Roy Blunt, United States Senator for Missouri

44 Senators Send Letter Urging Floor Action on Farm Bill

Tue, 15 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senators Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) today sent a letter, along with 40 of their colleagues, to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) calling for a timely and open debate on the Senate farm bill.

“With our constant focus on job creation, we write to urge you to schedule floor consideration of the ‘Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012’ as soon as possible,” the Senators wrote. “The bill takes steps to reduce the deficit and decrease government spending by $23 billion. It passed the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry on April 26 with a bipartisan vote of 16 to 5. This sets an example of how Senators can come together in a bipartisan way to craft meaningful, yet fiscally responsible, policy. We believe there is strong support in the full Senate to consider the bill in a fair and open manner that allows Senators the opportunity to offer amendments.”

As the letter states, the farm bill passed by the Senate Agriculture Committee would reduce the deficit and save taxpayers more than $23 billion while strengthening and preserving farm risk management programs. The bill also streamlines conservation programs and helps prevent fraud and abuse in nutrition programs.

The risk management, conservation, research, trade promotion and nutrition programs in the legislation impact nearly every American. Many of these programs will expire at the end of the year if no action is taken to reauthorize the farm bill.

Please click here to view the letter signed by the following 44 Senators: John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.), Dan Coats (R-Ind.), Kent Conrad (D-N.D), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Kay Hagan (D-N.C.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Mike Johanns (R-Neb.), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), Dick Lugar (R-Ind.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), John Thune (R-S.D.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

# # #

Wall Street Journal: Senator Raises Concerns On Labor Department's Rules For Data Release

Geoffrey Rogow and Jacob Bunge — Fri, 11 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

A Missouri senator is raising concerns over the Labor Department's move to change the procedures for journalists to report on market-sensitive economic data, saying the new rules could disrupt financial markets.

Sen. Roy Blunt (R., Mo.) said in a letter to Labor Department officials Thursday that a new system of distributing market-moving U.S. employment data risks "crippling" financial markets if there are hiccups in how the data are released. He also warned that the new system threatens the media's rights under the First Amendment.

Beginning in July, the Labor Department said it will no longer allow news agencies to use customized computer networks to send market-moving employment data to a range of clients, including traders. Currently, a number of news agencies, including Dow Jones Newswires, maintain specialized hardware and software on government premises, which allows them to transmit the data to subscribers as soon as it is released.

"Given the market-moving impact of these numbers and the largely automated processes of today's market institutions, even a minor flaw in the timing or accuracy of this data could result in a destructive impact on global markets," wrote Blunt.

The Labor Department, on a recent conference call, said the changes were about "leveling the playing field" but said little about what prompted them or its intended effects.

Carl Fillichio, who oversees the Labor Department's release policies, said in an interview with Dow Jones Newswires Thursday, "I have been told about incidents, and they were troubling to me. And so I hired Sandia National Laboratories, the folks that guard our nuclear secrets, to come in and give me an assessment." He said Sandia--a unit of Lockheed Martin Corp. LMT +0.20% (LMT)--highlighted "what the risks and vulnerabilities were" in their current system.

Fillichio declined to elaborate on the incidents, but said, "It's been over a decade since we looked at our procedures and policies...The times and the technology has changed."

When asked about Sen. Blunt's letter, Fillichio said he hadn't seen it.

The Labor Department distributes an array of data including monthly consumer price index and weekly jobless claims. But its monthly payrolls report is the one that is the most widely watched and traded on globally. Money managers from Jakarta to Moscow make bets using everything from currencies to commodities based on signals from the data, which are released the first Friday of every month at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time. The jobs report can trigger broad swings in futures tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Earlier this month, Dow futures swung about 50 points in the aftermath of a weaker-than-expected report. In April, futures tied to the DJIA fell by more than 100 points on the day of another disappointing jobs report.

The customers who would most likely notice the Labor Department's changes are those who get their feeds through algorithms. Some traders and hedge funds pay extra to plug their systems directly in to these feeds in a bid to get ahold of the news as quickly as possible.

High-frequency funds are investing cash and man hours to ensure that, no matter which outlet has the news first, they will be among the market leaders in trading on it. There are questions now about where to get the figures fastest. The news data feeds may still transmit the figures first--but they may not. Protocols for television broadcasters are also being updated, and there is a government push to more quickly get the news online.

Come July, one high-frequency trading executive said his firm will continue to have its trading models locked into news headlines from wire services that carry the data, including Bloomberg LP, Dow Jones & Co. and Thomson Reuters Corp. TRI -0.24% (TRI.T). News Corp. NWSA +4.85% (NWS, NWSA) owns Dow Jones, publisher of this newswire, and The Wall Street Journal.

