constituent who highly values the programming and services of my local
public broadcasters, I urge you to oppose any efforts to cut funding for public
broadcasting.
Sincerely,
Carol

April 3, 2011
Utah County
Mike,
Thanks for the job you are doing. I just wanted to voice my opinion on the fed budget. I
feel that if you can't cut several hundred billion, then let the gov't shut down. I am ok
with that. Maybe it will make the Dem's look at making some serious cuts to the budget.
This talk of 60 billion is a drop in the bucket. 500 billion in cuts would be more like it.
Regards,
Ron

April 4, 2011
Wasatch County
Topic: The Internet
Dear Mike Lee,
The internet is amazing the way it is, and innovation continues to make It even better.
Congress must act to protect the free-market, hands-off approach that has allowed the
Internet to succeed. That means stopping the FCC’s so-called "open Internet" or "net
neutrality" rules.
I urge you to support Senator Hutchison’s SJ.Res.6 and Representative Walden’s

HJ.Res.37, efforts under the Congressional Review Act to overturn the rule.
The arguments made by advocates of such regulations have been proven false by nearly a
decade of experience since their concerns were first raised. The Internet is a remarkable
free market success story, and the vast majority of Internet users are not clamoring for
regulation.
Please do not allow the FCC to distort the law and take extreme measures to seize
regulatory control of the internet. I urge you to do everything necessary to stop the FCC,
overturn these regulations, and protect the free-market internet.
Sincerely,
Lawrence

April 15, 2011
Summit County
Topic: Environment
Dear Senator Lee,
We ask you to support Congressional action to support wolf delisting. The language in
the Continuing Resolution (H.R. 1473) allows for wolf delisting for portions of the West
while also protecting the important court victory of Wyoming's wolf management plan.
This court decision is an important step in acknowledging the right of state's rights to
manage their wildlife. It is not right that the responsible sportsmen of America who have
invested so heavily to protect and recover America's wildlife are demonized for simply
asking the promises of the Endangered Species Act to be fulfilled. There is no room for
this type of divisive rhetoric in America. There are also many other states that have
invested heavily to recover the nation's wolf populations who will not be delisted by this
action. There is also serious concern that anti-sportsmen groups want to spread the
destruction of unmanaged wolf populations to elk, moose and deer of Arizona, New
Mexico, Utah, Colorado, Nevada, California, Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota and
other states across the West and Midwest without assurances that they will not end up
like Montana, Idaho and Wyoming. Forcing states to accept wolves without these
assurances builds distrust with the federal government and hurts the ability to recover
other endangered species. We strongly ask you to continue to support efforts to allow
wolf populations to be managed by state wildlife managers who manage and protect other
large predators so effectively. When the ESA was enacted decades ago, it was built on a
foundation that common sense, judgment and responsibility would be used in its
administration. It is unfortunate that a few anti-sportsmens groups have removed the
common sense and responsibility from the equation. Abuse of the Endangered Species
Act has become expected by many who support the need to protect truly endangered
species, but who also wish that common sense and responsibility could be returned to the
equation. The health and future of healthy wildlife populations are endangered by these
actions. It is unfortunate that Congressional action was required to finally return wolves
to state wildlife managers. This action was overdue as a result of years of over reaching
and ambiguous litigation intended to stop delisting of a fully recovered and robust wolf
populations in the U.S. Overreaching by a few anti-sportsmen groups, not the actions of
responsible sportsmen, have led us to this day. We are hopeful that once wolf populations
are delisted across all of America to provide these needed assurances, steps are taken to
ensure that common sense, responsibility, science and good judgment can replace the
hysteria and anti-sportsmen rhetoric which is far too prevalent in this country's wildlife
dialog. We ask for your leadership and judgment in support of this important issue.
Sincerely,
Justin

April 18, 2011
Utah County
Topic: Animal Issues
Senator Lee,
With our national deficit at all-time highs, and economies around the world in disarray, I am
writing to urge you to defund the Lacey Act. This mandate restricts the free flow of global
commerce under the veil of helping other countries improve their environment. Moreover, the
Lacey Act has been used in the past to justify all kinds of marginal prosecutions. The reality is
that we all lose under the Lacey Act.
If current efforts to implement the Lacey Act's declaration requirements that were enacted in
2008 go forward, not only will consumers across America be faced with higher prices, but
developing nations will be forced to cut jobs and scale back investments necessary for their
economic growth.
Most troubling of the revised Lacey Act provisions currently under government review is Section
8204, which deals with the "prevention of illegal logging practices." Without a doubt, this
provision is a blatant trade barrier against poor nations that rely on the export of wood products
for the health of their economies
For one, the countries of origin should be the ones determining which of its natural resource
products are legal or not. Additionally, these Lacey Act import rules go beyond the legal
jurisdiction of our government. The U.S. paper companies and the unions that are pressuring you
to make these provisions even more stringent should be rejected.
Since consumers have rejected the anti-trade agenda of these paper companies and labor unions,
these interests have now joined with environmentalists and policymakers to sneak amendments
into the century-old Lacey Act. These amendments mandate full declarations concerning the
origin of wood products through the entire supply chain -from the ground to the shelf.
What's more, we simply cannot afford the money you are earmarking for enforcement of these
Lacey Act provisions. Most importantly, this effort limits the options of consumers like me for
countless every day products like toilet paper and paper towels and will force me to pay more
money for just about every product that may contain wood.
It's not Washington's job to pick winners and losers in the marketplace. Again, I hope you will
revisit the Lacey Act provisions currently being reviewed by the USDA and defund the Act
altogether. If you do, you will be lending a big helping hand to struggling American consumers
and those in developing nations working hard to achieve a better life for themselves and their
families.
Sincerely,
Rhonda

April 25, 2011
Kane County
Dear Senator Lee,
In the strongest terms possible, I urge you to please vote AGAINST raising the US debt
ceiling any further. Senator, it’s imperative that we get our spending under control now.
The way that we can do that is to eliminate any and all programs and departments not
authorized by our US constitution.
We are heading full throttle ahead towards destruction of this wonderful country. I hope I
can count on you to do the right thing.
Sincerely,
Terry

May 4, 2011
Piute County
Topic: Appropriations
Senator Lee,
I urge, in the strongest possible terms, to vote NO on the confirmation of John

McConnell for U.S. District Judge for the District of Rhode Island. It comes as no
surprise that leading gun control proponents in the Senate support McConnell: he has
contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to liberal, anti-gun candidates over the
years, including Obama and Rhode Island’s two senators. In fact, it appears that
McConnell's chief qualifications for this post are his generous contributions to liberal
candidates and his long relationship with former Rhode Island attorney general and
current Senator, Sheldon Whitehouse. However, even in a world where political backers
are often selected to fill openings for judgeships and other federal jobs, the size of
McConnell's contributions sets him apart from other nominees. In 2008 alone, for
example, McConnell gave over $120,000 to Democrat candidates. He also served as
treasurer of the Rhode Island Democratic State Committee, which raises the question of
whether he could serve impartially on the federal bench. McConnell's views on the
Constitution are also extremely troubling. In written questions that were part of
McConnell's confirmation hearings, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) asked the nominee if
he believed the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights protected fundamental rights.
McConnell responded evasively and refused to declare what he considered to be
fundamental, individual liberties. Of course, McConnell repeatedly insisted that he would
be "bound by applicable Supreme Court and First Circuit precedent" on Second
Amendment issues. But nothing in the Heller and McDonald decisions necessarily preclude an
anti-gun ideologue from ruling that almost any gun law short of a total ban on firearms -
including gun owner registration, purchasing limits, waiting periods, private sale background
checks, and more - is consistent with the Constitution. We've heard this tune before. Recall the
confirmation hearings of Sonia Sotomayor, in which the Senate, and the American people, were
assured that she accepted the Court's ruling in Heller that the Second Amendment protects an
individual right. Yet, in the McDonald case, Sotomayor joined the dissent in writing that "I can
find nothing in the Second Amendment's text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant
characterizing it as 'fundamental' insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for
private self-defense purposes." Gun owners are sick and tired of nominees who hide behind the
rhetoric of "precedent" and "settled law" during confirmation hearings, only to turn around and
rule against the right to keep and bear arms once placed on the bench. While McConnell does not
have a record litigating in the area of the Second Amendment, his arguments in favor of
massively expanding liability for manufacturers of products such as tobacco and lead paint are
eerily similar to those used in attempts to bankrupt the firearms industry through frivolous
lawsuits. In fact, McConnell has not shied away from his willingness to use the courts to achieve
his own version of "social justice," as when he said in a 2005 interview that "[t]here are wrongs
that need to be righted, and that's how I see the law." Gun Owners of America will score all votes
related to the McConnell confirmation.
Sincerely,
Garrett
May 5, 2011
Uintah County
Topic: Energy
Dear Senator Lee,
In the coming weeks, the House of Representatives will consider three bills (H.R. 1229, H.R.
1230, and H.R. 1231) aimed at expanding the production of our offshore resources of oil and
natural gas. The bills come at a time of great uncertainty for our country's energy future.
Americans are ready for a serious discussion on our country's energy security and these bills
provide a real path forward. By expanding production and adding certainty to the permitting
process, we can address the fact that our country will need oil and natural gas for decades to
come. Rather than import this energy from unstable parts of the world, we can produce it right
here and create the jobs so many Americans desperately need. Your vote will send a positive
signal to the solid majority of Americans 69 percent who favor more offshore drilling, showing
that you are serious about our nation's energy security.
Sincerely,
Robert

May 11, 2011
Duchesne County
Topic: Natural Resources
Senator Lee,
I write to ask that you vote to end subsidies for the oil industry. I ask you to bring an end to these
subsidies, which are an unnecessary burden on American taxpayers, and which support an
industry that exploits American lands. These subsidies go to the same industry that is pushing
legislation which would expedite offshore development without new safety requirements. The oil
industry fights safety inspections, complains about environmental safeguards critical to protecting
community water supplies and wildlife refuges, pressures Congress to gut environmental laws
and blocks attempts to ensure that the taxpaying public gets fair value through royalties when
they exploit the lands that belong to all Americans. In a budget environment where severe cuts to
environmental protection programs, education and programs like Medicare are being threatened,
there's no place for the oil industry giveaways that cost taxpayers $40 billion each decade. I hope
you will vote to end giveaways to big oil, and that you will lend your support to increasing
renewable clean energy for the U.S. Their is much talk in the country about ending entitlements
for citizens as being Socialistic. This is Socialism for Big Oil plain and simple!
Sincerely,
Michael

May 12, 2011

Morgan County
Dear Senator Lee,
Please OPPOSE excessive Federal spending.
In article 1 section 8 of our Constitution it states:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay
the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all
Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
Providing for the common welfare does not mean inflating our country and passing bills that
continue to plunge our economy into debt.
Sincerely,
Chelsea

May 16, 2011

Wayne County
Topic: Animal Rights
Senator Lee,
It is of the utmost priority that each State keep and maintain a registry of all animal
abusers. These abusers have been linked to serial killing, domestic violence as well as
drug related issues and so forth. This kind of crime breeds other crimes and must be
stopped. If we have a national registry of these criminals, we would be able to keep them
from ever adopting an animal again, we would be able to look at them first when
searching for a serial killer, we would be able to protect those who are victims of
domestic violence. It's a new day and our animals need our voice. Please, President
Obama, get involved in animal rights and make this happen. Please support this petition.
Thank you and God Bless you from all of us who care about our animals.
Sincerely,
Donna
May 20, 2011

Rich County
Topic: Health
Senator Lee,
Countless Americans can't afford to buy medications in the U.S., and yet cannot afford to
go without them. For this reason, many rely on safe, affordable medications routinely
ordered from licensed Canadian and international pharmacies. Now this source faces an
imminent threat: a misguided effort by officials in the White House to abruptly take away
this longstanding access to affordable medications. This would be catastrophic to the
health and devastating to the finances of many. President Obama supported importation
as a senator and a presidential candidate, but now the White House sides with the U.S.
pharmaceutical industry--and against constituents. I need you to protect my rights, and to
do the right thing for Americans suffering from the staggering cost of U.S.
pharmaceuticals. Tell the White House your constituents won't support elected officials
who threaten our right to obtain safe and affordable medications from Canadian and
international pharmacies. I support the over a million Americans who rely on safe,
reasonably priced medicines from Canadian and other international pharmacies. On
behalf of all of us, thank you for your help on this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Constance

June 13, 2011
Garfield County
Topic: Social Security
Dear Senator Lee,
As your constituent and a member of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security
and Medicare, I urge you to stand with us in opposition to any deficit-reduction proposals
that would cut Social Security benefits.
In poll after poll, the American people have rejected cutting Social Security. We know
the money in Social Security's Trust Funds belongs to the workers and retirees who've
made contributions throughout their working lives.
While difficult spending decisions must be made, targeting Social Security at a time
when growing numbers of Americans are counting on full benefits in retirement is unfair
and irresponsible.
The National Committee strongly opposes all proposals that harm current and future
beneficiaries. I urge you to work closely with the National Committee to protect Social
Security and Medicare for all Americans.
Sincerely,
Anna
June 29, 2011

Utah County
Senator Lee,
Thank you for advocating the Sound Money Promotion Act! It is very encouraging to see
you take a strong stand on such a critical issue. Often congress addresses symptoms, but
your are striking at the tap root with the Sound Money Promotion Act. You are leading
on this issue, and I hope the rest of Utah's delegation and the delegations from other
states will join with you in this crucial effort. Please contact me if I can be of assistance
on this particular issue, and THANK YOU!
Sincerely,
Carlton

June 27, 2011
Daggett County
Topic: Veterans
Senator Lee,
I did my part to defend this nation now you do yours, enough bickering already, get to
work and earn your wages. As your constituent, I write to you today regarding my
concerns about the uncertainties facing veterans and their families and survivors resulting
from the National Debt and federal spending cuts debate. With federal spending cuts
under consideration and the possibility that the U.S. government may not be able to meet
its financial obligations in the near future, I am concerned about the priority our
government is giving to veterans' benefits and services. Veterans' benefits are unique
among federal spending because they are earned by the sacrifices of veterans and their
families on behalf of our nation. As such, they should be given the highest priority. I am
disturbed that elected officials may not give veterans' benefits and services the
importance they deserve. This is why I am standing up for veterans and participating in
the Disabled American Veterans' Virtual March on Washington on Wednesday, July 27,
2011. I encourage you to visit the DAV's Facebook page to observe the discussion of
what veterans' disability compensation and services from the Department of Veterans
Affairs mean to veterans and their families. Please participate in this conversation and let
veterans know how you would prioritize their benefits and services.
Sincerely,
David
July 27, 2011

Salt Lake County
Topic: Budget
Dear Senator Lee,
I want to thank you for your continuing strong support of the US House passed Cut, Cap
and Balance Act, and your efforts to bring a Balanced Budget Amendment to the
American people. Despite what we hear emanating from most of the popular press and
from inside the Beltway, the majority of the American people clearly understand that this
is the approach that will give us, and most importantly our children, the future of
opportunity and prosperity that they hope for, and deserve. Please urge your fellow
colleagues in the Senate to support this approach to fiscal responsibility. Please fight for
our country.
Thank you.
Richard
July 29, 2011
Box Elder County
Topic: Budget
Senator Lee,
Please do whatever you can to protect the much needed benefit of Social Security,
medicare, and medicaid to those that depend on those benefits for daily living. They
shouldn't be penalized by lack of income and health care because of what others have
chosen to do with financial matters that didn't involve them. In a lot of cases these people
haven't chosen to need this assistance in their lives but have come to swallowing their
pride to accept help so that they can have an income and health care to take care of
themselves and their families.
Thank you SO Very Much!
Julie
August 18, 2011

Sevier County
Topic: The Food and Drug Administration
Senator Lee,
Introduced by Senator Dick Durbin on July 1, the Dietary Supplement Labeling Act of
2011, S. 1310, would expand the group of "conventional foods" and place the FDA in the
role of defining which products are foods, and which are health aids and therefore subject
to regulation as dietary supplements for FDA policing.
However, there are already regulations that can be used to enforce laws already in place
for truly unsafe or dangerous products. Industry leaders report it is just a matter of
enforcement.
But some legislators want to further regulate food additives and dietary supplements by
imposing a new set of onerous rules for manufacturers that would delay or even prohibit
new products from coming to market, both a loss for the economy and the consumer.
Consumers can and should look after themselves; a bureaucratic agency, the legislative
branch, or Big Brother have no business interfering in the decisions of consumers.
Most Americans want unrestricted access to nutritional supplements produced by
manufacturers whose focus is their product, not multiple government registration and
labeling forms. Keep the government out of my health aid and food choices by refusing
to cosponsor, promote, or vote for S. 1310.
Sincerely,
Robert
September 29, 2011

Sanpete County
Topic: The U.S. Constitution
Senator Mike Lee:
CONGRESS: JUST VOTE THE CONSTITUTION!
The critical missing issue is the need to confine the federal government to
its proper role to following the Constitution, which gives the House of Representatives
control of the purse string. Not the president or the Senate.
James Madison emphasized in the Federalist Papers No 58, "The House of

Representatives cannot only refuse, but they alone can propose the supplies requisite for
the support of government. They, in a word hold the purse-- that powerful instrument
{for reducing}..all the overgrown prerogatives of the other branches of government."
Evidently the GOP house leadership has no intention of conforming the federal
government to the Constitution or rolling back socialist inroads.
Tell me why all the congressman and the Senate and the Potential candidates for
president, always call our nation a DEMOCRACY? They never mention the truth that we
are a REPUBLIC nation. Democratic nations have always failed. Our founding fathers
knew this and that is why they founded a Republic. In other words our government is
brain-washing us into believing the majority should always rule even to the detriment to
others.
To improve our economics we must get industry that has moved to other nations to return
to the US. We need to change the climate for business to
succeed without the taxes and red tape they must go through. Everyone says we must
improve our economy but they never mention that can only be done by returning our
industry back to our shores.
I wonder how uninformed our representatives must be when our energy is in such a
crises, but nothing is done to open the many potential oil fields in this nation. We would
not have to import any oil from other nations if we would just start opening our own
natural resources. And guess What? Even our gas prices would come down to where our
people could afford it and would help our economy tremendously.
Sincerely yours,
Ronald
October 2, 2011
Millard County
Topic: Environment
Senator Lee,
If the President and you, as my representative, are really serious about protecting and
growing jobs and the economy, then you need to stop the EPA's industry- and jobs-
destroying rules and regulations.
Cement MACT is an area where the EPA's over-reach threatens to destroy or send
overseas America's cement producing facilities. The reductions for particulate matter,
hydrocarbons, acid gasses, and the like, demanded by the EPA in late 2010, will cost the
private sector cement industry billions of dollars and still be unachievable, forcing some
facilities to close, and sending others to foreign countries while thousands of jobs will be
lost to American workers and taxpayers.
Does this make any sense at all?
The stakes are just too high for the cement industry, jobs, the economy and for the
nation's infrastructure to let the EPA's heavy-handedness wreak further destruction.
Please quickly pass H.R. 2681, the Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act of 2011. This is
but a first step in voiding the EPA's current cement pollutant rulings.
Then, you need to permanently rein in the unaccountable EPA, rather than rolling back in
piecemeal fashion every set of rules it imposes on various industries and businesses that
do nothing but destroy this country's jobs and economy.
Pass H.R. 2681.
Please do what is right.
Sincerely,
Rick
October 10, 2011
Utah County
Topic: Boy Scout Letter
Dear Senator Lee,
Utah is doing a good job to build better roads and highways. This also creates more jobs
and decreases the unemployment rate and the number of homeless people.
I don’t want Utah to go into a recession. So I think that it isn’t fair to pay taxes for the
prisoner who committed a foul crime. I think that it can be too expensive and risky to
keep a prisoner for life. In school I learned that we are paying taxes to take care of
prisoner by giving t hem food and keeping them in their own private cell. If these taxes
put families in debt then we will have to pay for those families. Pretty soon our country
would be broken.
I suggest that we put prisoner through what they put innocent people through. It would
make our environment a safer place and less crime would be committed.
Thanks for reading my letter and please write back.
Sincerely,
Dallin

October 10, 2011

Emery County
Topic: Transportation
Dear Senator Lee,
It has come to my attention that there is a bill being considered that will charge additional
fees to airlines at airports etc. that will be passed on to passengers. From what was
reported on the news, the airlines have figured this out to be about $100 per passenger.
My understanding is that this fee will be charged per stop of a flight even if you do not
get off of the plane. Airline travel is already difficult due to new security requirements
and the cost of airline tickets. Adding this additional tax/fee will prove to be even more
devastating in our ability to travel. With the information I have currently, I strongly
encourage you to vote against this bill. Thank you for your time in considering my views.
Sincerely,
Debbie
October 11, 2011
San Juan County
Topic: Healthcare Reform
Dear Senator Michael Lee:
As Congress tackles reducing the deficit, I am counting on you to be a voice for the
Medicaid and Medicare programs. While I understand that fixing our economy and
cutting the nation's debt needs to be a top priority, I feel strongly that this can't be done
by putting the health of millions of Americans, particularly our seniors, children and
people with disabilities, at risk.
I want you to share with Senators Reid and Murray and Representatives Boehner and
Hensarling that Medicaid and Medicare are critical sources of health insurance coverage
for patients with heart disease and stroke, our nation's No. 1 and No. 3 leading causes of
death. In fact:
-Medicaid provides comprehensive insurance coverage, including nursing home and

long-term care services, to 16 million low-income Americans who have a history of
cardiovascular disease or stroke, including children, the elderly, and people of all ages
with disabilities.
-Medicare has improved the health and well-being of tens of millions of America's
seniors by providing needed, affordable care. This includes 42% of beneficiaries who
have a heart condition and 12% who have had a stroke.
Even with the financial protection and important benefits that Medicare and Medicaid
currently provide, beneficiaries, like many Americans, are still struggling to make ends
meet. For example, a Medicare recipient with heart failure spends an average of one-
quarter of their income on health care.
That's why significant cuts or changes to the Medicare and Medicare programs that
would reduce patients' access to care or shift additional costs to beneficiaries or the states
is not an acceptable solution to our country's economic challenges. In addition, such cuts
could actually worsen the nation's economy by forcing the health care industry---one of
the few industries that has been consistently adding jobs over the last several years--to lay
off workers.
I urge you to work with your colleagues and encourage the leadership to find a balanced
approach to reducing the deficit and to keep in mind that behind all of the numbers are
real people- our friends, family, and neighbors- who depend on Medicaid and Medicare
to access and afford the care they need to live healthy lives.
Sincerely,
Carol

