﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Lamar Smith RSS Articles</title>
    <description>Lamar Smith RSS Articles</description>
    <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/</link>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
    <generator>RSS.NET: http://www.rssdotnet.com/</generator>
    <item>
      <title>Smith Co-Sponsors Respect for Rights of Conscience Act</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Congressman Lamar Smith released the following statement today: &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
“The Obama administration is threatening the foundation of religious freedoms that America was built on with their decision to require all employers, including faith-based organizations, to provide contraceptive coverage. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;“All citizens should be free to practice their religious beliefs.&amp;nbsp; This drastic government overreach could have far-reaching consequences.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I am proud to be a co-sponsor of H.R. 1179, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act.&amp;nbsp; This legislation amends the health care law to permit a health plan to decline coverage of specific items and services that are contrary to the religious belief of the sponsor or issuer.&amp;nbsp; I will continue fighting to protect the constitutional rights of religious organizations in this country.”&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=278558</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=278558</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Smith: Warren Buffett's Secretary Not Symbol of Economic Injustice</title>
      <description>&lt;p style="text-align: left;"&gt;Billionaire&amp;nbsp;Warren Buffett’s longtime secretary has become a symbol in the current Administration’s fight over the tax code and economic fairness. While she was the President’s chief stage prop in a show of the alleged unfairness of our tax system, this is hardly the truth. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The national media have painted this as a case of the little person paying a higher tax rate than her billionaire boss. Thankfully, &lt;i&gt;Forbes &lt;/i&gt;and a few media outlets have researched the facts. By reviewing the Internal Revenue Service’s own detailed tax tables by income level, &lt;i&gt;Forbes &lt;/i&gt;has determined she likely makes between $200,000 and $500,000. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The national media have not done their homework on Mr. Buffett’s longtime secretary. They have misled the American people on the important issue of income taxes and capital gains investments that help create jobs. We need to remind the national media of their obligation to provide the American people with the facts. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277632</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277632</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Smith Statement on Repeal of CLASS Act</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Congressman Smith released the following statement today after the House voted to repeal the Community Living Assistance Services and Support (CLASS) program, an entitlement program for long-term care payments that was inserted in the health care law. The program was written to make it appear it would cost less than it really would.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“It is clear that this $80 billion budget gimmick was never a viable solution.&amp;nbsp; Despite warnings from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that ‘this program would collapse in short order,’ Democrats went ahead with inserting it into their health care law so they could tout savings that didn’t exist.&amp;nbsp; Even the Obama administration has since admitted the program cannot work. Now that the House has acted to remove this unsustainable new entitlement program,&amp;nbsp; I hope the Senate will move to repeal this unworkable policy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The unconstitutional health care law should be repealed entirely and replaced with legislation that expands access to care while curbing costs, and eliminating unfair mandates and penalties.”&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277707</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277707</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Smith Presses for Interviews with Senior DOJ Staff re: Fast and Furious</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;House Judiciary Committee&lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) today pressed the Justice Department to make senior officials available for interviews with the Committee regarding the Department’s knowledge of ATF’s Operation Fast and Furious following the shooting death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010. Specifically, Chairman Smith requested to interview Monty Wilkinson, former Deputy Chief of Staff to the Attorney General, and Lanny Breuer, Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Documents released by the Department on Friday indicate that the Attorney General’s former Deputy Chief of Staff may have been aware of the connection between Agent Terry’s death and Operation Fast and Furious within days of the shooting. The emails also show inconsistencies between statements by Assistant Attorney General Breuer regarding his reaction to the initial discovery that ATF had engaged in gunwalking.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Chairman Smith: &lt;/b&gt;“The House Judiciary Committee and the American people have a right to know the whole truth, not just bits and pieces released here and there over several months.&amp;nbsp; As Attorney General, you have an obligation to ensure that the statements given to Congress are both accurate and complete. Unfortunately, the documents released by the Department continue to raise serious questions about the validity of statements made by senior Department officials.” &lt;b&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Last Friday, the Justice Department released 486 new documents to the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees as part of compliance with a subpoena from the House Oversight Committee.&amp;nbsp; The emails show an exchange between Mr. Wilkinson and former U.S. Attorney for Arizona Dennis Burke regarding the death of Agent Terry. Mr. Wilkinson claimed to have notified the Attorney General about the death of Agent Terry and then pressed U.S. Attorney Burke for additional details regarding the shooting. U.S. Attorney Burke later notified Mr. Wilkinson that guns found at the scene of the shooting connected back to “the investigation we were going to talk about.”&amp;nbsp; The investigation in question turned out to be Operation Fast and Furious. Mr. Wilkinson replied, “I’ll call tomorrow.”&amp;nbsp; It is not known if that call ever took place.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Chairman Smith requested that the Department contact the House Judiciary Committee by February 10 to arrange for the interviews of Mr. Wilkinson and Assistant Attorney General Breuer. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A copy of the full letter can be found &lt;a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/news/pdfs/01312012%20Letter%20to%20ATG.pdf"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277372</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=277372</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>President should back up his rhetoric with real reform</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/207643-rep-lamar-smith-r-texas"&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;January 31, 2012&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;President should back up his rhetoric with real reform&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;By Chairman Smith&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In his State of the Union address, President Obama urged Congress to set aside politics and work with the White House on passing legislation. But the president neglected to mention that Republicans in Congress have been doing just that. Unfortunately, our efforts to expand the economy and create jobs for American workers have been rebuffed by the White House.