Despite having been decisively rejected by the people and  Congress, the Cyber Information Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is back in the House of Representatives, once again up for a vote with supporters hoping that the people are no longer paying attention.

Now is the time to take action to let them know you don’t want the government and big businesses accessing and sharing your email and personal data without any kind of warrant or due process of law.

CISPA (HR624)  would massively reduce the privacy and security of your online communications and personal data. It would give government agencies and many private companies access to your personal communications and financial information and would allow government security agencies like the National Security Agency unprecedented power to access your data including medical records, private emails and financial information – all without a warrant, oversight by any court or due process of law.  It is supported by government security agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and also by big online data companies like Google and Facebook which want to use your data for marketing with fewer restrictions.

This access to your records would require no misbehavior on your part, not even an accusation of terrorism or criminal activity and it would take place without your knowledge or permission or any opportunity to protect your information or your privacy interests. That information could then be passed on to private companies or other agencies or used against you with no real rules or restrictions on who could access it or what hands it would end up in.

The Republican Liberty Caucus joins with other concerned groups like the Liberty Coalition and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU in opposition to CISPA in any form or under any name. We stopped CISPA, SOPA and PIPA last Congress and now we have to fight that battle again.

We urge you to email your representative in Congress and tell them to oppose CISPA and keep government agencies out of our private online data and communications and to stand up and overturn CISPA if it is introduced by executive order.  You need to take information now.  The vote is scheduled for Thursday April 18th.

You can start with an email to your representatives using the form below. Customize the text to express your personal outrage.

Once again Texas is taking the lead in challenging the overreach of the Transportation Safety Administration with a new bill to protect individual privacy against unreasonable and invasive searches. Rep. David Simpson has a new bill called the Texas Travel Freedom Act (HB80) in committee in the Texas House this week. It would provide punishment under Texas law for federal employees of the TSA who engage in inappropriate acts which would now be classified as “Official Oppression.”

It is not acceptable for government employees to treat innocent travelers like criminal suspects. As Rep. Simpson said, “Traveling is not a criminal act. Treating travelers as criminal suspects and forcing innocent citizens to submit to humiliating and unreasonable searches without probable cause as a condition of travel violates protections our forefathers envisioned in Section 9 of the Texas Bill of Rights and the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. Contrary to what some TSA agents have claimed, we do not believe that you give up your rights when you travel in public.”

Last legislative session state government leaders like Joe Strauss and David Dewhurst did everything they could to block this legislation, including using some very underhanded tactics. We can express them to face a lot of pressure from the TSA this time as well and to do what they can to undermine support for the bill and bully legislators into opposing it. They lack the strength of conviction to support the confrontation with the federal government over individual rights and state sovereignty which this bill is designed to oppose.

Legislators need your encouragement for the confidence to stay strong in the face of all this opposition. They need to know that the people are behind them.

The first step is to tell your Texas House member and key members of the State Affairs committee that you support the bill. Please use this form to send an email to the House before noon on Wednesday. The hearing on the bill is at 1pm. Change the wording of the letter to represent your personal concerns.

On the 45th anniversary of the dark day when Dr. Martin Luther King was gunned down in Memphis, I feel the need to write about some political history. I grew up in the Dayton area. Most of my friends back home are black. I have always found it hard to believe that most of them constantly vote Democrat, when the party itself has run many of Ohio’s major cities into the ground economically for many years. But I shouldn’t be surprised. The Ohio Republican Party, often showing little difference between themselves and the Democrats, deserves blame as well. They have allowed Ohio to remain a tax and spend state with failing schools, high crime, union and corporate corruption, and annoying, bigoted nativist sentiments.

Though my family mostly votes Democrat I have always been a Republican. You might call me a recovering neocon turned Rand Paul Republican through a drawn out awakening from the statism I grew up around. Though I wasn’t a huge fan of Bush I believe–and did from my teen years–that historically the Republican Party has had the better track record on economics and foreign policy; even though I’ve never quite been in agreement with them on social issues. In high school I read John Stuart Mill and got my first taste of the importance of individual liberty. The history books I read suggested that the Republican Party, at least prior to George W. Bush, had a better track record on this, through the civil rights support from Calvin Coolidge and Dwight Eisenhower, and the economic policies of Ronald Reagan. When the party was founded as the party of civil rights, its motto was: Free Soil, Free Labor, and Free Men.

Though some northern Democrats such as my late grandfather (who would have turned 86 today) were friendly to the black community in the first half of the 20th century, most of the party — especially in the south — had always been an enemy of civil rights. It had been the party of Jim Crow. Even in the North,  working class Democrats before the 1960s had a tendency to bigotry. The earliest labor unions were founded to protect “white labor.”  After both WWI and WWII, many blacks fled the south to work in the industrial cities of the northeast and midwest, and the white unions would fight hard to keep them out. This would continue until the 50s, when the struggle for racial equality reached new heights.

Prior to the 70s, most blacks were Republicans. They began a mass exodus to the Democratic Party when Johnson signed the civil rights bill, even though it only passed because of the Republicans in congress. Ironically enough, Johnson as a Senator opposed civil rights legislation vehemently.

Unfortunately the Republican Party never did anything to maintain those voters or get them back. The last Republican president to campaign in black neighborhoods and truly speak to issues that affected black communities in televised debates was Ronald Reagan. Had he not been such a drug warrior he might have repaired the frayed relations. Now, historically misguided baby boomers and gen-xers in the African-American community have taught their children the myth that Republicans are racist; some of it as a result of the aggressive anti-drug policies that were kicked up during the Reagan years. Of course, our opposition to Barack Obama makes it easier to keep this myth going even if this opposition is legitimate because the president’s economic and foreign policies have been counterproductive and downright wrong. Perception is everything.

Fact: the only thing the Republican Party ever did to set back black people in its entire history was the War on Drugs. But that was a bipartisan mistake and has been supported over the years by just as many Democrats. Many rising Republican leaders such as Rand Paul and Justin Amash are finally willing to admit prohibition doesn’t work and does nothing but disproportionately incarcerate black and Hispanic men for crimes where no physical or financial harm was wrought by them on another; just as gun laws do (ever heard of the “white and polite” rule?). As they do this, rising Democratic leaders such as Elizabeth Warren mock them as potheads or flip flop on the issue and do nothing to alleviate the problem.

I’m sick and damn tired of ignoramuses accusing the Republican Party of being racist for reasons most of them can’t even explain when the Democrats clearly are part of the problem and won’t admit it. At least Rick Perry, in spite of all his faults, signed the Peaceable Journey act into law to strike down the “white and polite” rule that was locking up minorities in Texas for carrying lawfully owned guns in their car for their own protection. Historically, you could carry a gun in your car in Texas for protection; but if you were ever stopped, there was a de facto “white and polite” rule. If you were white, and nice to the officer, he’d let it slide. If you were black or Tejano, good luck. You were probably going to be arrested. This disgusting remnant of the Jim Crow south was finally repealed when the Texas Republican Party pushed for the peaceable journey act. Now all Texans’ second amendment rights are respected. They are allowed to carry guns in their car without a permit. It keeps me safe when driving at night in Houston, that’s for sure.

Do you ever wonder why minority poverty and minority incarceration are highest in blue states? There are a lot of reasons; and support for prohibition — which I will define as locking someone up for possession or use of an item where no physical or financial harm was done to anyone else — is one such reason. The welfare state and teacher’s unions are to blame too; as well as opposition to school choice programs that allow black students to get out of the ghetto by doing something as simple as: STOP FORCING THEM TO STAY THERE! (I’m very passionate about education reform. You’ll see me write more on it in coming months).

It’s going to take more than a generation to get blacks voting Republican again. It starts with ignoring or even laughing at the Rovian notion that religious-right wedge issues like gay marriage and abortion are the answer. If the black community was really that passionate about social conservatism, they would not be voting overwhelmingly Democrat. Truthfully, young blacks are just as secular as young whites. The generational shift away from social conservatism transcends race. I’ve actually met fewer young blacks who are aggressively anti-abortion or anti-gay than I have young whites, and when you put the two together, the number is inconsequential. It is likely to remain that way. The liberals control the pop culture, and it has secularized the generation. The culture war is effectively over. Fortunately, secularism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive; rather they are highly compatible.

First, the GOP needs a message of economic empowerment in black communities; one that can be brought by a revival of vocational training opportunities and academic improvement that the free market can best provide. We must be able to explain why lower taxes and fewer regulations create jobs, lower the price of everyday goods, and raise local wages. We must aggressively promote upward mobility through school choice and a return of apprenticeships in skilled crafts and STEM fields.

Next, we must become the civil rights party again, by doing as Senator Rand Paul recently said:

“It is important that we always stand up for the Bill of Rights, whether the First Amendment, Fourth or Second. The Constitution is non-negotiable”

The Bill of Rights is like dominoes, knock down one and they all fall. We must become the party of civil liberties again.

Finally, it would help if the first president to pardon a high number of non-violent gun or drug offenders was Republican. Rand Paul could very well be that president. He’s probably not going to campaign on it if he runs in 2016. But I wouldn’t be surprised if he did so after being elected.

In his address to CPAC, he said:

“Ask the Facebook generation whether we should put a kid in jail for the nonviolent crime of drug use, and you’ll hear a resounding no,”

That would be as symbolic a move for the GOP as civil rights legislation was for the Democratic Party under Johnson. Tens of thousands of mostly black and Hispanic men, who have committed no physical or financial harm to anyone other than themselves, suddenly released back into society with their records expunged, so that they can get the help they need, get back on their feet and get back into the workforce. It’s the right thing to do. And the Republican governors (hint hint, Mr. Perry), should start now as congress gears up for this gun control debate.

I urge Republican governors to scour the records of the incarcerated. Find people, of any race, who were incarcerated for possession of a firearm without a permit but committed no violent or financial crimes on top of this possession, and expunge their sentences and/or reimburse their fines. The overwhelming majority of them will be minorities. Show these people the Republican Party is not the party of prohibition, but the party of liberty, by freeing them from the police state.

I also urge you to pardon those who are incarcerated for committing non-violent, non-financial drug crimes, at least for weed–which science has irrefutably proven (to the point where anyone who still denies it is stupid) is safer than alcohol or tobacco. But you might as well start with the non-violent/non-financial gun “offenders.” Think of the taxpayer money you will save! Your voters will thank you!

It’s sad. Most of my generation thinks Dr. Martin Luther King was a pro-gun control liberal and many baby boomers think he’d be a drug warrior. I assure you if he was alive today and saw the prison statistics resulting from gun and drug prohibition, he’d be ashamed. Not that he was a fan of guns or drugs. He was a preacher of non-violent resistance and would not have appreciated self-destructive behavior. However, he would have been against government locking people up for possession of either; especially with those in prison for non-violent offenses being so disproportionately non-white. He would not want self-destructive behavior to be met with police brutality and incarceration. I’m confident he would have seen it as a mission of the church to solve these problems, not the nanny state.

The pro-civil liberties, pro-economic growth Republican Party being [re]invented by fresh young faces like Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, as well as the many Gen Y Republicans supporting organizations like Young Americans for Liberty, is the one that will repair the GOP’s frayed relations with the black community, as well as other minority groups; Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, even gays. The Rove/Kristol/Graham/Santorum wings of Dominionism, prohibition, crony capitalism, disrespect for the Bill of Rights, and perpetual warfare is what destroyed the relationship in the first place. The sooner we realize this, and begin taking action, the sooner black Americans will begin coming back to the party they once loved.

———————————————————————————————–
Aaron Alghawi obtained a B.S. in Economics from Texas A&M University in 2012, and is an At-Large Board Member of the Republican Liberty Caucus national committee.

Big corporations don’t like competition and they’ll use government to kill it when they can.  This is easy to do when it means more revenue for government and less competition for the big corporations.  This has come together in a disastrous bill in the senate  called the Marketplace Fairness Act.  With this bill big box retailers are poised to kill internet businesses the way they killed small local retailers, all with a big payoff to state and local governments.

Right now, sales over the internet are usually only taxed when the buyer and seller are physically located in the same state.  This bill from Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) would lift the usual federal protections on interstate commerce and authorize state governments to tax sales which cross state lines, and put the burden of collecting that tax on the online business making the sales, regardless of where it is located.  This addresses a claim from huge retailers that they are at a competitive disadvantage because they have retail outlets in every state and therefore charge tax on all of their sales in person or online.

How online businesses operate is basically the same as mailorder businesses have for over a hundred years, but now that there are more of them with a little more access to consumers suddenly the big chain stores think they are unfair.

Store chains with physical locations have their own advantages.  They can attract casual buyers and allow them to examine their products with access which is impossible online.  Plus their size and the bulk in which they buy products wholesale give them an edge through economy of scale which allows them to sell products through their stores at lower prices.  They can  undercut online retailers because they do not have to pay shipping to deliver each product.

Most online businesses are entrepreneurial micro businesses which operate in very specialized areas and have to do everything they can to cut overhead.  They are one of the strongest and most dynamic areas of growth in our troubled economy.   They have also become a second chance for many of the unemployed, who have taken their savings and invested them in internet businesses and found a new way to earn a living and become a new middle class.  This proposed tax policy will take all of that away and bankrupt them, leaving them without even unemployment to fall back on.

Raising the effective price  of goods sold by online retailers may drive them out of business.  But the more serious threat is the incredible paperwork burden which compliance with this law will place on these vulnerable businesses.  Online businesses will have to charge taxes to satisfy the rules of 50 states and hundreds of thousands of other smaller taxing jurisdictions.  There is no way they can track all those taxes, charge them accurately and deliver the money to all of the taxing authorities without a huge cost in man hours or money.  When you have thousands of employees, hiring a department of tax accountants is a manageable expense.  When you’re one guy working out of his garage with a couple of part time employees it’s instant bankruptcy.

This bill would stifle the freedom which the internet has given to consumers and small businesses and sacrifice the welfare of hundreds of thousands of entrepreneurs for the benefit of some of our largest and most powerful corporations.  This is not just a way to raise revenue for spendthrift states and make commerce more “fair” – it is a death sentence for most online businesses.

The bill is backed by the powerful lobbying machines of companies like Best Buy, Target, WalMart, PetSmart, Lowe’s and PetCo as well as by state and local governments eager to get their hands on a few more consumer dollars.  It is largely opposed by consumer advocacy groups who see that it is monopolistic and realize that competition makes the marketplace stronger and prices lower for everyone.

The giant retailers have already forced most local businesses which try to compete with them out of business and now they want to do t

There’s no point in coming up with a strong set of legislative priorities on an issue if we don’t let Congress know what we think they ought to be doing. So we’d like you to email your representatives with a complete copy of the RLC’s Statement on Immigration Priorities to get their attention.

This is particularly timely because our efforts have just been endorsed by the Federation of Hispanic Republicans, Cafe Con Leche Republicans and the 5-11 Campaign (opposes a national ID).

Th basic concept of our statement is to focus on the benefits of immigration for our nation when it is part of a comprehensive free market economic approach to the needs of workers and businesses. It emphasizes three primary points. First, that any policy should be designed to preserve the rights and economic interests of citizens and businesses. Second, that access to visas should be limited by the market and not quotas, through a robust guest worker program. Third, that immigration reform should be part of a comprehensive free market approach to business and labor in America.

Please use the form below to send a full copy to your representatives. Feel free to add some comments of your own to personalize it.

We thought the NDAA was fixed. We thought we had won the fight. Between a court injunction and the hard work of Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul to pass the Feinstein-Lee Amendment, we thought that the issue of indefinite detention of US citizens without trial had been laid to rest and that the NDAA was finally fixed. We saw the bill pass the Senate and celebrated a major legislative victory.

Then it went to a conference committee chaired by John McCain which was tasked with reconciling the House and Senate versions, and despite all good sense and the cries of the people, the final version which will be voted on by both Houses on Thursday has had the strong language against indefinite detention taken out of it and replaced with redundant and watered down platitudes.

At this point the only viable course of action is to tell the House and Senate to vote down the bill and insist that it go back to committee and have the Lee-Feinstein Amendment wording restored to protect the rights of our citizens against unprecedented abuses of their most fundamental rights.

The big challenge here is that both houses will vote on the bill sometime Thursday, so you need to take action right now. Use the handy tool below to email your Senators and Representative and tell them you want them to stand up for liberty and the Constitution and vote down the conference committee version of the NDAA and send it back to be fixed.

John McCain is the Chairman of the Conference Committee. He’s the one who put indefinite detention back in the bill. In addition to emailing, take a few minutes to call him and tell him what you think of Republicans who don’t believe in the rule of law and the Constitution at (202) 224-2235.

Make sure to customize the language of the email to make it unique and in your own words.

In the midst of the most important budget negotiations of our lifetimes, House Speaker John Boehner has removed the four most fiscally conservative house members from two key committees because he is afraid that they will lead resistance to his plans to sacrifice cuts and compromise on tax increases in the budget negotiations with the Obama administration.

Justin Amash (R-MI) and Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) were removed without notice from the Budget Committee on Tuesday and Walter Jones (R-NC) and David Schweikert (R-AZ) were removed from the Financial Services Committee. All four had records of opposing past budget compromises and were reportedly ranked below other Republican representatives on a loyalty index put together by the house leadership, because they were more likely to vote based on principle and constituent requests rather than in lockstep with the leadership. These removals were made over the objections of the chairmen of the committees.

We believe that these four representatives have been outstanding advocates for the concerns of grassroots Republicans and all Americans who are worried about this nation’s dire financial condition. They should be looked to as leaders in determining fiscal policy, not cut out of the process. We hope that you will join us in a three-phase campaign to pressure House leaders to reinstate the “Fiscal Four” and stand firm for a budget which is fiscally responsible.

First: Use the form below to email your representative and request that they contact the party leaders in the House to ask that the Schweikert, Jones, Amash and Huelskamp be given back their committee assignments.

Second: Call Speaker Boehner’s office at (202) 225-0600 and tell them you want the Speaker to speaker to listen to grassroots Republicans and listen to strong fiscally conservative voices in the budget process and give the four Congressmen back their committee assignments.

Third: Get on twitter and send a comment to @SpeakerBoehner asking that Huelskamp, Amash, Shweikert and Jones be given back their assignments. Tag it #FiscalFour. Something like “@speakerboehner Please give the #FiscalFour back their committee assignments and stand firm for spending cuts” works great.

When you use the email form below to email your representative, take a few minutes to customize the message with your own words.

On Thrusday an amendment authored by Senators Mike Lee (RLC-UT) and Daine Feinstein (D-CA) which alters the NDAA to protect citizens from arrest without a warrant and guarantees the right to a trial was passed 67-29 by the Senate. This came after an impassioned speech in support by Sen. Rand Paul (RLC-KY) on Wednesday in which he said:

“If you don’t have a right to trial by jury, you do not have due process. You do not have a Constitution. What are you fighting against and for if you throw the Constitution out? When zealots of the government arrest suspects or radicals without warrants, hold them without trial, deny them access to counsel or admission of bail, we have shorn the Bill of Rights of its sanctity.”

Paul had also threatened to put a filibuster hold on the NDAA bill if an attempt was made to pass it with the provisions allowing unconstitutional detention of citizens without a trial included. Since the passage of an earlier version of the NDAA more than a year ago, grassroots groups like the Republican Liberty Caucus have been calling and emailing members of the House and Senate relentlessly expressing opposition to the detention provisions in the bill and it appears that for once our legislative leaders actually listened to the people. Sadly about half of the Republicans in the Senate voted against the amendment.

While the Lee-Feinstein amendment is not as comprehensive as Rand Paul’s version which has had trouble passing the Senate, it does address the most fundamental civil liberties concerns with the NDAA. The substandive part of the Amendment reads:

“(b)(1) An authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority shall not authorize the detention without charge or trial of a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States apprehended in the United States, unless an Act of Congress expressly authorizes such detention.

“(2) Paragraph (1) applies to an authorization to use military force, a declaration of war, or any similar authority enacted before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2013.

“(3) Paragraph (1) shall not be construed to authorize the detention of a citizen of the United States, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, or any other person who is apprehended in the United States.”

The final clause of (b)(1) has attracted some criticism, including from Representative Justin Amash (RLC-MI) who whote:

“The Feinstein amendment to the 2013 NDAA does NOT protect you from indefinite detention without charge or trial. In fact, it explicitly permits such detention so long as the detention is approved by an Act of Congress . . . such as the 2012 NDAA.”

Prior to the amendment the NDAA permitted detentions solely on presidential authority, but Amash and others are concerned that Congress could use the option provided in the amendment to reverse the protection at will, or that courts could interpret the NDAA itself as such an authorization.  However, Senator Lee has issued an explanation of how the amendment works in context which makes very clear that no existing legislation including the NDAA itself would negate the protections in the amendment, hailing it as “a clear victory for civil libertarians and should be celebrated as a strong step forward in protecting due process rights for all Americans.”

However, a federal court did already grant an injunction against the detention provision in the NDAA and it is likely that if it were further tested in the courts it would be found unconstitutional. In addition, changes to the main text of the 2012 version of the NDAA which actually expand detention authority beyond earlier versions demanded that some response be made to protect civil liberties

While this is not a perfect victory, it remains a major win for civil libertarians who do not believe that the people should have to sacrifice their most sacred rights, nor should the nation abandon the rule of law, even in a times of crisis or war. If the Bill of Rights can be discarded just because we feel threatened, then we have already thrown away the very values for which we fight as a nation.

Audit the Fed is now in the Senate and it’s the lame duck session and the Democrats are doing everything they can to stop it. We need to get all the sponsors on board that we can, particularly Democrats and the few remaining reluctant Republicans.

Right now Audit the Fed (S. 202) is still being held in the Senate Banking Committee after 2 months, and Chairman Tim Johnson (D-SD) is under orders from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) not to let it out of committee. If it doesn’t get out of the committee it never even gets a chance for a vote from the Senate as a whole. Some progress is being made. The bill now has 37 co-sponsors, even including one Democrat. That puts some pressure on the House leadership, but not enough.

Experts are declaring Audit the Fed to be “dead on arrival” in the Senate, but if our government works at all, if there is enough grassroots outcry for the Senate to take action on the bill, we ought to be able to pressure Reid and Johnson to release the bill for a fair vote on the floor.

Making this happen requires a two phase plan of action.

First, you have to call Reid and Johnson directly yourself. They’re Democrats and they may not represent your state, but they should still take your call because of their leadership positions. Don’t necessarily tell them you’re not a Democrat. Just make very clear to their staff member who answers the phone that you’re concerned about Audit the Fed (S.202) and would like the Senate to have a chance to vote on it. Point out the strong bipartisan support in the House and the wide popular support in polls. That might help.

Call Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) at 202-224-5842
Call Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) at 202-224-3542

Second, use the form below to write your Senators and urge them to join as sponsors of the bill and to contact Reid and Johnson and ask that they bring the bill to the floor of the Senate for a vote. If enough people contact them about it they will reach out to these two powerful Democrats and if enough Senators take action it might wear them down. Use the text entered in the email form or it might be even better if you customize it to express your concern in your own words.

Here is the current list of sponsoring Senators. If yours are not on the list, you absolutely must email them and urge them to sponsor it.

Sen Ayotte, Kelly [NH] – 9/10/2012
Sen Barrasso, John [WY] – 10/6/2011
Sen Begich, Mark [AK] – 9/12/2012
Sen Blunt, Roy [MO] – 10/6/2011
Sen Boozman, John [AR] – 5/24/2011
Sen Brown, Scott P. [MA] – 9/19/2012
Sen Burr, Richard [NC] – 10/6/2011
Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] – 7/25/2011
Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] – 10/6/2011
Sen Cochran, Thad [MS] – 7/25/2012
Sen Collins, Susan M. [ME] – 11/13/2012
Sen Cornyn, John [TX] – 3/28/2012
Sen Crapo, Mike [ID] – 9/6/2011
Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] – 1/26/2011
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY] – 8/2/2012
Sen Graham, Lindsey [SC] – 7/17/2012
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] – 10/31/2011
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] – 5/24/2011
Sen Heller, Dean [NV] – 6/22/2011
Sen Hutchison, Kay Bailey [TX] – 9/12/2012
Sen Inhofe, James M. [OK] – 10/6/2011
Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA] – 9/10/2012
Sen Kirk, Mark Steven [IL] – 7/31/2012
Sen Lee, Mike [UT] – 3/1/2011
Sen McCain, John [AZ] – 10/31/2011
Sen Moran, Jerry [KS] – 9/10/2012
Sen Murkowski, Lisa [AK] – 7/23/2012
Sen Portman, Rob [OH] – 11/13/2012
Sen Risch, James E. [ID] – 10/6/2011
Sen Roberts, Pat [KS] – 11/13/2012
Sen Rubio, Marco [FL] – 10/6/2011
Sen Sessions, Jeff [AL] – 9/19/2012
Sen Shelby, Richard C. [AL] – 8/2/2012
Sen Thune, John [SD] – 10/6/2011
Sen Toomey, Pat [PA] – 8/1/2012
Sen Vitter, David [LA] – 1/26/2011
Sen Wicker, Roger F. [MS] – 10/6/2011