Tag Archive: Ron Wyden


 

 

 

Bastiat Institute.org Facebook page

**************************************************************************************

OVERNIGHT MONEY: Online sales tax bill gets boost

 

 

By Vicki Needham and Peter Schroeder 04/22/13 06:58 PM ET

 

TUESDAY’S BIG STORY:

Online tax bill on the move: The Senate overwhelmingly agreed, 74-20, on Monday to end debate on a bill that would allow states to tax online purchases from Internet retailers located outside their borders, seemingly setting up passage of the bill as early as Tuesday.

Despite the support in the upper chamber, the bill could face resistance in the House. So far, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) has said he is going to take a close look at the legislation before giving it an all-clear.

Meanwhile, the White House gave the legislation a thumbs-up on Monday with Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, saying the bill would put online retailers on the same footing with businesses that have a physical presence in states.

“This administration has carefully considered the legislation, and our team has met with a broad array of people on the issue,” Carney said. “And we have heard overwhelmingly from governors, mayors and the business community on the need for federal legislation to level the playing field for our businesses and address sales tax fairness.”

Under current law, states can only collect sales taxes from retailers with a physical presence. Consumers using the Internet to buy goods are supposed to declare the purchases on their tax forms, although few follow through. Some online businesses have begun to voluntarily add the state taxes.

 

The Supreme Court ruled more than two decades ago that companies only have to collect from in-state customers, but also said that Congress could weigh in on the issue.Retail groups have long supported the issue and put their weight behind the measure, propelling it to this point.

Supporters say that the proposal could give billions in extra revenue to struggling state and local governments. The bill would also exempt small businesses with less than $1 million in out-of-state sales.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who has been pressing for passage of the bill for at least two years, said the bill is needed to help states refill their coffers depleted by a lingering economic downturn.

“What it means is a lot of money for the states and localities,”  he said.

Still, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said Monday that the online sales tax bill would create a new tax and leads America down a “dark path.”

Supporters’ efforts were revived by a vote last month on the Senate’s budget proposal in which 75 senators voted in support of the plan, giving them the go-ahead to press for a quick resolution of the bipartisan bill.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) announced last week he planned to bring the bill straight to the floor, bypassing the Senate Finance Committee and setting the stage for a vote.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

About these ads

With bipartisan aid, Paul filibusters CIA pick Brennan

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

Senate Foreign Relations member Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. questions Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 24, 2013, during Kerry’s confirmation hearing before the committee to replace Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

By Carrie Dann and Kasie Hunt, NBC News

Pledging to speak “until I can no longer speak,” Kentucky Republican Rand Paul on Wednesday launched a filibuster of the nomination of John Brennan to be the next CIA director, getting assists from a half dozen other lawmakers over the course of hours standing on the Senate floor.

The filibuster continued into its eighth hour after Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois objected to Paul’s request that the Senate take up a non-binding sense of the Senate resolution stating that the U.S. government cannot target “noncombatants” with drones on American soil.

Paul objects to what he calls the Obama administration’s lack of clarity over whether a suspected terrorist who is an American citizen can be targeted with a drone strike within U.S. borders.

Arguing that such a resolution would be premature, Durbin instead invited Paul to testify at an upcoming hearing on the issue of drones.

But that offer was not enough for Paul to halt his protest.

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., engages in a discussion with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., over the use of lethal force on American citizens on U.S. soil and the nomination of John Brennan as CIA director on the Senate floor on Wednesday.

Hours into his filibuster, Paul acknowledged that Brennan will ultimately be confirmed, saying the lengthy delay is merely a “blip” in his nomination. But he and other participants emphasized that the debate is intended to shine a spotlight on the government’s balance of civil liberties with national security.

Paul spoke solo for over three hours before being joined on the floor by other lawmakers who stepped in to continue the filibuster.

Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah, Ted Cruz and John Cornyn of Texas, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Marco Rubio of Florida – as well as Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon — participated.

Over six hours after beginning the filibuster, a visibly tired Paul could be seen eating what appeared to be several pieces of candy in between sentences. At one point, Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., set a thermos and an apple on his desk.

 

Read Full Article and  Watch Video Here

 

******************************************************************************

 

Rand Paul’s Filibuster Is Picking Up Major Steam With Both Parties

Brett LoGiurato | Mar. 6, 2013, 4:03 PM

Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster of the nomination of John Brennan to be CIA Director has started to gain significant momentum this afternoon, as other prominent Republican Senators and conservative minds have praised Paul’s three-plus-hour long effort.

