The freshman class spent months knocking on doors, holding town halls and going to forums. They may be new to Washington, but they know who they are and why they’re here, and they’re ready to speak for the people who sent them.

I want them to be able to serve their constituents, so I want freshmen to be serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

If I’m chairman for a second term, we’re going to spend 2011 dragging the Obama administration to the Hill to explain what on earth it is doing in areas such as health care and energy. Nothing has gone quite so awry as the massive, government-run Obama health program, and it is plain that the individual mandate, the employee mandate, the abortion funding, the tangle of outsider/insider councils like the comparative effectiveness board and the effective nationalization of health care under grants of authority to the Department of Health and Human Services — all that has to go.

In short, the Energy and Commerce Committee will be the front lines in the battle to repeal ObamaCare, and stop job-killing environmental regulations, and provide an environment in which businesses, not government, create jobs. The new members – and the people they represent – deserve a seat at the table.

We allowed freshmen to serve on Energy and Commerce after Republicans gained the majority in 1995 and I will ask Speaker Boehner and the Republican leadership team to give freshmen a voice on the committee next year.

We’ll need some help on my committee making the changes America has asked for and I look forward to the energy, vitality and expertise the freshmen bring as we serve side-by-side on Energy and Commerce in the 112th Congress.

It looks as if voters were more than ready to show how much they’re fed up with the Democratic Party’s idea of healthcare reform by investing their trust in Republicans to repair the medical malpractice that took place under President Obama. Now it’s imperative that we Republicans respond with more than talk.

Delivering the goods should start with oversight hearings into exactly what went so wrong and the repeal of everything after the enacting clause of the law that set ObamaCare in place. The individual mandate, employee mandate, abortion funding, the tangle of outsider/insider councils like the comparative effectiveness board, and the effective nationalization of health care under grants of authority to the Department of Health and Human Services: All of those have to go. I hope we can move a repeal bill through the House in the first 90 days.

Next, we need the thoughtful creation and passage of healthcare reforms that make sense. I particularly want to ban insurers from rescinding coverage when their policyholders get sick and need to use their insurance. And an updated Patients’ Right to Know Act makes sense so that patients can know the actual price and quality of the care when making their healthcare decisions. This proposal would provide ways to collect and publicly disclose pricing and risk-adjusted quality data. Never again should patients get a bill on which a box of Kleenex tissues is featured as a pricey “mucus recovery system.”

Purchasing health insurance across state lines is another reform that’s overdue. This bill actually passed out of committee when I was chairman. People living in a state with expensive health insurance are now locked into those plans and do not have an opportunity to choose lower-cost insurance available in other states. Only in the restrictive world of health insurance do we find that goods and services don’t flow from one state to another state without restriction. I can’t think of a good reason why Americans should not be allowed to buy insurance coverage outside the state in which they live if the plan they buy is approved by the state where it is offered.

Still another priority should be reversing the Obama administration’s effort to demolish the Medicare Advantage programs. The chief actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that half of all seniors who select a Medicare Advantage plan will lose that coverage under ObamaCare, cutting 7.4 million people off from their insurance. “You can keep insurance if you like it” was one Obama promise worth keeping, even if it takes Republicans to get it done.

On Medicare, we face an even more immediate problem. The latest extension of Medicare payment rates to doctors expires on December 1, 2010, effectively cutting their pay, followed by a second cut on January 1, 2011. In total, doctors face approximately a 26% reduction in their rates of payment from Medicare, giving some an enormous incentive to simply stop accepting Medicare patients altogether. It’s time to solve this problem permanently.

We should also rescind the ban on expanding or creating physician-owned hospitals. It is a strength of the American free-enterprise system that people may own their own businesses, and doctors should not be excluded from that right.

Competitive bidding for Medicare-bought equipment is another area deserving our attention. The Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 required bidding, which Medicare says will save an average of 32 percent on the money paid under the current fee schedule.

Finally, I propose the creation of a task force with governors on a bipartisan basis to hold hearings on the state-federal welfare program, Medicaid. As we already know from governors on both sides of the partisan aisle, the federal mandate forces states to spend money they don’t have.

Crossposted at Human Events

An open letter to the gathering wave of new House Republicans:

In a turbulent campaign year, you are winning because you were honest with voters and you cut through the smog of media skepticism and Democrats’ acrimony. Those who win the trust of voters on election night will do so because you are the people in touch with America. I hope and expect that you will bring to Washington a perspective that’s been absent for too long, plus the determination to make it stick.

When you get here, there’s a fictional character that William Faulkner invented whom you’ll meet every day. He said, “Only thank God men have done learned how to forget quick what they ain’t brave enough to cure.” Lots of people here think like that.

