THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 45 - SHE VOTES AGAINST AMERICA'S NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOR CHINA, AGAIN!!!

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

H.R. 6160 is the Rare Earths and Critical Materials Revitalization Act of 2010. What, you may ask, does that have to do with the price of tea in China? That is the exact correct question. China is dominating the world supply of "rare earths" and directly undermines our national security.

Representative Kathleen A. Dahlkemper

The author of the legislation is Pennsylvania's Democratic Representative Kathleen A. Dahlkemper. Her remarks on H.R. 6160 can be found at http://dahlkemper.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=319:dahlkemper-statement-on-fighting-chinese-currency-manipulation-and-chinese-dominance-of-rare-earths&catid=9:press-releases&Itemid=9. I have excerpted Representative Dahlkemper's remarks here.

“What would happen to our national defense if we could no longer build a jet engine? Vehicle batteries? Advanced targeting systems? What are the chances that we become energy independent if we cannot produce hybrid cars, wind turbines and other alternative energy products? What would happen to our economy if the technologies we depend on to make businesses work are no longer available? 

“These are questions we would have to answer if China cut off our supply of rare earth materials—vital components to nearly every piece of advanced technology we use in our national defense and throughout businesses and industry.

“For the past decade, the United States has been almost entirely dependent on China for its supply of rare earth materials, despite the fact that we have an abundant reserve of these materials within our own borders. China currently accounts for as much as 97 percent of the world’s available supply of rare earth materials.

“But they are reducing the amount of these materials going into the global market. Just this summer, China announced it would cut its rare earths exports for the second half of 2010 by 72 percent.

“The bottom line is this: China is cornering the market on rare earth materials and we are falling behind. That is why we need to act now to begin the process of creating our own domestic supply of rare earth materials so the United States is never dependent on China—or on any other country—for crucial components for our national security.

“My bill is a bipartisan plan to jump start U.S. research and development in rare earth materials to improve our ability to find, extract, process and use rare earths to improve products. We want to ultimately create a domestic supply of rare earths.

“My legislation will foster a strong rare earths industry here in the United States. The scope of this bill spans the full supply chain, from exploration to mining to manufacturing. It will reduce risk in financing new rare earths production facilities by guaranteeing loans to companies with new processing and refining technologies.

“China has stated clearly that foreign firms that move their manufacturing capacity onto Chinese soil will have no trouble procuring rare earth materials. That’s just another way American manufacturing jobs are being lured overseas.

“That has to stop. We need to make things right here in our country and give those great manufacturing jobs to American men and women here.

“This legislation is both urgent and timely. Just last week, China reportedly cut off Japan’s supply of rare earths in the wake of a territory conflict.

“This is a clear warning sign, and we would be foolish to ignore it. The GAO reports that it may take up to 15 years to rebuild the U.S. rare earth supply chain. Delaying the seed money to begin this process only prolongs our dependency on China.

“I am pleased that representatives on both sides of the aisle supported my plan to jump start our own rare earths supply chain, promote U.S. global competitiveness and ensure our national defense is Made in America.

“So, yesterday was a very good day for manufacturers in Western Pennsylvania and a good day for U.S. global competitiveness.” 

Lynn Jenkins voted against our national security on roll call vote 555. The Rare Earths and Critical Materials Revitalization Act of 2010 passed the House by a vote of 325 to 98.

On back to back votes, roll call votes 554 and 555, Lynn Jenkins has stood with China against America's economic and national security. Lynn Jenkins does not represent us.



THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 44 - SHE VOTES AGAINST DUTIES AGAINST ARTIFICIALLY INFLATED CHINESE PRODUCTS COSTING AMERICAN JOBS

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

China has been propping up its currency. Lynn Jenkins apparently thinks that is okay. What are the effects of China's currency policies? First a little detail about Chinese money. The Chinese yuan is like the British pound, it is the unit of accounting. The Chinese renminbi is like the British sterling, it is the unit of currency.

According to the International Monetary Fund, China's exchange rate policy contributes to large trade deficits in the United States. The overvalued Chinese currency has a negative impact on economic growth and job creation. The Chinese are placing a drag on international trade policies, making it more difficult for countries to import and export goods. The overvalued Chinese yuan depresses interest rates and may be a contributing, if not exacerbating, factor in the recent global economic crisis. The Chinese policy distorts investment patterns as China looks for overseas investments of accumulated American dollars to keep the renminbi undervalued.

One economist, Peter Morici, formerly the chief economist of the International Trade Commission, said the U.S. trade deficit with China will reduce American Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by more than $400 billion.