October 15, 2011
Cache County
Senator Lee,
I urge you to stop wasting taxpayers money by supporting the United Nations Population
Fund (UNFPA). A proposal will soon be coming up for debate and vote, H.R. 2059, that
would defund this organization.
The UNFPA needs to be defunded now to ensure that American taxpayer money is not
supporting coerced abortion and abuse of women in China. On that one issue alone, the
UNFPA should be defunded, which would also bring the U.S. back in line with the law
under the Kemp-Kasten Amendment.
Then, there is the promotion of sexual promiscuity, the breakdown of morals and values,
and introduction of abortion to the continent of Africa by UNFPA and International
Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF).
UNFPA also funds IPPF, to the tune of $1.6 million in 2010. It is shameful that tax
dollars are used to encourage young people of the world as young as 10 to "experience
and celebrate their sexuality," by UNFPA, an agency that provides and promotes sex
education, while rampant disease and poverty are ignored.
The Senate and President Obama are calling for the U.S. to fund the UNFPA in fiscal
2012 to the tune of $40 million and $47.5 million, respectively.
Stop the fraud by defunding UNFPA completely!!!
Support H.R. 2059.
Sincerely,
Chris
October 18, 2011

Davis County
Topic: Healthcare Reform
Dear Senator Michael Lee:
I urge you to support a full repeal of the Medicare sustainable growth rate (SGR)
formula. Any serious proposal to confront the fiscal challenges facing our nation, and the
Medicare program in particular, must employ honest accounting and address the massive
shortfall in funding for Medicare payments for physician services.
Patients deserve more than budget tricks and temporary solutions that threaten access to
care. It is time for Congress to pass a long-term solution to the SGR formula and move to
a more stable Medicare physician payment system that provides security for patients and
the physicians who care for them.
Sincerely,
Kelly
November 23, 2011

Salt Lake County
Topic: Military Issues
Mr. Lee,
I am wondering what the heck are we doing with these 2 articles.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2650542.ece
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/aircraft-carrier-cvn-77-parks-next-door-syria-just-us-
urges-americans-leave-country-immediately
What is the strategy? Are we intentionally looking to cause a regional conflict? Please tell
me with out a form response what are the goals and objectives of this move?
Thank you,
Roger
December 7, 2011
Utah County
Dear Peter,
And thank you for saying Christmas Season instead of Holiday! I appreciate what
Senator Lee is doing to try and keep our constitution intact, and trying to reign in this
administration. We are watching.
Merry Christmas to you..
Suzanne
December 7, 2011
Cache County
Topic: Thank You letter
Senator Lee,
You have a safe and happy Christmas season too. And thanks for calling it CHRISTMAS
season.
God Bless you,
Mary
December 19, 2011

Grand County
Dear Senator Lee,
I wanted to write and thank you for working with your congressional colleagues to
orchestrate an Omnibus bill funding the federal budget. I, like many Americans, have
been frustrated by this Congress’s infighting, and I hope the passage of this bill is a
harbinger of future legislative compromises that can help keep our country moving
forward.
Happy holidays,
Rebecca
December 20, 2011

Davis County
Topic: Religious/Human Rights
Senator Lee,
Here's the content of a blog about the NDAA. Is it essentially correct?? What
could/would you do about this situation?? Do you feel it is acceptable or not? PLEASE
read it: Would it really be possible to burn and circumvent basic constitutional rights
without much of the American public even noticing? The National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA) could be poised to do just that by allowing the U.S. federal government to
treat its citizens as enemy combatants. But only if the government claims that those
citizens are a threat to national security, so don’t worry, really. The NDAA is legislation
that has been passed by the federal government for each of the past 48 fiscal years. The
act establishes the budget, logistics and organization of the Department of Defense for
that given year. It’s nothing less than remarkable, in the most disturbing way possible,
then, that a tedious, business-as-usual act could be home for loop holes in such a
fundamental American right as habeas corpus. H.R. 1540: National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, as passed by the House on Dec. 15, still contains
the provisions that have garnered criticism, outrage and panic from citizens and groups
like Oath Keepers, Infowars and Anonymous. While it is much less threatening than
previous versions, the criticism falls largely on Subtitle D Detainee Matters, especially in
sections 1031 and 1032. Section 1031 subsection A reaffirms the president’s authority to
use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military
Force, which includes the power to detain covered persons pending disposition under the
law of war.? Subsection B gives the definition of covered persons as any person (which
of course would include U.S. citizens by the wording) that aided in 9/11 or supported al-
Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United
States or its coalition partners. What disposition under law of war means is that someone
accused of affiliation with a terrorist group can face detention under the law of war
without trial until the end of the hostilities, or a military trial, where citizens aren’t
guaranteed rights such as trial by a jury of peers. The only difference between being
treated as a citizen and an enemy combatant becomes the accusation by the executive
branch that you aided or abetted terrorists. Here’s where things get confusing. Section
1031 subsection E was added, which states, Nothing in this section shall be construed to
affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens or any
other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.? But Section 1032
subsection B, Applicability to U.S. Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens is specifically
included to note that the executive branch is not required to treat citizens as enemy
combatants. Stripping a citizen of rights is, instead, purely optional. But the most
appalling apart of the NDAA is seemingly snuck in with semantics. Section 1032 also
includes subsection A, paragraph 4, Waiver for National Security, which apparently
allows the Secretary of Defense to waive the requirement criteria of being terrorist-
affiliated. And paragraph 3 says that section 1032?s definitions apply to section 1031, the
section that stated that the rights of U.S. citizens wouldn’t be affected. It’s enough to
make heads spin. In a congress that can’t stop bickering long enough to pass a budget that
keeps the nation afloat, it is shocking that the U.S. senate can readily unite against liberty
in a 93-7 vote in favor of such a massively unpopular bill. They’ve repeatedly said how
badly we need a more flexible detention policy for national security, but at what cost?
Are they supposed to listen to each other, or to us? President Obama had promised to
veto the bill, but on Dec. 14 the White House announced that it would not be vetoing the
bill. The good news is that provisions were added to attempt to make NDAA apply less to
U.S. citizens, and language was removed from the bill in July that would have allowed
the federal government to use military forces anywhere there were terrorism suspects,
which would’ve authorized military operation on U.S. soil. But controversial sections
1031 and 1032 remain, and the fact that this years NDAA used to be even worse seems
like little consolation. The reality is that, even as a compromise, this act is a threat to
constitutional rights and a massive step in a horribly wrong direction. This is an abusive
expansion of presidential power. A petition exists to lobby for the president to veto the
bill, but after the formal announcement that he no longer intends to do so, it seems in
vain. Instead, concerned citizens can do their part by staying informed and alert for any
further legislation and staying actively engaged in government. We can each do our part
by writing to our congresspersons to make sure that our voices are heard.
Sincerely,
Paula

Floor Statement In Memory of Colleen Monson Bangerter - Blog... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ab83eb74...

Blog
Aug 02 2011
Floor Statement In Memory of

Colleen Monson Bangerter
Mr. President, I stand to address this body to honor the life of one of Utah's
great citizens, a good friend of mine, former Utah Governor Norman
Bangerter who announced on Saturday that his beloved wife of 58 years had
passed away after a long-time battle with Alzheimer's disease.
Colleen Monson Bangerter having been born in 1935 was the mother of six
children, the mother also of one foster son, and, in many respects, was the
friend to all of Utah's three million residents.
She served faithfully in many capacities including as PTA president and

other offices within the PTA. She also served faithfully in a variety of
positions as a member of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
Just a few years ago, she and her husband, former Governor Bangerter
presided over the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints mission in
South Africa. They worked hand in hand in raising their children, in running
the Governor's campaigns and in running the state throughout his time as
Governor , which wasn't an easy time for our state.
During Governor Bangerter’s two terms in office, the state faced financial
difficulties, flooding challenges, and the Bangerters served the conditions
well, serving as standing examples for all the citizens of Utah for what it
means to rise to the challenge of adversity.
Colleen Bangerter had many friends in many corners. And she had many
talents, including the fact she was the state hopscotch champion in Utah in
1947. There are not many first ladies who can claim that distinction and she
definitely did. She was the recipient of the highest award granted by the Boy
Scouts of America, which she received a few years ago.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:03 PM
Floor Statement In Memory of Colleen Monson Bangerter - Blog... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=ab83eb74...
But of all the honors, including the honors that went along with being the
First Lady of the state of Utah and serving with someone who in my opinion
was one of the great governors ever to serve our state, her greatest honor, her
greatest prize was that of her family. She loved being a mother, loved each of
her six children, their 30 grandchildren and 18 great grandchildren.
Today, we as Utahans mourn the loss of this great citizen of our state. We
mourn the loss of this friend and our thoughts and our prayers go out to
former Governor Bangerter and his family.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/8/floor-
statement-in-memory-of-colleen-monson-banerter
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:03 PM
Meeting Utah's Finest - Blog - Press Office - Mike Lee, United S... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=779e3e0a...

Blog
Oct 12 2011
Meeting Utah's Finest

Today, I had the opportunity to meet the brave men and women of the 744th
Engineer Company of the Army Reserve. The company is based out of
Ogden, Utah, and was mobilized in October 2010 for deployment to
Afghanistan in November of that year. While there, the 744th supported the
301st Maneuver Enhancement Brigade by helping to sustain Brigade Combat
Teams with maneuver support and area support operations and by carrying
out engineer missions, consequence management and stability operations in
support of full spectrum operations, all while protecting the force. While
deployed, one of the unit’s soldiers was killed in action, and one soldier was
lost to suicide. I was honored to meet these exemplary Americans and
cannot thank them enough for their service.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/10/meeting-
utah-s-finest
1 of 1 2/3/12 1:05 PM
Jell-O with the Senator
My staff and I want my Washington D.C. office to be a place where visitors from Utah feel at home. Every
Wednesday at 3:30 p.m., we host "Jell-O with the Senator." All are invited to come meet me and enjoy a
serving of Utah's official state snack.
Dates and times are subject to change, so if you are planning on visiting my office during one of these
events, you are welcome to call ahead for a confirmation - 202-224-5444.
Here is the text from the bill passed by the Utah State Legislature designating Jell-O as the official state
snack:
This Senate resolution of the Legislature recognizes Jell-O® brand gelatin as a favorite snack of
Utah.
Be it resolved by the Senate of the state of Utah:

WHEREAS, Jell-O® brand gelatin was introduced to the country in 1897, just one year after Utah was
admitted to the Union as the 45th state;
WHEREAS, Utah has been the number one per capita consumer of Jell-O® brand gelatin for many
years;
WHEREAS, Jell-O® is representative of good family fun, which Utah is known for throughout the
world;
WHEREAS, Salt Lake Magazine proclaimed Utah "the Jell-O® State" in a cover story in 1996;
WHEREAS, Jell-O® brand gelatin recipes, which often include bananas, apples,
marshmallows, pretzels, carrots, and grapes, are a traditional favorite at family, church, and community
dinners throughout the Beehive State;
WHEREAS, in 1997, Salt Lake Tribune editorial cartoonist Pat Bagley drew a week-long series of
political cartoons showcasing Jell-O® in Utah in conjunction with the 100th anniversary of Jell-O®;
WHEREAS, a 2002 Winter Olympic pin was designed that featured a bowl of green gelatinand has
become a valuable collector's item;
WHEREAS, when Des Moines, Iowa edged out Salt Lake City as the capitol of Jell-O® gelatin
consumption in 1999, it sparked front page stories in Salt Lake City's newspapers;
WHEREAS, Utahns rallied to "Take Back the Title" as Chef Scott Blackerby hosted a recipe contest in
the Hotel Monaco's Bambara Restaurant and Pat Bagley ran a cartoon persuading Utahns to purchase more
Jell-O® gelatin;
WHEREAS, throughout 2000, Brigham Young University students campaigned to make Utah's love of
Jell-O® official at festivals and fairs throughout Utah;
WHEREAS, more than 14,000 signatures have been collected from the people of Utah in support of the
campaign to select Jell-O® as the Official Snack of Utah; and
WHEREAS, due to these and many other efforts, Salt Lake City has now successfully recaptured the
title:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Senate of the state of Utah recognize Jell-O® as a
favorite snack food of Utah.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to Kraft Foods, Inc.

Senator Lee’s 2011 Interns

Spring 2011

Trevor Hoyt – Utah
Kate Cannon – BYU
Mitchell McBride – Weber

Summer 2011

Maren Bishop – Weber
Austin Rich – Utah
Sarah Jane Curtis – BYU
Alisha Rogers – BYU
Kirsten Frank – USU
Scott Melis – Utah

Danny Morris – Utah (Salt Lake Office)
Max Chaffetz – Utah (Salt Lake Office)

Fall 2011

Suzette Swallow – BYU
Candice Backus – UVU
Jashon Bishop – USU
McKall Killpack – USU
Taylor Williams – BYU
Brittney Park – SUU
Scott Nielson -‐ BYU

Sarah Elledge – Utah (Salt Lake City Office)

Spring 2012

Adam Anderson -‐ BYU
Sam Bloxham -‐ SUU
Hannah Fjeldsted -‐ USU
Cassidy Florence -‐ Utah
Elyse Greiner -‐ Weber
Trevor Long -‐ UVU
Maren Sargent -‐ BYU
Lauren Sutherland -‐ UVU
Spencer Thueson – Utah
Kelli Young -‐ USU

Andrea Christensen -‐ Utah (Salt Lake Office)
Jordan Linford – UVU (Salt Lake Office)
Rick Smith – Dixie (St. George Office)

Number of Interns by University

Univeristy of Utah 9
BYU 7
BYU 1
USU 5
Weber 3
SUU 2
UVU 4
Dixie 1
Photo Contest for Senator Lee's Website - Blog - Press Office -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/blog?ID=204dc752...

Blog
Apr 29 2011
Photo Contest for Senator Lee's

Website
I would like to invite everyone to submit their pictures of our beautiful state
to my website photo contest. We will display the winners on the featured
header area of our permanent website.
I am honored to represent the most beautiful state in the nation, and I want
my website to prove it.
Even if your picture isn't selected to be on the featured area, there are many
other places on the website where we will be using the submitted pictures.
To enter, please visit my Facebook Page, and click on the contests link on
the left. We are running the contest through Facebook to make it easy to
share with your friends, and to allow for a public voting period.
If you want to learn more, you can read our Official Rules.
We are looking forward to receiving a lot of great submissions!
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:53 PM
Utah Press Connection

The Utah Press Teleconference is a weekly call held for members of the Utah press.
All journalists are invited to join the call on Tuesdays at 3:30pm MST to receive an
update on Senator Lee’s activities in the Senate, and to ask him questions on any
topic of interest. The call provides weekly, open access to Senator Lee for Utah
media.

Members of the press from the following news outlets participated in the call during
2011:

• ABC 4
• Daily Herald
• Daily Universe
• Davis County Clipper
• Deseret News
• Fox 13
• KCPW
• KDXU
• KNRS
• KTKK
• KUER
• KVNU
• Lincoln Brown Show
• Mid-‐Utah Radio
• Salt Lake Tribune
• The Spectrum
• Uintah Basin Standard
• Utah Public Radio

Utah Senator Mike Lee updates constituency on divided
Congress, jobs bill
Will spend the rest of the week in Utah visiting voters
Sep 27, 2011, 4:32 pm

By Mitch Staley
• Sen. Lee reported on the American Jobs Act of 2011 and recent Senate voting
• Lee will be in Utah visiting with constituents until the end of this week
Utah Senator Mike Lee held a Utah press teleconference Tuesday to update local media on
activities taking place in Washington, D.C.
Sen. Lee highlighted the Senate’s recent vote on a continuing resolution that will keep
government running through November and noted he will be in Utah the remainder of this week
meeting with constituents.
When asked for his thoughts on President Barack Obama’s recent legislation, the American Jobs
Act of 2011, he said, “[The bill] hasn’t moved forward, but [Senator] Harry Reid said it will get
more attention next week.”
The U.S. Senate will be back in Washington next week.
“If we engage in more of the same it’s not reasonable to expect that a little more of the same will
get better results,” Lee said.
The legislation proposed by Obama has yet to gain sponsorship in the House of Representatives.
In response to press questioning whether or not the split divisiveness in Congress would provide
any real progress in Washington, Lee said he sees some hope in compromise.
“There is tremendous opportunity for compromise in tax reform,” he said. “There is a large
appetite for tax reform. There is a decent possibility that there will be proposals to reform the tax
code from the Senate Super Committee.”
Late last week, Lee questioned Google executive chairman, Eric Schmidt at a Senate Judiciary
Committee about Google ranking their own products in search results and whether or not the
process limits competition.
“[I] was not proposing how he [Schmidt] should run his business,” Lee said. “I was questioning
how Google’s own products are ranked in search results.”
Lee said in a news release, “I had hoped to hear the company acknowledge the responsibilities
that accompany its preeminent position in the Internet search market and address concerns many
have raised about Google’s possible anti-competitive activities. Unfortunately, I fear that some of
the testimony in today’s hearing may only encourage those who are calling for legal enforcement
or government regulation.”
Sen. Lee defends Huntsman from claims of disloyalty
By Jennie Christensen
Story Created: May 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM MST
Story Updated: May 12, 2011 at 5:24 PM MST
Was former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, Jr. being disloyal when he accepted a job as
Ambassador to China in the Obama administration then left the post early, reportedly to run for
President on the Republican ticket?
U.S. Senator Mike Lee, R-Utah, says no. Lee does not believe that Huntsman did anything
wrong.
"It didn't appear to me that the President was offended by it," Lee said in a teleconference. "I
don't think the President regards it as an act of disloyalty, the fact that he might exercise his
Constitutional right to run for political office or state opinions that are contrary to those of the
administration."
Lee says Huntsman did not announce a candidacy while he was an ambassador and, in fact, he
has not yet announced that he is running for President.
Utah Prairie Dogs at the Center of Endangered Species Battle
Dan Bammes (2011-11-01)
PARAGONAH, UT (kuer) - The Utah Prairie Dog is listed as a threatened species under federal
law, but if you ask some people in Iron County, it's not nearly threatened enough. They'd like to
see the animals disappear, especially from the airport in Parowan and the cemetery in Paragonah.
There's a new proposal to take that protection away - and critics think it's a new attack on the
Endangered Species Act as well as the prairie dogs.
Jeff Rice recorded prairie dogs chattering in Bryce Canyon National Park, where the population is
growing and people enjoy seeing them. But in Paragoonah, 25 miles north of Cedar City, Mayor
Connie Robinson drives around with a stuffed prairie dog on her dashboard. It has a target on the
front and back. She's been trying for years to get rid of the critters in the city cemetery, where
they dig their tunnels through the grass and even into graves.
Robinson sees the ongoing battle with the prairie dogs as a sign her community isn't getting the
respect it deserves. "How would Arlington Cemetery accept something like this? They wouldn't,"
she says. "They'd get right on it, wouldn't they? And yet, every flagpole you see here's a veteran.
And we don't get the same acknowledgement that we're important."
Robinson met with other local officials and Congressional staffers at the Paragoonah cemetery in
August, and that produced a bill that's been introduced both in the U-S House and the Senate. It's
called the Protecting Public Safety and Sacred Sites from the Utah Prairie Dog Act of 2011, and it
has the backing of all five members of Utah's Congressional delegation.
It points out another area where the Utah Prairie Dog is unwelcome - the Parowan airport.
Parowan airport manager Dave Norwood points out places where prairie dogs have dug burrows
under and through the asphalt on the runway and the tarmac. He's worried a plane landing at the
airport could catch a wheel in one of the spots where the pavement has collapsed on top of a
burrow.
He also points out areas where the prairie dogs threaten the electrical cables for the runway lights.
"You can see, if you see the burrow extending out right here. That's where he's dug under there
and the aircraft have pushed it down inside."
The F-A-A, the U-S Fish and Wildlife Service and the city of Parowan are preparing to spend
almost 400-thousand dollars to build an underground fence to protect the runway.
That may be unnecessary if the bill passes Congress. It would allow the city to shoot or poison
prairie dogs that remain on the property.
But the critters may not be the only target. Critics say they're also part of a broader effort to
weaken the Endangered Species Act and its protection for unpopular animals in the West.
"Our organization sees this move as part of a larger pattern," says Taylor Jones, the endangered
species advocate for Wild Earth Guardians, which has been working to protect prairie dogs across
the West. "Congressional members have sought to weaken the ESA for a decade and longer and
that may have escalated in the last six months or so. It started with Republicans and Democrats
delisting wolves in the northern Rockies by a controversial Congressional rider on a spending
bill, and since then there have been several efforts to Congressionally prevent other species."
Democratic Congressman Jim Matheson represents Iron County, and he's met frequently with
county officials on the issue. That's one reason he says the Endangered Species Act is due for
reform. "It's been around for decades and Congress has never really taken a look at it," he
says."And there's no question that in its implementation there are inefficiencies and there are
things we've learned over the last few decades about the Endangered Species Act that, in my
opinion, warrant us taking a look at how to make it work better."
Republican Senator Mike Lee says the prairie dog issue is typical of what happens when federal
agencies exercise too much authority. "These are far from the only problems that have arisen
under the Endangered Species Act, or even under the protection of the Utah Prairie Dog. So I
would not expect this to be the last, the only effort I undertake in this area."
The agency caught in the middle of this debate is the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. It's
been responsible for implementing the federal management plan for the prairie dogs, and it's
spent about 85-thousand dollars a year trapping them and moving them to safer places like Bryce
Canyon National Park.
Doug Messerle, the southern region supervisor for DWR, says the Congressional action could
have unintended consequences, such as ending the species' eligibility for federal money to
mitigate the impacts caused by prairie dog colonies. "I presume that if they're no longer a
threatened species that they won't be eligible for endangered species mitigation fund money or
Fish & Wildlife Service Section 6 money," he says. That's the money being used to build the
fence at the Paragonah cemetery and the underground fence around the airport.
Messerle thinks a better idea is a revision of something called Rule 4-D. The current version
allows farmers to kill prairie dogs raiding their alfalfa fields.
Laura Romin with the U-S Fish and Wildlife Service says a proposed revision would extend that
to sensitive places like the Parowan airport and the Paragoonah cemetery. She says public
comment on the revision focused on eliminating the prairie dogs from sensitive sites. "One of the
big things that we're trying to work on now with the airport and the cemetery is getting fencing to
keep the prairie dogs out of the area where we don't want them," says Romin. "Then we can move
the prairie dogs out and they won't come back in."
But there's no deadline for issuing the revised rule, and Paragoonah Mayor Connie Robinson is
skeptical about the fences. She'd like to see Congress simply bypass the Endangered Species Act
in her cemetery. And she says that's the general feeling of people in Iron County. "It's not so
much the dogs, it's just the way it's being enforced and on their property. And I know a lot of
people kill em. And I can't blame em."
In the meantime, the prairie dogs of southern Utah keep an eye out for hawks, unaware that
Congress may pose a greater danger to them than anything they can spot when they poke their
heads out of their burrows.
The bill called the Protecting Public Safety and Sacred Sites from the Utah Prairie Dog Act of
2011 has been introduced in both the House and the Senate and assigned to committees, but no
hearing dates have been set.
Lee: Focus on Counterrorism in Afghanistan, Draw Down Troops
05.11.2011 by Jeff Robinson
(KCPW News) Freshman Utah Senator Mike Lee isn’t aggressively calling for U.S. troops to be
withdrawn from Afghanistan, like Congressman Jason Chaffetz, but the Republican does want to
see a shift in the war’s focus, and that means less of them. Lee told reporters yesterday it’s time to
look at ramping up counterterrorism through special operations.
“Focusing on counterterrorism would allow us to undertake a very substantial troop drawdown

process,” said Lee. “I do think that’s where we’re headed, and that’s certainly where I’m inclined
to go.”
Lee said the mission has to be focused on protecting U.S. national security, so the strategy can’t
be cut and run.
“And so that’s why I say perhaps we ought to look at drawing down our troop levels so as to rely
more heavily, almost exclusively on a counterterrorism effort that would rely principally on
special operations,”
Regarding Osama bin Laden’s death, however, Lee expects it will only have a subtle effect on
what Congress thinks about the Afghanistan strategy. Instead, he thinks the larger factor is how
long the war has been going on, and how much it’s contributed to the national debt.
Lee's bill would extend stay for immigrant dairy workers,
sheep herders
By Amy Joi O'Donoghue , Deseret News
Published: Tuesday, Oct. 18 2011 5:46 p.m. MDT
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has introduced a bill called the DASH Act, or the Dairy and Sheep H2A,
which aims to help fix that problem by extending the length of time temporary foreign workers
can stay in the United States on a visa. (Ravell Call, Deseret News)
MIDWAY — Mike Kohler says he remembers the days on the family dairy farm in this valley
when the harvest was ready and local kids would line up to help bring in the hay and do other
chores.
Those days of abundant local labor, he said, have disappeared in the last decade, leaving the dairy
industry along with sheep herding and goat herding in a lurch when it comes to a dependable
labor pool.
"Back then, the locals were eager to do it," he said. "There were a large number of kids who
wanted to work, help with the hay, whatever, and you just can't find it anymore. It's too
laborious."
Perhaps the competition has grown stiffer with the city jobs available, Kohler guesses, or maybe
it is that farm work can be downright dirty, the hours long and the physical demands great.
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has introduced a bill called the DASH Act, or the Dairy and Sheep H2A,
which aims to help fix that problem by extending the length of time temporary foreign workers
can stay in the United States on a visa.
Instead of regulatory language that only allows a stay to be "seasonal," the revisions would allow
permitted guest workers to continue their employment on a dairy farm or as a herder for three
years.
In a Washington D.C., teleconference hosted by Lee on Tuesday, the junior Utah senator said the
fix is a simple one for a large problem that threatens the agricultural industry around the country.
"With a seasonal visa, workers return home each year, which works fine with some truly sub-
agricultural industries," Lee said. "It doesn't make as much sense for the dairy industry and the
sheep herding industry, which is year round."
Kohler, who is head of the Dairy Producers of Utah, said seasonal time frames work well for fruit
and other crops but are impractical for the demands of a dairy farm.
"It's many odd hours and certain types of jobs, many of them require extensive training. You keep
somebody here for nine months, they really like it and are just starting to figure out how to do it,
and then you send them home."
The Food and Agricultural Policy Institute at Texas A&M University has been urging revisions,
saying that the program is not working as it was intended and fewer than 5 percent of U.S. farms
use the H2A program.
Lee said what his bill would not do is establish a legal path to citizenship and a renewal would be
required.
"It's relatively unremarkable. It does not create a new visa where one doesn't exist," Lee said.
"You can only hear about an issue so many times as a senator when you start thinking about how
to remedy the problem. I decided it was time to move forward."
Senator Mike Lee responds to criticism over mission to kill
Osama bin Laden
Updated: 5/04/2011 1:26 am | Published: 5/03/2011 6:18 pm

Reported by: Noah Bond
"If we had gone through the step of trying to get their permission. I suspect we may have lost the
opportunity to take him (Osama bin Laden) out," - Sen. Mike Lee R-Utah
WASHINGTON D.C. (ABC 4 News) - Rookie Utah Senator Mike Lee is responding to criticism
from Pakistan about the mission to kill Osama bin Laden.
The Pakistani government says it will not tolerate another secret mission within its borders, but
this statement is not going over well among leaders in the United States.
The U.S. has given billions of dollars to Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies, but its
leaders could not tell the U.S. bin Laden was living in a mansion in less than a two hour drive
from the nation's capitol.
U.S. officials told Pakistan's leaders the temperature is rising in Washington over Pakistan's
reaction.
"If we had gone through the step of trying to get their permission. I suspect we may have lost the
opportunity to take him out," said Sen. Mike Lee R-Utah. "You think there is corruption in the
Pakistani Government?" asked ABC 4's Noah Bond. "There is corruption in almost every
government," replied Lee.
Either Pakistan's government didn't know bin Laden was in the country or knew and didn't act.
Leaders in Pakistan say Osama bin Laden would have been arrested if his whereabouts were
known.
Lee: ‘It was an exciting victory for our country’
Tom Busselberg
May 09, 2011
WASHINGTON, D.C. — “It was really a big victory, an exciting thing for our country.”
That’s how Sen. Mike Lee characterized U.S. military operations that saw the country’s long-time
“Enemy Number One” killed last Sunday in Pakistan.
“We (the Senate) voted on a resolution congratulating our troops for their operation” in removing
bin Laden, he said of action he was involved with at the nation’s Capitol just prior to Lee’s
telephone press conference held earlier this past week (the Clipper was included).
“I continue to be very pleased with and proud of our troops,” Utah’s new junior senator said. “At
the same time, our thoughts are with the victims if 9-11.
“I commend the Obama Administration for keeping this manhunt going. It sends a strong
message to the world, that if you attack the U.S., we will pursue you, and keep going until we
find you – and we did,” he emphasized.
“We need to look closely at our relationship with Pakistan. It was definitely an emotional day,”
he said.
“There were speeches on both sides” of the immigration reform debate, Lee said, turning to other
issues raised by media representatives.
“There was a lot of passion, and unfortunately some booing here and there – not altogether
pleasant. But the interesting thing was the two sides were not quite as far apart as many of them
appeared to be,” Lee said.
“There was a fair amount of agreement on a couple of things. The present immigration system
isn’t working so well. The state suffers from mandates it faces, which are not always
accompanied by federal funding.
“Amnesty is not always the answer. There’s a lot of agreement on that,” he said of Utah’s HB116,
which would allow for a guest worker program between the U.S. and the Mexican state of Nuevo
Leon.
“There are two points of view, one which supports HB116 and one which doesn’t. I’ve indicated
there is no provision in existing federal law that would allow for an administrative waiver to the
state to allow the state to create the kind of guest worker program that HB116 appears to
contemplate. It would require a legislative change,” said Lee, an attorney by training.
“This has started a discussion” that could bring interesting developments in the future, he said.
“My primary emphasis is we need to fix legal immigration. For those who have opportunities for
legitimate, gainful employment in the U.S., particularly where we’ve demonstrated a high
demand for migrant labor, we ought to make it easier for people to get the visas they need, from
employers and workers’ perspective.
“I’m looking at a couple of options to do that. Comprehensive immigration is going to be difficult

in this environment. Things are so polarized,” Lee continued.
As far as any lawsuit against the state by the United States Department of Justice against HB 116,
Lee said “it wouldn’t surprise me” if a suit were filed.
“There is no move on the part of the state to even implement HB116 yet,” the senator said.
“The effective date is still more than two years away. It’s not clear to me the state is even
planning on taking any steps in the near term that would be likely to trigger a lawsuit.”
Legis
lative
Activi
ties
Uni
tedSt
atesSenat
or
Mi
keLe
e
Pres
sIndex
Uni
tedSt
atesSenat
or
Mi
keLe
e
Managing the Prairie Dog in Iron County - Op-Eds - Press Office... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=194996...

Op-Eds
Oct 03 2011
Managing the Prairie Dog in Iron

County
During August, I had an opportunity to see up close and personal just how
damaging the prairie dog has been to certain portions of southern Utah.
Both public and private lands have been affected and Utahns are right to
demand that local and state officials do something about it.
Unfortunately, federal laws that are outdated, unfair, and irresponsible have
hampered efforts to respond. Currently, the Endangered Species Act insists
that when determining an official protected species designation only prairie
dogs on public land be counted. This represents a gross understatement of
the actual population of prairie dogs in southern Utah, and has wrongly
resulted in the designation of the animal as a “threatened” species. State and
local officials are therefore prevented from properly managing the prairie
dog population.
In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Service is only allowed to eliminate prairie
dogs on lands that are considered agricultural areas. This regulation has had
a disastrous effect on Iron County’s Paragonah cemetery and Parowan
airport. Recently, the Utah delegation has unified behind legislation, known
as the ‘Protecting Public Safety and Sacred Sites from the Utah Prairie Dog
Act,’ that would address the desecration of cemeteries and the public safety
hazards created by this senseless federal regulation.
While much more needs to be done to address the larger problems managing
the prairie dog population, I stand ready to work with our federal delegation
to update our laws, protect the property rights of Utahns, and assist our state
and local officials.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:23 PM
DASH Act: Small Piece of the Immigration Puzzle - Op-Eds - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=e0f6f01...

Op-Eds
Oct 25 2011
DASH Act: Small Piece of the

Immigration Puzzle
The American agricultural industry is critical to the stability of our nation’s
economy. Unfortunately, few Americans are willing to work in many
agricultural jobs, and outdated visa laws prevent business from attracting
temporary foreign workers to fill the shortage.
In Utah, dairies and ranches need year-round help, but many temporary farm
workers are only able to obtain seasonal visas. To address this problem, I
have recently introduced the Dairy and Sheep H2A Act, (or “DASH Act”)
along with Senator Chuck Schumer of New York. Our bill would make
dairy workers, sheep herders, and goat herders eligible to apply for
year-round positions through the H2A visa program. Visas for such workers
would have an initial term of three years and could be renewed for additional
periods of three years without requiring workers to return to their home
countries.
Unlike other legislation, the DASH Act would in no way provide a legal
path to citizenship and would require workers who do not obtain a proper
renewal to go home.
Immigration involves a complicated and difficult set of issues. Rather than

attempt to fashion an all-or-nothing “comprehensive” approach aimed at
solving every problem simultaneously, it makes more sense to address each
challenge individually and make real progress towards our country’s larger
objectives.
For example, making certain types of legal immigration more efficient and
fair diminishes the incentive for some to come here illegally or overstay their
visas. This is the principle behind the DASH Act. Streamlining the process
by which we identify, process, and oversee temporary workers coming to our
country to do agricultural work will strengthen our nation’s economy.
1 of 2 2/3/12 1:23 PM
DASH Act: Small Piece of the Immigration Puzzle - Op-Eds - P... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=e0f6f01...
The DASH Act is one small piece of the immigration puzzle. In the coming
months, I will be pushing for further progress in other immigration related
areas, such as reforming birthright citizenship and strengthening our
E-Verify system.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/10/dash-
act-small-piece-of-the-immigration-puzzle
2 of 2 2/3/12 1:23 PM
Tapping America's Energy Future - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mik... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=744267...

Op-Eds
Oct 25 2011
Tapping America's Energy

Future
published in 10/13/2011 Edition of Vernal
(UT) Express
President Obama has spent weeks telling Congress to pass his flawed second
stimulus bill, which he erroneously believes will put Americans back to
work with another round of wasteful government spending on bloated
programs and failed investments.
Noticeably absent from the president’s agenda, however, is a significant push

to tap more of our vast natural resources in order to expand domestic energy
production and achieve energy independence for the first time in decades. To
simply ignore the potential that lies beneath American soil is to handicap the
nation’s economic future.
An aggressive domestic energy plan would create hundreds of thousands, if

not millions, of new jobs at a time when they are desperately needed. A
recent study by consulting firm Wood Mackenzie found that over 1.4 million
jobs would be created in the United States—50,000 in Utah by 2020—by
adopting a variety of pro-energy policies, including re-opening the outer
continental shelf to oil and natural gas exploration and production,
approving the Keystone XL pipeline that will deliver oil from Canada, and
easing excessive restrictions on hydraulic fracturing or “fracking.” The study
supports the notion that federal bureaucracy is strangling job growth, and
that the best job creation program Washington can adopt is getting the
government out of the way.
Unlike President Obama’s plan, which borrows close to $500 billion from
China and increases our national debt, cutting red tape doesn’t cost a dime.
In fact, making the described changes in policy could produce hundreds of
billions of dollars in additional government revenue over the next twenty
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:23 PM
Tapping America's Energy Future - Op-Eds - Press Office - Mik... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=744267...
years.
If we give businesses the freedom to move the country towards energy

independence, the effects will be enormous. Wood Mackenzie estimates the
equivalent of nearly 60 billion barrels of oil in combined oil and natural gas
would be made available. By 2030, those additional reserves would increase
total U.S. oil and gas energy production by nearly 50% over current policy
projections.
The American Gas Association estimates that the amount of recoverable

natural gas that exists in the United States would be enough to last for more
than a century. We can power a renewed American economy for decades by
merely taking advantage of what’s sitting right under our feet.
Congress is already considering legislation that would move the country

towards that goal. The American Energy and Western Jobs Act (S. 1027)
would streamline the oil and natural gas leasing process while encouraging
the exploration of oil shale resources in the West, and require President
Obama to create goals for American oil and natural gas production in the
region.
The Jobs and Energy Permitting Act (S. 1226/H.R. 2021) would eliminate
uncertainty and confusion caused by the EPA’s decision-making process for
air permits. The Domestic Jobs, Domestic Energy, and Deficit Reduction Act
(S. 706/H.R. 1287) would create a timeframe for environmental and judicial
review of energy projects, require the Interior Department to move forward
with offshore energy exploration, and open the Alaska National Wildlife
Refuge for oil and natural gas exploration.
The good ideas are not limited to fossil fuels. The Utilizing America’s
Federal Lands for Wind Energy Act (H.R. 2172) would streamline the
application process for renewable energy projects on federal property. The
Exploring for Geothermal Energy on Federal Lands Act (S. 1470/H.R. 2171)
would do the same for various proposed geothermal projects. These bills,
and others, can be part of a permanent solution to our nation’s energy
dependence problems.
There is no better time for Americans to begin the process of fulfilling the
potential created by our bountiful energy resources. President Obama may
want to stretch the national credit card to benefit favored political groups,
but such a plan is fundamentally irresponsible when there are simple,
straightforward ways to take advantage of proven methods of energy
production that will actually help to shrink the deficit as they expand
American payrolls. Congress should support the policies that will truly win
the future.
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:23 PM
Sen. Lee: Avoiding the Trojan horse BBA - Op-Eds - Press Offic... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=85048e...

Op-Eds
Nov 15 2011
Sen. Lee: Avoiding the Trojan

horse BBA
Not all balanced-budget amendments are created equal, as the American
people are about to find out. The recent deal that raised the debt limit and
created the so-called supercommittee mandates that both houses of Congress
vote on a constitutional amendment requiring Congress to balance the
federal budget.
Several versions have been proposed in recent months, and others will
surface as the deadline to vote nears. The most important task for Congress
is to determine which version will actually serve to restrain government
spending and prevent the American economy from collapsing under the
weight of its own debt.
Washington has a long and unhappy history of well-intentioned but

ultimately unsuccessful attempts at spending reform. In the 1980s, the
so-called Gramm-Rudman reforms called for automatic spending cuts if
annual deficits exceeded specified targets. Yet budget deficits surpassed the
Gramm-Rudman targets every year the law was in effect because Congress
simply circumvented the automatic cuts. The overall framework was
discarded after only a few years.
Next came pay-go (“pay as you go”) rules, which required spending cuts or
tax increases to offset any new spending. For the next decade, however,
clever politicians used accounting gimmicks to avoid these rules and
continue deficit spending. In recent years, congressional Democrats passed
new pay-go rules but waived or simply ignored them on no fewer than 26
spending bills between 2007 and 2010.
With mounting deficits at record levels and a national debt now larger than
our entire economy, Americans have a renewed interest in imposing a strict,
structural and enforceable spending restraint on Congress. But not all
1 of 3 2/3/12 1:23 PM
Sen. Lee: Avoiding the Trojan horse BBA - Op-Eds - Press Offic... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/op-eds?ID=85048e...
balanced-budget amendments are alike.
Congress can pass and the states can ratify language that amends the
Constitution to require the federal government to balance its budget. But if
the amendment, like a Trojan horse, is filled with loopholes and avenues to
circumvent the balanced-budget requirement, it will do little to rein in
out-of-control spending.
At a minimum, a meaningful balanced-budget amendment must include four

essential provisions. First, it must apply to all spending. Some have already
suggested taking Social Security and other entitlement spending “off
budget,” but doing so would allow Congress to ignore the greatest drivers of
our nation’s deficit.
Second, the amendment must cap spending at the average historical level of
federal revenue as a percentage of gross domestic product. Over the last 40
years, revenue has averaged just above 18 percent of GDP, while spending
now approaches 25 percent — a trend that, if not reversed, will bankrupt the
country with mathematical certainty.
Third, it must require a supermajority vote in both houses of Congress to

raise taxes. Maintaining an easy path to extract new revenue from the
productive sector of the economy diminishes Congress’s incentive to
prioritize spending and use taxpayer dollars wisely.
Finally, the amendment must require a supermajority vote in Congress to

raise the debt limit. Over the past two decades, both parties have eagerly
borrowed trillions of dollars from foreign countries rather than reforming
government spending habits. A strong, enforceable spending restraint will
make borrowing a measure of last resort.
All 47 Republican senators have co-sponsored legislation, SJ Res 10, which

contains all four of these protections. A similar measure has been introduced
in the House. If Congress is serious about dealing with our fiscal crisis, it
will oppose efforts to pass a phony, watered-down version of the balanced-
budget amendment and will instead send a strong spending restraint to the
states for ratification.
Originally published in The Hill
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/sen-lee-
avoiding-the-trojan-horse-bba
2 of 3 2/3/12 1:23 PM
Senator Lee calls on Secretary Salazar for disclosure of key do... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jan 06 2011
Senator Lee calls on Secretary

Salazar for disclosure of key
documents, meeting
A new Department of Interior policy may
hinder economic growth for Utah economy
WASHINGTON, DC—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today sent a letter to
Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to request that all
communications relating to Secretarial Order 3310 be disclosed to the
public. The Senator also asked for a personal meeting to discuss this major
policy that will detrimentally impact Utah communities.
“The policies set forth by Secretary Salazar will increase uncertainty for
Utah businesses that involve federal lands, and also hinder energy
production at a time when developing domestic energy sources is so
critical,” said Senator Lee. “This order will result in lost jobs, investment
and revenues at a time when we can least afford it. I will not sit idly by while
the federal government puts a chokehold on our most valuable resources.”
The order allows the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to designate areas
with wilderness characteristics as “Wild Lands” and to retain their
wilderness characteristics. This designation imposes the most restrictive land
use policies available, placing severe limitations on public access, inhibiting
energy producing activities, and forbidding motorized and mechanized
recreation.
In addition to the negative impact this policy will have on Utah’s economy,
Interior’s action undercuts previous assurances given to Utah’s elected
officials.
“Simply relabeling these lands as ‘Wild Lands’ seems to be a game of
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:18 PM
Senator Lee calls on Secretary Salazar for disclosure of key do... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
semantics,” said Senator Lee, “and is an unacceptable departure from

