Randy's Blog

RSS Feed
Posted by | November 25, 2014
I need your help: I want to hear firsthand how the President’s healthcare law has impacted you – either as a small business owner, employer, or employee in the Fourth District of Virginia. How has it impacted your business, or your workplace?

Accessible, affordable healthcare is an important priority, but it cannot come at the cost of our small businesses’ viability. Freeing up small businesses to grow, thrive, and create jobs is the key to lighting up our economy – and the government needs to be an enabler, not a barrier, to that growth. Read about my work to accomplish that, here.

Your story matters, and your insight on this issue is valuable to me. Leave your comments below.
Posted by Randy | November 25, 2014
I’m sure by now you have heard the Administration’s justification for executive action on immigration: that Presidents Bush, Reagan, and “every president in the last 70 years” have acted unilaterally to address the immigration system.

We could spend our time pointing out key differences between past presidents' actions on immigration, and the current Administration’s sweeping executive order, which will impact roughly 5 million people who are illegally in this country.

But instead, I would like to focus on a different reason this is not justification for unconstitutional action. And that is because this is not about politics. It’s not about one person. It’s not about one party. If a Republican president issued the same executive order, it would be just as wrong. This is about principles. Our nation was founded on the fundamental premise that the law is the ultimate authority – not the preferences of elected officials, the will of an elite minority, or the whims of an executive. This respect for the rule of law is what has defined our country since the day the words, “We the People… “ were scrawled in ink on parchment, and the Constitution of the United States of America was birthed as the Supreme Law of the Land and a testament to freedom, justice, and equality under the law.

Our heritage is a nation of immigrants. But let us not forget our heritage is also a nation founded upon the integrity of the rule of law. The Constitution doesn’t play favorites, and it has no respect for partisan politics. The law is the law. It must be respected.

As a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I am working with Chairman Goodlatte and the other Committee Members to use every tool at the Committee’s disposal to fight against this executive overreach. Keep updated on our fight by connecting with me on facebook or visiting my website.

Posted by | November 25, 2014
Last week, the President announced his executive actions to change the immigration laws of this country, exempting millions living here illegally from deportation.

This announcement came just over a year after the President warned against the belief that if Congress doesn’t act, a president can, “sign something and that’ll take care of it and we won’t have to worry about it.” President Obama went on to say that would be, "ignoring the law in a way that I think would be very difficult to defend legally.”

I believe that the President’s intention to act unilaterally to change our immigration laws is a blatant disregard of the separation of powers as laid out in the Constitution. Entry into the United States is not a right, but a privilege. For these reasons, I will continue to oppose amnesty and support the House Judiciary Committee in using every tool at its disposal to fight the President’s planned executive amnesty.


Question of the week:  Do you support changes to the immigration laws through executive action by the President, rather than through legislation passed by Congress?


( ) Yes.
( ) No.
( ) I don’t know.
( ) Other.


Take the Poll here.


Find the results of last week’s InstaPoll here.  
Posted by Randy | November 20, 2014
For me, no amnesty means no amnesty. Broad amnesty. Narrow amnesty. It doesn't matter. Entry into this country is a privilege, not a right.

For the Administration to act unilaterally to change our immigration laws is a blatant disregard of the separation of powers as laid out in the Constitution. I have strongly urged the President not to proceed with granting executive amnesty to millions of people who are in this country illegally, and not to diminish our institutions, our Constitution, and our nation’s foundation built on the rule of law. The integrity of the law, and more importantly, the integrity of our government, demand nothing less.

Amnesty won’t fix what is broken. An executive order granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants not only undermines our current immigration policy, but also perpetuates the problem by encouraging more illegal immigration. That’s why I have, and will continue to, strongly oppose amnesty of any form. I have also:
  • Opposed the release of criminal illegal immigrants;
  • Demanded deportation of illegal immigrant gang members;
  • Opposed the Administration’s actions to selectively enforce our laws and defer deportation;
  • Strongly support securing the border as our first priority;
  • Opposed the closure of border patrol stations;
  • Supported legislation to verify employment;
  • Demanded answers from the President about the taxpayer dollars being spent to house, feed, and transport the unaccompanied minors crossing our border;
  • Voted to prohibit federal funds or resources to authorize deferred action for any class of illegal immigrants moving forward, and prevent federal funding or resources from being used to authorize work permits for immigrants not lawfully present in the United States.          

