Jason Chaffetz on Government Reform

Disallow lobbyists in senior administration positions

Pres. OBAMA: I can stand here unequivocally and say that there has not been an administration who was tougher on making sure that lobbyists weren't participating in the administration than any administration that's come before us. Now, what we did was, if there were lobbyists who were on boards an commissions that were carryovers and their term hadn't been completed, we didn't kick them off. We simply said that moving forward any time a new slot opens, they're being replaced. There have been a handful of waivers where somebody is highly skilled--for example, a doctor who ran Tobacco-Free Kids technically is a registered lobbyist; on the other end, has more experience than anybody in figuring out how kids don't get hooked on cigarettes.

Run campaigns %& budgets as fiscal conservative

• I support giving the President a line item veto to provide a check against pork barrel spending.
• Revamping the earmarking process is a top priority.

Voted NO on Senate pay raise.

Makes appropriations to the Senate for FY2010 for:
1. expense allowances;
2. representation allowances for the Majority and Minority Leaders;
3. salaries of specified officers, employees, and committees (including the Committee on Appropriations);
4. agency contributions for employee benefits;
5. inquiries and investigations;
6. the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control;
7. the Offices of the Secretary and of the Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate;
8. miscellaneous items;
9. the Senators' Official Personnel and Office Expense Account; and
10. official mail costs.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D, FL-20): We, as Members of Congress, have responsibility not just for the institution, but for the staff that work for this institution, and to preserve the facilities that help support this institution. We have endeavored to do that responsibly, and I believe we have accomplished that goal.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. SCALISE (R, LA-1): It's a sad day when someone attempts to cut spending in a bill that grows government by the size of 7%, and it's not allowed to be debated on this House floor. Some of their Members actually used the term "nonsense" and "foolishness" when describing our amendments to cut spending; they call that a delaying tactic. Well, I think Americans all across this country want more of those types of delaying tactics to slow down this runaway train of massive Federal spending. Every dollar we spend from today all the way through the end of this year is borrowed money. We don't have that money. We need to control what we're spending.

Identify constitutionality in every new congressional bill.

The Contract from America, clause 1. Protect the Constitution:

Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does.

Audit federal agencies, to reform or eliminate them.

The Contract from America, clause 5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington:

Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality,

Moratorium on all earmarks until budget is balanced.

The Contract from America, clause 9. Stop the Pork:

Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark.

Require Internet disclosure of all earmarks.

• Establishes a free public searchable website, listing all requests by Members of Congress for congressionally directed spending items (congressional earmarks).
• Requires each congressional committee, within five calendar days of receipt of a request for a congressional earmark from a Member of Congress, to provide the initial information regarding that request that is required to be placed on the website.
• Makes it out of order to consider any legislation unless it meets the requirements of this Act.

The website shall be comprised of a database including the following information, in searchable format, for each earmark:
1. The fiscal year in which the item would be funded.
2. The number of the bill or joint resolution for which the request is made, if available.
3. The amount of the initial request made by the Member of Congress.
4. The amount approved by the committee of jurisdiction.
5. The amount carried in the bill or joint resolution (or accompanying report) as passed.
6. The name of the department or agency, and the account or program, through which the item will be funded.
7. The name and the State or district of the Member of Congress who made the request.
8. The name and address of the intended recipient.
9. The type of organization (public, private nonprofit, or private for profit entity) of the intended recipient.
10. The project name, description, and estimated completion date.
11. A justification of the benefit to taxpayers.
12. Whether the request is for a continuing project and if so, when funds were first appropriated for such project.
13. A description, if applicable, of all non-Federal sources of funding.
14. Its current status in the legislative process

Member of House Judiciary Committee.

The U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, known as the House Judiciary Committee, is charged with overseeing the administration of justice within the federal courts, administrative agencies and Federal law enforcement entities. The Judiciary Committee is also the committee responsible for impeachments of federal officials. Because of the legal nature of its oversight, committee members usually have a legal background, but this is not required.

Member of House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's government-wide oversight jurisdiction and expanded legislative authority make it one of the most influential and powerful committees in the House. The Committee serves as Congress' chief investigative and oversight committee. The chairman of the committee is the only committee chairman in the House with the authority to issue subpoenas without a committee vote. Source: U.S. House of Representatives website, www.house.gov 11-HC-OGR on Feb 3, 2011

Require Congressional certification of president's "Czars".