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the president is serious about working across party lines to tackle the tough issues facing America today, I urge him to support common-sense proposals from the House Judiciary Committee. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Rein in regulations:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The House of Representatives passed three Judiciary Committee bills last year to help lessen the strain of burdensome regulations on business owners.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;More than once this year, the president has talked about the dangers that excessive regulations pose to our economy. But unfortunately, his actions speak louder than his words.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Federal regulations already cost our economy $1.75 trillion per year. But rather than reduce the number of regulations, the Obama administration has only added to the burden.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The administration counted 410 new major rules in its regulatory agendas for 2010 and 2011. That’s four times the number of major rules than during the first two years of the previous administration. Uncertainty about the costs of these regulations discourages employers from hiring new employees and expanding their businesses.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Last year the House passed the Regulatory Accountability Act and the Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act, which ensure that new regulations are imposed at the least cost to small businesses. The House also passed the REINS Act, which requires congressional approval for government regulations with an economic impact of at least $100 million before they can be imposed on the American people.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The president cannot say that he cares about addressing the massive burden of existing regulations and ignore these real solutions. He should make a commitment to regulatory reform and support these bills, or discuss with us what he could support.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;i&gt;Medical malpractice reform:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
During the State of the Union last year, the president said he was willing to consider meaningful medical liability reforms to reduce the cost of health care. But his promises proved to be nothing more than platitudes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to the Harvard School of Public Health, 40% of medical malpractice suits filed in the U.S. are “without merit.” The threat of these lawsuits forces doctors to conduct tests and prescribe medicines that are not medically required.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In February, the Judiciary Committee passed the HEALTH Act to help address the problem of frivolous lawsuits that drive up the cost of health care for all Americans. The Congressional Budget Office predicts this legislation would save American taxpayers more than $54 billion over the next decade.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The president should do more than just consider working with Republicans on medical liability reform. He should support the HEALTH Act to help reduce the cost of health care for all Americans. Yet we have received no response from the White House after numerous attempts to engage them.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;i&gt;Immigration:&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Last year, the Judiciary Committee approved two important pieces of legislation to stem the flow of illegal immigration and protect America’s communities from dangerous criminal immigrants. Despite promises of bipartisanship, the president has not expressed support for either one of these proposals.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
We know terrorists continue to exploit loopholes and weaknesses in our immigration system to enter the U.S. The 9/11 hijackers came to America after obtaining visas. The Christmas Day bomber was able to board a plane en route to Detroit because he too had a visa. And just last year, a 20-year-old citizen of Saudi Arabia who entered the U.S. on a student visa was charged with the attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Until we close this dangerous loophole in our immigration laws that allows foreign terrorists to enter the U.S., history will continue to repeat itself. The Judiciary Committee approved the Secure Visas Act to help prevent terrorists from obtaining U.S. visas and to allow U.S. officials to expedite the removal of terrorists and other immigrants whose visas have been revoked.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Judiciary Committee also approved the Keep Our Communities Safe Act to halt the release of illegal and criminal immigrants back into American communities when they cannot be removed to their native country in the “reasonably foreseeable future.” The federal government has released thousands of criminal immigrants into our neighborhoods, including rapists, child molesters, murderers and other dangerous criminals.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
According to a recent press report, an immigrant from Haiti who was supposed to be deported in 2007 for two convicted felonies was released by federal immigration authorities in October 2010 because the Obama administration suspended all deportations to his native country. Tragically, just two months later he killed three Americans in Miami, Florida.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Just because a criminal immigrant cannot be returned to their home country doesn’t mean they should be freed into our communities. Dangerous criminal immigrants need to be detained. The Keep Our Communities Safe Act helps keep dangerous criminal immigrants off of our streets.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
To prevent future tragedies and protect American communities, the president should work with Congress to sign both of these bills into law. So far, he has not.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
President Obama can certainly talk the talk when it comes to promises of bipartisanship. But the American people are tired of political rhetoric; they need real reforms.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Republicans will continue to pass legislation to rein in federal spending, promote national security, and create jobs for American workers. The real question is will the president work with us?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Rep. Lamar Smith (R - Texas) is Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=278013</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=278013</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RSC Video: 1,000 days without a budget from Senate Democrats</title>