The 2008 Nobel Prize winner in Economics, Paul Krugman, estimates that China's exchange rate policy reduces American GDP by 1.4 to 1.5 percentage points each year and equals 1.4 to 1.5 million fewer American jobs each year.

The budgetary implications of H.R. 2378 estimate that this bill will produce $125 million in revenue, from increased customs duties, for the period of fiscal years 2011 - 2020, while costing $41 million for salaries, expenses, & benefits for additional staff. The bill does not trigger the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The pay-go considerations show the bill increases revenues and does not involve direct spending .

Although discussions have been held on this topic with China, they refuse to budge from their position.

So what part of Chinese monetary policy does Lynn Jenkins favor? Does she like the cheap lead laden toys dumped on our kids? Does she like America being a debtor nation to China? Does she favor Chinese people working rather than American people working?

To summarize China's monetary policy gives the United States large trade deficits which means it is costing us more money than it is worth to do business with China; economic growth and job creation are stunted; international trade is negatively impacted restricting the flow of goods between nations; Chinese monetary policy made the global economic crisis worse; China is investing American dollars to keep the Chinese renminbi artificially cheap.

So what to do? The House of Representatives has answered with H.R. 2378, the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, which contains sections amending Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify that countervailing duties may be imposed to address subsidies relating to a fundamentally undervalued currency.

What could keep a fiscally responsible incumbent Republican Representative to Congress from voting for H.R. 2378? Maybe it is the Chamber of Congress' China Connection.

The U.S. Chamber of Congress endorsed Lynn Jenkins' candidacy on June 29th.

The problem with the Chamber's endorsement is that the Chamber lobbied for TARP and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, as that legislation was necessary to keep Chamber members on life support until the most critical part of the economic crisis passed. Lynn Jenkins is opposed to the Stimulus, and the TARP predates her tenure in the House.

The other huge problem with the Chamber's endorsement is that MSNBC and other sources were reporting last night that Chamber membership is now open to foreign corporations. Those corporations are sending their checks directly into the same Chamber of Commerce checking account the Chamber uses to pay for attack ads against Democratic candidates.

Remember when Associate Justice Sam Alito retorted to President Obama's remark that the decision in Citizen's United would not permit foreign corporations from influencing American elections? Well here it is. The Chamber of Commerce needs to be investigated by the Department of Justice for being a front for Chinese, Indian, and other foreign corporations attempting to buy influence in American politics.

The Republicans are voting to keep tax credits that encourage shipping American jobs offshore. The Republicans are voting to keep the import duties down on Chinese products, costing America direct revenues from customs and duties, costing America at least $400 billion in GDP, and costing America close to a 1,500,000 American jobs each year.

Ironically, Lynn Jenkins claims she should be reelected because she has been fighting for jobs. Well, she voted against American jobs when she voted against H.R. 2378, roll call 554. She voted against keeping American jobs in America when she voted closing tax loopholes that let American jobs get shipped overseas, that was H.R. 1586 the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act of 2010. Some record!

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 43 - SHE FORGETS THOSE WHO RESPONDED TO THE AFTERMATH OF 9/11/01

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

We remember. We remember the dastardly attacks on civilians September 11, 2001. We remember the blazing twin towers. We remember the firefighters and police officers that rushed headlong into danger. We remember the towers falling, the dust cloud rolling through the concrete and steel canyons of New York, and the devastation of ground zero. We remember the brave souls that went in, waded through the debris, painstakingly took the devastation apart, paused to honor the fallen as they came upon their bodies, and cleaned up the place afterwards. Now Lynn Jenkins wants to forget.

We Remember

Serious health problems face the men and women who encountered, first hand, the most cowardly attack to hit America. Lynn Jenkins (whose prior response to health care was to do it the responsible way) wants us to take no responsibility for the health consequences of these victims of 9/11. Airborne toxins were released when those buildings fell. These workers were exposed to those poisons because they responded to America at a time of peril. Lynn Jenkins thinks they should be on their own.

We Remember

H.R. 847 is the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, it passed the House of Representatives on roll call vote 550, September 29th. The margin of passage was 268 to 160. Lynn Jenkins voted against H.R. 847.

The bill established the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program which is charged with providing initial health screenings and follow-up for WTC responders. The legislation contains provisions to prevent fraud and unreasonable administrative costs.

