Considered Forthwith: Budget Committees and reconciliation

Welcome to the 20th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

Since we are all interested in passing the public option through reconciliation, this seems an opportune time to look at the House and Senate Budget committees that have jurisdiction over reconciliation. This process, which has existed since 1974, is not used every year, but is being actively considered this year. The major function of the budget committees, however, is to handle the budget resolution, which was done months ago. (CF regrettably missed that opportunity to discuss the Budget Committees.)

Members and Jurisdiction

Normally I list all of the members of the committees and their jurisdictions here. This will be a lengthy and substantive entry, so here are links to the House members, Senate Democratic and Republican members and official statements of jurisdiction of the House and Senate committees.

Kent Conrad is the chair and Judd Gregg is the ranking member of the Senate Committee. John Spratt is the House committee chair and Paul Ryan is the ranking member.

Neither committee has any subcommittees.

Reconciliation

Reconciliation is not the main function annual function of the committees. That would be writing the annual budget resolution, which is discussed below. The Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 established the modern budget process including the optional reconciliation process and the budget resolution. Reconciliation...

...is utilized when Congress issues directives to legislate policy changes in mandatory spending (entitlements) or revenue programs (tax laws) to achieve the goals in spending and revenue contemplated by the budget resolution. First used in1980 this process was used at the end of a fiscal year to enact legislation to fine tune revenue and spending levels through legislation that could not be filibustered in the Senate. The policy changes brought about by this part of the budget process have served as constraints on the levels of mandatory spending and federal tax revenues which also has served since 1981 as a vehicle for deficit reduction.

Reconciliation is immune to a filibuster because debate is limited to 20 hours by the statute. That's why we are considering using reconciliation to pass health care reform, or at least the public option. With out the filibuster threat, the Democrats only need to muster 50 votes plus the vice president's tie breaker for passage.

The health care reform bill was included in both the House and Senate budget resolutions for fiscal year 2010. More on the process of this below. The important point is that reconciliation was included in the budget resolutions, so the reconciliation process may take place this year.

Under the rules of reconciliation, the budget committees direct the authorizing committees to submit their pieces of the reconciliation bill. It is up to the budget committees to combine these bills into one omnibus bill to be reported to the full chamber with fiscal reports from the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation. (Honestly, I cannot make heads or tales of the current reports on the reform bills. However, I do see a few key Blue Dogs, including Max Baucus and Kent Conrad on the committee.) The work of the Budget committees, however, is largely administrative since they are not allowed to make substantive changes to the bills that make up the omnibus. If the public option, for example, is in one bill, then it will be in the omnibus.

From there, the bill goes through the normal floor votes and conference report process with the exception of the 20 hour limit on debate in the Senate and the possibility of points of order outlined next.

At the moment, our current debate is not so much whether the public option can pass under reconciliation. The current whip count seems to indicate that a majority are in favor of establishing a public health insurance agency. The real problem is whether the public option may even be included in a budget reconciliation bill. This is due to the Byrd Rule. The Byrd Rule rule, originally propagated by Senator Robert Byrd in the mid 1980s, defines what constitutes "extraneous matter" that would be subject to a point of order by any Senator. These six tests for identifying extraneous matter are:

* do not produce a change in outlays or revenues;

* produce changes in outlays or revenue which are merely incidental to the non-budgetary components of the provision;

* are outside the jurisdiction of the committee that submitted the title or provision for inclusion in the reconciliation measure;

* increase outlays or decrease revenue if the provision's title, as a whole, fails to achieve the Senate reporting committee's reconciliation instructions;

* increase net outlays or decrease revenue during a fiscal year after the years covered by the reconciliation bill unless the provision's title, as a whole, remains budget neutral;

* contain recommendations regarding the OASDI (social security) trust funds.

A point of order can be waived if 60 members vote in favor of waiving it. If the point of order is upheld, the provision would be struck from the bill. Of course, that essentially defeats the point of running the public option through reconciliation to get around the filibuster threat. Now, there are some exceptions to the Byrd Rule that can eliminate the point of order. They are:

* a provision that mitigates direct effects attributable to a second provision which changes outlays or revenue when the provisions together produce a net reduction in outlays;

* the provision will result in a substantial reduction in outlays or a substantial increase in revenues during fiscal years after the fiscal years covered by the reconciliation bill;

* the provision will likely reduce outlays or increase revenues based on actions that are not currently projected by CBO for scorekeeping purposes; or

* such provision will likely produce significant reduction in outlays or increase in revenues, but due to insufficient data such reduction or increase cannot be reliably estimated.

When a member makes a point of order, the presiding member rules whether or not it is in order (i.e may even be voted upon). In making this decision, the presiding member confers with the parliamentarian. The parliamentarian is a non-partisan professional who has gone through years of training in the rule and procedures of Congress. When the parliamentarian makes a decision it is highly likely that the presiding officer will rule the same way. The presiding officer, of course, may rule the other way. However, this sets a dangerous precedent. Essentially, the presiding officer is saying that it is fine to disregard the finer points of the chamber rules as interpreted by the person who was hired to know this information.

It seems very likely that the public option would violate one or more of the tests of the Byrd Rule. Therefore, the supporters will need to show that it meets one of the exceptions. In other words, they will need to show that it will save money in the long run despite the required start up costs. This will also necessarily require splitting the bill into the financial components and the sections that do not affect the federal budget.

In this case, the parliamentarian's decision would be heavily influenced by estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation (linked above and the subject of next week's entry). This seems like a good time to discuss CBO, over which the committees have jurisdiction.

Congressional Budget Office

CBO was also created by the 1974 budget reform act to serve as a source of objective budget information and long-term spending and revenue projections for Congress. Their reports do not include policy recommendations. In other words, the numbers are what they are. However, the CBO director, under Congressional testimony can be pressed for recommendations based on the office's reports and studies.

CBO is not to be confused with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which does similar work for the President. The CBO budget for FY 2009 is $44.1 million and employs 235 people, most of whom hold advanced degrees in public policy or economics. OMB's FY 2009 budget is about $72.8 million and has a work force of 489 full time equivalents, meaning that their employees work the equivalent of 489 40-hour weeks. Why have two budget offices? Long-term budget projections are as much art as science. Two sets of experts can come to radically different conclusions on budget forecasts. Therefore it is advisable to essentially get a second opinion.

One major role of the CBO is to produce a cost estimate on every bill that is reported from any committee. In mid July, CBO released a report on the Democrats' health care reform plan. The Senate Budget Committee promptly held a hearing with CBO director Douglas Elmendorf. The result of this hearing was the revelation that the current plan might be a drain on the budget, which sent the fiscal conservatives into a panic and made them waver in their support for a government-run health insurance company. The July 16 hearing was really a turning point in the debate. This hearing also illustrates another key power of the Budget committees: through their hearings the members have the opportunity to shape budget debates.

Like any economic projection, these numbers are only estimate. Furthermore, CBO is quick to point out that the July projections are not based on complete information:

The figures released yesterday do not represent a complete cost estimate for the legislation. In particular, the estimated impact of the provisions related to health insurance coverage is based on specifications provided by the committee staff, rather than on a detailed analysis of the legislative language.

That means that additional information may change the budget forecasts. I have also heard an argument that allowing the Bush tax cuts (which were also passed under reconciliation incidentally) could cover the costs of the public option.

To be accurate, the July time line looked like this: CBO released a preliminary analysis of the House bill July 14. The Senate Budget Committee held their hearing July 16. CBO released it's latest report July 17.

To keep up to date with CBO's health care reform reports, bookmark this page. The climate change reports are here.

The other major roles of CBO include overseeing the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP, or the bank bailout), making long-term projections on the budget and entitlement programs, issuing monthly budget reports to Congress on current incomes and outlays, and assisting with the annual budget resolutions.

Budget resolutions

For a full rundown of the budget process, please see my primer on the budget process.

A major role of the Budget committees is to produce the annual budget resolutions. These are brief statements outlining the amount of money that may be spent on each of 21 "budget functions." The budget functions are listed herehere. If the President and Congress are of the same party, the budget resolutions will be largely based on a President's budget. If relations between Congress and the President are strained, the budget could be declared "dead on arrival" and the budget resolution will be radically different from the President's budget.

In addition, any reconciliation plans must be included in the budget resolution. Under the original 1974 budget reform act, two resolutions were required and reconciliation happened in the second resolution in the fall. This was problematic, The point of reconciliation is to reduce spending or increase resolution. However, by the fall the appropriations committees have already settled on the outlays and it proved difficult to cut funding that had already been appropriated. After that experience, Congress shifted to using only a single budget resolution in early spring.

Once the Budget committees report the budget resolutions, they go to the full chamber for a vote. The resolution is not subject to a filibuster in the Senate as debate is limited to 50 hours. These resolutions become rules of the chamber and it takes a supermajority votes to exceed spending limits to spend more than the amount listed in the resolution.

Ongoing studies

Finally, the committees continue to oversee the budget process and study proposals to change the current budget or the process in general. For example, the House Budget Committee has held hearings on PAYGO (a law requiring all spending to be covered by revenue or spending cuts elsewhere), the economic case for health care reform, and Budgeting for Nuclear Waste Management. The Senate Committee has held fewer hearings and several recent ones have focused on Chairman Conrad's home state of North Dakota.

Finally, if anyone is still under the delusion that the Republicans operated like the party of fiscal responsibility under George W. Bush, consider these numbers from the House Budget Committee which were current as of November, 2008 just after the election:

Budget Surplus or Deficit:
Fiscal Year 2001: surplus of $128 billion
Fiscal Year 2008 as projected in 2001: surplus of $635 billion
Fiscal Year 2008 (actual): deficit of $455 billion
Fiscal Year 2009 projected in the Administration's July 2008 Mid Session Review: deficit of $482 billion

Debt:
Debt held by the public in January 2001: $3.4 trillion
Debt held by the public in November 2008: $6.3 trillion
Statutory debt limit* in January 2001: $5.6 trillion
Statutory debt limit* now: $11.3 trillion
*(Statutory debt limit includes debt held by the public and intragovernmental holdings)

Foreign-Held Debt:
Foreign-held debt: $2.7 trillion - more than two and half times its level in 2001
More than 80 cents of every dollar of new debt is bought by foreign investors

Interest on National Debt:
Fiscal Year 2008 debt service as projected in 2001: $27 billion
Fiscal Year 2008 debt service (actual): $249 billion

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
Senate and House Armed Services Committees
Small Business Committees
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
The Committee Primer
House Education and Labor Committee
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted on Docudharma, Congress Matters and Daily Kos.

Considered Forthwith: Small Business Committees

Welcome to the 17th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

This week I'm examining the House Committee on Small Business and the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. These are not the most glamorous committee assignments, but anyone who owns, plans to own, or works for a small business should pay attention.

Here are the committee members:

House Committee on Small Business:

Democrats: Chairwoman Nydia Velázquez of New York; Dennis Moore of Kansas; Heath Shuler of North Carolina; Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania; Kurt Schrader of Oregon; Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona; Glenn Nye of Virginia; Mike Michaud of Maine; Melissa Bean of Illinois; Daniel Lipinski of Illinois; Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania; Yvette Clarke of New York; Brad Ellsworth of Indiana; Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania; Bobby Bright of Alabama; Parker Griffith of Alabama; Deborah Halvorson of Illinois

Republicans: Ranking Member Sam Graves of Missouri; Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland; Todd Akin of Missouri; Steve King of Iowa; Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia; Louie Gohmert of Texas; Mary Fallin of Oklahoma; Vern Buchanan of Florida; Blaine Luetkemeyer of Missouri; Aaron Schock of Illinois; Glenn Thompson of Pennsylvania; Mike Coffman of Colorado

Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship:

Democrats: Chairwoman Mary L. Landrieu (LA); John F. Kerry (MA); Carl Levin (MI); Tom Harkin (IA); Joseph I. Lieberman (CT); Maria Cantwell (WA); Evan Bayh (IN); Mark L. Pryor (AR); Benjamin L. Cardin (MD); Jeanne Shaheen (NH); Kay Hagan (NC)

Republicans: Ranking Member - Olympia J. Snowe (ME); Christopher S. Bond (MO); David Vitter (LA); John Thune (SD); Michael B. Enzi (WY); Johnny Isakson (GA); Roger Wicker (MS); and a Republican Leadership Designee to be named

Jurisdiction

Here is a plain language statement on the House Committee's jurisdiction:

(T)he House Small Business Committee is charged with assessing and investigating the problems of small businesses and examining the impact of general business practices and trends on small businesses. The committee has oversight and legislative authority over the Small Business Administration (SBA) and its programs, as well as provides assistance to and protection of small businesses, including financial aid and the participation of small business enterprises in federal procurement and government contracts.

And the Senate committee's jurisdiction:

1) Oversight of the Small Business Administration

2) Consideration of Non-SBA Legislation

Any proposed legislation reported by the Committee on Small Business and Enrepreneurship that relates to matters other than the functions of the SBA shall, at the request of the chairman of any standing committee having jurisdiction over the subject matter extraneous to the functions of the SBA, be considered and reported by such standing committee prior to its consideration by the Senate; and likewise measures reported by other committees directly relating to the SBA shall, at the request of the chairman of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, be referred to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship for its consideration of any portions of the measure dealing with the SBA, and be reported by this committee prior to its consideration by the Senate.

3) Study of American Small Businesses

Notice that the main function of the committee is to oversee the Small Business Administration. This is an independent Executive Branch agency with a substantial, though largely invisible, influence.

Small Business Administration

The American economy is very dependent upon small business. Here are some statistics from the Census Bureau on the sheer number of small businesses and the number of people who work for them. Almost all of the employers in the United States are classified as small business and about half of all American workers are employed by a small business. A small business is generally defined as having few than 500 employees and less than $7 million in annual receipts. More details on limits by industry are here.

These employers are also the most vulnerable to market fluctuations. While large companies like Walmart and Microsoft can ride out economic downturns, a few bad months or one ill-conceived business expansion can put the independent bookstore or small factory out of business. As a result, the federal government offers some support for those businesses and people considering starting a business. The main government agency to help small business is the Small Business Administration. Since both committees oversee this agency, this would be a good time to investigate further what exactly they do.

SBA was proposed by President Eisenhower in 1952 and established by Congress the next year. However, the roots of small business assistance go back the the Great Depression with the establishment of President Hoover's Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) in 1932. RFC was a government lender for all businesses affected by the Depression. President Roosevelt saw value in the program and made sure the RFC was well funded and staffed.

During both World War II and the Korean War, the federal government set up similar programs specifically to help small businesses be competitive with larger corporations to supply war matériel. RFC was abolished in 1952 and many of its small business activities were taken up by the newly formed SBA. The agency later expanded to offering business advice as well as awarding grants and loans.

More history on SBA is posted here.

Today, SBA offers loans and grants to small business owners and potential small business owners for start up/expansion costs. Additionally, and probably more importantly, SBA offers expertise on all areas of business (including declaring bankruptcy). These are handled through regional Small Business Development Centers like this one and the volunteer SCORE program, which offers free counseling services from other business professionals.

SBA also has a number of programs to encourage and promote business owned by women and minority groups and handles some disaster assistance.

Here is another list of resources, courtesy of the Senate Committee website. Other assistance is available at your county (or parish because Louisiana has to be different) or city economic development organization.

The Senate Appropriations Committee recently reported the Financial Services Appropriations Bill, which would appropriate $697 million to SBA. This is an increase of $150 million over the last year of the Bush Administration and $22 million more than President Obama requested. More information here. The House version, meanwhile, provides $848 million, an increase of $236 million. The discrepancies will be worked out in conference committee.

I will leave it at that, but I would encourage any small business owners (including self-employed people) to explore these resources and see what might be available to you.

Other committee activities

The SBA is not the only responsibility of the committees and they have a few other things going on. There is not much in the way of upcoming hearings, but the House committee will hold a hearing called “Meeting the Needs of Small Businesses and Family Farmers in Regulating our Nation’s Waters” on Wednesday.

Here are a few other things that have been going on:

Economic stimulus program: Remember the hundreds of billions of dollars we spent to stimulate the economy? Well, there is some work going on with the two year plan to use the money. On July 15, the House Committee held a hearing to check on the progress within the small business community.

From the chairwoman's opening statement:

Six months after the Recovery Act was signed into law, the clouds are starting to clear. To begin, lending from the SBA is up dramatically. As of June, the agency had supported $6 billion in loans. Just as importantly, small business credit markets are coming back to life. Loan volumes in the secondary market jumped from under $100 million in December to $360 million last month. So things are looking up. Still, small firms continue to face challenges in accessing capital, and it would be wrong to say we are out of the woods just yet.

-snip-

Small firms are already leading the Green Revolution. Increases in clean energy tax credits are helping that process along, and generating tremendous opportunity for small firms. In a recent survey by the Air Conditioning Contractors of America, 75% of respondents said they had seen improved sales. Because the efficiency sector is dominated by entrepreneurs, good news for green businesses is good news for small businesses.

I have not watched the full hearing, but the highlights are available on YouTube.

Physician shortage: Health care reform, if when it happens will be irrelevant if there are no doctors to provide care. The problem is that general practice is not always lucrative enough to attract new doctors, particularly in rural areas. House Committee Chairwoman Velázquez had this to say in reaction to a July 8 hearing on the issue:

Velázquez noted that Democrats are already taking steps to help address the physician shortage. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) sets aside $2.5 billion to expand community health centers and provide educational debt relief to get thousands of new doctors and health professionals into the field faster, especially in underserved and rural areas. Nonetheless, it was clear in today’s hearing that more would need to be done to further incentivize doctors to practice medicine in those fields facing a workforce shortage.

Health care reform and the small business: The cost of health care is a particularly large concern for small businesses, particularly to the 22 million (out of 27 million small businesses) that are self employers. These are the people who start their own businesses with no employees and need to worry about health care coverage along with all of their other concerns. Between 2001 and 2008, health care premiums for the self employed increased by an unsustainable 74 percent. The Senate Committee examined this issue on July 9.

From chairwoman Landrieu's opening statement (pdf link)

Small businesses need: stable coverage that cannot be taken away; stable, affordable costs that will not increase without warning; and stable quality that assures the proper treatment is always within reach. Simply put: We need to reform our health care system to provide small businesses the opportunity to grow and prosper. The cost of doing nothing is just too great.

A link to watch the hearing is here.

I'm not entirely sure what the small business committees can directly do about this issue, but the fact that these Senators are aware of the health care issues within the small business community means that they should be cognizant of these issues during the eventual floor debate and amendment process.

Rural broadband Internet access: Another piece of the stimulus/recovery program is to spend $4 billion on improving broadband internet. This is being done through the Commerce Department and more information is available here. The deadline to apply for funds in Aug. 14. Here is Chairwoman Landrieu's statement on the program. If you are stuck with dial up internet, contact the nearest cable company and urge them to apply for the money.

For anyone lost on what I am talking about, here's the deal. In a city or town, a few dozen feet of cable can provide television and Internet service multiple customers. Therefore it is cost effective to provide cable and high speed Internet there. In rural areas, a cable company might have to run several miles of cable and poles (and do the maintenance on them) to serve a handful of -- or even one -- customer(s). Even if that happens, there are no guarantees that those customers will sign up for service anyway. That is not cost effective. This program would at least put the infrastructure in place and give residents of rural areas access to this digital playground and potential money-making tool the rest of us enjoy.

It may or may not be related, but Chairwoman Landrieu's state has a town that finally got basic phone service in 2005. To illustrate the expenses involved in such a project, the cost to provide 15 homes with phone service was $700,000.

Minority sites

I think it is a good idea to take a peek at what the Republicans are saying on their sites. On the House minority site, the latest post is spinning the July 15 hearing as a failure by President Obama and Speaker Peloisi. A tax hike on the wealthiest people to pay for health care reform will doom small business. Moreover, the recovery has not yet resulted in new jobs, therefore, it is a failure of epic proportions. Never mind that these things take time and the situation might be even worse without the recovery/stimulus money.

On the Senate minority site, Ranking member Snowe is complaining that the government has not cut energy taxes enough. She might have a point because the Republicans are looking for tax cuts to encourage more energy efficiency and green technologies. Credit where it is due, I suppose.

Subcommittees

The Senate Committee does not have subcommittees. All of these subcommittees are under the House Committee. I could not find formal statements of jurisdiction, so we only have names and member, which are listed here. The subcommittees are:

Finance and Tax (Kurt Schrader, Chair and Vern Vern Buchanan, Ranking Member)
Contracting and Technology (Glenn Nye, Chair and Aaron Schock, Ranking Member)
Regulations and Healthcare (Kathy Dahlkemper, Chair and Lynn Westmoreland, Ranking Member)
Rural Development, Entrepreneurship and Trade (Heath Shuler, Chair and Blaine Luetkemeyer, Ranking Member)
Investigations and Oversight (Jason Altmire, Chair and Mary Fallin, Ranking Member)

That's it for this week. We are getting close to the summer recess, so there probably won't be much going on in the committee in the near future. However, I am soliciting suggestions for next week's installment.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
The Committee Primer
House Education and Labor Committee
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted on Daily Kos, Congress Matters, and Docudharma.

Considered Forthwith: House Education and Labor Committee (Health Care update)

Welcome to the 13th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

First, I want to note the committee monitoring project that Meteor Blades has announced. I hope to take part and invite anyone else who is participating to see my list of links at the end of this diary for more information about specific committees.

This week, I will look at the House Education and Labor Committee, yet another committee with jurisdiction over health care reform. The big news: we have a public option sighting!

First, here are the members of the committee:

Democrats: George Miller, Chairman (CA-07), Dale E. Kildee (MI-05), Donald M. Payne (NJ-10), Robert E. Andrews (NJ-01), Robert C. Scott (VA-03), Lynn C. Woolsey (CA-06), Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15), Carolyn McCarthy (NY-04), John F. Tierney (MA-06), Dennis J. Kucinich (OH-10), David Wu (OR-01), Rush D. Holt (NJ-12), Susan A. Davis (CA-53), Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07), Timothy H. Bishop (NY-01), Joe Sestak (PA-07), Dave Loebsack (IA-02), Mazie Hirono (HI-02), Jason Altmire (PA-04), Phil Hare (IL-17), Yvette Clarke (NY-11), Joe Courtney (CT-02), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), Marcia Fudge (OH-11), Jared Polis (CO-2), Paul Tonko (NY-21), Pedro Pierluisi (PR), Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (Northern Mariana Islands), Dina Titus (NV-3), Vacancy

Republicans: John Kline (MN-02), Ranking Member, Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, Ranking Member (CA-25), Thomas E. Petri (WI-06), Peter Hoekstra (MI-02), Michael N. Castle (DE-At Large), Mark E. Souder (IN-03), Vernon J. Ehlers (MI-03), Judy Biggert (IL-13), Todd Russell Platts (PA-19), Joe Wilson (SC-02), John Kline (MN-02), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA-05), Tom Price (GA-06), Rob Bishop (UT-01), Brett Guthrie (KY-2), Bill Cassidy (LA-6), Tom McClintock (CA-4), Duncan D. Hunter (CA-52), Phil Roe (TN-1), Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (PA-05), vacancy

Buck McKeon left the committee last week to take a seat on the House Armed Services Committee. The Republicans picked John Kline to be the ranking member, but the member page has not been updated yet.

