“I applaud today’s Supreme Court ruling,” said Chaffetz.  “The idea that GPS technology can be used to track somebody without their knowledge, thus violating the personal liberties provided to American citizens under the Fourth Amendment, is flat out wrong.  While today’s ruling is a positive step in the right direction, further action is needed in order to prevent the government from tracking people through other devices, like smartphones.  Today the Supreme Court laid down the broad principle that location tracking without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment.  It is now up to Congress to enact a comprehensive statute to fill in the details.”

“This is a big win for defenders of privacy rights and civil liberties,” said Welch.  “With new devices making it easier to track individuals, there is a great need for clarity on how and when these technologies can be used.  Today’s decision is a step in the right direction.  I will continue to ensure that the law is updated so that the rights of individuals are protected.”

“I am encouraged by today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision which upholds Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights and confirms the fact that a warrant is necessary for tracking an individual’s movements with a GPS device,” said Goodlatte.  “However, the Court stopped short of requiring a warrant for all geolocation information including that obtained from mobile telephones.  I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the Geolocation Privacy and Surveillance (GPS) Act, which protects individual liberty by providing clear guidelines for when and how geolocation information can be accessed and used.”

Representatives Chaffetz, Welch, and Goodlatte, are sponsors of H.R. 2168, the Geolocation Privacy and Surveillance (GPS) Act, bipartisan legislation which creates a legal framework designed to give government agencies, commercial entities, and private citizens clear guidelines for when and how geolocation information can be accessed and used.

###

“If you work for the federal government and you don't pay your taxes, you should be fired.  It is totally unacceptable to live on the federal payroll and not pay your taxes.  The Obama Administration has totally ignored this cheating.  Congress should pass my bill and hold federal workers accountable.”

This past June, Mr. Chaffetz introduced legislation (H.R. 828) which would terminate the employment of current federal employees and prohibit the hiring of future federal employees who have a “seriously delinquent tax debt.”  Similar legislation was introduced during the 111^th Congress (H.R. 4735).  Each employee terminated would be subject to due process.  The Daily Caller published a column by Mr. Chaffetz on this subject in March 2011. 

According to FERDI, more than 98,000 federal civilian employees owed $1.034 billion in unpaid federal income taxes in 2010.  When retirees and military personnel are included, nearly 280,000 people owed $3.4 billion.  Currently, only IRS employees can be terminated by their agency for non-payment of federal income taxes.

While the number of delinquent federal employees has remained fairly constant since 2004, the amount owed has increased 72%. 

(Source: Internal Revenue Service FERDI. Excludes federal employees who owe taxes but have entered into repayment agreements.)

###

“Washington D.C. must change the way it does business,” said Chaffetz.  “The RED Act makes fundamental changes to the appropriations process and requires Congress to be more accountable for their financial decisions.  By improving the process this legislation will help Congress do the right thing and slow down spending.  If we want different results, we are going to have to change the process."

The bill has five provisions that reform the way Congress creates budgets. First, the bill requires periodic sunset reviews and reauthorization of federal programs. Committees of jurisdiction shall consider whether spending programs should be modified, terminated, or reauthorized. Criteria include cost effectiveness and efficiency of the program, whether the program is duplicative with other programs and should be consolidated with similar programs, whether the original objectives of the program have been achieved, and whether alternative methods exist to carry out the objectives.

Second, the bill creates deficit reduction accounts. This reform would ensure that if an amendment is adopted that reduces the amount of budget authority provided in a bill, then that budget authority is not merely shifted to some other part of the bill but is instead made permanently unavailable and thus used to reduce the deficit.

Third, general fund transfers to the highway trust fund will be scored as spending. In recent years, the federal government has transferred more than $34 billion from the general fund to the highway trust fund. This provision does not prevent general fund transfers to the highway trust fund nor does it reduce highway spending, which includes the mass transit account, but this provision does require that such transfers be scored as spending.

Fourth, Pell Grant funding will be entirely discretionary. Currently, Pell Grants are funded through a mixture of annual appropriations and direct spending. This provision shifts current Pell Grant mandatory spending to discretionary spending without reducing Pell Grant spending or the current maximum award of $5,550. This provision simplifies the program and gives Congress better control over costs.

