Hatch, Congressional Delegation Urge Full Rescission of Bears Ears in Letter to Zinke
Washington, D.C.—Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the senior Republican in the United States Senate, along with Senator Mike Lee, Congressmen Jason Chaffetz, Chris Stewart, and Rob Bishop, and Congresswoman Mia Love, sent a letter to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke yesterday urging the Trump administration to fully rescind the Bears Ears National Monument, while simultaneously expressing support for Zinke’s fair, responsible, and thorough review process.
“We stand unified in our recommendation for a full rescission of Utah’s most excessive monuments,” the delegation wrote. “Know that, as you conclude your review, you have our full support. We trust that your process will be fair, responsible, and thorough. To be clear, our top priority is the establishment of a new precedent for designating national monuments—one that corrects past abuses and remains consistent with the original intent of the Antiquities Act by limiting monument designations to the smallest area compatible with the protection of the antiquities within.”
Senator Hatch's has stated that his top priority is ensuring that the people of Utah, particularly in San Juan County, have a voice in the process of both protecting and managing these lands, which Secretary Zinke's review has made possible. While he has urged the Trump administration to fully rescind the Bears Ears monument, he will accept whatever the Secretary recommends to the President at the end of a fair and thorough review process.
The full letter, as delivered to Secretary Zinke, is attached and below:
May 25, 2017
The Honorable Ryan Zinke
Secretary
c/o Mr. Micah Chambers
Acting Director, Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
U.S. Department of Interior
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Mr. Secretary:
We write you in response to your May 12, 2017 letter requesting congressional input regarding executive action(s) to be taken pursuant to President Donald J. Trump’s April 26, 2017 Executive Order 13792 (the Order), which charges you with the task of a thorough review of national monuments created under the Antiquities Act—specifically, those designated since January 1, 1996 with footprints greater than 100,000 acres.
As a united delegation, we would like to begin by thanking you and the President for this long-overdue Order, which begins a critical examination of previously designated national monuments and establishes a new precedent for future monument proclamations. Our support rests upon a shared view that this action represents a significant step in addressing decades of Antiquities Act abuses, which have occurred time and time again against the will of the people, at great expense to regional prosperity, and contrary to the original intent of Congress when it delegated this authority to the President.
We applaud your review because our home state of Utah has repeatedly fallen victim to overreaching use of the Antiquities Act—a law that has become a tool of political advocacy rather than public interest. As you well know, the original intent of the Antiquities Act was to identify and protect objects of “historic or scientific interest” that are “limited to the smallest area compatible” with protection thereof. Regrettably, as you mentioned in your remarks, this guidance has become, “the exception, rather than the rule,” and many of Utah’s most rural and remote communities have suffered as a result.
Under the guise of protecting our nation’s antiquities, massive restrictions in access to our public lands discount Congressional intent. Congress—which holds sole authority under the Constitution to manage federal lands—granted the President only narrow authority to designate national monuments, specifically to protect objects of antiquities, such Native American burial grounds, relics, and artifacts. Designating massive monuments that are larger than some states is a gross abuse of executive power.
Unfortunately, these colossal abuses have soured the appetite for national monument designations, making the Antiquities Act synonymous with overreach rather than a tool to be celebrated for protecting our national heritage. Restoring the legitimacy of Antiquities Act authority in the eyes of the public requires a responsible and collaborative approach to monument designations—an approach that takes into account the needs of local communities and restores trust between states and the federal government.
We stand unified in our recommendation for a full rescission of Utah’s most excessive monuments. Know that, as you conclude your review, you have our full support. We trust that your process will be fair, responsible, and thorough. To be clear, our top priority is the establishment of a new precedent for designating national monuments—one that corrects past abuses and remains consistent with the original intent of the Antiquities Act by limiting monument designations to the smallest area compatible with the protection of the antiquities within.
We welcome the review of the monuments in our state that failed to properly take into account the views of the most impacted local communities. We appreciate you taking the time to meet with a wide array of various stakeholders in Utah during your most recent visit, and we stand ready to support you as you finalize your review.
