Considered Forthwith: House Oversight Committee

Welcome to the 21st 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.

Congress is still in recess (until Tuesday), but the committees are coming back to life and scheduling hearings. This week I will be taking a look at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This is the main investigative committee in the House. While most other committees have the power to conduct investigations, this committee exists to provide another layer of oversight. The committee also has jurisdiction over several specific operations of the federal government and the local affairs of the District of Columbia.

Members

Edolphus Towns of New York took over the chairmanship of this committee after Henry Waxman took over the gavel on the Energy and Commerce Committee. Darrell Issa of California is the ranking minority member. Here are the members of the Oversight Committee:

Democrats: Chairman Edolphus Towns, New York; Paul E. Kanjorski, Pennsylvania; Carolyn B. Maloney, New York; Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland; Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio; John F. Tierney, Massachusetts; Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri; Diane E. Watson, California; Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts; Jim Cooper, Tennessee; Gerry Connolly, Virginia; Mike Quigley, Illinois; Marcy Kaptur, Ohio; Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia; Patrick Kennedy, Rhode Island; Danny Davis, Illinois; Chris Van Hollen, Maryland; Henry Cuellar, Texas; Paul W. Hodes, New Hampshire; Christopher S. Murphy, Connecticut; Peter Welch, Vermont; Bill Foster, Illinois; Jackie Speier, California; Steve Driehaus, Ohio

Republicans: Darrell Issa, California, Ranking Minority Member; Dan Burton, Indiana; John M. McHugh, New York; John L. Mica, Florida; Mark E. Souder, Indiana; John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee; Michael Turner, Ohio; Lynn A. Westmoreland, Georgia; Patrick T. McHenry, North Carolina; Brian Bilbray, California; Jim Jordan, Ohio; Jeff Flake, Arizona; Jeff Fortenberry, Nebraska; Jason Chaffetz, Utah; Aaron Schock, Illinois

Jurisdiction:

As noted above, this committee is primarily an oversight and investigations body and has a few other roles within the federal government. Here is the formal statement of jurisdiction:

Legislative Responsibilities
The legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform includes the following areas, as set forth in House Rule X, clause 1:

• Federal civil service, including intergovernmental personnel; and the status of officers and employees of the United States, including their compensation, classification, and retirement;
• Municipal affairs of the District of Columbia in general (other than appropriations);
• Federal paperwork reduction;
• Government management and accounting measures generally;
• Holidays and celebrations;
• Overall economy, efficiency, and management of government operations and activities, including federal procurement;
• National archives;
• Population and demography generally, including the Census;
• Postal service generally, including transportation of the mails;
• Public information and records;
• Relationship of the federal government to the states and municipalities generally; and
• Reorganizations in the executive branch of the government.

And here is the section dealing with oversight responsibilities:

Oversight Responsibilities

The oversight responsibilities of the Committee are set forth in House Rule X, clauses 2, 3, and 4.

House Rule X, clause 2(b), provides that the Committee shall review and study on a continuing basis—

(A) the application, administration, execution, and effectiveness of laws and programs addressing subjects within its jurisdiction;

(B) the organization and operation of Federal agencies and entities having responsibilities for the administration and execution of laws and programs addressing subjects within its jurisdiction;

(C) any conditions or circumstances that may indicate the necessity or desirability of enacting new or additional legislation addressing subjects within its jurisdiction (whether or not a bill or resolution has been introduced with respect thereto); and

(D) future research and forecasting on subjects within its jurisdiction.

House Rule X, clause 3(i), provides that the Committee shall “review and study on a continuing basis the operation of Government activities at all levels with a view to determining their economy and efficiency.”

House Rule X, clause 4(c)(1), provides that the Committee shall:

(A) receive and examine reports of the Comptroller General of the United States and submit to the House such recommendations as it considers necessary or desirable in connection with the subject matter of the reports;

(B) evaluate the effects of laws enacted to reorganize the legislative and executive branches of the Government; and

(C) study intergovernmental relationships between the States and municipalities and between the United States and international organizations of which the United States is a member.

And House Rule X, clause 4(c)(2), provides that the Committee “may at any time conduct investigations of any matter without regard to clause 1, 2, 3, or this clause [of House Rule X] conferring jurisdiction over the matter to another standing committee.”

Nearly every other Congressional Committee has oversight responsibility for the parts of the Executive Branch bureaucracy that fall under their respective jurisdictions. This reality makes the Oversight Committee seem redundant. However, there are no guarantees that a particular committee with jurisdiction will vigorously investigate (or investigate at all, for that matter) any given issue.

More to the point, this committee is a protection against out of control Iron Triangles. To seriously oversimplify, Iron Triangles refer to the often too cozy relationships among interest groups (i.e. lobbyists and contractors), Congress (particularly committee members and staffers) and bureaucrats. If a committee gets too cozy with those that they are supposed to oversee, the oversight can suffer. The oversight committee offers another layer of oversight. Here is a graphic showing how Iron Triangles work:



Current Investigations

As set forth in House Rule X, clause 4, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform may, at any time, conduct investigations of any matter regardless of whether another standing committee has jurisdiction over the matter. In 1998, Rep. Waxman formed the Special Investigations Division to conduct investigations into issues that are important to members of the Oversight Committee and other members of Congress.

It would be impossible to detail every investigation undertaken by this committee. I suggest checking out the investigations page to see a list of all of the major investigations the committee has handled in recent years. Here are some of the most recent announcements of the committee's activities.

