Burr, Fellow Republicans Introduce Patients' Choice Act

An Alternative to Obamacare

By Tom Coburn, Richard Burr, Paul Ryan & David Nunes
RealClearPolitics
May 20, 2009

While President Obama may believe the stars are aligned for major health reform this year it is far from certain whether Congress will pass a bill that works. The groups that are most likely to unravel this effort are not the president's opponents, but his allies. Nothing will rally ordinary Americans against the president's plan more than his allies arguing too forcefully for a system run by politicians and bureaucrats in Washington - what we call the "public option" in the Obama plan.

It should come as no surprise that this ideologically rigid position is coming under fire. As the Washington Post recently wrote, "the fixation on a public plan is bizarre and counterproductive ... It is entirely possible to imagine effective health-care reform - changes that would expand coverage and help control costs - without a public option."

We agree. We have introduced a comprehensive health care reform bill, the Patients' Choice Act that, we believe, will bring us far closer to the goal of universal coverage than the Obama plan. Our bill, in specific legislative language, does the following:

Puts affordable coverage and choice within reach of all Americans. We do this by first ending the discrimination in the tax code that rewards corporations and employers for offering insurance yet offers no benefit to the unemployed and is unfair to the self-employed. Our current tax laws are a relic of the 1940's when Americans stayed in the same job far longer than they do today. It's time for a reboot.

Specifically, we would shift health care tax benefits to individuals and families in the form of a "Medi-Choice" tax rebate worth about $2,200 for individuals and $5,700 for families. Under our plan, if you like the health care you have, you can keep it - but you'll have more money in your pocket because you will still receive a tax rebate. ...

Prevents cherry picking by guaranteeing access to coverage. Even though we're confident that less government interference and more individual choice will control costs and improve quality and access, we recognize that markets can't solve all problems. That's why our bill prevents cherry picking - when insurance companies choose to cover only healthy patients - by equalizing risk across insurance companies and reversing the perverse incentives that leave those most vulnerable with the fewest options. ...

Strengthens the health care safety net. Currently, about 40 percent of doctors and hospitals do not accept Medicaid patients because payments are so low. This means that needy moms and kids may have health coverage, but poor access to health care. We remove the stigma from Medicaid recipients and give them the ability to purchase the health coverage and care they need from any provider. We preserve Medicaid for the blind, aged, and disabled and we eliminate widespread fraud in the programs. We do all this and still save states and the federal government about $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years.

Finally, our bill accomplishes these goals without spending any new federal money, or raising taxes. If this sounds too good to be true, we would note that the problem in health care is not that we don't spend enough, but that Americans aren't getting enough value for their dollars. On a per capita basis, America spends nearly twice what other industrialized nations spend on health care yet we are hardly twice as healthy. ...

The Obama plan promises change and progress, but it is based on old ideas. For the past 50 years, the Left has promised that a little more government intervention and spending will fix health care. If Washington can effectively run a health program like Obama's public option, why are Medicare, Medicaid, and other federal health programs in such disrepair? ...

The American people deserve better. Congress should be looking to 2040, not 1940 or 1965. We can achieve universal access to quality, affordable health care without bankrupting our children with trillions more in debt or imposing draconian tax hikes on all Americans. It can be done, and the Patients' Choice Act shows us how.

Click here to read the full article...

McHenry Op-Ed: Congress Must Demand Accountability at the Fed

By Rep. Patrick McHenry
Hickory Daily Record
May 18, 2009

The Federal Reserve System was created in 1913 by President Woodrow Wilson and Congress. The Fed, as it is known, is a semi-public agency that serves as the central hub of our banking system.

The Fed's original mission was to regulate monetary policy in the United States, meaning that it would restrict and loosen the supply of money in circulation. Its objective was to achieve stable prices and maximum employment.

The Fed does this by setting interest rates. These rates impact the interest that Americans pay on our mortgages and car loans, for example.

Today, the scope of the Fed's responsibilities is much larger. It is the agency most responsible for overseeing our financial markets. The Fed may soon take on the role of the "systemic risk" regulator for America's financial system.

However, our laws have not kept pace with the Fed's expanded use of power. Therefore, very little information about its activities is disclosed to Congress and the American people. ...

Click here to read the rest of the article...

McHenry: Obama Budget Savings = 0.002%

Encouraged by step in the right direction

WASHINGTON – Congressman Patrick McHenry (NC-10) issued the following statement regarding President Barack Obama’s call for $100 million in administration budget cuts. These savings would amount to a reduction of 0.002% in the federal budget.