Fifth, this bill requires that administrative actions that increase costs of mandatory programs cannot go into effect unless Congress enacts legislation to fund them. Under current law, agencies that run programs funded through direct spending can take administrative actions such as changing eligibility that increase the cost of that program to the federal government without approval from Congress. Congressional approval should be required for all spending, including mandatory spending.

Together with the other nine reforms, including the Expedited Line-Item Veto and Rescission Act which has bipartisan support, the Review Every Dollar Act reforms the federal government’s broken budget process by increasing oversight and transparency.

###

“I’m thrilled to see this pro-growth, pro-jobs, and pro-family legislation pass the House of Representatives,” said Chaffetz.  “I’m committed to fixing legal immigration and this bill is one part of that important process.  I encourage my colleagues in the Senate to swiftly pass this bipartisan legislation.”

The Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act, co-sponsored by a bipartisan group of 11 House members, including House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (TX-21) and Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (CA-16), received broad support as it proceeded through the legislative process.

###

H.R. 665 would streamline the disposal of properties owned by the federal government while also overhauling the existing disposal process through two dynamic reforms.  The bill overhauls the current disposal process by reducing administrative overhead, creating new agency incentives, and requiring greater transparency and accountability from the property disposal apparatus. 

"Passage of this bill out of committee is great news," said Chaffetz.  "Our government is $15 trillion in debt.  We can no longer foot the bill for vacant buildings and non-federal uses and we should limit giveaways to non-federal entities.  This bill is bipartisan, generates revenue, and reduces operation and maintenance budgets.  The legislation also addresses the concerns of third parties, such as the homeless.  I applaud the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Committee for passing this bill and encourage all my colleagues in the House to support it."

The federal government is the largest single holder of real property in the United States with more than 900,000 buildings and structures[1]. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimated that the federal government holds 45,000 underutilized properties that cost nearly $1.7 billion annually to operate[2]. 

More recently, Office of Management and Budget Comptroller Daniel Werfel testified before a Senate Subcommittee that the government controls even more, with 14,000 excess buildings and structures and 76,000 underutilized properties[3]. 

The federal government has accumulated excess properties because the disposal process is flawed.  In 2003 and 2011, GAO designated federal real property management as a high-risk area to the federal government[4]. 

H.R. 665 now moves to the full House of Representatives for consideration.

###

"Congress created TSA ten years ago to be a lean, risk-based, adaptive agency, responsible for analyzing intelligence, setting security standards, and overseeing the nation’s transportation security structure.  Unfortunately, TSA has lost its way," said U.S. Rep. John L. Mica (R-FL), Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.  "TSA has strayed from its security mission and mushroomed into a top-heavy bureaucracy that includes 3,986 headquarters staff, making $103,852 per year on average, and 9,656 administrators in the field.  Currently, TSA has 65,000 employees.  Unfortunately, over the past ten years, the agency has spent $57 billion on numerous operational and technology failures.

"While we are safer today than we were ten years ago, this is largely thanks to the vigilance of American citizens and passengers, the actions of flight crews and armed pilots, the addition of hardened cockpit doors, and the assistance of foreign intelligence agencies," Mica continued.  "After ten years, we cannot continue to rely on luck.  It is time for reform.  TSA must become the kind of agency it was intended to be – a thinking, risk-based, flexible agency that analyzes risks, sets security standards and audits security performance.  "The report is being provided to Congress and there are plans to introduce legislation to improve this critical security agency.  We look forward to working with Members of Congress and the committees of jurisdiction to achieve much needed reforms."

"TSA was envisioned and sold to the American people as a proactive agency that would strategically deploy the latest technology and cutting-edge tactics to protect travelers," said U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.  "Despite these high ambitions, the agency has become a backwards-looking dinosaur that seeks employees through pizza box advertising and struggles to detect actual terrorist threats.  TSA needs a vision and purpose that goes beyond throwing expensive equipment and invasive searches at passengers who do not pose a security threat."

"Despite TSA’s massive bureaucracy, reports indicate that more than 25,000 security breaches have occurred in U.S. airports since 2001," said U.S. Rep. Paul Broun, M.D. (R-GA), Chairman of the Science Committee’s Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, and a member of the House Homeland Security Committee.  "The agency as a whole has been a colossal disappointment; the one thing it has been successful at is violating the rights of the American people.  Instead of worrying about ‘political correctness’, TSA should be putting our resources into intelligence and technologies that could be more effective when it comes to catching highly elusive and dangerous terrorists.  We should know about terrorist attacks before they materialize on U.S. soil, and I have yet to see that kind of progress come out of TSA."

"Terrorism is a global problem and we should continue to consider and learn what other countries are doing to effectively safeguard the public and stop terrorism," said U.S. Rep. Tom Petri (R-WI), Chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee of the House Transportation Committee.  "We need to focus more on identifying and thwarting terrorists rather than spending vast resources on programs that simply inconvenience the travelling public who are not a threat."

"This report highlights what we have known for years – that TSA is misguided, overly bureaucratic, and mismanaged," said U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations of the House Oversight Committee.  "It invests in tomorrow’s technology to fight yesterday’s threats and wastes billions of taxpayer dollars in the process.  It’s time for President Obama and Secretary Napolitano to refocus the troubled agency and get serious about real solutions."

From the top down, TSA is a troubled agency.  TSA and its administrator are buried within the Department of Homeland Security along with 21 other agencies.  Turnover in the position of TSA Administrator has been excessive, and too little priority has been placed on naming a new administrator when the position has become vacant.

The list of TSA operational failures has grown over the last ten years, and the agency has expended a significant amount of taxpayer resources in too many efforts that have provided little or no security benefits.  Earlier this year the agency undermined a successful – and congressionally mandated – program to allow airports to opt out of the all-federal passenger screening model in favor of a model in which qualified private contractors conduct screening under TSA standards and oversight.  TSA’s expenditure of a quarter of a billion in taxpayer dollars resulted in a poorly designed, poorly tested, and poorly performing behavior detection program, known as SPOT.  The agency has also failed to successfully implement a long-delayed Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program at many of the nation’s ports. 

TSA personnel failures include its inability to retain its workforce, high training costs for replacements, and decisions to recruit employees with ads on pizza boxes and discount gas pumps.

The agency has also failed to effectively deploy technology.  Since 2001, TSA has obligated over $8 billion on screening technology, a significant portion of which has been useless, unused, discarded, poorly deployed, or sitting idle because of a lack of trained personnel.

Despite great expenditures, TSA’s record of stopping terrorist plots is dismal.  Classified evaluations of security performance continue to reveal concerning results.  For example, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber, the Times Square bomber, and the toner cartridge bomb plot were not thwarted by TSA, but by flight crews and passengers, or by foreign intelligence agencies.

The complete report "A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform," including a review of TSA operations over the last decade and a list of recommendations to improve the agency, can be found by clicking here.  The report was prepared by the majority staff of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. 

"After countless, expensive detours, it is time for TSA to refocus its mission as an oversight agency based on risk and common sense security protocols," Mica added.

###

Third District U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz is sticking his neck out by proposing Social Security reforms. If only for that reason, his plan deserves serious consideration.

"There is no excuse for allowing Social Security to become insolvent," Chaffetz said. "The program is unsustainable in its current form. However, this problem is completely within our power to resolve -- without tax increases and while protecting retirees."

He is right that it's unsustainable. It is already running a deficit that will snowball as the baby boomers retire. Eventually, either Social Security or the nation -- or both -- will go broke.

What makes Chaffetz's proposal serious is that it seems to be more than just a rehash of slogans, or some blue-sky idea that no one will buy. At first glance, it seems to be a detailed proposal that takes into account both fiscal and political realities. (More at Chaffetz.house.gov)

Chaffetz basically proposes adjusting the law gradually over the next 75 years. Making the changes over the long run would allow the system to maintain equilibrium without sudden, traumatic changes that would spook nervous voters.

His seven-step plan includes raising the retirement age gradually, tweaking the way benefits are calculated, and instituting means-testing for seniors with very high incomes. It would even increase benefits for a few.

At least one official source has checked the congressman's math. The Social Security Administration's Office of the Chief Actuary wrote in a letter: "We estimate that enactment of the basic provisions in this proposal would maintain solvency of the OASDI [Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance] program throughout the long-range (75-year) projection period and would fulfill the requirements for sustainable solvency."