Around 3 p.m. this afternoon, Republican Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) joined Paul on the Senate floor to join in his filibuster. Shortly after, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) also began taking part.

Finally, to make the filibuster bipartisan, Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon came to the floor to speak.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), one of the GOP’s rising stars, tweeted support for Paul’s filibuster:

is asking a legit question of Holder.Why so hard for them to just give straight answer?Almost like they feel it is beneath them.

773 Retweets 215 favorites

Erick Erickson, the editor-in-chief of the conservative website RedState, urged Rubio to join the filibuster, along with Lee and Cruz. Erickson said it would “cement” the legacy of recently retired Sen. Jim DeMint, who was historically one of the Senate’s most frequent employers of the filibuster technique.

If Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio go give Rand Paul a filibuster assist, Jim DeMint’s legacy will be cemented as a force for change.

209 Retweets 44 favorites

******************************************************************************

Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden Joins Rand Paul For Historic Bipartisan Filibuster Over Drone Strikes

by Andrew Kirell | 4:29 pm, March 6th, 2013 video

Sen. Rand Paul‘s (R-KY) filibuster of John Brennan‘s CIA nomination just became a bipartisan affair: Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) announced he will join the effort to protest the Obama pick’s appointment by railing against executive overreach on targeted killings.

Several hours into his filibuster effort, Paul’s Republican colleagues in Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) joined him on the Senate floor. But it took nearly four hours for a Democrat to surprise everyone and make the filibuster a bipartisan one.

Shortly before 4:00 p.m. ET, Sen. Wyden announced, via Twitter, that he was heading to the floor to speak out against the president’s executive overreach on targeted killings and the lack of congressional oversight thereof:

Several minutes later, Wyden appeared on the floor and Paul handed off the mic to the liberal Oregon senator.

 

Read Full Article and Watch Video Here

 

Activists voice dismay as Senate renews government surveillance measure

Two amendments that would have provided basic oversight for US government’s warrantless surveillance program

    US senator Ron Wyden

    An amendment by Ron Wyden (above) would have required the government to estimate the number of US citizens it had spied on. Photo: Joshua Roberts/Reuters

    Civil rights campaigners voiced dismay on Friday over the US Senate‘s re-authorization of the government’s warrantless surveillance program, and the defeat of two amendments that would have provided for basic oversight of the eavesdropping.

    The Senate voted 73-23 to extend the law, called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments Act, for five years. The House of Representatives has already passed the measure, which President Obama has said he will sign.

    But while the program was extended as expected, campaigners saw a silver lining in that the vote was closer than when the legislation was first introduced in 2008.

    “We’re incredibly disappointed, not just that it passed, but that they rejected some very moderate amendments that wouldn’t have interfered with the collection of intelligence,” said Michelle Richardson, an ACLU expert on surveillance issues.

    An amendment by senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon would have required the secret court that oversees surveillance requests to disclose “important rulings of law.” It failed 37-54. An amendment by Merkley’s fellow Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden would have required the government to estimate the number of US citizens it had spied on. It fell by a narrower margin, 43-52.

     

    Read Full Article Here

    KBR shouldn’t be able to sue government, Oregon members of Congress tell the Pentagon

    Six Oregon members of Congress released a letter to the Pentagon Saturday urging it resist efforts by defense contractor KBR to have American taxpayers pick up the estimated $100 million bill after a federal court judgement last month in favor of 12 soldiers from the Oregon National Guard.

    “Contractors that put our servicemen and women, as well as innocent civilians, at risk should be held accountable,” says the letter to Jo-Ellen Darcy, assistant secretary of defense. “At the very least, U.S. taxpayers must not be the ones paying for their mistakes. We are eager to see this case resolved and to hold accountable those that negligently expose our troops to toxic chemicals.”

    The letter was signed by Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Earl Blumenauer, Suzanne Bonamici, Peter DeFazio and Kurt Schrader. Wyden, Bonamicici and Schrader released the letter at a news conference Saturday. They were joined by about 20 of the Oregon National Guard veterans and their family who were part of the lawsuit against KBR.

    The federal jury in Portland ordered KBR to pay $85 million to the 12 Oregon soldiers who were exposed to the carcinogen hexavalent chromium while in Iraq in 2003.

    Under a once-classified indemnification clause in the contract, KBR subsequently sued the Army Corps of Engineers to cover about $100 million in damages and legal costs.

