“Earmarks have become the symbol for all the abuse and waste in Washington.  While every aspect of my own earmark process has been open and transparent at unprecedented levels, many of my colleagues weren’t as open.  That’s why I have joined in this effort to enact some spending reform.  This earmark moratorium won’t balance the budget by itself, however it is an important first step and demonstrates to the American people that we are serious about bringing true fiscal reform to Washington.

“Like the Montanans I’ve heard from, I’m upset about the dramatic increases in the budget and downright furious about all the new spending.  From taxpayer-funded bailouts for Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, AIG, Banks and the auto industry totaling more than $1 trillion, to a $1 trillion so-called stimulus that only stimulated bigger government, to a $1.2 trillion government takeover of health care, this Congress can’t spend money it doesn’t have fast enough.  I’m proud to be the only member of Montana’s delegation who voted against all of these big spending plans and in favor of true fiscal responsibility.  Montanans are rightfully upset about these dramatic increases in spending, which is why I am an original cosponsor of a Constitutional Amendment to require the Federal Government to balance the budget.”

“The Little Shell have waited long enough for their rightful recognition,” said Rehberg, a member of the House Native American Caucus. “While the legislative process is almost always slow, after more than 30 years of waiting, we’re closer to the finish line than we’ve been in a long time.  We’ll keep fighting until we’re done.”

The Little Shell Tribe is made up of approximately 4,300 members, mostly in the Great Falls area. In 2000, the same year the tribe was recognized by the state of Montana, the Department of Interior issued a positive finding for the tribe making them eligible for recognition. Since then, little progress has been made due to bureaucratic obstacles. Rehberg’s bill expedites recognition through the legislative process.

The full letter is below:

Dear Chairman Rahall,

We request an expeditious markup for the following bills which are currently under consideration in the Committee on Natural Resources: the Duwamish Tribal Recognition Act (H.R. 2678), the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians Reaffirmation Act (H.R. 1358), the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians Restoration Act (H.R. 3120), and the Chinook Restoration Act (H.R. 3084).

As Members of Congress, we have worked on these bills for many years, in some cases more than a decade.  Each of the tribes has contributed significantly to the culture, history, and character of the regions which we represent, and federal recognition would be a step toward righting a historical wrong.

We believe that these bills are ready to advance through the legislative process to a vote on the floor of the House.  On July 15, 2009, the Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing examining all four of these bills.  Concerns which arose from this hearing have since been addressed, and we believe that a markup should now be scheduled without delay.

We respectfully request a meeting to discuss how we may work with you and House Leadership to move this legislation to a final vote in Committee and on the House floor as quickly as possible.  We strongly believe in the importance and caliber of these bills.  Passage of these bills is of the highest priority for each of us, and we urge swift action by our colleagues in the House.

“Public input is certainly important, but it’s not enough if that input is ignored or comes after a policy has been written or implemented.  When it comes to executive action, we’ve already seen this Administration shoot first and ask questions later, and now that the sights are on millions of acres in Montana, the responsible action is to reassert congressional oversight, just like Wyoming has already done.”

“I think Montanans would be outraged to learn that huge national special interest groups with multi-million dollar endowments are bankrolling thousands of lawsuits with tax dollars meant for small businesses, individuals and non-profits,” said Rehberg a member of the House Western Caucus.  “It’s one thing to have access to the courts, but it’s another to force taxpayers to pay for it.  Since 1995, the federal government has inexplicably stopped tracking how it spends these funds, and it’s time to restore the transparency and accountability.”

Originally passed in 1980, EAJA was meant to help provide fair access to legal remedies for individuals, small businesses and non-profits with limited means.  It does this by reimbursing attorney’s fees for plaintiffs who sue the federal government if they win the case or settle out of court.  The original legislation required annual reports to Congress on the amount and nature of EAJA payments, but those reports ended in 1995.

