114th Congress

The first session of the114th Congress enacted into law six out of the 2,616 introduced bills (0.2 percent). Comparatively, the113th Congress had 1.3 percent of introduced bills enacted into law in the first session. In the second session, the114th Congress enacted 133 out of 3,159 introduced bills (4.2 percent). Comparatively, the113th Congress had 7.0 percent of introduced bills enacted into law in the second session.^[47][48] For more information pertaining to Sanford's voting record in the 114th Congress, please see the below sections.^[49]

Economic and fiscal

Trade Act of 2015

See also:The Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, 2015

Trade adjustment assistance
On June 12, 2015, theHouse rejected thetrade adjustment assistance (TAA) measure inHR 1314—the Trade Act of 2015—by a vote of 126-302.Trade adjustment assistance (TAA) is a federal program providing American workers displaced by foreign trade agreements with job training and services. The measure was packaged withtrade promotion authority (TPA), also known as fast-track authority. TPA is a legislative procedure that allows Congress to define "U.S. negotiating objectives and spells out a detailed oversight and consultation process for during trade negotiations. Under TPA, Congress retains the authority to review and decide whether any proposed U.S. trade agreement will be implemented," according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Sanford was one of 158 Republicans to vote against TAA.^[50][51]
Trade promotion authority
On June 12, 2015, theHouse passed thetrade promotion authority (TPA) measure inHR 1314—the Trade Act of 2015 —by a vote of 219-211. TPA gives thepresident fast-track authority to negotiate trade agreements sent toCongress without the opportunity for amendment or filibuster. Although the House approved TPA, it was a largely symbolic vote given the measure was part of a package trade bill includingtrade adjustment assistance (TAA), which was rejected earlier the same day. Sanford was one of 191Republicans to support the measure.^[52][53]
Trade promotion authority second vote
After thetrade adjustment assistance (TAA) andtrade promotion authority (TPA) did not pass theHouse together on June 12, 2015, representatives voted to authorize TPA alone as an amendment toHR 2146—the Defending Public Safety Employees' Retirement Act—on June 18, 2015. The amendment passed by a vote of 218-208, with all voting members of the House maintaining their original positions on TPA except forTed Yoho (R-Fla.). Sanford was one of 190Republicans to vote in favor of the amendment.^[54][55]
Trade adjustment assistance second vote
TheHouse passedHR 1295 - Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 on June 25, 2015, by a vote of 286-138. TheSenate packagedtrade adjustment assistance (TAA) in this bill after the House had rejected the TAA measure inHR 1314 - Trade Act of 2015. Along withtrade promotion authority (TPA), whichCongress passed as part ofHR 2146 - Defending Public Safety Employees' Retirement Act, TAA became law on June 29, 2015. Sanford was one of twoRepublicans who did not vote on HR 1295.^[56][57]

Defense spending authorization

On May 15, 2015, theHouse passedHR 1735—the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016—by a vote of 269-151. The bill "authorizes FY2016 appropriations and sets forth policies for Department of Defense (DOD) programs and activities, including military personnel strengths. It does not provide budget authority, which is provided in subsequent appropriations legislation." Sanford voted with seven otherRepublicans and 143Democrats against the bill.^[58] The Senate passed the bill on June 18, 2015, by a vote of 71-25. PresidentBarack Obamavetoed the bill on October 22, 2015.^[59]

On November 5, 2015, theHouse passedS 1356—the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016—by a vote of 370-58. The second version of the $607 billion national defense bill included $5 billion in cuts to match what was approved in the budget and language preventing the closure of the Guantanamo Bay military prison.^[60][61] Sanford voted with eight otherRepublicans and 49Democrats against the bill.^[62] On November 10, 2015, theSenate passed the bill by a vote of 91-3, and PresidentBarack Obama signed it into law on November 25, 2015.^[63]

2016 Budget proposal

On April 30, 2015, theHouse voted to approveSConRes11, a congressional budget proposal for fiscal year 2016, by a vote of 226-197. The non-binding resolution was designed to create 12 appropriations bills to fund the government. All 183Democrats who voted, voted against the resolution. Sanford voted with 225 otherRepublicans to approve the bill.^[64][65][66]

2015 budget

On October 28, 2015, theHouse passedHR 1314—the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015—by a vote of 266-167. The bill increased military and domestic spending levels and suspended the debt ceiling until March 2017.^[67] Sanford voted with 166Republicans against the bill.^[68] It passed theSenate on October 30, 2015.^[69] PresidentBarack Obama signed it into law on November 2, 2015.

