Washington, D.C. - Today the U.S. House of Representatives passed two amendments authored by Representative Jason Smith (MO-08) to preserve the ability of Missourians to freely hunt and fish in the Mark Twain National Forest and other public lands. During passage of H.R. 2406, the Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement (SHARE) Act, the U.S. House voted to adopt language offered by Representative Smith on the House Floor which prevents the National Forest Service from physically blocking or locking any access point to the Mark Twain National Forest for hunters and fisherman, and affirming in U.S. law that no bureaucrat in Washington can write any rule or regulation preventing Sportsmen access to the Mark Twain.
On the House Floor, Representative Smith commented, “The great outdoors and hunting traditions of the United States are a way of life for folks all across this great country. Throughout our history they have been championed by Presidents George Washington, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and to Teddy Roosevelt who established national forests, game preserves, and national parks,” Smith said. “My amendments provide assurances to the residents of Missouri that no executive order, no executive action, and no bureaucrat sitting in a Washington, D.C. office can write a rule inhibiting the ability to hunt or fish in the Mark Twain National Forest. This amendment secures our freedom to be avid sportsmen and enjoy our beautiful National Forests.”
The SHARE act enhances access to federal lands for sportsmen and protects the Second Amendment rights of hunters through the revision of a variety of existing programs to expand access to, and opportunities for, hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting. The Smith Amendments help specifically protect the roughly 1.3 million Missourians who hunt or fish in the Mark Twain National Forest.
Rep. Smith was determined to offer the amendments after he heard from numerous hunters and fisherman who said that during the peak of hunting season they were commonly finding different access points to the Mark Twain National Forest blocked. The Mark Twain National Forest covers 2,331 square miles and roughly 1.5 million acres, the majority of which reside in the 8th Congressional District.
The House approved legislation that would force the Missouri Department of Natural Resources to sell land it had acquired in Oregon County for use as a new state park. Many House members had taken issue with the decision of the executive branch to acquire the Frederick Creek Ranch land with funds that were meant for important remediation efforts such as clean drinking water projects in Missouri’s lead mining district.
During the 2015 interim, the House formed a committee to look at what members said was an inappropriate use of settlement funds that were intended to be utilized to remediate the damage done by the ASARCO mining conglomerate at five sites in southeast Missouri’s lead mining district, which includes St. Francois, Reynolds, Iron and Madison counties. Instead, the trustees of the ASARCO settlement determined it was appropriate to use funds to acquire land several counties away and in a different watershed.
Now, with the legislation approved by the House, members hope to undo the decision made by executive branch to prioritize the purchase of Frederick Creek Ranch over the remediation projects in areas that were actually impacted by ASARCO’s actions. The bill now moves to the Senate for consideration.
House Approves Resolution Encouraging an Audit of the Federal Reserve (HR 71)
The members of the Missouri House of Representatives approved a resolution calling on Congress to pass the Federal Reserve Transparency Act to require a complete audit of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States. As the sponsor of the resolution said on the House floor, the Federal Reserve has loaned trillions of dollars to bail out foreign banks without the consent of Congress, and it refuses to fully disclose the details of its lending practices. He also noted that the Federal Reserve has never received a complete audit.
The resolution approved by the House notes that the Federal Reserve has inflated the money supply and manipulated interest rates since its inception in 1913, which has eroded the purchasing power of the dollar by approximately 95 percent, and contributed to boom and bust business cycles. It also points out that Federal Reserve has operated the nation’s monetary system without full disclosure and transparency, which has led to a lower quality of life for the American people and abuse verified by the United States Government Accountability Office in its 2011 Report to Congress.
The bill’s sponsor hopes that a complete audit will finally provide the American people with answers about how their money is being spent, where their money is being spent, and at what cost.
A Supreme Vacancy
Friday, February 19, 2016
Sadly, as you may have seen, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia passed away last week at the age of 79.
