DOCSLIB.ORG

Barbara Comstock (VA-10): Swamp Creature

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Barbara Comstock (VA-10): Swamp Creature Significant Findings Comstock received more than $1 million in a taxpayer-funded salary, and if she retired today, she would receive a congressional pension worth more than $20,000. Comstock also accepted over $18,000 in privately funded travel. Comstock’s top industry contributors were lawyers, lobbyists and Wall Street. Comstock voted with Paul Ryan 90% of the time, and voted with her party 95% of the time. She voted to elect Speaker Ryan two times and accepted $27,000 from Ryan’s PAC. Comstock voted with Trump nearly 97% of the time. She voted to fund Trump’s border wall, and voted against releasing his tax returns, addressing conflicts of interest in the administration and voted repeatedly against investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. Comstock was an absentee Congresswoman. In September 2017, her constituents delivered a cake to her office to mark 1,000 days of her not holding a town hall. Constituents made “missing” posters and conducted search parties to express their dissatisfaction with the congresswoman. Comstock voted for the Republican tax plan, which benefitted the wealthy and corporations, shipped jobs overseas, and would cause 13 million Americans to lose their health insurance. She voted for the Republican tax scam despite opposition from her district: Comstock’s district relied heavily on State and Local Tax deductions, and she refused to take a hard line stance against elimination of the deduction, unlike her GOP colleagues in SALT heavy districts. After the bill passed, Comstock’s constituents lined up to avoid penalties from the tax bill. Comstock voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act and voted against Medicaid Expansion in Virginia. Comstock voted ten times to defund or attack Planned Parenthood and supported overturning Roe v. Wade. She voted for a Virginia “TRAP Law” that was considered one of the most restrictive in the country for first-trimester abortions. Comstock voted against improving traffic conditions in Northern Virginia. Comstock voted for the House GOP tax bill that eliminated the employer-sponsored subsidy for commuting – transportation advocates called it a “tax hike” for commuters. In 2013, Comstock voted against the state’s transportation funding compromise, and the Sun Gazette called her vote a “disservice to her constituents.” Comstock voted against funding for federal railroad safety, and voted to block consideration of a long-term transportation bill. Comstock compared immigrants to Fed Ex packages, agreed with Trump’s decision to phase out DACA, voted to end DACA, voted to restart deportations of undocumented families and Dreamers, opposed DACA youth joining the military, and ran away from DACA advocates when they tried to talk to her. Comstock voted to prohibit prevailing wage requirements, and voted to add a Right to Work statue to the Virginia constitution twice. In 2014 and 2016, the NRA awarded Comstock an “A” rating. The NRA spent more than $137k on getting Comstock elected, making her the tenth highest recipient of NRA funding in Congress. Comstock voted to allow Internet service providers to sell customer’s personal information to advertisers without their permission. Comstock supported the Keystone XL Pipeline and supported offshore drilling. In 2017, Comstock voted for the Choice Act that gut Dodd-Frank banking reforms. Over the course of her career, Comstock accepted more than $700,000 from Wall Street. Biography Barbara Comstock is a Member of Congress representing Virginia’s 10th Congressional District and has served in that position since 2015. Graduated from Middlebury College in 1981; earned her law degree from Georgetown University Law Center in 1986 1991-1995: Served as a senior aide to Congressman Frank Wolf, who she went on to replace in Congress after his retirement 1995-1999: Investigative Counsel for Committee on Government Reform, where she was known for her dogged investigations of the Clinton Administration 2000: Led opposition research at the RNC Director of Office of Public Affairs at the Department Of Justice during the Bush Administration Worked as a lobbyist at Blank Rome, before establishing her own public relations and government affairs firm, Corallo Comstock Elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2009, served until she was elected to Congress Comstock Benefitted From The Perks Of Congress Comstock Has Received More Than $1 Million In Taxpayer Funded Salary 2015 – 2017: Comstock Received More than $500,000 As A Congressional Salary Today, Comstock receives a Congressional salary of $174,000. Over her three years in Congress, Comstock has received a total of $522,000 in taxpayer-funded salary. Year Congressional Salary 2015 $174,000 2016 $174,000 2017 $174,000 TOTAL $522,000.00 [Congressional Research Service, 6/21/16] 2010-2014: Comstock Was Paid More Than $100,000 As A Delegate Comstock Was Paid More Than $88,000 In Salary As A Delegate. Employer Date Position Salary Commonwealth of Virginia 2010 Delegate $17,640 Commonwealth of Virginia 2011 Delegate $17,640 Commonwealth of Virginia 2012 Delegate $17,640 Commonwealth of Virginia 2013 Delegate $17,640 Commonwealth of Virginia 2014 Delegate $17,640 TOTAL $88,200 [Virginia House of Delegates, accessed 3/16/14] Comstock Was Paid More Than $37,000 In Per Diem As A Delegate. Year Amount 2010 $8,235.00 2011 $7,695.00 2012 $11,050.00 2013 $7,990.00 2013 (through 1/12/14) $2,520.00 $37,490.00 [Virginia House of Delegates Clerk’s Office] 1995-1999: Comstock Was Paid More Than $454,000 As Investigative Council On The House Oversight Committee 1995-1999: Comstock Was Paid More Than $454,000 As Investigative Council On The House Oversight Committee: Name Dates Title Salary Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/10/95-6/30/95 Investigator $18,900.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/95-9/30/95 Investigator $21,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/95-12/31/95 Investigator $21,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/03/96-03/31/96 Investigator $21,266.67 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/96-06/30/96 Investigator $21,750.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/96-09/30/96 Investigator $23,250.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/96-12/31/96 Investigator $23,250.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/03/97-03/31/97 Chief Investigative Counsel $22,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/97-06/30/97 Chief Investigative Counsel $24,666.67 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/97-09/30/97 Chief Investigative Counsel $26,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/97-12/31/97 Chief Investigative Counsel $32,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/03/98-03/31/98 Chief Investigative Counsel $25,422.23 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/98-06/30/98 Chief Investigative Counsel $28,500.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/98-09/30/98 Chief Investigative Counsel $28,500.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/10/98-12/31/98 Chief Investigative Counsel $33,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/03/99-03/31/99 Chief Investigative Counsel $27,866.67 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/99-06/30/99 Chief Investigative Counsel $31,000.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/07/99-09/12/99 Chief Investigative Counsel $25,500.00 TOTAL $454,872.24 [US House of Representatives Disbursements] 1991-1995: Comstock Was Paid More Than $74,000 As A Legislative Assistant For Rep. Frank 1991-1995: Comstock Was Paid More Than $74,000 As A Legislative Assistant For Rep. Frank Wolf: Name Dates Title Salary Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/05/91-12/31/91 Senior Legislative Assistant $7,931.12 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/01/92-03/31/92 Senior Legislative Assistant $8,750.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/92-06/30/92 Senior Legislative Assistant $8,750.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/92-09/30/92 Senior Legislative Assistant $8,750.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/92-12/31/92 Senior Legislative Assistant $8,750.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/01/93-03/31/93 Senior Legislative Assistant $9,500.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/93-06/30/93 Senior Legislative Assistant $9,500.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/93-09/30/93 Senior Legislative Assistant $9,500.01 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/93-12/31/93 Senior Legislative Assistant $1,055.56 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/93-12/31/93 Part-Time Employee $266.67 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/01/94-03/31/94 Part-Time Employee $300.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/94-06/30/94 Part-Time Employee $300.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 07/01/94-09/30/94 Part-Time Employee $300.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 10/01/94-12/31/94 Part-Time Employee $300.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 01/01/95-03/31/95 Part-Time Employee $300.00 Comstock, Barbara Jean 04/01/95-04/09/95 Part-Time Employee $30.00 TOTAL $74,283.42 [US House of Representatives Disbursements] Comstock Would Receive Approximately $21,000 Per Year In Taxpayer Funded Pension According to the Office of Personnel Management, a “Member of Congress or Congressional Employee (or any combination of the two) must have at least 5 years of service as a Member of Congress and/or Congressional Employee” to qualify for their retirement annuity. The annual pension is calculated as “1.7% of your high-3 average salary multiplied by your years of service as a Member of Congress or Congressional Employee which do not exceed 20, PLUS 1% of your high-3 average salary multiplied by your years of other service.” [Office of Personnel Management, accessed 7/18/17] For Members who joined after 1991, the annual pension is calculated as: [The Atlantic, 10/2/15; Congressional Research Service, 11/10/16] Including her service as a Congressional aide and a Member of Congress, Comstock has more than 5 years of service in the federal government.
Recommended publications
  • Extensions of Remarks E745 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS

    Extensions of Remarks E745 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS

    June 2, 2017 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E745 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS HONORING THE LIFE OF ALMON Chief Miller has dedicated his entire career As Delaware County grew, the parish school WILLIAM MARTIN to the people of Gonzales, and our commu- opened its doors in 1919 and soon served nities on the central coast of California. His many families. HON. JAMES B. RENACCI career began in the Monterey County The Saint Laurence School is still an award- OF OHIO Sherriff’s Explorer Program in 1978 where winning institution in the community, com- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Chief Miller achieved the rank of Captain, the mitted to academic excellence. The parish highest rank in that program. After completing Friday, June 2, 2017 school seeks to integrate Catholic values of the Explorer Program, Chief Miller joined the service and respect. With the dedication and Mr. RENACCI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to Gonzales Police Department (GPD), first as a devotion of nearly ten pastors in the last hun- pay tribute to the life of Sergeant Almon Wil- reserve officer, and then a full-time officer in dred years, the Saint Laurence Parish is proud liam Martin, father of William Martin, Craig 1985. After being recognized as the Depart- to serve nearly two thousand registered Martin, and Leslie Lederer and husband of Au- ment Officer of the Year in 1987 and 1991, households in the Upper Darby and drey June Martin. Sergeant Martin dedicated Chief Miller was promoted to the rank of Ser- Havertown areas today. his life to serving his community and our Na- geant in 1992.
  • Statement of David Rybicki Deputy Assistant Attorney General Department of Justice

    Statement of David Rybicki Deputy Assistant Attorney General Department of Justice

    STATEMENT OF DAVID RYBICKI DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL CRIMINAL DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BEFORE THE TOM LANTOS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AT A HEARING ENTITLED “PURSUING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ATROCITIES” PRESENTED June 13, 2019 STATEMENT OF DAVID RYBICKI DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE BEFORE THE TOM LANTOS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AT A HEARING ENTITLED “PURSUING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ATROCITIES” PRESENTED JUNE 13, 2019 Thank you for inviting the Department of Justice to testify at this hearing. Pursuing justice on behalf of victims of atrocity crimes is a mission of great and manifest importance. As the Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division who supervises a key participant in that mission – the Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section – I am pleased to address the Justice Department’s ongoing efforts against the perpetrators of atrocity crimes and other human rights and humanitarian law offenses. It is especially fitting that this hearing on the subject of the U.S. Government’s efforts to hold accountable the perpetrators of atrocity crimes and other human rights violations is being held before a commission named after the late Tom Lantos, the only Holocaust survivor ever to serve in the Congress of the United States. His life was saved in wartime Budapest, Hungary, through the legendary efforts of Raoul Wallenberg, a courageous American-educated Swedish diplomat. Wallenberg’s herculean efforts to rescue Hungarian Jews were significantly funded by the United States government and, in recognition of his extraordinary heroism in the face of evil, he was posthumously made an honorary United States citizen by Act of Congress in 1981 – an action that was endorsed by the Reagan Administration in part based on the recommendation of the Department’s Criminal Division.
  • Witnesses' Bios

    Witnesses' Bios

    U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom Hearing Religious Freedom in Nigeria: Extremism and Government Inaction Panel Frank Wolf was first elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from the 10th District of Virginia in 1980. He announced that he would leave the Congress in December 2014, at the end of his 17th term, to focus exclusively on human rights and religious freedom. In announcing his decision, Wolf said that as a follower of Jesus, he is called to work for justice and reconciliation, and to be an advocate for those who cannot speak for themselves. In January 2015, Wolf was appointed the first-ever Wilson Chair in Religious Freedom at Baylor University, a post he held through 2016. That same month he joined the 21st Century Wilberforce Initiative, a newly created religious freedom group, from which he retired in September 2018 as Distinguished Senior Fellow. Wolf is the author of the International Religious Freedom Act, which infused America’s first freedom – religious freedom – into U.S. foreign policy by creating the International Religious Freedom Office at the State Department headed by an Ambassador-at-Large, and the bipartisan, independent U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom. Wolf also founded and served as co-chairman of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. Wolf received his B.A. degree from Penn State University in 1961 and his law degree from Georgetown University in 1965. Mike Jobbins leads Global Affairs and Partnerships at Search for Common Ground. He joined Search in 2008 and has designed, developed and managed conflict resolution, violence prevention, and inclusive governance programs.
  • CDIR-2018-10-29-VA.Pdf

    CDIR-2018-10-29-VA.Pdf

    276 Congressional Directory VIRGINIA VIRGINIA (Population 2010, 8,001,024) SENATORS MARK R. WARNER, Democrat, of Alexandria, VA; born in Indianapolis, IN, December 15, 1954; son of Robert and Marge Warner of Vernon, CT; education: B.A., political science, George Washington University, 1977; J.D., Harvard Law School, 1980; professional: Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia, 2002–06; chairman of the National Governor’s Association, 2004– 05; religion: Presbyterian; wife: Lisa Collis; children: Madison, Gillian, and Eliza; committees: Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; Budget; Finance; Rules and Administration; Select Com- mittee on Intelligence; elected to the U.S. Senate on November 4, 2008; reelected to the U.S. Senate on November 4, 2014. Office Listings http://warner.senate.gov 475 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510 .................................................. (202) 224–2023 Chief of Staff.—Mike Harney. Legislative Director.—Elizabeth Falcone. Communications Director.—Rachel Cohen. Press Secretary.—Nelly Decker. Scheduler.—Andrea Friedhoff. 8000 Towers Crescent Drive, Suite 200, Vienna, VA 22182 ................................................... (703) 442–0670 FAX: 442–0408 180 West Main Street, Abingdon, VA 24210 ............................................................................ (276) 628–8158 FAX: 628–1036 101 West Main Street, Suite 7771, Norfolk, VA 23510 ........................................................... (757) 441–3079 FAX: 441–6250 919 East Main Street, Richmond, VA 23219 ...........................................................................
  • The Wolf Act Amendments to the U.S. International Religious Freedom Act: Breakthrough Or Breakdown?

    The Wolf Act Amendments to the U.S. International Religious Freedom Act: Breakthrough Or Breakdown?

    UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA JOURNAL of LAW & PUBLIC AFFAIRS Vol. 4 Jan. 2019 No. 2 THE WOLF ACT AMENDMENTS TO THE U.S. INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT: BREAKTHROUGH OR BREAKDOWN? Robert C. Blitt* This Article takes a critical look at the major changes brought about by recent amendments to the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA). The first section briefly traces IRFA’s key features and operation since its enactment, including an overview of the statute’s institutions and reporting and sanctioning mechanisms. This section also highlights the ongoing debate regarding IRFA’s legitimacy and offers a summary of the major criticisms leveled against the statute, as well as the responses raised in its defense. With this background in place, the Article turns to an analysis of the legislative history surrounding the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act (Wolf Act) between 2015 and 2016. This bipartisan legislative initiative envisioned a wide range of amendments intended to address some of IRFA’s past shortcomings. Among the changes initially put forward, IRFA’s narrow focus on states would be expanded to include violent nonstate actors responsible for violating freedom of religion or belief. In addition, the original Wolf Act called for boosting the responsibilities and profile of IRFA’s institutional actors, increasing funding for the promotion * Professor of Law, University of Tennessee College of Law. The author was USCIRF’s International Law Specialist from 2004-2006. The impetus for this project flowed from participation in an academic seminar entitled “War and Peace and Religion: Religious Freedom during Russian-Ukrainian Conflict” held at Yaroslav the Wise National Law University in Kharkiv, Ukraine in 2018.
  • Supreme Court of the United States

    Supreme Court of the United States

    No. 14-1504 IN T HE Supreme Court of the United States ROBERT J. WITTMAN, BOB GOODLATTE, RANDY FORBES, MORGAN GRIFFITH, SCOTT RIGELL, ROBERT HURT, DAVID BRAT, BARBARA COMSTOCK, ERIC CANTOR & FRANK WOLF, Appellants, v. GLORIA PERSONHUBALLAH & JAMES FARKAS, Appellees. On Appeal From The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Virginia BRIEF OPPOSING APPELLEES’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR AFFIRM MICHAEL A. CARVIN Counsel of Record JOHN M. GORE JONES DAY 51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 (202) 879-3939 [email protected] August 4, 2015 Counsel for Appellants Robert J. Wittman, Bob Goodlatte, Randy J. Forbes, Morgan Griffith, Scott Rigell, Robert Hurt, David Brat, Barbara Comstock, Eric Cantor & Frank Wolf i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ....................................... ii BRIEF OPPOSING APPELLEES’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR AFFIRM .............................. 1 I. APPELLEES FAIL TO REHABILI- TATE THE MAJORITY’S MISAPPLI- CATION OF EASLEY AND ALABAMA ......... 4 II. APPELLEES FAIL TO REHABILI- TATE THE NARROW TAILORING ERRORS ......................................................... 10 III. APPELLANTS HAVE STANDING ............... 11 III. CONCLUSION ............................................... 13 ii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) CASES Ala. Leg. Black Caucus v. Ala., 135 S. Ct. 1257 (2015) ............................ 1, 4, 10, 11 Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1996) ................................................ 9 Cantor v. Personhuballah, 135 S. Ct. 1699 (2015) ............................................ 3 Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001) .......................................passim Hall v. Virginia, 276 F. Supp. 2d 528 (E.D. Va. 2003) ................... 11 Hollingsworth v. Perry, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013) .................................... 11, 12 In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978) ................................................ 4 Johnson v. Mortham, 915 F. Supp. 1529 (N.D. Fla. 1995) ..............
  • Conversations with Bill Kristol

    Conversations with Bill Kristol

    Conversations with Bill Kristol Guest: Ronald Brownstein, Senior Editor, The Atlantic Senior Political Analyst, CNN Taped June 27, 2018 Table of Contents I: Red America and Blue America 0:15 – 47:07 II: 2018 and 2020 47:07– 1:24:19 I: Red America and Blue America (0:15 – 47:07) KRISTOL: Hi, I’m Bill Kristol. Welcome to CONVERSATIONS. I’m joined today by Ron Brownstein, senior editor at The Atlantic, senior political analyst at CNN. In my opinion, one of the best analysts of American politics. BROWNSTEIN: Thank you, Bill, good to be here. KRISTOL: A rare combination of detailed, granular understanding of electoral matters and the big historical sweep. So, I’ve now put a big burden on you here… BROWNSTEIN: Thank you, thank you. Well, we are living in a big – we are in a big sweep right now, right. KRISTOL: …to live up to this introduction. BROWNSTEIN: Yes. KRISTOL: So, I think we talked a year ago. Now we’re – what? – more than a year and a half out from the election. BROWNSTEIN: Yeah. KRISTOL: Only four or five months till November 2018. What’s changed over the last year? We analyzed 2016 a little bit last time. So, where are we now, here in June-July of 2018? 2017 – what are we in? 2018. BROWNSTEIN: 2018. I feel like every crevice, every fissure that we talked about in 2017 and that we saw in 2016 may be even deeper in 2018. To me, the Trump presidency has said more about the country than about him.
  • IT Governance Structure Is Overly Complex and Does Not Function Effectively

    IT Governance Structure Is Overly Complex and Does Not Function Effectively

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Inspector General Washington, DC 20546-0001 May 15, 2014 The Honorable Barbara A. Mikulski Chairwoman Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Richard C. Shelby Ranking Member Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Committee on Appropriations United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Subject: Status of Recommendations Made in Audit Report “NASA’s Information Technology Governance” Report No. IG-13-015 Dear Madam Chairwoman and Senator Shelby: In June 2013, the NASA Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report that found the decentralized nature of NASA’s operations and its longstanding culture of autonomy hinder its ability to implement effective information technology (IT) governance.1 We reported that NASA’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) has limited visibility and control over a majority of the Agency’s IT investments, operates in an organizational structure that marginalizes the authority of the position, and cannot enforce security measures across NASA’s computer networks. Moreover, the Agency’s IT governance structure is overly complex and does not function effectively. As a result, Agency managers tend to rely on informal relationships rather than formalized business processes when making IT-related decisions. We made eight recommendations in our audit to improve NASA’s IT governance structure to effectively balance compliance, cost, risk, security, and mission success and meet the needs of internal and external stakeholders. As directed by House Report 113-171 - approved by the explanatory statement to Public Law 113-76, the Consolidated Appropriations for FY 2014 - we are providing this update to keep you informed of the actions taken by NASA management in response to our IT governance recommendations.
  • Plaintiffs' Brief in Response to All Defendants Motions to Dismiss

    Plaintiffs' Brief in Response to All Defendants Motions to Dismiss

    Electronically Filed 2021-02-17 16:41:44 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION COUNTY OF WAKE CASE NO. 20 CVS 500147 PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC, on behalf of itself, its physicians and staff, and its patients; et al., Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO v. ALL DEFENDANTS’ TIMOTHY K. MOORE, as Speaker of the North MOTIONS TO DISMISS Carolina House of Representatives, in his official capacity; et al., Defendants. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 2 STANDARD OF REVIEW ............................................................................................................ 3 ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................. 4 I. This Court Has Subject Matter Jurisdiction ........................................................................ 4 A. Plaintiffs Have Standing ......................................................................................... 4 1. Plaintiff Providers Have Standing in Their Own Right .............................. 5 a. Plaintiff Providers Have Suffered a Direct Injury Sufficient
  • Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Congressional-Executive Commission on China Hearing on China, Genocide and the Olympics Tuesd

    Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Congressional-Executive Commission on China Hearing on China, Genocide and the Olympics Tuesd

    Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Congressional-Executive Commission on China Hearing on China, Genocide and the Olympics Tuesday, May 18, 2021 – 1:00 p.m. Virtual vis Cisco WebEx Statement of Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for bringing us together on this very important issue. It's about our values. It's about who we are as a country. It's about more than words. It's about actions. Thank you, and I thank you for the years of service that you have given to this. You never have faltered in all of it. I myself have lost my innocence on expecting people to behave in a way that is consistent with their words, when it comes to respecting human rights. But matters have only gotten worse in China, as you have pointed out, and the genocide recognized as a genocide should be reason for us to change our actions. But it's been an honor to serve with you and with Frank Wolf over the years, and I thank you for calling forth the bipartisanship of this to Senator Merkley. Jim McGovern has, as has Chris Smith, been a relentless, persistent advocate for human rights in China – well, throughout the world – but I've seen him in action speaking to the leadership of China, going to Tibet, talking – giving – undermining the misrepresentation that the Chinese are making about what is going on in Tibet. You talked about Hong Kong. We talked about human rights throughout China. But now this rises to the level of recognized genocide.
  • Revolving Congress

    Revolving Congress

    Revolving Congress: The Revolving Door Class of 2019 Flocks to K Street Nearly Two Thirds of Former Members of 115th Congress Working Outside Politics and Government Have Picked Up Lobbying or Strategic Consulting Jobs By Alan Zibel, Public Citizen Research Director May 30, 2019 – Nearly two-thirds of recently retired or defeated U.S. lawmakers now working outside politics have landed jobs influencing federal policy, providing further evidence that members of Congress continue to spin through Washington’s revolving door at astonishing rates. Public Citizen analyzed the post-Congress employment activities of the 115th Congress, which started in 2017 and concluded on Jan. 3 of this year. Of the former members who have found new jobs outside of government and politics, 59% (26 of 44) were working for lobbying firms, consulting firms, trade groups or business groups working to influence federal government activities. Many others were working in television (14%) law (9%) corporate jobs (7%) academia (7%) or state-level groups (5%). Category Count Pct. Lobbying/consulting 22 50% Business/Trade Group (Federal) 4 9% Television 6 14% Law 4 9% Academia 3 7% Corporate 3 7% Business/Trade Group (State) 2 5% Subtotal Federal Influence 26 59% Grand Total 44 100% Sources: Roll Call, Public Citizen research Over the past two decades, concern has been building about members of Congress who flock to lobbying firms or trade groups after retiring or losing their seats. These revolving-door lawmakers cash in on their connections by representing wealthy special interests who can afford to pay top dollar for insider influence. Revolving Congress Public Citizen In the 115th Congress, there have been several notable examples of the revolving door activity, with two of the largest Washington, D.C.
  • Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions

    Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions

    REPORT TO THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT GOVERNOR AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIrgINIA AND REVIEW COMMISSION Evaluation of Proposed Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Evaluation of House Bill 1174: Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions COMMONWEALTH OF VIrgINIA RICHMOND MARCH 2013 Members of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission Chairman Delegate John M. O’Bannon III Vice-Chairman Senator John C. Watkins Delegate David B. Albo Senator Charles J. Colgan Delegate M. Kirkland Cox Senator Janet D. Howell Delegate Johnny S. Joannou Delegate S. Chris Jones Delegate James P. Massie III Senator Thomas K. Norment, Jr. Delegate Robert D. Orrock, Sr. Delegate Lacey E. Putney Delegate Lionell Spruill, Sr. Senator Walter A. Stosch Martha S. Mavredes, Auditor of Public Accounts Director Glen S. Tittermary Members of the Special Advisory Commission on Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Senator George L. Barker Delegate Timothy D. Hugo Delegate Terry G. Kilgore Senator Donald W. Merricks Senator A. Donald McEachin Delegate Christopher K. Peace Jeffrey Allende Terri B. Flagg Mark W. Foreman Eugene J. Koprowski Greg T. Madsen John W. Rhee, M.D. Charles Herbert Slemp III Laura Lee O. Viergever JLARC Staff for This Evaluation Nathalie Molliet-Ribet, Division Chief Kimberly A. Sarte, Chief Fiscal Analyst Massey S.J. Whorley, Senior Associate Legislative Analyst JLARC provides evaluations of proposed health insurance mandates in accordance with Sections 2.2-2503 and 30-58.1 of the Code of Virginia. Report No. 440 - Available on the JLARC website at http://jlarc.virginia.gov Copyright 2013, Commonwealth of Virginia. Evaluation of Proposed Mandated Health Insurance Benefits Evaluation of House Bill 1174: Mandated Offer of Insurance Plans Not Covering Induced Abortions Outside of Certain Exceptions JLARC SUMMARY House Bill (HB) 1174 of the 2012 General Assembly Session would mandate health insurers to offer policies that do not provide cover- age for abortion services outside of certain required exceptions.