Time to Take Action
Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

Congressman Tom McClintock is in California District 4

McClintock E-News
April 2012

Town Hall Meeting To Be Held In Pollock Pines on Monday, April 30th


Congressman McClintock will host a town hall meeting in Pollock Pines this Monday, April 30th. Topics to be discussed include important issues pending before Congress, the recent House passage of the fiscal year 2013 budget, the upcoming debate on next year's spending and efforts to protect businesses and consumers from frivolous lawsuits. Details of the meeting can be found below. We hope to see you there!

Pollock Pines Town Hall
Monday, April 30th
6:00 PM
Pollock Pines Community Center
2675 Sanders Drive, Pollock Pines

Speeches From the House Floor


IRS Harassment of Tea Party Groups

April 17th, 2012

Excerpt: "A defining aspect of the American tradition is that groups of citizens band together for a wide variety of civic purposes. They recruit volunteers, raise funds and spend those funds to promote whatever project or cause brings them together.

"For more than a century, our tax laws have recognized that such voluntary associations – non-profits, we call them today – should not be taxed, because their proceeds are devoted entirely to improve our communities through education, advocacy, and civic action. Section 501 of the Internal Revenue code recognizes them today, and civic groups like Move-on-dot-org, the League of Conservation Voters, the ACLU, the National Rifle Association and various taxpayer groups have always been included in this definition.

"We don’t apply a political test to these civic groups – we recognize the fundamental right of Americans to organize and to pool their resources to promote whatever causes they believe in – left or right. Indeed, whatever their political persuasion, these civic groups perform an absolutely indispensible role in our democracy by raising public awareness, defining issues, educating voters, promoting reforms, holding officials accountable and petitioning their government to redress grievances. Abolition, Women’s Suffrage, the Civil Rights movement – all would have been impossible without them.

"In order to be recognized as non-profit groups, these organizations must register with the IRS – a purely ministerial function that has, in the past, been applied evenly and without regard to their political views.

"At least until now." "IRS Harassment of Tea Party Groups" click photo above to watch speech or click here to read full remarks.


The Tax Cut Illusion

April 19th, 2012

Excerpt: "The House just passed H.R. 9 that purports to give a temporary tax cut to small businesses.

"I say “purports” because it doesn’t cut spending at the same time and thus it merely shifts current taxes into the future. Once a dollar has been spent, it’s already become a tax, taken either from today -- or from tomorrow to pay for today’s deficits." "The Tax Cut Illusion" click photo above to watch speech or click here to read full remarks.


A Truly Orwellian Measure - H.R. 3523

April 27, 2012

Floor remarks: "Under the Fourth Amendment, if the Government wants to snoop through a person’s email, it must first convince a judge that there is probable cause to believe that person has committed a crime and it must specify the documents it believes are relevant to that charge.

"Yesterday the House passed a measure that makes a mockery of this cherished protection. Under the guise of cyber-security it allows the government to pressure and cajole Internet providers to turn over their subscribers’ data and for the government then to use that data – without the consent or even knowledge of the individuals affected – for a wide variety of vague purposes unrelated to cyber-security – all without warrant.

"This is a truly Orwellian measure that our Bill of Rights was specifically written to prevent. I hope the House will have second thoughts as it reflects on the ramifications of this act." "A Truly Orwellian Measure" click photo above to watch speech or click here to read full remarks.


Vote Notes From the House Floor

HR 4628 – Student Loan Subsidies: NO. Tuition is rising at four times the rate of inflation specifically because of the billions of dollars of subsidies that the government is pumping into that market. Then, under the guise of “helping” students pay for these government-inflated prices, we offer them below-market student loans that they can’t possibly repay. The result is an economy where student loans now exceed consumer credit card debt and one out of two college grads can’t find a job. Meanwhile, they’re left to struggle with catastrophic debt that the government has lured them into acquiring with teaser rates. As the father of two college students myself, I believe the best way we can help these students and their families is to bring tuition costs back down to earth by getting the government out of the market. Instead, this bill continues to pump up a trillion-dollar debt bubble that will someday burst with devastating results. House Floor, April 27, 2012.

Water and Power Subcommittee

Congressman McClintock is Chairman of the House Water and Power Subcommittee. In opening remarks delivered at an April 17th hearing the Congressman discussed two bills, one dealing with hydropower and another dealing with desalination of seawater:

"The subcommittee sits today to hear two bills, one removing government impediments to development of one of the cheapest and cleanest forms of electricity generation and one proposing more government subsidies for one of the most expensive forms of water delivery," excerpt, opening statement by Subcommittee Chairman Tom McClintock. Congressman McClintock's compete opening statement can be read here. Or HERE:

House Water and Power Subcommittee, Chairman's Opening Statement, Legislative Hearing on H.R. 460 and H.R. 2664

April 17, 2012 1:36 AM

House Water and Power Subcommittee

Chairman’s Opening Statement

Legislative Hearing on H.R. 460 and H.R. 2664

April 17, 2012

The subcommittee sits today to hear two bills, one removing government impediments to development of one of the cheapest and cleanest forms of electricity generation and one proposing more government subsidies for one of the most expensive forms of water delivery. 

We have first, HR 460, by Congressman Chaffetz of Utah.  It removes a Catch-22 in federal law that makes development of 50 megawatts of hydropower on a federal irrigation facility impossible.  This self-defeating roadblock is a requirement that before a hydro power generator can be placed on this facility, the developer must pay the sunken costs for the facility itself.  I am a staunch defender of the beneficiary pays principle of financing federal water and power projects – which means that the beneficiary pays for the price of the project and NO MORE.  In this case, the federal policy is to require that a hydro-power add-on pay for the entire facility – in this case, $161 million.  This requirement renders the project cost-prohibitive.  It prevents another 50 megawatts of power – enough for 50,000 homes – and denies the nation the nearly a half-million dollars of new money that the project would pay every year to the Federal Treasury.

It is akin to a family renting out a room, but first requiring the renter to pay off their mortgage.  Then they are shocked just shocked that nobody wants to rent from them.  The family is no further along in paying off its mortgage and has denied itself the rental income that a renter would otherwise provide.

I view this bill as taking another step to remove impediments in law that are keeping us from harnessing our nation’s vast hydropower resources.  The Subcommittee has focused on removing federal obstacles to hydropower development with this bill, Congressman Tipton’s H.R. 2842 and Congressman Smith’s H.R. 795 and it will continue to do so.    
Also today we will hear H.R. 2664 by the ranking member, Congresswoman Napolitano.  It provides additional federal subsidies for water desalination research, wind and solar promotion and public outreach.  It reflects a lot of what is wrong with our federal policy on water and energy development.

Desalination of seawater or brackish water dates back to the second century AD.  It makes economic sense in extremely arid and remote regions where water cannot be imported.  There’s a market for it.  Ships, remote resorts, and remote desert outposts have relied on it for centuries.  I remember in 1963 as a young child visiting the island of Aruba and having it impressed on me that we were drinking distilled seawater and that it was tightly controlled because it was so expensive.  That would not have been the case in a rain forest.

Because a market exists for this process, private industry invests between $100 million and $150 million a year for research and development according to the National Academy of Sciences.  This bill would add – pardon the pun – a drop in the bucket – $2 million a year for government to do the same thing.

Well, almost the same thing.  One of the aspects of this bill is integration of renewable energy – that is, wind and solar -- and the other is public outreach – which is Washingtonese for “political self-promotion.”

The Congressional Research Service has pointed out that “current desalination processes are already operating close to the theoretical minimum energy required.”  The reason desalination is so expensive is that it is highly energy dependent.  What does this bill do?  It attempts to graft onto this highly energy dependent process the most expensive forms of electricity generation that we have yet invented: wind and solar.  This is lunacy. It bespeaks of political – not scientific or practical – objectives.

Which brings us to funding public “outreach” programs.  That is purely political – although no doubt necessary to combat public outrage when taxpayers see how their money is being squandered.

Even if the measure were for pure basic research, it begs the question, why should taxpayers subsidize the R&D budgets of some of the biggest companies in the country – G.E. for example – and why should the taxpayers of Tacoma, Washington pay for water delivery systems that cannot conceivably benefit them in such a water-rich region?

The bottom line was well expressed in testimony from Mr. Crews of the Competitive Enterprise institute: “a viable technology needs no subsidy and a non-viable technology probably can’t be helped by one.”




In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Home Contact


              Page Updated: Saturday April 28, 2012 01:39 AM  Pacific

             Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2001 - 2012, All Rights Reserved