Sincerely,
Orrin G. Hatch Mike Lee
U.S. Senator U.S. Senator
Rob Bishop Jason Chaffetz
Member of Congress Member of Congress
Chris Stewart Mia Love
Member of Congress Member of Congress
===============
Hatch, King, Nelson Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Provide Community Bank Relief
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Angus King (I-ME), and Bill Nelson (D-FL) today introduced the Community Bank Relief Act (S. 1284) to provide regulatory relief to small financial institutions. The bill preserves financial safety measures and broadens small bank lending opportunities that will provide families, small businesses, and start-ups better credit options.
“Smaller banks are at the heart of our local communities and national economy,” Senator Hatch said. “Sadly, these banks, and the local economies they serve, are being squeezed hard. Post-crisis policies and excess compliance disproportionately hit community lenders relative to large banks, even though community banks were not at the source of the crisis. This bipartisan bill makes a critical improvement to Dodd-Frank without compromising safety standards. This legislation also helps small financial institutions provide households and small businesses more quality-based loans that will invigorate our local communities.”
"It's common-sense to know that Maine's community banks are different from large Wall Street banks. But too often today, regulations from Washington treat them as if they're the same, and community banks -- along with the Maine people they serve -- are paying the price," Senator King said. "This bill will help provide relief and flexibility to community banks across Maine that are a critical source of the capital that helps drive our state's economy."
“Community banks are connected to local residents in ways large banks cannot be,” Senator Nelson said. “It’s important to ensure that they can continue to meet the needs of local businesses and ordinary Americans without being tripped up by regulations meant for larger banks.”
Statements of Support:
Camden R. Fine, President and CEO, Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA):
“On behalf of the more than 5,800 community banks represented by ICBA, I write to express our strong support for S. 1284, which would allow more community bank holding companies to raise needed capital to better serve their customers and communities.”
Chuck Boulier, Chairman, America’s Mutual Banks:
“We believe strongly that small banks are engines of economic growth in those communities where large multi-national banks have forsaken small businesses. Many studies have shown that collectively community banks disproportionately support small business lending where much larger banks seek their business in complex international activities involving large multi-national corporations. Our members believe that it is important to the nation to relieve the unnecessary and inappropriate burdens on community banks which have had a ripple effect on small businesses in much of the country. Therefore, it is with great enthusiasm that we welcome the bi-partisan introduction by you of S. 1284, the Community Bank Relief Act and support its passage by the Senate.”
Howard Headlee, President, the Utah Bankers Association:
“Senator Hatch's ability to reach across the aisle to promote common sense policies that will benefit Utah is astounding. Increasing the small bank holding company threshold is a simple yet powerful way to support local businesses and Utah's growing economy without sacrificing the safety of the banking system.”
Along with support from ICBA, America’s Mutual Banks, and the Utah Bankers Association, the Community Bank Relief Act is supported by the Maine Bankers Association and the American Bankers Association.
Senators Hatch, King, and Nelson recently joined a letter urging the Senate Banking Committee to hold a hearing on measures to provide regulatory and supervisory relief for our nation’s small financial institutions, including community banks and credit unions. The letter promotes bipartisan legislative measures to provide relief for these small financial institutions and the customers they serve.
Background
Specifically, S. 1284, the Community Bank Relief Act requires the Federal Reserve to expand the number of institutions to which the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement applies by increasing the asset size threshold from $1 billion to $5 billion. For safety purposes, the Federal Reserve may still exclude any bank holding company (BHC) or savings and loan company if the Board determines such action is warranted.
Data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation indicates that raising the asset threshold to $5 billion would affect 443 BHCs and savings and loan holding companies. The bill would also have a dual impact on their subsidiary banks (namely 457 community banks). Based on information provided by the Federal Reserve, 96 percent of BHCs and savings and loan holding companies would be covered by the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement should the asset threshold increase from $1 billion to $5 billion (by comparison, 87 percent of BHCs are covered as of December 31, 2016).
Since subsidiary banks are already subject to capital requirements, making the parent small BHC subject to capital requirements is overly onerous and not necessary for financial resilience. The Community Bank Relief Act helps advance the complementary goals of banking soundness, regulatory efficiency, and economic growth.
