The Facts about Hatch's 36 Year Record by Michael Duncan

The facts about Senator Orrin Hatch’s 36 year record

Earmarks U Spending Health Care U Big Government Deficits U Bailouts U TARP

do you call a Senator who’s “What served in office for 18 years? You call him home.

” — Orrin Hatch, 1976, speaking of his opponent, the 18 year incumbent US Senator Frank Moss1

After 36 years, should Senator Hatch come home?

1. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=1013&sid=16005079, http://campaign2012. washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/meet-orrin-hatchs-tea-partythreat/270001

Should Orrin come home?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY U

tah Senator Orrin Hatch has, for over 30 years, held himself out as a conservative. Hatch’s record, however, belies any assertion that he is a true fiscal conservative. In fact, Hatch’s record and public statements on matters ranging from earmarks and government spending to TARP and the automotive and housing bailouts show him to be another Washington insider committed to Big Government. In addition to commentary about Hatch’s career impact, the following report highlights deficiencies in Senator Hatch’s record on six primary economic issues of concern: Earmarks: Hatch is one of the Senate’s leading abusers of earmarks. From his support of abominable projects such as Alaska’s “Bridge to Nowhere” and the massive, notorious 2005 highway bill (that included nearly 6,500 earmarks) to his vote against a moratorium on earmarking, Hatch has proved his commitment to irresponsible pork-barrel spending. Spending and Deficits: Hatch shows his penchant for massive government spending in his support of a multitude of unsustainable programs, including TARP, government health care, bailouts, and Raser, his own “personal Solyndra.” Hatch has voted 16 times to increase the debt ceiling by a staggering $7.5 trillion. Hatch’s reluctance to support entitlement reform alone could increase the long-term debt by some $21 trillion. Health Care: Hatch partnered with Sen. Ted Kennedy in 1997 to pass the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), the largest expansion of taxpayer-funded health insurance since Medicaid and the precursor to ObamaCare. Hatch also voted for Medicare Part D, adding as much as $21.9 trillion in unfunded liabilities for taxpayers.

TARP (Wall Street Bailout): Hatch not only supported the unconstitutional $700 billion Wall Street Bailout, but also refused to vote against additional TARP funds. Corporate Welfare: In addition to his staunch support of TARP, Hatch supported the infamous government takeover of General Motors and bailout of Chrysler. He also supported the unconscionable bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government entities whose reckless loans were at the center of the housing crisis. Education: Hatch voted for the 1979 establishment of the Department of Education and the 2001 passage of No Child Left Behind, watershed events contributing to the growth of the federal education bureaucracy and the decline of the public education system in the United States. Appointments: Hatch actually proposed two of the most liberal Supreme Court Justices — Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Hatch marched in lockstep with President Obama to confirm Ben Bernanke (Federal Reserve Chairman), Timothy Geithner (Treasury Secretary), Cass Sunstein (Regulatory Czar) and Eric Holder (Attorney General), best known for the Fast and Furious scandal. Orrin Hatch’s record is that of a man who has been in power too long; a man who went to Washington proclaiming himself a fiscal conservative, yet, over time, repeatedly voted to massively expand the scope and power of government. Hatch’s record, especially in recent years, shows a man who has lost faith in free market economic principles and is instead committed to Big Government. Hatch won his Senate seat in 1976, claiming that his opponent had lost touch with his constituents. Ironically, it is now Hatch who has lost touch with his constituents in Utah, instead transforming himself into just another Big Government spender.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. The Orrin Hatch Record..................................................................................................................................... 6 Why Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, like Utah Sen. Bob Bennett before him, should be retired. 2. Why Orrin Hatch Is Not a Conservative ............................................................................................................. 7 Hatch’s record demonstrates his commitment to Big Government and aversion to free market solutions. 3. Hatch on Earmarks ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Earmarks defined; Hatch’s voting record on massive earmark spending and his commitment to preserve earmarks. 4. Hatch on Spending and the Deficit ................................................................................................................... 11 Hatch claims to support a balanced budget amendment, yet voted 16 times to raise the debt ceiling and to spend trillions on government interference in the free market. 5. Hatch on Health Care...................................................................................................................................... 13 Partnership with Ted Kennedy to sponsor SCHIP, the precursor to ObamaCare; votes to incur trillions of dollars of unfunded taxpayer liability for Medicare Part D. 6. Hatch on TARP ............................................................................................................................................... 15 TARP defined; Hatch voted for TARP, refused to block second round of TARP funding. 7. Hatch on Corporate Bailouts and Cronyism ....................................................................................................... 17 Hatch voted to bail out Wall Street (TARP); voted to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; voted to siphon funds from TARP for auto industry bailout; orchestrated $50 million for green energy money pit Raser. 8. Hatch on Education ......................................................................................................................................... 20 Proponent of the creation of the U.S. Dept. of Education and No Child Left Behind. 9. Hatch on Appointments................................................................................................................................... 22 Proudly proclaims to have suggested the nominations of two of the most liberal Supreme Court Justices in history; confirmed radical animal rights activist as federal regulatory czar. 10. Don’t Be Bullied — Dismantling the Olympia Snowe Myth ............................................................................. 26 Don’t be intimidated by Hatch’s campaign threats that a vote against him is a vote for Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) to replace him as Chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee. 11. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 27

Appendices I — Will the Real Orrin Hatch Please Stand Up? A Look at Key Votes Senator Hatch Cast from 1979 to 2009 .................................................................................................................................... 29 II — Hatch Votes on the National Debt ............................................................................................................... 33 III — Op Ed: Raser Technologies is Orrin Hatch’s Solyndra ................................................................................... 35 IV — Top Twelve False Claims Made About the Hatch-Kennedy Children’s Health Coverage Bill, by Michael F. Cannon ................................................................................................................................ 36 V — Bibliography .............................................................................................................................................. 42

Should Orrin come home?

THE ORRIN HATCH

RECORD

ng rrin Hatch is aski O n. Se . .S U n, all the ars in Washingto nate. Considering Se es After nearly 36 ye at St d te ni U time to 7th term in the we’ve decided it’s , m hi g in ng le Utah voters for a al es ch ublican candidat conservative Rep . retire Orrin Hatch unt of Hatch’s Big co ac d ile ta de a h ples. ovides you wit nservative princi co om fr d ye This document pr ra st he has Sen. rd, listing where at we must oppose th am I as d ce Government reco in conv th. I hope you are as ntion on April 15 ve on C After reading it, an lic ub ep ion bid at the R ks, a Hatch’s nominat m of FreedomWor ar al ic lit po the e th r America is bers committed to em m n io ill m FreedomWorks fo 5 1. p of ident I’ve tive grassroots grou e freedom. As pres or m d an t, national conserva en m g taxes, less govern ervatives includin er ns w co lo h of ta es U pl of ci s in pr ousand ith U.S. of working with th d replaced him w an tt ne en B ob had the privilege B red delegates who reti the hardworking 2010. legates Sen. Mike Lee in e same reasons de th e ar ch at H e ac r more anting to repl nsistently voted fo Our reasons for w co s ha , tt ne en B t balanced . Hatch, like he preaches abou le hi W . ng replaced Bennett di en s sp those conviction e taxes, and more ns or do m an t, ab en m ch rn at ve go Utah, H ed government in budgets and limit to the Beltway. tive when he returns self as a conserva m hi st ca re to s ve State. ent to great length s across the Beehi st vi ti ac In 2011, Hatch w ve ti va er lout gatherings of cons e Wall Street Bai at th r up fo g d in te ow vo sh ch by y. Hat rk-barrel tells the real stor mandates and po re ca th al he But Hatch’s record d te or rt of the auto bailout, supp Constitution is pa e th r fo d (TARP) and the ar eg sr di atch’s blatant earmarks. Orrin H tion. n — not the solu to ng hi as W in m proble enough. the U.S. Senate is in s ar ye x si y rt Thi st. atch on April 21 H in rr O re ti re Let’s In Liberty,

Matt Kibbe , FreedomWorks President and CEO

“One of History’s Greatest Conservatives”? By Russ Walker

“B

y any measure, I’m considered one of the greatest conservatives in the history of this country.” So said Utah’s senior senator, Orrin G. Hatch, on Fox News, July 12, 2011.

loudly decrying President Obama’s unpopular health care mandate as unconstitutional, back in 1993 he cosponsored a bill that included that very mandate.

This statement captures in one sentence the whole case for why FreedomWorks decided to get behind the local Utah effort to retire Sen. Hatch and replace him with a true friend of liberty and the Constitution.

Was it not an infringement of our liberty in 1993? Was it constitutional then?

The incredible hubris of Sen. Hatch’s claim suggests a desperation and terrible loss of touch with reality. Power corrupts. Clearly, Mr. Hatch is determined to avoid the fate of his former U.S. Senate colleague, Robert Bennett, who Utahns wisely replaced in 2010 with the dynamic young constitutionalist Mike Lee. But it is hard to see how the courtly Hatch can avoid Bennett’s fate. After 36 years in the Senate, he simply cannot run from his record. Would “one of history’s greatest conservatives” have voted to: s Preserve earmarks? s Create a federal Department of Education?

By his own account, one of Sen. Hatch’s proudest achievements is SCHIP, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. In 1997, he shepherded this obscure program into law with his good friend, Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. This story bears recounting in detail, because of this program’s impact on our freedom. What is SCHIP? It’s a subsidy for health coverage for children whose parents make too much money to be on Medicaid. While Mr. Hatch depicts it as a “conservative” program that promotes work, it is in fact an inferior, government-run health plan that, studies show, displaces 25 to 50 children from good private coverage for every 100 who go on the public rolls.3 But that’s not the biggest problem.

s Bail out New York City? s Bail out Wall Street (via TARP)? s Bail out GM and Chrysler? s Bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Would one of the greatest conservatives in our history support requiring every American to buy government-controlled health coverage? Mr. Hatch did. While today he has reversed position,

2. Orrin Hatch, interview, Fox News’ Happening Now, July 12, 2011. http://politicalcorrection.org/video/201107120009

“

By any measure, I’m considered one of the greatest conservatives in the history of this country.2

”

— Orrin Hatch

3. “[F]or every 100 children who enroll as a result of SCHIP, there is a corresponding reduction in private coverage of between 25 and 50 children.” Congressional Budget Office, The State Children’s Health Insurance Program, May 2007, p. ix. http://www. cbo.gov/ftpdocs/80xx/doc8092/05-10-SCHIP.pdf

Should Orrin come home?