    Last week, Wyden inserted an amendment into the defense authorization that requires the Pentagon to disclose when it enters into indemnification agreements with contractors like KBR.

    – The Oregonian

     

    Taxpayers may not be on the hook for KBR’s legal costs in sodium dichromate suits

    qarmataliext1.jpgView full sizeKBR Inc.Qarmat Ali in 2003

    It’s not clear who’s going to pay legal costs for defense contractor KBR Inc., which is being sued by National Guard soldiers who accuse the company of knowingly exposing them to a carcinogen.

    While the company persuaded the Army Corps of Engineers to write an indemnification clause into its 2003 contract to restore the flow of Iraq’s oil, the Corps has twice refused KBR’s request to cover its costs in the two lawsuits proceeding against it in Oregon and Texas.

    Lawyers for KBR say they believe the company is entitled to have its expenses covered by taxpayers but is proceeding through the litigation in the meantime at its own risk and expense, said Geoffrey Harrison of the Houston firm of Susman, Godfrey. The company expects to challenge the Corps’ denial “maybe at the end of the case,” he said.

    The indemnification clause was classified, but its existence has emerged in the course of depositions and filings in the lawsuits brought by Oregon and Indiana soldiers.  Last month, Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., asked Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to investigate KBR’s “excessive” expenses and the terms under which the Pentagon had provided it “a blank check.”

    In 2003, the soldiers from Oregon, Indiana, the United Kingdom and elsewhere were sent to Qarmat Ali in southern Iraq to provide security for KBR’s contractors, who were charged with repairing a water treatment plant. One of the chemicals stored at the plant was sodium dichromate, a powder that contains hexavalent chromium, a potent carcinogen. Some of the chemical compound was loose and drifting at the site and had stained the soil. Soldiers said later they suffered a variety of maladies, from nosebleeds to breathing difficulties, that they believe were caused by exposure to the chemical.

    KBR has denied knowingly exposing the soldiers to the carcinogen and suggests that their ailments may have been caused by the harsh conditions of the desert.

    A Nov. 18, 2011, letter from a Corps of Engineers contracting officer to a KBR official posted on the website of the Project on Government Oversight spells out the reasons the Corps denied KBR’s request for financial protection.

    “It remains my opinion that this clause does not extend to the chemical and industrial hazards resulting in the alleged exposure of U.S. National Guard and British Military Personel who provided site security at Qarmat Ali to sodium dichromate,” wrote John Rodgers for the Corps. “KBR, as the subject matter expert in oil field issues, was responsible for assessing conditions at each site to which it was sent and taking appropriate action to prevent exposure of any personnel at the site to industrial and environmental hazards.”

    Further, wrote Rodgers, the Corps disputes KBR’s assertion that the Army “failed to provide benign conditions” the contract called for.

    “Both parties to the contract fully understood the conditions in Iraq and the Army interpretation of this provision,” he wrote. “It was not until well after this litigation had been filed that KBR complained that the Army had failed to provide benign conditions.”

    Rodgers further noted that the Army has decided to “remain neutral” in the lawsuits against KBR.

    Celia Balli, KBR’s senior counsel, noted last week that the government has the ability to step in and assume the defense in the cases against KBR, but has decided not to do so.

    When asked if KBR has considered settling the soldiers’ cases, Harrison said no.

    “The company is not at all interested in paying any money to settle claims brought by these plaintiffs’ lawyers,” he said.

    –Mike Francis

     

    U.S. Commandos’ New Landlord in Afghanistan: Blackwater

    A U.S. Special Forces soldier trains on his MK-12 sniper rifle in Iraq, 2007. Photo: U.S. Navy via Wikimedia

    Updated 7:50 a.m.

    U.S. Special Operations Forces have a brand new home in Afghanistan. It’s owned and operated by the security company formerly known as Blackwater, thanks to a no-bid deal worth $22 million.

    You might think that Blackwater, now called Academi, was banished into some bureaucratic exile after its operatives in Afghanistan stole guns from U.S. weapons depots and killed Afghan civilians. Wrong. Academi’s private 10-acre compound outside Kabul, called Camp Integrity, is the new headquarters for perhaps the most important special operations unit in Afghanistan.

    That would be the Special Operations Joint Task Force–Afghanistan, created on July 1 to unite and oversee the three major spec-ops “tribes” throughout Afghanistan, which command some 7,000 elite troops in all. It’s run by Army Maj. Gen. Raymond “Tony” Thomas, a former deputy commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, and is already tasked with reforming how those elite forces train Afghan villagers to fight the Taliban. And its role is only going to grow in Afghanistan, as regular U.S. forces withdraw by 2014 and the commandos take over the residual task of fighting al-Qaida and its allies. Perhaps that’s why Academi’s no-bid contract runs through May 2015.

