Wally Backs Stem Cell Research

Wally made the last paragraph of a LA Times article on House Republicans going against the president on legislation to break free some more federal funding for research.

I'm glad Wally didn't take the same tone as House Majority Leader Tom DeLay who said that, "If we afford the little embryo any shred of respect and dignity we cannot in good faith use taxpayer dollars to destroy them.'' He added, "That is the essence of the experiment: Kill some in the hopes of saving others." If Wally had done that he would have looked like a huge hypocrite because that last sentence is "The War on Terror."

Credit on Cuba

David Paul Brown, of The Paradise Post, gives Wally some love over his stance on travel to Cuba.

This has long been overdue. We've diplomatically dealt with, traded with and cozied up to, not only other communist countries, but also other unsavory figures like Castro for decades if we deemed it in our interests. We need to be able to visit Cuba, traveling legally from our shores vs. having to go there via Mexico or wherever. Cuban-American migrs need to be able to be able to visit loved ones in Cuba.

While most democracies and allies of ours have engaged in commerce, travel and cultural exchanges with Cuba for years, we've been too often been influenced by the anti-Castro Cuban vote, especially in Miami. I think a little good will could go along way in changing Cuba for the better and as the strongest nation an earth, what are we afraid of?

Saving the Land from the People

Many summers ago I worked for the Nature Conservancy. They work to "preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive." That sounds pretty good, right?

One of the ways they get people to help is to donate land. In exchange for helping to save diversity of life on Earth you get a nice tax break. Well it seems that some people don't like this system. Yup, you guessed it. Wally thinks the system is "rife with abuse." I wish the story had more about what Wally was saying because I thought all Republicans liked tax breaks. Maybe I'll send a him a request for clarification.

Wally Continues to Protect Foster Children

One of the areas that I don't cover enough is Wally's stance on foster children. It's good. He's been banging on the drum about these poor kids being enrolled in clinical drug trials for HIV. Yes, many times these trials were life saving treatments -- and you could look at this in a cynical way, saying that Herger just wants to spend less money on saving foster children that have HIV. I just don't think Wally has that in him. I honestly think he is trying to look out for these kids.

I'll try and keep an eye on this subject and see where he takes it though, just to be on the safe side.

Wally's 2005 Legislation

A Thomas link to Wally's 2005 legistration has been added in the Quick Access Wally sidebar. This is only legislation that he sponsored and does not count bills that he has cosponsored.

To Havana!

From the Editorial Board at the Paradise Post we learn that Wally is cosponsoring (along with 57 other Congress critters!) a bill (H.R.1814) which basically tells Bush to ram his Cuba travel policy. It's a remarkably short and easy to read bill. I'm not really sure if this is some kind of delayed April Fool's Day joke or what.

Action Alert: Pentagon Requests Environmental Waivers

I visit the NRDC's Earth Action Center and send a letter:

I urge you to vote to reject the Department of Defense's request for exemptions from public health and environmental laws. Specifically, please do not exempt the Pentagon from the Clean Air Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) during consideration of the Defense Authorization bill.

The president already has the authority to waive these laws for national security reasons. But the Defense Department has yet to request any waiver, and has made no case to Congress for blanket waivers that could endanger public health. In the end, our military families who live in and around bases would suffer the most. Local communities also would be adversely affected as they are left to foot the bill for cleanup or deal with permanent blight.

Again, I urge you to protect America's military families and other communities and uphold our environmental laws. Please vote "No" on language that would exempt the Pentagon from these important public health statues.

I predict a response along the lines of, "we are at war, we must do what ever it takes, blah blah blah."

A Personal Moment

The Hill looks at the age of the "people in charge" and we find that Wally met his wife in D.C. Just a little factoid for your day.

More Rudeness

John Busch also writes a letter to the editor of the Chico Enterprise Record about rudeness at Wally's Social Security Town Hall meetings. I've had my say on rudeness. Perhaps if President Bush wasn't carefully vetting his audience and his minions allowed people with different opinions in to his town hall meetings he would also be met with people who want to let him know that they don't agree with him.

