Not only is the underlying bill a costly reauthorization of a programthat acts as little more than a slush fund for legislators’ pet projects, butthere are also many worthwhile pending amendments deserving of an up-or-downvote. Both matters merit the Senate’s further attention.
The Economic Development Administration (EDA) is a well-documentedmoney pit whose attempts at reversing stagnation in “chronically depressedareas” of the country have often done more harm than good. Despite repeatedcriticism by the Government Accountability Office over the EDA’s claims of jobcreation and investment returns, S. 782 proposes a $200 million increase to theagency’s operating budget. Although the Administration has stated support forthe bill, it has also questioned this level of funding, suggesting that S. 782 couldbetter balance the “need for smart investment” with the “need to controlspending and reduce the deficit.”
These issues alone should justify the Senate'swholesale reconsideration of the bill, rather than a rush to passage. Inaddition, however, there remain numerous pro-taxpayer amendments worthy ofconsideration. Among them are amendments by Senator Snowe (R-ME) to requirefederal agencies to consider the economic impacts of proposed regulations, by SenatorDeMint (R-SC) to repeal the onerous Wall Street Reform and Consumer ProtectionAct, and by Senator Hutchison (R-TX) to delay the implementation of the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act. Undoubtedly, one of the most important is SenatorDeMint’s Amendment 460, which would repeal the federal mandate on ethanol (thusbuilding upon the NTU-backed provision from Senator Coburn (R-OK)) as well asphase out the death tax.
Forthese reasons, a “NO” vote on the current motion to invoke cloture on S. 782will be considered the pro-taxpayer position.
If you have any questions, please contact NTU Federal Government Affairs Manager Brandon Greife at(703) 683-5700