u.s. congressman Mac Thornberry.com serving the people of the 13th district of texas

Dear Friend,
 
In this edition of video mailbox, I want to respond to some letters that I have received concerning the 2012 Farm Bill and the Department of Labor’s Youth Ag Rule that places restrictions on what a child can and cannot do on a farm.  I have received a good deal of mail on both topics, and I understand how important each of these issues is to our part of Texas. 
 
Passing some sort of Farm Bill is essential before September 30, but I believe we must make sure we pass the best bill possible for our farmers and ranchers.  The House has already passed a bill to fund disaster programs.  The disagreement is primarily about the 80% of the Farm Bill that is Food Stamps and nutrition programs.
 
In addition, at this point the Department of Labor has withdrawn their proposed Youth Ag Rule.  It is still critical, however, that we remain watchful for other examples of over reach by the federal government in the future.

I invite you to learn more about these issues by watching this edition of the video mailbox.  Have a question you would like answered?  Please contact me by phone, e-mail, letters, or on Facebook and Twitter.

As always, I appreciate hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Mac

Yesterday, we all received even more evidence that we need to take serious steps to shore up Social Security sooner rather than later.  The Social Security Trustee issued their annual report and said that the Trust Fund will be depleted three years earlier—by 2033—than they projected last year.

This announcement is just the latest data that shows how Social Security’s financial situation is worsening.  In 2010, Social Security for the first time in many years paid out more money in benefits than it received in payroll tax revenues. That trend will continue.  And even if all of the money borrowed out of Social Security in the past is repaid, the Trust Fund will be exhausted by 2033.

Meanwhile, every day more Americans who count on Social Security are planning for or entering retirement.

As you may know, mandatory spending programs—like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid —make up the largest part of our nation’s budget.  And it is increasingly clear that leaving these programs on autopilot will continue to threaten the financial security of all Americans, not just those who currently receive benefits.

I do not believe we should change the rules in the middle of the game. Proposals I have supported in the past would not affect those who are 55 years of age or older.  But for younger workers, some reforms are necessary or Social Security cannot survive.

You can read the Trustee report yourself at www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/TR/2012/.

Press Releases | Opinion Pieces | In the News | Committee Statements | eNewsletters | Photos

Email | eNewsletter | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Tumblr | Mac’s Blog | YouTube | Video Mailbox | Flickr

One issue that affects nearly everyone in our area and across the country is gas prices.  There is no doubt that high energy prices have placed a real burden on many Americans. And, from small business owners to parents who drive carpool, chances are that the cost of gas is hitting your wallet hard.

Some predict that we will see near or above $5 per gallon at the pump by peak driving time this summer.  Many experts believe that the recent turmoil overseas is one of the reasons for rapidly increasing gas prices.  And while things happening in the Middle East drive up the world price of oil, the President has only made things worse with the anti-fossil fuel agenda being implemented by this Administration.

Of course, the federal government does not directly control the price you pay at the pump.  We do know, however, that this Administration has prevented actions that could promote stable prices through production of more oil and gas here at home.  Among other things you have heard by now, the President has limited drilling off our shores and on federal lands.  He continues to threaten tax increases on the entire oil and gas industry; he has vetoed the full-length of the Keystone XL pipeline; and he has sent out EPA regulators to harass drillers.  The Administration and its allies are also working hard to discredit fracking and other successful technologies like horizontal drilling.  And I think, unfortunately, the cost of energy will continue to increase if the President continues along this course.

Just look at what has happened over the last three years.  In 2009, the Administration listed carbon dioxide as a hazardous pollutant, opening the door for the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act.  The decision, in effect, granted more regulatory control to the EPA and its bureaucrats in Washington to govern through regulation.

In 2010, the President effectively reinstated the ban on offshore drilling, placing the entire Pacific Coast, the entire Atlantic Coast, the Eastern Gulf and parts of Alaska off limits to future production until 2017 at the earliest.  In 2011, the President proposed a budget that included over $60 billion in direct tax and fee increases on American energy production.  And, already in 2012, the President announced a plan to close over a million acres of public land in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming to oil shale development.

Many officials from the White House have argued that domestic oil and natural gas production is up.  It has increased on private lands, but it has decreased on land controlled by the federal government.  And the reality is that the increase has been in spite of this Administration, not because of them.  Energy production on private lands is up because of improved recovery methods like fracking, not the Administration’s policies. 

The more stable the supply of energy, the more stable the price.  It is that simple.  And people are tired of excuses for tying our own hands and not producing all of the energy we can here at home.  My proposal, the “No More Excuses Energy Act of 2011 (H.R. 1023),” is a common sense plan that encourages responsible domestic energy production of all kinds here in the United States.  The bill seeks to remove some of the most burdensome regulatory roadblocks that limit our domestic supply of energy.  Among other provisions, the bill requires the President to designate at least 10 sites for oil or natural gas refineries on federal lands; it opens up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for drilling; and it removes carbon dioxide from the list of pollutants amended to the Clean Air Act.  Overall, this legislation seeks to increase the production of American energy with American workers. 

In fact, a study by the American Petroleum Institute (API) found that changes in federal energy policies could add nearly 1.1 million energy-related jobs over the next decade.  The study notes that federal regulation changes, such as expanding drilling permits in the Gulf of Mexico and approving the Keystone XL pipeline, could create jobs from coast to coast, increase domestic oil production, and lead to projected federal revenues of $803 billion by 2030.

As you may know, Texas leads the nation in production of crude oil and natural gas.  Texas is also home to at least one-third of the jobs created nationwide since the recession.  Data recently released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis highlighted the strength of the Texas economy in a report which found that Texas surpassed nearly $1 trillion in economic output and gained nearly a full percentage point in its share of the U.S. economy during the last decade.  A report released in August 2011 highlights how other energy-producing states—North Dakota, Oklahoma, and West Virginia— have ranked among the top job markets for the previous 3½ years.  And one of these states, North Dakota, has an unemployment figure of 3.1 percent, currently the lowest in the nation. 

We can—and should—create jobs and bring down the cost of energy by implementing commonsense domestic energy policies.  It is time to stop making excuses and get the government out of the way when it comes to a whole variety of things, including our energy resources.  It is the right thing to do for gas prices, for the American people, and for the economy. 

Press Releases | Opinion Pieces | In the News | Committee Statements | eNewsletters | Photos

Email | eNewsletter | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Tumblr | Mac’s Blog | YouTube | Video Mailbox | Flickr

There is so much constant, loud clatter in politics that it is often difficult to separate that which is important and revealing from that which is just noise.  But, President Obama said something important and revealing on Monday in South Korea.  The White House tried to laugh off his comments at first and then to explain them away.  But the implications are too serious for political spin.

President Obama was talking with Russian President Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones.  Here is what they said:

OBAMA: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”

MEDVEDEV: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you –”

OBAMA: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

MEDVEDEV: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

“This is my last election.  After my election I have more flexibility.”  That statement tells us much about the President’s mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough.  President Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the Bush Administration.  Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further.  The clear implication from the President’s comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase, “on all these issues,” implying more is at stake than just missile defense.   

For example, the White House has floated proposals for more deep cuts in our nuclear deterrent – as much as 80 percent.  In mid-February, I had the chance to ask Defense Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey about these trial balloons.  I told them that such talk does nothing but encourage our enemies to pursue nuclear weapons and discourage our friends from believing they can count on our nuclear deterrent. The result is a more dangerous world with more nuclear weapons programs spread across it.   

“More flexibility” without having to answer to voters again may well mean cuts in nuclear weapons and capability that will end the peace-through-strength approach pursued by both parties for more than 50 years.  In addition, “more flexibility” in an attempt to please Vladimir Putin could also include a host of other measures that weaken the United States and reduce the confidence that other nations have in us. 

Finally, the President, his advisors, and his supporters often say that he is committed to “restoring American leadership abroad.”  Sure, leaders can be flexible, but when it comes to keeping their country and its citizens safe, they must be firm.  These comments overheard in Seoul show that the only thing that the President is really committed to right now is his own re-election.

Press Releases | Opinion Pieces | In the News | Committee Statements | eNewsletters | Photos

Email | eNewsletter | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Tumblr | Mac’s Blog | YouTube | Video Mailbox | Flickr

Press Releases | Opinion Pieces | In the News | Committee Statements | eNewsletters | Photos

Email | eNewsletter | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Tumblr | Mac’s Blog | YouTube | Video Mailbox | Flickr

The Department of Health and Human Services recently issued a rule that requires health insurance plans to cover—at no charge—certain services for women, including all FDA-approved forms of contraception.  That would include the drug known as the "morning after pill."  The rule does not contain a meaningful conscience exemption.  This rule, which was issued pursuant to a provision of the new health care law, is one example of the extensive new controls that Washington will exercise over our health care. 

The rule requires health insurance plans to cover certain health services for employees, even if the service violates an employer’s moral or religious conscience.  There is an exemption within the rule for certain religious organizations, such as churches.  However, this exemption does not extend to other faith-based organizations such as religious hospitals, universities, and service organizations.  The Catholic Church, among others, has been very vocal in its opposition to the rule.

I have cosponsored the “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2011” (H.R. 1179), which would provide a religious conscience exemption to health insurance plans to allow them to decline coverage of specific items and services that are contrary to the beliefs of the issuer or beneficiary.  Of course, I also support repealing the health care bill which gives Washington the authority to dictate such personal matters of conscience.

While continuing to push for repeal, I am also working to have this measure brought for a vote and maintain at least some degree of religious freedom in health care.

Press Releases | Opinion Pieces | In the News | Committee Statements | eNewsletters | Photos

Email | eNewsletter | Facebook | Twitter | Google + | Tumblr | Mac’s Blog | YouTube | Video Mailbox | Flickr