Not every Republican voted against H.R. 847. Louisiana Representative Anh "Joseph" Cao voted "yes". Delaware Representative Mike Castle voted "yes". Oklahoma Representative Tom Cole voted "yes". Pennsylvania Representative Charlie Dent voted "yes". New Jersey Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen voted "yes". Pennsylvania Representative Jim Gerlach voted "yes". North Carolina Representative Walter B. Jones voted "yes". New York Representative Peter King voted "yes". Illinois Representative Mark Kirk voted "yes". New Jersey Representative Leonard Lance voted "yes". New York Representative Frank LoBiondo voted "yes". California Representative Daniel E. Lungren voted "yes". Pennsylvania Representative Tim Murphy voted "yes". Pennsylvania Representative Todd Platts voted "yes". Tennessee Representative Phil Roe voted "yes". New Jersey Representative Chris Smith voted "yes". Those sixteen Republican Representatives remembered 9/11, good for them, they are Republicans second and Americans first.

Lynn Jenkins forgets or never understood, shame on her.

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 42 - SHE'D RATHER FOLLOW THE PARTY LINE THAN SERVE CONSTITUENTS

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

H.R. 4785, the Rural Energy Savings Program Act, will make money available under the Agriculture Department's Rural Utilities Services (RUS) so they can make loans to their customers to purchase and install off the shelf energy saving technology. That could be dual pane, low E, argon filled windows, roof top solar-electric systems, energy efficient electric water heaters, or small wind turbines. Rural customers are facing increased electric utility costs and this is a bill that let's tem get affordable loans to reduce those costs. That's a good idea, right? That would be included in an "all of the above approach" to solving our energy concerns, right?  Well apparently not for Lynn Jenkins.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the RUS will be able to leverage $993 million into between $4 billion and $5 billion in loans to local electric cooperatives. CBO estimates RUS will spend $800 million over the next four fiscal years. There are no Pay-As-You-Go considerations because enacting   H.R. 4785 does not impact direct spending or revenue. We're making loans here not handouts, it does not affect direct spending. H.R. 4785 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.

Here is an opportunity for a Representative to Congress whose district is largely rural to vote for a program that will let people borrow money to go their local farm center or hardware store and buy the technology to reduce their electric bill.

The bill defines rural as a community of less than 50,000 population and not contiguous, or next to, an urban area. The loans bear a 3% interest rate. That's got to be a winner for a Representative from a largely rural district. But not for Lynn Jenkins who voted against H.R. 4785 on roll call vote 530 on September 16th. The margin was 240 to 142.

Electric Utilities only gave Lynn Jenkins a mere $4,250, so this is probably Lynn Jenkins following the party line. Lynn Jenkins votes with the Party of No 95.40% according to the Washington Post. See, http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/J000290/

When Lynn Jenkins is voting "no" with the Party of No she is voting against her constituents living in rural Kansas.  H.R. 4785 has been sent to the Senate.



THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 41 - SHE'S AGAINST WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION FOR OIL RIGS, TAKES CONTRIBUTIONS FROM EPA EMPLOYEE, AND WALLOWS IN OIL & GAS CASH

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Anyone remember when we were captivated by the un-natural disaster of British Petroleum's Deepwater Horizon? That was once the oil rig, with safety features disengaged, that blew apart, killing workers, and spewing millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. Do you remember it now?

That's good, because apparently Lynn Jenkins has forgotten. Lynn Jenkins who likes to claim that she's for "all of the above" in energy policy includes corporate malfeasance in that list of answers to our energy needs.

H.R. 5851, the Offshore Oil and Gas Worker Whistleblower Protection Act of 2010 passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 315 to 93, roll call vote 506 on July 30th. Lynn Jenkins was among those stalwarts of Big Oil voting against this measure.

H.R. 5851 prohibits employers from discharging, discriminating against, or engaging in retaliatory actions against specified employees reporting any violation or unsafe condition under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to the government. The oil companies can't attack their employees for testifying about such conditions. Nor can they take punitive measures if the employee reports an illness, injury, or unsafe condition related to the employer's activities to the employer or a state or federal government official. The same whistleblower protections apply if the employee refuses to perform duties, or exercises stop work authority, based upon a good faith belief that performing such duties could result in injury to or impairment of the health of the covered employee or other employees, or cause an oil spill to the environment; or objects to, or refuses to participate in any activity, policy, practice, or assigned task that the employee reasonably believed to be in violation of such the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.

It is clear that a majority of the House understood what happened in the Gulf of Mexico. So why did Lynn Jenkins vote with Big Oil? Maybe it has something to do with that revolving door from public sector work to the lucrative private sector. It seems that someone or some folk over at the United States Environmental Protection Agency gave Lynn Jenkins $4,700 according to OpenSecrets.org at the Center for Responsive Politics, http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00029077&cycle=2010&type=I&newMem=N&recs=100.

