Jump to content

Recks

Suspended
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,632

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Recks

    COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: PN-01-1 Scott Wiener (HUD)

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    11 hours ago, Blake said:

    1) I have not served in an executive role on the state or federal level, but I have worked on the legislative side both in San Francisco and in the California State Senate. Where I have focused on improving Housing in California. 

     

    Mr. Wiener,

     

    If I may follow-up on this line of questioning. California is home to 28% of the nation's homeless population, and over half of the nation's unsheltered population. If you have focused on improving housing in your home state, would it be fair to say that your work has been an objective failure? I am concerned that you may bring California-style policies nationwide, without any real executive experience that qualifies you to lead such a large department.

     

    I'll now pivot to a rapid-fire series of questions:

    Do you support rent controls?

    Do you support the Faircloth Amendment?

    Do you support an increase in federal funding for Section 8?

    COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: PN-01-3 Heather McTeer Toney (EPA)

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    Ms. Toney,

     

    I have a handful of questions relating to the concept of "environmental justice" or "climate action." First, would you state that you support either, or both, of these terms? And can you define what they mean to you?

     

    You have previously called for increased regulation by the federal government. To carry on the question asked by my colleague, the Senator for Georgia, do you believe the EPA has a role to play in developing new regulations that go beyond existing law? Where should the EPA draw the line between what the law actually says, and how broadly it can be interpreted?

     

    Finally for now, I'd like to focus on the concept of "white privilege" and how that comes into play with environmental regulation. What does the color of one's skin have to do with environmental regulation?

    COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE: PN-01-2 Andy Byford (DOT)

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    Mr. Byford,

     

    I apologize that I don't have a formal biography, but I understand that you were born in England, attended university in the United Kingdom, and then started your career in the United Kingdom.

     

    You have since worked in Australia and Canada, and for a brief two-year stint, in New York City before returning to the United Kingdom. I suppose the first question I would have is, given your extensive travel and work history, do you hold American citizenship? I ask because this role requires you to take an oath of office to the United States Constitution, to bear true faith and allegiance to our nation's governing document.

     

    As a second question: you have experience managing public mass transit systems. I suppose my question involves our federal highway system, which carried Americans more than 800 billion miles in 2019. In Nebraska, the east-west Interstate 80 is a major tourism driver for our state, as well as a conduit for a large amount of trucking activity. What experience do you have managing traditional forms of transportation, such as roads and highways, as compared to public mass transit?

    S.126 America Values Life Abroad Act

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted · Edited by Recks
    CS

    IN THE SENATE

     

    Mr. FISK (for himself, Mr. EDEN, Mr. DAVIS, Ms. HARFIELD, Mr. RIDGEWAY, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. WILSON, and Mr. HURST, with thanks to Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill;

     

    To permanently enact certain appropriations Act restrictions on the use of funds for abortions and involuntary sterilizations, and for other purposes.

     

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the “America Values Life Abroad Act”.

     

    SECTION 2. CODIFICATION OF FUNDING PROHBITIONS.

    (a) Foreign Assistance Act Of 1961.—Section 104(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b(f)) is amended to read as follows:

    “(f) Prohibition On Use Of Funds For Abortions And Involuntary Sterilizations.—None of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to carry out this Act may be made available—

    “(1) to pay for the performance of abortions as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions;

    “(2) to pay for the performance of involuntary sterilization as a method of family planning or to coerce or provide any financial incentive to any person to undergo sterilizations;

    “(3) to pay for biomedical research which relates in whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of, abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family planning;

    “(4) to lobby for or against abortion; or

    “(5) to any organization or program which, as determined by the President, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”.

    (b) Peace Corps Act.—Section 301(b) of the Peace Corps Act (22 U.S.C. 2501a(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

    “(3) Subject to section 614 of the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2014 (division E of Public Law 113–76; 128 Stat. 227), none of the funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to carry out this Act may be used to pay for abortions.”.

     

    PES.

    Prohibits foreign assistance funds from going to pay for abortions as a method of family planning or involuntary sterilization.