“I am encouraged that President Obama has finally recognized the need for fiscal discipline. The first three months of his administration have been defined by boundless government spending. In doing so, the President broke his often-repeated campaign promise to go 'line by line' to identify savings in the federal budget. Although these cuts are too miniscule to be considered anything more than symbolic, at least it’s a step in the right direction. In fact, we could have saved three times that much by not buying a new fleet of cars for government employees in the so-called stimulus bill. As the national debt continues to spiral out of control, I hope President Obama will work in a bipartisan way to reform the careless way in which Washington spends tax dollars.”

Myrick: "We Have to Stop Living on Borrowed Money."

On April 4, Rep. Myrick participated in the Carolina Taxpayer Tea Party in Uptown Charlotte. Joined by hundreds of taxpayers from North and South Carolina, she said that the government must stop running on borrowed money and get spending under control. Click here for the full story.

Last week, Rep. Myrick voted for fiscal responsibility by voting for the Republican Budget Alternative for FY 2010. "How is increasing taxes by $1.5 trillion over ten years, increasing discretionary spending by 8.6 percent, and bringing our total national debt to $17.1 trillion considered a responsible thing to do in this economy?" Rep. Myrick said in a statement. "I voted for a Republican Budget Alternative that controls spending, decreases taxes for families and small businesses, and stops putting trillions of dollars in debt on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren."

Number of the Day

$7,300,000,000

N.C. First District Congressional Representative G.K. Butterfield requested $7.3 billion in earmarks requests in the Democrats' federal budget. The Wilson Democrat then hid the numbers under a tab on his Congressional website unlike his collegues who have placed the information on the home pages of their websites. When a Democrat requests that much new spending during a recession, it is no wonder he would want to keep it under the radar. You can view the full list of earmarks here.

The Better Budget

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) writes in this morning's Wall Street Journal of the GOP's alternative budget and its benefits for American taxpayers and families of all income levels. Republicans plan to push forward an alternative budget in Congress which will not exponentially increase debt, will provide solutions to the pressing problems of energy, health care, entitlements, and the tax code, and will lead to stronger job creation than what is offered under the President's plan.

The GOP's Alternative Budget

By Paul D. Ryan
Wall Street Journal

...Here's an outline of what we propose:

- Deficits/Debt. The Republican budget achieves lower deficits than the Democratic plan in every year, and by 2019 yields half the deficit proposed by the president. By doing so, we control government debt: Under our plan, debt held by the public is $3.6 trillion less during the budget period.

- Spending. Our budget gives priority to national defense and veterans' health care. We freeze all other discretionary spending for five years, allowing it to grow modestly after that. We also place all spending under a statutory spending cap backed up by tough budget enforcement.

- Energy. Our budget lays a firm foundation to position the U.S. to meet three important strategic energy goals: reducing U.S. dependence on foreign oil, deploying more clean and renewable energy sources free of greenhouse gas, and supporting economic growth. We do these things by rejecting the president's cap-and-trade scheme, by opening exploration on our nation's oil and gas fields, and by investing the proceeds in a new clean energy trust fund, infrastructure and further deficit reduction.

- Entitlements. Our budget also takes steps toward fulfilling the mission of health and retirement security, in part by making these programs fiscally sustainable. The budget moves toward making quality health care affordable and accessible to all Americans by strengthening the relationship between patients and their doctors, not the dictates of government bureaucrats. We preserve the existing Medicare program for all those 55 or older; and then, to make the program sustainable and dependable, those 54 and younger will enter a Medicare program reformed to work like the health plan members of Congress and federal employees now enjoy. Starting in 2021, seniors would receive a premium support payment equal to 100% of the Medicare benefit on average. This would be income related, so low-income seniors receive extra support, and high-income seniors receive support relative to their incomes -- along the same lines as the president's Medicare Part D proposal.

We strengthen the Medicaid safety net by converting the federal share of Medicaid payments into an allotment tailored for each state's low-income population. This will enhance state flexibility and sensitivity to spending growth.

In one of the most valued government programs -- Social Security -- our budget begins to develop a bipartisan solution to the program's pending bankruptcy by incorporating some of the reforms advocated by the president's budget director. Specifically, we provide for a trigger that would make small adjustments in the benefits for higher-income beneficiaries if the Social Security Administration determines the Social Security Trust Fund cannot meet its obligations. This is a modest but serious proposal which would not affect those in or near retirement, but is aimed at helping develop a consensus, across party lines, toward saving this important retirement program. We also assure that benefits for lower-income recipients are large enough to keep them out of poverty.