    Academi spokeswoman Kelley Gannon declined to comment for this story. But it’s highly unusual for U.S. military forces to take up official residence on a privately owned facility. According to Lt. Col. Tom Bryant, the spokesman for Special Operations Joint Task Force-Afghanistan, it’s only supposed to be temporary, as the command plans to move to Bagram Air Field by summer 2013. But Camp Integrity is already shaping up to be a crucial location for an Afghanistan war that’s rapidly changing.

     

    Peter Singer, a scholar at the Brookings Institution who’s closely studied the private security industry, finds the spec ops’ private HQ unsurprising. “We’ve seen these kind of close, intertwined relationships in the field between the public and private forces before,” he says. “The U.S. military and the CIA, reportedly, have hired these companies to do everything from building bases, running the facilities and logistics, to serving as the guard forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan. You get to a certain point where you wonder where the U.S. military and private military roles begin and end. But to me, the interesting question is what have we actually learned from these past experiences?” (Full disclosure: Danger Room editor Noah Shachtman works with Singer at Brookings’ 21 Century Defense Initiative.)

    The uber-special ops command’s birth at Camp Integrity apparently occurred for a simple, mundane reason: overcrowding.

    In March, the U.S. Special Operations Command, which oversees all commando units around the world, instructed a local unit in Afghanistan to prep for the creation of a new force that would encompass all American special operations forces there. The problem was, there wasn’t sufficient space at existing spec-ops facilities to house the 217 additional personnel that made up the initial complement of the Special Operations Joint Task Force-Afghanistan. “We were forced to look for a temporary home until we were ready to consolidate our operations” at Bagram, Bryant says. So it turned to Academi.

    Through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which had an existing contract with Academi for operations at Camp Integrity, the commandos awarded Academi a no-bid deal worth $6.6 million in its first year. They jointly determined that “no other vendor” could have accommodated Special Operations Joint Task Force-Afghanistan by the July 1 deadline for the command’s establishment, particularly as it needed secure facilities. A deal was reached with Academi for use of Camp Integrity on May 15.

    “Meeting the deadline of May 15, 2012 was vital for U.S. national security interests and organic Afghan capabilities of local security and governance,” according to an announcement of the basing deal quietly released this week — over six months after Academi began moving the command into its privately-owned home. Without explanation, the contract further states that failing to set up the new special-ops command on time could have jeopardized the U.S. troop drawdown, thereby imposing “insurmountable costs” for keeping U.S. troops in Afghanistan longer.

    Academi’s contract for providing the “life support services” to the task force is worth $22.3 million. If all options on the contract are exercised, and the planned move to Bagram takes longer than the command anticipates, it will last until May 2015 — an indication that the special operators’ counterterrorism mission in Afghanistan will continue after most U.S. forces come home after 2014. Last month, Gen. Joseph Dunford, President Obama’s nominee to take over command of the war, said “counterterrorism” would be among the missions of a post-2014 force.

    U.S. and Afghan negotiators recently began discussions over the scope of that residual presence, and a big factor in that debate will concern which Afghan bases will host American troops. But it’s less clear what authority U.S. diplomats and Afghan bureaucrats have over a privately-owned base like Camp Integrity, although Academi’s operations are already certified by Afghan authorities.

    Academi won’t talk much about Camp Integrity. A spokesman, John Procter, told Danger Room in March that it contains a “24/7 operations center, fueling stations, vehicle maintenance facility, lodging, office and conference space and a fortified armory.” His colleague Gannon declined to elaborate for this story. According to its contract, Academi will provide everything from food to tech support to “armed security services” for the mega-spec ops command at Camp Integrity.

    But the commandos won’t be the only U.S. military tenants at Camp Integrity. A Pentagon agency called the Counter-Narcoterrorism Program Office also uses Camp Integrity as a base of operations to aid in its war on Afghanistan’s drug lords. Academi provides the office’s small Kabul cell with, among other things, “a secure armory and weapons maintenance service.”

    Academi’s old incarnation, Blackwater, had deep ties to the secretive U.S. special operations community. Founder Erik Prince was a Navy SEAL, and the firm aided the Joint Special Operations Command with counterterrorism targeting and “snatch and grab” operations in Pakistan. But while the new ownership of the rebranded Academi has previously emphasized its differences with the old Blackwater regime, some continuities are on display — like how the military’s newly expanded spy service will rely on Academi for self-defense training.