But the trading firm is also dedicating resources to voice-recognition software for monitoring television news and a web crawler that will scan the Internet, in case the figures show up in those places first.

Firms less focused on trading in microseconds--millionths of a second--say they don't have the resources to compete with large firms that are able to spend heavily to reposition based on the Labor Department's change. Some of these traders worry the changes could widen the difference between the haves and the have-nots.

"This isn't a fix, and in some ways makes it worse," said Frank Ingarra Jr., head trader at NorthCoast Asset Management, a Greenwich, Conn.-based asset-management company that doesn't subscribe to the pricey direct data feeds. He thinks the changes will make it more difficult for the average trader to act on the news.

Others are applauding the change. Will Hobert, chief executive of Chicago-based WH Trading, said the Labor Department decision would prevent potentially critical news from going to "the highest bidder first."

The shift comes as U.S. market regulators pursue inquiries focused on the business of high-speed trading, which generally involves the rapid buying and selling of securities and derivatives contracts in an effort to profit from fleeting price movements. Slower-moving investors and some lawmakers have aired concerns that the method of trading has exacerbated market swings and could be used to mask manipulation. Exchanges and trading firms have defended the practice as reducing all investors' costs of doing business by making markets more efficient.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, which polices stock-market activity, declined to comment on the Labor Department's changes.

The change has some news executives frustrated. They say shifting to unfamiliar systems could lead to inaccuracies and disrupt the smooth distribution of news.

"We think their technological solution risks market chaos," said Matthew Winkler, editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News, of the government's fix. He added that the company is "exploring our options to ensure that the public's right to know is not impeded."

"The restrictions the Department of Labor is contemplating will make it far more difficult for the media to publish timely, accurate articles on some of the most important data the government collects and on which so many rely," said Stephen J. Adler, Thomson Reuters's editor-in-chief.

"Any delay in disseminating important news is of material concern to us, as is any process that could increase the frequency of inaccuracies or infelicities," said Robert Thomson, editor-in-chief of Dow Jones and managing editor of The Wall Street Journal.

The concern of the media was shared by Sen. Blunt, who said in his letter that the change "represents a fundamental threat to the media First Amendment rights." Bloomberg News earlier reported on Blunt's letter.

Other news organizations may no longer have direct access to the data under the new policy. The Department of Labor this week posted a list of media outlets credentialed to participate in the data releases following the July changes, and a number of currently qualified news companies, including the Bond Buyer and RTT News, weren't on the list.

Michael Stanton, publisher of the Bond Buyer, said, "We are disappointed, both by their decision and the lack of an explanation for it. We have written to the Department's Office of Public Affairs asking for an explanation of their decision and asking them to reconsider. We haven't yet heard from them."

A representative for RTT News had no immediate comment.

To view the original story, please click here.

Senator Blunt Talks w/ Neil Cavuto Re: Obama Administration's Latest Government Overreach 5/11/2012

Fri, 11 May 2012 12:00:00 EST

On May 11, 2012, U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) spoke with Neil Cavuto on Fox News regarding his letter to the Department of Labor (DOL) urging the agency not to restrict the media and the public's access to critical monthly unemployment data.

Bloomberg: Senator Blunt Says New Rules on Labor Data Risk Market Turmoil

Meera Louis — Thu, 10 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

The Department of Labor’s move to restrict how journalists transmit market-sensitive economic data risks disrupting financial markets, Senator Roy Blunt said.

In a letter to Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, Blunt, a Missouri Republican, objected to the agency’s plan to have media organizations remove from the department computer software, hardware and communications lines used to transmit news on data such as the unemployment rate and consumer prices.

“Given the market-moving impact of these numbers and the largely automated processes of today’s market institutions, even a minor flaw in the timing or accuracy of this data could result in a destructive impact on global markets,” Blunt wrote in his letter, dated today.

Reporters in so-called lockups are given data in advance of its release to the public, allowing time to prepare stories using their own hardware, software and data lines. The new system would force journalists, including Bloomberg News reporters, to use government-provided equipment and Internet access, with no guarantee they can send their stories at exactly the same moment.

“I am deeply concerned that the new policy proposed by DOL will not only result in the degradation in the quality of information the American people receive on the economy, but also represents a fundamental threat to the media’s First Amendment rights and a disturbing retreat from the government transparency that the Obama administration so often touts,” Blunt wrote.

Jesse Lawder, a Labor Department spokesman, didn’t immediately respond to a telephone call and an e-mail message seeking comment.

Public Input

Blunt urged the agency to solicit public input on the proposed changes, saying that “a period of public consultation that affords the media, investors and other concerned Americans an opportunity to examine these issues is absolutely essential to any proposed changes,” he said.

