Unfortunately, in my judgment, the agreement reached last year just didn't meet the standard.
Mike Johanns
The Public Record
Mike Johanns is a former United States Senator from Nebraska, serving from 2009 to 2015. A member of the Republican Party, he previously held the position of Secretary of Agriculture under President George W. Bush from 2005 to 2007. Johanns has a background in law and public service, having served as the Governor of Nebraska from 1999 to 2005. His tenure in the Senate included work on agricultural policy and issues related to rural development. Johanns is known for his commitment to supporting farmers and ranchers during his time in office.
oversight is important, and the rules we have are designed to prevent that sort of incident from taking place.
I appreciate your candor, because I think everybody knows that is the obvious answer.
The budget request you are making this year admittedly is sizeable. I appreciate you are a little bit different circumstance.
You are saying political appointees, we have no evidence that they were involved.
the budget has grown from $377 million to $1.35 billion in 2014, very, very significant growth by any definition.
I would want to know that. And if I did know that, I would be telling somebody, my committee of jurisdiction, the President himself, 'There is a very serious problem here.'
I have joined a number of my colleagues in supporting a bipartisan effort to impose stricter sanctions on Iran if ongoing negotiations between Iran and other nations fail to produce results.
Would it help to just require that the name of the person, the individual involved that qualifies for that credit be listed together with a social security number?
It is disappointing to see that the IRS budget request this year is also equally unrealistic.
But you just informed us that if I file under 501(c)(4) and I attest to you that no more than 40 percent of our resources will go to political activity, then I go right on through.
Will you assure me, Mr. Secretary, that all comments will be taken seriously, will be reviewed, will be thoughtfully analyzed before any further action is taken on this rule?
I can state unequivocally Congress never intended for nonfinancial end-users to be subject to costly margin requirements.
Unfortunately, I believe many current policies are hindering rather than helping growth.
The Internal Revenue Service, beyond a shadow of a doubt, has damaged its credibility. I do not think anybody could disagree with that.
Now, I appreciate they brought in a bunch of people and fine-tuned it or whatever, and saved the day or did their best to save the day.
One of my concerns is that, once the door opens, the temptation for other countries, other parts of the world, to squeeze that door further open and further open is just too great to pass up.
I cannot imagine as the Secretary of Agriculture walking into OMB and saying to them, I want half of every increase in discretionary dollars in agriculture.
It drives me crazy that deserving people are not getting it. Undeserving people are fraudulently claiming it.
As members of this committee, we, of course, have a responsibility to conduct oversight to ensure that hard-earned tax dollars of millions of Americans are spent appropriately, thoughtfully, wisely.
This is not a Republican versus Democrat issue. The measure has gained strong bipartisan support.
The reason why I find that confusing is that the rule comes out--the proposed rule, then you have this interpretive document.