But John was also bothered by how "private" and "privitization" were being cast as negatives in the debate by some people. Simply put the government is good at absorbing risk and Social Security is a big insurance program designed at absorbing the risk of retiring into poverty. In terms of this debate "privitization" means taking the risk on as your own. There is also the idea that Bush is intent on phasing out Social Security instead of fixing it. That could be where some of the rudeness is coming from.

I'll let Josh Marshall do the talking.

It's easy to get lost in verbiage about defined this and defined that and mazes of actuarial figures. The key, though, is the difference between an unsecured system and a secured one. That's why it's called Social Security and why phase-out is really the only candid way to describe what the president wants.

Is Wally Helping Farmers?

Devvy Kid doesn't think that Wally is standing up for family farmers.

For someone who allegedly was fighting for the rights of these attendees, apparently Herger forgot to mention something called the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the privately owned Federal Reserve and how these two mechanisms have gone hand in hand in destroying tens of thousands of family owned farms.

Ouch. Sounds like one of those Big 'C' conservatives isn't happy with Wally or the Rubber Stamp Congress in general.

Credit Where Credit Is Due

Wally can't always be in the district, mingling with the common folks. So this post goes out to Dave Meurer, who has been all over the north state representing Wally. I'm sure I've missed lots of your appearances Dave. I'm sorry and I hope this goes a tiny bit towards repaying that debt.

How Rude

Leon P. Randall, of Chico, worries about rudeness towards Wally in his letter to the editor of the Chico Enterprise Record.

While I agree that discourse between our representatives should be polite and respectful, it doesn't mean that it can't be honest. If people feel that Wally is not telling them the truth about a topic, like Social Security, it is not rude to say so.

This isn't to say that he hasn't been treated rudely on occasion, as I'm sure he has. But rudeness on the part of some is no reason for the rest of us to feel that we shouldn't speak our minds to our elected officials.

The Company You Keep

Patrick Oliveria, of Paradise, sends a letter to the editor of the Chico Enterprise Record that says Wally may be a little to into cronyism. The DeLay Fiasco continues to be an anchor around the neck of the GOP.

Wally Responds: Ethics Committee

I have to admit that I don't recall what exact message this is in response to. But it's about Tom DeLay. Most of the letter is juiceless. But towards to end, there is a good part.

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns with the current impasse at the House Committee on Standards of Conduct, also commonly known as the House Ethics Committee. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.

I agree with you about the importance of a credible ethics process. Congress needs to be steadfast in its commitment to high ethical standards and a functioning ethics process, which help uphold the credibility of this institution. The public's confidence in Congress and their elected representatives depends upon it. As such, I, too, regret the impasse that has delayed the formal organization of the House Ethics Committee in the 109th Congress, and am hopeful that those Members who have objected to the Committee's formation wi11lift those objections soon and allow us to move forward in a bipartisan manner.

The objections have focused primarily on several changes to the current ethics process adopted by the full House of Representatives as part of the larger organizational rules package that was approved in January. Each year at the beginning of a new Congress (in this case, the 109th, which began in January), the House adopts a set of rules to govern legislative and other activities throughout the duration of that particular Congress. Specifically, several changes were adopted in response to concerns raised by some Members that the ethics process, as it was then structured and had been operating, was too easily abused for political purposes. Other Members of Congress believed certain other changes were necessary to ensure proper due process is afforded to all individuals brought before the committee to answer for alleged ethics violations.

I agreed with the proposed changes and supported them during their consideration and adoption in January. On balance, I believe they represent minor changes that will go a long way toward insulating the process from political influence and providing Members additional due process protections, while still firmly adhering to the spirit and intent of our ethics regime.

As for the specific allegations directed against Majority Leader DeLay, I believe they are an unfortunate example of how these issues and the ethics process itself can be manipulated for political purposes. I have not seen anything to indicate that Majority Leader DeLay has violated any ethics rules or otherwise acted improperly or against the best interests of the people he represents. Indeed, Mr. DeLay has indicated his willingness to go before the committee and explain his actions.

Again, thank you for contacting me to express your views. Please don't hesitate to do so again on this or any other federal matter of importance to you.

Sincerely,
Wally Herger
Member of Congress

He probably could have saved a sheet of paper and just said that IOKIYAR (It's Okay If You're A Republican).