More than 39,000 E-Mini S&P 500 contracts worth $2.7 billion traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange in the five minutes after the Labor Department released its February employment report March 9, data compiled by Bloomberg show. The value was more than nine times the average of $290 million for five-minute intervals in the past decade, the data show.

In the five minutes after the release of the March report on April 6, more than 45,000 contracts worth about $3.2 billion traded, almost 13 times the decade average, the data show. The E-Mini is the most popular futures contract tracking the benchmark gauge for American equities.

Seeking Explanations

Blunt asked Solis to explain the purpose of the changes, flaws in the current system as well as measures the Labor Department would take to protect the new process from a failure or a cyber attack.

Bloomberg News, which participates in the lock-ups along with news organizations including Thomson Reuters, the Associated Press and Dow Jones Newswires, has written to the Department of Labor opposing the changes.

The department has said it can’t promise journalists they will be able to transmit market-sensitive economic releases at exactly the same time under changes resulting from the first review of procedures in a decade.

“I’m not going to guarantee anything,” Carl A. Fillichio, the department’s senior adviser for communications and public affairs in Washington, said on a conference call last month.

To view the original story, please click here.

Senator Blunt Fights To Maintain Transparency In Obama Administration’s Monthly Jobs Numbers

Thu, 10 May 2012 12:00:00 EST

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) released the following statement today after sending a letter to the Department of Labor (DOL) urging the agency not to restrict the media and the public’s access to critical monthly unemployment data:

St. Louis Public Radio: Blunt says student loan debate is red herring

Adam Arlington — Wed, 09 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

St. Louis - Missouri’s Republican Senator says he’ll continue his opposition to a plan put forth by Democrats to extend federal subsidies for student loans for another year.

Roy Blunt says an alternative plan would accomplish the same goal, without raising the deficit. Blunt says he supports freezing student loan interest rates where they are now, at 3.4 percent, but says he would pay for the subsidy by taking the money from part of the President’s 2010 healthcare overhaul— which he claims is partially funded by interest payments from student loans.

“Apparently it was OK for students to subsidize healthcare,” Blunt said, “but not OK to take that money back when you decide that subsidy is not one that the federal government should be part of.”

Blunt accused the Democrats of pushing the issue now to generate talking points for the election cycle.

“It’s like so many of the things we’re doing now…it’s just focused on the politics of the year, rather than getting the work done that needs to be done,” Blunt said.

Not missing a beat, Democrats laid into Republicans for turning their backs on poor and middle class families who are struggling with soaring tuition costs.

Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill says the bill would not add to the deficit, and would pay for itself by eliminating a specific tax loophole for certain corporations.

“If we’re going to keep this economic recovery moving in the right direction," McCaskill said, “then we’ve got to make college more affordable and accessible and make sure our kids and grandkids can compete for the jobs of the future. That’s what this fight is all about.”

If Congress does not act soon, the rate that more than 7 million college students pay for new Stafford loans will double July 1.

Lawmakers say that that translates to students' owing about $1,000 more per year.

KMBC: Blunt Calls Senate Student Loan Bill Political

Michael Mahoney — Wed, 09 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

Missouri Senator Roy Blunt says Tuesday’s vote on a student loan bill was more for politics than anything else. Senate Democrats were unable to gather the 60 votes need to move the measure forward. The bill would keep student loan rates at 3.4% for the coming year.

Republicans object to it because excess money from the program, they say, would help pay for the President’s health law.

“There was no way ( Majority Leader Sen. Harry) Reid thought that bill would pass”, said Blunt in a teleconference call Wednesday. He says the Democratic Senate majority is now focused on election year issues.

Blunt says he and Tenn. Senator Lamar Alexander have another proposal. It would also keep the loan rate at 3.4%. Blunt says the so-called profits from the loan program would be returned to the program, not directed into something else.

Link

Missouri State Standard: Blunt, Long speak at Ag Forum

Amy Fuemmeler — Tue, 08 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

SPRINGFIELD - U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt expressed frustration with Congress not passing legislation that could potentially benefit the agriculture community during his speech at the annual agriculture forum hosted by Missouri State last Tuesday.

“The House is doing a lot of work, passing a lot of bills, none of which will become law,” Blunt said. “The senate takes a totally different approach, which we don’t pass any bills and they don’t become laws either. The constitutional part of the government is just not running like you and I think it should.”

The Missouri State University Collegiate Farm Bureau sponsored the forum held at the Christopher Bond Learning Center at the William H. Darr School of Agriculture.

Blunt and Rep. Billy Long attended the forum to speak about current and upcoming agriculture legislature and to field questions from audience members.

According to Samantha Warner, president of the Missouri State University Collegiate Farm Bureau, this year was the 13th agricultural forum. Blunt has attended all but one forum, and this was Long’s first.

Justin Mauss, a freshman agriculture education major, said he enjoyed attending the forum.