I will continue to be unrelenting in my demand that the Administration enforce the laws of this nation as the Constitution requires them to do. As a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee, I will continue to fight to support the rule of law and uphold Congress’ duty to hold the executive branch accountable for its actions.

Weigh below -- I want you to be a part of this conversation.

Posted by Randy | November 20, 2014

I can sum up President Obama’s executive action on immigration in two words: Staggering. Arrogance.

This is not a dispute between the Administration and Republicans, this is between the Administration and the Constitution of the United States. The House Judiciary Committee is prepared to use every tool at its disposal to fight the President’s planned executive amnesty. I strongly support Chairman Goodlatte’s leadership in this fight.

To learn more, watch my discussion with Lou Dobbs on Fox Business last night, here, or by clicking the image below.


For me, no amnesty means no amnesty. I have long opposed, and will continue to oppose, amnesty of any form. Learn more about my work, here.
Posted by Randy | November 14, 2014
Last week, a Russian member of the Taliban pleaded not guilty to terrorism charges, including an attack against the United States in Afghanistan.  According to the indictment, Irek Hamidullan was charged with providing material support to terrorists, attempting to destroy a U.S. aircraft, and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction.

Hamidullan is the first military detainee from Afghanistan brought to the United States to be tried in a criminal court.

The National Security Council said the decision to transfer the detainee was the result of an agreement between the United States and Afghanistan that the U.S. will not operate or maintain prisons in Afghanistan by 2015.


Question of the week:  Do you support trying Irek Hamidullan in U.S. criminal court?


( ) Yes.
( ) No.
( ) I don’t know.
( ) Other.


Take the Poll here.

Find the results of last week’s InstaPoll here.
Posted by Randy | November 03, 2014
The size and scope of the federal government has been an issue of debate since the founding of our nation.  Today, as was true in the past, Americans hold differing views on the appropriate size of government and the impact of that size on economic outcomes, efficiency of citizen services, and personal liberty and opportunity, among other factors.

Proponents of smaller government argue that government is oversized and too involved in the everyday lives of American citizens.  They believe that while the government has continued to grow, waste, fraud, and abuse have reduced the effectiveness of government, threatened critical services, and caused economic harm in the form of overregulation and high taxation.

On the other hand, some believe that a large federal government is best placed to issue regulations and provide access to programs and services in order to enhance citizen safety and wellbeing.  They believe that government programs are working and are improving the lives of the American people.


Question of the week: Which comes closer to your view of the appropriate size and scope of the federal government?


( ) A smaller government with fewer services.
( ) A bigger government with more services.
( ) It depends on the services. 
( ) I don’t know.
( ) Other.


Take the Poll here.

Find the results of last week’s InstaPoll here.
Posted by Randy | November 03, 2014
If the economy isn’t doing well, it makes it very difficult for businesses to grow and create jobs.

Two signs indicating that our economy is struggling are that: (1) In 2010, China replaced the United States as the largest manufacturing country; and (2) for the first time in 30 years, more businesses are closing than opening.

Regardless of why this is happening, this should tell us that something is wrong.  It’s time to light up this economy and get our nation back on course

We need a national manufacturing strategy.  We need to lower taxes and reduce burdensome regulations.  We need to lower healthcare costs.

There’s no lever that can be pulled in Washington to get the economy back on track, but we can work to create an environment that encourages entrepreneurship, and allows existing businesses to grow and continue to thrive.

Read about what I’m doing to get the economy back on track here.
Posted by Randy | November 03, 2014
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” While others may disagree, the plain language of this Amendment guarantees the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.

While no one condones the purchase and use of guns by felons or other high-risk individuals to perpetrate any crime, we must not improperly hamper the right of law-abiding citizens to bear or purchase arms, or infringe upon rights guaranteed under the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

I will continue to be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 
Posted by Randy | October 31, 2014
I wanted to share this story of a miracle baby with you.

When Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler was pregnant, her doctors told her that her baby didn’t have kidneys, and she would likely miscarry or the baby would die during birth. When presented with the option of terminating the pregnancy, she and her husband determined that with “faith and some courage,” they were going to fight for their daughter’s life.

After undergoing extensive and rare procedures, Abigail was born and is now 14 months old.

Life is precious and deserves our respect and protection. I am proud to join my colleagues like Congresswoman Herrera Beutler in being a strong advocate for the unborn.