Considered Forthwith: Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

Welcome to the 16th 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.

Well, DK Greenworks week has come and gone, but the group lives on. Click the link and join us. In keeping with the green theme, this week I examine the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Here are the members of the committee:

Democrats: Barbara Boxer, California, Chair; Max Baucus, Montana; Thomas R. Carper, Delaware; Frank R. Lautenberg, New Jersey; Benjamin L. Cardin, Maryland; Bernard Sanders, Vermont; Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota; Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island; Tom Udall, New Mexico; Jeff Merkley, Oregon; Kirsten Gillibrand, New York; Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania.

Republicans: James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma, Ranking Member; George V. Voinovich, Ohio; David Vitter, Louisiana; John Barrasso, Wyoming; Mike Crapo, Idaho; Christopher S. Bond, Missouri; Lamar Alexander, Tennessee.

Jurisdiction

There is a connection between public works projects and the environment since the construction of things like highways, bridges, dams, and levees invariably affect the environment. In addition, this committee handles some economic development issues as there is often a connection among creating jobs, undertaking public works projects, and protecting the environment.

According to the committee's history, a Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds was formed in 1837 to oversee the development of federal buildings Washington, DC. During the committee reorganization of 1947, the committee came to be known as the Committee on Public Works.

As the federal government began to take on more and more public works projects, like the interstate highway system, the committee's power and relevance grew.

During the environmental movements of the 1960s and 1970s, Congress took a greater role in environmental protection. The Public Works Committee took the lead in passing the 1970 Clean Air Act and the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The Committee got its present name and even greater authority over more policy areas, notably endangered species and civilian nuclear power, in 1977.

Somewhere along the way, the committee also picked up jurisdiction over regional economic development since this also involves public works. More on this below.

Note that there is also a Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources with some overlapping jurisdiction.

The Committee's formal jurisdiction is as follows:

1. The following standing committees shall be appointed at the commencement of each to act until their successors are appointed, with leave to report by bill or otherwise on matters within their respective jurisdictions:

1. Air pollution.
2. Construction and maintenance of highways.
3. Environmental aspects of Outer Continental Shelf lands.
4. Environmental effects of toxic substances, other than pesticides.
5. Environmental policy.
6. Environmental research and development.
7. Fisheries and wildlife.
8. Flood control and improvements of rivers and harbors, including environmental aspects of deepwater ports.
9. Noise pollution.
10. Nonmilitary environmental regulation and control of nuclear energy.
11. Ocean dumping.
12. Public buildings and improved grounds of the United States generally,including Federal buildings in the District of Columbia.
13. Public works, bridges, and dams.
14. Regional economic development.
15. Solid waste disposal and recycling.
16. Water pollution.
17. Water resources.

(2) Such committee shall also study and review, on a comprehensive basis, matters relating to environmental protection and resource utilization and conservation, and report thereon from time to time.

Environmental protection

I won't get into a full discussion of all of the environmental protection statutes since that could take up multiple posts, but a few laws deserve mention. The big one is the Cap and Trade Bill. Initially, there was talk that the Senate would take up the bill soon, but Chairwoman Boxer has decided to hold off consideration until after the summer break.

Other than that, a handful of major laws form the basis of U.S. environmental policy and all of them fall under this committee's jurisdiction and most are enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency. These laws include the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act. For a full list of EPA enforced laws, click here. The Fish and Wildlife Service has information about endangered species.

Two technical notes. First, most new environmental policy takes the form of amendments to existing statues rather than new laws. A major exception is the current cap and trade bill, which represents a major new program rather than tweaks to the clear air act.

Second, the regulations that polluting industries are always griping about are usually rules issued by EPA and other executive branch agencies. Rules are technical policy while the act is a more of a broad framework. Congress can pass all kinds of laws saying that we need clean water, but it is up to the EPA to write the regulations that will make that happen.

This system is problematic on one level since these rules are indeed written by Washington DC bureaucrats -- rather than elected officials -- and influenced by both industry and environmental protection lobbyists. Take a really wild guess which one has more money. This is your motivation to join and donate to groups like The Sierra Club, which recently stopped its 100th coal plant from opening, from and The World Wildlife Federation. On the other hand, members of Congress do not have the expertise to write rules/regulations, so they defer to the experts while also conducting oversight to ensure that the rules are fair and effective.