As a law student, Justice Scalia helped shape how I analyze laws. Scalia represented the best qualities of a Supreme Court Justice—he was fiercely intelligent, a passionate defender of the Constitution, and a man of uncompromising principle. He interpreted the Constitution from the perspective of the Founding Father’s intentions, and never reinterpreted the Constitution to serve political needs. He believed that the letter of the law matters.
In the case of District of Columbia v. Heller Justice Scalia wrote the majority opinion of the Court and confirmed our Second Amendment right to bear arms extends to people and not just the militia. In the case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Scalia reinforced his faith in a true democracy and belief that there is no constitutional right to an abortion.
The Supreme Court is an equal independent branch of our Federal government, a check and balance on the Executive and Legislative branches. The makeup of the nine Justices on the Court prior to Justice Scalia’s death was considered by many to be balanced because it represented both conservative and progressive political and legal perspectives.
This is why the president should nominate someone of the same line of thinking as Justice Scalia, because without his pure interpretation of the text of the law and the origin of the Constitution we may see a drastic change in the rulings of the court.
The most liberal president in our history should not use this as an opportunity to score political points by replacing a conservative Justice with a progressive liberal who believes the Constitution should be reexamined on a case-by-case interpretation. Unfortunately, president Obama has not hidden his intention to replace Scalia with a liberal justice who liberals in the future will be able to rely on for support of their government-centered, government solutions agenda.
Article Two of the United States Constitution is clear that the president, “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate… Judges of the Supreme Court.” Fundamentally, the president can nominate a new Supreme Court Justice, but the Senate also has the Constitutional right & responsibility to not confirm the President’s nominee until an appropriate conservative mirroring Scalia is nominated. If the President nominates a liberal justice who will interpret the law in a vastly different way than Scalia has, the Senate should continue to vote them down.
If the president cares about maintaining the balance of the institution, the foundation of our federal government based on a separation of powers, then he will do the right thing and nominate a conservative Justice to follow in Scalia’s footsteps. The Senate should reject any of Obama’s liberal nominations to the Supreme Court and only confirm a conservative judge who will continue to read our Constitution as a non-living, non-evolving document, whose simplicity is exactly what our Founding Father’s intended - a document which empowers the states and citizens of our great nation, not the government.
Bootheel Area State Representatives Join House Speaker Richardson
in Pledging Support to Keep Noranda Aluminum in Business in Missouri
Jefferson City, Missouri - Following the news that Noranda Aluminum had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, members of the Southeast Missouri legislative delegation pledged their support to finding policy solutions that would help keep one of the area’s most important job creators in business. State Reps. Tila Hubrecht, Andrew McDaniel, Holly Rehder, and Don Rone said they are working with House Speaker Todd Richardson to explore every possible option to retain the hundreds of good-paying jobs the company provides.
“Losing Noranda, and the jobs it provides, would be disastrous for our area, and for our state’s economy. I am committed to doing everything I can to help, and I will continue to work with my colleagues to look at every avenue we can take to keep Noranda up and running here in Missouri,” said Hubrecht, R-Dexter. She added, “I am thankful that Speaker Richardson has pledged his support to working with us, and I am hopeful that we can develop a solution that will move quickly through the legislative process this session.”
“We will not rest until we find a solution that will preserve these jobs and protect the families they support. These are our neighbors, friends, and family who need our help, and I know we are ready and willing to do everything we can legislatively to lend a hand,” said Rone, R-Portageville.
Noranda Aluminum Holding Corp. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Monday morning. The company said the filing was necessary because of challenging market conditions and a catastrophic loss of electrical supply that forced the New Madrid smelter to close two of its three production lines. Noranda had already announced the layoff of several hundred employees in January, and the Southeast Missouri legislative delegation was already working to prevent further job loss. Now, the legislators will work together to assess potential actions the legislature could take to keep the job provider operational.
“Right now every option is on the table and in discussion as we work together to prevent what would be a devastating blow to the economy of the Bootheel, and our state,” said Richardson, R-Poplar Bluff. “I know Reps. Hubrecht, McDaniel, Rehder, and Rone have been working diligently for months now to keep Noranda operational here in Missouri, and they have my full support as they do everything possible to save these jobs that mean so much to so many families.”