Two private studies, one by a Wyoming law firm and another by Virginia Tech University, have shown that despite congressional intent to assist small organizations, some large environmental obstructionist groups appear to be the biggest beneficiaries of EAJA payments.  The Wyoming study, for example, found that more than 1,200 federal cases were filed in 19 states and the District of Columbia by just 14 environmental groups.  The cost to the taxpayer was $37 million.

The Open EAJA Act reinstates and consolidates tracking and reporting requirements under the Department of Justice (DOJ), and requires the DOJ to publish a public online, searchable database of EAJA payments.  It would also authorize an audit of the last 15 years, during which the fund has operated with absolutely no oversight.

“The hard working folks of the Montana Wood Products Association appreciate Rep. Rehberg signing on to the Open EAJA Act of 2010,” said Ellen Simpson, the Executive Vice President of the Montana Wood Products Association.  “Changes in EAJA are sorely needed to shine a bright light on obstructionists who have made a cottage industry out of suing the Forest Service to stop active management on Montana’s national forests.  The taxpayers have a right to know how their money is being spent and who benefits while the forests die.  The Open EAJA Act of 2010 will provide that information.”

“Even after the notoriety of the New Orleans levee failures in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, someone in the Army Corps of Engineers made the decision to stop certifying levees altogether,” said Rehberg, a member of the House Levee Caucus.  “That was the wrong decision, because it leaves struggling homeowners up a flooded creek without a paddle.  I’m working closely with the Corps to identify their concerns.  Once those are clear, I’ll be able to decide the best course forward, whether it’s legislative or administrative action.”

The Corps has traditionally certified levees that were originally built by the Corps and turned over to drainage districts.  The West Side Great Falls Levee, which was built by the Corps after a major flooding event in 1964, currently protects 1,000 homes near Great Falls.  Certifications were funded through the Inspection of Completed Works program. 

Failure of the Corps to certify levees in turn forces municipalities or private homeowners to contract with private engineering firms, which is often very expensive because of the potential liability for a levee failure.  In fact, there are no such firms in Montana that currently issue certifications.  If no action is taken, homeowners could be forced to purchase flood insurance because FEMA maps would show that no levees exist.

Although a major problem in Montana, this issue is by no means restricted solely to the Last Best Place.  The bipartisan Congressional Levee Caucus gives Rehberg a chance to amplify his concerns by teaming up with other members of Congress.  The Caucus Chairman, Rep. Rodney Alexander (LA-5), has indicated that levee certification is the number one priority for the Caucus.

“If these levies don’t get certified, our flood insurance costs will go sky high, while property values will fall,” said Sandy Mares, the Administrative Commissioner of the West Great Falls Flood Control and Drainage District.  “We all really appreciate Denny’s work on this important issue.”

“The scary part is that a lot of the folks who are in the path of the proverbial storm don’t even know it’s raining yet,” said Rehberg.  “We’ve got to work together to get this fixed, or Montanans are going to be fighting mad when their insurance rates increase.”

Letter below:

Dear Lieutenant General Van Antwerp and Assistant Secretary Darcy:

I’m writing in response to your testimony before the House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee on February 24, 2010.  As Montana’s Congressman, I have concerns regarding the certification of levees in Montana and other states, and I would appreciate your agency’s attention to ensure these problems are recognized and addressed in a timely manner.

The West Side Great Falls Levee, which was built by the Corps of Engineers after a major flooding event in 1964, currently protects 1,000 homes near Great Falls, Montana.  The Levee was turned over more than two decades ago by the Corps of Engineers, and regular operations have fallen under the supervision of the West Great Falls Flood Control and Drainage District since that time. 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is in the process of digitally re-mapping the area, which would require the Levee’s certification.  This re-mapping process is not unique to Montana, as it is occurring in other states across the nation.  Without a new certification, FEMA’s maps would show that no levee exists, requiring homeowners to purchase costly flood insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

According to the City of Great Falls, which has approximately 550 parcels within the District worth millions of dollars in estimated property value, the Corps of Engineers has, historically, “certified the levees, and property owners within the district were assessed a small property tax to fund repairs and maintenance.”  Furthermore, the Commissioners of Cascade County recently sent my office a petition with the signatures of 810 property owners and members of the West Great Falls Flood Control and Drainage District requesting certification assistance.