###
=============
Following CBO Score on AHCA, Hatch Urges Senate to Refocus on Addressing Shortcomings in Current System
Utah Senator Says we must, “strive toward our own policy goals to implement patient-centered health reforms that address costs and promote choice and competition.”
WASHINGTON – Earlier this week the Congressional Budget Office released a report about the American Healthcare Act, the House of Representatives legislative effort to repeal and replace Obamacare. In a speech on the Senate floor, Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) urged his colleagues to focus on the importance of repealing and replacing Obamacare, noting the skyrocketing costs associated with the unworkable law and the damage skyrocketing premiums are doing to Utah families.
“We need to act as quickly as possible to repeal and replace the misguided law,” Hatch said. “Just today we received a report from HHS that from the time Obamacare took effect through 2017 there was an average premium increase of 105 percent across the 39 states using HealthCare.gov. This is just one snapshot of the runaway costs of Obamacare.”
Hatch went on to address specific policy issues that fall under the jurisdiction of the Senate Finance Committee including taxes and the individual mandate.
“My view that all of the Obamacare taxes need to go. We shouldn’t be treating the Obamacare taxes as a smorgasbord, picking and choosing which ones to keep and which to discard,” Hatch continued. “Like the taxes, the Individual Mandate needs to be repealed. Republicans have spent years condemning the individual mandate as an unconstitutional assault on individual liberty”
Earlier this week Hatch spoke more specifically about how Obamacare is hurting families in Utah.
The complete speech as prepared for delivery is below:
Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the continuing effort to repeal and replace Obamacare.
This effort has essentially been going since the day the bill was signed into law, and I think most of us on the Republican side recognize the overwhelming consensus surrounding the failures of Obamacare as a major reason we currently find ourselves in the majority.
As you know, the House passed the American Health Care Act, a bill that would repeal-and-replace Obamacare, earlier this month.
This was an important step in the process.
And, later today, we expect to hear from the Congressional Budget Office about the House bill.
The CBO score will lay down an important marker for the repeal-and-replace efforts in the Senate. It will allow us to work to ensure that the House bill fits into the constraints of the reconciliation rules in the Senate, while we continue to strive toward our own policy goals to implement patient-centered health reforms that address costs and promote choice and competition.
These changes are more important than ever, Mr. President. Just today we received a report from HHS that from the time Obamacare took effect through 2017 there was an average premium increase of 105 percent across the 39 states using HealthCare.gov.
This is just one snapshot of the runaway costs of Obamacare. And it is just one of many examples indicating why we need to act as quickly as possible to repeal and replace the misguided law.
As the Senate continues to discuss the policy matters related to this effort, we’ll need to confront a number of different issues as we work to provide enduring reforms for our beleaguered healthcare system. As Chairman of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over most of the salient issues under discussion, I want to make my views on these matters very clear.
First, it is my view that ALL of the Obamacare taxes need to go.
We shouldn’t be treating the Obamacare taxes as a smorgasbord, picking and choosing which ones to keep and which to discard. I don’t think there’s a single tax increase in Obamacare that has enjoyed support on the Republican side.
And, when all is said and done, the tax provisions of the Affordable Care Act represented a trillion dollar hit on the economy in just the first ten years. That is nearly one percent of the projected gross domestic product over the same period.
In my view, it would be inappropriate, after spending the better part of a decade railing against Obamacare’s burdensome, job-killing taxes, for us to then turn around and say that some of them are fine so long as they’re being used to fund Republican healthcare proposals.
It’s very simple: We need to repeal all of the Obamacare taxes.
The medical device tax, the Health Insurance tax, the so-called Cadillac Tax, the taxes on healthcare savings and pharmaceuticals, and several others – they all have to go.
Second, we need to fully repeal the Individual Mandate.
There has been some talk about keeping the mandate around, temporarily if nothing else, to help shore up the new system.
But, as I said with the Obamacare taxes, Republicans have spent years condemning the individual mandate as an unconstitutional assault on individual liberty. We’ve also argued that it was ineffective in that it has failed to draw enough younger and healthier consumers into the insurance markets in order to offset the costs of Obamacare’s draconian market reform mandates.