      <description>&lt;iframe height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QR25KAHc4Gw" frameborder="0" width="560"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=276151</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=276151</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Smith Reaction to President’s State of the Union Address</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Congressman Lamar Smith released the following statement today in response to President Obama’s State of the Union address.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“Since President Obama took office, almost 2 million more Americans are out of work, and we have run up the three largest deficits in U.S. history.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“His policies of higher taxes and increased government spending are making our economy worse. We know what our nation’s job creators need from Washington - more certainty and less costly regulations. Tax increases discourage hiring and prolong economic uncertainty. Getting our economy back on track requires leadership from President Obama and Democrats in the Senate. Instead, 27 jobs bills that have been passed by the House are awaiting Senate action. Unfortunately the President missed an opportunity tonight to focus on the pro-growth policies that will move our economy forward.”&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=276423</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=276423</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Judiciary Committee to Hold Hearing on Recess Appointments</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) today announced that the House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on February 15 to examine questions regarding the constitutionality of recent recess appointments by the Obama administration.&amp;nbsp; Chairman Smith released the following statement regarding the President’s recess appointments of Richard Cordray as Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three individuals to the National Labor Relations Board.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Chairman Smith:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp; “President Obama’s recent appointments are unprecedented and possibly unconstitutional. The President may make appointments while the Senate is in recess, however these appointments were made while the Senate was not—something no other President has attempted. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The Constitution gives the Senate the authority to determine the rules of its proceedings. The President cannot unilaterally decide to rush through ‘recess appointments’ while the Senate is not in recess. Doing so threatens the oversight powers of the Senate and the separation of powers that is fundamental to our Constitution. And it sets a dangerous precedent for future administrations that want to avoid transparency and the constitutional role of the Senate to vote on certain nominations.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“These appointments continue the administration’s pattern of manipulating Executive authority to avoid having to secure support from Congress. Pro forma sessions were never meant to be a window for the Administration to appoint whomever it likes to powerful government positions. This power grab threatens the role of Congress and raises serious constitutional questions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing to determine whether or not the President’s appointments are constitutional and in the best interests of the American people.”&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Background:&lt;/b&gt; On January 4, 2012, the White House appointed four individuals using the recess appointment authority to bypass congressional approval of the nominees.&amp;nbsp; But the Senate, which has the constitutional authority to provide advice and consent on certain presidential appointments was not actually in recess.&amp;nbsp; This intentional attempt to circumvent the authority of the Senate granted by our Founding Fathers poses serious constitutional questions and undermines the validity of the recent appointments.&amp;nbsp; The House Judiciary Committee hearing will examine all of the constitutional questions surrounding these appointments. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=275771</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=275771</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Statement from Chairman Smith on SOPA</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;House Judiciary Committee&lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) today issued the following statement in response to the Senate decision to postpone consideration of legislation to help combat online piracy. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Chairman Smith:&lt;/b&gt;&amp;nbsp; “I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns regarding proposed legislation to address the problem of online piracy. It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The problem of online piracy is too big to ignore. American intellectual property industries provide 19 million high-paying jobs and account for more than 60 percent of U.S. exports.&amp;nbsp;The theft of America’s intellectual property costs the U.S. economy more than $100 billion annually and results in the loss of thousands of American jobs.&amp;nbsp; Congress cannot stand by and do nothing while American innovators and job creators are under attack.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The online theft of American intellectual property is no different than the theft of products from a store.&amp;nbsp; It is illegal and the law should be enforced both in the store and online. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;“The Committee will continue work with both copyright owners and Internet companies to develop proposals that combat online piracy and protect America’s intellectual property.&amp;nbsp; We welcome input from all organizations and individuals who have an honest difference of opinion about how best to address this widespread problem.&amp;nbsp; The Committee remains committed to finding a solution to the problem of online piracy that protects American intellectual property and innovation.”&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The House Judiciary Committee will postpone consideration of the legislation until there is wider agreement on a solution.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=275770</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=275770</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Smith: Media Bias is real and unfortunate </title>
      <description>&lt;p style="text-align: center;"&gt;&lt;iframe height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/L62VzR3kBMY" frameborder="0" width="420"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Professor Tim Groseclose of UCLA has recently published a book, &lt;em&gt;Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/em&gt;He uses clearly defined quantitative measures to evaluate the bias of media outlets&lt;em&gt;.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In &lt;i&gt;Left Turn&lt;/i&gt;, he scientifically measures the political content of media outlets and converts that content into a “Slant Quotient” of the outlet. &amp;nbsp;To measure the bias, he compares “Slant Quotients” of news outlets to the “Political Quotients” of the&amp;nbsp;typical American voter and political leaders.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Groseclose concludes that the great majority of all national media outlets have a liberal bias.&amp;nbsp; He also points out the conservative bias of a very few&amp;nbsp;outlets. &amp;nbsp;But he determined their conservative bias is less than the liberal bias of most national media.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dr. Groseclose also cites evidence that the media has shifted the political views of Americans and caused them to be more liberal.&amp;nbsp; So media bias is both real and unfortunate.&lt;b&gt;&lt;u&gt;&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <link>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=272292</link>
      <guid>http://lamarsmith.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=272292</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