In other words, Chaffetz's plan would keep the system from going broke. The letter isn't meant to be an endorsement of the idea; and we all know how slippery Washington numbers can be. But this proposal at least seems to be grounded in reality.

Politically -- which is just as important -- the scheme seems viable. The idea is not to slash benefits for everyone, but to slowly reduce increases. With savings compounding, that would enable the system to regain financial stability with few if any retirees noticing the changes.

That is, unless politicians decide to make hay. Social Security has been called the "third rail of American politics." That's because, like the electrified rail of a subway system, touching it is usually fatal. And political opponents try to make the most of that.

Chaffetz's plan could get the same treatment as the Medicare reforms proposed by his Republican colleague Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. In an example of why people loathe today's politics, Democrats quickly ran ads with a Ryan lookalike pushing an old woman off a cliff. Pretty subtle, huh? But the unfair attack took the edge off Republican ardor.

Nor would even Chaffetz, the staunchest of conservatives, seem invulnerable to attacks from the right. There's still sentiment for more radical changes of the system, or even dismantling it.

But, let's face it, the American people are in no mood for big changes. President George W. Bush's plan for private retirement accounts was, unfortunately, trounced, and that was during a more optimistic time than today. These days, the specter of radical change just rattles a nervous, recession-battered electorate.

Chaffetz seems to be facing these facts. He has a draft of the actual bill, which is only a few pages long and tweaks existing numbers. He is trying to get a Democrat to co-sponsor it, a prudent move. Changes that are in any measure identified as the product of just one party don't have much political chance. If at least some Democrats and Republicans get behind a plan, then it might have a prayer.

The whole project seems to be a sign that Chaffetz has left the political grandstand and is working for real change. For that alone, he deserves credit. Perhaps this will spark some productive debate on a most serious issue. Many people have come to count on Social Security, and its problems grow with every passing day. Those can be solved with a responsible approach. Let's not wait for the crisis that is sure to come.

Article originally published here

Read what the Deseret News wrote about the Chaffetz proposals

Read what Editorial Boards are saying: The Daily Herald and Salt Lake Tribune

Read what the Social Security Administration wrote about the Chaffetz proposals

Read the text of the proposed legislation

Watch the Congressman discuss his proposal on KSL's Sunday Edition

“I’d prefer to see that part of the Arizona Strip transferred to Utah before requiring Utahns to pay tolls to the state of Arizona to drive on I-15.  If this segment of I-15 does not benefit Arizona’s economy, then Arizona’s economy would not be negatively impacted by having this portion of the Strip transferred to Utah.”

The section of Interstate 15 that runs through the Arizona Strip is a unique segment of the Interstate Highway System , and Arizona has legitimate concerns about having to use state tax dollars to fund a project that does not benefit Arizona’s economy.  However, tolling residents of Utah and other states is not the best solution.

###

H.R. 3012 enjoys broad, bipartisan support.  It is cosponsored by House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (TX-21), Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (CA-16), and Rep. Tim Griffin (AR-02).  H.R. 3012 amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per country numerical limitation for employment-based immigrants and adjusts the limitations on family visas without increasing the total number of available visas.  The legislation creates a fair and equitable “first come, first serve” system.  Under this system, US companies will be able to focus on what they do best – hiring smart people to create products, services, and jobs for Americans.

“I am committed to fixing legal immigration,” said Chaffetz.  “I am pleased to see this bill pass the Judiciary Committee with bipartisan support.  By removing per country limits, American companies will be able to access the best talent.  This legislation is pro-growth, pro-jobs, and pro-family.  I encourage my colleagues in the House to pass this bipartisan legislation.”

###

One of the witnesses is from my – and the Chairman’s – home state.  Mark Ward, who will deliver testimony in support of HR 1126, is the Senior Policy Analyst/Public Lands and Natural Resources Counsel for the Utah Association of Counties.  Among other things, the Utah Association of Counties is dedicated to “Securing state and federal legislation and administrative action that is beneficial to the counties of Utah and to county residents.”  Needless to say, I value their mission, their expertise, and their support and am grateful for Mark’s participation. 