- Tax Reform. Our budget does not raise taxes, and makes permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. In fact, we cut taxes and reform the tax system. Individuals can choose to pay their federal taxes under the existing code, or move to a highly simplified system that fits on a post card, with few deductions and two rates. Specifically, couples pay 10% on their first $100,000 in income (singles on $50,000) and 25% above that. Capital gains and dividends are taxed at 15%, and the death tax is repealed. The proposal includes generous standard and personal exemptions such that a family of four earning $39,000 would not pay tax on that amount. In an effort to revive peoples' lost savings, and to create an incentive for risk-taking and investment, the budget repeals the capital gains tax through 2010 for all taxpayers.

On the business side, the budget permanently cuts the uncompetitive corporate income tax rate -- currently the second highest in the industrialized world -- to 25%. This puts American companies in a better position to lead in the global economy, promotes jobs here at home, and strengthens worker paychecks.

We hope the administration and Democratic leaders in Congress do not distort and preach fear about our Republican plan. Some may be tempted to appeal to the darker emotions of envy and insecurity that surely run high in times like these. Yet we know Americans are stronger, smarter and prouder than this ploy assumes.

In the recent past, the Republican Party failed to offer the nation an inspiring vision and a concrete plan to tackle our problems with innovative and principled solutions. We do not intend to repeat that mistake. America is not the greatest nation on earth by chance. We earned this greatness by rewarding individual achievement, by advancing and protecting natural rights, and by embracing freedom. We intend to continue this uniquely American tradition.

Mr. Ryan, from Wisconsin, is the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee.

Will Larry Kissell Raise Energy Costs on North Carolinians During Hard Times?

The NRCC put out a press release this afternoon asking if Larry Kissell will raise energy costs for struggling North Carolinians just when they can afford it the least. It's a good question and one that Rep. Kissell should answer for his constituents in the Eighth District.

Will Larry Kissell Support Devastating Energy Tax?
North Carolina Families Would Suffer from Skyrocketing Home Heating Costs Under “Cap-and-Tax”

Washington- Despite Democrats’ promises to deliver tax relief to families who need it the most, the recent budget proposal from the White House includes a “cap-and-trade” provision that should more appropriately be named the “cap-and-tax” provision, because if it became law it would raise energy taxes on every single person who flips on a light switch. As Congress takes the President’s federal budget under consideration, North Carolina families deserve to know if Rep. Larry Kissell (D-NC) would support such a devastating energy tax proposal.

The cap-and-tax proposal made by President Obama would drastically increase electricity rates for every American, causing additional hardships for already struggling North Carolina families. A new analysis shows that electricity rates could rise by as much as $6.4 billion per year, costing a North Carolina family of four approximately an additional $2,797 per year.

NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain asks, “Will Larry Kissell put partisan allegiances ahead of struggling workers and support a fiscally irresponsible cap-and-tax proposal that will increase energy bills, raise taxes and overwhelm the budgets of American families? The last thing that American families need to worry about right now is whether they will be able to cool their homes this summer or keep their families warm next winter.”

Families in North Carolina would be even more drastically affected, as so many families’ homes are heated with expensive fuels: MIT researchers released an “Assessment of U.S. Cap-and-Trade Proposals,” which shows that the increase would be an increase of more than $3,000 a year for each household. (A Report of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Climate Change; Assessment of U.S. Cap and Trade Proposals; http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/MITJPSPGC_Rpt146.pdf.)

What’s more disturbing is that low-income families would take the hardest hit from this “cap-and-tax” proposal: Testimony from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) revealed that, “The rise in prices would impose a larger burden, relative to income, on low-income households than on high-income households for two reasons. First, low-income households spend a much larger fraction of their income than do high-income households. In addition, energy-intensive items compose a greater share of low-income households’ total expenditures.” (CBO Congressional Testimony; The Distributional Consequences of a Cap-and-Trade Program for CO2 Emissions. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10018/03-12%20ClimateChange_Testimony.1.1.shtml)

(Source: House Committee on Ways and Means Republican Staff, Analysis of Annual Increase in Electricity Costs, http://list.nrcc.org/t/2191043/10052024/3375/0/,
3/26/09)

Constitution? What Constitution?

George Will, in his column for the Washington Post today, runs down the litany of consitutional abuses that have gone on so far with the new Congress and the Obama administration in power. Democrats have taken a no-holds-barred approach to governance, run ramshod over previous promises of bipartisanship, and have displayed ignorance and outright disdain for constitutional mandates.

... From Mexico, America is receiving needed instruction about fundamental rights and the rule of law. A leading Democrat trying to abolish the right of workers to secret ballots in unionization elections is California's Rep. George Miller who, with 15 other Democrats, in 2001 admonished Mexico: "The secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose." Last year, Mexico's highest court unanimously affirmed for Mexicans the right that Democrats want to strip from Americans.

Congress, with the approval of a president who has waxed censorious about his predecessor's imperious unilateralism in dealing with other nations, has shredded the North American Free Trade Agreement. Congress used the omnibus spending bill to abolish a program that was created as part of a protracted U.S. stall regarding compliance with its obligation to allow Mexican long-haul trucks on U.S roads. ... Mexico has resorted to protectionism -- tariffs on many U.S. goods -- in retaliation for Democrats' protection of the Teamsters union.

NAFTA, like all treaties, is the "supreme law of the land." So says the Constitution. It is, however, a cobweb constraint on a Congress that, ignoring the document's unambiguous stipulations that the House shall be composed of members chosen "by the people of the several states," is voting to pretend that the District of Columbia is a state. Hence it supposedly can have a Democratic member of the House and, down the descending road, two Democratic senators. Congress rationalizes this anti-constitutional willfulness by citing the Constitution's language that each house shall be the judge of the "qualifications" of its members and Congress can "exercise exclusive legislation" over the District. What, then, prevents Congress from giving House and Senate seats to Yellowstone National Park, over which Congress exercises exclusive legislation? Only Congress' capacity for embarrassment. So, not much.

The Federal Reserve, by long practice rather than law, has been insulated from politics in performing its fundamental function of preserving the currency as a store of value -- preventing inflation. Now, however, by undertaking hitherto uncontemplated functions, it has become an appendage of the executive branch. The coming costs, in political manipulation of the money supply, of this forfeiture of independence could be steep.

Jefferson warned that "great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities." But Democrats, who trace their party's pedigree to Jefferson, are contemplating using "reconciliation" -- a legislative maneuver abused by both parties to severely truncate debate and limit the minority's right to resist -- to impose vast and controversial changes on the 17 percent of the economy that is health care. ...

This is but a partial list of recent lawlessness, situational constitutionalism and institutional derangement. Such political malfeasance is pertinent to the financial meltdown as the administration, desperately seeking confidence, tries to stabilize the economy by vastly enlarging government's role in it.

Did Kissell Knowingly Back AIG Bonus Package?

Question for Larry Kissell: Did He Ever Actually Read the Bill or Did He Knowingly Support a Bill That Would Hand out Millions in Taxpayer-Funded Bonuses to Wall Street Executives?

NRCC Press Release
March 18, 2009

Washington- American International Group (AIG) Chairman and CEO Edward Liddy is testifying before Congress today about the $165 million in bonuses paid to top AIG executives. Now, Rep. Larry Kissell (D-NC) – who helped pass the “AIG stimulus” bill that allowed AIG executives to receive these bonuses – needs to answer some very serious questions. Kissell needs to explain to his constituents what he knew, when he knew it and if he helped to keep AIG bonus information quiet. Larry Kissell either blindly followed his party leadership and voted for a trillion dollar bill he never read, or he knowingly backed a bill that would hand out millions of taxpayer dollars to Wall Street executives in the form of bonuses.

The facts are crystal clear: Democrats, including Larry Kissell, voted for this “AIG stimulus” bill, which was negotiated behind closed doors in the middle of the night and allowed for taxpayer-funded bonuses to go to AIG executives:
“…The rules in the stimulus bill apply not only to companies that receive bailout funds in the future, but also to those that have received TARP money in the past – although executive bonuses doled out in contracts signed before February 11 would not be impacted.” (Carol E. Lee, “Dodd banker pay cap one-ups Obama,” Politico, 2/14/09)

“It seems that Larry Kissell and Wall Street executives will never learn that ‘business as usual’ is no longer tolerated by American taxpayers,” said NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain. “The question is simple: Did Larry Kissell ever actually read the bill or did he knowingly support a bill that would hand out millions in taxpayer-funded bonuses to Wall Street executives?”