The Corps of Engineers has traditionally certified levees that were built by the agency and turned over to drainage districts.  The alternative—contracting through private engineering firms—would be an unreasonable financial burden for jurisdictions seeking certification. 

In the Corps of Engineers’ testimony, the agency admitted that it previously worked with FEMA on accreditation, but that its main function is not to accredit levees and that accreditation is not a high priority.  Specifically, I have several questions in regards to this statement:

1. Does the Corps of Engineers believe it has sufficient authority and funding to conduct levee certifications?
2. It has come to my attention that the Corps of Engineers recently certified a levee in Missoula, Montana.  Although this structure is located within the Seattle District, why has the Omaha District failed to issue similar certifications within its jurisdiction, including the West Side Great Falls Levee?
3. In the Corps of Engineers’ budget request, the agency has requested $120,000 for the Inspection of Completed Works in Montana.  If appropriated, will these funds be used to conduct levee certifications in Montana? 
4. The Operation and Maintenance account, which funds the Inspection of Completed Works program within the Corps of Engineers’ budget, received $2.075 billion in last year’s stimulus bill in addition to its annual appropriation.  If budgetary constraints prohibit the Corps from issuing certifications, how much additional funding is necessary?

If the Corps of Engineers fails to certify levees affected by FEMA’s re-mapping efforts, hundreds of thousands of Americans would be forced to purchase costly flood insurance.  This would drastically increase the cost of homeownership for Americans during difficult economic times.  As such, I urge the Corps of Engineers’ attention to correct this matter and would appreciate feedback to ensure that accreditation becomes a top priority.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.  If you have further questions, please don’t hesitate to contact my office at (202) 225-3211.

Sincerely,

“For our ranchers, farmers and anyone who makes a living off the land, the ESA can be a four-letter word.  Every week, the Interior Department is taking drastic steps to interfere in the proven efforts of the local land owners and managers who are personally invested in safeguarding precious resources like sage-grouse.”

“The Constitution puts the authority to pass laws in the hands of Congress because we must answer directly to the will of the people,” said Rehberg, a member of the Congressional Liberty Caucus.  “An agency, whether it be the Environmental Protection Agency or the Secretary of the Interior, has no such responsibility to the people.  When Congress abdicates its role to legislate, it undermines the very notion of a government by the People.  This legislation would restore the Constitutional checks and balances.”

Rehberg pointed out that rules and regulations authored by non-elected Washington, D.C. bureaucrats can have the same harmful consequences as those passed by Congress.  The REINS Act requires a vote on every new major rule, which will ensure Congress resumes the legislative accountability granted by the Constitution and the responsibility for Congressional decisions intended by our founders.

“This isn’t about which President happens to be in the White House today,” said Rehberg.  “The fact is, whether it’s a Republican or a Democrat, Congress has been too willing to sacrifice our authority.  Our authority, ultimately, is the authority of the American people, and our duty is to protect it.”

“For more than a century, the Antiquities Act has served a valuable function in the preservation of America’s natural treasures, making it all the more tragic that it’s now being misused for a 13 million-acre land-grab,” said Rehberg, a member of the House Western Caucus.  “When it comes to land in Montana, we’ve got a long-standing tradition of working together to find consensus-based solutions.  Circumventing that tradition by unilaterally carving out millions of acres with the stroke of a pen is not the American way.  The President is not a king, and we are not his subjects, which is why congressional checks and balances are so important.”

Rehberg, who recently sent a letter to Interior Secretary Salazar demanding details on the proposals, introduced H.R. 4754, which requires congressional approval of new National Monument designations in Montana.  This requirement isn’t unprecedented; the current law prohibits the extension or establishment of any National Monument in Wyoming without the express authorization of Congress.

“This isn’t about undermining a good law,” said Rehberg.  “It’s about preventing a good law from being abused.  It’s about ensuring Montanans are heard and preventing a bureaucratic overreach.  It’s about making sure that we aren’t rendered landless in our own state because a big-city politician thought it would be fun to shut us out of our land.”