It’s no exaggeration to say that, with SCHIP, Sen. Hatch single-handedly pulled HillaryCare out of the dustbin of history — and paved the way for ObamaCare.

new [universal] system … Under this approach, health care reform is phased in by population, beginning with children.”4 After two years of licking their wounds, the Democrats were ready to put their plan into operation. In October 1996, Sen. Ted Kennedy unveiled his “Kids First” bill. President Clinton endorsed it. Then, in March 1997, so did Sen. Orrin Hatch. Hatch’s crossover split the GOP, enabling the Kennedy bill to become law in August ’97 as part of the bipartisan Balanced Budget Act. SCHIP, which was supposed to cost about $5 billion a year has instead gone up to $8 billion a year — a 60% increase.5 Today, the senator defends his handiwork as a “success,” arguing that it was subsequently ruined by the Democrats, who after their 2006 takeover of Congress dropped the word “State” from its title, made it more top-down, and greatly expanded its cost.

Recall that before President Obama tried to take over health care, President Bill Clinton tried to do so, in 1993. He failed, and one result was the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress. Documents from Hillary Clinton’s infamous secret health care task force, released in late ‘94, reveal that SCHIP was in fact the fallback plan for the Clinton administration, should HillaryCare fail in Congress.

But what did he expect his Big Government allies to do? In 2010, when President Obama signed the controversial health care bill into law, he was simply completing the Left’s century-long effort to put Washington in charge of our health care. That project, decisively stopped in ‘94, had been resurrected — and become law — thanks in large part to the Kennedy-Hatch “Kids First” bill. Thus did “one of the greatest conservatives in the history of our country” facilitate one of our country’s greatest losses of freedom. Russ Walker is the National Political Director of FreedomWorks For America, a nationwide grassroots political organization fighting for lower taxes, less government and more freedom.

A Clinton memorandum dated April 9, 1993, reveals their intention to concoct a plan similar to Hatch’s SCHIP, dubbed “Kids First,” as their backup: “Kids First is really a precursor to the

4. “SCHIP/Kids First memo shows, again, that transparency is Big Government’s worst enemy,” Washington Examiner, 10/02/07: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/ opinion/schipkids-first-memo-shows-again-transparency-big-government039s-worstenemy

5. Figure 1 in Kaiser Family Foundation fact sheet. “SCHIP at a Glance.” January 2007, http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/Financing-Health-Coverage-The-State-Children-sHealth-Insurance-Program-Experience-Issue-Paper.pdf; CBO March 2007 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8818/schip.pdf; CBO March 2008 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/90xx/doc9053/schip.pdf; CBO March 2009 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/budget/factsheets/2009b/chip.pdf; CBO March 2010 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11521/CHIP.pdf CBO March 2011 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/budget/factsheets/2011b/Chip.pdf

HATCH ON EARMARKS “

Hatch is the third highest earmarker in the U.S. Senate. When I see how wasteful these projects are I’m even more certain that Utah can find someone better, someone who is a real fiscal conservative.

”

— Michael Jolley Former Utah Delegate, Utah County Resident

What Are Earmarks? An earmark is a special funding request made by a lawmaker to circumvent the usual budget process. An earmark is usually tucked away — hidden — in some large spending bill considered to be “must pass” legislation, and is commonly referred to as “pork-barrel spending.” The Cato Institute’s Dan Mitchell points out: “Earmarks are utterly corrupt. The fact that they are legal does not change the fact that they finance a racket featuring big payoffs to special interests, who give big fees to lobbyists (often former staffers and Members), who give big contributions to politicians. Everyone wins … except taxpayers.”6 For more on earmarks, see Appendix III. Why Earmarks Are Dangerous. An earmark is not subject to competitive bidding, congressional hearings, or oversight of any kind. Earmarks are often a result of intense lobbying, not bargained for in the free market. As we saw with Medicare Part D in 2003 and ObamaCare in 2010, earmarks are tools that politicians use to buy the votes they need to secure passage of huge 6. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/253722/bad-arguments-earmarks-goodarguments-against-them-veronique-de-rugy 7. http://www.legistorm.com/earmarks/details/member/49/Sen_Orrin_Hatch_UT/page/1/ sort/amount/type/desc/year/all.html 8. http://www.legistorm.com/earmarks/details/member/49/Sen_Orrin_Hatch_UT/page/1/ sort/amount/type/desc/year/all.html 9. http://innovation.cq.com/media/earmarks2010/?ref=CQ

expansions of the welfare state. Earmarks grease the skids of Big Government. Hatch’s Voting Record on Earmarks. From 2008-2010, Hatch made 28 solo requests costing $5,109,0007, and a nearly incredible 194 additional joint requests costing $373,627,450.8 Of 100 senators, this made Hatch the 3rd highest earmarker in 2010.9 A few examples: s 2005: Roll Call 118: Hatch voted to increase funds in the highway bill.10 s 2005: Roll Call 220: Hatch voted for the notorious $300 billion highway spending bill stuffed with nearly 6,500 earmarks.11 s 2005: Roll Call 286: Hatch voted against responsibly reducing non-defense discretionary spending.12 10. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00118 11. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00220 12. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00286

Should Orrin come home?

s 2006: Roll Call 81: Hatch voted against including federal entities in the definition of earmarks.13 s 2006: Roll Call 97: Hatch voted against another measure to prevent wasteful increases in spending.14 s 2006: Roll Call 99: Hatch voted to suspend consideration for an amendment that would cut rail line pork.15 s 2006: Roll Call 100: Hatch voted against eliminating seafood promotion pork-barrel spending.16

s Hatch’s Personal Solyndra. Hatch requested seven earmarks for more than $20 million from 2006 to 2008 to help fund “green energy” research and development projects for the bankrupt Raser Company.19 Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), a major opponent of earmarks, once called earmarks the “gateway drug” on the road to spending addiction. Senator Hatch’s record suggests he has travelled far enough down the road to spending addiction so as to have completely lost contact with Utah’s true fiscal conservatives.

s 2007: Roll Call 347: Hatch voted for this pork-laden bill, which contained over nine hundred special-interest earmarks.17 s 2008: Roll Call 75: Hatch voted against establishing an earmark moratorium to end the abusive process of porkbarrel spending.18

13. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=2&vote=00081 14. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=2&vote=00097 15. http://156.33.195.33/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=10 9&session=2&vote=00099 16. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=2&vote=00100

17. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 10&session=1&vote=00347 18. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 10&session=2&vote=00075 19. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1

HATCH ON SPENDING AND THE DEFICIT Deficit Spending. Orrin Hatch claims we must balance the federal budget, yet he has spent the past 36 years in the Senate voting for trillions in wasteful spending and creating new entitlements. Any claim of fiscal conservatism rings hollow after two financially catastrophic votes from which Hatch should not be allowed to hide: He voted for Alaska’s infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” as well as for the 2005 bill with nearly 6,500 earmarks, exemplifying the worst of Republican excesses just before they lost control of Congress.20

a pattern of voting to fund programs that would not — and could not — survive if left to market forces alone. Some of these votes are:

Hatch’s Voting Record. The list of Hatch’s votes in favor of wasteful and economically pernicious programs is too extensive to list. However, the common theme is that Hatch has demonstrated

s Hatch voted to restore $550 million in funding for Amtrak for 2007.23 The result was to increase funding to $1.45 billion for a business that had proved over and over again that it could not compete in a free market.24

s 2005: Roll Call 262: Hatch voted against cutting the “Bridge to Nowhere,” one of the most ludicrous financial boondoggles in the history of the United States government.21 s 2008: Roll Call 153: Hatch voted against removing $300 billion in additional spending for FHA loans.22

Balanced Budget Amendments. Hatch was recently quoted as saying, “We’re $14 trillion in national debt, and it’s going up every day. Frankly, I don’t think there is a downside (to a balanced-budget amendment). If we don’t do something like that, we’re never going to get things under control.”25 Hatch has co-sponsored 13 Balanced Budget Amendments.26 Does Hatch Really Want to Balance the Budget? Hatch was a vocal supporter, and cast his vote in favor, of Medicare Part D, which alone would increase the long-term deficit by as much as some $21 trillion.27 Notwithstanding his sponsorship of Balanced Budget Amendments, over the past 30

20. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00220 21. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00262 22. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 10&session=2&vote=00153 23. http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-052.htm

24. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r109:FLD001:S52171 25. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700104011/Sen-Orrin-Hatch-sponsors-balancedbudget-amendment-for-17th-time.html 26. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700104011/Sen-Orrin-Hatch-sponsors-balancedbudget-amendment-for-17th-time.html 27. https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2004.pdf

Should Orrin come home?

years Orrin Hatch has voted to increase the debt ceiling 16 times, by a total of $7.5 trillion. That’s over half of our national debt! Orrin Hatch has a proven record of increasing government spending that is burying our children and grandchildren under a mountain of debt. To review more of Hatch’s votes on the National Debt, see Appendix II. Political Hypocrisy. Orrin Hatch may honestly believe we should have a balanced budget. He may honestly believe we need to dramatically reduce the deficit. The problem is that he has become so entrenched as a tool of the Big Government federal bureaucracy that he cannot stop himself from continually voting to fund wasteful or unsustainable projects. Almost unbelievably, regarding the massive, multi-trillion dollar unfunded Medicare Part D, of which Hatch was a staunch supporter, he said: “It was standard practice not to pay for things. We were concerned about it, because it certainly added

28. http://www.pensitoreview.com/2009/12/29/hatch-deficit-spending-was-standardpractice-not-to-pay-for-things-under-bush-gop-congress/

to the deficit, no question.”28 Orrin Hatch has become a political hypocrite: Saying one thing to his constituents, but doing quite another when it comes time to cast his own vote.

“

Senator Hatch’s irresponsible actions put the financial future of this nation and my children and grandchildren at risk. We deserve better, our children and grandchildren deserve better than Orrin Hatch.

