Congressman McClintock questions Medicare’s Chief Actuary about budgetary claims made by supporters of the new health care law.  January 26, 2011.
 

Legislation will ensure debt service payments in the event the debt ceiling is reached

  Washington, D.C. – Congressman Tom McClintock (R-CA) yesterday introduced HR 421 -- the Full Faith and Credit Act -- directing the United States Treasury, in the event the debt ceiling is reached, to pay principal and interest due on debt held by the public before making any other payments.  The legislation is being co-sponsored in the House by Republican Study Committee Chairman Congressman Jim Jordan, Congresswoman Virginia Foxx and Congressman Scott Garrett.  This bill is a companion to an identical measure introduced yesterday by Senator Pat Toomey.

Maintaining the good credit of the United States is essential to economic prosperity and national security.  In the event of a shortfall in the federal budget, default on credit obligations should not be our first option, it should be the last.  A default on debt would lead to catastrophic consequences, including loss of the nation’s triple-A credit rating, sky-high interest rates and rapid inflation, all of which would make a return to prosperity, job growth, and balanced budgets an impossibility. 

“The ‘full faith and credit’ of the United States should not hang in the balance on every adjustment to the national debt limit,” said Congressman McClintock. “States protect their credit by pledging first call on revenues to their debts and so should the federal government.  After all, before you can ‘provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty,’ you have to be able to finance them.”

“A pitiful scare tactic already being used by the Treasury Secretary in the debt ceiling debate is the threat of allowing the federal government to default on its obligations,” said Republican Study Committee Chairman Jordan.  “This is government mismanagement at its worst.  Secretary Geithner knows full well that he has the authority to prioritize federal spending so that default is not an option.  This bill will take Secretary Geithner’s disastrous scenario completely off the table.”

"America's sterling credit rating is vital to our future prosperity,” said Congresswoman Virginia Foxx.  “This bill offers a simple safeguard to protect our credit and prevent a sovereign debt crisis.  It's the sort of common sense solution that we can easily put in place without wading into the debate over raising the debt ceiling." 

“This important piece of legislation ensures America’s debt rating and the threat of default on our debt cannot be used as political weapons.  This bill will remind the markets and the world that America will never default on its debt while giving Congress time to have a meaningful, reasonable discussion about how to rein in out-of-control spending and prevent our country from sliding further into debt,” remarked Congressman Scott Garrett.

-30-
 

I cannot imagine a more disturbing example of this ideology at work than the announcement yesterday by the Department of Interior.  Even faced with a super-abundance of water, they are determined to create and then to ration water shortages.  Full Text.

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 19, 2011.  M. Speaker:

 The Department of Interior issued an announcement yesterday that perfectly illustrates the irrationality of our current approach to water issues.

 California’s precipitation this season has gone off the charts.  Statewide snow water content is 198 percent of normal; in the all-important Northern Sierra snowpack is 174 percent of normal.  This is not only a wet year – it is one of the wettest years on record.

 Yet yesterday, we have this announcement from the Department of the Interior: that despite a nearly unprecedented abundance of water, the Bureau of Reclamation will only guarantee delivery of 45 percent of the California Central Valley’s contracted water supply south of the Delta.  This is the same percentage they received last year with barely average rainfall.

 This is of crucial importance to the entire nation, since the Central Valley of California is one of the largest producers of our nation’s food supply.  California produces half of the U.S.-grown fruits, nuts and vegetables on the nation’s grocery shelves and the prices you pay are directly affected by the California harvest. 

 The deliberate decision by this administration in 2009 and 2010 to divert hundreds of billions of gallons of water away from the Central Valley destroyed a quarter million acres of the most productive farmland in America, it threw tens of thousands of families into unemployment and it affected grocery prices across the country.

At the time, the administration blamed a mild drought, but never explained why a drought justified their decision to pour 200 billion gallons of water (that we did have) directly into the Pacific Ocean.    In a rational world a drought means that you are more careful not to waste the water that you have.

The real reason for this irrational policy, of course, is that they were indulging the environmental Left’s pet cause, a three-inch minnow called the Delta Smelt.  Diverting precious water to Delta Smelt habitat was considered more important than producing the food that feeds the country and preserving the jobs that produce the food.