Secretary Salazar’s previous assurances.”
lee-calls-on-secretary-salazar-for-disclosure-of-key-documents-meeting
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:18 PM
Senator Lee receives committee assignments - Press Releases - ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jan 26 2011
Senator Lee receives committee

assignments
Positions will allow Senator to focus on
issues important to the State of Utah
WASHINGTON, DC—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today received
committee assignments for his first term, which include seats on the
Judiciary; Energy and Natural Resources; Foreign Relations; and Joint
Economic committees.
“I’m thrilled about these committee assignments and look forward to having
an active role in each. These seats will allow me to work on issues that are
crucial to the Utah delegation, as well as the country as a whole. It’s time for
the real work to begin.”
Serving on the Energy and Natural Resources committee has been of

particular interest to Senator Lee, Energy and Natural Resources committee,
which will enable him to focus on freeing up federal lands for economic uses
to create jobs, encourage economic growth and lead the U.S. towards energy
independence. The Senator also plans to work towards creating greater
certainty for regulations and bringing the lands under more local control.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is chaired by Senator Patrick J. Leahy

(D-VA), and is responsible for holding hearings prior to the Senate votes on
confirmation of federal judges. Senator Lee’s background in Constitutional
law and his time serving as Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s law clerk
have well-prepared him for this assignment.
The Foreign Relations Committee is chaired by Senator John Kerry (D-MA)

and addresses issues of national security, U.S. boundaries, as well as foreign,
economic, military, technical and humanitarian assistance.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:18 PM
Senator Lee receives committee assignments - Press Releases - ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
The Joint Economic Committee is lead by Congresswoman Maloney

(D-NY), and is a bicameral committee composed of 10 members from the
Senate, and ten from the House of Representatives. The committee provides
continuous attention to matters relating to the U.S. economy.
The Senate is divided into twenty committees to accommodate for the high
volume and complexity of the legislation at hand. Committee assignments
are made by senior party members.
lee-receives-committee-assignments
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:18 PM
Lee Calls for Antitrust Oversight Hearings on Google - Press Re... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 11 2011
Lee Calls for Antitrust Oversight

Hearings on Google
Senator emphasizes importance of a
competitive Internet economy, cites
concerns about Google's possible abuse
of its predominant position and the need
for vigorous antitrust oversight.
Washington, DC - Senator Michael S. Lee (R-UT) today called for the
Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Subcommittee to conduct an
oversight hearing on Google Inc. Lee joins Chairman Herb Kohl in
encouraging hearings on the business practices of the dominant search firm.
Lee is Ranking Member of the Subcommittee.
In a letter to Kohl, Lee noted that those who follow the tech industry, as well
as those responsible for enforcing antitrust laws, have concerns that Google
could be acting to harm competition.
“The powerful position Google occupies in the general search arena creates
myriad opportunities for anticompetitive behavior,” Lee writes. “The Deputy
Director for Antitrust within the Bureau of Economics at the Federal Trade
Commission, Howard Shelanski, recently observed that a ‘hypothetical
search engine’ with various ‘scale and network economies’ might become a
‘must have’ for consumers and thereby more effectively engage in
‘anticompetitive discrimination.’”
Given its prominent position in the search and search-advertising markets,

Google in some ways acts as a gatekeeper over a variety of Internet
businesses.
In particular, Lee’s letter points to Google’s proposed acquisition of ITA
1 of 5 2/3/12 12:22 PM
software, which could potentially provide Google with the ability to control
the travel search vertical market, currently populated by sites like Kayak,
Travelocity, and Orbitz.
“Google’s position as the preeminent search engine may be abused so as to

disadvantage competing vertical search sites to the detriment of advertisers
and internet users,” Lee writes.
Lee adds that Google’s acquisition of personal data through searches and its
many products, such as Gmail, Google Checkout, Google Books, and
Google Web History, couldpresent serious privacy issues.
“Google’s powerful position as an Internet gatekeeper reduces the

company’s incentive to compete with other search engines by providing
enhanced privacy protection for consumers.”
“The combination of behavioral and personal information enables Google to

generate consumer data that is unprecedented in scale and scope. These
activities raise serious privacy concerns and may be indicative of an
important market that is largely unconstrained by competition. Antitrust
enforcement may unlock beneficial competition for the protection of user
privacy and avert the need for additional privacy regulation.”
Utah has a growing tech sector with several large companies set to expand
their businesses in the state, and was awarded Forbes “Best State for
Businesses” in 2010.
“As an increasing number of companies with an online presence expand and

create jobs, we want to make to maintain and competitive and business-
friendly environment,” Lee said.
The full text of Senator Lee’s letter to Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl is
included below:
March 10, 2011
The Honorable Herb Kohl

Chairman
Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
2 of 5 2/3/12 12:22 PM
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Chairman Kohl:
I write to express my strong concerns relating to Google Inc.’s possible

abuse of its predominant position in the general internet search arena and the
need for vigorous antitrust oversight and enforcement in this area. As the
new ranking member of the Antitrust Subcommittee, I look forward to
working with you to hold a hearing on this important issue. I recognize and
applaud your efforts in this area of vital importance.
The proper functioning of our nation’s free-enterprise system is critical

during the current economic downturn. Enforcement of the antitrust laws is
especially important for sectors in which the United States has been a leader,
such as the e-commerce and online advertising industries. Antitrust
enforcement is far preferable to the creation of inefficient government
regulation and bureaucracy that could hamper innovation in these crucial
industries. Internet search is of particular concern to me because Utah –
recently labeled by Newsweek as the “new economic Zion” due to its
growing number of high tech businesses – has a significant interest in
preserving open competition in this importantarea of our economy.
Many commentators, as well as those responsible for enforcing antitrust

laws, have voiced serious questions concerning whether Google has acted to
harm competition. Given its prominent position in the search and search
advertising markets, Google in some ways acts as a gatekeeper over a
variety of internet businesses. Among other things, commentators have
expressed concern that Google may be using its position to harm specialized
(or so-called “vertical”) search sites. If allowed to compete free of restraints,
vertical search sites – such as travel, mapping, and shopping sites – could
attract users and advertisers from Google’s search platforms. Some vertical
search sites have accused Google of using its power to deprive those
websites of internet traffic by biasing the display of its search-advertising
and search results.
Likewise, some claim that Google may disadvantage rivals in subtle,

potentially undetectable, ways. Indeed, Google’s founders recognized as
early as 1998 that “a search engine could add a small factor to search results
from ‘friendly’ companies, and subtract a factor from results from
competitors” and that “[t]his type of bias is very difficult to detect but could
still have a significant effect on the market.”[1] Whether this type of
3 of 5 2/3/12 12:22 PM
behavior is occurring is a question of great practical significance. The

powerful position Google occupies in the general search arena creates
myriad opportunities for anticompetitive behavior. The Deputy Director for
Antitrust within the Bureau of Economics at the Federal Trade Commission,
Howard Shelanski, recently observed that a “hypothetical search engine”
with various “scale and network economies” might become a “must have”
for consumers and thereby more effectively engage in “anticompetitive
discrimination.” According to Shelanski, “once one realizes there could be
an application . . . that is more essential to consumers than any particular
downstream network, then the locus of possible bottleneck discrimination . .
. shifts upstream.”[2]
The DOJ has extensively analyzed bias in the display of airfares to travel
agents on airline-owned computerized reservation systems (“CRSs”) and
concluded that “[p]erhaps the most effective and insidious method by which
an airline can use a CRS with market power to punish other carriers for
competing with it is secretly to bias the system in favor of the host carrier.”
The DOJ went on to point out that “[b]ias influences, and may mislead, the
travel agent who uses CRS in such a way as to cause airline ticket revenues
to shift from competing carriers to the host.”[3] In a similar way, Google’s
position as the preeminent search engine may be abused so as to
disadvantage competing horizontal and vertical search sites to the detriment
of advertisers and internet users. As you know, the DOJ is in the process of
determining whether to approve Google’s proposed acquisition of ITA
Software – a deal that could potentially provide Google with the ability to
control the travel search vertical market.
In addition to its consideration of the contemplated ITA acquisition, I believe

the DOJ should also investigate whether Google’s powerful position as an
internet gatekeeper reduces the company’s incentive to compete with other
search engines by providing enhanced privacy protection for consumers.
Google collects an unequaled amount of information about consumers
through its search platform, including data about web searches, reactions to
online advertising, and precise geographic location for both mobile devices
and personal computers. Google also gathers an enormous amount of
consumer information through its related products and services, including
Gmail, Google Checkout, Google Books, and Google Web History. Google
has admitted that for nearly three years it used its Street View mapping
service – without notice or consent – to access unprotected Wi-Fi networks
and amass extensive information about theinternet activities of American
consumers in all 50 states. The combination of behavioral and personal
information enables Google to generate consumer data that is unprecedented
in scale and scope. These activities raise serious privacy concerns and may
be indicative of an important market that is largely unconstrained by
competition. Antitrust enforcement may unlock beneficial competition for
4 of 5 2/3/12 12:22 PM
the protection of user privacy and avert the need for additional privacy
regulation.
Oversight by our Subcommittee is essential in helping free markets flourish

in this important area of our economy. Ensuring robust competition will
benefit consumers, spur innovation, and lead to job creation in our nation’s
high-tech internet economy. Utah, ranked by Forbes magazine as the “Best
State for Business” in 2010, will likewise benefit from the preservation of
competition in this area. Vigorous antitrust enforcement is almost always
preferable to a system of government regulations, which will inevitably be
more costly and less efficient than a free market unencumbered by
anticompetitive restrictions.
I very much appreciate your efforts in this regard and look forward to our
work together.
Sincerely,
Michael S. Lee
Ranking Member
Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/3/lee-calls-
for-antitrust-oversight-hearings-on-google
5 of 5 2/3/12 12:22 PM
Bipartisan Coalition of Senators: Stop and Study Proposed Debi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 15 2011
Bipartisan Coalition of
Senators: Stop and Study
Proposed Debit Card Rule
Proposed Fed rule will have unintended
consequences for consumers, community
banks, credit unions
(U.S. SENATE) – Senators Jon Tester (D-MT), Bob Corker (R-TN), Jon Kyl
(R-AZ), Ben Nelson (D-NE), Tom Carper (D-DE), Pat Roberts (R-KS),
Chris Coons (D-DE), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Pat Toomey (R-PA) today
introduced legislation to protect consumers, small businesses and rural and
small community banks and credit unions from a proposed rule regarding
transaction fees on debit cards.
“Price controls are almost always problematic,” said Lee, who is Ranking
Member on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy
and Consumer Rights. “If the rule remains in place, retailers, banks and
consumers will lose out in the long run through higher costs and limited
choices. I believe we can form a better solution that does not unnecessarily
burden small businesses and local financial institutions or pass fees on to the
customer. The delay in implementing the rule will allow us to find options
that benefit everyone.”
The bipartisan coalition of Senators today introduced the Debit Interchange

Fee Study Act in response to concerns of the impact of a proposed rule from
the Federal Reserve on consumers and small businesses.
The Federal Reserve is proposing a rule that will cap the interchange fee per
debit card transaction at 12 cents, regardless of the size of the transaction.
Consumer advocacy organizations have raised concerns that this proposed
rule will significantly impact consumers because small banks may limit the
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:24 PM
Bipartisan Coalition of Senators: Stop and Study Proposed Debi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
size of a debit card transaction or end free checking services.
The Debit Interchange Fee Study Act suspends implementation of the

proposed rule and calls for a two year study of debit interchange fees.
“The stakes are simply too high to move forward with this rule without a
closer look at the impact on consumers, credit unions, community banks, and
the small businesses and jobs they sustain” said Tester, a member of the
Senate Banking Committee. “That is why we need to make sure we stop and
study these proposed rules before implementing anything.”
“The federal government shouldn’t be telling private companies what they

can charge for goods and services; that’s price fixing, and that’s exactly what
the Durbin amendment does,” said Corker, a member of the Senate Banking
Committee. “The hastily passed Durbin amendment will have numerous
unintended consequences for debit card users, including reduced access and
increased fees. I’m sympathetic to retailers’ concerns and am open to a better
solution, but the Durbin amendment isn’t the answer.”
“I’m concerned that the proposed rule dictating debit card interchange fees
willhave a harmful effect on consumers, small banks and credit unions,”
Carper said. “This legislation will allow Congress and federal regulators to
take a thoughtful pause and avoid unintended consequences.”
“The government should not be in the business of setting price controls on

any product and implementing this rule would set a precedent for that,” said
Roberts. “We need more time to sufficiently review this regulation, because
failing to get it right ultimately means it will fall on the backs of consumers,
merchants and financial institutions, including our small community banks.
And at a time when Americans are watching every penny, we cannot afford
to let that happen.”
"The concerns raised by Fed Chairman Bernanke and FDIC Chairman Sheila
Bair about the potential harm to credit unions and community banks require
further study of the unintended consequences of this rule," Coons said. "Any
government regulation of interchange fees should yield some tangible
consumer benefit, but the Fed's current cap offers no such guarantee. Further
study will help yield a more thoughtful, long-term solution."
A copy of the S. 575 can be found online HERE.
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:24 PM
Lee, McCain Submit Bill to Reduce Ownership of Federal Lands... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 17 2011
Lee, McCain Submit Bill to

Reduce Ownership of Federal
Lands
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee of Utah and Senator John
McCain of Arizona introduced legislation to reduce federal ownership of
certain public lands and allow the land to be sold for more productive
purposes. The bill directs the Secretary of Interior to dispose of federal lands
identified in a 1997 Clinton Administration report deemed suitable for sale.
Under this legislation, the amount of land sold would be equal to roughly
1% of all land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and less than
one half of one percent of all federal land. Representative Jason Chaffetz,
also of Utah, recently introduced a similar bill in the House.
“It’s been more than a decade since the land was deemed suitable for
disposal and there is no critical need for the federal government to hold on to
it,” said Senator Lee. “The sale of the land alone could generate more than a
$1 billion, and there is further economic benefit of putting the land to good
use. That will mean jobs, future growth, and better prosperity for the
surrounding areas.”
“It’s good for the state of Utah and I am happy to work with Senator McCain
and my fellow Utahn Representative Chaffetz in the House in supporting the
move.”
“The federal budget, much like the household budgets of millions of

American families, is stretched alarmingly thin in today’s fiscal climate,”
said Senator McCain. “Congress must explore all possible avenues for
reducing our $1.4 trillion deficit and ballooning $14 trillion national debt.
Our legislation aims to reduce the federal estate in a way that’s mindful of
how we currently manage our public lands and seeks to dispose land that the
federal government simply does not want.”
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:25 PM
Lee Condemns Cowardly Act in Jerusalem - Press Releases - Pr... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 24 2011
Lee Condemns Cowardly Act in

Jerusalem
WASHINGTON—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) issued the following statement
today on the bombing in Jerusalem:
“The senseless murder of an innocent woman and the harm done to more
than twenty bystanders is reprehensible andshould be condemned as a
cowardly act. It is a reminder that our allies remain targets and, as much as
our attention has been directed at domestic affairs, we should stay vigilant in
the war against terrorism. The thoughts and prayers of millions of Americans
are with the families of those struggling to survive this attack, and our
support is firmly behind Israel as they root out those responsible and bring
them to justice.”
/lee-condemns-cowardly-act-in-jerusalem
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:25 PM
Sen. Lee and Rep. Bishop Introduce Land Conveyance Legislati... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Mar 30 2011
Sen. Lee and Rep. Bishop

Introduce Land Conveyance
Legislation for Mantua, Utah
Bill Transfers Three Parcels from Federal
Government to Town of Mantua
WASHINGTON– Today, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Congressman Rob
Bishop (R-UT) introduced legislation to transfer three parcels of federally
owned land in Box Elder County to the town of Mantua, Utah. Specifically,
The Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance Act would convey nearly 32 acres of
land that could be used by the community for multiple purposes, including
the potential development of a new city cemetery, a new town hall, fire
station, park or elementary school.
The parcels of land included in this legislation are located on the south end
of town below 100 South and west of Main Street and Willard Peak Road.
They are part of a larger tract originally owned by Hans Rasmussen, an early
settler of Mantua, whose family deeded the land to the U.S. Forest Service in
1941 for $1.00. Under this legislation, the city of Mantua would not be
required to pay for the land, but would assume all costs associated with
surveying and development.
“It is a testament to the growth of our state and cities like Mantua that
this bill is necessary,” said Senator Lee, who sits on the Energy and Natural
Resources Committee. “The city can use the land productively and the
federal government has no pressing need for it. With the help of Rep.
Bishop, I hope we can move this bill quickly through Congress.”
“There is absolutely no valid reason why the federal government should

maintain ownership of this land, which has sat vacant and virtually
unused for decades, when it could otherwise be utilized by the town of
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:25 PM
Sen. Lee and Rep. Bishop Introduce Land Conveyance Legislati... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
Mantua to meet the current challenges associated with its growth and
expansion,” said Congressman Bishop, whose district encompasses all of
Box Elder County. “The parcels of land we’re asking to have conveyed
are relatively small in size but would have a significant impact on the
future of this community.”
In addition, Senator Lee is also introducing legislation to return forest

service land to the town of Alta for a community center and fire station.
and-rep-bishop-introduce-land-conveyance-legislation-for-mantua-utah
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:25 PM
Lee: Lack of Libya Debate "Shameful and Discouraging" - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Apr 05 2011
Lee: Lack of Libya Debate

"Shameful and Discouraging"
Along with Senator Rand Paul, Senator Lee recently cosponsored a
resolution that stipulated: “The President does not have the power to
unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve an
actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
The quote comes from remarks then-Senator Barack Obama made in 2007.
Today, Senator Paul offered the resolution as a motion to the pending
business on the floor and requested just 30 minutes for debate. Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid denied the request and only allowed 10 minutes
for debate, then sought to table the motion to avoid a vote on it. The vote to
table the motion passed.
“We channel the war power in the Constitution so as to make sure these
discussions always come to the forefront, always be brought up by the
elected representatives of the people in Congress,” Lee said on the Senate
floor just before the vote. “And for that reason, although we give power to
the President to be the Commander in Chief in Article Two of the
Constitution, in Article One of the Constitution we reserve that power – that
power to declare war to Congress.
“This is how we guarantee the people’s voice will be heard and that people’s
sons and daughters won’t be sent off to war without some public debate and
discussion by those who have been duly elected by the people and stand
accountable to the people.”
Lee’s remarks were cut short as time expired.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:26 PM
Lee Expresses Comments on DoJ Decision Regarding Google-I... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Apr 08 2011
Lee Expresses Comments on

DoJ Decision Regarding
Google-ITA
Washington, DC – Today, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), Ranking Member of
the Antitrust Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary,
commented on the Department of Justice’s decision to impose stringent
conditions on Google’s acquisition of ITA Software and reiterated his call for
antitrust oversight of Google’s search-related businesses.
“Today’s announcement by the Department of Justice (DOJ) outlining

rigorous conditions for Google’s proposed acquisition of ITA Software is an
important step in applying antitrust laws to the company’s predominant
position in the realm of Internet search,” said Senator Lee. “As the DOJ
recognized, Google’s unique presence as an Internet gatekeeper raises
serious concerns about activities that may limit competition, reduce
consumer choice, and thwart innovation. Continued scrutiny is essential as
Google extends its reach into a variety of vertical search markets and online
services. As a member of the Antitrust Subcommittee, I will continue to
work to ensure vibrant competition in this and other areas of our economy.”
On March 10, 2011, Senator Lee sent a letter to the Subcommittee Chairman
Senator Herb Kohl calling for oversight hearings into Google’s practices that
could harm competition, and specifically pointed to the acquisition of ITA
Software, which powers sites like Kayak, Travelocity, and Orbitz.
“As you know, the DOJ is in the process of determining whether to approve
Google’s proposed acquisition of ITA Software – a deal that could
potentially provide Google with the ability to control the travel search
vertical market,” Senator Lee wrote.
“Oversight by our Subcommittee is essential in helping free markets flourish

in this important area of our economy. Ensuring robust competition will
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:27 PM
Lee Expresses Comments on DoJ Decision Regarding Google-I... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
benefit consumers, spur innovation, and lead to job creation in our nation’s
high-tech Internet economy,” Senator Lee added. “Vigorous antitrust
enforcement is almost always preferable to a system of government
regulations, which will inevitably be more costly and less efficient than a
free market unencumbered by anticompetitive restrictions.”
/lee-expresses-comments-on-doj-decision-regarding-google-ita
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:27 PM
LEE: Merger Should be Guided by What is Best for Consumers ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
May 11 2011
LEE: Merger Should be Guided

by What is Best for Consumers
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee said the proposed merger
between AT&T and T-Mobile to create the largest wireless carrier in the
country should be reviewed carefully to ensure the best outcome for
consumers. Lee, the Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee’s
Antitrust Subcommittee, said that he favors market approaches to developing
mobile networks, but that care should be taken to ensure the merger
preserves robust competition nationally and from smaller regional carriers,
promotes consumer choices, and encourages innovation.
“An important question before our Subcommittee today is whether the

proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile is a positive step along the
path to world-class wireless broadband throughout the United States,”
Senator Lee said during his opening remarks this morning. “A merger
between the two companies may provide significant and immediate
efficiencies that will enable enhanced service quality, fewer blocked or
dropped calls, and increasing data speeds.”
“At the same time, I share some of the concerns expressed by my colleague,
Senator Kohl, and believe it is our responsibility—along with the
Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Communications
Commission—to ensure that the proposed merger would not produce
damaging anticompetitive effects,” he added.
“A critical question, therefore, is whether the smaller regional carriers can

effectively compete in a post-merger market,” Lee said, citing potential
conflicts regarding the smaller carriers’ access to data roaming networks and
the most popular devices, like iPhones.
Lee concluded: “Our analysis of the proposed merger between AT&T and
T-Mobile should be guided by what will be best for consumers—in the form
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:28 PM
LEE: Merger Should be Guided by What is Best for Consumers ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
of prices, service quality, and range of choice.”
See Senator Lee’s full remarks here>>
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/lee-merger-
should-be-guided-by-what-s-best-for-consumers
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:28 PM
Lee Condemns President's Statement on Israel's borders - Press ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
May 19 2011
Lee Condemns President's