Chaffetz co-sponsored Sunset All Czars Act

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION To define advisors often characterized as Czars and to provide that appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries and expenses associated with such advisors.
• Whereas Congress recognizes the importance of coordinating executive agencies, and recognizes that Presidents often appoint special assistants, commonly referred to as 'czars', to manage this coordination with regard to important areas of national policy, and to advise the President;
• Whereas at least 36 czars have been appointed in 2009, raising concerns about the Federal government's provision of adequate transparency and accountability to the public; and
• Whereas members of Congress are concerned that the appointment of these czars and their actions may subvert the legislative and oversight authority of Congress under article I of the Constitution:
• Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the sense of Congress that the President should--
• issue a report to Congress clearly outlining the responsibilities, qualifications, and authorities of the special assistants to the President, commonly referred to as 'czars', that he has appointed; and
• certify to Congress that such czars have not asserted and will not in the future assert any powers other than those granted by statute to a commissioned officer on the President's staff; and
• Congress should hold hearings on such report and such certification within 30 days after the date of their receipt.
• [HR59 adds the additional stricter clause]: Appropriated funds may not be used to pay for any salaries or expenses of any task force, council, policy office within the Executive Office of the President, or similar office that is established by the direction of the President; and the head of which is a Czar. Source: HCR3&HR59 11-HR059 on Jan 5, 2011

Subcommittee	Chair	Ranking Member
Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service and Labor Policy Dennis A. Ross (R-FL) Stephen Lynch (D-MA)
Government Organization, Efficiency and Financial Management	Todd Platts (R-PA)	Ed Towns (D-NY)
Health Care, District of Columbia, Census and the National Archives	Trey Gowdy (R-SC)	Danny K. Davis (D-IL)
National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations	Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)	John F. Tierney (D-MA)
Regulatory Affairs, Stimulus Oversight and Government Spending	Jim Jordan (R-OH)	Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs	Patrick McHenry (R-NC)	Michael Quigley (D-IL)
Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform	James Lankford (R-OK)	Gerry Connolly (D-VA)

Click here for definitions & background information on Government Reform. Click here for a profile of Jason Chaffetz. Click here for SenateMatch answers by Jason Chaffetz. Agree? Disagree? Voice your opinions on Government Reform in The Forum. Click here for a summary of Jason Chaffetz's positions on all issues. Click here for issue positions of other UT politicians.
Other candidates on Government Reform:		Jason Chaffetz on other issues:
UT Gubernatorial: Gary Herbert UT Senatorial: Mike Lee Orrin Hatch UT politicians Retiring as of Jan. 2013: AZ:Kyl(R) CT:Lieberman(D) HI:Akaka(D) ND:Conrad(D) NM:Bingaman(D) TX:Hutchison(R) VA:Webb(D) WI:Kohl(D)	Senate elections Nov. 2012: AZ:Flake(R) CA:Feinstein(D) vs.Holbrook(R) CT:Bysiewicz(R) vs.Murphy(R) vs.Shays(R) DE:Carper(D) FL:Nelson(D) vs.LeMieux(R) HI:Hirono(D) vs.Case(D) IN:Lugar(R) vs.Mourdock(R) vs.Donnelly(D) MA:Brown(R) vs.E.Warren(D) vs.Khazei(D) vs.Massie(D) vs.S.Warren(D) MD:Cardin(D) vs.Wargotz(R) vs.Capps(R) ME:Snowe(D) vs.D`Amboise(R) MI:Stabenow(D) vs.Hekman(R) vs.Konetchy(R) vs.Hoekstra(R) MO:McCaskill(D) vs.Akin(R) vs.Steelman(R) MT:Tester(D) vs.Rehberg(R) ND:(D) vs.Berg(R)	NE:Nelson(D) vs.Flynn(R) vs.Stenberg(R) vs.Bruning(R) NJ:Menendez(D) vs.Linker(R) NM:Bingaman(D) vs.Balderas(D) vs.Sanchez(R) vs.Wilson(R) NV:Heller(R) vs.Berkley(D) NY:Gillibrand(D) vs.Noren(D) OH:Brown(D) vs.Coughlin(R) vs.Pryce(R) PA:Casey(D) vs.Scaringi(R) RI:Whitehouse(D) vs.Hinckley(R) TN:Corker(R) TX:Cruz(R) vs.Jones(R) vs.Leppert(R) UT:Hatch(R) vs.Chaffetz(R) VA:Kaine(D) vs.Allen(R) vs.Donner(R) vs.Radtke(R) WA:Cantwell(D) WI:Schiess(R) vs.Neumann(R) vs.Thompson(R) vs.Kagen(D) vs.Kind(D) vs.Baldwin(D) WV:Manchin(D) WY:Barrasso(R)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings
Contact info: Campaign website: www.jasonforcongress.com Email: info@jasonforcongress.com Email Contact Form Mailing Address: 315 Westfield Circle, Alpine, UT 84004 Official Website Phone number: (202) 225-7751

Page last updated: Nov 04, 2011