”

— Kim Coleman Utah Delegate, Salt Lake 9-12, Salt Lake County Resident

HATCH ON HEALTH CARE Mandates Defined. The “health care mandate” is the legal requirement that, as a condition of living in the United States, one must purchase health insurance. The health care mandate is the foundation of ObamaCare. Never in the history of the United States has the federal government required citizens purchase specific goods or services as a condition of residency. The Health Care Mandate Is Unconstitutional. The mandate that private citizens purchase health insurance has been denounced as unconstitutional by most if not all conservative organizations and is the basis of the multi-state challenge to the constitutionality of ObamaCare. The Attorneys General of 26 states have challenged the constitutionality of ObamaCare on this basis.

SCHIP. In 1997, Orrin Hatch and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) — one of the most leftwing senators in United States history — passed the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). SCHIP provides government sponsored health insurance to uninsured, lowincome children 18 years of age or younger.31 s Why SCHIP Is Important — and Dangerous. A mandate for anyone is a slippery slope, proven by how Hatch’s SCHIP or “Kids First” led to ObamaCare. Don’t forget the infamous Clinton memorandum dated April 9, 1993, that revealed this strategy: “Kids First is really a precursor to the new [universal] system … Under this approach, health care reform is phased in by population, beginning with children.”32

s “The Constitution limits federal power by granting Congress authority in certain defined areas, such as the regulation of interstate and foreign commerce. Those powers not specifically vested in the federal government by the Constitution or, as stated in the 10th Amendment, “prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The [United States Supreme C]ourt will now determine whether those words still have meaning.”29 Hatch on Mandates. In 1993, Hatch supported a government takeover of health care when he cosponsored legislation (S. 1770) that contained an individual mandate.30

29. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286. html 30. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d103:S1770:, http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ bdquery/z?d103:SN01770:@@@P

31. http://www.cms.gov/apps/firststep/content/schip-qas.html 32. http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/opinion/schipkids-first-memo-shows-againtransparency-big-government039s-worst-enemy

Should Orrin come home?

s SCHIP Over Budget. Studies show SCHIP displaces 25 to 50 children from good private coverage for every 100 who go on the public rolls.33 Thus, for each 100 children enrolled, taxpayers wind up paying for insurance for up to 50 children who previously were not in need of the government dole. SCHIP, which was supposed to cost about $5 billion a year has instead gone up to $8 billion a year — a 60% increase.34 s Hatch’s Insistence the SCHIP Mandate Works. Today, the Senator defends his handiwork as a “success,” arguing that it was subsequently ruined by the Democrats, who after their 2006 takeover of Congress dropped the word “State” from its title, made it more top-down, and greatly expanded its cost. Yet stunningly, in 2007 Hatch cosponsored with Democrats John Kerry, Dick Durbin, and Sherrod Brown an effort to expand SCHIP even further, a bill called the Children’s Health Care Quality Act (S. 1226). Medicare Part D. Hatch voted YES for Medicare Part D, a huge entitlement program that added trillions in unfunded liabilities to Medicare. He was also a co-sponsor of the Senate version of the bill that created Part D, the “Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act of 2003.”35 s Medicare Part D Is a Fiscal Disaster. Former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker has called Medicare Part D “the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation

33. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/80xx/doc8092/05-10-SCHIP.pdf 34. Figure 1 in Kaiser Family Foundation fact sheet. “SCHIP at a Glance.” January 2007, http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/Financing-Health-Coverage-The-State-Children-sHealth-Insurance-Program-Experience-Issue-Paper.pdf; CBO March 2007 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8818/schip.pdf; CBO March 2008 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/90xx/doc9053/schip.pdf; CBO March 2009 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/budget/factsheets/2009b/chip.pdf; CBO March 2010 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11521/CHIP.pdf CBO March 2011 baseline, http://www.cbo.gov/budget/factsheets/2011b/Chip.pdf

since the 1960s.”36 In November 2003, the CBO estimated that the Medicare Modernization Act (Public Law 108-173) would result in additional direct spending totaling about $395 billion over the 20042013 period.”37 s Medicare Part D = Trillions in Unfunded Liabilities. Over time, if fully implemented under the Hatch plan, Medicare Part D would nearly swallow taxpayers whole! In the 2004 Medicare trustees report (p. 108), the trustees estimated the total 75year unfunded liability of Part D at $10.8 trillion.38 In 2011, the Medicare trustees modified this figure slightly downward, but still estimated a staggering unfunded liability of $9.9 trillion.39 The “infinite horizon” liability estimated by the same report puts the unfunded liability at $21.5 trillion!40

“

We need a senator who understands that competition and innovation is key to providing better health care for everyone, not more government control.

”

— Patti Bateman Utah Delegate, Cache County Resident

35. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:SN00001:@@@P 36. http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/19/republican-budget-hypocrisy-health-care-opinionscolumnists-bruce-bartlett.html 37. http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=6113&type=0 38. https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2004.pdf 39. https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2011.pdf 40. https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2011.pdf

HATCH ON TARP What Is TARP? TARP, commonly known as the “Wall Street Bailout,” is the Troubled Assets Relief Program, enacted in 2008 to provide a “legal” means for the federal government to use taxpayer funds to bail out troubled banks and lenders to prevent their “failing.” How Expensive Was TARP? On October 3, 2008, Congress wrote Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson a blank check — for $700 billion, which amounts to a quarter of the entire federal budget last year. Awash with fear of an impending financial crisis, Congress enacted the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA), giving the Secretary staggering and unprecedented power to create the TARP program and intervene directly in our nation’s economy. TARP Is Contrary to Free Market Principles. A fundamental principle of the free market economy is that the market itself determines winners and losers; TARP contravenes that principle in that it allowed for government bureaucrats to directly and definitively determine who would win and who would lose. TARP contravenes the free market because it:

s Created a false perception that some businesses are too big to fail. Why Is TARP Dangerous? Our government enshrines the principle of the separation of powers. This means, as the Constitution states, that “All legislative Powers” are “vested in a Congress of the United States” and cannot be delegated to the executive branch. A FreedomWorks Foundation legal brief found that the broad authority of the TARP “Wall Street bailout” legislation violates this legal doctrine and is unconstitutional.41 s When Congress debated this Wall Street bailout bill and explained it to the American people, most expected the Treasury Secretary would use his newlyacquired authority to purchase “troubled” mortgage-related assets from major banks who were, in the catchword of the moment, “too big to fail.” But with blank check in hand, the Treasury Secretary

s Empowered politicians, bureaucrats, and lobbyists to choose winners and losers in the marketplace. s Rewarded bad behavior, in effect punishing those who behaved well. s Did not lead to an economic recovery as promised.

41. http://www.freedomworks.org/files/policyanalysis.pdf

Should Orrin come home?

“

At one time I believe that Senator Hatch went to Washington to make a difference, but more than three decades later, unfortunately he’s become part of the problem. He has a long history of supporting programs and voting for spending bills that we simply cannot afford.

”

— Robert Stott, Utah Delegate, Davis County Paulson almost immediately began to spend it differently. Paulson funneled tax dollars to banks both large and small, both troubled and healthy, and to nonbank institutions such as auto lenders and insurers. Further, instead of purchasing troubled assets, he purchased direct equity stakes in these various institutions. s Putting aside any merits of these various actions, the process should raise alarm. The Secretary was enabled to stray from the originally envisioned approach because EESA granted him enormous power with very few limits on his discretion. In our view, EESA violates the core principle, rooted in the Constitution’s separation of powers, that Congress may not delegate its

42. http://www.freedomworks.org/files/policyanalysis.pdf 43. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/opinion/30barofsky.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper 44. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 10&session=2&vote=00213

lawmaking authority to the executive branch. s The full FreedomWorks Foundation legal brief explains the importance of the “nondelegation” principle to our constitutional system and concludes that EESA unconstitutionally violates that principle by delegating such a broad lawmaking power to the Treasury Secretary.42 Government Can’t Be Trusted to Replace the Free Market. Neil M. Barofsky, the congressionallyappointed special inspector general for TARP, wrote: “Treasury’s mismanagement of TARP and its disregard for TARP’s Main Street goals — whether born of incompetence, timidity in the face of a crisis or a mindset too closely aligned with the banks it was supposed to rein in — may have so damaged the credibility of the government as a whole that future policymakers may be politically unable to take the necessary steps to save the system the next time a crisis arises.”43 Hatch Must Be Held Accountable. Hatch voted for TARP, which allocated $700 billion in taxpayer funds to buy “toxic assets.”44 Hatch refused to vote against eliminating the second round of TARP bailout funds.45 Even more egregiously, Hatch voted to allow taxpayer dollars to be taken to bail out auto manufacturers.46 Hatch’s support of TARP, which reveals a shocking disregard for the Constitution and a dogged determination to use Big Government to circumvent the free market, is a perfect example of why Sen. Hatch must be replaced by a true fiscal conservative.

45. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 11&session=1&vote=00005 46. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 11&session=1&vote=00148

HATCH ON CORPORATE BAILOUTS AND CRONYISM

s previously stated, the bedrock belief of true fiscal conservatives is that the free market must be allowed to determine winners and losers in the marketplace. True fiscal conservatives oppose government subsidies to private business. Businesses must compete in the marketplace rather than the halls of Congress. Orrin Hatch has proved himself to be a big-government Republican over his 36-year tenure in the Senate.47 His voting record is the opposite of what limited government conservatives stand for.

s Voted for the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout.

Hatch’s Corporate Welfare Votes. Amongst other wrong votes, Hatch:

s Voted against the interstate sale of health insurance.

s Voted for the auto bailout, giving GM and Chysler an unfair market advantage. s Voted for Medicare Part D. s Cosponsored an individual health care mandate. s Was a lead sponsor of SCHIP, a massive expansion of government health insurance.

s Voted to establish the Department of Education.

s Voted against eliminating the second round of TARP bailout funds.

s Voted for the TARP Wall Street bailout.

s Voted against cutting the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska.48

47. http://www.hatchrecord.com/index.php/the-truth/

48. http://www.hatchrecord.com/index.php/the-truth/

Should Orrin come home?