    Bryant, the spokesman for the Special Operations Joint Task Force-Afghanistan, says the command intends to complete a move to Bagram Air Field, one of the major logistical and command hubs of the war, by summer 2013. (Use of Bagram beyond 2014 is likely to be an issue in the U.S.-Afghan negotiations for a residual force.) While the exact date for the move is still “fluid,” Bryant says the move to Bagram should “favorably posture our headquarters for the next 25 months and beyond.” For the time being, the heart of the enduring commando mission in the U.S.’ longest war can be found at the headquarters of its most infamous private security company.

    Politics, Legislation and  Economy

     

     

    The legislation would get around the DEA’s refusal to differentiate hemp from marijuana and allow American farmers to grow it.
     

    A bipartisan group of senators has introduced a bill that would exclude industrial hemp from the definition of marijuana. The bill, if passed, would get around the DEA’s refusal to differentiate hemp from marijuana and could result in American farmers being allowed to grow the industrial crop.

    The bill, Senate Bill 3501 , was introduced last week by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and cosponsored by Sens. Rand Paul (R-KY), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), and Jeff Merkley (D-OR). It would amend the Controlled Substances Act to make clear that hemp is not a drug, even though it is part of the cannabis family. Hemp has much lower levels of THC than marijuana grown for recreational or medicinal purposes.

    The bill marks Wyden’s second attempt this year to get hemp de-listed. He tried to offer an amendment to the farm bill the Senate passed in June to do just that, but the Senate leadership ruled the amendment was not germane.

    “I firmly believe that American farmers should not be denied an opportunity to grow and sell a legitimate crop simply because it resembles an illegal one,” Wyden said. “Raising this issue has sparked a growing awareness of exactly how ridiculous the US’s ban on industrial hemp is. I’m confident that if grassroots support continues to grow and Members of Congress continue to hear from voters then common sense hemp legislation can move through Congress in the near future.”

    The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    Meanwhile, another hemp bill, House Resolution 1831 , which would also clarify that hemp is not marijuana for the purposes of the Controlled Substances Act, languishes in the Republican-controlled House.

    Dem senator advocates for industrial hemp bill – The Hill’s Video.

    Dem senator advocates for industrial hemp bill

    By Daniel Strauss 06/13/12 05:14 PM ET

    Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) explained the difference between industrial hemp and marijuana on Wednesday in a floor speech advocating for an amendment to a Senate farm bill that would allow American farmers to grow hemp.

    Wyden’s amendment would remove a federal regulation banning farmers from growing hemp and replace it with a state-administered permit system. Wyden’s amendment (#2220) is co-sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

    “This is, in my view, a textbook example of a regulation that flunks the commonsense test. There is government regulation on the books today that prevents America’s farmers from growing industrial hemp and what’s worse is this regulation is hurting job creation in rural American and increasing our trade deficit,” Wyden said.

    The amendment would likely win more support from other members of the Senate once they learned that it really wasn’t an attempt to legalize marijuana, Wyden continued.

    “When my colleagues get, I think, more information on this outrageous, outlandish regulation, I think most of my colleagues are going to say that the restriction on industrial hemp is really a poster child for dumb regulation,” Wyden continued. “The only thing standing in the way of taking advantage of this very profitable crop is a lingering misunderstanding about its use, and the amendment that I have filed on this issue will end a ridiculous regulation once and for all.”

    Wyden added that there were major differences between industrial grown hemp and marijuana.

    “Now I know that there are going to be members of Congress and others who are going to be listening and say ‘all this talk about hemp is basically talk about marijuana.’ The fact of the matter is while they come from the same species of plant, there are major differences between them.

    “Under this amendment the production of hemp would still be regulated but it would be done through permitting programs, not the federal government,” he said.

    Wyden said nine states had already introduced permitting programs that banned the growth of marijuana and that industrial hemp had a very low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) level — much lower than marijuana.

    “Under 0.03 percent. The lowest-grade marijuana typically has 5 percent THC content,” Wyden said.

    “The bottom line,” Wyden added, “is no one is going to get high on industrial hemp.”

    Wyden introduced his amendment on Thursday. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) put forward similar legislation, H.R. 1831, in the House. —This story was updated at 5:46 p.m.

    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 740 other followers