Price Tags Prove Priorities

Bailing Out Wall Street: $170 billion

AIG gets more than $170 billion in bailout funds. Now top executives want to use taxpayer funds to fund $165 million in bonuses paid to themselves.

The American International Group, which has received more than $170 billion in taxpayer bailout money from the Treasury and Federal Reserve, plans to pay about $165 million in bonuses by Sunday to executives in the same business unit that brought the company to the brink of collapse last year.

Protecting Small Businesses: $15 billion

Small businesses have created roughly 70 percent of jobs in the last decade according to President Obama himself. Today, Obama announced a $15 billion plan to aid small businesses and their owners.

President Barack Obama is unveiling a $15 billion package to help small businesses.

Where do President Obama and Democrats' priorities lie? Just study the price tags.

Larry Kissell Shows True Colors

Looks like Larry Kissell won't be campaigning as a blue dog, conservative Democrat anymore. Larry Kisell is not a conservative and he's not a moderate. He's a liberal Democrat in a conservative district which he owes 7,700 jobs. He won't be convinving his Eighth District constituents of anything else before 2010, either.

Larry Kissell Rejected from Blue Dog Coalition
So Much for Those “Fiscally Conservative” Credentials He Campaigned On

NRCC Press Release
March 5, 2009

Washington- The new membership list of the Blue Dog Coalition for the 111th Congress was released, but self-proclaimed “fiscal conservative” Rep. Larry Kissell’s name was noticeably absent. Despite Kissell’s rhetoric that he would be a good steward of the taxpayers’ dollars in Congress, did the Blue Dog Coalition see Kissell’s claims as nothing more than empty rhetoric?

In the two short months since he came to Congress, he’s repeatedly supported bills that hurt the middle-class families in his district. Could it be Kissell’s support for the pork-laden “stimulus” package and the omnibus spending bill - which were filled with wasteful Washington spending and tax hikes for small businesses – that excluded Kissell from admission to the Blue Dog Coalition? (House Roll Calls 46, 70, 86)

“Larry Kissell’s rejection from the conservative Blue Dog Coalition provides even more convincing evidence that Kissell’s calls for ‘fiscal responsibility’ were nothing more than empty rhetoric,” said NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain. “Since coming to Congress Kissell has repeatedly supported the liberal wing of his party’s unending spending spree and has failed to put the interests of middle-class families in his district first.”

The Blue Dog Coalition’s website describes itself as being “particularly active on fiscal issues, relentlessly pursuing a balanced budget and then protecting that achievement from politically popular ‘raids’ on the budget,” but it’s clear that despite all his rhetoric, Larry Kissell’s record does not hold up to these standards.

Update: From Dome

"Congressman Kissell pledged during the campaign that he would not join the Blue Dogs and therefore has not," Kissell spokeswoman Brianna Atkins.

McHenry Statement on Democrats' Historic Increase in Discretionary Spending

Press Release
February 25, 2009

Congressman Patrick McHenry (NC-10) released the following statement regarding H.R. 1105, the fiscal year 2009 omnibus appropriations bill.

“Last evening, we heard President Obama talk about the need to “make the hard choices to bring down the debt.” The President seemingly understands that a $2 trillion federal deficit will prolong and deepen the economic crisis.

“On the heels of the so-called $787 billion stimulus bill, the Democrat majority in Congress has not made the tough choices necessary, but are increasing discretionary spending at its highest rate since the Carter Administration. Worse, the omnibus spending bill includes 8,696 earmarks to fund the pet projects of politicians at a cost of $11 billion. This is money that taxpayers do not have and cannot afford.

“The Democrat majority refuses to heed the advice of their President and countless economists who warn against such gluttonous use of the public purse. Unless they stop spending as though we’re playing with Monopoly money, taxpayers will be left with catastrophic inflation and tax increases like we’ve never seen before in this country.”

Myrick Statement on 2009 Omnibus Appropriations

Press Release
February 25, 2009

(Washington, DC) – US Representative Sue Myrick has released the following statement regarding her vote on the 2009 omnibus appropriations bill passed today in the House of Representatives:

“When is this out-of-control spending going to stop? The 2009 omnibus appropriations bill that passed today – without my support – contains billions of dollars in additional funding for agencies and government programs that have already received billions of dollars this month from the stimulus. One agency‘s funding even increased 91% from last year. How can we call this fiscal responsibility? How are we going to rebuild the economy, reduce the deficit and pay down our debt if the government is determined to spend over a trillion dollars that we don’t have?”