They’re the ones who walk the yellow lines in the middle of the highway and will tell you it’s okay to accept 8 percent unemployment because it beats 10 percent.  They will urge you to embrace tax hikes that are only moderately destructive. They will advise government spending that only grows twice as fast, and explain patiently that a deficit that swells by a trillion dollars is okay because, after all, it could be worse. It’s insidious, and I hope you will reject the philosophy that tells us to forget what we “ain’t brave enough to cure.” Now is no time to compromise with failure.

I’m sure the people of your district aren’t terribly different from those in mine. They tell me in the plainest possible way that they want less government and more freedom.  What that means to me is lower taxes, a lot less waste, greater energy security, and enhanced worldwide competitiveness. By electing you, I think the people will be taking a big step at a crucial moment toward remaking their Congress into something that finally represents them and their neighbors.

We’ve had some modest success against very long odds in Democrat-dominated Congresses over the last four years. Radical cap-and-trade legislation was shelved because the more people heard about it, the more they disliked it. The objections to the vast new entitlements and health care mandates weren’t enough to stop ObamaCare altogether, but they did chase universal health care off the table. The fight has been uphill all the way, so I’m especially glad that because of the people of your districts, the cavalry is riding to the rescue.

With your help, the House will launch the new year by making it clear that we’re here to serve the people who work and pay taxes, and who expect us to deliver on our commitment to their agenda. Government runs on the money taken from their pockets, and I hope you agree with me that issue No. 1 should be sticking with the tax cuts so that working families are able to decide how to spend more of their own money.

Ending the president’s spending extravaganza in short order is a close second, and a fine place to start is through real entitlement reform. Entitlement spending amounts to $1.4 trillion and is now more than half the federal budget. Thanks to ObamaCare, entitlement programs are growing like crazy. They were costing each American taxpayer $7,698 a year even before the president decided that many more people needed a much larger share of other people’s earnings. I think the wage earners need some help, too, and that Washington can get along on a smaller share of their money. Those who believe in the sunrise also believe in the sunset, and it seems clear that the sun must set on some government spending.

The candidates I’ve talked with tell me that their successes so far prove how much Americans want real leadership, and that they’re fed up with liberal causes and with the sort of politics in which congressmen quietly trade freedom for bureaucracy one deal at a time.

When I look toward the 112th Congress, I see what the man who first brought me to Washington, Ronald Reagan, called “morning in America.” It can be that all over again if you reinvigorate our policymaking with an application of old values and new thinking.

Nearly every analyst in the country now says that the people are about to go to the polls and invest their trust in us. If they do decide to give us the chance, it will be because while Democrats were talking about the people, you were listening to the people. It’s not over until it’s over, but it sure looks like we Republicans are about to be afforded a unique opportunity to lead, and that’s because America wants you and me to succeed where the Democrats have failed.

Sincerely,

Joe Barton, Texas
Ranking Republican
House Energy and Commerce Committee

Crossposted at The Daily Caller.

On this page two weeks ago, Erick lamented the fact that American factory workers are losing jobs to China as a result of the de facto ban on the incandescent light bulb. Light bulbs seem to be a pretty simple part of our lives today. It gets dark, you flip a switch and presto – light happens. But a law passed by Democrats in 2007 – the Pelosi non-energy energy bill – banned nearly all use of the incandescent light bulb by 2014.

A recent Washington Post reported GE is shuttering a plant in Winchester, Va., killing 200 jobs in the process.

“‘Everybody’s jumping on the green bandwagon,’ said Pat Doyle, 54, who has worked at the plant for 26 years. But ‘we’ve been sold out. First sold out by the government. Then sold out by GE.’”

Turns out the compact florescent light bulb, or CFLs as they are commonly known, can’t be produced cheaply enough in America so we’ve turned to China, where virtually every CFL is produced.

Even the AFL-CIO isn’t happy about the move to CFLs. The labor union’s Web site, Screw That Bulb, makes the valid point that there are many ways to save electricity without shifting to the mercury-filled compact florescent bulb from China, or anywhere.

Fortunately, we were already working on legislation to repeal the ban. Today we’ve introduced H.R. 6144, the Better Use of Light Bulbs Act, which repeals the ban on the incandescent bulb that has been turning back the night ever since Thomas Edison ended the era of a world lit only by fire in 1879. It’s as simple as that, though technically it repeals Subtitle B of Title III of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

The unanticipated consequence of the ’07 act – Washington-mandated layoffs in the middle of a desperate recession – is one of many examples of what happens when politicians and activists think they know better than consumers and workers. From the health insurance you’re allowed to have, to the car you can drive, to the light bulbs you can buy, Washington is making too many decisions that are better left to people who work for their own paychecks and earn their own living.

We believe that the consumer, not Washington, is capable of deciding which light bulb works best. Democrats, however, believe that you just can’t be trusted to make the right decision. If Democrats want to show the folks back home that they understand the pent-up frustration in this country, they’ll start by supporting our bill.

The scheduled Feb. 17 switch from analog to digital television broadcasting will give first responders the functioning equipment and broadcast frequencies they need. In fact, help was on the way for three years before the Obama transition team panicked and told Congress to delay. Last week, Congress tried to accommodate the White House, but the Senate’s DTV-delay bill failed to gain sufficient support to skirt normal rules in the House.

Now, all of us have work to do. Contrary to what you have heard, the digital TV transition program is neither stuck nor broke, and there’s no need for further delay. In fact, a delay could actually cause fewer people to be ready when their stations transition to digital.

Yesterday, acting FCC Commission Michael Copps told me and Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla. that 61 percent of TV stations – 1,089 – could switch to a digital signal before June 12 without causing interference to other stations. The other 39 percent – 700 or so stations – may be able to do so.

What the FCC is saying is that despite the Democrats’ insistence in pushing back the transition date to ease consumer confusion, in fact, many stations can transition earlier. Given that the delay will cost stations millions, not to mention the fact that they are ready to transition, why wouldn’t they? How exactly does that help consumers? It reinforces what Cliff and I have been saying for weeks – that a delay will hurt first responders, add confusion and cost millions.

The worst part about the Democrats’ bill is that it doesn’t actually do anything to get converter box coupons into the hands of consumers. It merely delays the transition. The money for the coupons comes from the “stimulus” bill, to the tune of $650 million dollars for both coupons and consumer education. This is no way to reduce consumer confusion.

Republicans have a better alternative, yet the Democrats refuse to even debate our amendment on the House floor. The alternative, recommended by the Commerce Department under President Bush, still exists in the form of pending legislation to authorize $250 million for more converter box coupons. This simple action would empty the waiting list, and we even anticipate getting most of the money back because we know from experience that many of the coupons will go unused.

Nobody quite understands why the Democrats are so determined to fix something that isn’t broken, but the more you look at what they’re doing, the more you understand that the repair job makes things worse instead of better. Someone said it’s like getting Roto-Rooter to come out and clog your kitchen sink.

What’s likelier to do the job is an end to the ban on exploring for oil off America’s own shores. The ban on drilling in the same Gulf that’s open to Venezuelans, Indians, Vietnamese and Cubans never made much sense except as a political barricade erected by anti-oil environmentalists in and out of Congress. Now that the president is voiding the old executive order, I hope the Democratic leadership can figure out a way not to automatically talk themselves into the kind of frenzied opposition that prevents real action to lower gasoline prices.

This used to be the sort of Washington spat that made drivers shrug, but hardly anybody’s shrugging since gasoline got to $4 a gallon. The president’s decision offers an opportunity for the speaker to be part of the solution, and I hope she will not simply reject it again because she’s a Democrat and the president is not. What’s happened lately isn’t encouraging. Whenever the issue of gasoline prices comes up, the speaker calls offshore exploration a hoax and reflexively pretends that evil producers are sitting on an ocean of oil under leases they already hold. Smirking and sneering when producers aren’t willing to spend millions to drill dry holes is propaganda, and the only hoax is that the speaker wants them to drill where the oil is not instead of where it is.

In contrast, the more environmentally conscientious countries in the world—from Scandinavia to Japan—have no qualms about developing their own energy resources, including in the waters off their own coasts. They understand the basic reality that withholding oil and gas will not alter world demand. Withholding oil may only displace production to countries with lower environmental standards than our own.

The “severe energy price crisis facing millions of Americans,” referenced in her letter compels congressional action. Here are just some of the bills that would do the job:

• Access OCS – (H.R. 6108; H.R. 3089; H.R. 6001)
• Access ANWR – (H.R. 6107; H.R. 3089; H.R. 6001)
• Alternative Fuels for Defense and Aviation – (H.R. 6131)
• Boutique Fuels – (H.R. 2493)
• Coal-to-Liquids – (H.R. 2208; H.R. 6001)
• Develop Oil Shale Resources – (H.R. 6138)
• Repeal Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 – (H.R. 5656)
• Building Refineries – (H.R. 6139; H.R. 2279; H.R. 3089; H.R. 6001)

It seems to me that Americans want more energy production here in America, and the speaker might now choose to let the will of the American people prevail by permitting the House to vote on whether we will allow more American energy supply.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee