As they did in the Senate with the ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ and the ‘Louisiana Purchase,’ backroom promises were made to some members in the House of Representatives in exchange for a yes vote on the recently passed health care bill.  One of the most controversial was President Obama’s promise to sign an executive order he claims would reinforce a ban within the bill on the use of federal funds for abortions in a last minute effort to assuage pro-life Democrats to abandon their constituency and their core beliefs. 

Any legal scholar will tell you that an executive order cannot change statutory law, no matter how much the president may want to believe it can.  The only way to truly prevent taxpayer funding for abortions is to enact a law that prevents taxpayer funding of abortions – and this health care legislation does the exact opposite.  But you don’t have to take my word for it.  Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the Chief Deputy Whip for the Democratic Caucus, has stated herself that, ‘an executive order can’t change the law.’  So it appears that Democrats and Republicans alike can agree in a bipartisan fashion that this executive order is simply for show – statutory language is the only thing that can alter existing law.

Earlier today, President Obama signed his non-binding, ineffective executive order that will do little more than provide political cover for those so-called ‘pro-life’ members who voted in favor of the health care bill.  Well, it might also leave many Americans wondering if – as most Democrats claim – the health care bill doesn’t actually provide federal funding for abortions because of the Hyde Amendment, why this executive order is necessary at all.

The debate in Washington this month reached a level of intensity that I have never seen.  People took to the streets and to the halls of Congress to loudly declare in one united voice their strong opposition to the government takeover of health care.  And, after fifteen months of ignoring the political minority and the will of the American people, the House of Representatives passed a final version of the legislation.  I joined the entire Oklahoma delegation opposing this costly and flawed legislation.

While the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored this legislation at costing $938 billion dollars over the next ten years, it is important to understand that the full consequences this bill will have on our federal budget cannot fully be recognized at this time.  Many economists believe that the true cost of this bill once it is fully implemented, could be more than $2.6 trillion by the year 2043.  Our national debt is more than $12 trillion currently, and is expected to rise above $14 trillion by 2011 – making our national debt almost equal to the size of our entire economy.  Spending another trillion dollars on this program is simply not feasible and will do nothing more than burden our children and grandchildren with crippling debt they may never be able to pay.

It’s not just the cost of this bill that concerns me.  Its content is also very disturbing.  In addition to including $528.5 billion in cuts to Medicare and $569.2 billion in tax increases, it also includes $20 billion in unfunded mandates – requirements on states to dramatically increase their contribution to their Medicaid program.  Many states are already struggling through the current economic crisis and are being forced to cut much needed programs.  They certainly should not be forced by the federal government to cut even more programs – or raise state taxes – in order to comply with these new federal mandates.

And as they did in the Senate with the ‘Cornhusker Kickback’ and the ‘Louisiana Purchase,’ backroom promises were made to some members in exchange for a yes vote.  In a last minute effort to assuage pro-life Democrats to abandon their constituency and their core beliefs, President Obama vowed to issue an executive order that would reinforce a ban on the use of federal funds for abortions.  However, an executive order cannot change statutory law, no matter how much the president may want to believe it can.  The only way to truly prevent taxpayer funding of abortions is to enact a law that prevents taxpayer funding of abortions – and this health care legislation does the exact opposite. 

I think we can all agree that there are problems within our health care system that need to be addressed.  But this almost one trillion dollar, 2,700 page bill is, quite simply put, not the right solution.  In an effort to pass a health care bill – any bill – this Congress has lost its way.  The American people deserve better, and as their representatives in Congress it’s time we gave them that.

The House of Representatives spent much of yesterday discussing H.ConRes. 248, the Afghanistan War Powers Resolution, sponsored by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).  The resolution would have required the president to remove all U.S. troops in Afghanistan within 30 days of the resolution being signed into law unless the president felt it would not be safe to do so.  In that case, the president would then have until December 31, 2010 to withdraw all troops from the country.  The resolution went directly against General McChrystal’s recommendation for the region and against President Obama’s own strategy.  It lost by an overwhelming vote of 356-65.

Not only would this resolution have sent a bad message to our troops overseas, it would also have sent a message to our enemies that we are not committed to winning the war on terror.  I was strongly opposed to this resolution and will continue to be opposed to any resolution like this one that does not give our full support to our men and women in uniform.

This resolution epitomizes the extreme disconnect between the American people and the majority party in Congress.  Rather than discussing legislation that will create jobs and improve our economy, the House of Representatives spent the day debating a resolution that would endanger our troops and undermine our efforts in Afghanistan and around the world.  The American people are sick and tired of Congress wasting precious time while the unemployment rate continues to hover at 10 percent and the economy still continues to lag.  They are fed up with a Congress that disregards what they want and need in order to push their own liberal agenda, including a massive government takeover of our health care system. 

It’s time for this government get back to the business of representing our constituents.

After riding into Washington with promises of hope and change and overwhelming public support, one year later President Obama is sitting in a much different position.  He has yet to pass one of his major agenda items, including health care and cap-and-trade, and his approval rating has dropped below 47% according to the latest Rasmussen poll.

In his first State of the Union address this evening, the president has the opportunity to change his tune a bit. 

Although the full text of the speech has not been released, the White House has stated that the president plans to focus his speech on the economy – not his stalled health care bill.  There has been mention that he will propose a three-year freeze on all discretionary, non-defense spending.  I am encouraged by president’s change of heart – during the election he stated that spending freezes sound good but don’t actually work.  However, I hope he is actually serious about this.  It has also been announced that he will request a 6.2% increase in education spending during the speech, all the while continuing to support the Senate’s $80 billion jobs bill and their $1.9 trillion debt limit increase proposal.

The election in Massachusetts last week should have served as a wake up call for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that their current agenda of dramatically expanding the size and scope of the federal government that require unprecedented levels of spending and borrowing is simply not what the American people want.  Rather, we need to get back to focusing on job creation, improving our economy, and providing tax relief for the American people.

I encourage everyone to tune in tonight at 8:00pm central and hear what the president has to say – it should be an interesting watch.

Earlier this month, a massive earthquake struck the small island-nation of Haiti, producing catastrophic damage in and around its capital city of Port-au-Prince. The earthquake has caused immeasurable human suffering.  Although the total devastation is still unknown, approximately 100,000 people have been killed and more than two million people have been left homeless. During such a time of great peril and human suffering, the American people and the American government have once again stepped up as the world leader in providing aid and assistance to countries in need. As of today, the U.S. has pledged over $100 million in aid and sent 12,000 American troops to Haiti to work around the clock to coordinate rescue efforts and assist the Haitian government with maintaining order.

In particular, the people of Oklahoma have demonstrated extraordinary compassion and resolve in their response to this humanitarian disaster. Just last week, 50 soldiers and six C-17 cargo planes deployed from Altus Air Force Base to assist relief efforts in Haiti. Additionally, last week several Oklahoma families, in coordination with the Cherokee Hills Christian Church in Oklahoma City, adopted ten orphans from Haiti.  The tremendous outpouring of support has made me proud to be an American and an Oklahoman.  As the Haitians continue to work to rebuild their nation, I am certain that the American people will continue stand by them and assist them in their work.

The resounding victory by Republican Scott Brown in the Massachusetts special election last night demonstrated a fact that President Obama might not be too happy with: the winds of change can blow both ways.  The people of Massachusetts – an historically liberal state – spoke with one voice to reject his legislative agenda and to loudly say no to a government takeover of health care, no to a $600 billion national energy tax, and no to an economic policy of borrow, tax, and spend.

His campaign promises of ‘hope’ and ‘change’ inspired many Americans and brought him a considerable victory in 2008.  However, the American people didn’t have any idea what kind of ‘change’ they were in for.  Now, one year later, they see his idea of ‘change’ – and they realize it’s change they don’t want. 

Since taking office, the president’s popularity has continued to decline, dropping him 20 percentage points to a 48% approval rating one year into his term according to Rasmussen.  New polling numbers by NBC and the Wall Street Journal show that only 33% of Americans are in favor of his health care reform and 46% consider it a bad idea.

With now-Senator Brown’s victory, the Democrats have lost their supermajority in the Senate, derailing their agenda of ‘change.’  On the day after the political hurricane that hit the state of Massachusetts last night, the American people are all waiting to see what President Obama will do.  I, for one, hope he remembers there is a fine line between doing something for the people and doing something to them.

We like to say that we have the safest, most abundant, most affordable food and fiber supply in the world.  But this isn’t just a boastful expression, it is a reality.  Our farmers and ranchers are responsible for feeding folks living in our country and throughout the world.

But, cap and tax legislation threatens that safe, abundant and affordable food and fiber supply.  The agriculture industry, as we know it, will not survive under the heavy burdens of a cap and tax policy.

This week the Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research held two important hearings to learn more about the economic impact of climate change legislation.  Despite the fact that the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed the Waxman-Markey climate change bill last June – a bill that I voted against—this is only the second time Members of the Agriculture Committee have had the opportunity to explore specifically the economic impact of climate change legislation on the agriculture sector.

Read More →

The debate over health care has reached a fevered pitch in our nation’s capital.  Over the last several months, millions of Americans have spoken out at town halls, have called and written in to the White House, and have even made personal visits to their members of Congress to express their strong opposition to government run health care.  Yet Speaker Pelosi has once again ignored their voices.

Speaker Pelosi’s health care bill H.R. 3962 was drafted without committee hearings or markups behind closed doors by Speaker Pelosi and a very limited number of her inner-circle.  Weighing in at more than 2,000 pages, Pelosi’s bill will cost the American taxpayers $1.2 trillion over the next ten years.

Real reform of our health care system is needed.  We must help those who want health insurance but cannot afford it.  We must expand access to health care in rural America.  We must fix our medical malpractice laws so that doctors can focus on saving patients rather than paying lawyers.  And we must expand our investments in preventative care.  However, that doesn’t mean we should throw out the car because it has a soft tire.  This country still has the best doctors, the best treatments, the best researches, and the best hospitals in the world.  Improvements need to be made, but not at the cost of potentially destroying our current health care system, saddling our children and grandchildren with trillions of dollars of debt, decreasing our standard of care, and burdening American families and small businesses with $729.5 billion in new taxes.

I will continue to oppose Speaker Pelosi’s government run health care legislation and any legislation that comes before Congress that includes a public option.

Congressman Frank Lucas represents Oklahoma’s Third Congressional District.  For more information, visit his website at www.house.gov/lucas.

No matter how many different ways she scores it, Speaker Pelosi’s health care legislation will cost the American taxpayers approximately one trillion dollars.  Right now, the federal government is running a deficit – fiscal year 2009 ended with the government more than $1.42 trillion in debt – and our national debt continues to climb every day.   

In order to pay for her almost trillion dollar federal government takeover of health care, Speaker Pelosi plans to make dramatic cuts to the Medicare program used by many of our senior citizens.  Cuts to Medicare will cause some health care providers to drop out of the program, limiting seniors’ access to this popular program and causing many to lose their current coverage.  In addition, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has stated that the Pelosi health care plan will increase seniors’ Medicare prescription drug premiums by 20 percent over the next ten years.  That means many of our seniors will no longer be able to afford the prescription drugs they need to survive.

So much for the President Obama’s promise, “If you like your plan, you can keep it.”

Millions of seniors take advantage of the Medicare program in this country today and most are very happy with their coverage.  However, under the Pelosi bill, seniors may be forced out of Medicare or incur higher costs and premiums.  And all of this to pay for a trillion dollar federal government takeover of our health care system that a majority of Americans do not support.  Is this really the way we should be treating our senior citizens? 

Reforms within our health care system are needed, but we should be focused on the areas that need the most attention: decreasing costs and increasing accessibility for rural Americans.  I will continue to fight against any health care legislation that includes the so-called “public option,” which really means higher taxes, a decrease in the standard of care, cuts to Medicare, and bureaucrats in Washington coming between doctors and patients.

Congressman Frank Lucas represents Oklahoma’s Third Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives.

As Congress moves closer towards solidifying a health care reform package, one thing is clear: the Democrats’ takeover of health care is bad for small businesses.
 
H.R. 3962, the health care bill currently in the House has a price tag of almost one trillion dollars. As our national debt climbs to over $9 trillion, the only way to pay for this legislation is by raising taxes. Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Waxman plan to enact a $544 billion tax on the so-called “rich” to offset the massive cost of their new program. However, according to the IRS, more than half of those targeted under this new tax are small business owners. In addition, they want to impose a $208 billion tax on businesses that cannot afford to pay for their employees’ health care.
 
Instead of calling this health care reform, perhaps Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Waxman should call this legislation what it really is: a massive tax on small businesses during one of the worst economic recessions of our time.
 
In addition to this being a dramatic hardship on our American small businesses, this tax would be devastating to the American worker. Small businesses represent more than 99 percent of all businesses in this country and have historically employed half of the American workforce. In addition, in the past, they have created more than 72 percent of new jobs across the country. So a hardship for them quickly translates into jobs lost and no new jobs created. In fact, it’s estimated that these new taxes will result in an estimated 5.5 million jobs lost. As the national unemployment rate continues to sit just below 10 percent, is this really a time to enact a massive, job-killing tax?
 
The American health care system is the best in the world, but there is always room for improvement. We need a solution for those who cannot afford health insurance. We need a solution for those who do not have access to health care. But that does not mean we need to completely alter our health care system and put it under the control of the federal government.