H.R. 1126 directs the Secretary of the Interior to sell federal lands that were initially identified in a 1997 Report conducted by the Clinton Administration.  The Report directed the Secretary of Interior to identify federal land suitable for disposal.  The Secretary identified roughly 3.3 million acres of Bureau of Land Management land in ten western states in its final report – these lands remain in federal ownership today.  Under the bill, all proceeds from the sales would be directed to the US Treasury to help reduce the $14.9 trillion debt.  At the time, Assistant Secretary of Policy, Management, and Budget for President Clinton, Bonnie Cohen, expressed optimism for the Report when she said, “The Department of Interior is working closely with the General Services Administration to further identify, evaluate, and dispose of excess federal property for this important initiative.”

Unfortunately, the Department and GSA never quite got around to finishing the job.  The 3.3 million acres identified remain in federal control today.  These lands amount to just over 1% of BLM land and less than one half of 1% of all federal lands.  And given the fact that over 90 million acres have been acquired since 1997, I believe it’s important to ask the question, when is enough federal land enough?

Throughout the course of US history, the federal government has acquired roughly 1.8 billion acres of land.  These acquisitions have come via cession by the colonies, treaties, and purchases.  For example, the most well known acquisition was the Louisiana Purchase in 1801.  Up until passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, it was generally the policy and intent of the federal government to transfer ownership of most lands to private and state ownership.  This policy resulted in the transfer of approximately 1.2 billion acres of land to private and state ownership since our country’s beginning.  Current estimates place federal land ownership as approximately 660 million acres.

Current federal land policies favor acquisition, not disposal.  Between 1997 and 2004, the General Services Administration estimated that federal land ownership increased 16 percent – from 563.3 million acres to 653.3 million.  By comparison, between 2000-2010, net land disposal under the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act totaled just 7,832 acres. 

In the West, more than 50% of the lands are controlled by the federal government.  In Utah, this means that just 31% of the land is subject to state and local taxation – a reality that places great burdens on public education, firefighters, and police officers who depend on state and local taxes for financial support.  Returning certain federal lands back to state and local control would help to alleviate these restraints. 

Removing certain public lands from federal control would allow federal land management agencies to focus on lands more deserving of active management techniques.  It is neither logical nor responsible for the federal government to own and manage surplus lands.  Management of surplus land is more expensive and pulls resources from lands that are truly deserving of federal management.  HR 1126 is needed to streamline federal land management.

In closing, I want to reiterate my thanks to this Subcommittee.  Federal land ownership issues are extremely important to my state and the West at large.  The federal government owns nearly one-third of the land-mass, and continues to spend millions of dollars each year to acquire more and more.  Despite escalating budget deficits and a record-high national debt, the federal estate continues to grow, not shrink.  This growing portfolio limits local government’s ability to deliver vital public services, such as public education.  There are lands that should continue to fall under the purview of the federal government, but we must also work together to identify and dispose unneeded, excess, or surplus federal lands.  The current land disposal and exchange system is broken.  Consideration of HR 1126 is a good start towards fixing it.   

###

The SESD electric distribution system was originally built as part of the Strawberry Valley Project in the 1920’s.  A long, complex history of federal, local, and private involvement has created great uncertainty surrounding portions of the system.  The bill clarifies which portions are titled to the District and which portions are titled to the Bureau of Reclamation.  This clarification divests the federal government of future liability while also providing the District – the entity already operating and maintaing the system – with greater certainty and autonomy in day-to-day and long-term operations.

Title transfers are non-controversial and common practice in Congress.  Since 1996, titles of 27 Bureau of Reclamation projects have been transferred to non-federal partners.  These transfers benefit both parties.  According to a report produced by the House Committee on Natural Resources, "Title transfers benefit both local communities and the federal government. The transfer of title will divest [the Bureau of] Reclamation of federal liability while providing the non-federal entity with greater autonomy and flexibility to manage facilities in a manner that best meets its needs"

“I am pleased the House of Representatives unanimously approved the South Utah Valley Electric Conveyance Act,” said Rep. Chaffetz.  “The bill helps clarify the long and complex ownership history of the electrical distribution system.  This system helps power the once underserved areas of South Utah Valley and is vital to the long-term viability of SESD and their customers – the citizens of south Utah Valley.”

The legislation is supported by the mayors of Spanish Fork, Santaquin, Salem, Payson, Genola, Woodland Hills, Springville, and Elk Ridge.

###