Foxx: Huge Spending Bill Passes House, National Debt Increases

Foxx votes against $410 billion bill, votes for increased earmark transparency

Press Release
February 25, 2009

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congresswoman Virginia Foxx (NC-05) today voted in opposition to a massive spending bill (H.R. 1105) that once again increases federal government spending at a time of record budget deficits. H.R. 1105, which completes the funding process for the federal government for fiscal year 2009, spends $410 billion, 8.3 percent more than 2008.

“The federal budget is growing by 8.3 percent, while family budgets are shrinking,” Foxx said. “At a time when Americans are tightening their belts, Washington is on a reckless spending spree. This is irresponsible.”

When the spending legislation passed before the end of 2008 is factoring in, federal discretionary spending will reach $1.01 trillion for 2009. This is the first time in U.S. history that the federal discretionary budget has passed the $1 trillion mark. Additionally, federal agencies lucky enough to get money from both this spending legislation and the recently-enacted stimulus bill are about to see their funding jump by 80 percent—nearly doubling some agencies’ budgets in a single year.

“Congress has jacked up the federal debt limit four times in the past 17 months in order to accommodate Washington’s profligate spending,” Foxx said. “Thanks to this new massive bill it is just a matter of time until we take out yet another mortgage on our children’s future earnings.” ...

Click here to read the full release...

ICYMI: A Defining Week for Congress

By Rep. John Boehner
RealClearPolitics
July 28, 2008

The final week before the August district work period is typically among the busiest of all for Congress - and usually one during which major legislation is passed in advance of the lengthy recess away from Washington. The pressure is on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Barack Obama (D-IL), and their colleagues in the Democratic leadership to carry on that tradition this week by bringing to the floor of each chamber comprehensive legislation that increases production of American energy to address the number one issue on the minds of the American people: the rising cost of gasoline.

Today begins a defining week for Congress. All year long, gas prices have soared as a result of misguided Washington policies. Even with the small recent dip since President Bush ended the executive ban on deepwater drilling far off our shores (a ban that Congress also needs to lift in order for critical energy production to take place in the oil-and gas-rich Outer Continental Shelf), families and small businesses know we will never see $2 or even $3 per gallon gasoline until the Democratic Majority signals real support for American-made energy to lower gas prices. Over the next five days, Congress has a chance to make this commitment - but only if Democratic leaders allow it.

Throughout the summer, Republicans have asked for a vote on an "all of the above" energy strategy built on increased exploration, conservation, and innovation - the reforms Americans solidly support in poll after poll. And throughout the summer, the Democratic leaders of Congress have made every excuse to block a vote - all at the behest of a tiny band of radical special-interest groups that support high gas prices and aim to keep America's vast energy resources under lock-and-key. Speaker Peosi plainly stated in a recent CNN interview, in fact, that when it comes to allowing a vote on the reforms the American people expect and support, she has "no plans to do so." ...


Last week, House Republicans transformed our "all of the above" plan into a single piece of legislation: the American Energy Act, which encourages conservation and efficiency, promotes alternative forms of energy such as biofuels and nuclear, and increases production of American energy far offshore, on federal lands in the Inter-Mountain West, and in remote areas of Alaska's North Slope. This bill would pass Congress with a strong, bipartisan majority right now ... if only it was put to a simple up-or-down vote.

If the Democratic Majority refuses to allow a vote later this week on the American Energy Act, House Republicans will stand firmly against a vote to adjourn for the August break. Prior to a lengthy recess, the adjournment vote is usually cast without a second thought. But this week, that vote could mean much, much more. A vote to adjourn without increasing production of American energy to bring down gas prices will be a vote against the American people and a vote against American energy independence. It will be a vote against increased energy exploration, conservation, and innovation. And yes, it will be a vote against lower gas prices - and for continued and dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

Just as this is a defining week for this "drill-nothing" Congress, the adjournment vote could be a defining one for the Democratic Majority. Casting a "yea" or "nay" on that vote would be the difference between heeding the calls of the American people, who strongly support more American-made energy to reduce gas prices, or continuing to defy their will by leaving town for five weeks of politics and vacations - and leaving them to fend for themselves amid energy costs that will only soar higher this fall and beyond.

John Boehner is a United States Representative from Ohio and the Republican leader in the U.S. House.

Click here for the full article: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/a_defining_week_for_congress.html