SEC Personnel: Chairman Towns is seeking information about the level of experience of investigators at the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding the investigation of the Ponzi Scheme operated by Bernie Madoff. SEC's Office of the Inspector General reviewed the commission's work on the case and issued a scathing report Aug. 31. The executive summary is available here in .pdf format. The report indicates that SEC could have uncovered the scheme as early as 1992, but inexperienced personnel were assigned to the case and the SEC missed important red flags. Towns points out that a 2002 law gave the SEC the authority to offer higher pay than is usually seen in the federal government to recruit experienced and talented investigators, so he wants to know why key personnel on the case:

had “recently graduated from law school” or had “joined the SEC as his first job out of school.”

Federal Procurement System: An Aug. 7 Washington Post article titled A $191 Million Question: How a relationship between an Army official and a private contractor led to allegations of collusion and impropriety caught Chairman Towns' attention. (And you thought the traditional media had shirked its responsibilities a long time ago.) Towns sent a letter to the U.S. Merit Protection Board requesting information about this matter. This is not exactly a Strongly Worded Letter ™. "Requests" for information from Congress are not to be taken lightly.

This situation is a classic example of an Iron Triangle (though the alternate term "cozy triangle" seems more appropriate). In this instance, a technology program director for the Army and an executive in a military contracting company were very close personally (though he claims they were not romantically involved). In any case, he provided her with information about upcoming contracts, allowing her company to write proposals that all but ensured her company would win the contracts. Even if the government got the best deal for the best price, the situation reeks of impropriety.

Bank of America bailout: Towns is also seeking documents related to the Bank of America - Merrill Lynch merger likely with an eye on future hearings and investigations. When Bank of America acquired Merrill Lynch at the beginning of this year, BoA's stock prices tanked badly -- within three weeks, the bank's stock price dropped 78 percent. The Treasury Department dutifully (though probably reluctantly) forked over a $20 billion bailout and the American taxpayers are now on the hook for that money. To be sure, this is the latest in a string of investigations into the merger that the Wall Street Journal frankly called "A Deal From Hell." For example, three days before Towns called for the investigation, Subcommittee on Domestic Policy Chair Dennis Kucinich took credit for uncovering bonuses promised to Merrill Lynch executives that greased the way for the merger vote.

There is certainly a whole lot more to this story, but I will leave it at that for the sake of salvaging some kind of brevity here.

Whistleblowers

Have you got a tip about possible corruption in the government? Here is the whistleblower contact information:

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5051

You can also contact them via e-mail through this portal: http://oversight.house.gov/contact/. In addition, there are separate tip lines for general tips; waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars; and steriods in professional sports. You don't even have to include your name.

District of Columbia

From the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

That means the federal government was granted the Constitutional authority to run a town. James Madison discussed the need for a separate entity for the nation's capital in Federalist 43 in which he argues that the seat of the government needs to be insulated from the legislative whims of any state that would host the capital.

Initially, the populated areas of the district generally only consisted of the hamlets of Georgetown on the northern bank of the Potomac River and Alexandria on the southern bank. (Alexandria was returned to Virginia in 1846 in a compromise over slavery.) Since the original federal government was envisioned as very limited in scope and the climate was terrible (it was a swamp, after all), few people expected the population to grow very much. However, the government did grow, particularly during the Civil War and later during the New Deal era. This growth, in turn, attracted government workers, special interest groups, and people to actually build and staff all of the things that make a city a city.

Congress continued to directly govern the growing district until 1973 when the Home Rule Act devolved certain powers to the city and provided for a mayor and city council to make local decisions. Regardless, Congress still retains the power to overturn local laws. This committee and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs has jurisdiction over such matters. This is also the reason why the delegate from DC traditionally sits on the House Oversight Committee.

A case in point is the DC council's decision earlier this year to recognize same sex marriages performed elsewhere. Congress could have intervened, and thus touched off a debate that could have either opened the door to overturning the Defense of Marriage Act or conversely banned the practice entirely depending on the votes in Congress. However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged Congress to just let the issue slide, thus expanding same-sex marriage rights without actually doing anything.

Dissenting from this decision -- but not getting anywhere -- was Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the ranking member of the subcommittee that oversees the District.:

It’s not something I can let go softly into the night.... I recognize the Democrats are in the majority, but I represent the majority of Americans on this issue.

Well, he did not even get a press release on the minority home page at that time, much less a hearing on the matter.

Oversight under Republicans

This committee certainly can abuse its power. During Bill Clinton's term, the Republican-controlled committee issued 1,052 subpoenas compared to three under the Bush Administration. Put quite frankly:

An examination of committees' own reports found that the House Government Reform Committee held just 37 hearings described as ''oversight" or investigative in nature during the last Congress, down from 135 such hearings held by its predecessor, the House Government Operations Committee, in 1993-94, the last year the Democrats controlled the chamber.

Source

Instead of investing Jack Abramoff, 9/11, Plamegate, suppression of NASA supporting global warming, torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo, claims of WMD in Iraq, the Downing Street Memo, and the botched response to Hurricane Katrina, Committee Chair Thomas Davis was focused on Terri Schiavo (going as far as to issue a subpoena ordering her to appear before the committee) and steroid abuse in professional wrestling. Committee Democrats were even forced to use a small basement room to discuss the Downing Street Memo.

When Waxman took over the chair in 2007, he followed through with promises to step up oversight.