Hatch and His Personal Solyndra. Hatch has criticized the $535 million stimulus government loan to the now bankrupt Solyndra. However, Hatch was a vocal and avid supporter of Raser Technologies, a Utah based “green energy” company that, although smaller than Solyndra, was just as incapable of surviving if left to the marketplace. If a business cannot stand on its own, true fiscal conservatives would have that business go forward at its own peril, but without a government welfare check in hand. Hatch, however, requested seven earmarks for more than $20 million from 2006 to 2008 to help prop up research and development projects for the automotive wing of the Raser Company.49 According to the USA Today, “Hatch was on hand for the Raser’s ground-breaking of what the company dubbed the ‘Hatch Plant’ in honor of the Senator, and he spoke of the construction of the facility as a ‘turning point’ for the U.S. green energy industry. But a month before the groundbreaking, the company had $51.2 million in debt and less than $6 million on hand, according to Securities and Exchange Commission records.”50 For more on Raser, Hatch’s Solyndra, see Appendix III. Hatch and the Auto Bailout. After voting for TARP, Hatch voted to allow taxpayer dollars to be taken to bail out auto manufacturers.51 The Treasury Department spent $49.9 billion in TARP funds for General Motors and $14.3 billion for privately-held Chrysler.52 Why the Auto Bailout Was (and Is) Dangerous. CATO Institute analyst Dan Ikenson has said: “They didn’t bail out the auto industry, they bailed out two companies. They denied Ford the spoils of competition, and I think they injected a sense of entitlement: If things go bad at Ford, they sort of ‘banked’ their bailout. They didn’t get a bailout this time, but they’ve got a pretty

49. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1 50. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1 51. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 11&session=1&vote=00148

“

Orrin Hatch’s support of the housing and auto bailouts demonstrated his belief that government bureaucrats like Timothy Geithner and Ben Bernanke do a better job at determining winners and losers than do consumers in the free marketplace.

”

— D.J. Schanz Founder of the Austrian Economics Club of Utah, Davis County Resident strong argument if they run into financial trouble in the future. So there could be lingering costs out there.”53 s FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe commented: “GM and the Big Three are looking for a bailout from reality. In a debate driven by romance and not fact, GM [is threatening] the American public to bail it out or else risk economic Armageddon. A healthy manufacturing sector is based on quality products, innovative manufacturing processes, and flexible workplaces, not on lifelines from the government. Without catastrophic change, the Big Three will continue to burn through cash and look to Washington for more taxpayer dollars to just postpone the inevitable.”54

52. http://www.cnbc.com/id/32756258/Taxpayers_May_Face_Losses_from_Auto_Bailout_ Warren 53. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/06/how-much-did-the-auto-bailout-costtaxpayers/ 54. http://www.freedomworks.org/press-releases/freedomworks-opposes-75-billion-autoindustry-bail

Hatch Supported the Housing Bailout. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are corrupt, bloated government bureaucracies masquerading as private companies. They control much of the massive mortgage lending industry. These companies have proved their inability to operate without huge government subsidies. In 2008, Hatch voted for the massive housing bailout bill that nationalized much of the mortgage industry, raised the ceiling on risky loans, instituted another $4 billion housing subsidy program, expanded the welfare state, increased FHA loan limits, and encouraged more risky loans from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.55 Hatch’s Hypocrisy. Hatch fancies himself a conservative, yet his voting record exposes a man committed to allowing the government — not the free market — to choose winners and losers. When Big Government is wrong — which is often — losses are massive, and are paid for not by Hatch and his fellow lawmakers, but by the rank and file taxpayers. In addition to Hatch’s infamous votes in favor of the “Bridge to Nowhere,” TARP, SCHIP, and others:

55. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 10&session=2&vote=00010 56. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 09&session=1&vote=00138 57. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 08&session=2&vote=00077

s In 2005, Orrin Hatch voted for an arbitrarily-mandated ethanol subsidy, which even Al Gore has recently declared a failure and is a politically-motivated handout to the first presidential primary state, Iowa.56 s Roll Call 408: Hatch voted against requiring the most able-bodied, non-elderly food stamp recipients to work for 40 hours during every 4-week period. s Roll Call 77: In 2004, Hatch voted against permanently halting taxes on electric commerce imposed by the Internet Tax Freedom Act.57 s In 1998, Orrin Hatch voted to continue taxpayer funding of the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA).58 In 1993, Hatch voted against prohibiting the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) from using taxpayer money for morally offensive purposes.59

58. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 05&session=2&vote=00269 59. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 01&session=2&vote=00307

Should Orrin come home?

HATCH ON EDUCATION

rguably the two most important — and infamous — moments contributing to the decline of public education in America were the 1979 creation of the United States Department of Education and the 2001 passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. These watershed events shifted an incalculable amount of decision-making authority from local educators to federal employees in Washington, D.C. No longer could teachers and parents craft and execute learning plans without interference from a massive and slow-toreact bureaucracy. The result is a school system that is failing and a bureaucracy motivated more by self-preservation than by the desire to empower and equip those educators who best know the students’ wants and needs. Hatch Is Part of the Problem. Hatch voted YES for the establishment of the Department of Education (1979, Roll Call 70) and voted YES for No Child

60. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/52782216-90/behind-child-congress-education. html.csp

Left Behind (2001, Roll Call 371). No Child Left Behind is the massive federal government education mandate crafted by the extreme leftwing Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and passed after intense lobbying by Kennedy and President George W. Bush. In 2009, Hatch claimed, “He [Bush] delivered education reform with the No Child Left Behind Act, and I can tell you what a difference it has made. Lives are changed, hopes are kindled, and futures are brighter as a result. Empowering teachers to help students meet higher expectations works.”60 Hatch Was Wrong on No Child Left Behind [NCLB]. October 31, 2011: “The current law just hasn’t worked like we hoped it would,” Hatch told The [Salt Lake] Tribune in an interview. “I gave No Child Left Behind the benefit of the doubt, but frankly, while my vote was motivated by the best of intentions, it ended up being too much of a

straitjacket.”61 Here Hatch demonstrates his misguided belief in Big Government solutions to problems faced by real Americans. A true conservative would have known that a massive redistribution of power from local communities to a bloated federal bureaucracy would likely produce flawed results and a huge price tag for taxpayers. Hatch’s “New” Position. Here’s Hatch on November 7, 2011: “Utah’s parents and students deserve better than this [No Child Left Behind] legislation. They need great teachers in their classrooms and leaders in their schools, districts, and state offices — not more Washington bureaucrats and a greater federal presence meddling in what should be the local decisions of parents and educators... Education is the responsibility of our state and local governments.”62 Notwithstanding his recent statements supporting local control of schools, Hatch has been on the wrong side of this issue for more than 30 years.

61. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/52782216-90/behind-child-congress-education. html.csp

Utah voters cannot give Senator Hatch a free pass on education and allow a few good words to save him from sharing in the responsibility for decades of bad policy and bad votes.

Hatch has repeatedly “Senator supported legislation that removes choice and local control away from parents and educators and shifts it to bureaucracies in DC.

”

— Dan McCay Utah Delegate, Director Utah FreedomWorks, Salt Lake County Resident

62. http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/videos?ID=67e8953a-7b6e-4a1b-bf374b184877c894

Should Orrin come home?

HATCH ON APPOINTMENTS J

ustices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are two of the most liberal Supreme Court Justices in U.S. history. Not only did Hatch vote to confirm both, but he proudly proclaims (in his book) that it was he (Hatch) who actually first proposed their names to President Clinton.63 Both Senator Hatch voted to Justices have confirm Timothy Geithner been consistent as Treasury Secretary. supporters of leftwing positions on nearly all key votes. Hatch also voted to confirm Cass Sunstein as Obama’s “Regulatory Czar,” Ben Bernanke (TARP) to the Federal Reserve, Timothy Geithner (“Bailout Czar”) as Treasury Secretary and Eric Holder (Fast and Furious) as the U.S. Attorney General. All of these confirmations by Sen. Hatch have one thing in common: each has served to massively expand the scope and power of the Federal Government. Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Cass Sunstein, “Regulatory Czar,” as Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget.64

63. http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/03/time-to-retire-uncle-orrin.html 64. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=1 11&session=1&vote=00274 65. http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201003180062 66. http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/05/17/latest-target-of-cass-sunstein-amish-milk/ 67. http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201105250012

s Glenn Beck refers to him as the “Regulatory Czar” and the “[m]ost evil man, the most dangerous man in America.”65 s Hatch describes how Cass Sunstein targeted Amish Milk for regulation. Hatch should have thought about this before he voted to confirm Sunstein. s “Amish farmers made the horrible mistake of trying to sell unpasteurized milk across state lines, which prompted the FDA to launch a year long sting operation to stop farms from selling ‘contraband’ to customers. Why in the world is the federal government wasting time going after the Amish?”66 s Cass Sunstein wants to ban hunting.67 s Cass Sunstein believes the Constitution does not protect the right to bear arms.68 s Cass Sunstein believes animals should be permitted to bring suit against humans.69 s Cass Sunstein has an extreme view of the Constitution far outside the mainstream. He describes his extreme views in his book Radicals in Robes.70 Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Cass Sunstein. Orrin Hatch, as a U.S. Senator, has an obligation to protect the citizens of Utah and the United States from people like Cass Sunstein and their radical leftist views. Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Ben Bernanke as Chairman of the Fed.71 Ben Bernanke oversaw TARP and promoted policies that prolonged the worst recession since the Great Depression.