While it is not common for employees of the EPA to donate to political campaigns, neither is it an unheard practice. Employees of the EPA have donated $2,400 to Republican candidate Sean R. Bielat in this year's race for Massachusetts' Fourth Congressional District. Deforest (Buster) Sories the 2002 Republican candidate for New Jerseys' Twelfth Congressional District took $5,700 from folks at the EPA.

Michigan's Democratic Representative Sander Levin took $2,000 from someone at the EPA in his 2004 race. That was long before he held the gavel at Ways and Means. Georgia's Republican Representative Charles R. Norwood also took money with an EPA connection in 2004. He got $2,000. The Center for Responsive Politics also lists the U.S. Government as giving his campaign $3,000! What's that all about? See, http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00002630&cycle=2004&type=I&newMem=N&recs=100.

In 2006 it was Wisconsin Democrat Ron Kind who received $2,000 from a person working at the EPA. That year Colorado, then Republican Representative, now American Constitution Party candidate for Colorado Governor, Tom Tancredo took $1,500.

In 2008 the honor went to Virginia's Democratic Senator Jim Webb, who received $5,000.

Civil Servants do not lose their First Amendment Rights when they become public sector employees. It would be wrong to impugn illicit motive to those at the EPA who gave money to politicians. It would be stupid not to follow the track from public sector donor to Big Oil's high paid executive status. If there is a connection it should be provable and prosecutable.

In the meantime, Lynn Jenkins' vote on H.R. 5861 has to be viewed in light of the Oil & Gas Industry's payments to her campaign of $46,800. See OpenSecrets.org, http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2010&cid=N00029077&type=I. That's for this year's race. Lynn Jenkins is at the end of her first term and the Oil & Gas cumulative total is $109,550.

Cheryl Hudspeth refuses to take a cent of corporate cash. Lynn Jenkins is wallowing in the stuff, and she votes like it too!

Either it is Lynn Jenkins short memory, or the massive infusion of special interest money that drives her vote on H.R. 3534, the Consolidated Land, Energy, and Aquatic Resources Act of 2009. Always remember and never forget the cozy relationship between the Minerals Management Services (MMS) and the Oil and Gas Management program both of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).


According to The Hill's Ben Geman, Acting Inspector General (IG) Mary Kendall's office is conducting an investigation into the actions of MMS officials focused on their inspection and approval of the Deepwater Horizon . In May, Kendall released a report that found that MMS regulators in Louisiana were receiving gifts from oil and gas companies prior to 2007. A 2008 IG report uncovered a culture of substance abuse and promiscuity at MMS' Denver office.

H.R. 3534 takes these suspect agencies out of BLM and transfers them to a newly established Interior Department Office of Federal Energy and Minerals Leasing. Given the history of MMS under the BLM this is reasonable.

Big Oil was content to keep things the way they were. Lynn Jenkins is raking in a little more than $25,000 a year, so far, from the FAT CATS from BIG OIL & GAS. Lynn Jenkins was more than willing to forget the catastrophic results of the Deepwater Horizon. SPILL BABY SPILL! The vote was 209 to 193, on roll call vote 513 July 30th. Lynn Jenkins is against fixing that which is broken , she voted "no" on H.R. 3534. "no" on H.R. 3554. See, http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/99929-interior-ig-is-probing-federal-approval-deepwater-horizon-rig-operations.

Lynn Jenkins voted "no" on H.R. 3554 on roll call vote 513, July 30th.

IS SENATOR TED STEVENS MEMORIAL A TESTAMENT TO GLOBAL WARMING?

Alaska's late Senator Ted Stevens

Perhaps Global Warming will have its epitaph written as a legacy of the late Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska. Alaska's Tea Party Challenged  - write-in candidate, Lisa Murkowski has introduced Memorial Legislation to honor Ted Stevens, S. 3820. A companion bill, H.R. 6197, has been introduced to the House by Alaska's Republican Representative Don Young.

An extremely large component of their bills is the 8,340 square miles to be designated the "Ted Stevens Icefield." The proposed area includes the Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Nelchina, Tazlina, Valdez, and Shoup Glaciers.

The late Alaskan politician was once known for his opposition to Global Warming. In 2007 he reversed course recognizing that human contributions to climate change pose a serious threat to the environment.

Irony is alive and well in his proposed commemoration. Just as Senator Stevens advanced and retreated in his views on anthropogenic climate change, so do the glaciers in his geographical cenotaph shows signs of both advance and retreat.