    Prohibits Peace Corps funds from going towards abortions, except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the child were carried to term, or the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

    Spin Zone, Q1 2021

    in The Airwaves

    Posted

    Name: Daniel Fisk (R-NE)

    Media/Outlet: Fox News

    Reason: President Mulroney's Executive Order Repeals

     

    • When President Mulroney was elected, he promised to work in a commonsense fashion and cut through the partisanship. Unfortunately, one of his very first actions upon taking office was to issue Executive Order #2,  which repealed a number of commonsense orders that were previously implemented by President Bailey.
    • One Bailey-era Executive Order protected infants who were born alive or born with a disability during an abortion attempt. God-given human life has an intrinsic value, and on his first day in office, Robert Mulroney has already taken direct aim at the importance of this gift that we should instead be protecting.
    • Another item that President Mulroney axed was the prohibition on using experimental, life-altering drugs on minor children. President Bailey had led the charge against unproven gender-transition therapies, but now Robert Mulroney is authorizing permanent experimentation on our next generation. Frankly, it is sickening.
    • Now, I didn't really expect President Mulroney to be a moderate - even though that is his image. And today, with his executive actions, he is outing himself as a far-left politician on key social issues that matter to middle America. He had hardly settled into the Oval Office before throwing the value of human life out the window.

    DEBATE: S.96 CARE Act

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    Madam President pro tempore,

     

    When I was approached to work on an opioid bill, I had an open mind, eager to listen to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Unfortunately, those conversations were never followed-up on and instead this partisan proposal was dropped into the Hopper and placed on the first docket without a word of forewarning from my Democratic colleagues who had begun expressing an interest in this topic.

     

    Madam President, with the pending passage of the Du Pont I amendment, which is clearly a poison pill from my standpoint, I cannot in good conscience support this bill.

     

    That is why I move to table S.96. To my Democratic colleagues, I encourage you to reach back out and continue dialogues on ways we can get, for instance, more naloxone in the hands of first responders and other sensible reforms. But this bill, which started from partisan Democratic premises, is not the answer.

     

    I yield.

    DEBATE: S.95 CLEAN Elections Act

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    Madam President Pro tempore,

     

    While I disagree with the Supreme Court's recent ruling on this matter - and I take great umbrage at the Court's suggestion that Congress must require nonpartisan redistricting commissions - I believe there can be a common ground. Specifically, if a state operates with a nonpartisan Legislature, it should be allowed to redistrict in its normal fashion, as it would by definition be a nonpartisan redistricting process. For these reasons, I believe that a nonpartisan Legislature is not bound by the Supreme Court's ruling. The only nonpartisan Legislature being located in the Great State of Nebraska, I would ask my fellow Senators' leave to offer the following amendment which protects the uniqueness of the Unicameral.

     

    I move to amend Section 2(c) to read:

     

    Fisk I

    (c) State Defined.—In this section, the term “State” means each of the several States, except for any State with a nonpartisan Legislature.

     

    I yield.

    Press Office of Daniel Fisk (R-NE)

    in The Airwaves

    Posted

    Fisk Weighs in on Elections, New Term as Senate Republican Leader

     

    Krugman1380-revised.jpg

     

    LINCOLN, NE -- In the aftermath of the 2020 General Election, Senate Minority Leader Daniel Fisk (R-NE) spoke to students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln about the campaign process, his reactions, and his re-election to serve as Senate Minority Leader for another term. "Part of our Founders' genius," said Fisk, "was the division of government, the separation of powers. And this November, we saw the American people endorse divided government. While I am disappointed for my friend, President Bailey, I also recognize that Speaker Liz Cheney received a major mandate from the voters. And, indeed, in the Senate we picked up a net total of four seats - which is relatively high for a Presidential election year. We put in the work, and on the legislative side, the voters rewarded our policies and vision," Fisk told his audience. "There were definitely hurdles along the way - including some internal to my own party. This upcoming Congress, I am optimistic that we will emerge more united than before. That we'll be able to stand up to the worst excesses of a Mulroney-Bu White House while making inroads through the House and our filibuster powers in the Senate."

     

    Senate Minority Leader Fisk, whose caucus had been one seat away from a Democratic supermajority in the Senate before winning seats in states like New Hampshire and North Carolina, has since been acclaimed for a second stint as Senate Republican Leader. "It is a privilege to be able to not only represent this great state of Nebraska, but to be able to amplify our rural American voices as the leader of our caucus." Daniel Fisk has been the first Nebraskan floor leader in the Senate since Kenneth Wherry died in 1951. When asked about his legislative priorities for the upcoming Congress, Senator Fisk said, "Representing rural America, fighting for choice in education and promoting personal savings are all top priorities for me. So is working within our budgetary constraints." Daniel Fisk concluded his remarks to the panel at UNL by saying, "In a time where so many issues divide us as a nation, I am optimistic that we can reach a common-ground without compromising our commitments or core values. That is what I intend to do heading into this latest Congress."

    DEBATE: S.44 Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted

    Madam President,

     

    Along with a large majority of the members of this body, I support the right of the people of Puerto Rico to choose their commonwealth's legal status vis-à-vis the United States. However, this legislation has a number of glaring issues that I believe should be corrected before we advance this bill further.

     

    Specifically, Section 3 would create a convention - paid for by American tax dollars - that could go around the existing legislative process on the island. This section would also institute public, taxpayer funding of elections. That is something that I oppose, and I call on all of my colleagues to oppose. That is why I move the following amendment:

     

    Fisk I

    Strike section 3

     

    And then, on top of attempting to duplicate the Legislative Assembly of Puerto Rico, this bill, in Section 4, would create a federal bureaucracy to advise the duplicative convention. I can appreciate the fact that admission to statehood is a complicated legal question, but giving the reins of key issues like culture and language over to the bureaucrats is a poor decision. We should allow the people of Puerto Rico to make up their mind, not have it imposed from Washington, DC. That is why I move the following amendment:

     

    Fisk II

    Strike section 4

     

    To help conform the following section 5, which is really the meat-and-potatoes of this proposal, I therefore offer the following amendment:

     

    Fisk III

    Quote

     

    SEC. 5. PUERTO RICO STATUS REFERENDUM; EDUCATION CAMPAIGN.

    (a) Structure And Process.—

    (1) IN GENERAL.—A referendum vote by the people of Puerto Rico—

    (A) may be conducted in a ranked-choice voting format in which voters rank choices by preference on their ballots without a limit on the number of choices ranked;

    (B) may include the following options: 

    (i) Statehood;

    (ii) Independence; or

    (iii) Status Quo (Territory)

    (B) may consist of choices each composed of a self-determination definition and accompanying transition plan as presented by the delegates under section 3; and

    (C) may include more than one choice with the same self-determination definition, but a distinct accompanying transition plan as presented by the delegates under section 3.

    (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated the Puerto Rico State Commission on Elections, $2,500,000 to carry out a referendum vote under this subsection.

    (b) Educational Campaign.—

    (1) IN GENERAL.—Delegates shall carry out an educational campaign through traditional paid media related to the referendum under subsection (a).

    (2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated the Puerto Rico State Commission on Elections, $5,000,000 to carry out an educational campaign under this subsection. The Federal Election Commission shall ensure that funds made available under this paragraph are divided equally among each self-determination option represented on the referendum held under this Act.

    (3) QUARTERLY CAMPAIGN REPORTS.—Each delegates shall submit quarterly campaign reports of the educational campaigns to the Federal Election Commission.

     

     

    As you can see, Fisk III would get at the heart of the matter while removing the education campaign. I believe that the people of Puerto Rico know more about their situation than some federal education - perhaps propagandistic - campaign.

     

    These amendments suggest that the people of Puerto Rico, who have every right to statehood if they should choose so, shouldn't be treated paternalistically by Members of Congress or the federal government. They have every right to self-govern, just as the Unicameral back in Nebraska has the right to do so. I hope that these amendments receive some traction, and with that, I yield.

    Voting Record of Daniel Fisk (R-NE)

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted · Edited by Recks

    Voting Record of 

    Senator Daniel Fisk

    Republican of Nebraska

     

    AYE

    NAY

    PRESENT

    SPONSOR

    CO-SPONSOR

    SPONSORED AMENDMENTS

    S.91 Education Savings Act of 2021

    in Legislative Branch

    Posted · Edited by Recks
    CS

    IN THE SENATE

     

    Mr. FISK (for himself and Ms. BOUCHER, Mr. BU, Mr. DAVIS, Ms. HARTFIELD, Mr. KELLER, Mr. EDEN, and Mr. WILSON, with thanks to Mr. CRUZ and Mr. NEAL) introduced the following bill;

     

    To allow 529 education savings accounts to be used for elementary and secondary tuition and related expenses, apprenticeship programs, and for student loan repayment.

     

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     

    SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the “Education Savings Act of 2021”.

     

    SECTION 2. 529 ACCOUNT FUNDING FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION. 

    (a) Section 529(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 USC 529) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

    “(7) TREATMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY TUITION.—Any reference in this section to the term ‘qualified higher education expense’ shall include a reference to the following expenses in connection with enrollment or attendance at, or for students enrolled at or attending, an elementary or secondary public, private, or religious school:

    “(A) Tuition.

    “(B) Curriculum and curricular materials.

    “(C) Books or other instructional materials.

    “(D) Online educational materials.

    “(E) Tuition for tutoring or educational classes outside of the home, including at a tutoring facility, but only if the tutor or instructor is not related to the student and—

    “(i) is licensed as a teacher in any State,

    “(ii) has taught at an eligible educational institution, or

    “(iii) is a subject matter expert in the relevant subject.

    “(F) Fees for a nationally standardized norm-referenced achievement test, an advanced placement examination, or any examinations related to college or university admission.

    “(G) Fees for dual enrollment in an institution of higher education.

    “(H) Educational therapies for students with disabilities provided by a licensed or accredited practitioner or provider, including occupational, behavioral, physical, and speech-language therapies.

    Such term shall include expenses for the purposes described in subparagraphs (A) through (H) in connection with a homeschool (whether treated as a homeschool or a private school for purposes of applicable State law).”.

    (b) Limitation.--Section 529(e)(3)(A) is amended by adding at the end the following:

    "The amount of cash distributions from all qualified tuition programs described in subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii) with respect to a beneficiary during any taxable year shall, in the aggregate, include not more than $10,000 in expenses described in subsection (c)(7) incurred during the taxable year.''.

     

    SECTION 3. 529 ACCOUNT FUNDING FOR REGISTERED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS.

    Distributions For Certain Expenses Associated With Registered Apprenticeship Programs.—Section 529(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

    “(8) TREATMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH REGISTERED APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS.—Any reference in this subsection to the term ‘qualified higher education expense’ shall include a reference to expenses for fees, books, supplies, and equipment required for the participation of a designated beneficiary in an apprenticeship program registered and certified with the Secretary of Labor under section 1 of the National Apprenticeship Act (29 U.S.C. 50).”.

     

    SECTION 4. 529 ACCOUNT FUNDING FOR QUALIFIED EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENTS.

    Distributions For Qualified Education Loan Repayments.—

    (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 529(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

    “(9) TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENTS.—

    “(A) IN GENERAL.—Any reference in this subsection to the term ‘qualified higher education expense’ shall include a reference to amounts paid as principal or interest on any qualified education loan (as defined in section 221(d)) of the designated beneficiary or a sibling of the designated beneficiary.

    “(B) LIMITATION.—The amount of distributions treated as a qualified higher education expense under this paragraph with respect to the loans of any individual shall not exceed $10,000 (reduced by the amount of distributions so treated for all prior taxable years).

    “(C) SPECIAL RULES FOR SIBLINGS OF THE DESIGNATED BENEFICIARY.—

    “(i) SEPARATE ACCOUNTING.—For purposes of subparagraph (B) and subsection (d), amounts treated as a qualified higher education expense with respect to the loans of a sibling of the designated beneficiary shall be taken into account with respect to such sibling and not with respect to such designated beneficiary.

    “(ii) SIBLING DEFINED.—For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘sibling’ means an individual who bears a relationship to the designated beneficiary which is described in section 152(d)(2)(B).”.

     

    SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply to distributions made after December 31, 2020.

     

    PES.

    Allows 529 savings accounts to be used for elementary and secondary tuition and related expenses (up to $10,000 per year), registered apprenticeship programs, and repayment of qualified education loans (up to $10,000 per year). Becomes effective for Tax Year 2021.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept