SIX MEASURES ADVANCE IN THE HOUSE 12/21/10

H.R. 6540, the Defense Level Playing Field Act has been received in the Senate after sailing through the House by a margin of 325 in favor to 23 opposed, on Roll Call vote number 658.

The KC-X Aerial Tanker

H.R. 6540 Requires the Secretary of Defense (DOD), in evaluating offers to award a contract for the KC-X aerial refueling aircraft program, to consider any unfair advantage that an offer or may possess. This bill directs the Secretary to: (1) report to the congressional defense committees on any such advantage; and (2) take into account the findings of such report in awarding a contract.

On a related front, H.R. 5136 §§824 and 848 speaks to the issue of the KC-X tanker. That bill, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, which is dead in the Senate requires the Secretary of DOD to submit an interim report on "any review of a covered subsidy initiated pursuant to subsection (a) of section 886 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; 122 Stat. 4561) not later than 60 days after the date of the initiation of the review." Section 848 mandates, in subsection (a) the "Requirement to Consider Unfair Competitive Advantage- In awarding a contract for the KC-X aerial refueling aircraft program (or any successor to that program), the Secretary of Defense shall, in evaluating any offers submitted to the Department of Defense in response to a solicitation for offers for such program, consider any unfair competitive advantage that an offer or may possess."

H.R. 6523, the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, is the pared down version of the military spending bill for the next fiscal year. H.R. 6523 does not contain the language regarding the KC-X aerial tanker found in H.R. 6540 or H.R. 5136. H.R. 6523 is treading water waiting for Senate action in this Lame Duck session of the 111th Congress.

The KC-X program should see the production of 175 aircraft over a span of two decades costing in the neighborhood of $35 billion, and probably more. The current fleet of tankers is subject to uncertainty due to age and the potential for fatigue. Currently employed in the fleet are KC-135 tankers which were delivered in 1965 and KC-10 tankers delivered between 1979 and 1987.

The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, H.R. 5116 passed the House on Roll Call vote number 659 by a margin of 228 in favor to 130 opposed. This was on the vote to resolve differences with the Senate. This bill originally passed in the House on May 28th. The Senate passed the measure with an amendment on December 17th by Unanimous Consent.

H.R. 5116 makes an investment in innovation through research and development, to improve the competitiveness of the United States. H.R. 5116 authorizes appropriations for several agencies to support scientific research, industrial innovation, and certain educational activities. The legislation allows for the collection of fees to offset the administrative costs of a loan guarantee program directed toward small and medium sized businesses. The CBO estimates that there is no net budgetary impact in a single year by this bill.

H.R. 2142, the Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act of 2010 passed the House on Roll Call vote number 660 by a margin of 216 to 139. H.R. 2142 expresses the sense of Congress that each executive agency should consult with the committees with jurisdiction over the agency and other interested Members of Congress each fiscal year regarding the agency's performance plan and priorities. The bill mandates that each federal agency head identify near- and long-term high-priority goals for the purpose of improving agency performance and submit quarterly reports relating to those goals.

H.R. 2142 establishes a Performance Improvement Council in the executive branch to make recommendations concerning, and to monitor, performance management. Includes among the Council's duties to: (1) develop a website for federal agency performance information; (2) link program performance information to program spending information on the website www.USASpending.gov; and (3) report to Congress on the feasibility of creating a single web-based platform for all government spending information and all program performance information.

The Comptroller Generally is directed to periodically assess the implementation of this Act. Any savings or reductions in expenditures generated by this Act are to be used to offset the costs of its implementation and any additional savings to be used to offset the deficit. Agencies are required to fund this Act's reporting requirements out of existing budgets and authorizes agencies to make necessary reprogramming of funds.

H.R. 2751, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act passed in the House on Roll Call vote number 661. The margin on the motion to resolve differences with the Senate was 215 in favor and 144 opposed. This is a major overhaul of food safety laws. H.R. 2751 began as a bill to accelerate motor fuel savings nationwide and provide incentives to registered owners of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient and less polluting automobiles. It was amended in the Senate with the language of S. 510 the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act introduced by Democratic Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois. Durbin's bill passed the Senate on a Record Vote number 257 by a margin of 73 in favor to 25 opposed. The problem with S. 510 is that one section contained a revenue measure. Bills containing revenue measures must originate in the House according to the Constitution. The language is in Article I § 7 "All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

H.R. 3082, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 is probably misnamed. This Continuing Resolution funds the government until March4, 2011. H.R. 3082 passed by a margin of 193 to 165 on Roll Call vote number 662.