The Harvard glacier is advancing. Alaska's Yale, Columbia, Nelchina, Tazlina, and Valdez glaciers, all within the 8,340 square mile designation, are retreating.

Ted Stevens finally figured it out. Let's hope more living Republicans can embrace the light of science.



THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 40 - HER RECORD ON MEDICARE

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Site Meters tells this blog of a recent visitor from Clifton, Kansas who was interested in Lynn Jenkins record on Medicare. That's a great inquiry, so let's take a look.

House Concurrent Resolution 85 established the Congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2010 and including appropriate budgetary levels for F.Y. 2009 and for F.Y. 2011 through 2014. So what's that got to do with Medicare?

Section 314of the resolution establishes the current policy reserve fund for Medicare improvements. That's important because this §314 is an essential component of reforming the Medicare payment formula. This section mandates changes incentives to encourage efficiency and higher quality care in a way that supports fiscal sustainability. It calls for improving payment accuracy to encourage efficient use of resources and ensure that primary care receives appropriate compensation. It requires improvement of coordination of care among all providers serving a patient in all appropriate settings. Finally it seeks to hold providers accountable for their utilization patterns and quality of care. Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.Con.Res. 85 on roll call vote 192, April 2, 2009.

H.R. 3962 the Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010, is now Public Law 111-192. This new law provides for a Medicare physician payment rate update and provides single and multiple employer pension plan sponsors with relief from pension funding requirements.

Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.R. 3962 on roll call vote 887, November 7, 2003. She voted yes on the measure roll call vote 393, June 24, 2010. That was on resolving differences with the Senate version of the bill. The final vote was 417 to 1.

Another case of where Lynn Jenkins was against it before she was for it is H.R. 3961, the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act of 2009 , now Public Law 111-141. On original passage in the House Lynn Jenkins voted against H.R. 3961, that was roll call vote 909 on November 19, 2009. When it came to resolving differences with the Senate, she was again on board. The final margin was 315 to 97, on roll call vote 67, February 27, 2009.

H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009, now Public Law 111-3, is more commonly known as SCHIP, This is the part of Medicare that provides for health insurance for the neediest children. This law expanded coverage to include all children whose families were at or below 300% of the poverty line, up from 200%. Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.R. 2 first on roll call vote 16, January 14,2009; then again on roll call vote 50, February 4, 2009. Jenkins argued that the top third of those children should be excluded. Talk about throwing out the baby with the bath water!

H.R. 598,was a bill to provide for a portion of the economic recovery package relating to revenue measures, unemployment, and health, which became Public Law 111-5 on 2/17/2009, and is known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This applies to Medicare because this is where incentives are provided to physicians and hospitals using the electronic health record (EHR) and reduce payments to those who continue using paper. This EHR is using technology to reduce overhead costs in the administration of Medicare. H.R. 598 became Title IV of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Lynn Jenkins voted no Public Law 111-5, first on roll call vote 46, January 28, 2009 and then on roll call vote 70 on February 13, 2009.

H.R. 4691, The Temporary Extension Act of 2010, now Public Law 111-144, made technical corrections to Medicare physician payment update, by delaying the increase to physicians by a month. The bill also extended the Medicare therapy caps exceptions process by three months. This measure passed the House by a voice vote.

The bottom line on Lynn Jenkins is that she voted to obstruct Medicare until the final vote. She voted to deny health insurance coverage to America's neediest children. She voted against modernizing Medicare when she voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

But there is more. The shameful propaganda in which she claimed that Health Care Reform would slash $500 Billion from Medicare, as though seniors would see a half a trillion dollar cut in benefits from Medicare. That wasn't the case. As reported on this blog Wednesday June 30th, That money is a reduction in the growth of future spending over t0 years. That money will not have to be spent because advancements in technology and elimination of waste and fraud.

Lynn Jenkins voted against Health Care Reform. If you are a senior looking at that doughnut hole then you were probably glad to see that $250 supplemental check this summer to help you through the hole. Don't thank Lynn Jenkins, she voted against it.

Lynn Jenkins likes to say how health care could be done correctly. Her votes tell us she speaking with a forked tongue. Lynn Jenkins was one of only 19 Representatives who voted against eliminating the anti-trust exemption for Health Insurance Companies.

When it comes to Medicare, Lynn Jenkins stirs the pot but comes up with last minute votes that lets her say supported the program. She's got a harder time with Veterans. Remember she voted against the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 5136, which languishes in the Senate.