"This is a company, and these are jobs, that the people of Southeast Missouri cannot afford to lose. We have been working diligently to find viable solutions to keep Noranda in business. This is a huge economic blow to our area and to the people who call the Bootheel home." said Rehder, R-Sikeston.
The Southeast Missouri legislators said they were already working to seek a legislative solution that would help ease Noranda’s operating costs so that it can afford to stay in business. They also said they have been in contact with both the offices of U.S. Senator Roy Blunt and Congressman Jason Smith to discuss other possible solutions.
“Plain and simple, the people of the Bootheel cannot afford to lose these jobs. Whatever the answer may be in regard to keeping Noranda in Missouri, we have to find it, and we have to do it sooner rather than later,” said McDaniel, R-Deering.
Hubrecht, McDaniel, Rehder, and Rone noted that Noranda, like many other manufacturing companies throughout the United States, has had to struggle with overly burdensome regulations and unfair trade laws passed by the federal government. The legislators also pointed out that manufacturing companies have had to contend with countries such as China continuing to dump inferior quality products at cheap prices into the market without interference from the federal government.
Rep. Hubrecht joins Bipartisan Coalition of Office Holders Represented by
Americans United for Life, Defending Health and Safety Standards for Women vulnerable to abortion industry abuses
“Women and unborn children’s lives, health and safety are of the upmost importance.” Stated Rep. Hubrecht
WASHINGTON, D.C. (02-03-16) – Rep. Tila Hubrecht, R-Dexter, joined a bipartisan coalition of more than 460 Republican and Democratic office holders represented by Americans United for Life and the Bioethics Defense Fund in an amicus curie (friend of the court) brief filed today in the most significant abortion case before the Supreme Court in decades, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, formally known as Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole. In the brief and on behalf of the officeholders, AUL demonstrates to the Court that state efforts to protect women through reasonable health and safety standards must be upheld for reasons of common sense and medical reality. “It is important to remember that policy decisions impact the health and well-being of women and the unborn child which is why I have joined this fight,” stated Rep. Hubrecht. AUL President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest commended Representative Hubrecht as “a champion for both women and their unborn children” and observed, “At every turn, the abortion industry fights health and safety standards that offer real protection to women, going to court to keep profits high and standards low and ignoring the severe medical risks to women exposed to the reality of abortion in America. AUL’s legal team is proud to stand with men and women from across the country – more than 460 Republicans and Democrats – who are working to protect life in law in their states.”
“This historical case provides an important opportunity for the Supreme Court to affirm its support of laws that protect women’s health,” Dr. Yoest noted. “After more than four decades of the abortion industry’s recalcitrant opposition to meaningful oversight, the Supreme Court must unequivocally affirm that it meant what it has said as far back as Roe: states may regulate abortion to protect a mother’s health.”
The case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellersted, involves Texas House Bill 2, a measure enacted in 2013 with a number of life-affirming provisions. Placing profit above women’s health, abortion providers challenged provisions requiring them to meet the same health and safety standards as ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), as well as to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. In June 2015, the Fifth Circuit upheld the provisions, and abortion providers appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in their continued effort to avoid compliance with the commonsense requirements.
AUL has been active in this case since its inception. In addition to providing expert consultation on the constitutionality of HB 2 before and after it was enacted, AUL filed an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit on behalf of Texas Legislators.
AUL’s current brief, was filed on behalf of more than 460 public officeholders from states with provisions similar to the Texas health and safety standards. The brief demonstrates that the Supreme Court has promised “wide discretion” to state lawmakers in the regulation of abortion and gives significant deference to legislative determinations as to the medical necessity for enacting health and safety regulations. Here, both the legislative record and the evidence before the trial court confirm that the State of Texas acted in the best interest of women, and the Supreme Court must uphold HB 2.