68. http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201105250012 69. http://politicalcorrection.org/blog/201105250012 70. http://books.google.com/books?id=aL2dbK5WOsQC&dq=radicals+in+robes&printse c=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=v26qSqqUFZLuswOR9oGHBQ&sa=X&oi=bo ok_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q&f=false 71. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN00510:@@@P

Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Timothy Geithner as the Obama Treasury Secretary. Timothy Geithner is the first Treasury Secretary in U.S. history to preside over a downgrade in America’s credit rating. Geithner has led the charge to bail out banks, insurance giants, auto companies, and even foreign nations.72 In describing Timothy Geithner’s failure and stunning lack of awareness, Julie Borowski of FreedomWorks said: s “Anyone who believes we’re on the right path to economic recovery might be living under a rock. In a recent NBC interview, Timothy Geithner criticized S&P’s decision to downgrade the U.S. credit rating by saying, “S&P has shown really terrible judgment and they’ve handled themselves very poorly…They’ve shown a stunning lack of knowledge about basic U.S. fiscal budget math.”73 But the truth is that it’s odd that S&P didn’t downgrade our top-tier credit rating a long time ago. The United States, the world’s largest debtor nation, is over $14.5 trillion in debt. It’s maddening that the Obama administration has the nerve to question S&P’s knowledge on fiscal budget math when the U.S. deficit and debt are at alltime highs. s Timothy Geithner has shown himself incapable of facing economic reality. Noted investor and firm believer in Free Market economics Jim Rogers recently said, “it seems to

me it’s physically, humanly impossible for the U.S. to ever pay off its debt. They can roll it over and continue to play the charade, but the U.S. is bankrupt.” Unlike Geithner, Jim Rogers was one of the few to predict the current financial crisis.”74 Geithner’s Tax Problems. Between 2001 and 2004 Geithner failed to pay $35,000 in taxes. He didn’t pay his back taxes in full until he was picked to serve as Treasury Secretary.75 When asked about Geithner’s failure to pay taxes, Hatch responded: s “People make mistakes and commit oversights. Even the most intelligent and gifted — two adjectives that certainly apply to Mr. Geithner — make errors in their financial dealings.”76 Does Orrin Hatch really believe Geithner is one of “the most talented and gifted”? Geithner failed to foresee the U.S. debt crisis and presided over the first-ever downgrade in the U.S. credit rating. Orrin Hatch voted to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General.77 Eric Holder is currently under Congressional investigation for the ATF’s operation “Fast and Furious,” the controversial program of selling weapons to Mexican drug lords, which resulted in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent.78 Orrin Hatch confirmed Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, two of the most liberal members of the U.S. Supreme Court.79

Senator Hatch voted to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General.

72. http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/treasury-secretary-timothy-geithnerdeserves-to-be 73. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/geithner-to-stay-on-as-us-treasury-chief-2011-0807-1556320?dist=beforebell 74. http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/treasury-secretary-timothy-geithnerdeserves-to-be 75. http://www.michaeljolley.net/1/post/2011/08/senator-orrin-hatch-has-record-ofconfirming-leftists.html

76. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28862809/ns/politics-white_house/t/geithner-sworntreasury-secretary/#.TwPs8eY_dyc 77. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:SN00510:@@@P 78. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20115038-10391695.html 79. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?cong ress=103&session=2&vote=00242, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/12/ breyer-founding-fathers-allowed-restrictions-guns/, http://www.michaeljolley.net/1/ post/2011/08/senator-orrin-hatch-has-record-of-confirming-leftists.html

Should Orrin come home?

“

I want to be confident that the Senator I help elect will confirm justices who respect the original intent of the Constitution. I’m not confident that Orrin Hatch is the person best prepared to accomplish that task.

”

— Larry Meyers Utah Delegate, Washington County

Most importantly, he didn’t just confirm them, he wrote in his autobiography that Clinton asked him for advice on nominations for the Supreme Court. Hatch proudly states that he suggested two possibilities who could easily pass nomination: Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.80 These are hardly the actions of a constitutional conservative: “[It] was not a surprise when the President called to talk about the appointment and what he was thinking of doing. President Clinton indicated he was leaning toward nominating Bruce Babbitt, his Secretary of the Interior, a name that had been bouncing around in the press. Bruce, a well-known western Democrat, had been the governor of Arizona and a candidate for president in 1988. Although he had been a state attorney general back during the 1970s, he was known far more for his activities as a politician than as a jurist. Clinton asked for my reaction.

against Bruce, and there would be a great deal of resistance from the Republican side. I explained to the President that although he might prevail in the end, he should consider whether he wanted a tough, political battle over his first appointment to the Court. Our conversation moved to other potential candidates. I asked whether he had considered Judge Stephen Breyer of the First Circuit Court of Appeals or Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. President Clinton indicated he had heard Breyer’s name but had not thought about Judge Ginsburg. I indicated I thought they would be confirmed easily. I knew them both and believed that, while liberal, they were highly honest and capable jurists and their confirmation would not embarrass the President. From my perspective, they were far better than the other likely candidates from a liberal Democrat administration. In the end, the President did not select Secretary Babbitt. Instead, he nominated Judge Ginsburg and Judge Breyer a year later, when Harry Blackmun retired from the Court. Both were confirmed with relative ease.”81 U.S. News and World Report describes both Breyer and Ginsburg as two of the most liberal Justices of the last 70 years.82 Orrin Hatch described radical liberal justice Ginsburg in the following way: “…a great scholar, a person of high integrity with good judicial temperament.”83 Orrin Hatch’s aide at the time, Edward Whelan, describes Ginsburg with very different language. He is also very candid about why Hatch supported Ginsburg.

I told him that confirmation would not be easy. At least one Democrat would probably vote

80. http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/03/time-to-retire-uncle-orrin.html; http://articles. latimes.com/1993-06-15/news/mn-3262_1_white-house-official; http://www. washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_07/006632.php 81. http://www.rightspeak.net/2011/03/time-to-retire-uncle-orrin.html; http:// thinkprogress.org/politics/2005/07/01/1228/how-clinton-treated-hatch/; http://www. washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_07/006632.php; Orrin Hatch, Square Peg: “Confessions of a Citizen-Senator”, Basic Books, 2002, Pg 180

82. http://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2008/05/12/ranking-the-politics-ofsupreme-court-justices 83. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/295527/HATCH-SEES-EASY-TIME-FORGINSBURG-IN-SENATE.html

Senator Orrin Hatch actually proposed two of the Supreme Court’s most liberal justices — Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg. “‘Ginsburg wasn’t anywhere near the mainstream,’ said Edward Whelan, who in 1993 was an aide to Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) and is now president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington. She ‘had a record of extremist constitutional and policy views that placed her on the far left fringe of American society,’ Whelan said. ‘Sen. Hatch and other Republicans voted to confirm her because they believed the president was entitled to considerable deference in selecting a Supreme Court justice.’” (emphasis added)84 Orrin Hatch has thus demonstrated a severe lack of judgment when making decisions about federal and judicial confirmations. A real constitutional

conservative would have fought to protect the Constitution from the judicial activism of radicals like Justices Ginsburg and Breyer. Orrin Hatch saw it as his job to collude with President Bill Clinton to nominate two of the most liberal justices on the Supreme Court. Over the years, he has supported the appointments of many good Justices and administrative officials; however, when he gets it wrong, he really gets it wrong. Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Cass Sunstein, Eric Holder, Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are not just liberals, they are enemies of liberty and freedom. They represent a clear and present danger to the economic and personal freedom of Americans.

84. http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/18/nation/na-ginsburg18

Should Orrin come home?

DON’T BE BULLIED Dismantling the Olympia Snowe Myth

ne of the main arguments employed by the Hatch campaign staff is that if their boss is not re-elected to his seventh term, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) will become chair of the influential Finance Committee. This is all couched in rhetoric that communicates fear and worry — after all, you don’t want Snowe raising taxes on us all, do you? After all, as Hatch’s campaign is quick to remind us, she voted to pass ObamaCare out of committee!85

In fact, the very idea that if Hatch loses Snowe will become Finance Committee chair is flawed. A larger and more conservative Senate Republican Caucus, likely in the majority, could confer the chairmanship to a different GOP Senator on the Finance Committee.

Perhaps it would be enlightening to examine the records of these two senior Senators to see if the argument has any merit. An online comparison tool at OpenCongress.org shows that since January 2007, Sens. Snowe and Hatch have voted the same way 71 percent of the time. That’s one overlapping Venn diagram! (See above.)86 However, that’s not the complete picture. It only goes back a few years, and it covers a ton of legislation that either was innocuous or an obvious vote. So, to dig deeper, one might review the 85. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/48647_Page2.html Hatch deliberately avoided using Snowe’s name, but made the argument that “They’re never going to get a better conservative handling that committee.”

votes compiled at HatchRecord.com to see how each senator voted since 1995, when Sen. Snowe assumed office. For the 47 votes analyzed, the two Senators voted the same way 42 times, or 89.3 percent of the time. For the other four votes listed on HatchRecord.com, Senator Snowe voted the right way in opposition to Hatch. The list we’re talking about here is a record of some of Hatch’s anti-liberty, pro-Big Government votes in recent years. Thus, it cannot be said that Orrin Hatch is a fiscal saint when compared to Olympia Snowe. While they have their differences (and while some of Hatch’s better votes may have been voted on the other way by Snowe), the two are so similar as to render the campaign’s claim that Snowe is far to the left of Hatch patently absurd.87 To vote for Hatch in order to keep the chairmanship of the Finance Committee away from Olympia Snowe is like voting for Barack Obama to keep Hillary Clinton from getting the Democratic presidential nomination. Politically speaking, they are virtually identical twins; so fighting for one over the other is largely a moot point. Whether a politician’s voting record supports Big Government 90 percent of the time or “only” 70 percent, it’s still too much. So, whether Utah keeps Hatch in office and he gets the chairmanship, or whether Utah denies him his seventh six-year term in office and Senator Snowe gets the chairmanship (assuming she is re-elected, and further assuming her fellow Republicans confirm her as chairman), things in the Finance Committee will proceed according to the status quo. You can count on that.88

86. http://www.opencongress.org/people/compare?utf8=%E2%9C%93&person1=300052& person2=300091&commit=Compare the number is actually 71% 87. www.hatchrecord.com 88. http://www.dethronehatch.com/dismantling-the-olympia-snowe-myth/

CONCLUSION A

fter nearly 36 years in the United States Senate, Orrin Hatch is once again asking Utah’s Republican voters to send him back to Washington. FreedomWorks For America strongly opposes the re-election of U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch. We did not come to this position without serious consideration. We examined his vast record carefully and came to the conclusion that it is time for Orrin Hatch to retire.

Recently Orrin Hatch has been calling himself a conservative. This year he said of himself, “By any measure, I’m considered one of the greatest conservatives in the history of the country.”89 In 1993, while being interviewed by The New York Times, he noted that he had been called a liberal by the conservative journal National Review and he did not reject that description.90 The truth is Hatch’s record is clear, it contradicts any assertion that he is a fiscal conservative, much less one of the greatest conservatives in American history.