The Department of Interior Memo can be found here: http://robbishop.house.gov/UploadedFiles/states_for_designation.pdf

“We must hold agencies accountable for improper payments, and we must identify, pursue and prosecute those who would defraud the American taxpayer,” said Rehberg in his opening statement.  “I’m glad to see that the Administration is taking this seriously.  It would be my hope that the savings that are recovered are used to shore up the Medicare trust funds and not immediately spent on something else.”

In his statement, Rehberg also cited an OMB study that estimated $10.8 billion in improper payments by Medicare in 2007 and a Washington Post story that reported $47 billion in improper payments last year.

Testifying were:

William Corr
Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services

Dan Levinson
Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services

Gary Grindler
Acting Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice

Julie Rivera
Special Agent, Office of Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services

“This naked abuse of power is not only a misuse of the Antiquities Act, but an egregious affront to the will of Montanans,” said Rehberg, a member of the House Western Caucus.  “The White House is considering a land-grab of more than three times the acreage with absolutely no regard for the interests or views of the people in Montana.  No wonder folks that I’ve heard from are fed up with how things work in Washington.”

The Antiquities Act authorized the President to designate objects or areas of historic or scientific interest as National Monuments on lands owned or controlled by the United States.  An internal Department of Interior document recently revealed the Administration is considering using this law to create as many as 14 new National Monument designations in the West.  These designations could lock up as many as 13 million acres of land in 11 different Western states, including Montana.

Rehberg has been a vocal opponent of a similar effort to lock up millions of acres through the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act.  That effort, at least, requires a vote by Congress which gives the impacted people an opportunity to be heard.  Rehberg has testified multiple times on behalf of more than 10,000 Montanans who contacted his office in opposition to this bill.

“When it comes to unilateral federal land grabs, Montanans don’t mince words.  They want bureaucrats to keep their hands off our state,” said Rehberg, citing a Facebook group he launched that has more than 3,000 members, “For the Montanans who work, till, graze, hunt, fish, hike, camp and enjoy this land, conservation is not only a daily personal choice; it’s our way of life.  Real conservation isn’t about making tough decisions for someone else who lives thousands of miles away, yet that’s exactly what the White House is trying to do.”

(Letter Below)

Dear Secretary Salazar:

We were distressed to learn from an internal “NOT FOR RELEASE” document that deliberations regarding potential National Monument designation sites and “high priority land-rationalization efforts” were taking place within the Department of Interior without public knowledge or participation.

We do, however, take a degree of comfort in your subsequent statement that you hope for a more open process in which locally affected people and their Representatives are engaged in a “public dialogue” rather than being recipients of surprise announcements.  While not an explicit assurance that the unilateral actions outlined in the document will not be carried out, we do hope the statement does mean that an open, transparent process involving the public will occur prior to any action by the Department or the President.

Left unanswered at this point are many questions about the status of potential National Monument designations, what groups and individuals are or were involved in this endeavor, and the extent to which the process will continue to be carried out behind closed doors.  Therefore, we request the following information no later than March 26, 2010.

1.      All pages of the “Internal Draft” document of which we obtained only pages 15 to 21. 

2.      With regard to the “brainstorming” sessions you publicly mentioned, we would like a copy of any documents distributed at or in preparation for the meetings, a list of all participants or invitees, any notes taken at the meeting (s), and any memoranda, work product or follow up documents from the meeting(s).  All records, electronic or otherwise, of meetings or discussions with private groups, individuals or other persons or entities that are not employees of the Department of the Interior where potential National Monument designations were discussed.  We request all notes, agendas, memoranda or documents from those meetings.

3.      All documents related to the Secretary’s initiative to compile a list of potential National Monument designations since July 1, 2009, including, but not limited to, maps.

4.      Any communication with any person or entity outside of the Department of the Interior related to the Secretary’s initiative since July 1, 2009.

We thank you for your prompt response to our previous letter and look forward to an equally prompt and fully informative reply to this letter.

Sincerely,