H.R. 6547, the Protecting Students from Sexual and Violent Predators Act, was the last measure passed by the House on 12/21/10. This bill require each state receiving funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to have in effect policies and procedures that: (1) require criminal background checks for school employees, including searches of state criminal registries or repositories, state-based child abuse and neglect registries and databases, the National Crime Information Center of the Department of Justice, the National Sex Offender Registry, and the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); and (2) prohibit the employment of school employees who refuse to consent to a criminal background check, make false statements in connection with one, or have been convicted of one of a list of felonies.

Local educational agencies (LEAs) or state educational agencies (SEAs) are required to report to local law enforcement any applicants for school employment who are discovered to be sexual predators.

Requires Periodic repetitions of such criminal background checks are required . Requires such states to provide for a timely process under which school employees may: (1) appeal the results of a criminal background check to challenge the accuracy or completeness of the information produced; and (2) seek appropriate relief for any final employment decision based on materially inaccurate or incomplete information produced. Requires this appeals process, however, to deny the individual employment as a school employee during the process.

H.R. 6547 moves on to the Senate.

Hits and Misses during the past week in the Lame Duck 111th Congress

The Senate had an idea, proposed by Delaware's Democratic Senator Tom Carper and Oklahoma's Republican Senator Tom Coburn, that the person running the Census Bureau should be qualified in running a large organization. They introduced S. 3167, the Census Oversight Efficiency and Management Reform Act of 2010.

Senator Lieberman, Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs reported the bill favorably with written report Number 111-351. S. 3167 passed the Senate by Unanimous Consent.

S. 3167 did not pass in the House despite receiving a majority of votes from the Members of the House. The bill was brought up on a Suspension of the Rules basis which means it needed a ⅔ majority to pass. The vote was on Roll Call 629 where 201 Members voted for S. 3167 and 167 Members voted against the measure. A ⅔ majority required 245 votes of those Members present and voting. If the Rules Committee submits a Rule for S. 3167 then it can be submitted for passage needing only a simple majority to pass.

H.R. 2965, the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell passed the House on Roll Call Vote 368 by a margin of 250 Members in favor to 175 opposed. The bill has been sent to the Senate where on a motion by Nevada's Democratic Senator, Harry Reid it was referred to the Senate Committee on Armed Services with the House message accompanying HR 2965, "with instructions to report back forthwith with amendment SA 4829 made in Senate".

Senate Amendment 4829 directs that at the end of the text the following is inserted: The Senate Armed Services Committee is requested to conduct a study on the impact of implementing these provisions on the family of military members. Senator Reid then proposed Senate Amendment 4830, an Amendment to Senate Amendment 4829 proposing that at the end of the text the following should be added: ” and that the study should focus attention on the dependent children''.

Meanwhile, Senator Liebermann [I-CT] introduced, together with 49 cosponsors, S. 4023, which is an exact duplicate of H.R. 2965. The Senate need not act directly on H.R. 2965 if it passes S. 4023 as drafted. Since the two are identical the legislation is considered to be enrolled and may be sent to the President.

Apparently a major disadvantage to hybrid and all electric motor vehicles is something Detroit has been selling as an advantage for years: a quiet ride. The new vehicles are so quiet that persons with disabilities of sight and hearing are put at risk. Normal cars and trucks, as quiet as automobile manufacturers have tried to make them, make enough noise so that a person with these disabilities is not likely to step out in front of them and be struck. Not so with these new ultra quiet vehicles.

That's why Massachusetts' Democratic Senator, John Kerry, introduced S. 841, the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010. This bill directs the Secretary of Transportation to study and report to Congress on the minimum level of sound that is necessary to be emitted from a motor vehicle, or some other method, to alert blind and other pedestrians of the presence of operating motor vehicles while traveling. It is expected the new standards will apply to vehicles operating at slow speeds and not be required at highway speeds.

S. 841 passed the Senate by Unanimous Consent. It sailed through the House, where it was brought up on a Suspension of the Rules motion requiring a ⅔ majority. S. 841 passed the House on Roll Call 640 with 379 Members voting in favor and 30 voting against the bill. The measure required 273 votes to pass.