Foreign Affairs

Iran nuclear deal

See also:Iran nuclear agreement, 2015

On May 14, 2015, theHouse approvedHR 1191—the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015—by a vote of 400-25. The bill required PresidentBarack Obama to submit the details of the nuclear deal with Iran for congressional review.Congress had 60 days to review the deal and vote to approve, disapprove, or take no action on the deal. During the review period, sanctions on Iran could not be lifted. Sanford voted with 222 otherRepublicanrepresentatives to approve the bill.^[70][71]

Approval of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
On September 11, 2015, theHouse rejectedHR 3461—To approve the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, signed at Vienna on July 14, 2015, relating to the nuclear program of Iran—by a vote of 162-269. The legislation proposed approvingthe nuclear agreement with Iran. Sanford voted with 243Republicans and 25Democrats against the bill.^[72][73]

Suspension of Iran sanctions relief
On September 11, 2015, theHouse approvedHR 3460—To suspend until January 21, 2017, the authority of the President to waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of sanctions pursuant to an agreement related to the nuclear program of Iran—by a vote of 247-186. HR 3460 prohibited "the President, prior to January 21, 2017, from: limiting the application of specified sanctions on Iran or refraining from applying any such sanctions; or removing a foreign person (including entities) listed in Attachments 3 or 4 to Annex II of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) from the list of designated nationals and blocked persons maintained by the Office of Foreign Asset Control of the Department of the Treasury." Sanford voted with 244Republicans and twoDemocrats for the bill.^[74][75]

Presidential non-compliance of section 2
On September 10, 2015, theHouse passedH Res 411—Finding that the President has not complied with section 2 of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015—by a vote of 245-186. Section 2 of theIran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 required the president to submit all materials related to the nuclear agreement for congressional review. HouseRepublicans introduced the resolution because two agreements between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran were not submitted to Congress. Sanford voted with 244Republicans for the resolution.^[76][77]

Export-Import Bank

On October 27, 2015, theHouse passedHR 597—the Export-Import Bank Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2015—by a vote of 313-118. The bill proposed reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank and allowing it to resume offering assistance in the form of loans and insurance to foreign companies that wanted to buy U.S. goods.^[78] Sanford voted with 126Republicans and 186Democrats in favor of the bill.^[79]

Domestic

USA FREEDOM Act of 2015

On May 13, 2015, theHouse passedHR 2048—the Uniting and Strengthening America by Fulfilling Rights and Ensuring Effective Discipline Over Monitoring Act of 2015 or the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015—by a vote of 338-88. The legislation revisedHR 3199—the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005—by ending the bulk collection of metadata under Sec. 215 of the act, requiring increased reporting from theForeign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and requiring the use of "a specific selection term as the basis for national security letters that request information from wire or electronic communication service providers, financial institutions, or consumer reporting agencies." Sanford voted with 46Republicans and 41Democrats against the legislation. It became law on June 2, 2015.^[80][81]

Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

On May 13, 2015, theHouse passedHR 36—the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act—by a vote of 242-184. The bill proposed prohibiting abortions from being performed after a fetus was determined to be 20 weeks or older. The bill proposed exceptions in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother. Sanford voted with 237Republicans in favor of the bill.^[82][83]

Cyber security

On April 23, 2015, theHouse passedHR 1731—the National Cybersecurity Protection Advancement Act of 2015—by a vote of 355-63. The bill proposed creating an information sharing program that would allow federal agencies and private entities to share information about cyber threats. It also proposed including liability protections for companies.^[84] Sanford voted with 18Republicans and 44Democrats against the bill.^[85]

On April 22, 2015, theHouse passedHR 1560—the Protecting Cyber Networks Act—by a vote of 307-116.^[86] The bill proposed procedures that would allow federal agencies and private entities to share information about cyber threats. Sanford voted with 36Republicans and 79Democrats against the bill.^[87]

Immigration

On November 19, 2015, theHouse passedHR 4038—the American SAFE Act of 2015—by a vote of 289-137.^[88] The bill proposed instituting additional screening processes for refugees from Iraq and Syria who applied for admission to the U.S. Sanford voted with 241Republicans and 47Democrats in favor of the bill.^[89]

113th Congress

The second session of the113th Congress enacted into law 224 out of the 3215 introduced bills (7 percent). Comparatively, the112th Congress had 4.2 percent of introduced bills enacted into law in the second session.^[90] For more information pertaining to Sanford's voting record in the 113th Congress, please see the below sections.^[91]

National security

NDAA

Sanford voted in support of HR 1960 - the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. The bill passed the House on June 14, 2013, with a vote of 315 - 108. Both parties were somewhat divided on the vote.^[92]

DHS Appropriations

Sanford voted in opposition of HR 2217 - the DHS Appropriations Act of 2014. The bill passed the House on June 6, 2013, with a vote of 245 - 182 and was largely along party lines.^[92]

Keystone Pipeline Amendment

Sanford voted in opposition of House Amendment 69, which would have amended HR 3 to "require that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, conduct a study of the vulnerabilities of the Keystone XL pipeline to a terrorist attack and certify that necessary protections have been put in place." The amendment failed on May 22, 2013, with a vote of 176 - 239 and was largely along party lines.^[92]

Economy

2014 Farm bill

On January 29, 2014, theU.S. House approved the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013,H.R. 2642, also known as theFarm Bill.^[93] The bill passed by a vote of 251-166. The nearly 1,000-page bill reformed and continued various programs of the Department of Agriculture through 2018. The $1 trillion bill expanded crop insurance for farmers by $7 billion over the next decade and created new subsidies for rice and peanut growers that would kick in when prices drop.^[94][95] It also cut the food stamp program an average of $90 per month for 1.7 million people in 15 states.^[95] Sanford voted with 62 otherRepublicanrepresentatives against the bill.

2014 Budget

On January 15, 2014, theRepublican-runHouse approvedH.R. 3547, a $1.1 trillion spending bill to fund the government through September 30, 2014.^[96][97] The House voted 359-67 for the 1,582 page bill, with 64Republicans and threeDemocrats voting against the bill.^[97] The omnibus package included 12 annual spending bills to fund federal operations.^[98] It included a 1 percent increase in the paychecks of federal workers and military personnel, a $1 billion increase in Head Start funding for early childhood education, reduced funding to the Internal Revenue Service and the Environmental Protection Agency and protected theAffordable Care Act from any drastic cuts. Sanford joined with the 63 otherRepublicans and 3Democrats who voted against the bill.^[96][97]

Government shutdown

See also:United States budget debate, 2013

On September 30, 2013, the House passed a final stopgap spending bill before the shutdown went into effect. The bill included a one-year delay of the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate and would have also stripped the bill of federal subsidies for congressional members and staff. It passed through the House with a vote of 228-201.^[99] At 1 a.m. on October 1, 2013, one hour after the shutdown officially began, the House voted to move forward with going to a conference. In short order, Sen.Harry Reid rejected the call to conference.^[100] Sanford voted to approve the stopgap spending bill that would have delayed the individual mandate.^[101]

The shutdown ended on October 16, 2013, when the House took a vote on HR 2775 after it was approved by theSenate. The bill to reopen the government lifted the $16.7 trillion debt limit and funded the government through January 15, 2014. Federal employees also received retroactive pay for the shutdown period. The only concession made bySenate Democrats was to require income verification forObamacare subsidies.^[102] The House passed the legislation shortly after the Senate, by a vote of 285-144, with all 144 votes against the legislation coming fromRepublican members. Sanford voted against HR 2775.^[103]

Sanford planned to donate his pay earned during the shutdown to charity.^[104]

Sanford's district in particular was harmed by the shutdown and residents expressed their anger to Sanford. Sanford explained his opposition to the clean resolution saying, "I think there’s validity to the point that says, without hurting people, there’s got to be a way to put the brakes on [federal spending] and that’s the $94 question. And it causes divided government, which we have now, a lot of squawking back and forth. Take this room and multiply it by 100 — that’s the kind of forces you have to bear in Washington, D.C., as people very legitimately disagree with each other on how you skin the cat." He toldPolitico that "On one level, it’s a big deal that 200 people show up at a town hall at 7 o’clock on a Saturday night. But on another level, from a contractor standpoint, of which there are a lot in the Charleston area, it hasn’t gotten to the crisis stage. Because when it does, you will see 600 people in that room."^[105]

2013 Farm Bill

In July 2013 theRepublican controlledHouse narrowly passed a scaled-back version of thefarm bill after stripping out the popular food-stamp program.^[106][107] The bill passed on a 216-208 vote, with noDemocrats voting in favor.^[108] All but 12Republicans supported the measure.^[109] The group consisted mostly of conservative lawmakers more concerned about spending than farm subsidies.^[109][110] Sanford was one of the 12 who voted against the measure.^[109]

Thefarm bill historically has included both billions in farm subsidies and billions in food stamps. Including both of the two massive programs has in the past helped win support from rural-state lawmakers and those representing big cities.^[108] After the bill failed in theHouse in June 2013 amid opposition from rank-and-fileRepublicans,House leaders removed the food stamp portion in a bid to attract conservative support.^[108]

Immigration

Morton Memos Prohibition

Sanford voted for House Amendment 136 - Prohibits the Enforcement of the Immigration Executive Order. The amendment was adopted by the House on June 6, 2013, with a vote of 224 - 201. The purpose of the amendment as stated on the official text is to "prohibit the use of funds to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the Morton Memos." These memos would have granted administrative amnesty to certain individuals residing in the United States without legal status.^[111] The vote largely followed party lines.^[112]

Healthcare

Repealing Obamacare

Sanford has supported all attempts to repeal or delay the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.^[113]

Social issues

Abortion

Sanford supported HR 1797 - Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. The resolution passed the House on June 18, 2013, with a vote of 228 - 196. The purpose of the bill was to ban abortions that would take place 20 or more weeks after fertilization.^[114]

Government affairs

HR 676

See also:Boehner's lawsuit against the Obama administration

On July 30, 2014, theU.S. House approveda resolution 225 to 201 to sue President Barack Obama for exceeding his constitutional authority. FiveRepublicans—Thomas Massie of Kentucky,Paul Broun of Georgia,Scott Garrett of New Jersey,Walter Jones of North Carolina andSteve Stockman of Texas—voted withDemocrats against the lawsuit.^[115] Sanford joined the other 224Republicans in favor of the lawsuit. All Democrats voted against the resolution.^[116][117]

All legislative questions for me begin with a look through the prism of conservative philosophy, but given how convoluted this term has gotten lately let me define what it means to me.

I believe conservative philosophy is designed to maximize our individual aspirations in achieving what we believe makes the American dream. Maximizing individual freedom, personal autonomy and allowing discretion in one’s own pursuit of happiness are building blocks to getting there. Sustaining it rests on a political system that should afford all of us rising levels of opportunity based on our own talents and work ethic – and equity and fairness in getting there. These two things are vital to sustaining any political or economic system across generations.

The founding fathers knew that the pursuit of happiness was inherently individualistic in nature given our unique design by God. Collective pursuits of happiness could never work because what was heavenly for one person might be hell for the next. Accordingly I believe in individual liberty, private property, the rule of law, competitive free enterprise, limited and frugal government, strong local communities, fiscal and personal responsibility and civility in public life because they are all building blocks to keeping the American Dream. These things are vital to rewarding work and initiative and maximizing individual discretion in pursuing one's own definition of “the pursuit of happiness.” Finally these things are key to sustaining a government that can protect these liberties and a commercial sector that can sustain both individual and government needs for money.

I believe the guidebook to keeping all of these moving parts in their proper order is the United States Constitution, and in as much as we adhere to its limitations there will be expanded opportunities for each one of us.

Debts and Deficits

I have said much here, but one final point is that deficit spending in times of peace and prosperity ultimately runs counter to the founding father’s mighty belief that there should be no taxation without representation. This makes whats occuring here a social equity and moral question on whether we really believe it's acceptable to enjoy government services now and hand the bill to the next generation for their payment.

Government Spending

I believe government spends too much. America was founded on the notion of liberty, and we were indeed promised life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Through the ages, there has always been a tension between government’s growth and freedom itself. Jefferson considered it a battle line wherein as one grew, the other declined, and vice versa – and he warned that the normal course of things was for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield. Holding governments growth back is not about the spending ultimately, but rather about preserving our incredibly fragile gift of liberty.

Taxes

For the last fifty years, Americans have sent in about 18% of GDP (the whole of all that is spent and consumed in our country) in taxes each year to the federal government. I do not believe this number should go up, but I do believe we could move to a fairer and simpler tax system along the lines of a fair tax or flat tax. Presently, more than a trillion dollars a year is carved out in the form of tax exemptions, and I believe a flatter and broader tax system would be helpful to individual liberty, job creation, and American competitiveness.

Healthcare

There will always be unlimited demand for a product that someone else pays for, and this well describes much of the current construct around healthcare. People feel as if they are spending someone else's money – whether that comes from the government or an insurance company. Furthermore, they don’t know the price, and differences in outcomes are not transparent. In short, there is no healthcare marketplace, and I believe bettering the system relies on creating one.

It’s for these reasons that Senator Rand Paul and I introduced the Obamacare Replacement Act in 2017. Among other things, it would legalize people buying the health insurance they needed, rather than the health insurance the government prescribed. It would allow people to deduct the cost of their insurance the way employers can with employees. It would bolster Health Savings Accounts, create competition across state lines and even incorporate some of the good ideas found in Obamacare – such as allowing children to stay on their parents plan until the age of 26 and protecting those with preexisting conditions.

I also think a good healthcare system should be built around incentivizing good healthcare decisions. We spend more than all other industrialized nations and yet have poorer health care outcomes. There is something wrong in a system that will not differentiate between the smoker and nonsmoker, or the person who watches what they eat and drink and those that don't. Similarly, working to make certain that healthcare decisions are between a doctor and a patient – not a patient and a government or insurance bureaucrat, I believe vital.

Immigration

I view the immigration issue primarily through the principle of fairness and the rule of law. To have a thousand people a day illegally crossing our border, or for that matter, overstaying their visa, is to make a mockery of the rule of law. It's also not fair to the millions who are either waiting for their chance to come to our country, or have already gone through the legal immigration process. My votes and stands in Congress and the Governorship have been consistent with this view.

I believe in a secure border. I have voted for wall funding, and also believe we need to update the amnesty laws in our country. I believe furthermore that we should increase the number of work permits to our country, end chain migration, and move from a family reunification system to a merit based system that attracts the skill sets we need to make America more competitive.

Conservation

I have long believed that the notion of conservatism should apply to more than just financial resources. It should apply to natural resources as well.

This fits with the biblical concept of stewardship, that we should do our part to leave the world better than we found it. It fits with the historic leadership that many great Republicans have offered over the years on the environment and conservation. It also fits with common sense because the open space around us, the air we breath and the water we drink very much impacts our ability to be productive and enjoy life.

People oftentimes forget that it was Teddy Roosevelt that founded our national park system. He recognized that there were special places in our country that should be preserved, not only as monuments to honor America’s past – but as monuments in the way that open space was vital to how we live today. It’s for that reason that when I was Governor I set aside more land than during any other governorship in South Carolina history. For these efforts and others, I was even recognized and endorsed by the Sierra Club and a variety of other conservation-minded organizations. In short, I don't think that being conservative or Republican should be viewed as being against conservation or the environment.

Education

There are only two ways to raise individual productivity and the wages that come with added levels of production – in investment that leverages our ability and through education that enhances our abilities. Education is key, and to compete effectively in the 21st Century its vital everyone of us recognize how lifelong learning is important. It must start early, and it's never finished. In this I believe in as many choices as possible that reflect the different ways we learn.

Climate Change

I’ve seen first hand rising sea levels over the course of my life at our family farm in the low country of South Carolina. In areas where pine trees once stood, there are now salt flats. On this issue, the scientific consensus fits with what I’ve seen firsthand, and that is that it's real. I think it's important to listen to what the scientific community has said here. After all, It makes no sense to say that one believes in the modern advances of science and the way they can cure and heal the human body, but then discount what science says in other areas of our lives.

The problem in my view has not been in whether or not it may be real, but in how we do something about it. I do not believe in things like the Kyoto Protocol, that would tie America and Western Europe to one standard, but hold China and India to a completely different standard, even though the overwhelming growth of new emissions will come these two places.

Foreign Policy

I believe in Teddy Roosevelt's notion of speaking softly, but carrying a big stick. To do this, we must maintain a strong economy, because economic supremacy has always been the precursor to military supremacy. Among other things, this once again ties back to our own debt as a threat to our ability to protect power and maintain our place in the world.

I also believe that the international trading system, created after World War Two, vital to America’s foreign policy. In this light, stability and predictability are important. Friends and foes alike need to have a sense of what America will do next. Alliances and investments are not made without predictability. We are not getting this from the White House and I believe the increasing talks of tariffs, and the seemingly daily changes of presidential perspective are undermining our standing in the world.

Federal Reserve Policy

I believe that the dual mandate on FED policy will prove untenable and that there are real limits to the FED’s ability to drive jobs and wages on a sustained basis. I believe bettering the economy is best done through legislative change, not financial engineering by unelected members of the Federal reserve. Bettering the economy is the role of Congress, and it comes in improving tax, regulatory, legal, and spending policies so that we create better playing fields for job creation and wage growth.^[138]