A note about postage stamps

I'm just putting this one out there. This is from the committee's rules:

Rule 20 -- Subjects of Stamps

The Committee has adopted the policy that the determination of the subject matter of commemorative stamps and new semi-postal issues is properly is for consideration by the Postmaster General and that the Committee will not give consideration to legislative proposals specifying the subject matter of commemorative stamps and new semi-postal issues. It is suggested that recommendations for the subject matter of stamps be submitted to the Postmaster General.

While the committee has the power to govern what images appear on postage stamps, they are refusing to waste their time punting such decisions to the Postal Service. Certainly, commemorative stamps can potentially set off damaging political firestorms over essentially nothing. What if the committee decided, for example, to put out a stamp commemorating the Roe v. Wade decision? The committee (and the rest of Congress for that matter) would be distracted from more important matters by a petty debate over stamps. The message here seems to be, it's somebody else's problem. Here are the 2009 commemorative stamp collections. My challenge to readers: can you detect the pronounced liberal bias going on here (snark).

Subcommittees

The Oversight Committee has five subcommittees to handle relevant business. Each of them also has their own webpage.The subcommittees are:

Domestic Policy:

Jurisdiction includes domestic policies, including matters relating to energy, labor, education, criminal justice, the economy, as well as the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Dennis Kucinich of Ohio is the chair and Jim Jordon of Ohio is the ranking member. Link

Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the District of Columbia:

Jurisdiction includes federal employee issues, non-appropriation municipal affairs of the District of Columbia, and the Postal Service, including post office namings, holidays, and celebrations.

Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts is the chair and Jason Chaffetz of Utah is the ranking member. Importantly, Delegate Elanor Holmes Norton is a member of the committee. Link

Government Management, Organization, and Procurement:

Jurisdiction includes management of government operations, reorganizations of the executive branch, and federal procurement.

Diane Watson of California is the chair and Brian Bilbray of California is the ranking member. This is the committee that will likely handle that procurement investigation discussed above. Link

Information Policy, Census, and National Archives:

Jurisdiction includes public information and records laws such as the Freedom of Information Act, the Presidential Records Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Census Bureau, and the National Archives and Records Administration.

William Lacy Clay of Missouri is the chair and Patrick McHenry of North Carolina is the ranking member. Link

National Security and Foreign Affairs:

Jurisdiction includes oversight of national security, homeland security, and foreign affairs.

John Tierney of Massachusetts is the chair and Jeff Flake of Arizona is the ranking member. Link

That's it for this week. I'm soliciting suggestions for next week.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
Conference Committees
Senate and House Budget Committees
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

This series appears at Congress Matters, Daily Kos, Progressive Electorate, Docudharma, and my own blog.

Considered Forthwith: Armed Services committees

Welcome to the 18th 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 will look at the House Armed Services Committee and Senate Armed Forces Committees. Obviously, these members are the ones to contact to advance the bill that would repeal the "Don't ask/don't tell policy." These are also the committees that need a proverbial kick in the pants to advance legislation that would close Gitmo. More information below.

Committee membership

First, here are the members of the House Committee:

Democrats: Ike Skelton, Chairman, Missouri; John M. Spratt, Jr., South Carolina; Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas; Gene Taylor, Mississippi; Neil Abercrombie, Hawai'i; Silvestre Reyes, Texas; Vic Snyder, Arkansas; Adam Smith, Washington; Loretta Sanchez, California; Mike McIntyre, North Carolina; Robert A. Brady, Pennsylvania; Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey; Susan A. Davis, California; James R. Langevin, Rhode Island; Rick Larsen, Washington; Jim Cooper, Tennessee; Jim Marshall, Georgia; Madeleine Bordallo, Guam; Brad Ellsworth, Indiana; Patrick Murphy, Pennsylvania; Hank Johnson, Georgia; Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire; Joe Courtney, Connecticut; David Loebsack, Iowa; Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania; Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona; Niki Tsongas, Massachusetts; Glenn Nye, Virginia; Chellie Pingree, Maine; Larry Kissell, North Carolina; Martin Heinrich, New Mexico; Frank Kratovil, Maryland; Eric Massa, New York; Bobby Bright, Alabama; Scott Murphy, New York; Dan Boren, Oklahoma

Republicans: John M. McHugh, Ranking Member, New York; Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland; Buck McKeon, California; Mac Thornberry, Texas; Walter B. Jones, North Carolina; Todd Akin, Missouri; Randy Forbes, Virginia; Jeff Miller, Florida; Joe Wilson, South Carolina; Frank LoBiondo, New Jersey; Rob Bishop, Utah; Mike Turner, Ohio; John Kline, Minnesota; Mike Rogers, Alabama; Trent Franks, Arizona; Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania; Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington; Mike Conaway, Texas; Doug Lamborn, Colorado; Rob Wittman, Virginia; Mary Fallin, Oklahoma; Duncan D. Hunter, California; John C. Fleming, Louisiana; Mike Coffman, Colorado; Tom Rooney, Florida

Here are the members of the Senate committee:

Democrats: Carl Levin (Michigan), Chairman; Edward M. Kennedy (Massachusetts); Robert C. Byrd (West Virginia); Joseph I. Lieberman (Connecticut); Jack Reed (Rhode Island); Daniel K. Akaka (Hawaii); Bill Nelson (Florida); Ben Nelson (Nebraska); Evan Bayh (Indiana); Jim Webb (Virginia); Claire McCaskill (Missouri); Mark Udall (Colorado); Kay R. Hagan (North Carolina); Mark Begich (Alaska); Roland W. Burris (Illinois)

Republicans: John McCain (Arizona), Ranking Member; James M. Inhofe (Oklahoma); Jeff Sessions (Alabama); Saxby Chambliss (Georgia); Lindsey Graham (South Carolina); John Thune (South Dakota); Mel Martinez (Florida); Roger F. Wicker (Mississippi); Richard Burr (North Carolina); David Vitter (Louisiana); Susan M. Collins (Maine)

These are relatively large committees for several reasons. For one thing, the military is the largest bureaucracy within the federal government, so the oversight and law-making functions are important.

More importantly, this is the authorizing committee for defense projects. For more background about the difference between authorizing and appropriating, check out my diary on the Appropriations Committees. In a nutshell, authorizing committees decide which projects to pursue while the appropriations committees decide whether or not to fund them. This is particularly important since the defense budget represents more than half of the government's discretionary spending.

Senate Committee Assignments

The House committees are fairly flexible in terms of how large they can be. As a result, the more prominent committees tend to have large memberships in order to accommodate members' preferences. Senate assignments rules, on the other hand, are very formalized. The two parties make their assignments and those are formally approved early in the session.

All of the Senate committees are classified as Super A, A, B, or C depending on the prominence and workload of the committee. Armed Services is one of the Democrats' five Super A committees. The others are Finance; Appropriations; Foreign Relations' and Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Republicans do not count Commerce, Science, and Transportation to be a Super A committee.

Chamber rules state that Senators are limited to service on two Class Super A/ Class A committees and one Class B committee. There are no limits on service on the Class C committees. Both Parties' rules limit members to service on only one Super A committee. For more about committee and chair assignments, check out the Senate's web page on these rules.

Jurisdictions

Here is the formal jurisdiction of the House Armed Services Committee:

(1) Ammunition depots; forts; arsenals; and Army, Navy, and Air Force reservations and establishments.
(2) Common defense generally.
(3) Conservation, development, and use of naval petroleum and oil shale reserves.
(4) The Department of Defense generally, including the Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, generally.
(5) Interoceanic canals generally, including measures relating to the maintenance, operation, and administration of interoceanic canals.
(6) Merchant Marine Academy and State Maritime Academies.
(7) Military applications of nuclear energy.
(8) Tactical intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the Department of Defense.
(9) National security aspects of merchant marine, including financial assistance for the construction and operation of vessels, maintenance of the U.S. shipbuilding and ship repair industrial base, cabotage, cargo preference, and merchant marine officers and seamen as these matters relate to the national security.
(10) Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and privileges of members of the armed forces.
(11) Scientific research and development in support of the armed services.
(12) Selective service.
(13) Size and composition of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force.
(14) Soldiers’ and sailors’ homes.
(15) Strategic and critical materials necessary for the common defense.

And here's the Senate Committee's official jurisdiction:

1. Aeronautical and space activities peculiar to or primarily associated with the development of weapons systems or military operations.

2. Common defense.

3. Department of Defense, the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, and the Department of the Air Force, generally.

4. Maintenance and operation of the Panama Canal, including administration, sanitation, and government of the Canal Zone.

5. Military research and development.

6. National security aspects of nuclear energy.

7. Naval petroleum reserves, except those in Alaska.

8. Pay, promotion, retirement, and other benefits and privileges of members of the Armed Forces, including overseas education of civilian and military dependents.

9. Selective service system.

10. Strategic and critical materials necessary for the common defense.

(2) Such committee shall also study and review, on a comprehensive basis, matters relating to the common defense policy of the United States, and report thereon from time to time.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

I won't get into the politics of DADT, except to say that I support a repeal and allowing gay and bisexual soldiers to serve in the military. For one thing, there are issues of equality to consider. For another, the military has very few Arabic and Farsi speakers and too many have been discharged under DADT.

Homosexuality in the U.S. military goes back to the Revolutionary War when Lt. Frederick Gotthold Enslin was drummed out of the service for attempting to engage in sodomy with another solider. For many decades, "sodomy" was classified as a crime under the Articles of War. In 1942, the policy of discharge for homosexuality was officially codified. Depending on the circumstances, soldiers discharged after being caught engaging in homosexual activity often could not collect veterans' benefits. Draftees during the Vietnam era sometimes claimed to be gay to avoid the draft.

Source

One of Bill Clinton's early efforts was to repeal the policy and allow gays, lesbians, and bisexuals to serve openly. Naturally the homophobes balked. The eventual compromise -- DADT -- was authored by Colin Powell and included in the Fiscal Year 1994 Defense Authorization Bill.

The repeal movement's current champion is Rep. Patrick Murphy (Pa-08). The former U.S. Army lawyer has introduced legislation in the last three Congresses to overturn DADT and allow gays, lesbians, and bisexuals to serve openly. Currently the bill is in the House Subcommittee on Military personnel. Murphy is a member and Susan A. Davis of California is the subcommittee chair. More information on the subcommittees appears below. Murphy's bill has 164 co-sponsors, but it is more important to get Chairwoman Davis to bring the bill to a markup/vote in the subcommittee and get Chairman Skelton to do the same in the full committee.

Other current issues

House Committee hearings: The House Committee has several hearings scheduled for this week, including professional development in the military, psychological stress of members of the military, and an assessment of the U.S.-Russian security arrangement.

Senate Committee hearings: This Week, the Senate Committee is dealing with several nominations, including Secretary of the Army.

Update: How did I miss this? The nominee for Secretary of the Army is John McHugh, the ranking member of the House Committee.

Gitmo: Both committees are dealing with the question of what to do with the prison at Guantanamo Bay. Earlier this month, the Senate Committee received testimony on the legal issues surrounding holding trials for the prisoners. Here is a link to the testimony and a webcast of the hearing. The House Committee last week marked up House Resolution 602 which would:

Requesting that the President and directing that the Secretary of Defense transmit to the House of Representatives all information in their possession relating to specific communications regarding detainees and foreign persons suspected of terrorism.

In addition, there are numerous bills in the two committees relating to the closing of Gitmo. The problem, of course, is that he have to find homes for the innocent and hold trials for the rest. Since the Bush Administration did exactly zero on this issue, this might unfortunately take a while. This is an issue we need to continue to pursue. We need to identify, try and punish the guilty and release the innocents.

Defense Authorization Act: Each year, Congress must pass the Defense Authorization Act, which sets the spending priorities for the Department of Defense for the year and make any Congressionally-directed policy changes like it did with DADT. (It will be up to the appropriations committees to actually fund those programs). The Senate passed the bill on Thursday. This was the bill that cut the authorization for those F-22s and expanded the hate crimes law. The House has already passed their version with significant differences. This bill will got to conference committee and a final vote will probably take place this fall. A full summary of the House version is on the committee's home page and here is the easy to understand round up from Congress Matters.

Subcommittees

Here is a brief run down of the subcommittees.

House subcommittees:

Readiness:

Military readiness, training, logistics and maintenance issues and programs. In addition, the subcommittee will be responsible for all military construction, installations and family housing issues, including the base closure process, and energy policy and programs of the Department of Defense.

Chair: Solomon Ortiz, Texas
Ranking member: J. Randy Forbes, Virginia

Seapower and Expeditionary Forces:

Navy and Marine Corps acquisition programs (except strategic weapons, space, special operations, and information technology programs) and Naval Reserve equipment. In addition, the subcommittee will be responsible for maritime programs under the jurisdiction of the Committee as delineated in paragraphs 5, 6, and 9 of clause 1(c) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

Chair: Gene Taylor, Mississippi
Ranking member: W. Todd Akin, Missouri

Air and Land Forces:

All Army and Air Force acquisition programs (except strategic missiles, special operations and information technology programs). In addition, the subcommittee will be responsible for deep strike bombers and related systems, National Guard and Army and Air Force reserve modernization, and ammunition programs.

Chair: Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Ranking member: Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland

Oversight and Investigations:

Any matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee, subject to the concurrence of the Chairman of the Committee and, as appropriate, affected subcommittee chairmen. The subcommittee shall have no legislative jurisdiction.

Chair: Vic Snyder, Arkansas
Ranking member: Rob Wittman, Virginia

Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities:

Department of Defense counter-proliferation and counter-terrorism programs and initiatives. In addition, the subcommittee will be responsible for Special Operations Forces; science and technology policy, including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and information technology programs; force protection policy; homeland defense and consequence management programs within the Committee’s jurisdiction; and related intelligence support.

Chair: Adam Smith, Washington
Ranking member: Jeff Miller, Florida

Strategic Forces:

Strategic weapons (except deep strike bombers and related systems), space programs, ballistic missile defense, intelligence policy and national programs, and Department of Energy national security programs (except non-proliferation programs).

Chair: Jim Langevin, Rhode Island
Ranking member: Michael Turner, Ohio

Military Personnel:

Military personnel policy, reserve component integration and employment issues, military health care, military education, and POW/MIA issues. In addition, the subcommittee will be responsible for Morale, Welfare and Recreation issues and programs.

Chair: Susan A. Davis, California
Ranking member: Joe Wilson, South Carolina

Source for jurisdictions

Senate Subcommittees
Airland
Emerging Threats and Capabilities
Personnel
Readiness and Management Support
Seapower
Strategic Forces

I don't have jurisdiction statements for the Senate subcommittees, but the membership lists are available at the link above.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
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

Note: Blogger Union rules state that, after doing this for 18 weeks with no pay, I get next weekend off. I almost feel like a Senator taking August off.

Crossposted on Daily Kos, Congress Matters, Docudharma, and my own blog.

Considered Forthwith: House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming

Welcome to the 15th 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 series usually runs on Sunday evening, but this is a special edition in honor of the DK Greenroots project. This evening, I will look at the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. This select committee was formed in March, 2007 after the Democrats took control of Congress to study policies intended to reduce America's dependence on fossil fuels, especially oil from overseas, and reduce greenhouse gasses.

If you are interested in environmental issues, please join DK GreenRoots, a new environmental advocacy group created by Meteor Blades and Patriot Daily. DK GreenRoots comprises bloggers at Daily Kos and eco-advocates from other sites. We focus on a broad range of issues and are always open to new ones. Over the coming weeks and months, DK Greenroots will initiate a variety of environmental projects, some political and some having nothing directly to do with politics at all. Some projects may involve the creation of eco working groups that can be used for a variety of actions, including implementing political action or drafting proposed legislation. We are in exciting times now because for the first time in decades, significant environmental legislation will be passed by Congress. It is far easier to achieve real change if our proposal is on the table rather than fighting rearguard actions. We alert each other to important eco-stories in the mainstream media and on the Internet, promote bloggers at one site to readers at other sites, connect bloggers of similar interests to each other and discuss crucial eco-issues. Come help us put these projects together. Bring ideas of your own. There is no limit on what we can accomplish together.

Here are the committee members:

Democrats: Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chairman; Earl Blumenauer of Oregon; Jay Inslee of Washington; John Larson of Connecticut; Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota; Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri; John Hall of New York; John Salazar of Colorado; Jackie Speier of California

Republicans: James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, Ranking Member; John Shadegg of Arizona; Candice Miller of Michigan; John Sullivan of Oklahoma; Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee; Shelley Capito of West Virginia

My humble take on Global Warming

I sincerely believe that human activity is a direct cause of the observed warming of the Earth in the last century. No, I don't think it has anything to do with the decline in the number of pirates in the world. If it did, I would be sailing the Seven Seas in search of booty and plunder right now.

If I am wrong, no matter. Even if spewing pollutants into the air is not actively altering earth's climate, it is still doing no favors for the environment, particularly in terms of air quality. Furthermore, I was raised to clean up my own mess, so we have a collective responsibility to minimize air pollution, even if global warming is a natural phenomenon unrelated to greenhouse gasses.

Select vs. Standing Committee

On Sunday, I wrote a brief overview of how Congressional Committees operate. However, this is a good time to note the difference between a standing and select committee. Select committees are temporary panels that are created by the chamber leadership to investigate certain issues. Select committees may hold hearings, but not mark up legislation. Standing committees are the permanent panels that do mark up bills and advance them to the full Chamber.

Jurisdiction

For those unfamiliar with the process, a committee's jurisdiction is the formal statement specifying the areas that a committee may address. This committee's jurisdiction is:

Jurisdiction: The select committee shall not have legislative jurisdiction and shall have no authority to take legislative action on any bill or resolution. Its sole authority shall be to investigate, study, make findings, and develop recommendations on policies, strategies, technologies and other innovations, intended to reduce the dependence of the United States on foreign sources of energy and achieve substantial and permanent reductions in emissions and other activities that contribute to climate change and global warming.

Admittedly, most citizens don't think to check with the House of Representatives' committee system system to get information about global warming and energy independence. This is more a resource for members and the reporters who cover them. For example, the committee recently promoted this story: National Climate Science Report Makes Strong Case for Immediate Action on Global Warming that should have turned some heads in Congress.

Furthermore, this is the official position of the majority party on global warming and energy independence, so we can rest assured that the House Democrats are generally on board with combating global warming, even if some voted against the American Clean Energy and Security Act also known as the Cap and Trade bill for their own reasons. If we can convert from fossil fuels -- particularly from overseas -- to non-polluting sources, then we can both protect the earth and unshackle ourselves from whims and politics of the members of OPEC.

In any event, this would be a good panel for Green Kossacks to track.

The importance of the committee

Energy and the environment are two problems that are inseparably linked. In the absence of efficient power sources (solar, wind, and geothermal) the production of energy pollutes since much of our electricity in generated through burning coal. Nuclear power does not directly pollute, but the toxic waste is a huge problem. Furthermore, the use of energy for transportation pollutes the air. Therefore, it is only reasonable to consider both issues together and the fact that this panel is addressing the two issues holistically rather than piecemeal is almost an innovation in governing.

Another important note is that this select committee was formed when the Democrats took office. We can all agree that the Republican record on the environment in general and global warming in particular is non-existent at best and a tragedy of epic proportions at worst. Just the establishment of the committee showed that the Democrats intend to take Global Warming seriously.

One indirect power of the committee is its members. Each one sits on at least one other committee that deals with climate change and energy independence issues. While this select committee has no direct power to alter legislation, members can take the ideas offered in hearings of the select committee and offer them as amendments to bills considered in standing committees.

In addition, the select committee is actively tracking legislation on topics they have investigated. Obviously, the major legislation right now is Cap and Trade, but there are plenty of other resources posted on the website. This committee's website is like a one stop shop for the latest on climate change legislation.

Debunking the deniers

The most frustrating part about addressing global warming is the fact that the deniers (sorry, they prefer to be called "doubters") are not only vocal, but very well funded.

From Newsweek:

But (Senator Barbara) Boxer figured that with "the overwhelming science out there, the deniers' days were numbered." As she left a meeting with the head of the international climate panel, however, a staffer had some news for her. A conservative think tank long funded by ExxonMobil, she told Boxer, had offered scientists $10,000 to write articles undercutting the new report and the computer-based climate models it is based on. "I realized," says Boxer, "there was a movement behind this that just wasn't giving up."

And the deniers may be winning on the public opinion front. From the same article:

Just last year, polls found that 64 percent of Americans thought there was "a lot" of scientific disagreement on climate change; only one third thought planetary warming was "mainly caused by things people do." In contrast, majorities in Europe and Japan recognize a broad consensus among climate experts that greenhouse gases—mostly from the burning of coal, oil and natural gas to power the world's economies—are altering climate.

On this page, the committee thoroughly debunks a denial piece that the Washington Post felt compelled to run in 2007. Sadly, while we are wasting time and paper arguing a point that is not really up for debate, we are also wasting time that could be better spent developing solutions.

In keeping with the theme of pushing back, let's check out the minority website. All of the committees have a minority website. Regardless of which party is in power, the official site is controlled by the majority, but the minority does get their own little corner of that slice of cyberspace. Here's what the Republicans have to say:

In the United States and around the globe, there's a debate about what affect emissions from cars, factories and power plants are having on the temperature of the Earth. This debate has inspired passion in some, fear in others, and a host of solutions, both good and bad.

snip

While searching for solutions, Republicans will urge Congress to be guided by these principles:

* First, any solution must produce real improvement to the environment. Some proposals would damage the economy without making any significant reductions in greenhouse gases.
* Second, any solution must focus on technologies from across the energy spectrum, from nuclear to clean coal to renewable energy to improved energy efficiencies.
* Third, any climate change policy must protect U.S. jobs and the economy.
* Finally, it must require global participation, including China and India, whose industrial growth is resulting in a tremendous rise in greenhouse gas emissions from these nations. This year, it is expected that China will surpass the U.S. in greenhouse gas emissions.

So far, so good. Nice platitudes. Now take a look at their latest press release and tell me if the GOP are concerned about playing the fear card:

Cap-and-Tax Bill Will Raise Energy Prices, Ship Jobs and Funds Overseas

So much for that.

And for what it's worth, Nate Silver figured out that a majority of Americans support Cap and Trade until their monthly energy bill increases by $18.75 per month. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the increase to be an average $14.58 per month.

Remember, too, that these global warming doubters deniers have managed to get themselves elected to congress. To name names, two of them are Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California. Even Select Committee Ranking Member James Sensenbrenner groused about the costs of halting global warming.

Some other committee studies

Beyond the ever present and ever unpleasant task of mythbusting global warming denials, the select committee has been busy with other studies. Some are positive ideas like tips for living more green at home, school and work. Others are dedicated to debunking other right wing myths.

Remember Drill, baby, drill? Here's what the committee has to say about that: "The facts are clear. America can not drill our way to energy independence."

They even included this pretty graphic:



Maybe they should have included this projection reported on Alternet which warns of up to 90 minor oil spills per day from increased offshore drilling.

Most recently, the select committee held a hearing on the impact of global warming on agriculture and forestry. Chairman Markey had this to say:

The findings of the report that rising temperatures, precipitation changes and increasing weeds, disease and pests will impact the productivity of farms and forests should make us all apprehensive.

source (.pdf link)

I have not read through all of the testimony. The important point to keep in mind, though, is that Congressional hearings typically get noticed by the traditional media and other members. Often, they will generate stories for the 24 hour news cycle. I could not find a specific story about this hearing, therefore I encourage the Progressive bloggers to take notice, too, and generate our own stories. To make it easier, many committees do live webcasts of hearings, so there is no reason why someone in California cannot watch hearings and write up a blog post on a story that the rest of the media ignore.

Here's a story that did grow legs, so to speak. Remember the debate about global warming's impact on the polar bear -- namely that Joe Scarborough doesn't care about polar bears. In January 2008 the committee held a hearing to ask Bush administration officials why they had not listed the species as endangered due to ice melts in the Arctic.

Markey even introduced a bill, that never got out of committee, to:

To prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from selling any oil and gas lease for any tract in the Lease Sale 193 Area of the Alaska Outer Continental Shelf Region until the Secretary determines whether to list the polar bear as a threatened species or an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, and for other purposes.

Source (.pdf link)

The polar bear has since been listed as "threatened," which does not have quite the same policy impact as "endangered," but it is a start.

If nothing else, this hearing generated interest in the media and the public. It also inspired this LOL:



Finally, the committee even has links to various carbon footprint calculators so that you can see exactly how much your lifestyle contributes to global warming and environmental degradation.

The whole point in writing this diary was to let everyone know that this committee exists and that they are doing something. Just the existence of the committee demonstrates the commitment of the House leadership to studying the causes of global warming, the effects of proposed policy, and ways to wean the country off of energy sources that pollute the environment and place us in strategically untenable political associations.

For more about other committees, check out my previous work:
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 at Congress Matters and Daily Kos.

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: The House Rules Committee

Crossposted at Congress Matters.

As promised and requested, this is the first in a new series about the various standing, special, and joint committees in the House and Senate.

The first topic is the House Committee on Rules. We're look at your committee, chairwoman Louise M. Slaughter (NY-28). (As an incidental side note for folks not familiar with the process, the committee chairs are members of the party controlling the chamber. The ranking member is sort of like a vice chair, who is a member of the opposition party. Therefore, until the the GOP is done with their 40 years in the political wilderness, the chairs will all be Democrats and the ranking members will all be Republicans.)

I am also trying to think of a good title for this series. I considered "Better know a committee," but that is too Colbertish. Besides, he might get a segment of the International Space Station named for him. I'm accepting suggestions.

On to the committee...

The Rules Committee does not have the same "sex appeal" of Appropriations or "gravity" of Armed Services. However, the House Rules Committee plays a key role in the legislative process and can effectively kill or save legislation. The composition of the the committee is 2:1 plus one for the majority party. The members are:

Full Committee

Democrats
Louise M. Slaughter NY-28 (chair)
James P. McGovern MA-3
Alcee L. Hastings FL-23
Doris Matsui CA-5
Dennis Cardoza CA-18
Michael Arcuri NY-24
Ed Perlmutter CO-7
Chellie Pingree ME-1
Jared Polis CO-2

Republicans
David Dreier CA-26 (ranking member)
Lincoln Diaz-Balart FL-21
Pete Sessions TX-32
Virginia Foxx NC-5

Legislative & Budget Process Subcommittee
Hastings(chair), Pingree, Cardoza, Polis, Slaughter, Diaz-Balart, Dreier

Rules & Organization of the House Subcommittee
McGovern(chair), Matsui, Arcuri, Perlmutter, Slaughter, Sessions, Foxx

I won't rehash the history of the Rules Committee. Instead, I will be detailing its current work. The Rules committee does have an interesting and rather extensive history on their website, accessible here. Knowing the history is important to understanding why the committee functions as it does. My concern, though, is how the committee works. I will mention that Rules was one of the original "select committees" from the First Congress and was formed on the second day of the First Congress.

Often called the "Speaker's Committee" the Rules Committee effectively functions as an extension of the House leadership. The Rules Committee is unique in that the Speaker hand selects her party's members of the committee. This means that the Speaker essential has almost total control over the committee.

The primary responsibility of the Rules Committee is to write a special rule for most bills that will be considered on the floor of the House and reviewing the rules of the Chamber. In addition, the committee has jurisdiction over the rules of the chamber and the budget process.

The full explanation of the committee's jurisdiction is here and the full text of the committee's rules is here. It is noteworthy that the only people who may offer testimony before the committee are other members of the House.

Special Rules

After a committee has considered a piece of legislation and written a report on that bill, the chair will typically request a special rule from the House Rules Committee and can request a specific type of rule. The special rule specifies how the bill will be debated and what amendments are in order.

The special rules also allows for bills to come up for consideration out of turn. According to chamber rules, bills are considered in the chronological order that they are listed on the House calendar. Because of this rule, important bills might not be considered before adjournment. The Rules Committee has the power to give a bill priority, effectively moving it to the front of the queue. (A bill can also come up by unanimous consent, special calendar days, suspension of the rules, and if a bill has privileged status. Appropriations and budget bills are among those with privileged status.)

There are four types of rules:

Open – Permits general debate for a certain period of time (the amount of time depends on the importance of the legislation and the legislative schedule) and allows any Member to offer an amendment under the five minute rule, provided that the amendment is in compliance with the standing rules of the House and the Budget Act.

Modified Open – Permits general debate and allows any Member to offer a germane amendment under the five minute rule subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process, and/or a requirement that amendments be pre-printed in the Congressional Record.

Modified Closed/Structured -- Permits general debate for a certain period of time, but the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered to those designated in the special rule or Rules Committee report to accompany the special rule. This type of rule may also preclude amendments to a particular portion of the bill, although the remainder of the bill may be completely open to amendment.

Closed – Permits debate for a certain period of time but permits no amendments to be offered.

source: The Rules Committee: Role and Process

Under the committee rules, the committee is to consult with the House leadership and the chair of the referring committee on the type of rule that is assigned to a bill. This is an important point, because this is a primary way the Speaker of the House and the leadership control the house. If Speaker Pelosi wants a bill considered as written, chances are good that the bill will get a closed amendment. If she wants a bill defeated, it will probably get an open rule in the hopes that the bill will be amended and debated to death.

Here's an example of a modified closed/structured rule (H.R. 1404, the Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement (FLAME) Act) for your reading pleasure. Notice that only 13 amendments are considered in order. This also provides a way for the leadership to keep party members in line: a member really does not want to risk being frozen out of the amendment process.

The floor procedure includes a debate and vote on the rule before consideration of the actual bill.

Following adoption of a rule, the Speaker also has the option of convening the committee of the whole. The committee of the whole includes every member of the House. They don't actually go anywhere, but the House operates under a different set of rules that allow for greater debate and amendments. If you are watching C-Span, you will see the Sergeant at Arms move the mace from the pedestal at the Speaker's Right to a pedestal at the Sergeant-At-Arm's desk. The Committee of the Whole can debate bills and offer amendments, but the full house must reconvene to take action on bills.

A note on Senate Procedures

Bills considered by the Senate do not get a rule. Bills come to the floor of the Senate by unanimous consent. Unlike the House rule referenced above, a unanimous consent agreement is rarely longer than a few sentences. This reflects one example of the greater discretion afforded to Senators under the chamber rules. The two most important differences are that Senators typically have unlimited time to talk and can offer amendments from the floor without going through a Rules Committee process. As a practical aspect of this difference in rules, it is hard enough to do business in the Senate with 100 members able to offer amendments. Allowing the same thing in a chamber of 435 members would be completely unworkable.

Other roles of the committee

The other primary role of the Rules Committee is to consider changes of rules for the House. This is defined as the committee's oversight role. The committee has until Feb. 15 of the year to inform the House Committee on Oversight and Reform and the Committee on House Administration of its plans for the year. Here is the plan for this year. pdf file. This year's plans range from the substantive (eliminating term limits for committee chairs and directing the Homeland Security Committee to increase its oversight functions) to the cosmetic (rewriting all rules to make the gender neutral and directing the clerk to only read those committees whose chairs will be calling up bills on Calendar Wednesday). Be sure to read the minority response for a good chuckle about Republicans whining about a lack of openness in government.

The Rules Committee also has responsibility for reconciling language in bills that went through multiple referrals. If more than one committee considers a bill, the resulting language from the separate markups will almost certainly be different. The Rules Committee decides which version the full House will consider.

Subcommittees
As previously noted, the Rules Committee has two subcommittees. Again, these committees do not directly consider legislation. Instead they focus on the process of considering legislation. The legislative process is anything but static.

The Legislative & Budget Process Subcommittee is charged with considering "measures or matters related to relations between the Congress and the Executive Branch." The subcommittee is primarily concerned with oversight of the budget process and any changes to the various budget acts that govern the process.

The Rules& Organization of the House Subcommittee has "general responsibility for measures or matters related to process and procedures of the House, relations between the two Houses of Congress, relations between the Congress and the Judiciary, and internal operations of the House." The subcommittee focuses on the jurisdiction of the various committees and the overall committee structure.

Other resources
Be sure to check out the committee's webpage. The front page outlines rules under consideration. This is a useful way to keep up to date about pending legislation. There are also links for understanding how congress works and the Legislative Process Program. Unfortunately, this is only open to Members and staffers, but the committee does offer a lot of educational materials from upcoming sessions.