Public works

I have to giggle a little bit and then get really depressed when I hear the small government advocates complain about public works projects like highways, bridges, levee and dams. The problem, of course, is that the private sector has no particular incentive to build these things. Even if they did, the final product would serve the interests of those who built them, and those interests are not necessarily the same as the public interest.

The Environment and Public Works Committee will eventually have to take up the authorization of a new highway bill, which is currently in the House. The proposed six-year $450 billion authorization is being held up over a discussion about how to pay for it. President Obama and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood would like to hold off on a new bill for 18 months to give him time to develop a comprehensive highway construction plan. The current authorization expires at the end of September. Typically when there is a hold up on a major spending authorization, Congress keeps the money flowing by doing three month reauthorizations of current funding levels. LaHood would like Congress to just accept that he needs a year and a half and just do the reauthorization all at once.

There is also the question of how to pay for the new highway bill. There has been talk of raising the 18.4 cent per gallon gasoline tax by another ten cents or more, but this might not be the best idea in a recession. Additionally, Americans are sensitive to gasoline price increases. Once again, the country and our politicians have to make the difficult decision to pay for the infrastructure we desperately need.

Economic Development

The committee has jurisdiction over regional economic development commissions. One example I will offer -- mostly because I am familiar with it -- is the Appalachian Regional Commission. ARC was created in 1965 to help this historically impoverished region to improve its economy. The region stretches from northeastern Mississippi to New York's Southern Tier. Each year, ARC awards grants to projects intended to create jobs. A major component of economic development is highway construction. Few major employers will set up shop in an area that is inaccessible to reasonable highway systems.

I am most familiar with ARC's work in converting U.S. Route 15 between Williamsport, Pa. and Corning, N.Y. This is a major north-south corridor in the region. In 1962, a group of three businessmen from Mansfield, Pa. (my last home) started a local effort to improve what was essentially a two-lane mountain road. They rallied local support and lobbied Congress to get the highway project underway. Work to expand the road to a four -lane highway did not actually begin until the 1990s and there is still a six mile section in New York that needs to be finished. Regardless, there has been a marked reduction in fatal accidents and an increase in economic activity in the region and it will eventually become part of Interstate 99.

Here is a map showing the ARC region and some of the highway projects they have helped to fund over the years:



Naming buildings

Thousands of bills are introduced each Congress. Only a couple hundred actually pass. Of these, a large number are bills to name public buildings. This committee has the responsibility for reviewing such requests. Thus, this committee sees a relatively large percentage of its bills pass.

Do you want to see your name engraved on a federal building? Don't get your hopes up. Here are the guidelines for naming buildings:

The committee may not name a building, structure or facility for any living person, except former Presidents or former Vice Presidents of the United States, former Members of Congress over 70 years of age, former Justices of the United States Supreme Court over 70 years of age, or Federal judges who are fully retired and over 75 years of age or have taken senior status and are over 75 years of age.

In other words, very few people are even eligible until they die. Sorry about that.

Current legislation and hearings

This week's three hearings will focus on the impact of global warming legislation on agriculture/forestry, transportation, and the economy respectively. The website does not indicate if live webcasts will be available, but you can watch past hearings.

In addition, the committee has quite a few pending bills. The committee's website is very useful because they actually list all of the bills that have been referred to the committee. Here are a few examples of the bills currently in committee:

A bill to prohibit the use of stimulus funds for signage indicating that a project is being carried out using those funds. -- Judd Gregg

Writer's note: errrr... Okay.

A bill to amend title 23, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Transportation to require that broadband conduit be installed as part of certain highway construction projects, and for other purposes. -- Amy Klobuchar

A bill to permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the Unites States, and for other purposes. -- Mike Crapo

A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to temporarily prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from considering global climate change as a natural or manmade factor in determining whether a species is a threatened or endangered species, and for other purposes. -- John Barrasso

A resolution recognizing the need for the Environmental Protection Agency to end decades of delay and utilize existing authority under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act to comprehensively regulate coal combustion waste and the need for the Tennessee Valley Authority to be a national leader in technological innovation, low-cost power, and environmental stewardship. -- Barbara Boxer

Global Warming and Polar Bears

There is a debate about whether or not to list animals as endangered due to global warming. This was the genesis of Joe Scarborough hates polar bears. Global Warming is destroying the polar bears' habitat. Of course, if the government lists the polar bear as an endangered species due to global warming, then we are explicitly stating that global warming is caused by humans. Thus, despite the objections of the global warming deniers, we might actually have to address the problem.

The majority side of the committee has created an excellent page about the plight of the polar bear. Of course, there are some people who don't think global warming is real or that if is real that human activity has nothing to do with it. That calls for a polar bear face palm:



And for more facepalm worthy material, we now turn to...

Minority home page

The official voice of the committee in Internet land is controlled by the majority party, but the minority gets their own page. There is a lot of lunacy here, but I want to highlight Ranking Member Inhofe's decision to post this: More Than 700 (Previously 650) International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims. There is even a prominent link on the welcome page.

To find evidence that this "report" is disingenuous, see links here, here, and here.

This quote from the first source is telling:

the list was padded with TV weathermen, economists and so on and contained very few actual climate scientists.

I won't go any further into this, but we should be aware that such misinformation is being actively promoted by the Republican Party.

Subcommittees

The subcommittee structure changed slightly in the 111th Congress. Most notably, children's health was given its own subcommittee. Here are the committees and their jurisdictions.

Children's Health: Amy Klobuchar is the chair and Lamar Alexander is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for policy issues in connection with protection of pregnant women, infants and children from environmental hazards

Clean Air and Nuclear Safety: Thomas R. Carper is the chair and David Vitter is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Clean Air Act, Indoor Air, Tennessee Valley Authority, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Nuclear Plant Safety

Green Jobs and the New Economy: Bernie Sanders is the chair and Christopher "Kit" Bond is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Responsibility for issues related to job creation through the development and deployment of “green” technologies and practices. Issues also include federal investment in technologies and practices that reduce the government’s carbon footprint or the emission of other pollutants, including technologies and practices that enhance energy efficiency, conservation, or renewable power sources.

Oversight: Sheldon Whitehouse is the chair and John Barrasso is the ranking member. Here is the jurisdiction:

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

Those agencies include:

The committee's oversight extends to programs in five cabinet level departments and seven independent agencies, including the Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service, the Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration and the Coast Guard, the Department of Commerce's Economic Development Administration and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the GSA's Public Buildings Service, the Council on Environmental Quality, the civil works program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Appalachian Regional Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Mississippi River Commission, and the nonperforming functions of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

Superfund, Toxics and Environmental Health: Frank Lautenberg is the chair and James Inhofe is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Superfund and Brownfields, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), including recycling, Federal Facilities and interstate waste, Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA), Chemical Safety Board, Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), Environmental Justice and Risk Assessment

Transportation and Infrastructure: Max Baucus is the chair and George Voinovich is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Public Buildings, Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), Economic Development Administration, Historic Preservation, National Dam Safety Program, Stafford Act and federal disaster relief programs, Mississippi River Commission, Green Buildings

Water and Wildlife: Ben Cardin is the chair and Mike Crapo is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

Clean Water Act, including wetlands; Safe Drinking Water Act; Coastal Zone Management Act; Invasive Species; Fisheries and Wildlife, Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Wildlife Refuges; Outer Continental Shelf Lands

That's it for this week. Next week will probably be the armed services committees and any movement on DADT unless something else comes up or I get a suggestion for something else.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
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, Docudharma, and my own blog.

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 "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: Senate Judiciary Committee

Welcome to the tenth 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 or use the link on my blogroll. I welcome criticisms and corrections in the comments.

This week I will look at the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The committee's jurisdiction is very similar to the House Judiciary Committee (the Forthwith diary is posted here). There is one big difference, though. The Senate committee gets to hold hearings on judicial confirmations, so this seems timely.

Additionally, the committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on an important gay rights/immigration bill (see Uniting American Families Act below).

Note: last week I mentioned that the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources will likely get the Cap and Trade bill. It turns out that the Environment and Public Works Committee has jurisdiction on global warming legislation. However, there is a an argument for sending it to either committee. This might wind up as a multiple referral.

Here are the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Democrats: Patrick Leahy, Chairman, Vermont; Herb Kohl, Wisconsin; Dianne Feinstein, California; Russ Feingold, Wisconsin; Chuck Schumer, New York; Dick Durbin, Illinois; Ben Cardin, Maryland; Ron Wyden, Oregon; Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island; Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota; Ted Kaufman, Delaware; Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania

Republicans: Jeff Sessions, Ranking Member, Alabama; Orrin Hatch, Utah; Chuck Grassley, Iowa; Jon Kyl, Arizona; Lindsey Graham, South Carolina; John Cornyn, Texas; Tom Coburn, Oklahoma

Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III (hey, if the wingnuts insist on using President Obama's middle name) is only the ranking member temporarily. When the 112th Congress convenes, Grassley will take over the ranking member post (assuming he gets reelected) or the chairmanship if the Democrats manage to lose a net of 11 Senate seats. In 2012, the plan is for Sessions to take the ranking member spot on the Budget Committee while Grassley will give up his spot on the Finance Committee to take over on the Judiciary Committee. If you haven't guessed, Senators only get to chair or serve as ranking member one committee at a time. Additionally, there are term limits on the seats and the leadership position assignments are typically based on seniority. CQ Politics had the full explanation here.

Jurisdiction

The Senate Judiciary Committee's jurisdiction is nearly identical to the House Judiciary Committee's jurisdiction. I could not find an explicit statement of the committee's jurisdiction on their website, so this one is from the Center for Responsive Politics (better known as opensecrets.org):

Apportionment of Representatives; bankruptcy, mutiny, espionage, and counterfeiting, civil liberties; constitutional amendments; Federal courts and judges; Government information; holidays and celebrations; immigration and naturalization; interstate compacts generally; judicial proceedings, civil and criminal, generally; local courts in the territories and possessions; claims against the United States; national penitentiaries; Patent Office; patents, copyrights, and trademarks; protection of trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies; revision and codification of the statutes of the United States; and state and territorial boundary lines.

I listed the House Judiciary Committee's jurisdiction in this diary. This diary will focus on two main differences: apportionment of representatives and nomination hearings. Under the Constitution, the Senate is solely responsible for approving appointments under the advise and consent clause.

Nomination Hearings

Right now, we are all excited Sonia Sotomayor's upcoming confirmation hearing. Obviously, this will be important, but the committee deals with a lot of nominations every year. Specifically, there are 875 federal judicial positions nationwide that are subject to Senate confirmation. These are lifetime appointments. In addition, the committee holds hearings for a number of top positions in the Executive Branch.

Granted, the SCOTUS nominations are important. However, the publicity is overblown in comparison to the other nominations. During the Bush era, many of the judges who were appointed to the federal bench were as wingnutty as the President himself and that will probably be his legacy. Consider this reporting from the LA Times:

"Some of the appeals courts will be quite far to the right for a generation to come. So why is the Senate rushing to confirm as many of these terrible nominees as possible?" asked Simon Heller, a lawyer for the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group.

He gives the Republicans more credit than the Democrats for adhering to the party line. "Republican senators have voted in lock step to confirm every judge that Bush has nominated. The Democrats have often broken ranks," he said.

Conservatives tend to agree on that point. They say the ideological makeup of the courts has grown into a major issue on the right, and it has brought Republicans together, whether they are social conservatives, economic conservatives or small-government libertarians.

The important point to remember is that the Supreme Court typically considers less than 100 of the thousands of cases that they receive each year. (Incidentally, the court clerks have a large influence on which cases are even considered.) This means that the rulings of the District Appeals Courts are often the final word on questions of law.

On the other hand, this guy was a Bush nominee, too.

The next section will examine the nomination processes for judicial and executive appointments. These will be brief descriptions, but full rundowns are available here and here. This nomination process is part of the "checks and balances" and "separation of powers" that your high school civics teacher talked about.

The process for judicial nominations: The committee handles appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, U.S. District Courts, and the Court of International Trade.

The first step is for the president (in consultation with his/her advisers) to name a nominee. This is also part of the separation of powers. Congress cannot pick their preferred nominee; they can only approve or deny the president's choice. The nominations are then automatically referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The next step is for the committee to collect information about the nominee. The nominee is expected to submit answers to a questionnaire, which is not unlike an indepth resume. The questionnaire that Sotomayor must fill out is here (pdf link).

The committee also receives ratings from the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. These ratings evaluate a nominee's integrity, competence, and temperament. They say nothing about political leanings or philosophy.

Finally, the Senators from the nominee's home state receive blue slips. The Senators use these blue slips to indicate their support for or opposition to holding a hearing on a nominee. This is part of the "Senatorial Courtesy" tradition. The committee's website indicates that "the return of a positive "blue slip" is not a commitment by either home state Senator to support or oppose, a pending nomination." However, a lack of support from one's own Senator can seriously undermine a nominee's appointment to a lower court. The point is that the committee cannot possibly know everything about every judge in the country and Senate is willing to defer to the opinion of the members who would know the local judges. Indeed:

Throughout the nation's history, appointments to judicial posts below the Supreme Court have generated little controversy. This has been due in part to the large number of such appointments and to the tradition of "senatorial courtesy," which defers to the preferences of senators belonging to the president's party who represent a particular nominee's home state.

Blue slips and Senatorial Courtesy are not a consideration with a Supreme Court nomination since the high court has jurisdiction over the entire country and not just a part of a state or a few states.

The next step -- however unofficial -- is for the media, special interest groups, other Senators, and now the blogoshere to go bat shit crazy about the nominee. Perceived opponents scramble to find that one nugget of bad information that will sink the nominee while supporters scream that the attacks are untrue and/or irrelevant. This phase applies to SCOTUS nominees only; other nominees are usually allowed to fly under the radar.

Next is the actual hearing, if requested, before the full committee. For obvious reasons, hearings are always held for Supreme Court nominees. This is the real power of the committee and the advantage of seniority. The character of the questioning influences public opinion and more importantly the opinions of Senators. For example, between the pre-hearing framing and the intense questioning, Robert Bork never really had a chance at confirmation. It's probably worth mentioning that Bork on the court would be a disaster for Progressives, but there's no arguing that the term "borked" has become a term for character assassination due to the intense questioning he went through. Another example is the Clarance Thomas hearings. Anita Hill's allegations that Thomas sexually harassed her did not stop the nomination, but it did start the national conversation about sexual harassment.

As for the seniority issue, members of the committee question nominees and other witnesses in order of seniority, alternating between the parties. That means Arlen Specter gets to go dead last. Had he not switched parties, we would have gone second. Basically, the Senator with the least seniority is stuck rehashing questions that have already been asked or asking the nominee his or her cat's name. Even if the most junior member has an important question to pose, the media has already written their stories and passed judgment on the nominee based on earlier interrogation.

After the hearing, members may submit follow up questions. These followups fly under the radar unless a member decides to make a big deal about it. The committee then votes on the nomination. If the committee votes in favor of the nomination, it is reported to the full Senate for a final vote. Of course, we are aware that the GOP is confused whether or not it is a good idea to filibuster a Supreme Court nominee.

The Supreme Court nomination hearings are typically slated for early to mid September after Congress reconvenes after Labor Day so that the nomination is confirmed before the court's start date of Oct. 1.

Executive nominations: The process for Executive Branch nominations is similar procedurally to those for the Judicial Branch. The difference is that there are no blue slips, questionnaires, or ratings from private organizations. Some of the key posts the committee considers include attorney general; assistant secretary of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and director of Citizenship and Immigration Service within Homeland Security; the directors of FBI, ATF, U.S. Marshalls, DEA; and 93 U.S. Attorneys and 94 U.S. Marshals. Here is the full list.

Apportionment of Representatives

This is one of those things that literally only comes up once a decade. Following the decennial census the 435 seats in the House are divided among the states so that each member of the House represents approximately the same number of people. With population movements, Northeastern states have been losing House seats while the South and Southwest have been gaining seats. This is typically a fairly mechanical process, but this is the committee that gets the final say.

Of course, there is the possibility that the committee may have to make some close calls. For example, if Utah and California have an equal claim to another Representative, a Democratically controlled committee would probably be inclined to award the seat to reliably Blue California. It is later up to the states to gerrymander draw the new congressional districts.

Uniting American Families Act

This is an important bill that falls under the Judicial Committee's jurisdiction. On Wednesday June 3 at 10 a.m., the full committee will hold a hearing on the Uniting American Families Act. Under current U.S. law, American citizens may sponsor their spouses for citizenship. Same sex couples do not have the same right. The Uniting American Families Act would remedy this. This is one of things that we should publicize and contact our Senators about. Of course, this is also an opportunity for the GOP to pull the ever elusive homophobia/xenophobia two-fer. I'm going to tune in.

Subcommittees

There are seven subcommittees under the full committee. Unlike many other committees, the Judiciary Committee does not have a specific oversight subcommittee. Instead, the various committees conduct oversight within their own jurisdictions. Here are the subcommittee leaders and jurisdictions.

Administrative Oversight and the Courts: Sheldon Whitehouse is the chair and Jeff Sessions is the ranking member. The jurisdiction is:

(1) Court administration and management; (2) Judicial rules and procedures; (3) Creation of new courts and judgeships; (4) Bankruptcy; (5) Administrative practices and procedures; (6) Legal reform and liability issues; (7) Oversight of the Department of Justice grant programs, as well as government waste and fraud; (8) Private relief bills other than immigration; (9) Oversight of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission.

Regarding point 8, a private bill is legislation that only applies to one person or a small group of people. For example, if Congress decides that you (and only you) are allowed to grow marijuana, Congress would pass a private bill to that effect.

Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights: Herb Kohl is the chair and Orrin Hatch is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Oversight of antitrust law and competition policy, including the Sherman, Clayton and Federal Trade Commission Acts; (2) Oversight of antitrust enforcement and competition policy at the Justice Department; (3) Oversight of antitrust enforcement and competition policy at the Federal Trade Commission; (4) Oversight of competition policy at other federal agencies.

The Constitution: Russ Feingold is the chair and Tom "I never met a hold I didn't like" Coburn is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Constitutional amendments; (2) Enforcement and protection of constitutional rights; (3) Statutory guarantees of civil rights and civil liberties; (4) Separation of powers; (5) Federal-State relations; (6) Interstate compacts.

Crime and Drugs: Arlen Specter is the chair and Lindsey Graham is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Oversight of the Department of Justice's (a) Criminal Division, (b) Drug Enforcement Administration, (c) Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, (d) Office on Violence Against Women, (e) U.S. Marshals Service, (f) Community Oriented Policing Services and related law enforcement grants, (g) Bureau of Prisons, (h) Office of the Pardon Attorney, (i) U.S. Parole Commission, (j) Federal Bureau of Investigation, and (k) Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, as it relates to crime or drug policy; (2) Oversight of the U.S. Sentencing Commission; (3) Youth violence and directly related issues; (4) Federal programs under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended (including the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act); (5) Criminal justice and victims' rights policy; (6) Oversight of the Office of National Drug Control Policy; (7) Oversight of the U.S. Secret Service; (8) Corrections, rehabilitation, reentry and other detention-related policy; and (9) Parole and prohibition policy.

Human Rights and the Law: Richard Durbin is the chair and Tom Coburn is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Human rights laws and policies; (2) Enforcement and implementation of human rights laws; (3) Judicial proceedings regarding human rights laws; and (4) Judicial and executive branch interpretations of human rights laws.

Immigration, Refugees and Border Security: Charles Shumer is the chair and John Cornyn is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Immigration, citizenship, and refugee laws; (2) Oversight of the immigration functions of the Department of Homeland Security, including U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Ombudsman Citizenship and Immigration Services; (3) Oversight of the immigration-related functions of the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement, and the Department of Labor; (4) Oversight of international migration, internally displaced persons, and refugee laws and policy; and (5) Private immigration relief bills.

Yes, these would be the border fence people.

Terrorism and Homeland Security: Ben Cardin is the chair and Jon Kyl is the ranking member. Their jurisdiction is:

(1) Oversight of anti-terrorism enforcement and policy; (2) Oversight of Department of Homeland Security functions as they relate to anti-terrorism enforcement and policy; (3) Oversight of State Department consular operations as they relate to anti-terrorism enforcement and policy; (4) Oversight of encryption policies and export licensing; and (5) Oversight of espionage laws and their enforcement.

Interestingly, the House established a separate Homeland Security Committee while the Senate handles those issues within a subcommittee.

For more information about the history of the committee, the past subcommittees (for example, the now defunct Youth Violence Subcommittee) can be found here. A history of the full committee since its founding in 1816 is available here.

A few highlights: This was the committee that debated the Missouri Compromise, handled the emergency war powers during the Civil War, and reported the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Committee, then chaired by Dixiecrat James Easton of Mississippi refused to schedule hearings on the Civil Rights Act of 1957. This prompted the Senate to bypass the committee system and bring the bill directly to the floor for debate and a vote. The committee has only held public hearings on Supreme Court nominees since 1955. Before 1916, the committee closed their investigative hearings and in the interim only a few hearings were open.

That's it for this week. Next week will probably be the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works unless news breaks about a relevant committee or someone makes a good any suggestion in the comments.

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.