I don’t see how we can now turn on a dime and say that the individual mandate is now somehow acceptable, because we’re using it to prop up a system that Republicans have designed.
Like the taxes, the Individual Mandate, in my view, needs to be repealed.
Lastly, we need to resist any temptation to alter the tax treatment of employer-provided health insurance as part of this particular exercise.
Now, don’t get me wrong, Mr. President, there have been a number of health reform proposals over the years that have dealt with this issue, including a legislative framework that I drafted along with two of my colleagues.
However, given the limitations we face under this current exercise, and the fact that we are not starting from a blank slate, but rather attempting to repeal a law that has been implemented for a number of years, we should be wary of the impact of pulling employer-sponsored insurance into this current debate.
The purpose of this budget reconciliation exercise to repeal and replace Obamacare is to address costs in the individual market. I believe it is important that everyone – whether they’re members of Congress, stakeholders in the business community, or living elsewhere in the country – manage their expectations about the possible outcomes of this process given the limitations we’re facing.
While the constraints inherent to the budget reconciliation process may be inconvenient at the specific moment, they serve a number of important purposes. Under this process, the Senate will need to reduce the deficit by at least as much as the House bill. There’s really no way around that.
The process for determining what provisions of the House bill will need to be changed is still ongoing. And, of course, we’ll have to take a good, long look at the numbers we get from CBO later today.
Not only do we need to take into account the CBO numbers and budget rules, we also need to consider what is the best policy and, at the end of the day, what approach is doable. We can do a lot in this exercise, but we shouldn’t make this the be-all-end-all of our healthcare reform efforts.
As I stated before, everyone should be managing their expectations at this point. While we can and should be ambitious in our efforts, we need to be realistic about the limitations that exist and be willing to practice the art of the doable, to compromise, and to recognize what issues will need to be set aside for a another day.
None of this will be easy, but I believe we are up to challenge. I look forward to working with my colleagues on these issues and to finding solutions that will help us keep the promises we’ve made to our constituents.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
===============
Hatch Fights for Schools with Bills Focused on Strengthening Teachers
Washington, D.C.— Today Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), a member and former Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, introduced two bipartisan bills to support America’s teachers.
The first bill, the Teacher Loan Repayment Act (TELORA), improves federal loan assistance programs and provides educators with clear and tangible incentives to enter and remain in the classroom. This bill simplifies the loan application process, provides teachers with real financial benefits, and incentivizes teachers to work in the neediest schools. Hatch was joined in sponsoring TELORA by Senator Mark Warner (D-VA) and Representatives Susan Brooks (R-IN) and Derek Kilmer (D-WA).
The second bill, the Elevating Educator Preparation through Innovation Act, improves professional development opportunities for teachers in high-needs school districts. This bill allows school districts greater autonomy in choosing which provider to partner with in conducting their teacher training. The legislation also permits grant funds to be used to create a more targeted linkage between teachers' clinical experience and their professional development in their job placement. Senator Hatch sponsored this bill alongside Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO), John Cornyn (R-TX), and Mark Warner (D-VA).
“I sincerely believe that one of the best ways for us to improve schools and education outcomes in the United States is to focus on finding the best teachers possible, then giving them resources to succeed and incentives to stay in the classrooms that need them the most,” Hatch said. “TELORA will entice more students to become teachers by simplifying the loan-application and repayment process for teachers in high-needs schools. The Elevating Educator Preparation through Innovation Act will expand teachers’ access to education training programs, helping them to feel more adequately prepared and helping students receive the best instruction possible. These two bills constitute a critical investment in the people that educate and inspire America’s future generations.”
Senator Hatch introduced similar legislation in the past. Background information and statements of support for TELORA in 2015 can be found here. Background information and statements of support for the Elevating Educator Preparation through Innovation Act in 2016 can be found here.
###
=======================
Hatch and Warner Introduce Bipartisan Geospatial Data Act
Washington, D.C.— US Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Mark Warner (D-VA) introduced the bipartisan Geospatial Data Act (GDA), a bill that will improve coordination, reduce duplication, and increase data transparency in the acquisition of geospatial data.