“I thought the ag forum was interesting,” Mauss said. “It was a good chance because you aren’t always connected with what’s going on in Washington, D.C.”

The first topic Blunt discussed was the bill the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is trying to pass, stating that farming must be performed without dust, according to Blunt.

“They’ve spent a lot of time and effort on this rule to try to prevent fugitive dust, that is dust that will go from your field to somebody else’s field,” Blunt said. “All these things will do is not allow us to be the competitive country we are.”

According to Long, the EPA is also trying to pass legislation to name manure as a hazardous waste. It would not be able to be used as fertilizer, or for any other purpose, he said.

“We have got to send a big signal here, right now, that EPA can’t stand for end production agriculture,” Blunt said.

Blunt is part of a committee that has recently been working on a Senate transportation bill.

Farmers would be able to drive for an agricultural purpose within a 150-mile radius of their property without having to get a commercial driver’s license and the other transportation licenses needed.

Both Blunt and Long have to deal with their constituents and the concerns they have.

Long was approached by the deer raisers of Missouri, those who raise deer and transport them across the country to game farms. The government is trying to pass legislation that states they must let the deer out of the trailers at rest stops to graze, according to Long.

“That’s the type of battles Roy and I fight every day up in Washington,” Long said.

Students can get involved in these issues by writing letters and making phone calls to senators and congressman.

Blunt can be reached at his Springfield office at 2740B East Sunshine. You can call his Springfield office at (417) 877-7814. Blunt can also be contacted by submitting a contact form (email) on his website at http://Blunt.senate.gov/public/.

Billy Long can be reached at his Springfield office at 3232 E. Ridgeview St. or calling 417-889-1800. You can submit an email at https://longforms.house.gov/email-billy.

“The more you all work together to bring good projects to the table, the more we all have to talk about,” Blunt said.

Senator Blunt Supports Responsible, Bipartisan Solution To Extend Student Loan Rates

Tue, 08 May 2012 12:00:00 EST

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) released the following statement today regarding his vote against a tax increase to pay for the temporary extension of student loan interest rates and his support for the “Interest Rate Reduction Act,” a responsible solution to extend interest rates and offset the cost with unspent ObamaCare funds:

Senator Blunt Tours OATS in Columbia

Mon, 07 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt toured OATS, Inc. in Columbia and discussed how energy prices impact families and seniors.

KRCG (CBS): Senator Blunt Tours OATS, Discusses Energy Prices, Jobs 5/2/2012

Mon, 07 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

KRCG (CBS) in Mid-Missouri reported on U.S. Senator Roy Blunt's (Mo.) tour of OATS in Columbia to discuss energy prices and jobs on May 2, 2012.

Columbia Daily Tribune: Blunt gets feedback during OATS visit

Jacob Barker — Thu, 03 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

COLUMBIA, Mo. - Vandalia resident Lynne Floyd isn't sure what she would do without the rides she gets from OATS Inc. She was passionate enough about the service that she agreed to be bused into Columbia yesterday to tell U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt how important it is to her.

"If it wasn't for the OATS bus, I'd be spending probably triple for groceries because we've only got one store where I live," Floyd told the senator, who made a stop yesterday at the Maguire Boulevard headquarters of the not-for-profit agency that provides transportation services in most areas of the state.

With a federal transportation bill in the spotlight and election-year politics driving a national conversation about high gas prices, the Republican senator spoke to about 40 people at OATS to gather feedback about the service. He said the country needs to tap domestic energy sources to keep gas prices sustainable, and he signaled he's hopeful that federal funding for OATS could be maintained in a pending federal transportation bill.

"I think this is a program that speaks for itself if someone is telling its stories," Blunt said after listening to attendees talk about their use of OATS.

Founded in 1971 as a transportation service for the elderly, OATS has since grown into a $25 million organization that provides more than 30,000 rides a year for the elderly, people with low income and people with disabilities. But the agency has been squeezed by high gas prices in recent years. According to figures provided by the agency, a 10-cent increase in gas prices costs it $152,500 a year, which equates to a reduction of about 10,000 van trips annually. OATS has already had to cut back on some routes, Executive Director Linda Yaeger said.

"It makes it really hard to budget, it makes it really hard to set service levels, it makes it really hard be consistent," she said of the wide fluctuations in oil prices in recent years.

The other looming uncertainty is the amount of federal funding that will be available to the agency. A conference committee of the U.S. House and Senate is scheduled to meet next week to negotiate a two-year transportation spending bill.

More than a third of OATS' budget comes from federal funding, and the government's authority to spend money from the Highway Trust Fund expires at the end of June without legislation. With the budget-cutting mood in Washington, whether OATS will continue to receive federal money is a big concern, Yaeger said, and it has already had an effect in some areas.

"We have been relying on discretionary funds and earmarks to renew our fleets, and there's nothing there now," she said.

Blunt also bemoaned the change in attitudes toward congressional earmarks in recent years. "I think the system where we argued for the things we knew about was a better system than letting the administration decide how to spend all the money," he said. "What do they know about Columbia, Missouri, or Callaway County or any of the places that you serve?"

One of OATS' main services, rural transportation, is almost entirely dependent on federal funding. The organization gets about $7 million a year for rural transportation services from the government. Without that funding, people in small towns who need to access health care and other services will be harmed because there is no alternative except maybe taxis, Yaeger said. "In the rural areas, there is no such thing as public transportation."

Senator Blunt Nominees Head To U.S. Service Academies

Thu, 03 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) announced today that 18 young men and women across Missouri have accepted appointments to attend United States military service academies.

“U.S. service academies are invaluable investments in our national security by providing training to the outstanding young adults who will become our military leaders in the next generation,” Blunt said. “These students will be challenged, inspired, and motivated with a world-class education to serve in an honorable career dedicated to the U.S. military.”

Please CLICK HERE to view bios and pictures of the nominees.

A committee of Missouri residents reviewed each applicant’s files and presented recommendations to Senator Blunt for a formal nomination. Applicants are considered on the basis of leadership skills, academic achievement, physical aptitude, and extracurricular activities.

# # #

St. Louis Post-Dispatch: McCaskill, Blunt press for delay in post office closings

Bill Lambrecht — Thu, 03 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

WASHINGTON • Yet another round of brinksmanship is taking shape in Washington, this time over post office closings and draconian steps to keep the Postal Service afloat.

As it stands, May 15 marks the end of a moratorium on starting a process that could close as many as 3,700 underused post offices and more than 200 distribution centers around the country.

The Senate reached a rare bipartisan compromise last month to overhaul the Postal Service, which is losing $25 million daily and on the verge of dramatic change including an end to Saturday delivery.

A significant feature of the legislation was an amendment by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., that would delay closing of rural post offices for one year. Even after that, the Post Office would have to meet some stiff criteria to shutter postal facilities outside urban areas.

For his part, Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., secured an amendment that would give rural post offices an ombudsman to help guide them through what promises to be tough times.

But what happens in the Senate means little to the House these days, and vice versa.

Indeed, GOP leaders signaled this week that they'll more reforms than found in the Senate proposal. And House budget hawks may well find it hard to swallow the $34 billion of costs in the legislation, including money to ease the Postal Services burden in paying into a retirement fund.

The House doesn't reconvene until next week, which leaves little time to sort things out. For that reason, Missouri's senators were joined by 37 of their colleagues in writing a letter yesterday urging the Postal Service to extend the moratorium.

"We are deeply concerned that the closing of these postal facilities prior to postal reform legislation being enacted would be devastating to communities around the country," the letter read.

No word on whether they used the Postal Service to deliver it.

Earlier this week, the quartet of Senate sponsors of the legislation made a similar bipartisan plea to delay closings. They haven't heard back.

Rep. Darrell Issa, a powerful California Republican with a reform plan more far-reaching than the Senate came up with, seemed ready to let the closings begin.

"Rather than letting an objective and independent process continue on, senators would inject parochial politics into the Postmaster General's decision making," he said in a statement.

KY3: Blunt is frustrated member of "do nothing" Senate

Jerry Jacob — Wed, 02 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. -- U.S. Senator Roy Blunt, on recess for the week and attending various events across Missouri, sat down for an interview Wednesday. In it, Blunt expressed frustration with the lack of progress on passing a federal budget, his thoughts on entitlements, the approaching election, the flat tax, and getting things done behind closed doors (Intelligence Committee reference).

The full interview is below. KY3 Political Reporter Jerry Jacob spoke with Blunt at KY3 studios.

You are on recess until Monday. When you return, what is on your agenda?

Well, it would be nice if we were going to get something done. I'm not optimistic we're going to get a lot done this year, but it can't go on like this much longer. The country deserves for the government to work. Right now, the regulators are fully engaged and way over engaged, but the constitutional part of the government is just not doing what it should be doing. We need to have a budget, we need to have the appropriations process working the right way and it can't work the right way without a budget. And we need to be doing things to encourage people to get out and take that risk that creates private sector jobs.

What are your thoughts on the performance of the economy, especially in terms of the stimulus money spent?

Well, the stimulus didn't really do the job. It was a lot of money spent and now we owe almost a trillion dollars to somebody that nobody owed them three years ago and for what gain? Not much. We'd be much better off if the government would begin to send signals of certainty. Here's going to be the tax policy, we're going to have a moratorium on regulation for a while, unknown health care costs that hold people back, the utility bills are going up because of the EPA regulations that are forcing utility bills to go up. And a lot of things that people would do if they had some sense of certainty about the things that can be controlled, they can go ahead and try to do. You know, when you invest your money there are lots of ways you can lose that money and there are lots of things you have no control over. People just may not decide to walk into the store or the restaurant. But if you have every reason to believe your utility bill could double in the next decade, and you have unknown health care costs for employees that you haven't hired yet, and the president talks every day about wanting to raise your taxes, and the regulators are not doing things that seem to make sense in the real world, the message there to a lot of people is, well, I think I'm just going to hang on to this money. I'm not going to borrow the extra money to put with it and I'm just going to wait and see. I think there is a lot of "waiting and seeing" going on in the economy right now and frankly I don't think that's going to change much this year. And another thing we're waiting to see is what happens in Europe. What we're seeing in Europe is the result of 65 years of giving the challenges of life to the government and letting your government get bigger than your economy can support. And it's not a question of taxes or tax policy. It's how much government can an economy really afford to have and still have a vital private sector economy?

In 1992, our public debt was 49% of the nation's GDP. Now it's 74%. A lot of that the result of budgetary entitlements that continue to grow. What are we doing at the federal level to try and get these entitlements under control? Because it's been said for years that entitlements is really where we have to start making some tough choices and need leadership to get that under control because it's the lynch-pin to everything.

Well, it is. It is. When we talk about entitlements, the programs where you get the money if you meet the definition of the program, these are not programs we don't know about. 80-plus percent of entitlement spending is social security, medicare, and medicaid. So these are not things we never heard of, and these programs, particularly medicare and social security, can last for a long time if you'll periodically adjust them to the demographics of the society we live in today. My dad was 65 when he retired, I'll be close to 67, my children are going to be 69 or 70, and we know that and we just as well make that decision. And the quicker you make that decision, the more time people have to adjust to it, the less it impacts anybody who's near retirement today and, frankly, you can a decision at maybe 69...remember Simpson/Bowles recommended 70. I don't think we have to go to 70, but if we wait very many more months or years before we make a decision, it might be a transition to a 70 year retirement for Social Security rather than a 69 retirement. And Medicare? There's no real reason for Medicare to, you qualify for Medicare two years earlier than you can qualify for Social Security. The only reason for that is, nobody had the courage at the time that Social Security was modified to also go ahead and say, "Let's be sure that Medicare lasts as well." We want these programs to last, and if you do this in the right way, people will have plenty of time to adjust to the changes, but you can't just keep putting this decision off, or the decision gets not only harder to make, but it's the difference between 69 or 70 or maybe older if we don't really do the responsible things that have to be done so that these programs survive.

Do we have that coming down the pike? Because I'm not smelling it.

Well, I think it HAS to come down the pike. And that's why I think this election is one of those generational moments, like 1980 was, where we're really going to decide who we're going to be for a long time. And I think the choice is basically, are we going to be more like Europe, even though we know now what happens at the end of the story in Europe if you do the things Europeans did after World War II, or are we going to decide, no, that's not who we want to be. We want to learn from their mistakes and here's how we want our country to move forward, with a dynamic, private-sector economy that has a safety net for people AND programs they have been told they can rely on, adjusted in a way that ensures that these programs survive.

You talk about uncertainty, that certainly is something people will want to know so they can plan their lives. How long until we're not looking at 65, but 67...

Well, we're not looking at 65 now for Social Security, we're looking at 67 and remember that decision was made in 1983 and we haven't quite gotten to 67 yet.

When is that?

In the next couple of years I think we get to the final number that Reagan and Tip O'Neal agreed to. But if you're not going to impact anybody who's within ten years of retirement, that means the change doesn't begin at all for a long time... and then you should do it gradually, so the guy who is 11 years from retirement, maybe his or her retirement age is 67 and two weeks. These things can be done, should be done, need to be done gradually so that they don't impact people's decisions. But the government can't just continue to put off decisions, not have a budget in the senate, a document that's required every year. Last weekend, the Senate passed the third year since the Senate passed the annually required budget. Now I've only been in the Senate a year, but it's pretty frustrating for me even in the minority to see the majority refuse to do something that from the start of The Budget Control Act of 1974 until three years ago, the Senate passed a budget every single year.

What? Sorry, I was out of town. You haven't passed a budget? Explain that to me.

Well, the budget is required by the law to be passed every year. And you really have to have a budget which allocates the money that you think the federal government is going to have to the various appropriations bills. If you don't have that allocating document, you can't really appropriate in a way that says, okay, here's the money we have that we decided to spend on agriculture, FDA, and rural development, happens to be the committee that I'm the leading Republican on right now. And when you have that number than you can say, it's not as much money as we had to spend as last year, so what are we going to do in agriculture, rural development or FDA? Where do we need to prioritize? And the government has to prioritize, just like families have to prioritize, and we're not doing that right now. And people want the government to do that. The choice in government is never between the perfect and the possible. It's between the possible and not getting anything done. And frankly, the Senate majority has decided in the last couple of years that the better option for them is just not to get anything done, rather than have to go on record making hard choices.

This is the first time in a lot of years that an election has come around and you're not a part of it. Do you feel like you're able to get out and say things and challenge people now in a way you couldn't before because you were working and campaigning?

I don't know, Jerry, I hope I've always thought I had that ability. There are other things to do besides these jobs if it doesn't work out. And particularly if these jobs are not jobs where you get stuff done, where you do the work that people expect you to do and need you to do. Now with the computer we can get all the information to people they can want or need about what's going on, about what you're doing. You can go to royblunt.gov or the other websites and Facebook, and ask a question and get an answer, sometimes just "Do you support this?" and a person just wants a yes or a no, but then sometimes also, "Why?" and we have a different conversation then, you give more information to them. But there's no reason not to keep that going all the time. And by the way, I'm on the Intelligence Committee in the Senate, which is the committee that meets with and monitors our intelligence activities. I think in all of the Senate, it is the committee that is functioning like the American people expect it to function. Dianne Feinstein, Democrat from California, is a good chairman, Saxby Chambliss is the vice-chairman, a job that Kit Bond used to have, the leading Republican on that committee. The world's a dangerous place and at least at the "intel-committee" level, I think people would feel good about it. Maybe the reason it works so well is that we can't talk about it! It's all done behind closed doors, with General Petraeus, and General Clapper, the head of the National Intelligence Agency, and others, but that part of what we're doing, I think we're continuing to do a fair job at, but the daily work of the government is just not getting done, like the American people deserve to have it done.

Any Republican senator, representative, governor, has to be thinking right now, "Is the phone going to ring and it's Mitt Romney on the phone asking to talk to me about being his Vice President?" Have you had any communications with his campaign?

I'm helping him organize the House and Senate, and I talk to him with some frequency, and I'll be interested to see what he decides on the Vice-Presidential choice. Though, I think the Vice-Presidential choice seldom makes a difference in the election.

(A long, disjointed, rambling reporter question about the superficial and antagonistic nature of political debate these days...)

I think this idea that if you don't get every thing you wanted in a legislative debate or a piece of legislation that that's a failure? Ronald Reagan wouldn't have seen that as a failure. I think Ronald Reagan would say, "If I can get 75 or 80 percent of what I wanted, I'm going to count that a victory and go on the next day and start the next morning trying to get the 20 percent I didn't get." Nothing wrong with that. But this idea that in a country as big and diverse as ours, that somehow you're going to get everything exactly the way you want it? I've never seen a perfect piece of legislation. Again, the choice is never between the perfect and the possible, it's between the possible and not getting anything done. Most times in a democracy you have to decide, "what's possible for us to do right now?" Whether you're the president of Southwest Baptist University, where I was for four years before I went to Congress, or in the House of Representatives, or in the Senate, moving the country in the direction toward more opportunity, toward more freedom, toward more potential for families to do well, we ought to be everyday be saying, "what can we do to move toward those important goals."

Before you go, what about the flat tax proposals?

I think a flatter, fairer tax system at both the corporate level and the personal level is something that people are ready for. And I think one of the great opportunities for the next president or for this president if serves another term is to take advantage of that. Make these tax codes much simpler, and much more appealing. There's no reason for us to have the highest corporate rate in the world. No reason at all, unless we just don't want to have corporations headquartered here. That's one way to achieve that. And we're seeing our corporations move to Britain, move to European countries instead of the United States of America, but we have the highest corporate rate in the world and we still have big corporations that don't pay any taxes. How's that possible? Well, we need a much simpler system, so that if you're running the smallest corporation in Springfield, Missouri and you have a profit, you have some reason to believe that whatever percentage of that profit that you give to the government is roughly the same as what any other corporation in America would wind up giving to the government, that the corporate code isn't so complicated that some people pay nothing and some people pay the highest rate in the world. And the same with the individual rate. I think fewer deductions, less complications, and ultimately that can produce the same amount of taxes at a lower rate and because it's a simpler system, people will do more and eventually that means you have more taxpayers paying more tax dollars.

Associated Press: Year after intentional levee breach in SE Missouri, Sen. Roy Blunt critical of rebuilding pace

Jim Slater — Tue, 01 May 2012 12:00:01 EST

ST. LOUIS — A year after the intentional breach of the Birds Point levee in southeast Missouri, Sen. Roy Blunt is criticizing the Army Corps of Engineers for its rebuilding pace.

The Missouri Republican on Tuesday sent a letter to Maj. Gen. Meredith W.B. Temple, acting commander of corps, urging fast restoration of the levee to its original height of 62.5 feet. Blunt called full restoration vital for farmers and landowners whose properties are protected by the levee.

The corps has temporarily rebuilt the levee to 55 feet and hopes to get it back to 62.5 feet by the end of the year, spokesman Bob Anderson said. He said a contract for the full rebuild is out for bid.

"We've got the funding," Anderson said. "It's just a matter of getting everything lined up with contractors." The corps is also rebuilding other damaged levees in southeast Missouri, southwest Illinois and western Kentucky, he said.

The intentional breach on May 2, 2011, flooded 130,000 acres of farmland and displaced 50 families.

"One year after the Birds Point Levee breach, it is simply unacceptable that full restoration still remains months away," Blunt said. "Flood protection for people and property should always be the primary goal in river policy. Our communities cannot return to normal until we fully restore what was lost and rebuild stronger."

The Birds Point levee protects a floodway designed to be opened in instances of extreme flooding. Last year's flood set records in many locations south of St. Louis.

The corps detonated explosives that tore holes in the levee, allowing river water to pour over 130,000 acres of rich southeast Missouri farmland. Corps officials have defended the move as necessary given the magnitude of last spring's flooding. Water threatened to top the floodwall in the nearby town of Cairo, Ill.

The corps said earlier this month that breaching the levee prevented more than $112 billion in damage throughout the Mississippi River and its tributaries in the southern U.S.

But Blunt is not alone in his criticism. Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat, has urged that the levee be restored to its original height as quickly as possible. U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, a Cape Girardeau Republican whose district includes the Birds Point levee area, said she believes the corps "jumped the gun" in deciding to activate the floodway, basing its decision on incorrect hydrology.

Anderson said there were areas south of Birds Point in direct danger unless something was done to lower the pool of water.

The corps has spent $25 million on the temporary levee now in place. While that offers protection against most floods, Anderson said more significant flood events, such as those in 1973 and 2011, would top that level.

Fortunately, river levels are low this spring — unusually low. The river level at Cairo is nearly 40 feet lower than it was a year ago.

"It's amazing what one year can bring," Anderson said.

Senator Blunt On Anniversary Of Birds Point Levee Breach

Tue, 01 May 2012 12:00:00 EST

One year after the intentional levee breaches of Birds Point, U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) sent a letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and released the following statement encouraging more focus on restoring the levee’s full protection and planning for future disaster events:

Senator Blunt On Withdrawal Of Outlandish Farm Labor Rule: Finally Some Common Sense

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) released the following statement today regarding the Department of Labor’s (DOL) decision to withdraw its controversial proposed rule restricting young people working on farms and ranches:

Senate Unanimously Approves Blunt, McCaskill Resolution Honoring Servicemembers & Military Families

Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:00:01 EST

WASHINGTON D.C. – Missouri’s U.S. Senators Roy Blunt (Mo.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.) today garnered unanimous approval of a resolution honoring America’s men and women in uniform who have been injured or become ill in service.

Blunt and McCaskill’s bipartisan Senate resolution designates May 1, 2012, as National Silver Star Service Banner Day—set aside to recognize and thank servicemembers and their families for their sacrifices.

“We cannot do enough to honor the brave men and women who have served or made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedoms,” Blunt said. “I was proud to sponsor a resolution designating Silver Star Service Banner Day when I served in the U.S. House of Representatives, and I’m proud to cosponsor it in the U.S. Senate again this year.”

“Our men and women in uniform and their families make tremendous sacrifices every day,” McCaskill said. “While we should always honor the heroic work of our military, our veterans and their families, it’s my hope the designation of a Silver Star Service Banner Day will remind everyone to take a moment and show their appreciation for these brave men and women.”

Silver Star Families of America (SSFoA) is a national nonprofit organization headquartered in Clever, Mo., that honors and assists members of the U.S. Armed Forces and their families from every branch of service and from all wars. SSFoA provides assistance to veterans who have suffered physical or emotional trauma in military service and distributes Silver Star Flags and care packages to wounded veterans and their families.

The resolution approved today expresses support for the designation of May 1, 2012,as National Silver Star Service Banner Day, encouraging communities across the country to hold commemorative ceremonies and to honor the sacrifices made by injured troops and their families.

Last year, Blunt and McCaskill passed a similar resolution designating May 1 of 2011 National Silver Star Service Banner Day as well.

# # #

Senator Blunt Introduces Amendment To Move Critical Funds To Priority Flood Control Projects

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 02:30:00 EST

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) released the following statement today after introducing an amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill that would move $40 million from the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery Program (MRRP) to emergency streambank and flood control projects: