Elected to Congress in 2010, Morgan Griffith is serving his first term in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Prior to his election to Congress, Morgan served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates from 1994 to 2011, where he represented the 8th District (City of Salem and precincts in Roanoke County). In 2000, Morgan was elected House Majority Leader and was the first Republican in Virginia history to hold that position.
By Bill Archer
January 15, 2012
Full Article Here
BLUEFIELD — Friday was a busy day for freshman U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., as he prepared to return to Washington, D.C., to represent Virginia’s Ninth Congressional District in the second session of the 112th Congress.
“Do I have time for one story?” Griffith asked, as the allotted time for his meeting with the Bluefield Daily Telegraph editorial board neared its end. He said he wanted to share a story before he tackled a final question about the polarity that seems to intensify as the party faithful — Republicans and Democrats alike — move closer to a national election.
“There was a fellow who was appointed to serve as president of a well-established college,” Griffith, 53, of Salem said. Prior to his election to the House in 2010, Griffith had served in the House of Delegates of the Virginia General Assembly for 17 years, including the last 11 years as the body’s majority party leader. In Virginia, that position has been held by Republi-cans in recent years.
He continued with his story: When the newly-appointed college president walked around campus, the students, faculty, staff and even classified personnel greeted him with a wave of the hand and a jolly salute: “Tally ho!” Griffith said. Over time, the fictional college president in Griffith’s tale accepted the expression as a greeting that was perhaps unique to that institution. However, when he responded in like manner, he began hearing snickers from the individuals he responded to.
After some time in the position, the college president got to know one of the students well enough and decided to ask him why so many people greeted him by saying: “Tally ho.” The student responded to the college president with another story. He said that some time ago, an individual associated with the college had overcome incredible challenges to earn success in life. Through hard work and determination, he amassed a fortune with his construction business, and the one thing he wanted to do as a treat to himself was to become a member of an exclusive hunt club.
Because of his success, the self-made man got his wish. He became a member of the hunt club and joined the other more well-heeled members for a fox hunt. After his first hunt, one of the esteemed members of the club came to him privately to explain a subtle nuisance that is observed during the hunt. The somewhat puzzled editorial board leaned closer to Griffith as he brought his story to a conclusion. The room remained quiet and still.
“The established hunt club member told the new member that in the future, during the hunt, when a member sees a fox, he calls out: ‘Tally ho!’ and not: ‘There goes that S-O-B!’” Griffith’s actual wording may have been a little different, but everyone in the conference room got the joke, and Daily Telegraph staffers greeted each other with hearty: “Tally ho’s!” through the balance of the day.
“I think of history when I consider whether or not the media works voters into a frenzy,” he said. “That was suggested as a cause of the Spanish American War when yellow journalists were accused of pushing the nation into a war.”
Rather that blame the media, Griffith suggested that the fault for the polarity may well be the anonymous independent expenditures for campaigns. “With no accountability in those ads, they’re a lot like anonymous emails, and I’m sure that just about everyone who has an email account gets them.
“Make people accountable,” he said. “There’s an old law in Virginia that says you can’t use fightin’ words in political ads. Let the money in politics do what it’s going to do. Just make it more accountable. Let people know where it’s coming from.”
Since he unseated a popular, long-term incumbent Congressman Rick Boucher to earn his seat in the House, Griffith has experienced some challenges in the transition. After the editorial board ended, he said it took several months to get his name painted on his door so people would know where to come to visit him, but asked for and received, off-the-record status on another, less chaffing topic.
“Rules,” Griffith said, harkening back to his days in the General Assembly. “I love rules. This is something that I’m geeky enough to love. If the people I represent feel strongly enough to ask me what’s wrong with Congress, I tell them: To me, that’s a system that’s not functioning the way it ought to.”
He explained that bills in the House don’t appear to follow the traditional route of becoming law. “I’m a big believer that when bills come through committee, they ought to go to the floor for debate and a vote,” he said. “That doesn’t happen in Washington. Sometimes bills get through committee and you never see them again. If we start doing things like that, we’re not going to get anything done.
“In the 2010 mid-term election, the American people sent a very conservative congress to work with a very liberal Senate,” he said. “Voters really need to send a clear message to congress if they want change.” He said that voters sent conservatives to the House, but the system isn’t working. “I think we’re moving in the right direction, but we need to get there quicker. When you change what’s happening, you’ll always have problems.”
In terms of the federal highway bill, Griffith said he would rather see a six-year or five-year program like the model Virginia uses than the existing method. On the issue of post offices, Griffith said the U.S. Postal Service should have more flexibility in order to be competitive. “We have an obligation to make sure people get their mail,” he said.
Griffith said that as a freshman congressman, he did not think it would be appropriate for him to endorse any candidate in the Republican primary, although he provided a synopsis of the strengths and weaknesses of the front runners.
On a question about the Occupy and Tea Party movements, he said that both movements appear “frustrated” with the way things are. “Two years ago, I had a lot of Tea Party support, and I appreciate that,” he said. “Those of us who came in then want to see things get done. I want to see things get done. It’s going to take time,” he said, and added that the Tea Party achieved one major goal. “They’ve got congressmen who will listen to them,” he said.
At the end of the session, Griffith encouraged people in the Ninth District to contact his office with their concerns.
VIDEO: Morgan Griffith Meets with Bluefield Editorial Board
Salem - Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) called on the Obama Administration to oppose a request of the Solyndra Company to give bonuses to some of it’s employees.
“The United States Taxpayers are one of the bankrupt Solyndra’s biggest contributers. To pay bonuses out of what assets remain at Solyndra means the taxpayers will be paying a large percentage of those bonuses. The Taxpayers have already spent 535 million dollars supporting this company. Last year, the Obama Administration decided to put the taxpayers in second place for 75 million dollars of this debt. Surely, they don’t want to compound that mistake by having the taxpayers lose even more money through supporting bonuses.
“I implore the Obama administration on behalf of the taxpayers of America to make an appearance in the bankruptcy court as a creditor and ask the court not to approve these bonuses.”
Full Story Here
WARDELL, Va. — This time, Cinderella made it home before her post office turned into a pumpkin.
As he opened the public hearing concerning the closure of the Cedar Bluff, Va., Post Office Wednesday evening, Charles N. Griffith, manager of post office operations for the U.S. Postal Service’s Bristol, Va., office, announced the Postal Service and building lessor had come to an agreement concerning the Cedar Bluff facility.
“Everything has been signed off on within the past hour,” Griffith told a crowd of about 100 people who came to the public hearing at the National Guard Armory building in Wardell. The crowd appeared ready for a squabble, but they unfolded their arms and broke into a round of applause at the announcement.
Jim McGlothlin, Cedar Bluff town manager asked if the Postal Service intended to notify the Cedar Bluff customers who had already moved their boxes that it is OK for them to move back?
Paul Bradshaw, district coordinator for Southwest Virginia and southern West Virginia said that the postal service wasn’t going to take immediate action about the closure.
Tom Childress of Pocahontas, Va., asked about the other post offices in the area. Griffith said all have been extended for another five months.
“Most people in these small rural communities don’t use the Internet,” Childress said. He said that closing post offices that serve small rural areas can really hurt the communities. “It’s basically another nail in the coffin,” Childress said.
Griffith said that the Postal Service examined 3,700 post offices during its initial round, and will likely examine an additional 3,700 post offices in 2012.
Randy Bolling, who represented the Lester family’s interests in the negotiations that resulted in a new lease on the Cedar Bluff post office, addressed the audience, stating that the Lester’s position has never changed during the 17-month-long negotiations. He said that the terms offered to the post office were consistently lower than the existing agreement that the Postal Service had been working with. Bolling expressed thanks to the office of U.S. Rep. Morgan Griffith, R-Va., for his efforts on getting the two parties talking.
“This is fantastic,” U.S. Rep, Griffith said. “I’m glad the parties were able to come together.” He said that he did not take any part in the negotiations. “The small role I played was just to ask the parties to talk with each other.
“This was really the community that brought this about,” Griffith said. “All of my constituents who contacted my office made this possible. They are the ones who saved their post office.”
“Nobody wants to lose their post office,” Charles Griffith, no relation to the congressman, said. “I was happy to make this announcement.”
“It looks like you’ll have some good news to report,” Jim McGlothlin said as he left the armory.
— Contact Bill Archer at barcher@bdtonline.com
Washington Times
Dec. 2, 2011
Story Link Here
“You got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away and know when to run.”
Kenny Rogers‘ “The Gambler” holds many lessons for Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Steven Chu in his handling of the Solyndra bankruptcy fiasco. In an effort to force a stimulus success story of “green” jobs, Mr. Chu took a gamble with taxpayer money and lost on the Solyndra loan guarantee. Instead of knowing when to hold ‘em, he doubled down by subordinating taxpayers’ interests and lost again. Every gambler has to take risks, but Mr. Chu made reckless bets with a bad hand, costing taxpayers $170 million that never should have been gambled.
Following meetings with investors, Mr. Chu’s DOE staff made a decision by Dec. 10, 2010, to subordinate $75 million of taxpayer money so more private capital could be injected into Solyndra. Subordination gave private investor money priority over taxpayer money, meaning that in the event of bankruptcy, private investors would be paid before taxpayers. At that point, $440 million of the $535 million loan guarantee already had been pumped into the company. Instead of maneuvering to buy more time and send more good money after bad, it was time to fold ‘em.
In fact, by law Mr. Chu wasn’t allowed to subordinate the taxpayers’ money. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 states that any DOE loan guarantees are not to be subordinate to other financing. It was the clear intention of Congress that taxpayers should be reimbursed first. Other federal agencies, including the Department of Treasury and Office of Management and Budget raised concerns, but those concerns were shrugged off.
Mr. Chu ignored other warnings as well. DOE sought the opinion of outside counsel on the legality of subordination. In a 17-page draft memo obtained by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, DOE’s private attorneys seem to acknowledge that the law prohibits the subordination of department-guaranteed loans. However, this draft memo was never finalized. Instead, an email was sent by a lawyer at the law firm stating that DOE’s rationale for subordination “makes the best case possible based on a reasonable interpretation supported by the restructuring policy arguments.” Making the best case possible is one thing, but one could conclude that the case wasn’t good enough for the firm to put its reputation on the line by issuing a formal opinion letter.
Mr. Chu also ignored other parts of the law. The law requires the energy secretary to notify the attorney general in the event of a default on a loan guarantee. In a Dec. 13, 2010, letter to Solyndra, Jonathan Silver, then-executive director of the DOE’s Loan Programs Office, notified Solyndra it was in default. However, Mr. Silver’s boss, Mr. Chu, apparently did not alert the attorney general, as required by law. The Department of Treasury also expressed concerns to DOE about the legality of subordinating taxpayer interests and advised DOE to seek a legal opinion from the Justice Department. At every step along the way, Mr. Chu ignored the law and did whatever he could to push through the subordination, which will result in taxpayers losing most of their money.
From a business standpoint, Mr. Chu’s decision-making skills are even worse than his legal acumen. Essentially, he was betting blind. In a Nov. 17 hearing before the committee, Mr. Chu admitted to not knowing the value of Solyndra’s patents, other intellectual property or manufacturing facility. He decided it was in the best interest of the taxpayers to keep a company in business by having taxpayers be second in line to private investors to the tune of $75 million with no idea of Solyndra’s value in the event it went belly-up.
Had Mr. Chu walked away, the taxpayers at least would have walked out of the DOE stimulus casino with some of their chips. If DOE had not illegally approved the subordination and simply had let Solyndra fold in December 2010, taxpayers would not be on the hook for $95 million of the loan guarantee that had yet to be dispersed in addition to the $75 million that was subordinated. This is a case of throwing good money after bad, and taxpayers are left holding the $170 million tab because of bad bets.
Mr. Chu has a final choice to make: knowing when to run. He can clean out the system at DOE that led him to make such bad decisions or he himself can step aside.
Rep. H. Morgan Griffith, Virginia Republican, is a member of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on oversight and investigations.
America’s spending is out of control. Of course, that isn’t news to you. Likely, you encounter wasteful government spending in a variety of forms everyday. Just this week the national debt surpassed $15 trillion dollars. The President continues to encourage spending sprees through his programs and political agenda. We cannot stand for this any longer.
Today, the House of Representatives had the opportunity to change the direction of the government’s out of control spending. The Balanced Budget Amendment came before the House today for a vote and much to my disappointment the measure failed. An amendment requires a 2/3 majority to pass and this amendment, this opportunity, slipped through Congress’ fingers. I am extremely disappointed that the House Democrats refused to look beyond their own partisan games to recognize what an opportunity they squandered.
In Virginia we have a Balanced Budget Requirement. The Balanced Budget Requirement was actually written by Virginia Democrats which shows this is not a partisan issue, this is an issue of responsibility. As every family knows, staying within a budget means difficult decisions and sometimes not getting everything you want. Families also know, that the choices they make regarding their spending today will effect the future of their family for years and years to come. I do not understand how the House Democrats cannot see the Balanced Budget Amendment as anything but helpful and crucial. Either they have never learned to live within a budget or they just don’t care. Failure to vote for the Balanced Budget Amendment today reflects an irresponsible attitude towards the future of our country and our children who will reap the consequences.
When I ran for Congress I promised you I would go to Washington and fight to try to change the way our government works. Today, as I cast my vote for the Balanced Budget Amendment I knew this would be a great opportunity to turn America back to conservative and fiscally responsible principles. I am proud to say, I voted for responsibility and less government spending when I voted in favor of a Balanced Budget Amendment, but we still fell short.
I will keep fighting for our values and I ask that you keep me, and all Members of Congress in your prayers as we continue to face opportunities and decisions.