Notice that delegates from Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands sit on the committee. Delegates from U.S. territories and the District of Columbia do sit on committees (and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton chairs the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Emergency Management, and Public Buildings). They are allowed to vote in committees and when the House resolves into the Committee of the Whole (typically on amendments). However, they do not get to procedural matters or on final passage.

Cooperation on the public option

This might qualify as "breaking." The full committee has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday at noon to consider the The Tri-Committee Draft Proposal for Health Care Reform. If C-Span does not cover it, a live webcast should be available on the committee's website. (Aside: the expanded use of webcasts for committee hearings is one of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's reforms to promote open government.)

The Tri-Committee Draft Proposal includes the ever elusive public option. The key portion of the proposal:

1. If an individual likes their current plan, they would be able to keep it.

2. For individuals who either aren’t currently covered, or wanted to enroll in a new health care plan, the proposal would establishes a health care exchange where consumers can select from a menu of affordable, quality health care options: either a new public health insurance plan or a plan offered by private insurers. People will have similar choices that Members of Congress have.

3. This new marketplace would reduce costs, create competition that leads to better care for every American, and keep private insurers honest. Patients and doctors would have control over decisions about their health care, instead of insurance companies.

The proposal also includes a number of common sense measure to reduce health care costs and improve the quality of health care. You may want to check it out if you care about the debate.

What is really remarkable about this is that the three committees with jurisdiction, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, and Education and Labor Committees worked together on this. The norm in Congress is inter committee rivalry. Instead, the House committees will consider (and hopefully report) similar bills for Floor consideration. I have noted in past diaries that Senators and Chairmen Kennedy (HELP Committee) and Baucus (Finance Committee) agreed to work together on the Senate version as well. However, Baucus may be wavering on the public option.

So what would a committee called "Education and Labor" be doing with a health care bill? Let's look at the...

Jurisdiction
From the committee website:

Education. The Committee on Education and Labor oversees federal programs and initiatives dealing with education at all levels -- from preschool through high school to higher education and continuing education. These include:

* Elementary and secondary education initiatives, including the No Child Left Behind Act, school choice for low-income families, special education (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), teacher quality & teacher training, scientifically-based reading instruction, and vocational and technical education;
* Higher education programs (the Higher Education Act), to support college access for low and middle-income students and help families pay for college;
* Early childhood & preschool education programs including Head Start;
* School lunch and child nutrition programs;
* Financial oversight of the U.S. Department of Education;
* Programs and services for the care and treatment of at-risk youth, child abuse prevention, and child adoption;
* Educational research and improvement;
* Adult education; and
* Anti-poverty programs, including the Community Services Block Grant Act and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

Labor. The Committee on Education and Labor also holds jurisdiction over workforce initiatives aimed at strengthening health care, job training, and retirement security for workers. Workforce issues in the jurisdiction of the Education and the Labor Committee include:

* Pension and retirement security for U.S. workers;
* Access to quality health care for working families and other employee benefits;
* Job training, adult education, and workforce development initiatives, including those under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), to help local communities train and retrain workers;
* Continuing the successful welfare reforms of 1996;
* Protecting the democratic rights of individual union members;
* Worker health and safety, including occupational safety and health;
* Providing greater choices and flexibility (including "comp time" or family time options) to working women and men;
* Equal employment opportunity and civil rights in employment;
* Wages and hours of labor, including the Fair Labor Standards Act;
* Workers' compensation, and family and medical leave;
* All matters dealing with relationships between employers and employees.

Since health care is the gold standard for employment benefits, the labor side of the committee certainly has a claim to this legislation. The rest of the jurisdiction is fairly self explanatory. The committee's turf includes the (fairly limited) federal role in education as well as labor relations and worker safety.

It is also important to keep in mind that this is an authorizing committee. They can deal with policy changes and authorize new programs with spending proposals. It is up to the Appropriations committees to actually fund those programs, however.

A little history

The committee was established in 1867 as industry started to grow after the Civil War. In 1883, it was split into separate panels and handled education and labor separately. Following the Second World War, Congress passed the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. This reduced the number of committees (at the time there were 48 committees in the House and 33 in the Senate) and more clearly defined committee jurisdictions. Under the act, the Education and Labor Committees were once again merged.

When the Republicans took over Congress in 1995, the committee was renamed the "Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities." In the next Congress (1997), it was again renamed to the "Committee on Education and the Workforce." When the Democrats won back Congress, the name reverted back to its current name.

For more, click here.

Other current issues

401(k) fee disclosure. The committee is scheduled to mark up the 401(k) Fair Disclosure and Pension Security Act of 2009. This bill would increase disclosures about fee associated with 401(k) plans. This would allow workers and employers to better decide which 401(k) plans to select. More information is here.

Conflicts of interest in investing advice. Remember all of those last minute regulations that George W. Bush issued? One of them loosened regulations regarding conflicts of interest in the investment industry:

These actions opened the door for financial services companies to provide advice to employees where they had a direct or indirect financial interest.

The Conflicted Investment Advice Prohibition Act will restore workers’ protections by laying out clear rules to ensure that workers receive investment advice at work that is based solely on interests of the account holder’s needs, not investment firms’ bottom line.

Source

The subcommittee voted 13-8 (presumably along party lines) last week to report the bill to the full committee.

OSHA oversight. A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report says that the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) invested too much time and energy in the Voluntary Protection Programs (VPP) under the Bush Administration. VPP was established in 1982 recognizes businesses that voluntarily comply with safety regulations. Critics, including Congressional and Committee Democrats, contend that voluntary programs risked worker safety by relying on asking for compliance rather than enforcing it. Expect greater oversight and probably some hearings by the committee.

Student loan reform. Last month, the committee held a hearing about the need for reforms in the student loan system. Take it from this professional student, college is not cheap and the best education is really not cheap. In order for poor and middle class students to afford a higher education, there is agreement that the government programs that offer student loans needs reform. Read more here.

Check out the committee's website for other related news.

Subcommittees

There are five subcommittees under the full committee. The full membership lists are available here. Note that the these lists have not been updated to reflect Buck McKeon's change of committee. All jurisdiction descriptions are posted and taken from here.

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education: Dale Kildee is the chair and Michael N. Castle is the ranking member.

Including education from early learning through the high school level including, but not limited to, elementary and secondary education, education of the disabled, the homeless and migrant and agricultural labor. Also including school construction, overseas dependent schools, career and technical training, school safety and alcohol and drug abuse prevention, educational research and improvement, including the Institute of Education Sciences; and early care and education programs and early learning programs, including the Head Start Act and the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act.

Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities: Carolyn McCarthy is the chair and Todd "Russell" Platts is the ranking member.

Adolescent development and training programs, including but not limited to those providing for the care and treatment of certain at risk youth, including the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act and the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act; all matters dealing with child abuse and domestic violence, including the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, and child adoption; school lunch and child nutrition, poverty programs including the Community Services Block Grant Act, and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP); all matters dealing with programs and services for the elderly, including nutrition programs and the Older Americans Act; environmental education; all domestic volunteer programs; ; library services and construction, and programs related to the arts and humanities, museum services, and arts and artifacts indemnity.

Subcommittee on Higher Education, Lifelong Learning, and Competitiveness: Rubén Hinojosa is the chair and Brett Guthrie is the ranking member.

Education and training beyond the high school level including, but not limited to higher education generally, postsecondary student assistance and employment services, the Higher Education Act; postsecondary career and technical education, training and apprenticeship including the Workforce Investment Act, displaced homemakers, adult basic education (family literacy), rehabilitation, professional development, and training programs from immigration funding; pre-service and in-service teacher training, including Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and Title II of the Higher Education Act; science and technology programs; affirmative action in higher education; Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; all welfare reform programs including, work incentive programs, welfare-to-work requirements; the Native American Programs Act, the Robert A. Taft Institute, and Institute for Peace.

Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions: Robert Andrews is the chair and John Kline is the ranking member. Note: since Kline is now the ranking member of the full committee, he may have to give up this position.

All matters dealing with relationships between employers and workers generally including, but not limited to, the National Labor Relations Act, Labor Management Relations Act, Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment-related retirement security, including pension, health and other employee benefits, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA); all matters related to equal employment opportunity and civil rights in employment, including affirmative action.

Subcommittee on Workforce Protections: Lynn Woolsey is the chair and Tom Price is the ranking member.

Wages and hours of labor including, but not limited to, Davis-Bacon Act, Walsh-Healey Act, Fair Labor Standards Act , workers’ compensation including, Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, Service Contract Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, including training for dislocated workers, Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988, trade and immigration issues as they impact employers and workers, and workers’ health and safety including, but not limited to, occupational safety and health, mine health and safety, youth camp safety, and migrant and agricultural labor health and safety.

That's it for this week. Next, I am planning a general discussion about committee rules, procedures, assignments, etc. If there is a demand, I will get it up before next Sunday.

Also, if you are interested in the U.S. Congressional response to the situation in Iran, monitor the House Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee.

Past Considered Forthwith entries:
Senate Finance Committee
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Crossposted at Congress Matters and Daily Kos.

Considered Forthwith: Senate Finance Committee

Welcome to the 12th installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

This week, Considered Forthwith looks at the Senate Finance Committee. This committee is the other half of the health care reform debate equation. I detailed the other half, the Senate HELP Committee, last week.

In general, the Finance Committee handles tax measures and government-funded health insurance programs. As a result, this is a very powerful committee. Moreover, if health care reform dies, it will likely find its grave in this committee.

A note on the names of committees: The Senate counterpart to the House Ways and Means Committee is the Senate Finance Committee. The Senate counterpart to the House Financial Services Committee, which deals with banking and other financial institutions, is the Senate Banking Committee.

Here are the members of the Senate Finance Committee:

Democrats: Max Baucus, Chairman, Montana; Jay Rockefeller, West Virginia; Kent Conrad, North Dakota; Jeff Bingaman, New Mexico; John Kerry, Massachusetts; Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas; Ron Wyden, Oregon; Charles Schumer, New York; Debbie Stabenow, Michigan; Maria Cantwell, Washington; Bill Nelson, Florida; Robert Menendez, New Jersey; Thomas Carper, Delaware

Republicans: Chuck Grassley, Ranking Member, Iowa; Orrin Hatch, Utah; Olympia Snowe, Maine; Jon Kyl, Arizona; Jim Bunning, Kentucky; Mike Crapo, Idaho; Pat Roberts, Kansas; John Ensign, Nevada; Mike Enzi, Wyoming; John Cornyn, Texas

Public Comment!

We are late on this one, but the committee actually solicited public comment on health care reform. The deadline was May 26. However, the committee has a regular link for submitting comment on the topic du jour. Looking through past comments and comment solicitations, it seems that this is a fairly regular option.

On the other hand, if you have a particularly strong opinion on closing the alternative fuel tax cut loophole for "black liquor," click here (pdf link). In fact, using the "hearings" link, citizens and organizations can submit comments for the record via mail. The problem, of course, is that the committee is not always prompt about posting upcoming hearings.

As I have written many times, the goal of this series is to help progressives focus their activism for maximum impact. Sure, you could write your Senators and Representative every day, but there is little that those members cannot do if they do not sit on a committee with jurisdiction over the matter. Even more frustrating is the fact that many members will only accept calls, e-mails, and letters from constituents. This is why I suggest contacting committees directly. It is refreshing to see a committee this open to the public.

Finally, the phone/snail mail contact information is here.

Jurisdiction

The Committee has jurisdiction over the following topics:

1. Bonded debt of the United States, except as provided in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

2. Customs, collection districts, and ports of entry and delivery.

3. Deposit of public moneys.

4. General revenue sharing.

5. Health programs under the Social Security Act and health programs financed by a specific tax or trust fund.

6. National social security.

7. Reciprocal trade agreements.

8. Revenue measures generally, except as provided in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

9. Revenue measures relating to the insular possessions.

10. Tariffs and import quotas, and matters related thereto.

11. Transportation of dutiable goods.

The committee also has oversight responsibility for many Executive Branch agencies. Some of those oversight duties are shared with other committees. Follow the link above for the full list.

Cap and Trade Hearing

The only scheduled upcoming committee hearing regards tax considerations of climate change regulation. Presumably this has to do with the Cap and Trade bill that was recently considered by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. (This was the one with the speed reader.) Here's a preview:

The witnesses include:

Mr. Gary Hufbauer, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington DC

Mr. Mark Price, Principal-in-Charge, Financial Institutions and Products, Washington National Tax, KPMG LLP, Washington DC

Mr. Keith Butler, Senior Vice President of Tax, Duke Energy, Charlotte, NC

The Peterson Institute is calling for a multi-lateral approach to Global Warming. KPMG seems to be specialized in providing tax advice to businesses. FWIW, there was also this little issue from 2005. Duke Energy is obviously a large energy company that makes the usual nice statements about protecting the environment. I would expect a lot of hot air to be circulated about how expensive it will be stop global warming.

Hearings are nothing more than policy discussions among members of Congress and interested groups and individuals who manage to get invited/subpoenaed to appear. No official action is typically taken after a hearing. Indeed, it is not unusual for only a few committee members to show up. In any case, this is one of the ways that lobbyists, both good and bad, get access to the government. Urge your favorite public interest groups to get hearings with committees.

Health Care Reform

One of the reasons why it is difficult to pass major reform bills is the practice of multiple referrals. On almost every reform bill, more than one committee can claim jurisdiction over a policy change. Naturally, no committee or member will want to surrender the chance to influence major policy moves. The problem is that different committees often report radically different bills to the floor. All too often neither competing bill will get the votes needed for passage and the policy reform dies.

In the health care debate, both the HELP Committee and the Finance Committee have claims to jurisdiction. In an uncommon move, HELP Committee Chairman Ted Kennedy and Finance Committee Chairman Baucus have pledged to coordinate the bills from their respective committees. However, it looks like Baucus might be wavering on the public option and offering other (admittedly needed) fixes and expanding Medicare instead. Grassley, of course, is having none of the public option. Interestingly, Senator Jay Rockefeller, chair of the subcommittee on Health Care, introduced a bill to create the public option.

I won't go on about this since there are plenty of other posts about this issue, but I will offer this link which detail's Baucus' views on the issue. This would be a good person to contact about health care reform (hint, hint).

Other committee agenda items

The U.S. - Panama Trade Promotion Agreement was on the agenda May 21. The bill is a free trade agreement with Panama. There are concerns about lax labor and tax policies in Panama that could make an agreement unfair to U.S. interests. At least one U.S. company and an industry group favor the agreement. Two senior Democrats and a Kossack are not thrilled with the bill.

Meet Neal Wolin: Mr. Wolin's nomination to be Deputy Secretary was the focus of a recent hearing. He was confirmed May 18. Apparently, he helped deregulate the banks in the 1990, a contributing factor in last year's banking meltdown.

Trade with Cuba: Baucus is pushing a bill to open trade with Cuba (pdf link). Love it or hate it, Baucus is correct that five decades of U.S. sanctions have not forced political change in the little communist nation that could.

Paygo: This is a brand new proposal from the Obama administration. There is nothing on the Committee page about it yet, but this legislation will undoubtedly land in the Finance Committee. Paygo is a Clinton-era law that requires any loses from new entitlement spending to tax cuts to be made up through budget cuts or tax increases elsewhere. This rule would not apply to the 40 percent of the budget that is discretionary spending.

Note: the party of fiscal responsibility allowed the PayGo laws to lapse, which in turn allowed Congress to irresponsibly cut taxes and increase spending. Now the Conservatives are bashing the President for even bringing it up. The Democratic House did reinstitute PayGo as a rule 2007, but it was waived a number of times.

Subcommittees

I could not find formal statements of jurisdiction for the five subcommittees, but the names seem fairly self explanatory.

The Subcommittee on Health Care is chaired by John D. "Jay" Rockefeller and Orrin Hatch is the ranking member.

The Subcommittee on Taxation, IRS Oversight, and Long-Term Growth is chaired by Kent Conrad and Jon Kyl is the ranking member.

The Subcommittee on Energy, Natural Resources, and Infrastructure is chaired by Jeff Bingaman and Jim Bunning is the ranking member.

The Subcommittee on Social Security, Pensions, and Family Policy is chaired by Blanche Lincoln and Pat Roberts is the ranking member.

The Subcommittee on International Trade and Global Competitiveness is chaired by Ron Wyden and Mike Crapo is the ranking member.

Any assistance with jurisdiction would be appreciated.

That's it for this week. I am considering looking at the two Foreign Relations Committees next week, especially if the situation in Iran escalates. Of course, I welcome any suggestions and will watch for movement in any other committees.

Past Considered Forthwith entries:
Senate HELP Committee
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Considered Forthwith: Senate "HELP" Committee (with health care reform)

Welcome to the eleventh installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies.

This week Considered Forthwith will examine the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The Committee is also commonly referred to by its acronym, The Senate HELP Committee.

I settled on a different committee than I planned because there The HELP Committee has a major hearing scheduled this week.

First, here are the members of the committee:

Democrats: Edward Kennedy, chair (MA), Christopher Dodd (CT), Tom Harkin (IA), Barbara A. Mikulski (MD), Jeff Bingaman (NM), Patty Murray (WA), Jack Reed (RI), Bernard Sanders (I) (VT), Sherrod Brown (OH), Robert P. Casey, Jr. (PA), Kay Hagan (NC), Jeff Merkley (OR)

Republicans: Michael B. Enzi, Ranking Member (WY), Judd Gregg (NH), Lamar Alexander (TN), Richard Burr (NC), Johnny Isakson (GA), John McCain (AZ), Orrin G. Hatch (UT), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Tom Coburn, M.D. (OK), Pat Roberts (KS)

The HELP committee's webpage is one of the more informative sites that I have used while writing this series. Unlike many of the pages I have investigated so far, the HELP Committee includes a link to e-mail comments to the committee and the physical address is listed at the bottom of the page. The only thing that is lacking is a telephone number, but I tend to think that e-mail and snail mail is better since there is something of a paper trail. Additionally, contacting a committee or members of a committee directly gives citizens the benefit of addressing concerns directly to the people who can make a difference.

The committee also maintains a list of bills under consideration by the committee. This is helpful, too, since citizens can see what is on the agenda and lobby for or against pending legislation.

FWIW: The committee even maintains a photo gallery.

Important upcoming hearing

The HELP Committee has scheduled a hearing on "Healthcare Reform" for Thursday, June 11 at 3 p.m. There is no further information now -- not even a witness list -- but past hearing pages have included video and testimony in .pdf format. According to this Washington Post article, markups on Kennedy's proposed bill could start on June 16. Markups are the committee version of amendments and we can expect the minority to throw all kinds of killer amendments to any bill that comes from the committee. The GOP threw hundreds of amendments at the Cap and Trade bill, for example.

The timing of this hearing is not coincidental. Obviously, Health Care reform is one of the President's priorities and many members (including newly elected Democrats) in Congress want reform as well. In fact, the White House issued a report on June 2 arguing that health care reform is vital to keeping the American economy strong. Reform has public and special interest support, as evidenced by the 2008 elections. The ideas for reforms have been around for sometime, but we are now talking about them. Finally, There are enough flaws in the current system to fill a book on the subject.

Political Scientist John W. Kingdon discussed the concept of policy windows in 1984. When all of the above "streams" -- problem identified, political will to solve it, and possible solutions -- converge, policy windows open. Policy windows are the opportunity to implement new policies. It seems intuitive, but this is an important theory in the field. To put it more simply, we could have all kinds of great ideas for health care reform, but with a narrow Democratic majority in the Senate and a Republican President it was not happening.

Perhaps President Obama read his Kingdon when he said:

"If we don't get it done this year, we're not going to get it done," he said yesterday in a call to members of Organizing for America, the political group formed to advance his agenda. "And to do that we're going to need all of you to mobilize."

Source is the same Post article cited above.

One of the great failings of the traditional media is that they rarely announce upcoming hearings (the a fore mentioned Post article is a notable exception). Instead, they report afterwords on what was said. The problem with this convention is that citizens do not have the opportunity to contact their legislators ahead of time. The June 11 meeting is only a hearing and will not advance any legislation, but citizens could still contact these Senators and let their concerns be aired (hint, hint). Ideally, citizens' top concerns would be the basis for questions Senators pose to the witnesses.

The specialized media is better with this, but they are not always perfect. If you have a pet issue, find the relevant committee and book mark the hearings page. Check it regularly and watch for any upcoming hearings. I also want to give a shout out to David Waldman and his work on "Today in Congress." The place to find committee hearings is "Below the Fold" and it is only that day's hearings, but it is more than most news outlets give us.

Nomination Hearing

Like most other Senate committees, the HELP committee holds hearings on many executive branch appointments. In case you were wondering, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg will likely be the next Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. Here is her biography and here is her confirmation hearing.

Why do I bother taking up bandwidth making this point? Frankly, it really is that important. The legislature approves top level people to Executive Branch agencies. Many agencies have "rule-making" authority. Congress passes the laws, but it is often up to the Executive Branch agencies to create rules to implement the laws. For example, the HELP Committee reported a bill in May that would allow the FDA to "regulate tobacco products" (PDF link). Well, what does that mean in practical terms? Consider this excerpt from The Medical News:

Under the bill, FDA could ban certain tobacco products, such as candy-flavored cigarettes, restrict tobacco advertising to black-and-white ads, and prohibit use of the terms "mild" and "low tar" (Yoest/Mundy, Wall Street Journal, 5/21). FDA also could limit the amount of nicotine in tobacco products, as well as enlarge warning labels. To pay for the new regulatory efforts, the bill would require all tobacco companies to pay a fee that would raise nearly $5.4 billion over the first 10 years.

Bold is mine.

Basically, the bill gives the FDA broad authority to further regulate tobacco products, but it is up to the FDA to actually force a change in the warning label for example. Furthermore, under this language the FDA does not have to do a thing. Since the boss has ultimate authority, Dr. Hamburg's views on tobacco regulation will carry a lot of weight in the actual results of this legislation.

Committee Jurisdiction

Getting back to the nuts and bolts of the committee, here is the HELP Committee's jurisdiction under Rule 25 of the Senate's standing rules.

Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, to which committee shall be referred all proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to the following subjects:
1. Measures relating to education, labor, health, and public welfare.
2. Aging.
3. Agricultural colleges.
4. Arts and humanities.
5. Biomedical research and development.
6. Child labor.
7. Convict labor and the entry of goods made by convicts into interstate commerce.
8. Domestic activities of the American National Red Cross.
9. Equal employment opportunity.
10. Gallaudet University, Howard University, and Saint Elizabeth hospital.
11. Individuals with disabilities.
12. Labor standards and labor statistics.
13. Mediation and arbitration of labor disputes.
14. Occupational safety and health, including the welfare of miners.
15. Private pension plans.
16. Public health.
17. Railway labor and retirement.
18. Regulation of foreign laborers.
19. Student loans.
20. Wages and hours of labor.

Such committee shall also study and review, on a comprehensive basis, matters relating to health, education and training, and public welfare, and report thereon from time to time.

This committee will be key to any discussion of health care reform due to their jurisdiction. However, the Senate Finance Committee also has a claim to any reform plan. Such split jurisdiction can, and often does, lead to turf wars as members of Congress fight over who will take the lead on a given policy rather than on actually crafting legislation. In contrast, Chairman Kennedy and Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus issued this statement (pdf link):

For both of us, reforming the nation's health care system to cut cost, improve quality and provide affordable coverage remains the top priority on our two committees. We have worked together closely over many months and will continue to do so. We intend to ensure that our committees report similar and complementary legislation that can be quickly merged into one bill for consideration on the Senate floor before the August recess.

In other words, they are not planning to offer radically different pieces of legislation which might both fail. Instead, they want to work together and advance a viable bill.

A few other notes on jurisdiction: Gallaudet and Howard Universities in Washington were both founded by acts of Congress during the Civil War (Howard was actually founded just after the end of the war). Gallaudet University (along Metro's Red Line) was founded to accommodate deaf and hearing-impaired students. Howard University (along the Yellow and Green Lines) is a historically black university that now produces more on campus African American PhD candidates than any oher university in the world.

Retired railroad workers receive benefits similar to Social Security, but a separate agency was set up in the 1930s to handle those claims. More information about the Railroad Retirement Board is available here.

Finally, that final paragraph of the rule gives the committee oversight power over many Executive Branch agencies. I won't list them all here, but if you are interested go to the committee's page and click on the links for Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions to see the committee's oversight jurisdictions and link to those agencies.

Subcommittees:

There are only three subcommittees under the full committee. Like the full committee, the subcommittees have wide jurisdictions. The chair and ranking member are ex-officio members of all of the subcommittees.

Subcommittee on Children and Families: Chris Dodd is the chair and Lamar Alexander is the ranking member.

Jurisdiction:

The Subcommittee has jurisdiction over a wide range of issues including Head Start, the Family Medical Leave Act, child care and child support, and other issues involving children, youth, and families.

Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety: Patty Murray is the chair and Johnny Isakson is the ranking member.

Jurisdiction:

The Subcommittee has jurisdiction over a variety of labor issues including worker health and safety, wage and hour laws, workplace leave, employment trends and workforce training among others.

Subcommittee on Retirement and Aging: Barbara Mikulski is the chair and Richard Burr is the ranking member.

Jurisdiction:

The Subcommittee has oversight over many issues including: Pensions, the Older Americans Act; elder abuse, neglect, and scams affecting seniors; long-term care services for older Americans, family caregiving, and the health of the aging population, including Alzheimer's disease and family caregiving.

That's it for this week. I'm going to plan on writing about the Senate Finance Committee next week, unless I find something more interesting or someone makes a suggestion in the comments.

Past Considered Forthwith entries:
Senate Judiciary Committee
House Energy and Commerce Committee
House Ways and Means Committee
House and Senate Appropriations Committees
House Intelligence Committee
Considered Forthwith: House Judiciary Committee
House and Senate Ethics Committees
House Science and Technology Committee
House Financial Services Committee
House Rules Committee
The Role of Committees

Chris

Considered Forthwith: House Energy and Commerce Committee

Welcome to the ninth installment of "Considered Forthwith."

This weekly series looks at the various committees in the House and the Senate. Committees are the workshops of our democracy. This is where bills are considered, revised, and occasionally advance for consideration by the House and Senate. Most committees also have the authority to exercise oversight of related executive branch agencies. If you want to read previous dairies in the series, search using the "forthwith" tag. I welcome criticisms and corrections in the comments.

This week, I will examine the House Energy and Commerce Committee. There is a lot going on in this committee, including speed reading to neutralize a GOP stalling tactic.

First, here are the committee members:

Democrats: Henry Waxman, Chairman, California; John Dingell, Chair Emeritus, Michigan; Ed Markey, Massachusetts; Rick Boucher, Virginia; Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey; Bart Gordon, Tennessee; Bobby Rush, Illinois; Anna Eshoo, California; Bart Stupak, Michigan; Eliot Engel, New York; Gene Green, Texas; Diana DeGette, Colorado; Lois Capps, California; Michael F. Doyle, Pennsylvania; Jane Harman, California; Jan Schakowsky, Illinois; Charlie Gonzalez, Texas; Jay Inslee, Washington Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin; Mike Ross, Arkansas; Anthony Weiner, New York; Jim Matheson, Utah; G. K. Butterfield, North Carolina; Charlie Melancon, Louisiana; John Barrow, Georgia; Baron Hill, Indiana; Doris Matsui, California; Donna Christensen, Virgin Islands; Kathy Castor, Florida; John Sarbanes, Maryland; Chris Murphy, Connecticut; Zack Space, Ohio; Jerry McNerney, California; Betty Sutton, Ohio; Bruce Braley, Iowa; Peter Welch, Vermont.

Republicans: Joe Barton, Ranking Member, Texas; Ralph Hall, Texas; Fred Upton, Michigan; Cliff Stearns, Florida; Nathan Deal, Georgia; Ed Whitfield, Kentucky; John Shimkus, Illinois; John Shadegg, Arizona; Roy Blunt, Missouri; Steve Buyer, Indiana; George Radanovich, California; Joseph R. Pitts, Pennsylvania; Mary Bono Mack, California; Greg Walden, Oregon; Lee Terry, Nebraska; Mike J. Rogers, Michigan; Sue Myrick, North Carolina; John Sullivan, Oklahoma; Tim Murphy, Pennsylvania; Michael C. Burgess, Texas; Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee; Phil Gingrey, Georgia; Steve Scalise, Louisiana.

The chairman
Waxman is brand new to the chairmanship. In November he managed to take control of the committee from Dingell, who had served as chair for 28 years. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her allies quietly supported Waxman's bid under the assumption that the California Representative would be a more effective supporter of President Barack Obama's priorities, including a Cap and Trade bill, than the long-serving Representative from Michigan with ties to the automobile industry. Waxman won the chairmanship by a vote of 137-122 in the Democratic Caucus. Dingell now holds the title of chairman emeritus. According to the committee rules, that entitles him to be a non-voting ex-officio member of any subcommittee that he does not sit on.

Additionally, Dingell is the second most senior Democrat on the committee, meaning he will usually be third in line to ask questions of witnesses (after Waxman and Barton). This is important because the "five minute rule" means members may only take five minutes to question a witness. Going first means a member has a chance to make headlines by asking the tough questions before anyone else. Whereas Dingell might have a chance to ask a relevant and probing question, Peter Welch might be stuck with asking a witness his or her favorite color.

Jurisdiction
The Energy and Commerce Committee is one of the oldest standing committees (along with the Rules and the Ways and Means Committees). It also has one of the more expansive jurisdictions of the authorizing committees.

Authorizing committees handle non-appropriations bills. They have the power to set spending limits for government programs and purchases. It is then up the the appropriations committees to actually fund programs. For example, the committee recently passed a one-year program called "Cash for Clunkers" what would give Americans vouchers of up to $4,500 for trading in high polluting vehicles. If the program is approved, the appropriations committee would need to actually make money available for the program. This is part of an intra-branch system of checks and balances. Appropriators can only fund existing programs, but cannot create new ones. Authorizing committees, on the other hand can create all kinds of programs, but are at the mercy of the appropriators to get those programs funded.

As expected, the Energy and Commerce Committee has jurisdiction over most aspects of the nation's energy policy (including nuclear power) as well as interstate and foreign commerce. The commerce aspect includes several health care responsibilities including all health facilities not covered by payroll deductions (i.e. Medicare), biomedical research and development, public health, quarantine, Medicaid, SCHIP, and mental health research. The commerce aspect also covers consumer safety, the Internet, travel and tourism, sports, vehicle safety, and noise pollution.

Believe it or not, that is only scratching the surface of the jurisdiction. The full rundown is here.

The cap and trade speed reader
Also referred to as "Cap and Trade" the Waxman-Markey Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 was the focus of Thursday's hearing (actually a mark up) that featured that speed reader you may have heard about. The merits and flaws of cap and trade are a topic for another diary, though I generally support it as a first step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Instead, here's the deal with the speed reader. Barton tried a cheap procedural stunt to kill a bill that has overwhelming support in the House and the committee. In order to make a bill a part of the official proceedings, the clerk must read the bill into the record. That was fine in the early days of Congress when bills might be three pages long. The cap and trade bill was 946 pages, including the major amendments the minority was planning to introduce. These days, presiding officers routinely make a motion that the "reading of the bill be dispensed with" which normally passes with unanimous consent to save time.

Barton decided he wanted the 900+ pages read in the hopes that the supporters would just leave, (resulting in a lack of quorum) and/or Waxman would just give up and adjourn the meeting. Basically, he was angling for a House version of a filibuster.

Since one cheap political stunt deserves another, the committee hired Douglas Wilder to act as the committee's clerk and read the bill as quickly as possible. In fairness, Barton did say at the hearing that he was planning to agree to dispense with the reading, but he seemed interested in hearing the young man actually do it. Wilder went on for about half a minute and got applause before Barton relented.

Via Talking Points Memo, here is the video:



What was much more troubling was the 400+ amendments that the Republicans dreamed up to throw at the bill. Most of them failed, but they did cause the meeting to last 16 hours. The bill was reported from committee (i.e. it passed) by a vote of 33-25 with four Democrats voting against and one Republican (Bono-Mack) voting in favor. The bill will probably pass the House, but will face a committee markup and cloture vote in the Senate.

Other recent issues
One of the other more significant bills that the committee handled recently was the federal expansion of SCHIP by $33 billion. This program, run by states with federal assistance, helps to cover health care for children of low income families. The increase is funded by a new tax on cigarettes (so keep smoking for the good of the kids). This was the same bill that George W. Bush vetoed (one of only ten vetoes he exercised), which allowed us to mock him for hating children. On a related note, anyone with kids should look into this program as some states are fairly generous with guidelines for defining "low income."

On May 1, the committee met to discuss the state of college football's Bowl Championship Series and calls for a playoff system. This is a huge debate with fans; most other people could care less. To wit: three members of the committee showed up for it. Read all about it at espn.com, if you care.

Other recent issues have included U.S.-Cuba trade relations, the federal response to Swine Flu, secrecy surrounding a fatal explosion at a Bayer chemical plant, Cybersecurity, and several hearings about health care. Unfortunately, there are no future hearings listed on the committee's calendar and I hope that is due to the holiday break.

Reconciliation
As I pointed out last week, if health care reform happens via the reconciliation process, several committees in both chambers will have a say in the process. Furthermore, even if health care reform is handled without reconciliation, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, and Rules will all be key players in the House. Energy and Commerce's role, of course, will be in coverage for children and any revisions to Medicaid.

When (if) the health care reform debate gains traction in Congress, it is very likely that members of the committees involved will be asked to sit on a select committee, similar to the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Most select committee may only make recommendations on legislation and may not actually report a bill to the floor. On the other hand, the work of a select committee can become the basis for future law. Stay tuned on this one.

Taking it a step further, when (if) health care reform actually passes, there will be an inter-committee turf war/power struggle between the Ways and Means Committee and the Energy and Commerce Committee over which one gets jurisdiction over a nationwide health insurance program. We might get extremely lucky and one committee will concede the jurisdiction to the other, but that is highly unlikely since that is the same as surrendering power. It's hardly the most pressing issue of the debate, but one that could hijack the whole damned thing.

Subcommittees
There are five subcommittees under the full committee. The chair and ranking member are ex-officio members with voting privileges of all subcommittees to which they are not assigned. The chair emeritus is a non-voting ex-officio member of the subcommittees on which he is not a member. This means Dingell can question witnesses and join the debate, but not vote on amendments and final reporting.

Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection: Bobby L. Rush of Illinois is the chair and George Radanovich of California is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list. The jurisdiction is as follows:

1. Interstate and foreign commerce, including all trade matters within the jurisdiction of the full committee;
2. Regulation of commercial practices (the Federal Trade Commission), including sports-related matters;
3. Consumer affairs and consumer protection, including privacy matters generally; consumer product safety (the Consumer Product Safety Commission); and product liability; and motor vehicle safety;
4. Regulation of travel, tourism, and time; and,
5. Toxic substances and noise pollution.

That's pretty self explanatory, but I am wondering which member has the ability to regulate time. Maybe Bobby Rush is a Time Lord from Gallifrey. (In fairness, this provision probably has to do with Daylight Savings Time, but the second someone goes and develops time travel, this committee is going to be very busy.)

Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet: The subcommittee is chaired by Rick Boucher of Virginia and Cliff Stearns of Florida is the ranking member. The full membership list is here.

The jurisdiction is simple, but inclusive:

Interstate and foreign telecommunications including, but not limited to all telecommunication and information transmission by broadcast, radio, wire, microwave, satellite, or other mode.

In other words, these are the people you can complain to the next time someone flashes a breast for half a second during the Super Bowl or a troll starts mucking about in your blog post.

Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment: Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts is the chair and Fred Upton of Michigan is the ranking member. The full membership list is here. Markey is also chair of the select committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

The subcommittee's jurisdiction is as follows:

1. National energy policy generally;
2. Fossil energy, renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; energy information; energy regulation and utilization;
3. Utility issues and regulation of nuclear facilities;
4. Interstate energy compacts;
5. Nuclear energy and waste;
6. Superfund, RCRA, and the Safe Drinking Water Act;
7. The Clean Air Act; and,
8. All laws, programs, and government activities affecting such matters.

The committee recognizes that energy and environmental protection are necessarily intertwined. Energy production (i.e. coal power plants, nuclear reactors, oil and natural gas exploration) and consumption (i.e. driving, heating and air conditioning) have direct effects on the environment. Therefore, energy and environmental policy should be considered in tandem rather than in separate vacuums. Yes, sometimes government is efficient and intelligent.

Subcommittee on Health: Frank Pallone, Jr. of New Jersey is the chair and Nathan Deal of Georgia is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list.

Again, the jurisdiction is straight forward, but encompassing:

1. Public health and quarantine; hospital construction; mental health and research; biomedical programs and health protection in general, including Medicaid and national health insurance;
2. Food and drugs; and,
3. Drug abuse.

Highlighting is mine. Hint: here are some members to track and contact when health care reform hearings start. Considering the pretty specific mention of "national health insurance" in the jurisdiction, this subcommittee will likely end up with authority over any future programs and policies.

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations: Bart Stupak of Michigan is the chair and Greg Walden of Oregon is the ranking member. Here is the full membership list. The subcommittee's jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for oversight of agencies, departments, and programs within the jurisdiction of the full committee, and for conducting investigations within such jurisdiction.

I could not locate a full list of the Executive Branch agencies that fall under the oversight provision. However, some of the obvious ones include Department of Energy, Commerce Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Communications Commission, Food and Drug Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Consumer Product Safety Commission. Any additions would be welcome.

That's it for this week. Next week will likely be the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources since they will deal with Cap and Trade soon enough.

Crossposted at Daily Kos, Congress Matters, and Docudharma.