Statement on Israel's borders
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee criticized President Obama’s
call for Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders. He released the following
statement:
"I condemn in the strongest possible terms the President's irresponsible

suggestion that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders. I agree with Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that this move would leave Israel in a
militarily indefensible position.”
/lee-condemns-president-s-statement-on-israel-s-borders
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:29 PM
Lee Opposes Appellate Court Nomination - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
May 19 2011
Lee Opposes Appellate Court

Nomination
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee expressed his profound
objection to the nomination of Goodwin Liu as a Judge on the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In a speech on the Senate floor, Senator Lee
articulated two primary reasons for opposing the nomination.
“First, I am truly dismayed by the lack of judgment displayed in Professor

Liu’s 2006 testimony regarding the confirmation of Samuel Alito as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,” said Lee, a member of the Senate
Judiciary Committee and former Assistant U.S. Attorney.
During the confirmation hearing of Justice Alito, Liu made controversial and
inflammatory remarks misrepresenting Justice Alito’s judicial record.
“His comments about Justice Alito were offensive not simply because they
were unhelpful in his confirmation process, but because they were a
misleading and unwarranted personal attack on a dedicated public servant.”
“Professor Liu’s treatment of Justice Alito, and his last minute and
incomplete handling of the concerns raised by his remarks, lead me to
believe that he lacks the judgment and discretion to be confirmed to a
life-tenured position in the judiciary.”
Senator Lee also explained that “the judicial philosophy espoused by

Professor Liu is fundamentally inconsistent with the judicial mandate to be a
neutral arbiter of the Constitution and to uphold the rule of law.”
“Throughout the course of numerous speeches, articles, and books, Professor

Liu has championed a philosophy that in my judgment is incompatible with
faithfully discharging the duties of an appellate court judge in our
constitutional republic,” he added.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:28 PM
Lee Opposes Appellate Court Nomination - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
Lee concluded: “Professor Liu’s appalling treatment of Justice Alito leaves

grave doubt in my mind as to whether he possesses the requisite judgment to
serve as a life-tenured judge. And I have come to the conclusion that
Professor Liu’s extreme judicial philosophy is simply incompatible with the
proper role of a judge in our constitutional republic. For these reasons, as
well as those articulated by many of my colleagues, I am compelled to
oppose this nomination.”
Click Here for Senator Lee's Full Remarks
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/5/lee-opposes-
appellate-court-nomination
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:28 PM
Lee Applauds Salazar's Decision to Abandon 'Wild Lands' Policy... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 01 2011
Lee Applauds Salazar's

Decision to Abandon 'Wild
Lands' Policy
SALT LAKE CITY – Today, Senator Mike Lee applauded the decision by
Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar to not designate any lands as “Wild
Lands” in accordance with the 2011 Continuing Resolution. Senator Lee also
indicated he stands ready to work with the Utah state legislature and other
state and local officials to evaluate current wilderness study areas.
“Secretary Salazar has rightly recognized that Congress, and not the
Department of the Interior, has the authority to designate wilderness areas;
he has also recognized the importance of working with federal, state and
local representatives in managing federal land,” said Senator Lee, who sits
on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. “With nearly 70 percent
of Utah lands under federal control, it is critical that we have a say early in
the process to protect the rights of Utahns and all Americans to access and
use federal lands.”
Last December, Secretary Salazar issued a controversial order directing the

Bureau of Land Management to designate areas with wilderness
characteristics as “wild lands,” a move that was widely seen as an end run
around Congress’s authority to designate wilderness areas. Within weeks,
Senator Lee sent a letter to Secretary Salazar requesting all documents
regarding the formation of the new policy, including meeting notes,
electronic and hard-copy correspondence, and any maps that include Utah
lands affected by the order.
Salazar’s failure to respond to the request forced Senator Lee to take other
measures in order to encourage compliance. He indicated he would put a
“hold” on the nomination of Dan Ashe as Director of the Fish and Wildlife
Service until all documents pertaining to the formulation of the “wild lands”
policy had been turned over. After more than four months, the Secretary’s
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:29 PM
Lee Applauds Salazar's Decision to Abandon 'Wild Lands' Policy... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
office is expected to comply with the document request this week.
Today’s news was welcomed by Senator Lee as an acknowledgment that the

Interior Department cannot and should not act unilaterally to impose a
highly restrictive land use policy.
“The ‘wild lands’ policy that was abandoned by the Secretary today would
have harmed the Utah economy, prevented job growth, blocked domestic
energy development, and resulted in less revenue for our state,” Lee added.
“I appreciate that the Secretary has shifted his position and we can now work
together with state and local officials to determine the future designation of
our current wilderness study areas.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/lee-applauds-
salazar-s-decision-to-abandon-wild-lands-policy
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:29 PM
Bishop, Chaffetz, Hatch, Lee Introduce Bill to Protect Utah fro... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 14 2011
Bishop, Chaffetz, Hatch, Lee

Introduce Bill to Protect Utah
from Presidential Monument
Designations
WASHINGTON – Congressman Rob Bishop (UT-01), Chairman of the
House Natural Resources National Parks, Forests and Public Lands
Subcommittee, today introduced the Utah Lands Sovereignty Act, which
would protect Utah from future national monument designations made by
Presidential executive order. Congressman Jason Chaffetz (UT-03)
co-sponsored the bill and Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Mike Lee
(R-UT) introduced companion legislation in the Senate. In 1950, Congress
passed a law that prohibited the future establishment of national monuments
in Wyoming except as authorized by Congress. This legislation would
provide Utah with the same level of protection.
Last year, Congressman Bishop obtained the internal Treasured Landscapes

memo created by the Department of Interior that lists as many as 14 possible
new national monuments, two of which are located in Utah. In total, the
memo, which has since generated a groundswell of opposition across the
West, identifies as many as 13 million acres of federally owned land and
approximately 26 million acres of private land as areas that could potentially
be subject to national monument designations.
“We have seen far too many attempts by this Administration to circumvent
the open congressional process in order to execute their political agenda—
the Treasured Landscapes memo is just one of the many examples. While
I’m not necessarily opposed to national monuments, I do not support efforts
to create new designations, locking up thousands of acres of land, without
the support of our local communities, residents and stakeholders,” said
Congressman Bishop. “Last week’s remarks made by former DOI Secretary
Bruce Babbitt are a reminder that the Antiquities Act is still being
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:30 PM
considered as an avenue to lock up millions of acres of public lands. It is

clear that former Secretary Babbitt isn’t in the business of protecting
hard-working Utahns, and is instead looking to fulfill the agendas of a
handful of radical special interest groups. This legislation provides a
necessary safeguard to protect Utah from future national monument
designations made through executive fiat.”
During a press conference held on June 08, 2011, former Department of

Interior (DOI) Secretary Bruce Babbitt suggested that the President use the
Antiquities Act as executive fiat to pressure Congress into implementing
restrictive new land management policies. Babbitt stated that, “By voicing
his willingness to use the Antiquities Act as an alternative to Wilderness
designation, the president can bring Congress to the table to work out
conservation measures acceptable to reasonable stakeholders.” He went on
to say that, “the best way to defend the Antiquities Act is for the president to
use it.” [read the entire transcript here]
“Utahns are all too familiar with the consequences of presidential

administrations creating national monuments without public input or
congressional approval. We have been living with lost jobs, economic
inactivity and other fallout from the creation of the Grand Staircase-
Escalante National Monument since 1996. National monuments should not
be created in secrecy and without the consent of Congress, this bill will
ensure that they won’t here in Utah,” said Senator Hatch.
“The Antiquities Act is a misguided and outdated law that lends itself to
abuse by the Executive Branch. The Utah Lands Sovereignty Act improves
the law to ensure local input is considered. Decisions regarding control of
our public lands rightfully belong to those closest to the situation and those
most likely to be impacted. Management of our public lands must reside in
the hands of elected officials who are accountable to their local
constituencies. Congressional, state, and local leaders are the ones best
equipped to manage these precious resources, and to make decisions
regarding their future,” said Congressman Chaffetz.
“Proponents who have abused the system suggest Utah is being ‘honored’
with national monument designations. Frankly, Utah has been ‘honored’
enough. We lost nearly 2 million acres when the Clinton Administration
created the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument without any input
from Congress or state officials. This bill will prevent that from happening
again,” said Senator Lee.
The 1906 Antiquities Act allows the President to unilaterally designate new
national monuments through executive order. This legislation would ensure
that all future national monument designations in Utah are subject to the
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:30 PM
open Congressional process, which would provide Utahns and other

westerners with the opportunity to have their voices heard. Former President
Bill Clinton used the Antiquities Act in 1996 to unilaterally designate the
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah without ever
consulting the public or state, local and federal officials.
The total number of acres targeted as possible new national monuments in

the Treasured Landscapes memo is more than the states of Connecticut, New
Jersey, Delaware and Rhode Island combined.
Connecticut: 3, 548,160 acres

New Jersey: 5, 582,080 acres
Delaware: 1, 250,560 acres
Rhode Island: 988, 800 acres
Total: 11, 369, 600 acres
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/bishop-
chaffetz-hatch-lee-introduce-bill-to-protect-utah-from-presidential-
monument-designations
3 of 3 2/3/12 12:30 PM
Senators Call on President to Shift Strategy in Afghanistan - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 15 2011
Senators Call on President to

Shift Strategy in Afghanistan
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Mike Lee (R-UT)
and Tom Udall (D-NM) and 24 other senators sent a letter to President
Obama today calling for a shift in strategy in Afghanistan ahead of next
month's announced deadline to begin an accelerated transition to Afghan
security forces. In the letter, the senators urge the President to use the
deadline as an opportunity to begin a “sizable and sustained” drawdown of
troops that puts the U.S. on a path toward removing all regular combat
troops from the country.
Along with Merkley, Lee and Udall, the following senators have signed on
to the letter: Max Baucus (D-MT), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Jeff Bingaman
(D-NM), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Maria Cantwell
(D-WA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Richard Durbin
(D-IL), Al Franken (D-MN), Kirsten Gillibrand(D-NY), Tom Harkin (D-IA),
Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), FrankLautenberg (D-NJ),
Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Patty Murray (D-WA),
Rand Paul (R-KY), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Charles E. Schumer (D-NY),
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden
(D-OR).
In their letter, the senators noted that the primary objectives for U.S.
involvement in Afghanistan have been largely met – including the removal
of the Taliban government that sheltered al Qaeda, the killing of Osama bin
Laden and the disruption of terrorist networks allied with Al Qaeda and
those who planned the Sept. 11th attacks on the United States. Noting those
successes and the ability to pursue counter-terrorism and humanitarian goals
without a massive nation-building effort, the senators wrote, “the costs of
prolonging the war far outweigh the benefits. It is time for the United States
to shift course in Afghanistan.”
“We urge you to follow through on the pledge you made to the American
1 of 4 2/3/12 12:30 PM
people to begin redeployment of U.S. forces from Afghanistan this summer,

and to do so in amanner that is sizable and sustained, and includes combat
troops as well as logistical and support forces. We look forward to working
with you to pursue a strategy in Afghanistan that makes our nation stronger
and more secure,” the letter says.
The full text of the letter is below:
June 15, 2011
The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
We write to express our strong support for a shift in strategy and the
beginning of a sizable and sustained reduction of U.S. military forces in
Afghanistan, beginning in July 2011.
In 2001 the United States rightfully and successfully intervened in

Afghanistan with the goals of destroying al Qaeda's safe haven, removing
the Taliban government that sheltered al Qaeda, and pursuing those who
planned the September 11 attacks on the United States. Those original goals
have been largely met and today, as CIA Director Leon Panetta noted last
June, "I think at most, we're looking at maybe 50 to 100, maybe less" al
Qaeda members remaining in Afghanistan.
In addition, over the past few years, U.S. forces have killed or captured
dozens of significant al Qaeda leaders. Then, on May 2, 2011, American
Special Forces acting under your direction located and killed Osama bin
Laden. The death of the founder of al Qaeda is a major blow that further
weakens the terrorist organization.
From the initial authorization of military force through your most recent
State of the Union speech, combating al Qaeda has always been the
rationale for our military presence in Afghanistan. Given our successes, it is
the right moment to initiate a sizable and sustained reduction in forces, with
the goal of steadily redeploying all regular combat troops.
There are those who argue that rather than reduce our forces, we should
maintain a significant number of troops in order to support a lengthy
counter-insurgency and nation building effort. This is misguided. We will
never be able to secure and police every town and village in Afghanistan.
2 of 4 2/3/12 12:30 PM
Nor will we be able to build Afghanistan from the ground up into a

Western-style democracy.
Endemic corruption in Afghanistan diverts resources intended to build

roads, schools, and clinics, and some of these funds end up in the hands of
the insurgents. Appointments of provincial and local officials on the basis of
personal alliances and graft leads to deep mistrust by the Afghan
population. While it is a laudable objective to attempt to build new civic
institutions in Afghanistan, this goal does not justify the loss of American
lives or the investment of hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars.
Instead of continuing to be embroiled in ancient local and regional conflicts

in Afghanistan, we must accelerate the transfer of responsibility for
Afghanistan's development to the Afghan people and their government. We
should maintain our capacity to eliminate any new terrorist threats, continue
to train the Afghan National Security Forces, and maintain our diplomatic
and humanitarian efforts. However, these objectives do not require the
presence of over 100,000 American troops engaged in intensive combat
operations.
Mr. President, according to our own intelligence officials, al Qaeda no

longer has a large presence in Afghanistan, and, as the strike against bin
Laden demonstrated, we have the capacity to confront our terrorist enemies
with a dramatically smaller footprint. The costs of prolonging the war far
outweigh the benefits. It is time for the United States to shift course in
Afghanistan.
We urge you to follow through on the pledge you made to the American
people to begin the redeployment of U.S. forces from Afghanistan this
summer, and to do so in a manner that is sizable and sustained, and includes
combat troops as well as logistical and support forces.
We look forward to working with you to pursue a strategy in Afghanistan

that makes our nation stronger and more secure.
Sincerely,
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR)

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT)
Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM)
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO)
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
3 of 4 2/3/12 12:30 PM
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD)
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN)
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA)
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY)
Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Sen. RonWyden (D-OR)
call-on-president-to-shift-strategy-in-afghanistan
4 of 4 2/3/12 12:30 PM
Lee Disappointed with Google Response - Press Releases - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 22 2011
Lee Disappointed with Google

Response
WASHINGTON – After Google officially declined the request from the
Senate Judiciary’s Anti-trust Subcommittee to have the company’s Chairman
Eric Schmidt or CEO Larry Page testify before the committee, Ranking
Member Senator Mike Lee released the following statement:
“I'm very disappointed in Google's response to the request to have Larry

Page or Eric Schmidt testify at our subcommittee hearing. I'm committed to
work with Senator Kohl and others on the committee to ensure we have the
opportunity to investigate these issues thoroughly and receive adequate
responses from Google.”
###
Link to full text of original letter found below
/lee-disappointed-with-google-response
Related Files
Letter to Google's Larry Page and Eric Schmidt - Google Kohl Lee LT
61011.pdf (66.7 KBs)
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:31 PM
DeMint, Lee, Paul Offer Bill to Begin Restoring Sound Money -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jun 28 2011
DeMint, Lee, Paul Offer Bill to

Begin Restoring Sound Money
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-South
Carolina), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) introduced the
Sound Money Promotion Act, legislation that would remove the tax burden
on gold and silver coins that have been declared legal tender by the federal
government or state governments. On May 9, the State of Utah became the
first state to recognize such gold and silver coins as legal tender for use
within the state, and similar legislation has been introduced in 12 other
states, including South Carolina.
“Thanks to the government’s reckless over-spending, continued bailouts, and

the Federal Reserve’s easy money policy, this year the purchasing power of
the dollar hit an all-time low in the several decades since we went off the
gold standard,” said Senator DeMint. “In order to rebuild strength and
confidence in our economy, we need both the fiscal discipline to cut wasteful
spending and the monetary discipline to restrain further destructive
monetizing of our debt. This legislation would encourage wider adoption of
sound money measures, and that’s a step in the right direction.”
“Good monetary policy is an important part of a healthy and prosperous

economy,” said Senator Lee. “Since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the
dollar has lost approximately 98 percent of its value. This bill is an important
step towards a stable and sound currency whose value is protected from the
Fed's printing press."
Senator Paul added, "As the government runs massive deficits, uncontrolled
spending, and an increasingly unsustainable debt, governments and the
bureaucrats in charge are often forced to take an easier approach: to
monetize the debt, inflating the currency. These implications can be
devastating, leading to higher interest rates, which lead to higher borrowing
costs and slower economic growth, but most importantly, destroying the
savings and standard-of-living of all Americans. This bill will hold
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:31 PM
DeMint, Lee, Paul Offer Bill to Begin Restoring Sound Money -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
politicians and the Federal Reserve accountable; acknowledging that states

are serious about an alternative to a weakening dollar.”
The warning signs for our economic problems can no longer be ignored:
While the value of a dollar is at historic lows, the value of gold is at

historic highs
Recently Standard & Poor’s downgraded the U.S. outlook from “stable”
to “negative,” meaning there is a 1 in 3 chance of an actual credit
downgrade in the next two years
The world’s largest bond fund has dumped its U.S. debt-related holdings,
over concerns that we will not get our fiscal house in order
The Federal Reserve is now buying 70 percent of U.S. Treasuries, set to

surpass the holdings of both China and Japan combined
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/6/demint-
lee-paul-offer-bill-to-begin-restoring-sound-money
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:31 PM
Lee Calls on Salazar for Clarification on Leasing Process - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 11 2011
Lee Calls on Salazar for

Clarification on Leasing
Process
WASHINGTON – Today Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) sent a letter to Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar requesting clarification on new restrictions that serve
to further prevent the development of America's abundant domestic
resources.
Lee expressed concern that the Master Leasing Plan (MLP) process currently
used by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to reform oil and gas
leasing could be obstructingresponsible exploration for oil and gas. The
MLP is viewed by Lee as an “unnecessary obstacle to an already thorough
and public process.” The letter states:
We understand that the BLM professionals have defended the land use plans
written pursuant to the established Resource Management Plan (RMP)
process and so it remains unclear why the land use plans were deemed to be
insufficient to address any new issues.
Joining Senator Lee on the letter are Sens. John Barrasso (R-WY), Michael
Enzi (R-WY), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John Hoeven (R-ND) and Rep. Rob
Bishop (R-UT).
The letter includes a list of 12 questions and requests written responses in

order to provide clarification of the intent of the MLP policy.
The full text of the letter is attached below.
on-salazar-for-clarification-on-leasing-process
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:33 PM
Lee Demands President to Explain Social Security Threat - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 14 2011
Lee Demands President to

Explain Social Security Threat
WASHINGTON- Today, Senator Mike Lee demanded President Barack
Obama explain to the American people why he is threatening to withhold
Social Security benefits from seniors, rather than seek budget alternatives.
“[W]e're bringing in about $200 billion a month in tax revenue. So there's

more than enough tax revenue there to cover not only Social Security
benefits but also interest on debt and a number of other things as well,”
Senator Lee said from the floor of the Senate.
“That begs the question, why are Social Security beneficiaries the first to be
threatened? Why is it their checks that the President is threatening to
withhold first? There is no explanation to this that he's offered, and I hereby
demand one.
“I think our current retirees deserve more than to be used as pawns in a

high-stakes political game; one that uses fear and uncertainty and doubt
rather than reason and discussion and debate and willingness to
compromise…
“I urge my colleagues and I urge all Americans to work together to find a

solution to this; a solution that need not involve and should not involve
threatening America's most vulnerable, including our retirees who rely each
month on Social Security.”
Earlier today, Senator Lee posted to his website a list of alternatives he said
the President should consider before cutting benefits for Social Security
recipients. The list can be found here.
“Are there no programs in the Energy Department, or Interior, or at HUD

which we could suspend in order to ensure that our seniors receive the
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:33 PM
Lee Demands President to Explain Social Security Threat - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
income they are expecting,” Lee added.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/lee-demands-
president-to-explain-social-security-threat
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:33 PM
Lee: Merger Deserves Careful Review - Press Releases - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Jul 20 2011
Lee: Merger Deserves Careful

Review
statement regarding the proposed AT&T/T-Mobile merger:
“The mobile phone market is a critical component of our nation’s economy

and the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile deserves careful
review. In my view, the merger has the potential to provide significant
network efficiencies that may help alleviate capacity constraints, enable
enhanced service quality, and facilitate expansion of a 4G LTE nationwide
network, which would in turn create opportunities for handset innovation
and continued development of data-rich applications.
“I have confidence that the Department of Justice and Federal

Communications Commission will take steps to ensure that the market
remains competitive and that regional carriers continue to enjoy access to
popular handsets and roaming arrangements on the nationwide networks.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/7/lee-merger-
deserves-careful-review
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:34 PM
Lee Congratulates Barlow on Nomination - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Aug 03 2011
Lee Congratulates Barlow on

Nomination
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Lee congratulated David Barlow on his
nomination as U.S. Attorney for the State of Utah.
“David is a first-rate lawyer who will serve the people of Utah with
distinction,” said Senator Lee. “He graduated top of his class from BYU,
won the prestigious Truman Scholar award, earned his law degree from Yale
Law, and became a partner at one of the country’s top law firms. His
willingness to leave his firm’s partnership, serve in the Senate, and continue
to serve in Utah, speaks volumes about his character.”
Barlow responded, “I am grateful for the confidence of President Obama in

nominating me to be United States Attorney, and for the support of Senators
Lee and Hatch.”
David Barlow’s Bio:
David Barlow obtained his B.A. in Political Science from BYU, where he
graduated first in his class and was one of sixty students nationwide to
receive the USA Today All-USA Award. At BYU, David worked as a
research assistant for Professors David Magleby and Bud Scruggs.
After BYU, David attended Yale Law School as a Harry S. Truman Scholar,
a national award presented to eighty students each year. At Yale Law, David
served as the Submissions Editor for the Yale Law and Policy Review and
externed at the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Haven, as well as the U.S.
District Court for the District of Connecticut.
For most of his career, David has worked in private practice at Sidley Austin
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:36 PM
Lee Congratulates Barlow on Nomination - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
LLP, one of the country's most highly-regard law firms. David has served as
national, regional, and case-specific counsel in pre-trial, trial, and appellate
matters scattered throughout the United States. He has litigated a variety of
cases, including pharmaceutical, contract, insurance, defamation, medical
device, consumer and industrial product, eminent domain, and First
Amendment cases. His cases have run the gamut of size and amount in
controversy from modest, two-party, single jurisdiction cases to billion
dollar mass tort litigation with cases in a majority of state courts and many
federal courts throughout United States. He has played roles as varied as
sole counsel on a case to one of a few national counsel leading a multi-firm
team of hundreds of attorneys.
David has been honored nationally by clients for his legal work and is a prior
recipient of Pro Bono Advocates' Lawyer of the Year Award for work done
on behalf of victims of domestic violence.
David currently serves as Chief Counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee

for Senator Mike Lee. David advises Senator Lee on all legal issues
involved in the business before the Senate Judiciary Committee and the
United States Senate.
/lee-congratulates-barlow-on-nomination
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:36 PM
Senator Lee Responds to Justice Department's Decision to Bloc... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Sep 01 2011
Senator Lee Responds to

Justice Department's Decision
to Block AT&T and T-Mobile
Merger
WASHINGTON – “I am disappointed in the Justice Department’s decision
to seek to block the proposed merger between AT&T and T-Mobile. The
Senate Antitrust Subcommittee received significant evidence that the
transaction could benefit consumers through enhanced service quality,
expanded network capacity, increased data speeds, and continued innovation
of data-rich handset devices and applications. I look forward to reviewing
the Department’s analysis and trust that the merger review process will be
directed towards maximization of consumer welfare.”
lee-responds-to-justice-department-s-decision-to-block-at-t-and-t-mobile-
merger
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:37 PM
Utah Congressional Delegation Introduces Legislation to Addre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Sep 20 2011
Utah Congressional Delegation

Introduces Legislation to
Address Growing Threat From
Prairie Dogs
WASHINGTON – Members of Utah’s Congressional Delegation today
joined together to introduce legislation to address the damage being done by
prairie dogs. Sens. Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee, and Reps. Jim Matheson,
Jason Chaffetz, and Rob Bishop joined together to introduce the Protecting
Public Safety and Sacred Sites from the Utah Prairie Dog Act, which will
permit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take much-needed steps to
protect Utahns from the hazards posed to public safety from prairie
dogs.
Currently, the Fish and Wildlife Service is permitted to remove prairie dogs
only from agricultural areas. However, the animals have done extensive
damage to areas not designated as agricultural, such as the Parowan
Airport’s runway and the Paragonah Cemetery in Iron County. The
legislation introduced by the delegation grants the Fish and Wildlife Service
the ability to remove prairie dogs from airports and cemeteries that are
located within the range of the Utah Prairie Dog. The legislation is the
product of cooperation between the delegation, the City of Paragonah, the
City of Parowan, the Iron County Commission, the Utah Department of
Wildlife Resources, and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Sen. Lee: "While protecting the Paragonah cemetery and Parowan airport are
important, this issue goes beyond the desecration at one burial site or the
public safety hazard of one airport. The very rules that surround the
protection of certain species are outdated, unfair, and have disastrous
consequences. They have an unproportionally negative effect on the
economies of states like Utah, which have large segments of federally owned
land, and often violate basic property rights. This legislation is a small,
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:38 PM
Utah Congressional Delegation Introduces Legislation to Addre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
important step toward properly managing the prairie dog population in

Southern Utah, but much work remains to be done on this issue."
Sen. Hatch: “Just this August, I met with Iron County officials and saw
firsthand the damage prairie dogs have caused across the county. The
county’s hands were tied in dealing with this problem, and this bill will
ensure that the proper resources are dedicated to addressing this public
safety concern. I’m pleased the delegation has been able to quickly come
together and introduce this meaningful legislation to protect the safety and
sanctity of sites across our state.”
Rep. Matheson: “I have heard consistent reports from Iron County officials
–including during my recent visit—about their frustration over efforts to
manage prairie dogs at the cemetery and the airport. Together with the other
members of the Utah delegation, I am working to address Iron County’s
public health and safety concerns.”
Rep. Chaffetz: “The Endangered Species Act is indefensible in this situation.

Utah prairie dogs should not be elevated above the health and welfare of
Utah citizens. I promise to use whatever means necessary to stop bureaucrats
or environmentalist who care more about prairie dogs than people.”
Rep. Bishop: “The policies initially intended to regulate and manage the
Utah Prairie Dog population have become woefully outdated and are
creating a costly and dangerous situation for the state and counties. It is
unfair that Utah must shoulder the costly burden of these irrelevant policies
that no longer reflect the needs of the state. It is far too common these days
that policies created by Washington bureaucrats are causing more harm than
good- the issue regarding the Utah Prairie Dog is no exception. I am glad to
be a part of the delegation efforts to limit the federal government’s ability to
impose and enforce policies that are not in the interest of our state.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/9/utah-
congressional-delegation-introduces-legislation-to-address-growing-threat-
from-prairie-dogs
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:38 PM
Lee Statement on Schmidt Testimony - Press Releases - Press Of... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Sep 21 2011
Lee Statement on Schmidt

Testimony
Today, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) questioned Google CEO Eric Schmidt at a
Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill. He issued the following
statement at the conclusion of the hearing:
As a strong supporter of free markets, competition, and innovation, I was

disappointed by the testimony of Google chairman Eric Schmidt. I had
hoped to hear the company acknowledge the responsibilities that accompany
its preeminent position in the Internet search market and address concerns
many have raised about Google’s possible anti-competitive activities.
Unfortunately, I fear that some of the testimony in today’s hearing may only
encourage those who are calling for legal enforcement or government
regulation. I am hopeful that we can avoid those outcomes, and encourage
Google to take appropriate voluntary action to resolve these concerns.
/lee-statement-on-schmidt-testimony
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:38 PM
Senator Lee's Google Antitrust Hearing Opening Statement - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Sep 21 2011
Senator Lee's Google Antitrust

Hearing Opening Statement
WASHINGTON—Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) today delivered the following
opening statement at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill.
Lee, the ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust
Subcommittee, called for the oversight hearing on Google to review the
company's fair competition practices.
Opening Statement
Senator Mike Lee
“The Power of Google: Serving Consumers or Threatening

Competition?”
September 21, 2011
Internet Gatekeeper
Internet search is critical to economic growth in the United States and
Google has long been a dominant force in this arena. Indeed, Americans
“Google” so frequently and ubiquitously that the company’s name has
become a generic verb that means “to search the Internet.”
In the United States, Google controls somewhere between 65 and 70 percent

of general Internet search, more than 75 percent of paid search advertising,
and 95 percent of mobile search. Given its dominant position, most
Internet-based businesses rely on Google for a substantial share of their
traffic and revenues. As a result, last year Google generated nearly $30
billion in search advertising revenues.
1 of 4 2/3/12 12:38 PM
Studies show what most of us know from experience: that the first few
Google search results attract nearly 90 percent of all user clicks. Google’s
search ranking therefore has enormous power over the information users
find, whichwebsites receive traffic, and the amount businesses must pay to
be found on the Internet.
A former Reagan administration antitrust chief recently suggested that this

market power has essentially made Google a “monopoly gatekeeper to the
Internet.”[1] <#_ftn1>
Whether or not Google formally qualifies as a monopoly under our antitrust

laws, one thing is clear: given its significant ability to steer e-commerce and
the flow of online information, Google is in a position to help determine who
will succeed and who will fail on the Internet. In the words of the head of
Google’s search ranking team, Google is “the biggest kingmaker on the
Earth.”[2] <#_ftn2>
General Antitrust Concerns

Google has used its substantial advertising revenues to branch out into a
multitude of secondary Internet businesses. Largely by acquiring more than
100 different companies, Google now offers YouTube video, Gmail, Chrome
internet browser,Google Plus social networking, the Android mobile
smartphone operating system, and a host of services including Google maps,
news, books, shopping, places, and flight search. And with its recent
purchase of Motorola Mobility, Google is now poised to get into the
business of mobile handset manufacturing.
With Google’s expansion into so many areas, a large number of businesses,

advertisers, and consumer groups have raised concernsregarding Google’s
activities, suggesting the company may be acting indeceptive and
anticompetitive ways. As a result, Google is under investigation by antitrust
authorities both in the United States and abroad.
This Subcommittee has oversight of antitrust enforcement and competition
policy, and I appreciate Chairman Kohl’s leadership in calling a hearing to
address this important topic.
Search and Advertising Manipulation

From its inception Google’s stated goal was “to have users leave its website
as quickly as possible.”[3] <#_ftn3> But over time the company appears to
have changed its approach: to steer users not to other businesses and sources
of information but to its own growing complement of competing services.
Google has worked hard to cultivate the public perception that its searches
2 of 4 2/3/12 12:38 PM
are comprehensive and unbiased. But there is growing concern that Google
employs different search ranking algorithms and more attractive visual
displays to advantage its own secondary sites and products, to the detriment
of competing specialized search sites and other disadvantaged businesses.
There is also evidence that Google has taken information and reviews from
competing specialized search sites like Yelp and TripAdvisor, used that data
as part of its own services, and in the processdemoted the search result
rankings of the sites from which Google acquired the information.
In addition, some reports suggest that Google has taken steps to impede
competing search engines from crawling, indexing, andreturning search
results to its YouTube content and book scans. Access to these popular
stores of content is critical to enabling other search engines to compete.
Exclusive Dealing
There are also allegations that Google has achieved and sought to maintain
its dominance in search by imposing exclusivity restrictions in dealings with
advertising partners, perhaps in an effort toblock competing search tools.
This includes a broad network of exclusive search syndication deals with
websites like AOL and eBay, exclusive arrangements for Google’s search
box to appear on browsers like Mozilla Firefox and Safari, and agreements
that Google be theexclusive default search provider on the iPhone and many
Android models.
Similarly, Google’s contracts with advertisers apparently impose limits on

the advertisers’ ability to transfer data associated with Google’s advertising
platform to any other advertising platform using third party tools that would
make the process simple or even automatic. Studies by a Harvard Business
School professor concluded that the “net effect” of these restrictions “is to
reinforce the tendency of small to medium-sized advertisers to . . . use only
Google AdWords to the exclusion of competing platforms.”[4] <#_ftn4>
Many observers are also concerned that Google may be seeking to prevent
smartphone manufacturers and customers who wish to use its Android
platform from using competitors’ services—for example, by tying Android
to Google’s location program in order to exclude competing geolocation
services.
Consumer Welfare
In assessing each of these concerns, the primary focus of our antitrust
analysis should be consumer welfare. Growing complaints that Google is
using its search dominance to favor its own offerings at the expense of
competition deserve serious attention, especially if consumers are misled by
Google’s self-rankings and preferential display. Such bias would deny user
3 of 4 2/3/12 12:38 PM
traffic and revenue to competing sites, depriving those sites of resources

needed to develop more innovative content and offer better services to
customers. When competing websites lose traffic, they are forced to
increase paid search advertising on Google, ultimately leading to increased
prices for consumers.
As a conservative Republican who favors free markets, I believe that
ensuring robust competition in this critical area of our nation’s economy will
benefit consumers, spur innovation, and lead to job creation. In this
instance, I believe that preserving competitive markets through antitrust
principles can help forestall the imposition of burdensome government
regulation.
[1] <#_ftnref1> Charles F. Rule, Is Google a Monopolist?, Wall Street

Journal (Sept. 11, 2010) (Mr. Rule was head of the Justice Department’s
Antitrust Division in the Reagan Administration).
[2] <#_ftnref2> Matt Warner, Google, Caffeine, and the Future of Search,
The Telegraph (June 17, 2010) (quoting Amit Singhal, whoheads Google’s
search ranking team).
[3] <#_ftnref3> Google Philosophy, item 3, prior to September 2009. (After

September 2009 it was edited to read: “We may be the only people in the
world who can say our goal is to have people leave our homepage as quickly
as possible.”). Available at: http://www.google.com/about/corporate
/company/tenthings.html.
[4] <#_ftnref4> Professor Ben Edelman, PPC Platform Competition and

Google's "May Not Copy" Restriction, June 27, 2008.
http://www.benedelman.org/news/062708-1.html
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/9/senator-lee-s-
google-antitrust-hearing-opening-statement
4 of 4 2/3/12 12:38 PM
Sen. Lee Submits Jobs and Economic Stimulus Legislation - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 05 2011
Sen. Lee Submits Jobs and

Economic Stimulus Legislation
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee submitted legislation that would
create millions of new jobs and inject $1 trillion into the American economy
by significantly reducing the excessive tax on repatriated assets. Sen. Lee’s
proposal would permanently lower the tax rate for businesses from 35% to
5% on money earned overseas and brought back to this country.
“American companies want to bring their earnings back here, build out their
infrastructure, and invest in their domestic workforce, but current law makes
it punitive to do so. We should be lowering those barriers and encouraging
American companies to invest in this country, increase wages, and create
new jobs. My bill is a common sense reform that helps businesses, workers,
investors, and American industries across our economy without using
mandates and regulation, or having the federal government pick winners and
losers.”
Unlike recent repatriation “holidays,” which last a short period of time,

Senator Lee’s bill would make the repatriation rate permanent and give
American businesses the confidence they need to bring their earnings home
and the stability they require to invest in jobs rather than one-time capital
investments. Previous one-time “holidays,” such as the one in 2004, have
been used to minimal effect because the short-term duration of the benefit
does not incentivize companies to invest in long-term business infrastructure
or new employment.
“The President is currently traveling the country trying to convince

Americans to borrow another half-trillion dollars from the Chinese to
‘stimulate’ the economy. My amendment would stimulate our economy by
more than twice his proposal without saddling future generations with more
debt. “
Studies, such as one conducted this summer by J.P. Morgan, reveal
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:39 PM
Sen. Lee Submits Jobs and Economic Stimulus Legislation - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...
undistributed earnings from American companies’ foreign operations could

be closer to $1.4 trillion, which sits on the sidelines as a result of the 35%
tax rate. Research by a former Congressional Budget Office director
predicted repatriation could create close to 3 million new jobs.
Senator Lee’s legislation is Amendment 691 to S. 1619, which is currently

being considered by the Senate. In the case that Majority Leader Harry Reid
would prevent amendments from being added to S. 1619, Sen. Lee would
offer the amendment as stand alone legislation.
submits-jobs-and-economic-stimulus-legislation
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:39 PM
Lee Statement on China Currency Bill - Press Releases - Press O... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 06 2011
Lee Statement on China

Currency Bill
statement in opposition to the China currency legislation:
“There are better, more productive ways to create jobs than to threaten a
trade war with our largest trading partner. Tariffs only serve to increase costs
for American businesses and consumers. Instead, we should be looking at
ways to grow the economy by reducing excessive regulation, fundamentally
reforming the tax code, getting our fiscal house in order, and increasing our
domestic energy supply.“
/lee-statement-on-china-currency-bill
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:39 PM
Senators and Congressmen Introduce the Northern Arizona Min... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 12 2011
Senators and Congressmen

Introduce the Northern Arizona
Mining Continuity Act
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Orrin Hatch
(R-UT) and Mike Lee (R-UT) and U.S. Congressmen Trent Franks (AZ-02),
Rob Bishop (UT-01), Jeff Flake (AZ-06), Paul Gosar (AZ-01), David
Schweikert (AZ-05) and Ben Quayle (AZ-03) today introduced the Northern
Arizona Mining Continuity Act of 2011. This legislation will stop the U.S.
Department of the Interior from banning mining in a vast area of Arizona,
and killing jobs in the uranium mining industry.
In a recent letter to Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, several

members of Congress wrote in protest of the Secretary’s proposed one
million acre withdrawal of mining rights. The members stated the
withdrawal has nothing to do with protecting the Grand Canyon
environment but is actually ‘de facto wilderness’ for a region that
conservationists previously agreed would remain accessible to the mining
industry. The Interior Department’s own environmental study on the
proposed withdrawal found ‘no conclusive evidence’ that modern-day
mining operations in this area are harming the Grand Canyon watershed.
The Northern Arizona Mining Continuity Act of 2011 would uphold the
historic agreement embodied by the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (AWA)
that designated parts of the Arizona Strip as Wilderness and restored other
lands to reasonable and safe uranium mining uses. The letter points out that
the AWA “expressly refrained from banning mining on the Arizona Strip.”
“The Department’s proposed mining withdrawal would kill hundreds of

potential jobs to ‘save’ the Grand Canyon from the same form of uranium
mining that conservation groups once supported,” said Senator McCain. “It
also threatens to unravel the spirit of the Arizona Wilderness Act and will
raise significant questions for future Wilderness bills if agreements to
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:40 PM
accommodate responsible land uses are neither genuine nor enduring.”
"Despite the fact that uranium mining efforts have for decades operated
without impacting the environment or the beauty of our national parks,
President Obama is nonetheless seeking to make 326-375 million pounds of
the best quality uranium in the entire country off-limits, thus putting the
desires of a handful of rabid environmentalists above America's long-term
energy independence and national security," said Congressman Franks.
“The Obama Administration continues to push policies that stifle American

energy exploration and job creation,” Senator Hatch said. “Through Utah
and the West, there’s an abundance of energy that would help fuel the
economic recovery we so desperately need. This legislation ensures that
these vital public lands are accessible to domestic energy producers so we
can harness the nation’s second largest domestic source of uranium ore.”
“This Department of Interior’s decision to halt mining in this region is

nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to circumvent congress in order to
create new de-facto wilderness areas. Blocking access to more than a third
of the known U.S. uranium deposits would have a devastating impact on job
creation and would increase our reliance on foreign sources of uranium. As
it stands, we already depend on other countries for more than 90% of our
uranium needs,” said Congressman Rob Bishop. “This legislation will block
yet another federal land grab and help ensure that we have access to our
abundant domestic energy resources, which are essential to the future of this
country.”
“After having his 'wild lands' policy resoundingly rejected by Utahns and
other state and local officials, Secretary Salazar appears intent upon using
whatever authority he can claim to lock up lands in the western states,” said
Senator Lee. “The withdrawal of one million acres of mining rights also
reneges on a compromise between the federal government and the mining
industry negotiated in good faith almost thirty years ago, setting an
unwelcome precedent that could have future negative consequences. This
legislation will stand as yet another rebuke of the administration's relentless
pursuit of federal land grabs and reinforce the message that the people, not
federal bureaucrats, should be the final authority on what happens to land
within their state's borders.”
“Uranium mining in northern Arizona can create jobs and stimulate the
region’s economy without jeopardizing the splendor and natural beauty of
the area, and that’s why Arizona’s federal, state, and local officials oppose a
moratorium on such mining,” said Congressman Flake.
“It is important we focus on the facts surrounding mining in the Northern
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:40 PM
Arizona Mining district,” said Congressman Gosar. “It is simply false and
misleading to assert that if the Administration’s withdrawal is not enacted,
uranium mining will take place ‘in’ the canyon or ‘in’ the park. However
without a doubt, if the Administration’s proposed withdrawal is enacted, the
potential for nearly $30 billion dollars of economic growth opportunities –
nearly $700 million annually and over a thousand well paying jobs – will be
eliminated. I am proud to cosponsor this important legislation, and I
strongly support environmentally responsible development of our country’s
vast energy and mineral resources that will expand our domestic energy
supply, create new American jobs, and lessen our dependence on foreign
sources of energy and minerals.”
“At a time when we are desperate for jobs and economic growth, this
Administration continues to do everything in its power to implement the
job-killing policies of fringe environmental groups. This withdrawal is not
so much a protection of the Grand Canyon, but a government land grab of
economically fertile mining land,” said Congressman Schweikert.
“It is remarkable that we need legislation to force the Administration to stop

such an unwarranted ban,” said Congressman Quayle. “A study conducted
by the same department that is proposing the mining withdrawal found ‘no
conclusive evidence’ that modern-day mining will cause any harm to the
Grand Canyon region. Despite these findings, the Department of Interior is
still pushing forward even though the ban will prevent the creation of
thousands of potential Arizona jobs and economic growth for the state. The
Administration is once again putting special interests ahead of job creation.”
Letter and bill attached.
and-congressmen-introduce-the-northern-arizona-mining-continuity-act
Related Files
Letter to Secretary Salazar - Uranium - 10 12 11 LETTER TO SEC

SALAZAR.pdf (866.9 KBs)
Northern Arizona Mining Continuity Act - 10 12 11 Northern Arizona
Continuity Act.pdf (27.8 KBs)
3 of 3 2/3/12 12:40 PM
Lee Introduces the DASH Act - Press Releases - Press Office - ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 13 2011
Lee Introduces the DASH Act

WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee introduced a bill to help dairy
and ranch owners maintain the foreign workers they need to keep their
businesses operating year-round, without creating a legal path to citizenship
for workers. The Dairy and Sheep H2A (DASH) Act would make dairy
workers, sheep herders, and goat herders eligible to apply for year-round
positions through the H2A visa program. Currently, temporary farm workers
are only able to obtain seasonal visas.
“Immigration involves a complicated and difficult set of issues, particularly

regarding America’s agricultural industry,” said Senator Lee. “Few
Americans are willing to work in many of these jobs, and outdated visa laws
prevent business from attracting temporary foreign workers to fill the
shortage.
“Making certain types of legal immigration more efficient diminishes the

incentive for some to come here illegally or overstay their visas. The DASH
Act streamlines the system by which we identify, process, and oversee
temporary workers coming to our country to do agricultural work, thereby
strengthening our economy.”
Under the legislation, visas for such workers would have an initial term of
three years and could be renewed for additional periods of three years
without requiring workers to return to their home countries. The DASH Act
would in no way provide a legal path to citizenship and would require
workers who do not obtain a proper renewal to go home.
The legislation is also sponsored by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York.
Read the Salt Lake Chamber's release on the DASH Act
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:40 PM
Lee, Schumer Introduce Immigration Reform Bill - Press Releas... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 20 2011
Lee, Schumer Introduce

Immigration Reform Bill
WASHINGTON, DC—With an excess of supply stalling a recovery in the
U.S. housing market, U.S. Senators Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) and Mike
Lee (R-UT) announced today that they will offer a bipartisan proposal to
boost demand for homes by luring foreign investors to purchase residences
and live in the U.S. The concept is part of a broad immigration package
aimed at boosting foreign travel and investment in the United States.
The Visa Improvements to Stimulate International Tourism to the United

States of America Act (VISIT-USA Act) would remove bureaucratic red tape
that stifles travel and investment in the U.S. For instance, the bill would
reduce barriers for Canadian and Chinese visitors whose consumer spending
provides a lift to the U.S. economy. The bill would also expedite priority
visa applicants, introduce videoconferencing as a means to screening foreign
nationals, and make major changes to visa procedures for U.S. allies in the
fight against al Qaeda.
To confront the housing crisis, the legislation would provide, for the first
time, a three-year residential visa for foreign nationals who invest at least
$500,000 in residential real estate in the United States. At least $250,000
must be spent on a primary residence where the visa holder will reside for at
least 180 days out of the year while paying taxes to the U.S. Applicants
would still be subject to standard criminal and national security background
checks and, once approved, would not be able to receive government
benefits such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The program
would not serve as a path to citizenship for foreign nationals. Real estate
analysts have said this proposal could lift demand for U.S. homes and help
ease the housing crisis. Famed investor Warren Buffett has also supported
the concept of enticing foreign homebuyers previously.
Schumer said: “This concept has the potential to lift demand for the nation’s
excess homes. Our housing market will never begin a true recovery as long
1 of 4 2/3/12 12:41 PM
as our housing stock so greatly exceeds demand. This is not a cure-all, but it
could be part of the solution to the housing crisis and won’t cost the
government a nickel."
Lee said: “This bill supports a free market method for increasing demand for
housing at a time when so many working-class Americans are underwater on
their homes, are desperate for prices to rise again, and big-government
programs have failed to work. I am sponsoring this bill because I know that
it makes economic sense while protecting American citizens.”
The Schumer-Lee bill has been endorsed by the U.S. Chamber of

Commerce, the U.S. Travel Association, the American Hotel & Lodging
Association and the U.S. Olympic Committee.
A breakdown of the main provisions in the VISIT-USA Act, beyond the

homebuyer visa provision, appears below:
· Encourage Chinese Nationals to Travel to the U.S: Currently, Chinese

nationals must apply for a new U.S. visa every year while travelers from
other countries can receive up to 10-year multiple entry visas. The bill would
allow Chinese tourists access to 5-year multiple-entry visitor visas, in order
to eliminate this significant disincentive to travel to the United States. To
ensure maximum security, stop terrorism, and address fraud concerns,
Chinese tourists with 5-year visas will also be required to use the Electronic
System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). A recent report showed that the
average Chinese visitor to the U.S. spends $6,000.
· Expedite Priority Visitors: Currently, many people of means do not travel

to the United States because of the waiting times for visas. The VISIT-USA
Act will allow the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service to charge an
extra fee to expedite the processing of a nonimmigrant visa just like the
State Department to charges an extra fee to expedite the processing of a U.S.
Passport.
· Introduce Technology Into the U.S. Visa System: Applicants for a U.S.
visa are often forced to make significant investments of time and money. The
VISIT-USA Act authorizes the Secretary of State to conduct a
videoconference pilot program as a method for conducting visa interviews of
foreign national applicants. This would ensure that U.S. visitors spend their
money inside the U.S. on our goods and not on going through red tape.
· Encourage Canadian Tourism to the United States: Under current law,

without a visa, Canadian citizens are not permitted to remain in the United
States for longer than 180 days. Many Canadians would remain in the
United States for a longer period of time during periods where the weather is
2 of 4 2/3/12 12:41 PM
still cold if they had a legal ability to do so. In addition, Canadians who
currently return to Canada after 180 days are unable to take day-trips across
the border to northern-border-states in America. The VISIT-USA Act creates
a new “Canadian retiree visa” (non-immigrant visa) that allows Canadians
who are: (1) over age 50 (with derivative benefits to a spouse and minor
children); (2) who can show that they own a residence in the United States or
have purchased rental or hotel accommodations in the United States for the
duration of their stay; and (3) are not otherwise inadmissible – to have a visa
that lasts 240 days, and is renewable every 3 years
· Encourage U.S. Travel During Low Peak Season: One of the greatest
contributing factors to high visa demand is the summer travel season. Given
that visa interview wait times typically lengthen during the summer months,
this bill permits the State Department to lower visa application fees during
off-peak seasons to give travelers the incentive to apply for visas when
demand is lower.
· Expedite Visa for Countries Aiding the U.S. in Fight Against Al Qaeda:
The Visa Waiver program gives citizens of selected countries the ability to
travel to the US more easily, rather than go through the more lengthy and
complicated US Tourist Visa application process, but it’s not available to all
U.S. allies. The VISIT-USA Act amends the Immigration and Nationality
Act regarding the visa waiver program to: (1) authorize the Secretary of
Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Secretary of State, to
designate program countries; (2) adjust the criteria for visa refusal rates to
permit entry into the program if a country has a low visa overstay rate; (3)
set a maximum 3% visa overstay rate for program countries; and (4) revise
probationary status and program termination provisions
· Expediting Entry for Priority Visitors: The global entry program is a U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) program that allows expedited
clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United
States. At the moment, U.S. Customs and Border Protection lacks the ability
to add specific foreign nationals to the global-entry prescreening system if
they are not nationals of one of the “participating countries” that the United
States has a reciprocal agreement with. This creates problems for certain
high-priority visitors with decision-making capacity to bring important
international events—such as the Olympics, the World Cup, conventions,
etc.—to the United States. This section would permit Customs and Border
Protection to add important foreign dignitaries to the global entry program
on a “case-by-case” basis if they are employed by an organization that
maintains a strong working relationship with the United States and do not
pose security risks.
The VISIT-USA Act represents the most significant reform of the U.S.
3 of 4 2/3/12 12:41 PM
immigration system in a generation, all the while adding a significant boost

to our economy through increased foreign investment and tourism. Although
a budget analysis of the proposal is not yet available, the senators said it was
highly likely the package would significantly reduce the deficit through the
increased tax revenues collected from new visa holders living in the U.S.
/lee-schumer-introduce-immigration-reform-bill
4 of 4 2/3/12 12:41 PM
Lee Troubled By Proposed Rule Allowing Agencies to Mislead... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Oct 27 2011
Lee Troubled By Proposed Rule

Allowing Agencies to Mislead
Public
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee reacted to reports that the
Department of Justice may be attempting to allow federal agencies to
provide misinformation about the existence of certain government
documents. Senator Lee cautioned that the proposed rule could be a
“slippery slope” toward making government unaccountable to the people.
“Although the government has a legitimate interest in keeping certain

matters of national security from becoming public, I am concerned that this
proposed rule may represent a slippery slope that would ultimately limit the
public's ability to hold the federal government accountable for its actions.
There is already in place a process by which courts may assess whether or
not documents qualify for FOIA exclusions, and I am unaware of any
compelling reason to depart from that process. I will continue to investigate
this matter and work with my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee to
ensure it is properly resolved."
/lee-troubled-by-proposed-rule-allowing-agencies-to-mislead-public
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:42 PM
Governor Herbert, Utah Congressional Delegation React to An... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 02 2011
Governor Herbert, Utah

Congressional Delegation React
to Announcement on Hill Air
Force Base
In Letter to Air Force Today, Members
Write that the Proposal is “Most
Disappointing and Irresponsible”
WASHINGTON – Utah Governor Gary Herbert and Utah’s entire
congressional delegation, including Utah Senators Orrin Hatch and Mike
Lee, and Congressmen Rob Bishop, Jim Matheson and Jason Chaffetz, today
expressed deep concerns with the Air Force’s decision to eliminate jobs at
Hill Air Force Base. The Governor and Utah’s delegation sent a letter today
to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley detailing their disappointment with
the decision. Currently, there are approximately 24,000 employees that work
at Hill Air Force Base in various roles.
In the letter, the elected officials write that, the Air Force’s decisions
jeopardizes “the future modernization of Hill AFB facilities and
infrastructure.” They also note that “the Air Force either can’t, or won’t,
provide us with the needed answers as the analytical process seems to have
been circumvented.”
HERBERT : "Utah's Hill Air Force Base is unquestionably a critical

component of our nation's modern defense system. This state is deeply
disappointed with today's announcement, particularly given the lack of
public process and absence of local input. With so much other waste in
Washington, this hasty decision appears to be short-sighted and even
counter-productive, jeopardizing the modernization of the country's defense.
While some are saying this is a done deal, this is not over--we will exhaust
1 of 5 2/3/12 12:43 PM
every option to keep Hill as one of nation's premier defense installations and
preserve valuable jobs for Utahns."
HATCH : “The Air Force’s decision ignores the basic fact that the men and
women at Hill Air Force Base are among the hardest-working and most
efficient workers in our armed forces. It’s simply the wrong decision as
anyone who’s visited Hill well knows. I firmly believe that the command at
Hill and the Ogden Air Logistics Center would be able to work with the Air
Force to meet the service’s – and Utahns’ – goal of saving taxpayer dollars
and maintaining the strongest military in the world. I’m going to continue to
press the Air Force on maintaining the current logistics center infrastructure
and do everything I can to ensure the 24,000 jobs at Hill remain in northern
Utah.”
LEE: “The planned reorganization of the Air Force Materiel Command,

which will significantly affect Hill Air Force Base, should be shelved
immediately. The announcement came with very little coordination or
communication with Utah’s representatives and many important questions
remain. The Air Force has pursued this plan with an unsettling amount of
secrecy and during the process failed to provide adequate details regarding
personnel reductions and possible relocation sites, despite assurances that
those would be made in a fair and open manner. It has failed to perform a
business-case analysis, which is necessary to determine whether the
reorganization will even accomplish its stated goal. I repeatedly and
specifically asked the Air Force to postpone its announcement until these
issues had been resolved, but it was unwilling to change its plans. As a
result, I plan to fight this plan on all fronts.”
BISHOP: “In light of the fact that many questions remain unanswered and
no Business Case Analysis has been conducted, I remain deeply concerned
that the Air Force has chosen to proceed with the announcement of this
proposal. A BCA is an essential step that must be taken to determine
whether these decisions will be beneficial or detrimental to Utah and air
logistics capabilities as a whole. This necessary analysis would provide
evidence as to whether or not this would actually benefit taxpayers or end up
costing more in the long run as many suspect. The Air Force has remained
elusive about the details of this plan, including their refusal to conduct a
BCA. They have been less than forthcoming about what personnel
reductions may occur and where, as well as the overall impact this will have
on jobs, Utah, Hill AFB and efficiency amongst all Air Logistics Centers.
Subsequently, I have requested on several occasions, in writing and in
person, that Air Force Secretary Michael Donley immediately halt the
implementation of this plan. I want to do what is best for the Air Force and
for the nation but so far the Air Force has yet to prove that this proposal is in
the best
2 of 5 2/3/12 12:43 PM
interest of the country.”
MATHESON: “There is a process in place for how these workforce

decisions are made. I have concerns that in this case, the Department of
Defense’s own rules and regulations were not followed. That raises
questions about how appropriate the job reductions are, given the importance
of Hill’s mission and the excellence and efficiency shown by Hill’s
employees in our national defense.”
Hill Air Force Base is composed of two major components: the Fighter
Wings and Ogden Air Logistics Center. Under the Air Force’s plan, Ogden’s
commander will no longer be a Major General but a Brigadier General.
Ogden’s name will also be changed from an Air Logistics Center to an Air
Logistics Complex.
The Governor and the delegation are concerned that the Air Force’s plan
could disrupt the integrated management of Ogden’s life-cycle managers,
who plan and engineer modifications to aircraft, and depot maintainers, who
are responsible for performing the actual work on the aircraft.
According to the Air Force, Ogden will not lose any of its current functions
and missions, and the F-22 program managers previously scheduled to move
to Ogden are in fact coming. In addition, the Secretary of the Air Force has
said that Hill Air Force Base is on track to receive the first three operational
squadrons of F-35s.
The text of the letter Governor Herbert and Utah’s congressional delegation
sent to Sen. Donley is below, and can also be viewed HERE :
November 2, 2011
The Honorable Michael Donley

Secretary - United States Air Force
1670 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, DC 20330-1670
Dear Mr. Secretary:
As a united delegation of Utah elected officials, we are writing to express

dismay following your meeting yesterday afternoon with selected
Congressional leaders regarding your anticipated announcement which will
outline a major reorganization of the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC),
significant downgrading of the Air Logistics Centers (ALCs), and the
3 of 5 2/3/12 12:43 PM
establishment of new centralized bureaucracies in Ohio and

Oklahoma. As things stand, we cannot support your proposal due to the lack
of analysis which prohibits us from judging the efficacy of the proposed
changes and the impacts on sustainment. Sadly, the Air Force either can’t,
or won’t, provide us with the needed answers as the analytical process seems
to have been circumvented.
For months, our delegation’s attempts at dialogue and partnership have

largely been rebuffed by you, and other Air Force leaders, even as AFMC’s
reorganization plans were being drafted in haste and behind the cloak of
non-disclosure agreements. It is regrettable that you would proceed to
move forward to approve and implement such a major reorganization in this
effusive manner while ignoring Air Force regulations (AF165-509) which
require that a formal Business Case Analysis (BCA) to be conducted on any
proposed action which would result in a $500 million or greater impact
across the five-year defense plan (FYDP). Lt. General Janet Wolfenbarger
admitted, in writing, that no BCA had been completed, even though the $500
million threshold is reached. Therefore, your action appears to be in
violation of Air Force and Department of Defense (DoD) regulations. Even
without a regulatory mandate, principles of responsible government would
dictate that a BCA be conducted to demonstrate to taxpayers that such a
major reorganization creating two new three-star bureaucracies makes fiscal
sense.
The secretive and subjective process used by you and the Air Force to
determine the locations for the two new 3-star bureaucracies inherent in
your plan is highly suspect, and offends the very notions of fairness and
open government. To have determined these locations in secret violates the
precedents used previously by the Air Force in making basing decisions.
While we continue to have various other unanswered questions regarding

your plan’s impact on sustainment for the war fighter, due mainly to the lack
of specifics from you, one of our most significant concerns is that the plan
could severely undercut the long-term viability of the Falcon Hill Enhanced
Use Lease (EUL) project at Hill Air Force Base. As you well know, the
taxpayers of Utah have invested over $20 million in state funds into the
Falcon Hill EUL partnership. That investment now stands at risk through
what appears to be an impetuous Air Force reorganization scheme that
could reduce demand for Falcon Hill, thereby jeopardizing the future
modernization of Hill AFB facilities and infrastructure. To announce your
plan, and not to have considered these potential negative impacts on Falcon
Hill and Hill AFB modernization, is most disappointing and irresponsible.
Once again, we strongly urge you to defer the AFMC reorganization

implementation until greater dialogue and disclosure is achieved with
4 of 5 2/3/12 12:43 PM
stakeholders, and a formal BCA is completed in compliance with Air Force

and DoD regulations, including a detailed review of how the Falcon Hill
EUL and Hill AFB future modernization could be negatively
impacted.
Sincerely,
HATCH
HERBERT
LEE
MATHESON
BISHOP
CHAFFETZ
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/governor-
herbert-utah-congressional-delegation-react-to-announcement-on-hill-
air-force-base
5 of 5 2/3/12 12:43 PM
Lee’s Land Conveyance Bills Pass Senate - Press Releases - Pre... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 03 2011
Leeʼs Land Conveyance Bills

Pass Senate
WASHINGTON - Last night, the Senate approved legislation introduced by
Senator Mike Lee to authorize the transfer of vacant and virtually unused
federal land in Utah to the growing cities of Mantua and Alta. The bills were
approved by unanimous consent and represent the first pieces of legislation
authored by Senator Lee to pass the full Senate.
Under the passed legislation, Mantua will gain control of nearly 32 acres of
land in Box Elder County that was originally owned by Hans Rasmussen, an
early settler of Mantua. His family eventually deeded the land to the U.S.
Forest Service in 1941 for $1.00. Mantua will not be required to pay for the
land.
If passed by the House and signed by President Obama, Senator Lee’s bill
will allow Alta to assume control over Forest Service land that will be used
for a community center and fire station.
“It is a testament to the success of our state and cities like Mantua and
Alta that these bills are necessary,” said Senator Lee, who sits on the
Energy and Natural Resources Committee. “These cities can use the land
productively and the federal government has no pressing need for it. I
hope that the House will move quickly on Congressman Rob Bishop’s
version of this legislation.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/lee-s-
land-conveyance-bills-pass-senate
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:43 PM
Lee Introduces Bill to Repatriate Overseas Earnings - Press Rel... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 09 2011
Lee Introduces Bill to Repatriate

Overseas Earnings
WASHINGTON - Today, Senator Mike Lee introduced the Rebuilding
America Act, legislation that will permanently increase incentives for
American companies to invest overseas earnings back in to the U.S.
economy. Under Lee’s legislation the effective repatriation tax rate would
be set at 5% down from 35%, which is currently the highest in the developed
world.
“American companies have over $1.4 trillion sitting overseas because it’s
too expensive to bring it back home,” said Senator Lee. “That’s money that
could be used to build new infrastructure and invest in the domestic
workforce.
“My legislation reduces the rate permanently, rather than granting a

short-term ‘holiday,’ which lasts only a short period of time and fails to give
business owners the certainty they need to make long-term investments, such
as expanding their payrolls. Making the repatriation rate permanent gives
American companies confidence in a stable revenue stream that they will be
able to count on to fund long-term expansion.
“Most importantly, the Rebuilding America Act will free up this major new
source of capital, which will help the economy grow and generate new
revenue. Even a former Clinton economist estimates that corporate tax
revenues would increase by $36 billion with this lower repatriation tax rate.
Rather than borrowing additional billions from China, as President Obama
would have us do, my plan will provide those billions to American
businesses while reducing the deficit.”
Senators Roy Blunt (R-MO), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Rand
Paul (R-KY), and Jim Risch (R-ID) are co-sponsoring the bill.
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:43 PM
Lee Cosponsors Legislation to Reverse Rule on 'Mini-Unions' - ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=f...

Press Releases
Nov 10 2011
Lee Cosponsors Legislation to

Reverse Rule on 'Mini-Unions'
Bill Has Support of 28 Original Cosponsors
in the Senate
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) today introduced
legislation that would reverse the National Labor Relation Board’s recent
decision allowing as few as two or three employees to form micro
bargaining units, or “mini-unions,” to engage in collective bargaining with
employers. Isakson’s legislation, the Representation Fairness Restoration
Act, has 28 cosponsors.
Isakson’s legislation comes in response to the Aug. 26, 2011, decision by the
federal labor board in the “Specialty Healthcare” case, which set a new
precedent allowing unions to target small numbers of employees within a
company for the purpose of organizing them into micro bargaining units. For
example, in one grocery store, the cashiers could form one “mini union,” the
baggers could form another, the produce stockers could form yet another,
and so on. This could potentially create several different unions within the
same store location, making it easier for unions to gain access to employees
and nearly impossible for employers to manage such fragmentation of the
workforce.
Isakson’s legislation would reinstate the traditional standard for determining

which employees will constitute an appropriate bargaining unit, a standard
that has been developed through years of careful consideration and
Congressional guidance.
“The administration’s decision to allow micro bargaining units recklessly

disregards the long-standing principles of collective bargaining. This action
is yet another example of how President Obama’s appointees at this agency
are tipping the scales in favor of unions,” said Isakson. “This decision is
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:43 PM
Lee Cosponsors Legislation to Reverse Rule on 'Mini-Unions' - ... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=f...
adding to the pressure and uncertainty facing employers today and

threatening the creation of private-sector jobs at a time when unemployment
is over 9 percent.”
In March 2011, while the National Labor Relations Board was in the process
of making its final decision on the “Specialty Healthcare” case, Isakson
joined Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) in sending a
letter warning the agency that its legal reasoning could be used to apply new
rules for unionization for all U.S. industries and businesses under its
jurisdiction. The senators further expressed concern about the Board’s
practice of trying to make labor policy through adjudication instead of the
established rulemaking process.
The legislation has garnered the support of 28 original cosponsors in the

Senate, including Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Kelly Ayotte
(R-N.H.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Richard Burr
(R-N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Daniel Coats (R-Ind.), Tom Coburn
(R-Okla.), Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Bob Corker
(R-Tenn.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Michael Enzi (R-Wyo.), Lindsey Graham
(R-S.C.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), James
Inhofe (R-Okla.), Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Mike Lee
(R-Utah), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Rand Paul
(R-Ky.), James Risch (R-Idaho), Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), Olympia Snowe
(R-Maine), John Thune (R-S.D.), and David Vitter (R-La.).
/lee-cosponsors-legislation-to-reverse-rule-on-mini-unions
2 of 2 2/3/12 12:43 PM
Lee Statement on New Wilderness Recommendations - Press Re... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 14 2011
Lee Statement on New

Wilderness Recommendations
Last week, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar recommended to Congress
that three areas in Utah—Desolation Canyon, Westwater Canyon, and Mill
Creek Canyon—be federally designated as “wilderness areas.” In response,
Senator Mike Lee is reiterating his position on federal land use:
“Like every other state, Utah knows what is best for Utah’s land,” said
Senator Lee. “I will not support any new wilderness designations unless they
are first considered and approved by the Utah state legislature.
“Roughly two thirds of Utah is already owned by some part of the federal
government. While any other owner would pay property taxes on this land to
the state, the federal government does not, depriving Utah of an enormous
source of income. In addition, Washington’s pervasive overreach also affects
countless groups that want to put a small portion of land to some sort of use.
Utahns must go to the federal government, hat in hand, and ask permission
to merely dig a well, or to build a road, or to bury cable, or indeed to do
virtually anything.
"As a result, I believe the Utah legislature must first consider and approve
proposed wilderness designations before any final determination is made at
the federal level."
/lee-statement-on-new-wilderness-recommendations
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:44 PM
Republicans Announce Welfare Reform Act of 2011 - Press Rel... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 16 2011
Republicans Announce Welfare

Reform Act of 2011
Saves $2.43 trillion, ensures food stamps
used for essential items, ends budget
gimmicks, prevents taxpayer funding of
abortion
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South
Carolina) announced that he would soon introduce the Welfare Reform Act
of 2011 with original cosponsors including U.S. Senators Tom Coburn
(R-Oklahoma), Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), Jim Inhofe
(R-Oklahoma), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), Jeff Sessions
(R-Alabama), and David Vitter (R-Louisiana). Companion legislation has
been offered in the U.S. House by U.S. Representative Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
Over the past two decades the growth in means-tested welfare spending
(292%) has outpaced the combined growth of Medicare and Social Security
spending (213%) as well as the growth in education (143%) and defense
spending (126%). The Welfare Reform Act of 2011 would save $2.43 trillion
by 2021 by gradually reducing the costs of the 77 existing welfare programs
as unemployment decreases.
Senator DeMint said: “With record levels of federal spending and record
levels of Americans in poverty and using food stamps, it’s hard not to
conclude that federal welfare programs are failing,” said Senator DeMint.
“We don’t help Americans by making them dependent on Washington for a
handout, we need more Americans empowered to stand on their own with a
job in a vibrant economy. We need to reform our welfare programs to
encourage self-sufficiency. We can also save taxpayers trillions of dollars
that they can use to invest in our economy to create jobs and donate to local
1 of 3 2/3/12 12:44 PM
charities that have better success at lifting Americans out of poverty.”
Senator Vitter said: “One of the most significant substantive

accomplishments coming out of the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress
was welfare reform. But as significant as this reform was, we are overdue to
renew welfare reform efforts and make additional gains because the welfare
state has grown enormously since then – even factoring out recessions.”
Senator Lee said: "Failure to reform these programs puts them at risk. The
spending is unsustainable and it will affect our ability to afford other
national priorities. Making reasonable changes today will allow us to avoid
much more painful decisions in the future."
Senator Inhofe said: “Our nation’s welfare programs are in desperate need of
reform, and this measure provides a good approach. Welfare programs are
costing American taxpayers far too much while providing little benefit
beyond keeping individuals and families dependent. These reforms will
empower individuals to improve their situation by encouraging and
promoting greater self sufficiency. It also holds the federal government
accountable for how it spends taxpayer dollars. I am pleased to join my
colleagues in this effort to improve the situation many Americans have
found themselves in during a difficult economy.”
In fiscal year 2011, total government spending on means-tested welfare

spending will reach $909 billion per year. Federal spending comprises about
three-quarters of this spending at $701 billion, with states contributing an
additional $208 billion. This spending spans more than 70 means-tested
programs for the poor including health programs like Medicaid and CHIP,
housing programs, TANF, food stamps, and education programs, including
HEAD Start.
The Welfare Reform Act of 2011 would:
· Place an aggregate spending cap on all means-tested welfare spending

at pre-stimulus 2007 levels (indexed for inflation) effective by 2015 or when
unemployment falls below 7.5%.
· Enforce a spending cap through the budget resolution, and saves $2.43
trillion over 10 years relative to President Obama’s Budget according to the
Heritage Foundation.
2 of 3 2/3/12 12:44 PM
· Provide for transparency in our welfare state by requiring the

President’s budget to disclose the total means-tested welfare expenditures
contained in the 77 existing programs.
· Require the Secretary of Agriculture to ensure that the Supplemental

Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) limits the use of food stamps to
essential foods, ending the use of food stamps at fast food restaurants.
· Remove the 13.6% increase in food stamp benefits created by the

President’s 2009 Stimulus law.
· Reallocate $300 million of current welfare spending towards grants to

states that successfully reduce poverty and increase self-sufficiency.
· Prevent federal funding of abortion in any of the 77 means-tested

welfare programs.
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/11/republicans-
announce-welfare-reform-act-of-2011
3 of 3 2/3/12 12:44 PM
Senators Demand Details On Kagan’s Health Law ‘Role’ - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 18 2011
Senators Demand Details On

Kaganʼs Health Law ʻRoleʼ
Letter to Attorney General Holder: ʻIt
appears that former Solicitor General
Kaganʼs participation in the Obama
Administrationʼs defense of the PPACA
may satisfy both requirements for recusalʼ
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Key Senate Republicans sent a letter to Attorney
General Eric Holder on Friday urging him to comply with Congressional
oversight requests regarding former Solicitor General Elena Kagan’s role in
the administration’s defense of the health care law. Their letter states: “when
a former member of the Administration is in a position to rule on litigation in
which she apparently had some involvement and which concerns legislation
she herself supports, public confidence in the administration of justice is
undermined. Your Department’s refusal to provide information to the
Congress that could eliminate this apparent conflict of interest only
undermines that confidence further.” The letter is signed by Republican
Leader Mitch McConnell, Republican Whip Jon Kyl, Senate Judiciary
Committee Ranking Member Charles Grassley and Senator Mike Lee. Full
text of the letter is pasted below and a PDF of the original is attached.
November 18, 2011
The Honorable Eric Holder

Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Dear Mr. Attorney General:
1 of 4 2/3/12 12:44 PM
Members of Congress have been trying to determine whether Justice Elena

Kagan has a conflict of interest with respect to participating in litigation in
the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) due to her involvement with and support
for this legislation while a member of the Justice Department. Unfortunately,
your Department has rejected all Congressional oversight requests for
information about her role in the Obama Administration’s defense of this
law. You recently told the Senate, incredibly, that you were not even aware
of Congressional requests on this topic, and that your Department handled
her duties as it relates to such matters in a way that is belied by the facts,
namely that you physically removed her from all meetings discussing the
litigation. Because of the highly questionable manner in which your
Department is handling this important issue, we write to underscore the
importance to the rule of law of an informed resolution of this question, and
to apprise you of the legal and factual bases for our concerns.
Federal law requires recusal from a case if a judicial officer of the United
States “has served in governmental employment and in such capacity
participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the
proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular
case or controversy.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(3). In addition, a federal judge
must disqualify herself from participating in a matter if her “impartiality
might reasonably be questioned.” Id. at § 455(a). It appears that former
Solicitor General Kagan’s participation in the Obama Administration’s
defense of the PPACA may satisfy both requirements for recusal.
Then-Solicitor General Kagan acknowledged to the Senate Judiciary

Committee last year that, in fact, she played a “role” in the Obama
Administration’s defense of the PPACA, including attending “at least one
meeting” that discussed the litigation. But she minimized her degree of
involvement in the litigation, characterizing it as not “substantial.” Federal
law, however, requires recusal if a government official participated in a
matter that is the subject of litigation; it does not require the government
official’s past participation in that same matter to be “substantial” (as
determined by the self-same government official).
Moreover, emails finally produced by your Department in response to

lawsuits to enforce the Freedom of Information Act suggest involvement by
then-Solicitor General Kagan in the Administration’s preparations for
defending the PPACA. In January 2010—two months before then-General
Kagan was even aware she was being considered as a potential nominee to
the Supreme Court—your Department began planning to defend this law
against legal challenges. Neil Katyal, Ms. Kagan’s principal deputy, stated
he would “speak with Elena” about her office participating in a Department
2 of 4 2/3/12 12:44 PM
working group that would plan the Administration’s litigation strategy,

exclaiming that he wanted the Administration to “crush” those challenging
the PPACA. A few hours later, Mr. Katyal indicated that he had spoken with
Ms. Kagan about the legal working group, and said she “definitely” wanted
her office to participate in it. (“Elena would definitely like OSG [Office of
the Solicitor General] to be involved in this set of issues.”) He said the
working group would “bring Elena in as needed.” A few days later another
member of your Department made clear that the working group would
discuss the legal “claims that will be asserted and how [the Obama
Administration] will defend against them.” This email then listed the major
legal issues that likely would arise in legal challenges to the PPACA over
which the working group would deliberate. (Your Department has redacted
that part of the email: “The big areas of possible litigation are [redacted].”)
Mr. Katyal then underscored that Ms. Kagan’s office was to be “heavily
involved” in planning the Administration’s legal strategy “even in the
d[istrict court].”
In March—two months before then-Solicitor General Kagan was nominated

to the Supreme Court—she was party to a discussion involving the head of
the PPACA litigation defense working group (Associate Attorney General
Thomas Perrelli) and Mr. Katyal. Specifically, Mr. Katyal added Ms. Kagan
to an email discussion with Mr. Perrelli so Mr. Katyal could advise her of a
draft litigation complaint challenging the PPACA. Mr. Katyal raised
particular parts of the complaint with Ms. Kagan and Mr. Perrelli, including
his analysis of the plaintiff’s litigation strategy. He also provided a link to a
website so Ms. Kagan and Mr. Perrelli could review the document
themselves. Mr. Katyal then recommended to them the next steps the Justice
Department should take to respond to this upcoming legal challenge. He
specifically noted that he was now including then-Solicitor General Kagan to
apprise her of his recommendation, presumably so she could express any
disagreement with it (“I haven’t discussed this with Elena, but am cc’ing her
here”). It should be noted that according to then-General Kagan’s own
testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, during the time of this
discussion of a particular legal challenge to the PPACA, she was still
performing her duties as Solicitor General as normal.
Just three days later, then-Solicitor General Kagan expressed her glee to
another member of your Department, Legal Advisor and Law Professor
Larry Tribe, about the PPACA’s likely passage in the Congress. In an email
entitled, “fingers and toes crossed today!”, Ms. Kagan happily says to
Professor Tribe, “I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing.”
Professor Tribe then gives Ms. Kagan his view of a recent modification to
the legislation. (“So health care is basically done! Remarkable. And with
the Stupak group accepting the magic of what amounts to a signing
statement on steroids!”)
3 of 4 2/3/12 12:44 PM
President Obama chose to nominate a member of his Administration to the

Supreme Court knowing it was likely that, if confirmed, she would be in a
position to rule on his signature domestic policy achievement—“litigation,”
Mr. Katyal noted to former Solicitor General Kagan, “of singular
importance” to the Administration. Among other involvement in this matter,
it appears that she was privy to discussions of legal claims and litigation
strategy concerning court challenges to the PPACA. And it is apparent that
she herself enthusiastically supported this legislation as a member of the
Administration which is now defending it. When a former member of the
Administration is in a position to rule on litigation in which she apparently
had some involvement and which concerns legislation she herself supports,
public confidence in the administration of justice is undermined. Your
Department’s refusal to provide information to the Congress that could
eliminate this apparent conflict of interest only undermines that confidence
further.
The Justice Department noted at the time the Congress was considering the
current mandatory recusal law for federal judges that a purpose of its stricter
standards was to avoid the possibility “that public confidence in the federal
judicial system may be weakened.” We urge you to reconsider your
Department’s decision not to respond to Congress’s oversight requests so
that the public can have confidence in the resolution of this important
litigation.
Sincerely,
Republican Leader Mitch McConnell

Republican Whip Jon Kyl
Judiciary Committee Ranking Member, Senator Charles Grassley
Senator Mike Lee
demand-details-on-kagan-s-health-law-role
4 of 4 2/3/12 12:44 PM
Lee Supports Detainee Protections for American Citizens - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Nov 30 2011
Lee Supports Detainee

Protections for American
Citizens
WASHINGTON – Today, Senator Mike Lee announced his support for
legislation that would prevent any American citizen from being held
indefinitely by the military without trial. The provision is an amendment to
the National Defense Authorization Act, which is currently being considered
by the U.S. Senate.
“Congress should make absolutely clear that the U.S. government does not
have authority to detain an American citizen indefinitely without trial and
proper constitutional process,” said Senator Lee, a member of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. “This amendment ensures the proper balance between
individual liberty and national security, and maintains that we are both a free
and a secure nation.”
Amendment #1126 to the NDAA states: “The authority described in this

section for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain a person does not
include the authority to detain a citizen of the United States without trial
until the end of hostilities.”
Senator Lee strongly disapproves of any policy that would allow for the
indefinite detention of American citizens. Congress expects to vote on the
amendment this week as a part of the NDAA package.
/lee-supports-detainee-protections-for-american-citizens
1 of 2 2/3/12 12:45 PM
Lee cosponsors the North American Energy Security Act - Pres... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 01 2011
Lee cosponsors the North

American Energy Security Act
Today, Senator Mike Lee cosponsored the North American Energy Security
Act, which would authorize the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.
“Not only is this an important energy project, it’s a job-creating project that
is truly ‘shovel-ready,’” said Senator Lee. “Authorizing the Keystone
pipeline will create 20,000 direct jobs. We can’t wait to give the private
sector the freedom to put more Americans to work.
“Moreover, this pipeline will be the next step in reducing dependence on oil
imported from nations that are unstable, undemocratic, and often outright
hostile to the United States. It is infinitely preferable to buy more from our
neighbors to the north and less from dangerous regimes. This is the sort of
intelligent energy decision that we need to consistently make.”
/lee-cosponsors-the-north-american-energy-security-act
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:45 PM
Lee Calls for Iran Sanctions - Press Releases - Press Office - Mi... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 02 2011
Lee Calls for Iran Sanctions

WASHINGTON – Last night, all 100 U.S. Senators voted in favor of
S.A.1414, an amendment to S.1867, to sanction the Central Bank of Iran.
Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) cosponsored this amendment that was introduced
by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ).
Under this legislation, foreign financial institutions that conduct financial

transactions with the Central Bank of Iran will be prohibited from opening or
maintaining correspondent bank accounts in the United States.
This bill is a response to the illicit activities of the Government of Iran,

including its pursuit of nuclear weapons, support for international terrorism,
and efforts to deceive responsible financial institutions and evade sanctions.
“The United States needs to send a clear message to the government of Iran
that we will not tolerate the threats posed by the Iranian regime’s actions,”
said Senator Lee, who sits on the Foreign Relations committee. “Their
pursuit of nuclear weapons poses a serious threat to the United States, Israel,
and other allies. This amendment sends a clear signal to the Iranian regime
that they will not be allowed to participate in the global economic system if
they continue to destabilize the region.
"I call upon the Administration to take immediate action to implement these
sanctions and explain President Obama's strategy for halting Iran's charge
toward obtaining nuclear weapons. The United States cannot afford to ‘lead
from behind’ on this issue."
for-iran-sanctions
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:45 PM
Lee Land Bill Clears Congress - Press Releases - Press Office -... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 08 2011
Lee Land Bill Clears Congress

Yesterday, legislation introduced by Senator Mike Lee passed both chambers
of Congress for the first time. The House voted unanimously in approval of
its version of a bill that authorizes the transfer of vacant and virtually unused
federal land in Utah to the growing city of Mantua. The Senate version has
already been passed, also unanimously.
Under the new law, Mantua will gain control of nearly 32 acres of land in
Box Elder County that was originally owned by Hans Rasmussen, an early
settler of Mantua. His family eventually deeded the land to the U.S. Forest
Service in 1941 for $1.00. Mantua will not be required to pay for the land.
“It is a testament to the success of our state and cities like Mantua that
this bill was necessary,” said Senator Lee, who sits on the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee. “Mantua can use the land productively
and the federal government has no pressing need for it. I am glad that
the House passed Congressman Rob Bishop’s version of this legislation.”
Permalink: http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2011/12/lee-land-
bill-clears-congress
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:46 PM
Lee Sponsors Bill to Protect American Civil Liberties - Press Re... http://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=...

Press Releases
Dec 15 2011
Lee Sponsors Bill to Protect

American Civil Liberties
Today, Senator Mike Lee co-sponsored the Due Process Guarantee Act of
2011, which clarifies that a declaration of war or authorization for the use of
military force by Congress does not authorize the indefinite detention of
American citizens or legal residents who are apprehended in the United
States.
“The government’s most basic responsibility is to protect the civil liberties

of its citizens,” said Senator Lee. “Our nation has fought wars on American
soil and around the world in defense of individual liberty, and we must not
sacrifice this most fundamental right in the pursuit of greater security.
Without freedom there is no security."
“Americans who commit treason, or plot treasonous acts, should and will be
punished for their crimes. But granting the United States government the
power to deprive its own citizens of life, liberty, or property without full due
process of law goes against the very nature of our nation's constitutional
values.”
The full list of original cosponsors includes: Senators Feinstein, Leahy, Lee,
Udall (CO), Kirk, Gillibrand, Paul, Coons, Durbin, Nelson (NE), Shaheen,
Franken, Udall (NM), McCaskill.
/lee-sponsors-bill-to-protect-american-civil-liberties
1 of 1 2/3/12 12:46 PM
Sampling of 2011 Facebook Posts
Find more at: http://facebook.com/senatormikelee

State Leg Report (2011)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

State Leg Report (2011)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MICHAEL S.

United States Senate

To the Utah State Legislature:

Thank you for allowing me to serve you in Congress.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

25 standing and a cause of action to seek judicial enforce-

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 11, 2011

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Cut, Cap, and Balance

3 Fore purposes of section 302(a) of the Congressional

12 It is the sense of Congress that Congress should

19 Title III of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974

22 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

24 bill, joint resolution, amendment, or conference report that

24 ‘‘(8) For fiscal year 2019—

24 limits provided in this section, the budgetary aggre-

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

24 ‘‘(3) For fiscal year 2014, $580,743,000,000 in

24 the manager of the measure. An affirmative vote of

5 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

24 ‘‘(F) For fiscal year 2017, total outlays

24 two-thirds of the Members of the Senate, duly cho-

4 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

24 ‘‘(7) For fiscal year 2018, total outlays, exclud-

24 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the

24 not exceed $83,830,000,000.

19 The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control

24 ‘‘(a) ANNUAL REPORT AND SEQUESTRATION

24 uniform percentage each program within a category

24 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

24 fied through a declaration of war or a Congressional

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury

24 States Code, is amended by striking the dollar limitation

JULY 11, 2011

PATENT REFORM/Balanced Budget Amendment

SUBJECT: Patent Reform Act of 2011, S. 23. Lee/Manchin amendment

ACTION: Amendment Rejected, 58-40

5) Democrats suffered historic losses in the mid-term elections (6 Senate

CUT, CAP, AND BALANCE/Motion to Proceed

ACTION: Motion to Table Agreed to, 51-46

7) Democrats have expressed support for higher taxes on millionaires,

Grouped By Vote Position

BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT/Rejection

ACTION: Joint Resolution Defeated, 47-53

4) The House failed to pass a balanced budget constitutional amendment

Mike Lee, United States Senator for Utah

Why we need a balanced-

As originally published by the Washington Post

This week, 58 senators - including all 47 Republicans, 10 Democrats and

A similar measure in the House has more than 120 co-sponsors.

The vast majority of states have constitutional or statutory mandates to

First, a balanced-budget requirement will ensure we do not continue to drive

Finally, a structural budget restraint is necessary to overcome Congress's

Critics worry that an amendment that requires a two-thirds vote to

Other senators have good ideas, and I am open to considering and

The writer is a Republican senator from Utah.

Mike Lee, United States Senator for Utah

Reforms, Not Just Cuts, Needed

Like many conservatives, I was disappointed by the spending cuts agreed to

this pledge. Only by passing a balanced budget amendment can Congress

Now is the time to pass a balanced budget amendment. The amendment I

A House version of the Hatch-Lee amendment is gaining momentum and,