But that issue is now moot.  This year we have nearly twice the normal water supply at this point in the season, and yet the Department of Interior will allow only 45 percent of normal water deliveries to California Central Valley agriculture south of the Delta.

The difference comes to 1.1 million acre-feet of water.  1.1 million acre feet.

Now consider this: since December 1st, the Central Valley Project has released 1.4 million acre feet more water into the Pacific Ocean than they did just last year.

Let me repeat that.  At the same time this Administration is denying California Central Valley agriculture 1.1 million acre feet of their rightfully contracted water in one of the wettest years on record, it is dumping 1.4 million acre feet of additional water into the Pacific Ocean.

M. Speaker, this is insane.  Coleridge’s lament “Water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink” appears to have become the policy of this administration.

The American people did not invest billions of dollars into federal water projects so that their water can be dumped into the ocean to please environmental extremists. 

This policy may have been cheered by the previous Congress, but it won’t be tolerated by the new majority, nor by the American people.

 There was a time when the principal objective of our federal water policy was to assure an abundance of water to support a growing population and a flourishing economy.  But in recent years, a radical and retrograde ideology has taken root in our public policy, abandoning abandoned abundance as the objective of our water policy and replacing it with the government rationing of government-created shortages.

I cannot imagine a more disturbing example of this ideology at work than the announcement yesterday by the Department of Interior.  Even faced with a super-abundance of water, they are determined to create and then to ration water shortages. 

The American people expect better and they deserve better.  They deserve a government dedicated to restoring jobs, prosperity and abundance – all of which is well within our reach – if we will simply reverse the folly that was on full display with yesterday’s announcement.

Ironically, this announcement came on the same day that the President ordered his agencies to identify regulatory policies that are harming the economy. 

M. Speaker, it appears the Department of Interior missed that memo.

The central promises of Obamacare were that it would bend health costs down and wouldn’t threaten existing plans.

We now know that both these claims were false.  Text

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 18, 2011.

  M. Speaker:

 The central promises of Obamacare were that it would bend health costs down and wouldn’t threaten existing plans.

 We now know that both these claims were false.

 The CBO warns that this law will increase average private premiums by $2,100 within five years above what they otherwise would have been without Obamacare.  The administration’s own actuary admits that the law bends the cost curve up – not down – by $311 billion over the next ten years. 

 And we now know that many existing plans are indeed jeopardized and that scores of companies that offered their employees basic plans have either dropped them or continue them only with waivers left to the whims of Administration officials.

 But the most dangerous provision of this law is the federal government’s assertion that it has the power to force every American to purchase products the government believes they should purchase, whether or not they want them, need them, or can afford them.

 If this precedent prevails, the federal government will have usurped authority over every aspect of individual choice in the care of our families and can logically extend that power to every other commodity in the market.

 The tragedy is that every day we continue down this road is a day we have lost to address the real problems in our healthcare system: the spiraling costs of malpractice litigation and defensive medicine, the loss of freedom to shop across state lines, the loss of freedom to tailor plans to the needs of individuals and families, and the absence of the tax advantages that families need to afford and choose their own health plan according to their own needs.

 Churchill said, “All men make mistakes but wise men learn from them.” 

 The American people understand that Obamacare was a huge mistake.  Let us acknowledge that, learn from it, and move on to enact the reforms that will reduce health costs and increase health care choices for families. 

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.     January 12, 2011.  Text.

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 12, 2011.  M. Speaker:

 I haven’t gotten to know Gabrielle Giffords yet, and I thank God that by His grace, I haven’t lost the chance to do so.

 I didn’t know those Americans who came to speak with her that day. 

But what I do know is that they gathered last Saturday in Tucson to do something uniquely American.  Gabrielle Giffords was reaching out and listening to her employers, the American People, and they had come to offer her their guidance and advice and counsel. 

In this respect, the attack on Gabrielle Giffords and her constituents struck at the very heart of our process of representative democracy – that very point where the American people communicate their views to their elected representatives.  That is the linchpin in the entire process of self-government.