“The uses and applications for geospatial technology are immense and constantly growing,” Senator Hatch said, “The process in which the federal government collects geospatial data currently wastes vast amounts of taxpayer dollars and fails to provide the most accurate information. The GDA will provide the tools to create a more robust and modern system of maps and digital data with a budget that avoids redundant expenditures. We need to optimize the method in which we collect geospatial data to advance the technology for states, counties, and citizens around the nation.”
“Some of the greatest innovations in our digital economy have come from early investments the federal government made in geospatial data through development of the Global Positioning Systems (GPS),” Senator Warner said. “Geospatial data has enormous applications in transforming both the private and public sectors—supporting apps, innovative tools, and activities as wide-ranging as emergency preparedness to finding a restaurant. Today, the federal government is the largest purchaser of geospatial data, but the federal government’s collection and utilization of this data has been undermined by duplication and a lack of transparency. This bill would bring greater accountability to the federal government’s use of geospatial data, and ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently.”
Bert Granberg, President of the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) said, "From transportation, to natural resources, to homeland security, map-based digital information has quietly become mission critical to how work gets done and to future economic growth. We need an efficiency and accountability framework to build, sustain, and share geographic data assets for the entire nation. The GDA delivers just that."
Matthew Chase, executive director of the National Association of Counties, said, “GIS data is an important tool for counties when it comes to making land use decisions, maintaining infrastructure, and responding to emergencies. We support this bill because counties need accurate, modern mapping data to perform key duties and deliver services to their residents. We commend Senators Hatch and Warner for introducing this legislation and urge their colleagues to join them in supporting it.”
The bill is also supported by the National Association of State Chief Information Officers, the National Association of Counties, the National States Geographic Information Council, and MAAPS - An Association of Photogrammetry, Mapping, and Geospatial Firms.
Background
Geospatial data is the information that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural or constructed features, such as wells, roads, or forests. The federal government has recognized the need to organize and coordinate the collection and management of this data since at least 1990, when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) most recently revised Circular A-16 to establish the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and to promote the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of geospatial data nationwide. Unfortunately, the progress made over the last two decades has been inadequate. The federal government needs to improve management of geospatial data across the board.
The Geospatial Data Act will codify and strengthen OMB Circular A-16 and require federal agencies to implement international consensus standards, assist in eliminating duplication, avoid redundant expenditures, accelerate the development of electronic government to meet the needs and expectations of citizens and agency programmatic mandates, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public management.
Additionally, the bill will provide a clear definition for geospatial data and metadata, will require an accounting of the costs associated with the acquisition or creation of geospatial data, and will improve government transparency and availability to public information.
===================
Hatch’s International Communication Privacy Act (ICPA) Praised in Hearing
Washington, D.C.— Today in the Senate Judiciary Committee Crime and Terrorism Subcommittee hearing on “Law Enforcement Access to Data Stored Across Borders,” Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)—a senior member and former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Chairman of the Senate Republican High-Tech Task Force— discussed his bill, the International Communications Privacy Act (ICPA), and its importance in our increasingly globalized world.
In his remarks Senator Hatch said, “ICPA creates a clear legal framework for determining when U.S. law enforcement may compel service providers based in the United States to turn over data that is stored abroad. My bill incorporates feedback from both law enforcement and privacy groups and is grounded on three principles: respect for other countries and their laws, international comity, and reciprocity. ICPA is one of my top priorities, and I plan to push very hard for it once it’s reintroduced.”
Microsoft President Brad Smith told Hatch that if Congress does not act on this issue, the status quo will “leave us all hostage to a law that was passed 31 years that hinders law enforcement, undermines privacy rights, and frankly puts tension between countries.” As to ICPA’s requirement of U.S. search warrants for digital data, Smith said he and his company have been “broadly supportive” of such requirements.
Yesterday, Senator Hatch gave a floor speech on ICPA, describing how the bill would better protect consumer privacy, clarify U.S. law enforcement’s ability to obtain global electronic communications, and respect the data privacy laws of other countries.
=====================
