March 11, 2010

The Honorable Mitch McConnell
Republican Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Leader McConnell:

Eleven months ago, I wrote you to share my expectations for the coming health reform debate. At the time, I expressed Democrats’ intention to work in good faith with Republicans, and my desire that—while we would disagree at times—we could engage in an honest discussion grounded in facts rather than fear, and focused on producing results, not playing partisan politics.

Obviously, the opposite has happened, as many Republicans have spent the past year mischaracterizing the health reform bill and misleading the public. Though we have tried to engage in a serious discussion, our efforts have been met by repeatedly debunked myths and outright lies. At the same time, Republicans have resorted to extraordinary legislative maneuvers in an effort not to improve the bill, but to delay and kill it. After watching these tactics for nearly a year, there is only one conclusion an objective observer could make: these Republican maneuvers are rooted less in substantive policy concerns and more in a partisan desire to discredit Democrats, bolster Republicans, and protect the status quo on behalf of the insurance industry.

In fact, the attacks on the health care bill are part of a broader pattern. As has been well documented, your caucus conspicuously shattered the record for obstruction last Congress by demanding gratuitous procedural votes on even the most non-controversial matters, and by stalling the work of the Senate despite the urgency of the serious problems facing our country. Senate Republicans are on pace to again break their own record this Congress, illustrated by Sen. Bunning’s effort to prevent the Senate from acting to extend families’ unemployment and health benefits even after those benefits had expired.

While Republicans were distorting the facts in the health care debate and inflicting delay after needless delay, millions of Americans have continued to suffer as they struggle to afford to stay healthy, stay out of bankruptcy and stay in their homes. Thousands of Americans lose their health care every day, and tens of thousands of the uninsured have lost their lives since this debate began. Meanwhile, rising health costs have contributed to a rising federal budget deficit.

To address these problems, 60 Senators voted to pass historic reform that will make health insurance more affordable, make health insurance companies more accountable and reduce our deficit by roughly a trillion dollars. The House passed a similar bill. However, many Republicans now are demanding that we simply ignore the progress we’ve made, the extensive debate and negotiations we’ve held, the amendments we’ve added (including more than 100 from Republicans) and the votes of a supermajority in favor of a bill whose contents the American people unambiguously support. We will not. We will finish the job. We will do so by revising individual elements of the bills both Houses of Congress passed last year, and we plan to use the regular budget reconciliation process that the Republican caucus has used many times.

I know that many Republicans have expressed concerns with our use of the existing Senate rules, but their argument is unjustified. There is nothing unusual or extraordinary about the use of reconciliation. As one of the most senior Senators in your caucus, Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, said in explaining the use of this very same option, “Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don’t think so.” Similarly, as non-partisan congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein said in this Sunday’s New York Times, our proposal is “compatible with the law, Senate rules and the framers’ intent.”

Reconciliation is designed to deal with budget-related matters, and some have expressed doubt that it could be used for comprehensive health care reform that includes many policies with no budget implications. But the reconciliation bill now under consideration would not be the vehicle for comprehensive reform—that bill already passed outside of reconciliation with 60 votes. Instead, reconciliation would be used to make a modest number of changes to the original legislation, all of which would be budget-related. There is nothing inappropriate about this. Reconciliation has been used many times for a variety of health-related matters, including the establishment of the Children’s Health Insurance Program and COBRA benefits, and many changes to Medicare and Medicaid.

As you know, the vast majority of bills developed through reconciliation were passed by Republican Congresses and signed into law by Republican Presidents—including President Bush’s massive, budget-busting tax breaks for multi-millionaires. Given this history, one might conclude that Republicans believe a majority vote is sufficient to increase the deficit and benefit the super-rich, but not to reduce the deficit and benefit the middle class. Alternatively, perhaps Republicans believe a majority vote is appropriate only when Republicans are in the majority. Either way, we disagree.

Keep in mind that reconciliation will not exclude Republicans from the legislative process. You will continue to have an opportunity to offer amendments and change the shape of the legislation. In addition, at the end of the process, the bill can pass only if it wins a democratic, up-or-down majority vote. If Republicans want to vote against a bill that reduces health care costs, fills the prescription drug “donut hole” for seniors and reduces the deficit, you will have every right to do so.

Sincerely,

HARRY REID
United States Senator
Nevada

March 9, 2010

Mr. Bob Abbey

Director, Bureau of Land Management

1849 C St NW, Rm 5665

Washington, D.C. 20240


Dear Mr. Abbey:

I write to bring your attention to the Toquop generating station proposed by Sithe Global to be built on public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management in Lincoln County. I understand that the company is reconsidering construction of a natural gas-fired power plant, a cleaner generating project with significant job-creation potential that I would be pleased to support.

As you may know, in 2003, Sithe received a right-of-way to build a large natural gas plant 12 miles northwest of Mesquite, Nevada, after BLM completed a Final Environmental Impact Statement and issued a record of decision. Subsequently, the company modified its plans and sought instead to build a much dirtier, more polluting 750 MW pulverized coal-burning plant. Such a plant would have emitted unacceptable quantities of dangerous pollutants.

Now, the company would like to return to its original proposal, in large part because the long-term price and supply projections for domestic natural gas production have improved considerably, but also due to uncertainty about carbon pollution regulation. Increases in proved reserves of cleaner-burning natural gas found in shale formations around the country should help stabilize prices and, with environmentally responsible production, can make natural gas a secure fuel to smooth our nation’s transition to an economy fueled primarily by clean renewable energy.

Provided that Sithe Global withdraws its proposal to build a coal-burning plant and submits a timely plan of development for a natural gas plant that is similar to the original application, I urge that BLM work quickly with the company, the Mayor and the City Council of Mesquite, and other local stakeholders to permit Sithe to begin construction of a natural gas-fired power plant at the Toquop site and complete the land disposal needed for the project this year.

I urge BLM to proceed in such a way that will allow near-term construction of this proposed natural gas plant near Mesquite, creating hundreds of construction jobs. Please let me know if there are any regulatory or statutory hurdles which I can help the Bureau overcome and finally resolve this important matter.

I appreciate your commitment to utilizing our nation’s public lands for clean energy production. Thank you for your attention to my request.

Sincerely,

Harry Reid
United States Senator