This was not only an attack on those who serve, it was an attack on every citizen who steps forward to offer honest advice and counsel and yes – even criticism – to those they have selected to serve them and to serve the nation.

It is the nature and the strength of a participatory democracy to have passionate and heart-felt differences of opinion.
 
But in moments like this, we see the very best of the American people come forward.  Men and women of good will cease to be Republicans or Democrats; we put aside our passionate differences and disagreements; we suspend our political agendas; we silence partisan recriminations.  

We unite and stand together as one nation – the American nation; one race – the American race; one people – the American people. 

By doing so, we pay supreme honor to our fellow citizens who were felled in the exercise of their rights and responsibilities as a free people; we salute the heroes who without a moment’s hesitation rose to resist and stop this craven and depraved attack; and we assure the world, as Lincoln said, that “that government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth.”

“I am stunned and shocked by the horrific crime committed in Tucson this morning, and my heart goes out to the victims of this brutal act and to their families.  My prayers join those of every good American for the full recovery of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and we are all heartened by the optimism of her surgeons.  She was struck down in the performance of a duty central to representative democracy – reaching out and listening to her constituents.  The attack on her was an attack on everything that is good and decent in our society and indeed strikes at the heart of our form of self-government.

“I look forward to celebrating her speedy and triumphant return to the House of Representatives.”
 

Much of my district comprises forests managed by the U.S. Forest Service.  Over the last two years, I have received a growing volume of complaints protesting the increasingly exclusionary and elitist policies of this agency.   Full Text.

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 7, 2011.  M. Speaker:
 
Much of my district comprises forests managed by the U.S. Forest Service.  Over the last two years, I have received a growing volume of complaints protesting the increasingly exclusionary and elitist policies of this agency.

These complaints charge the Forest Service, among other things, with:
 
• Imposing inflated fees that are forcing the abandonment of family cabins held for generations;

• Charging exorbitant new fees that are closing down long-established community events upon which many small and struggling mountain towns depend for tourism;

• Expelling long-standing grazing operations on specious grounds – causing damage both to the local economy and the federal government’s revenues; and

• Obstructing the sound management of our forests through a policy that can only be described as benign neglect, creating both severe fire dangers and massive unemployment.

Practiced in the marketplace, we would renounce these tactics as predatory and abusive.  In the public service sector, they are intolerable. 

Combined, these actions evince an ideologically driven hostility to the public’s enjoyment of the public’s land – and a clear intention to deny the public the responsible and sustainable use of that land.

Most recently, the Forest Service has placed severe restrictions on vehicle access to the Plumas National Forest, despite volumes of public protests.  Supervisor Bill Connelly, Chairman of the Butte County Board of Supervisors writes that “The restriction applies to such activities as: collecting firewood, retrieving game, loading or unloading horses or other livestock, and camping.”  He writes, “The National Forests are part of the local fabric.  The roads within the National Forests are used by thousands of residents and visitors for transportation and recreation.  These activities generate revenue for our rural communities, which are critical for their survival.”

This is not a small matter.  The Forest Service now controls 193 million acres within our nation – a land area equivalent to the size of Texas.

 During the despotic eras of Norman and Plantagenet England, the Crown declared one third of the land area of Southern England to be the royal forest, the exclusive preserve of the monarch, his forestry officials and his favored aristocrats.  The people of Britain were forbidden access to and enjoyment of these forests under harsh penalties.  This exclusionary system became so despised by the people that in 1215, five clauses of the Magna Carta were devoted to redress of grievances that are hauntingly similar to those that are now flooding my office.

 Mr. Speaker, the attitude that now permeates the U.S. Forest Service from top to bottom is becoming far more reminiscent of the management of the royal forests during the autocracy of King John than of an agency that is supposed to encourage, welcome, facilitate and maximize the public’s use of the public’s land in a nation of free men and women.

 After all, that was the vision for the Forest Service set forth by its legendary founder, Gifford Pinchot in 1905: "to provide the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people in the long run." 

In May of 2009 and April of 2010, some of my California colleagues and I sent letters to the Forest Service expressing these concerns. I have also personally met with senior officials of that agency on several occasions in which I have referenced more than 500 specific complaints of Forest Service abuses received by my office. 

All that I have received to date from these officials are smarmy assurances that they will address these concerns – assurances that their own actions have belied at every turn.

It is time for Congress to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the abuses by this increasingly unaccountable and elitist agency, to demand accountability for the damage it has done – and is doing – to our forests’ health, to the public’s trust, to the government’s revenues and to the nation’s economy – and to take whatever actions are necessary to restore an attitude of consumer-friendly public service which was Gifford Pinchot’s original vision and for which the U.S. Forest Service was once renowned and respected.
 

Letter from Congressman Tom McClintock to USDA Forest Chief Thomas Tidwell regarding the Plumas National Forest: 

Read Letter Here

House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 6, 2011.  M. Speaker:

I rise to express the hope that historians will look back on the 112th Congress as the session that restored American prosperity – and to express my strong agreement with the new leaders of this House who have declared that every action of this body must be measured against this goal.

We speak of “jobs, jobs, jobs,” but jobs are a product of prosperity.  And prosperity is the product of freedom.

Government does not create jobs or wealth – it merely redistributes them.  Jobs and wealth can only be created through the free exchange of goods and services in a free market.  Government’s role is to create and protect the conditions which promote prosperity.

If I give you a dollar for a cup of coffee, what’s going on in that transaction?  I’m telling you that your cup of coffee is worth more to me than my dollar.  And at the same time, you’re telling me that my dollar is worth more to you than your cup of coffee.  We make that exchange and both of us go away with something of greater value than we took in – each of us goes away richer.

That is the freedom that creates prosperity.  That simple exchange – whether for a cup of coffee or for a multi-billion dollar acquisition – is what creates wealth.

But now suppose some third party butts its nose into this transaction.  “The coffee must be between 110 and 130 degrees; it has to include a swizzle stick; it must be covered if it is to be consumed more than 25 feet from the point of sale” – and on and on.  Every one of these restrictions reduces the value of that exchange for one or both of us.

That’s the fundamental problem that we face today.  Our government has not only failed to protect the freedom that creates prosperity, but it has become destructive of that freedom.

To create jobs we must restore prosperity and to restore prosperity we must restore freedom.

We must restore the freedom of choice that gives consumers the ultimate say over the output of our economy.  In a free and prosperous society, consumers vote every day with their own dollars on what kind of light-bulbs they prefer, on how they wish to get to work, on what foods they like, on how much water they want in their toilets, on what kind of cars they want or on what kind of housing they desire.   These consumer choices signal – every day – what things are actually worth and what our economy will actually produce.  Government is destroying the elegant simplicity of this process, and this Congress must reverse that destruction.

We must restore the freedom of individuals to enjoy the fruit of their own labor so that they can make these decisions for themselves once again.

  That’s why excessive government spending is so destructive to prosperity – it destroys the freedom of individuals to make their own decisions over what to spend and where to invest their own money.  It robs them of both the ability and incentive to create prosperity.

  Presidents like Coolidge, Truman, Reagan and Clinton who have reduced government spending relative to GDP all produced dramatic increases in productivity, prosperity and the general welfare of our nation. 

And Presidents like Hoover, Roosevelt, Bush and Obama who have increased government spending relative to GDP all produced or prolonged or deepened periods of economic recession, hardship and malaise. 

Our government is embarked on the latter course, and this Congress must reverse that direction.

Government has an important role to play in the marketplace.  It is there to assure that representations are accurate and that contracts are enforced – in other words, you have to tell the truth and you have to keep your promises.  Government exists to assure that the currency is stable and reliable and that property rights are secure. 

When it fulfills this fundamental role, it maximizes the freedom that a buyer and a seller have to assess their own needs and resources and to make those exchanges that allow both to go away better off than they were.  When it steps beyond this role, it destroys the conditions that maximize prosperity.

M. Speaker, let us together revive and restore the freedom and prosperity of this nation and fulfill that sacred command inscribed on our Liberty Bell: “To proclaim liberty throughout ALL the land, and unto ALL the inhabitants there of.”
 

The Prosperity Congress
House Chamber, Washington, D.C.  January 6, 2011.  Full Text.