He personally voted 16 times to increase the debt ceiling amounting to 7.5 trillion dollars in additional debt. That’s half our current national debt! He supported the creation of new entitlements, including ObamaCare-like health care mandates. He proudly boasts that he cosponsored SCHIP, a massive new health care entitlement that he partnered with Massachusetts uber-liberal Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) to create. He voted for Medicare Part D which has an estimated 21.6 trillion dollar unfunded liability. These are not the votes of a fiscal conservative. Rather they are representative of the misguided policy decisions and reckless spending that have led our nation to unprecedented debt. Orrin Hatch is not the solution; he has become the problem in Washington, D.C. Please join us and our more than 10,000 members in Utah and tell Orrin, it’s time to come home to Utah.

Orrin Hatch has spent 36 years expanding the size and scope of the federal government. He voted for the creation of the Department of Education, voted to fund the “Bridge to Nowhere,” voted to bail out Wall Street (TARP) and voted to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and GM and Chrysler. In 2010 he was ranked the 3rd highest earmarker in the senate. That’s 3rd out of 100.91

89. Orrin Hatch, interview, Fox News’ Happening Now, July 12, 2011. http:// politicalcorrection.org/video/201107120009

90. http://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/14/us/hatch-joins-kennedy-to-back-a-healthprogram.html?src=pm 91. http://innovation.cq.com/media/earmarks2010/?ref=CQ

Should Orrin come home?

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I Will the Real Orrin Hatch Please Stand Up? A Look at Key Votes Senator Hatch Cast from 1979 to 2009… s Hatch voted against banning earmarks s Hatch cosponsored the individual mandate for health care s Hatch voted for Medicare Part D, the largest entitlement expansion since the Great Society… until ObamaCare s Hatch voted for and was lead sponsor of SCHIP, a massive expansion of government health insurance s Hatch voted for the Wall Street bailout (TARP) s Hatch voted for the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout s Hatch voted to continue the auto bailout s Hatch voted to increase the debt ceiling 16 times by a total of $7.5 trillion s Hatch voted against the interstate sale of health insurance s Hatch voted to establish the Department of Education, a federal takeover of our schools s Hatch repeatedly voted for the expansion of government health care programs s Hatch repeatedly voted for wasteful and pork-laden farm subsidy programs s Hatch repeatedly voted for bills filled with pet projects and giveaways

s Roll Call 148: Hatch voted to allow taxpayer dollars to be taken to bail out auto manufacturers. s Roll Call 272: Hatch voted to use taxpayer money to promote travel. 2008 Key Votes s Roll Call 10: Hatch voted for the stimulus bill, which expanded the welfare state, increased FHA loan limits, and encouraged more risky loans from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. s Roll Call 75: Hatch voted against establishing an earmark moratorium to end the gratuitous and corrosive process of pork-barrel spending. s Roll Call 153: Hatch voted against removing $300 billion in additional spending for FHA loans. s Roll Call 185, Roll Call 96, H.R. 3221: Hatch voted to bail out the mortgage industry, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, nationalizing much of the mortgage industry, raising the ceiling on risky loans, and instituting another $4 billion housing subsidy program. s Roll Call 213: Hatch voted for the infamous Wall Street bailout (TARP), which allocated $700 billion in taxpayer funds to buy “toxic assets.” 2007 Key Votes

2009 Key Votes s Roll Call 5: Hatch refused to vote against eliminating the second round of TARP bailout funds. s Roll Call 90: Hatch voted to protect the power of special-interest trial lawyers to gouge fees from the American taxpayers.

s Roll Call 42: Hatch voted for Big Labor’s job-killing minimum wage hike. s Roll Call 105: Hatch voted to increase taxes in order to reauthorize and expand SCHIP.

Should Orrin come home?

s Roll Call 307: Hatch voted to expand the federal government’s role in health care through reauthorizing SCHIP. s Roll Call 347: Hatch voted for a pork-laden bill that contained over 900 special-interest earmarks and contained excessive spending. s Roll Call 354: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $850 billion. s Roll Call 400: Hatch voted to spend more taxpayer money on the failed passenger rail monopoly. s Roll Call 403: Hatch voted to increase funding for SCHIP by $50 billion. s Roll Call 434: Hatch voted for a massive $300 billion subsidy for agriculture businesses. s Roll Call 425: Hatch voted for a flawed energy bill that contained ethanol subsidies, and marked another victory for special interests and proponents of higher taxes and mandates in our energy policy. 2006 Key Votes s Roll Call 13: Hatch voted with the special interest trial lawyers to create a new system for resolving claims of injury caused by asbestos exposure. s Roll Call 52: Hatch voted for a gigantic $500 million earmark for Amtrak.

s Roll Call 125: Hatch voted to increase funds in the highway bill. s Roll Call 158: Hatch voted for an arbitrarily-mandated ethanol subsidy, which even Al Gore has recently declared a failure and a politically motivated handout to the first Presidential primary state, Iowa. s Roll Call 220: Hatch voted for the notorious $300 billion highway spending bill stuffed with nearly 6,500 earmarks, exemplifying the worst of Republican excesses just before they lost control of Congress. s Roll Call 262: Hatch voted against cutting the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska, which was the leading symbol of government waste and profligate spending in the 109th Congress. s Roll Call 286: Hatch voted against responsibly reducing non-defense discretionary spending. 2004 Key Votes s Roll Call 65: Hatch voted for more superfluous government spending and mandates on states. s Roll Call 213: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $800 billion. 2003 Key Votes

s Roll Call 54: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $781 billion

s Roll Call 202: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $984 billion.

s Roll Call 81: Hatch voted against including federal entities in the definition of earmarks.

s Roll Call 205: Hatch voted to keep unnecessary and expensive military bases open.

s Roll Call 97: Hatch voted against a measure to prevent wasteful increases in spending. s Roll Call 99: Hatch voted to suspend consideration for an amendment that would cut rail line pork. s Roll Call 100: Hatch voted against eliminating seafood promotion porkbarrel spending.

2005 Key Votes

s Roll Call 409: Hatch voted to increase federal control over state and local elections. s Roll Call 459: Hatch voted for Medicare Part D, a huge entitlement program that added trillions in unfunded liabilities to Medicare.

2002 Key Votes

1993 Key Votes

s Roll Call 141: Hatch voted to quintuple the funding for AIDS programs in Africa, from $100 million to $500 million. s Roll Call 148: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $450 billion. 1998 Key Votes s Roll Call 123: Hatch voted to include a member of the IRS employees’ union on an Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board. s Roll Call 143: Hatch voted to increase the tobacco tax. s Roll Call 256: Hatch voted against accountability measures regarding how the International Monetary Fund uses U.S. aid. s Roll Call 269: Hatch voted to continue taxpayer funding of the NEA. 1997 Key Votes s S.674: Hatch teamed up with Ted Kennedy to cosponsor the Children’s Health Insurance Provides Security (CHIPS) Act. s Roll Call 209: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $450 billion and create the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), the largest expansion of taxpayerfunded health insurance coverage for children in the U.S. since Medicaid. 1996 Key Votes s H.R.3136: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $600 billion. 1995 Key Votes s Roll Call 408: Hatch voted against requiring the most able-bodied, non-elderly food stamp recipients to work for 40 hours during every 4-week period. s Roll Call 601: Hatch voted against legislation that provided congressional oversight of U.S. taxpayer dollars sent to murky and volatile regions such as warstricken Bosnia.

s S.1770: Hatch supported a government take-over of health care when he cosponsored legislation that contained an individual mandate. s Roll Call 317: Hatch voted against an amendment proposed by Sen. Nickles (R-Okla.), which would have prohibited the use of funds to support U.S. armed forces under the command of United Nations commanders. s Roll Call 389: Hatch voted to kill this amendment introduced by Senator Stevens (R-Alaska) that would have reduced the costly environmental and labor regulations imbedded in NAFTA. 1992 Key Votes s Roll Call 264: Hatch voted to override President Bush’s veto of a bill that expanded government encroachment in television by regulating the cable television industry. 1990 Key Votes s Roll Call 269: Hatch voted to excessively appropriate $11.5 billion more than was necessary to fund the departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and other related agencies. s Roll Call 292: Hatch voted for a tax-andspend laden budget, which at the time amounted to the largest tax increase in U.S. history. s Roll Call 307: Hatch voted against prohibiting the National Endowment for the Arts from using taxpayer money for morally depraved purposes. 1989 Key Votes s Roll Call 94: Hatch voted to vastly expand the federal government’s role in the area of child care, infringing on the abilities of states and localities to handle individual family problems.

Should Orrin come home?

s Roll Call 173: Hatch voted for the expansion of the federal government’s role in regulating and determining workplace discrimination. 1987 Key Votes s Roll Call 19: Hatch voted to override President Reagan’s veto of a bill that reauthorized the Clean Water Act of 1972 and spent $20 billion in additional appropriations to implement mandates and regulations. s Roll Call 167: Hatch voted to vastly expand government and bureaucracy by creating a new federal interagency arm. s Roll Call 262: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $448 billion. 1986 Key Votes s H.R.5395: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $32.3 billion. s H.R.2005: Hatch voted to authorize $9 billion for waste removal programs. This “superfund” was largely duplicative and wasteful and could be handled more efficiently through the states. 1985 Key Votes s Roll Call 371: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $174.9 billion. 1984 Key Votes s H.AMDT.798: Hatch voted against striking funds from the NEA. s H. J. RES. 654: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $250 billion. s Roll Call 551: Hatch voted to provide funding to the Legal Services Corporation. 1983 Key Votes s Roll Call 115: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $98.8 billion.

s S.AMDT.2633: Hatch voted for a $25 billion bill to bailout the perpetually failing HUD and TIME programs, increasing government intervention in the housing sector. 1982 Key Votes s H.R.4961: Hatch voted for what was the largest tax increase in history at that time. s H. J. RES. 520: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $890.2 billion. 1981 Key Votes s Roll Call 23: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $50 billion. s Roll Call 298: Hatch voted to increase the debt limit by $94 billion. s Roll Call 336: Hatch voted against cutting 5 percent of obligational spending from the Department of Interior Appropriations bill. 1980 Key Votes s Roll Call 354: Hatch voted against easing roadblocks and regulations for trucking firms. s H.R. 5192: Hatch voted to extend the authorization for federal higher education programs. 1979 Key Votes s Roll Call 70: Hatch voted for the establishment of the Department of Education, which has led to a precipitous decline in American school students’ learning and performance. (Barry Goldwater and Senate Conservatives voted against this.) 1977 Key Votes s Hatch voted to impose nanny state regulations on auto manufacturers, leading to an increase in the costs of cars.

APPENDIX II Key Votes on the National Debt Cast by Orrin Hatch. Orrin Hatch Voted 16 Times For 7.5 Trillion Dollars of Debt. Of Note: There were numerous bills to raise the debt ceiling, which were passed by voice vote as well during this time period. Those votes are not included. s $50 Billion – Feb., 1981 Aye – 97th –

H.R. 1553 – “A bill to provide for a temporary increase in the public debt limit.”92 s $94 Billion – Sept., 1981 Aye – 97th –

H.J.RES. 265 – “A joint resolution to provide for a temporary increase in the public debt limit.”93 s $98.8 Billion – May, 1983 Aye – 98th

– H.R. 2990 – “An act to increase the permanent public debt limit, and for other purposes.”94 s $250 Billion – Oct., 1984 Aye – 98th

– H.J.RES. 654 – “A joint resolution increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.”95 s $174.9 Billion – Dec., 1985 Aye –

99th H.J.RES. 372 – “Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.”96 s $32.3 Billion – Aug., 1986 Aye –

99th H.R. 5395 – “Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1986”97 92. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1981-23 93. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1981-298 94. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1983-115 95. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1984-663 96. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1986-636 97. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1986-636 98. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1987-262 99. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:HR03136:@@@X 100. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 105&session=1&vote=00209

s $448 Billion – Sept., 1987 Aye – 100th

H.J.RES. 324 – “Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987” (Senate Roll #224).98 s $600 Billion – March Aye – 104th H.R.

3136 – “Contract with America Act of 1996” (passed by unanimous consent).99 s $450 Billion – July, 1997 Aye – 105th

H.R. 2015 – “Balanced Budget Act of 1997.”100 s $450 Billion – June, 2002 Aye – 107th

S. 2578 – “A bill to amend title 31 of the United States Code to increase the public debt limit.”101 s $984 Billion – May, 2003 Aye – 108th

H.J.RES.51 – “Increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.”102 s $800 Billion – Nov., 2004 Aye – 108th

S. 2986 – “A bill to amend title 31 of the United States Code to increase the public debt limit.”103 s $781 Billion – Mar., 2006 Aye – 109th

H.J.RES.47 – “Increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.”104 s $850 Billion – Sept., 2007 Aye – 110th

H.J.RES.43 – “Increasing the statutory limit on the public debt.”105 101. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 107&session=2&vote=00148 102. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 108&session=1&vote=00202 103. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 108&session=2&vote=00213 104. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 109&session=2&vote=00054 105. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 110&session=1&vote=00354

Should Orrin come home?

s $800 Billion – July, 2008 Aye –

110th H.R. 1424 – “The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008” (included an increase in the debt ceiling).”106 s $700 Billion – Oct., 2008 Aye – 110th

s This document contains a chart of

every vote which raised the debt ceiling from 1978 to the present: http://www. scribd.com/doc/55660572/Votes-onMeasures-to-Adjust-the-StatutoryDebt-Limit-1978-to-Present

H.R. 3221 – “The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.”107

106. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 110&session=2&vote=00213

107. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress= 110&session=2&vote=00186

APPENDIX III Raser Technologies is Orrin Hatch’s Solyndra

tah Senator Orrin Hatch has emerged as an outspoken critic of the $535 million “stimulus” loan to the now bankrupt Solyndra. The solar energy manufacturer is the latest in the long list of “green energy” companies to fail after being artificially propped up by the Obama administration. Hatch may talk a good game when it comes to ending crony capitalism, but truth be told, Hatch hasn’t always been against government subsidies to “clean energy” firms.

A recent audit discovered that Hatch had requested seven earmarks for more than $20 million from 2006 to 2008 for Raser Technologies to help fund research and development projects.108 The Southern Utah company, which operated a geothermal power plant and developed hybrid plug-in vehicles, went bankrupt in April. While Hatch’s requests were thankfully never funded, it does raise questions over his hypocritical stance on the Solyndra loans. Raser Technologies is Orrin Hatch’s Solyndra scandal. Raser even named their facility the “Hatch Plant” in honor of the Senator. At a press conference following the grand opening of the Hatch Plant in May 2008, Hatch sounded a lot like President Obama. He said, “Raser Tech is a company that has consistently pushed the envelope to develop, and bring to market, some of our nation’s most advanced concepts in clean energy, and I congratulate this Utah business for being first out of the gate to use the latest technology to convert the earth’s natural heat into the world’s cleanest energy.”109

108. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1 109. http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ID=cf3a2807-1b78-be3e-e07e6eefad143997 110. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1

Orrin Hatch just a few years ago was pushing for special treatment for the energy firm. Hatch’s relationship with Raser Technologies can be traced back to 2004 when Raser officials first met with the Senator to ask him to push tax incentives for hybrid vehicles.110 Politicians should not pick winners or losers in the marketplace. He went on to say, “Raser has also been supportive of my recent legislation S. 1617, or the Freedom Act, which is cosponsored by Senators Barack Obama and Cantwell. The Freedom Act proposes strong tax incentives for plug-in electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles and for the U.S. manufacture of these vehicles and their technology.”111 Imagine that. Orrin Hatch and then-Senator Barack Obama once worked together to prop up “green energy” companies. Despite his terrible record of proposing government subsidies, Hatch had the nerve to criticize President Obama for putting “$535 million into a program that has a poor business plan.” Hatch has been eerily silent about the failure of Raser Technologies, which was doomed to fail. Just a month before the Hatch Plant opened, Raser technologies was a whopping $51.2 million in debt. The geothermal power plant pledged to create 10.5 megawatts of energy but they never produced more than seven megawatts.112 Utah is so much more fiscally conservative than Orrin Hatch. His request for millions of dollars worth of earmarks for Raser Technology is one of many reasons why Hatch has got to go. Big Government Utah Senator Bob Bennett was replaced with limited government champion Senator Mike Lee last year. The next step is to retire Orrin Hatch and put a true fiscal conservative in his place in 2012. 111. http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/releases?ID=cf3a2807-1b78-be3e-e07e6eefad143997 112. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-28/hatch-solyndra-cyrqenergy/50985576/1

Should Orrin come home?

APPENDIX IV

ISSUE

ANALYSIS Number 51

April 24, 1997

Top Twelve False Claims Made About the Hatch-Kennedy Children’s Health Coverage Bill by Michael F. Cannon

Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and Ted Kennedy (D-MA) have proposed legislation to establish a new federal program to buy health coverage for five million children. Sen. Hatch has characterized their proposal as the “free market approach” to insuring children. Unfortunately, neither the bill (S. 525) nor its funding mechanism (S. 526) have been fairly represented.

1. “This is not an entitlement.”1 The bill requires participating states to “ensure that qualifying children’s policies are available to all eligible children in the State and that each eligible child has the opportunity to enroll for coverage” (p. 4 lines 9-12; emphasis added). The “all eligible children” clause seems to create a legal cause of action that constitutes an entitlement. Additionally, the bill grants “budget authority in advance of appropriations Acts” in an apparent attempt to circumvent mandatory spending rules (p. 19-20, lines 22-2). Utah Governor Michael Leavitt (R) notes, “It contains all of the old entitlement language.”2 Michael F. Cannon is a health care policy analyst at Citizens for a Sound Economy. 1. Sen. Hatch NBC’s “Meet the Press,” April 6,1997.

2. Paul Gigot,“ Republicans to Prodigal Senator: Snap Out of It,” The Wall Street Journal, April 18, 1997.

2. “It’s fully-financed.”3 The bill imposes unfunded financial burdens on the states. Participating states are required to finance 50 percent of the program’s administrative expenses (p. 16, lines 15-19) and a “state matching percentage ... equal to 40 percent of the percentage of the amount the State is responsible for expending” under Medicaid (p. 16, lines 20-25; p. 17, lines l-6). Under no circumstances are the states to contribute less than 10 percent of the program’s cost (p. l7, lines 7-12). This will require additional taxes at the state level.

3. “The tax is a user fee[.]”4 S. 526, a companion bill to S. 525, provides the funding mechanism for Hatch-Kennedy. It nearly triples the federal tax on cigarettes, hitting the poor 48 times as hard as the wealthiest taxpayers.5 The tax used is just that a tax in this case a $30 billion tax hike targeted at the poor. Unlike taxes, user fees are paid in exchange for a service. An excise tax on cigarettes is no more a user fee on tobacco than the income tax is a user fee on income. Senator Kennedy claims this punitive tax will discourage children from smoking. Whether or not this is true, the bottom line is that the tax will either generate revenue for the federal government or it will discourage the purchase of tobacco. It cannot do both. As a result, any revenue shortfall will inevitably be made up with still more tax increases.

4. “It will not create massive, new bureaucracies.”6 The bill will create new health care bureaucracies in all fifty states. S. 525 specifically requires participating states to “designate an appropriate State agency to administer the State program” (p. 10 lines 14-16). This will require either the creation of new bureaucracies or the expansion of existing bureaucracies. The bill will also require new bureaucratic oversight within the Department of Health and Human Services.

5. “It relies on the marketplace, with coverage provided through private insurance and the existing network of local community health centers.”7 Rather than rely on the marketplace, this bill empowers government to administer the provision of health insurance (p. 4 lines 6-7). Moreover, the “direct service benefit option” (p. 6-9) puts government in a position not just to pay for coverage, but to pay directly for health care. At the same time, the bill would provide health insurance companies and managed care plans some $20 billion of taxpayer funds. It will also be a windfall for employers, effectively subsidizing employers who drop children’s health coverage from their benefits package.

3. Sen. Hatch, news release, remarks before the Children’s D efense Fund, March 13,1997. 4. Sen. Kennedy, press release, April 7,1997. 5. Based on tobacco expenditures as a proportion of income, Consume Expenditure Survey, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1995.

6. Sen. Hatch, news release, remarks before the Children’s Defense Fund, March 13,1997. 7. Sens. Hatch and Kennedy,” ‘Legislative odd-couple’ proposes C HILD bill,” The Hill, April 9, 1997.

Should Orrin come home?

6. “This legislation clearly represents a free market approach at solving an important national problem.”8 This legislation does no such thing. In a free market, consumers make their own health coverage decisions, and businesses live and die by how well they are able to meet consumers’ needs, This bill moves America even farther from a free market for health insurance and closer to a government-run system. It taxes consumers and gives them whatever health coverage government deems appropriate. Instead of answering to consumers, insurance companies and managed care plans will simply cater to the needs of politicians.

7. “The fact is that this bill is a far cry from the Kennedy-Kerry bill[.]”9 Hatch-Kennedy is nearly identical to its predecessor, the Kennedy-Kerry bill (S. 2186) introduced in the 104th Congress. Despite minor changes, both bills would create a new entitlement, empower government to buy insurance policies on behalf of children, require new taxes, encourage employers to drop coverage, and impose unfunded financial burdens on the states. In fact, Hatch-Kennedy imposes greater unfunded financial burdens on states than Kennedy-Kerry. Kennedy-Kerry would have made states responsible for only 25 percent of administrative costs (S. 2186; p.8, lines I-4, and p.22, lines 16-19). Hatch-Kennedy requires states to contribute 50 percent of administrative costs, 40 percent of their Medicaid contribution and at least 10 percent of the total program costs at all times (p. 16, lines 20-25; p. 17, lines I-12).

8. “Children that are not covered should be covered, and that is what the Hatch-Kennedy bill will do.”10 Sens. Hatch and Kennedy claim the bill will cover five million uninsured children. Yet the Census Bureau reports that of 68 million children in the U.S., only 2.8 million are chronically uninsured. Forty-eight million children (or 70 percent of all children) have constant coverage. The remaining 18 million children have spells of noncoverage that usually last four months or less, but not longer than two years.” 11 Moreover, the General Accounting Office estimates that 2.9 million children who are eligible for Medicaid do not take advantage of the program.12

8. Sen. Hatch, news release, April 8.1997. 9. Sen. Hatch, NBC’s “Meet the Press” April 6, 1997. 10. Sen. Kennedy, NBC’s “Meet the Press,” April 6, 1999.

11. U.S. Census Bureau, “Health Insurance Coverage Status of Children Over a 28 Month Period During 1992 to 1994,” Survey of Income and Program participation, http://www. census.gov/hhes/hlthins/chldins/chhitab2.html, March 13.1997. 12. U.S. General Accounting Office,“ Health Insurance for Children: Private Insurance Coverage Continues to Deteriorate,” GAO/HEHS-96-129, June 1996, p. 3.

The reason coverage levels aren’t even higher is because high taxes have taken away families’ income while government regulations (such as mandated health benefits) have driven up the price of insurance.13 Sen. Kennedy knows S. 525 will cause more employers to drop coverage: “[O]nce you move into this type of approach, you’re going to find some slippage. That’s in the definition. We understand that.”14 Hatch-Kennedy would destroy the health insurance system that is already covering over seven out of every ten children.

9. “[T]his is going to be a state program, run through the private sector[.]”15 While states would administer the program, it would effectively be run from the federal government by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. For instance, the secretary must approve each state’s program (p. 3, lines 13-22). The bill also requires the state to establish “reasonable” eligibility requirements for children, leaving the federal government room to strike down “unreasonable” requirements (p. 24, lines 5-l 1). If the state determines the funds available for the program are “not sufficient to provide premium subsidies…the state may adjust the applicable eligibility criteria appropriately or adjust the state program in another manner specified by the secretary prior to the program year” (p. 13-14, lines 15-2). Further, while the secretary initially disburses grants to states based on the Medicaid formula, the bill directs the secretary to create and implement a new formula (without congressional approval) by 1998 (p. 15, lines 3-23). For all practical purposes, these and other powers put the federal government in charge of the program.

10. “It gives the states the flexibility to decide whether to participate and how to target benefits.”16 Utah Governor Michael Leavitt confirms the opposite: “I don’t think Hatch-Kennedy gives states the flexibility we need to insure more children.”17 The program is not voluntary. Citizens who do not participate — including those who are too poor to participate — are still forced to fund the program no matter in which state they reside. States that do not participate will see their federal tax dollars being distributed to other

13. See U.S. General Accounting Office, June 1996; Michael F. Cannon“ By Mandating Health Benefits, Congress Will Make Even More Americans Lose Their Health Insurance,” Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation Issue Analysis, Number 45, January 29,1997, and “Contrary to Media Reports Total Tax Bill Still Larger Than Food, Clothing and Housing Bill,” Tax Foundation, News Release, October 8 , 1996. 14. News conference on expanding health care coverage for children January 16,1997. Sen. Kennedy discussed the Kennedy-Kerry bill, whose language is identical to HatchKennedy.

15. Sen. Kennedy, NBC’s “Meet the Press,” April 6, 1997. 16. Sens. Kennedy and Hatch, “‘Legislative odd-couple’ proposes CHILD bill,” The Hill, April 9, 1997. 17. Paul Gigot, “Republicans to prodigal Senator: Snap Out of It,” The Wall Street Journal, April 18, 1997.

Should Orrin come home?

state governments. State legislators will be hard pressed to defend such an arrangement to their constituents.

“I don’t think Hatch-Kennedy gives states the flexibility we need to insure more children.” — Utah Governor Michael Leavitt

As for targeting benefits, the bill requires states to provide the Medicaid benefits package which is more generous and expensive than most private health insurance packages, and which in many states includes coverage for abortions (p. 5, lines 21-25; p. 8, lines 21-24). The bill requires states to contract with health centers in each area of a state served by such a center (p. 7, lines 3). It prohibits states from implementing any form of cost sharing for preventative services (p. 8, lines 4-6). Lastly, the bill locks into place current Medicaid eligibility requirements, forbidding any waivers to reduce children’s eligibility (p. 28, line 23).

11. “The states set their own eligibility.”18 States may set eligibility requirements, but only within the parameters dictated by the federal government. For instance, the bill writes into federal law that states must pay for at least 95 percent of the total premium cost for families with incomes under 185 percent of the federal poverty level. Again, the bill leaves the federal government authority to strike down unreasonable eligibility requirements (p. 24, lines 5-l 1).

12. “It’s about as moderate to conservative of a bill as you can get.”19 This bill creates a new, multi-billion dollar entitlement program, imposes new unfunded financial burdens on the states, erects new state health care bureaucracies, restricts states’ flexibility under Medicaid, and funnels $20 billion of taxpayer funds to health insurance companies and managed care plans. It encourages employers to drop coverage. Its companion, S. 526, raises taxes on the poorest Americans. Moreover, the bill is very much in line with the strategy developed by the Clinton administration to phase in government-run health care. Documents obtained from First Lady Hillary Clinton’s Health Care Interdepartmental Working Group reveal that the Clinton administration considered several options Hatch-Kennedy is very much in line with for implementing universal coverage. One of the strategy developed by the Clinton these options was named “Kids First.” “Under Administration to phase in government-run this approach,” writes the group, “health care health care. reform is phased in by population, beginning with children.” Kids First is designed to develop “structures for transitioning to the new system and the phasing in of certain population groups.” 20 Today, not three years after the failure of the Clinton health care plan, Sens. Hatch and Kennedy are leading us once again down that road.

18. Sen. Hatch, NBC’s “Meet the Press,” April 6, 1997. 19. Sen. Hatch, NBC’s “Meet the Press,” April 6, 1997.

20. Health Care Interdepartmental Working Group ,April 9,1993.

Conclusion Children do not suffer from too little government. They suffer from too much government. To make health insurance affordable for more families, Congress should instead eliminate the governmental barriers to provision of affordable health insurance. Congressâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; first step should be to repeal the provisions in the current medical savings account (MSA) pilot program that cap the number of people who can participate, restrict the program to the self-employed and small S. 572, introduced by Sen. Wayne Allard (Rbusinesses, sunset the program after CO) would make the MSA pilot program a five years, and impose tax penalties on permanent option for all individuals. participants who withdraw funds from their MSA at the end of the year. S. 572, introduced by Sen. Wayne Allard (R-CO), would make the pilot program a permanent option for all individuals. By making the MSA option more workable, Congress can make it easier for parents to finance their childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s health care. Ultimately, Congress must also eliminate the unfair tax treatment that allows employers to buy health coverage with pre-tax dollars, but forces consumers to buy coverage with after-tax dollars. This can best be achieved as part of a comprehensive tax reform initiative. Whatever problems exist in our health care system are the result of government meddling. Further meddling will only make these problems worse, and will bring us closer to a system of government-run health care. Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s children deserve better.

Should Orrin come home?

APPENDIX V BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Veronique de Rugy,“Bad Arguments for Earmarks, Earmarks, Good Arguments against Them,” National Review Online, November 22, 2010, http://www.nationalreview.com/ corner/253722/bad-arguments-earmarks-goodarguments-against-them-veronique-de-rugy 2. Dan Weil, “Ten Reasons Why the Auto Bailout Is a Bad Idea,” Newsmax.com, November 20, 2008,http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/autobailout/2008/11/20/id/326730. 3. George F. Will, “Bailing Out of the Constitution,” The Washington Post, March 29,2009,http://www.washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/ AR2009032702504.html

4. John Schwartz, “Some Ask if Bailout Is Unconstitutional,” The New York Times, January 15, 2009, http://www.nytimes. com/2009/01/16/us/politics/16challenge. html?ref=us&pagewanted=print 5. Favid B. Rivkin and Lee A. Casey, “ObamaCare and the Limits of Government: When asked if the health law was constitutional, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi sneered, ‘Are you serious?’ Now the Supreme Court has decided it’s a worthy question,” The Wall Street Journal, November 15, 2011, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424 052970204323904577038232724779286.html

Presorted Standard US Postage PAID Targeted Creative Communications, Inc.

400 North Capitol St. NW, Suite 765 Washington, DC 20001 www.freedomworksforamerica.org

do you call a Senator who’s “What served in office for 18 years? You call him home.

” — Orrin Hatch, 1976, speaking of his opponent, the 18 year incumbent US Senator Frank Moss1

After 36 years, should Senator Hatch come home?

Paid for by FreedomWorks for America and not authorized by any candidate or candidates’ committee. FreedomWorks for America – 202-783-3870.