S. 841 has been cleared to be sent to the White House for the President's signature.

S. 3447, the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 has also been cleared to be sent to the White House for the President's signature. This bill is the first major overhaul of G.I. benefits since 9/11. S. 3447 was introduced by Hawaii's Democratic Senator Daniel Akaka, with 35 cosponsors. The bill passed the Senate by Unanimous Consent. Having been brought up in the House on a motion to Suspend the Rules, the bill needed a ⅔ majority for passage. There were 402 Members in favor and 3 opposed on Roll Call 642.

At the end of May the House passed H. R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 by a margin of 229 to 186 on Roll Call 336. That bill went to the Senate, where it was buried. H.R. 6523 is the new incarnation of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. This version passed the House by a much wider margin with 341 Members in favor and 48 opposed to the measure. A ⅔ majority of 260 votes was needed since the bill came up on a motion to Suspend the Rules.

H.R. 5136 , the CBO estimated ,would authorize appropriations totaling $726 billion for fiscal year 2011 for the military functions of the Department of Defense (DoD), for certain activities of the Department of Energy (DOE), and for other purposes. That total includes $159 billion for the cost of overseas contingency operations, primarily in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill also would authorize an additional $34 billion for fiscal year 2010 for costs associated with those operations and for DoD relief efforts associated with the recent earthquake in Haiti. In addition, H.R. 5136 would prescribe personnel strengths for each active-duty and selected reserve component of the U.S. armed forces. CBO estimates that appropriation of the authorized amounts would result in outlays of $749 billion over the 2010-2015 period..

H.R. 6523, the CBO estimates, will have the same net increase in the budget as H.R. 5136 for fiscal year 2011. That is $3,973,000,000. For fiscal year 2012 H.R. 2136 had a larger deficit reduction impact than does H.R. 6523 by $40 million. Over the next decade H.R. 5136 would have reduced the deficit by $15 million compared to H.R. 6523, which the CBO projects will reduce the deficit by only $2 million.

H.R. 6523 moves on to the Senate in the waning days of the lame duck session.

H.R. 2142, the Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act of 2010 failed to get a ⅔ majority vote after being brought up on a Suspension of the Rules motion. H.R. 2142 originally passed the House on a voice vote, June 16, 2010. The Senate passed the bill with an Amendment by Unanimous Consent. The bill failed to get the requisite 229 votes of those Members present and voting.

The CBO report says that H.R. 2142 would amend the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA), requiring federal agencies to define their missions and evaluate their performance. Specifically, the legislation would require federal agencies to expand their efforts to track and improve performance by: providing the Congress and the public with additional information on their current plans; incorporating their management goals and improvement plans into the GPRA performance evaluation process; and providing information on their performance via the Internet. In addition, the legislation would require training for employees who analyze and evaluate government programs, a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and a study by the Office of Personnel Management regarding the evaluation of government programs.

H.R. 5510, the Aiding Those Facing Foreclosure Act of 2010 failed to garner a ⅔ majority required because it was brought up on a motion to Suspend the Rules.

This bill Amends the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to use otherwise unobligated amounts under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to enable nonprofit counseling intermediaries and nonprofit legal organizations to provide legal assistance to homeowners of owner-occupied homes consisting of from one to four dwelling units whose mortgages are in default or delinquency, in danger of default or delinquency, or subject to or at risk of foreclosure (including any deed in lieu of foreclosure or short sale).

Although the bill got a majority vote on Roll Call 655, 210 Members in favor and 145 Members opposed, it failed to get to the votes needed, in this case 237. Note: 78 Members did not vote!

Senator Barbara Boxer, [D-CA], introduced S. 3874, the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act. This bill passed the Senate by Unanimous Consent and managed to get the required ⅔ vote needed in the House when a bill is brought up on a motion to Suspend the Rules. On Roll Call 656 there were 226 Members in favor and 109 opposed. The magic number this time was 224.

This bill Amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to exempt from prohibitions on the use or sale of lead pipes, solder, and flux: (1) pipes or pipe or plumbing fittings or fixtures, including backflow preventers, that are used exclusively for nonpotable services such as manufacturing, industrial processing, irrigation, outdoor watering or any other uses where the water is not anticipated to be used for human consumption; or (2) toilets, bidets, urinals, fill valves, flushometer valves, tub fillers, shower valves, service saddles, or water distribution main gate valves that are two inches in diameter or larger.

Redefines "lead free" under such Act to mean: (1) not containing more than 0.2% lead when used with respect to solder and flux (current law); and (2) not more than a weighted average of 0.25% lead when used with respect to the wetted surfaces of pipes and pipe and plumbing fittings and fixtures. Establishes a formula to calculate the weighted average lead content of a pipe or pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture.

Now if Senator Boxer could only manage to get the lead out of the Senate!

The Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program is Running In the Red - The GE/ROLLS ROYCE Ad Campaign Implicates Incoming Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon - Are Republicans Restoring Bad Ethics to the House?

In the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010, Public Law 111-84, provision is made for the Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program. Specifically Title II § 217 authorizes [s]eparate procurement and research, development, test, and evaluation line items and program elements for the F-35B and F-35C joint strike fighter aircraft.

The Note to 10 U.S.C. 221 speaks to the Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program. It says; "In the budget materials submitted to the President by the Secretary of Defense in connection with the submission to Congress, pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, of the budget for fiscal year 2011, and each subsequent fiscal year, the Secretary shall ensure that within the Navy research, development, test, and evaluation account and the Navy aircraft procurement account, a separate, dedicated line item and program element is assigned to each of the F-35B aircraft and the F-35C aircraft, to the extent that such accounts include funding for each such aircraft.

That takes us to the line item in the budget for the Joint Fighter Alternative Engine Program. Lines 006 and 007 for the program show that, in thousands of dollars, the FY 2010 Request for line 006, the Joint Strike Fighter Program was $3,997,048 times $1000 for a final figure of $3,997,048,000. That's just a shade under $4 billion. The next figure is the same, it is the amount agreed upon in the Conference Agreement, nearly $4 Billion.

006 Joint Strike Fighter ...........................................$3,997,048.... $3,997,048

007 Advance Procurement .........................................$481,000.......$481,000

Line 007 shows the Advance Procurement in thousands of dollars for the 2010 Calendar Year (CY). So what looks, at first glance, to be a half a million dollars is actually $4.8 million for 2010.

Skip to line item 127 and try and follow the government's accounting. The FY2010 request on line 127, in thousands of dollars, is $1,741,296 or after the multiplier $1,741,296,000. That's $1.7 billion. What the Conference Agreed on was $1,956,296 times $1,000 or $1,956,296,000 or nearly $2 billion. In the line item below the number 0604800N refers to the program element within the budget. Bracketed numbers such as the [$215,000] usually indicate negative numbers. In this case the $215,000 times $1,000 equals $215,000,000 or $215 million by which Congress exceeded the President's request.

127 0604200N Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)....................$1,741,296...$1,956,296
       F136 Development .............................................$[215,000]...$[215,000]

Go back to line 84 and you'll see how this escalates.

084 0604800F Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).....................$1,858,055...$2,073,055

       F136 Development .............................................$[215,000]...$[215,000]

The FY 2010 request for program element 0604800F was $1,858,055 timed $1,000 or $1,858,055,000 that's $1.8 billion. What the Conference Agreed to was $2,073,055 times $1,000 or $2,073,055,000 which is more than $2 billion. The bracketed amount represents the $215,000,000 more than the President requested.

But do these figures add up? The overall authorization was for $3,997,048,000. $3,997,048,000 minus the funds for Program Element 0604800N or $1,956,296,000 equals $2,040,752,000. There's $2,040,752,000 left in the budget for the Joint Strike Fighter Program. Yet the amount budgeted on line 084 is $2,073,055,000. $2,040,752,000 minus $2,073,055,000 equals -$32,303,000.

This program is starting off $32 million dollars in the hole! If Congress had kept with the President's request then $430 million would not have been available. The question is whether Congress would have overrun the budget by the additional $400 million, as they have, or would they have pared spending to conform to the budget?

It is not an idle question. Before the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010 became Public Law 111-84 it was first introduced into the House as H.R. 5136. Maine's Democratic Representative Chellie Pingree introduced House Amendment 661 to H.R. 5136. That Amendment sought to eliminate funding for the Joint Strike Fighter's Alternative Engine Program. This is what she had to say about her Amendment on the floor of the House:

"Ms. PINGREE of Maine. Mr. Chairman, this amendment prohibits any further funding for the alternate F-35 engine.

In 2001, Pratt & Whitney won the award for the primary engine for the Joint Strike Fighter through a competitive bidding process. This process was set up to save millions in taxpayer dollars. Since then, Congress has authorized an astonishing $1.3 billion of unrequested funds for the development of this extra unnecessary engine. The Bush administration opposed this program. The Obama administration opposes this program. And yet if this amendment fails today, we will continue to fund a defense program that is a complete waste of money.

I could not put it any better than the Secretary of Defense put it himself: Given the many pressing needs facing our military and the fiscal challenges facing our country, we cannot afford a ``business as usual'' approach to the defense budget. Tough choices must be made by both the Department and Congress to ensure that current and future military capabilities can be sustained over time. This means programs and initiatives of marginal or no benefit, like the F136 engine, are unaffordable luxuries."

House Amendment 661 to H.R. 5136 failed by a vote of 193 in favor of the Amendment to 231 opposed, with 3 Members not voting. That was Roll Call 316 on May 27, 2010. There were no party line divisions on this vote. The inertial weight of the lobbying power of the Military Industrial Complex held the majority of Members and prevailed. The next Chairman of the House Committee on Armed Services voted against the Pingree Amendment.

This debate is not over. The partnership between General Electric and Rolls Royce is advertising their product for the Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program. They claim they can save the American Taxpayers $20 billion and reduce the national deficit. We are already over budget and going backwards on a program once decided and awarded. If you're going to save the taxpayers $20 billion don't you have to get back to zero first?

You can read the GE/Rolls Royce AD-STRAVAGANZA at http://www.f136.com/. You will want to pay attention to the Tweets directed to incoming Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon, [R - CA] in the advertising. McKeon is firmly planted in the camp advocating the Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program.  He's also known for speaking out of the other side of his mouth pandering to the notion of limited government with less spending.  Let's see if we give billionaires a FAT CAT TAX BOONDOGGLE and waste money on the Joint Strike Fighter Alternative Engine Program, which the Pentagon didn't want, then from where will the less spending of the limited government come?  Watch out Social Security!

That seems at least to reflect an appearance of impropriety if not a downright disqualifier. Nancy Pelosi worked to drain the swamp, with costly results to Democrats with Seniority. John Boehner and his team look like they are about to fill the swamp again. It seems as though the Republicans don't realize that their former Majority Leader, Tom DeLay, is facing what amounts to a life sentence for his shenanigans.

DeLay faces a sentence of five years to 99 years in prison for a Texas money- laundering conviction and a two year to 20 years sentence for a conspiracy count as well, plus fines. He is free on bond until his sentencing in a Texas state court on Dec 20. DeLay plans an appeal. DeLay turns 64 next April. 

DON'T ASK DON'T TELL IS BACK IN THE HOUSE

H.R. 2965 is the SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act of 2009, while it began as legislation targeting small business investment in research and innovation it has become the vehicle for repealing the military's Don't Ask Don't Tell policy.

H.R. 2965 was introduced by Pennsylvania's Democratic Representative Jason Altmire on June 19, 2009. The bill was reported out of the House Committee on Small Business and the Committee on Science and Technology. A related bill in the Senate is S. 1233, introduced by Louisiana's Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu.

H.R. 2965 passed in the House on roll call vote 486 on July 8, 2009. The margin was 386 in favor to 41 against. On July 13, 2009 it passed the Senate in lieu of S. 1233 with an amendment. Action in the Senate was on July 13, 2009 by Unanimous Consent.

The Senate Amendment struck all the language in the bill following the Enactment Clause and substituted the language of S. 1233 as it had been amended. Senator Reid, the Democratic Majority Leader from Nevada introduced Senate Amendment 1502 for Oklahoma's Republican Senator Tom Coburn and Wisconsin's Democratic Senator Russ Feingold.

The Rules Committee is taking up H.R. 2905 today with an Amendment. This Amendment appears to be in the nature of a substitute. The new Short Title of the legislation is the ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell 5 Repeal Act of 2010’’. To read the complete text of this amendment go to the Rules Committee website at: http://www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hrdadt.pdf.

The effective date of repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell under this amendment will be the latter date between 60 days after the Secretary of Defense has received the report on COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A REPEAL OF 10 U.S.C. 654, as required under a prior section of the amendment. Note: that report is in and may be accessed online at http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0610_gatesdadt/DADTReport-SPI_FINAL_20101130(secure-hires).pdf.

The President has issued a statement to the public consistent with the terms of this proposed law. You can read the President's remarks at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/11/30/statement-president-obama-dod-report-don-t-ask-don-t-tell.

The second triggering event is a communication from the President to the Congressional Committees on Defense certifying that the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations of the report and that they can proceed in a manner consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and the recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.

This legislation does not confer any additional benefits such as recognizing marriage between same sex partners. No private causes of action are authorized by this amendment. That means no one gets a new right to sue anyone else.

The House previously passed similar legislation when it adopted House Amendment 672 to H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011.  That measure passed the House on May 28, 2010, roll call vote 336, by a margin of 229 in favor and 186 opposed.  That bill is stalled in the Senate.  

THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 40 - HER RECORD ON MEDICARE

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Site Meters tells this blog of a recent visitor from Clifton, Kansas who was interested in Lynn Jenkins record on Medicare. That's a great inquiry, so let's take a look.

House Concurrent Resolution 85 established the Congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2010 and including appropriate budgetary levels for F.Y. 2009 and for F.Y. 2011 through 2014. So what's that got to do with Medicare?

Section 314of the resolution establishes the current policy reserve fund for Medicare improvements. That's important because this §314 is an essential component of reforming the Medicare payment formula. This section mandates changes incentives to encourage efficiency and higher quality care in a way that supports fiscal sustainability. It calls for improving payment accuracy to encourage efficient use of resources and ensure that primary care receives appropriate compensation. It requires improvement of coordination of care among all providers serving a patient in all appropriate settings. Finally it seeks to hold providers accountable for their utilization patterns and quality of care. Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.Con.Res. 85 on roll call vote 192, April 2, 2009.

H.R. 3962 the Preservation of Access to Care for Medicare Beneficiaries and Pension Relief Act of 2010, is now Public Law 111-192. This new law provides for a Medicare physician payment rate update and provides single and multiple employer pension plan sponsors with relief from pension funding requirements.

Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.R. 3962 on roll call vote 887, November 7, 2003. She voted yes on the measure roll call vote 393, June 24, 2010. That was on resolving differences with the Senate version of the bill. The final vote was 417 to 1.

Another case of where Lynn Jenkins was against it before she was for it is H.R. 3961, the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act of 2009 , now Public Law 111-141. On original passage in the House Lynn Jenkins voted against H.R. 3961, that was roll call vote 909 on November 19, 2009. When it came to resolving differences with the Senate, she was again on board. The final margin was 315 to 97, on roll call vote 67, February 27, 2009.

H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009, now Public Law 111-3, is more commonly known as SCHIP, This is the part of Medicare that provides for health insurance for the neediest children. This law expanded coverage to include all children whose families were at or below 300% of the poverty line, up from 200%. Lynn Jenkins voted no on H.R. 2 first on roll call vote 16, January 14,2009; then again on roll call vote 50, February 4, 2009. Jenkins argued that the top third of those children should be excluded. Talk about throwing out the baby with the bath water!

H.R. 598,was a bill to provide for a portion of the economic recovery package relating to revenue measures, unemployment, and health, which became Public Law 111-5 on 2/17/2009, and is known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This applies to Medicare because this is where incentives are provided to physicians and hospitals using the electronic health record (EHR) and reduce payments to those who continue using paper. This EHR is using technology to reduce overhead costs in the administration of Medicare. H.R. 598 became Title IV of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Lynn Jenkins voted no Public Law 111-5, first on roll call vote 46, January 28, 2009 and then on roll call vote 70 on February 13, 2009.

H.R. 4691, The Temporary Extension Act of 2010, now Public Law 111-144, made technical corrections to Medicare physician payment update, by delaying the increase to physicians by a month. The bill also extended the Medicare therapy caps exceptions process by three months. This measure passed the House by a voice vote.

The bottom line on Lynn Jenkins is that she voted to obstruct Medicare until the final vote. She voted to deny health insurance coverage to America's neediest children. She voted against modernizing Medicare when she voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

But there is more. The shameful propaganda in which she claimed that Health Care Reform would slash $500 Billion from Medicare, as though seniors would see a half a trillion dollar cut in benefits from Medicare. That wasn't the case. As reported on this blog Wednesday June 30th, That money is a reduction in the growth of future spending over t0 years. That money will not have to be spent because advancements in technology and elimination of waste and fraud.

Lynn Jenkins voted against Health Care Reform. If you are a senior looking at that doughnut hole then you were probably glad to see that $250 supplemental check this summer to help you through the hole. Don't thank Lynn Jenkins, she voted against it.

Lynn Jenkins likes to say how health care could be done correctly. Her votes tell us she speaking with a forked tongue. Lynn Jenkins was one of only 19 Representatives who voted against eliminating the anti-trust exemption for Health Insurance Companies.

When it comes to Medicare, Lynn Jenkins stirs the pot but comes up with last minute votes that lets her say supported the program. She's got a harder time with Veterans. Remember she voted against the National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 5136, which languishes in the Senate.




THE CASE AGAINST LYNN JENKINS CHAPTER 16 - SHE DOES NOT SUPPORT OUR TROOPS

This is Lynn Jenkins, she does not represent us

Lest we forget America remains at war, actual armed conflict where the members of our Armed Forces put their lives on the line every day. We have an obligation to the troops to support them with a robust effort. H.R. 5136, the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT for fiscal year 2011 is how we make sure our military has what it needs to get the job done.

H.R. 5136 Authorizes appropriations to the Department of Defense for: (1) procurement, including for aircraft, missiles, weapons and tracked combat vehicles, ammunition, and shipbuilding and conversion; (2) the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund; (3) Defense Production Act purchases; (4) research development, test, and evaluation; (5) operation and maintenance; (6) military personnel; (7) Working Capital Funds; (8) the National Defense Sealift Fund; (9) the Defense Coalition Acquisition Fund; (10) chemical agents and munitions destruction; (11) drug interdiction and counter-drug activities; (12) the Defense Inspector General; (13) the Defense Health Program; (14) the Armed Forces Retirement Home; (15) overseas contingency operations; (16) chemical demilitarization; (17) the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program; (18) National Guard and reserve forces facilities; (19) military base closure and realignment activities; and (20) overseas contingency operations military construction.

Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 - Authorizes appropriations for FY2011 for military construction, military family housing, and energy conservation projects.

Sets forth provisions or requirements concerning: (1) military personnel policy; (2) education and training; (3) military pay and allowances; (4) acquisition policy and management; (5) DOD organization and management; (6) DOD financial matters; (7) civilian personnel; (8) matters relating to foreign nations; (9) the National Defense Stockpile; and (10) military construction.

Establishes the Refined Petroleum Products, Marginal Expense Transfer Account for DOD purchases of refined petroleum products.

Since there is no Republican in the White House Lynn Jenkins and the Party of No have turned their backs on America's military. She voted against H.R. 5136 on roll call 336.

H.R. 5136 EXPANDS HEALTHCARE REFORM FEATURE TO TRICARE

A couple of days ago I read a story from the Washington Post "Popular benefit of health-care law excludes military families" by David Hilzenwrath. That link is: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/25/AR2010052501685.html.

In all the anxiety surrounding the debate about Health Care Reform military families were concerned that they'd lose the good plan they already have, TRICARE. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates requested Congress exclude military families and TRICARE from the overhaul.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates

It turns out that "Obamacare," as the Republicans are want to call Health Care Reform, isn't so bad as the Health Insurance/Republican propaganda said it was. Now America's military families are wanting to get some of what the rest of the nation's families got.

Remember the problem that occurred in the coverage of American young adults. When they were 18 and not in school their health care was being canceled by the insurance industry. I remember on particularly painful incident involving former Kansas City Royal, Fred Patek. Patek's daughter, Kimberly. was no longer on the family's plan and her coverage had not yet begun. She was paralyzed in an automobile accident. The bills were massive. Several fundraisers were held to assist in paying those fees.

Under Health Care Reform that can't happen anymore. American families are seeing the benefit of their college age kids not being put at risk by the insurance industry. Military families rightly want the same.

That takes us back to H.R. 5136, the Defense Appropriation Bill. Specifically Section 708 titled "EXTENSION OF DEPENDENT COVERAGE UNDER TRICARE." This will cover the older military "brats" until they reach age 26 unless they can enroll in an eligible employer-sponsored plan.

For those who want to read chapter and verse of the TRICARE expansion, link up at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:2:./temp/~c111rb7Dp6:e369786: or link to Thomas.gov and search using the keyword TRICARE or the bill number H.R. 5136.

Representative Martin Heinrich

The Washington Post reports that the TRICARE expansion amendment to this bill was proposed by New Mexico's Democratic Representative Martin Heinrich. Heinrich is from Albuquerque and is a freshman in the Congress.

H.R. 5136 was before the House last night in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, to make amendments.  If you want to see our elected leaders acting like adults with true bipartisan effort, you should see them pass one of Ike Skelton's bills.  H.R. 5136 remains as unfinished business, last night was all about making amendments.