Maurice's Blog

Title: Census Enumerators to Hit the Streets Starting in May

Maurice Hinchey — 04/21/2010 16:46

Starting the first week of May, census enumerators will begin going door to door to follow up with those who have not yet responded to the 2010 Census. Here is what you should know:

Census workers will try reaching someone in the home at least three times to fill out the questionnaire. If they are unable to reach someone to verify occupants, the enumerator will ask a knowledgeable source, such as the Town Hall or Post Office if they have any information about the residents.

All census enumerators will be wearing identification badges - you can also ask to see a driver's license to confirm the name on the badge matches their photo or verify their employment with the census by contacting the local census office. Please report all concerns about the legitimacy of a census worker to local law enforcement.
Do not provide Social Security, banking information or a signature - the census enumerator will only ask the ten simple questions that were included on the census form that residents received in the mail. Any request for Social Security or banking information should be immediately reported to local law enforcement.
Census staff do not have to enter the home - all information can be given at the door.
Census follow-up will end in early July - for more information contact your local census office:

Orange, Sullivan and Delaware County residents - call the Newburgh Local Census Office at 845-476-3030.
Broome, Tioga and Tomkins County residents - call the Elmira Local Census Office at 607-735-5441.
Ulster County residents - call the Poughkeepsie Local Census Office at 845-878-8240.

0 Comments

Upstate New Yorkers Will Save Money with Health Care Reform

Maurice Hinchey — 03/19/2010 10:11

With the House set to pass the most sweeping health care reform since the creation of Medicare, I'm proud to report that middle class families, seniors, small businesses and young people throughout upstate New York stand to benefit substantially. In the district I represent, the health care reform bill will:

Improve coverage for 415,000 residents with health insurance.
Give tax credits and other assistance to up to 158,000 families and 16,100 small businesses to help them afford coverage. A tax credit of up to 50 percent of the cost of providing coverage will be available to 93 percent of small businesses.
Improve Medicare for 109,000 beneficiaries, including closing the gap in prescription drug coverage for seniors known as the "donut hole."
Extend coverage to 47,000 uninsured residents.
Guarantee that 10,900 residents with pre-existing conditions can obtain coverage.
Protect 900 families from bankruptcy due to unaffordable health care costs.
Allow 68,000 young adults to obtain coverage on their parents' insurance plans.

This legislation represents an important step for the upstate New Yorkers who continue to struggle with rising health care costs and limited choices. It will make coverage more affordable for everyone and hold insurance companies accountable; it will stop the denial of coverage because of a pre-existing condition; it will prevent the dropping of your coverage when you get sick; and it will make sure the practice of arbitrarily hiking up insurance premiums is ended. That's why I am proud to support it.

You can learn more about how the bill will affect people throughout our area by clicking here.

0 Comments

The Cost of Inaction on Health Care Reform

Maurice Hinchey — 03/16/2010 15:38

The rising cost of health care is a constant burden for residents throughout Upstate New York. It is the primary reason why we simply cannot wait any longer for reform. A recent analysis from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation further illustrates that if nothing is done our families will pay the price:

Families Pay the Price as Premiums Rise: the cost of both single and family policies would more than double by 2020, increasing from $4,800 to $10,300 for single policies and from $12,100 to $25,600 for family policies.
Middle Class Families Would Lose Insurance: the share of the uninsured from middle- and higher-income families would rise from 44% to 56% in 2020, with middle class families being hit the hardest.
Small Businesses Would Cut Coverage: the number of small businesses that offer health care to workers would drop from 41% to 23% in 2020.
Wages Would be Threatened: employer spending on premiums would increase by 98% from 2010 to 2020, further limiting their ability to maintain or increase wages.
The Number of Uninsured would Rise: without action, the number of uninsured Americans would increase from 49.4 million in 2010 to 59.7 million in 2015 and 67.6 million in 2020.

I encourage you to take a look at the full study and to do whatever you can to make sure health care reform passes. Also - take a look at this press release from earlier today which highlights the immediate benefits of health care reform.

0 Comments

Too Big to Fail = Too Big to Exist

Maurice Hinchey — 12/07/2009 15:54

We are in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. More than 27 million American workers are either unemployed, underemployed or have given up looking for work. The immediate cause of this economic catastrophe is the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior of a small number of Wall Street firms that brought the financial system to the verge of collapse.

In order to stabilize these too-big-to-fail financial institutions, the U.S. government has provided the largest bailout in world history. In all, $23.7 trillion from taxpayers has been put at risk to stabilize the financial system, according to the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Incredibly, since the beginning of the financial crisis, three of the largest “too-big-to-fail” institutions have become even bigger. In other words, if any of these financial institutions were to fail again the taxpayers would be on the hook for another bailout, perhaps even larger than the last one.

It is not just a question of the ongoing threat these firms pose to taxpayers if they get into trouble again. The enormous concentration of ownership within the financial sector also is damaging the economy by limiting choices and raising prices for consumers and small businesses.

Today, just four huge financial institutions hold half the mortgages in America, issue nearly two-thirds of our credit cards and control about 40 percent of all bank deposits in this country. Adding insult to injury, just five financial institutions hold 95 percent of the $290 trillion in derivatives at commercial banks — side bets made by Wall Street gamblers that brought the entire economy to the brink of despair.

As banks get bigger, consumers are paying twice — first as taxpayers called on to bail out the financial behemoths and a second time as consumers forced to pay higher fees and interest rates on credit cards and other financial products.

At the dawn of the 20th century, Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and William Howard Taft took a big stick to the largest and most powerful corporate interests of their era. Today, it is time to take a page out of the book of these courageous Republicans and break up financial institutions and insurance giants that have become too big to fail.

Simply put, if an institution is too big to fail, it is too big to exist.

No single financial institution should be so large that its failure would cause catastrophic risk to millions of American jobs or to our nation’s economic well being. No single financial institution should have holdings so extensive that its failure could send the world economy into crisis.

Further, no consumer or small business should have to pay interest rates on credit cards and other loans so high they would make a loan shark blush.

There is a growing chorus across the political spectrum for breaking up too-big-to-fail banks. The former CEO of Citicorp, John Reed, apologized last week for the role he played in allowing Citigroup to become so large and risky that it needed a $45 billion taxpayer bailout.

Two former chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan and Paul Volker; the governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King; a former labor secretary, Robert Reich; former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, Simon Johnson, and others have all said that if they’re too big to fail, they’re too big to exist.
Importantly, the British government is beginning the break-up process in the United Kingdom by forcing the Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Banking Group and Northern Rock to sell off parts of their operations.

We are certainly under no illusions. Breaking up some of the most powerful companies in the world will not be easy. We have already seen a recent billionaires march on Washington in opposition to House legislation that authorizes the dismantling of some of the biggest Wall Street firms, and we are certain that massive amounts of campaign contributions and lobbying efforts are already being planned.

Nonetheless, the American people have had enough. They are tired of the greed, arrogance and power of the “masters of the universe.” They want a competitive financial industry that invests in job-creating businesses in the productive economy, and an end to the destructive gambling spree by institutions that are too big to fail.

Now is the time. Let’s break ’em up!

(This posting was co-written with U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT))

0 Comments

Championing America's Red Rock Wilderness Act of 2009

Maurice Hinchey — 10/01/2009 13:14

Today, the House Committee on Natural Resources' Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 1925, America's Red Rock Wilderness Act of 2009. I've sponsored this important piece of legislation every session of Congress since 1994. I had the opportunity to testify on the merits of the bill at today's hearing. Here is what I said:

"Mr. Chairman, thank you for scheduling this hearing today on America's Red Rock Wilderness Act. Thank you to the witnesses who will be speaking later who traveled here today from Utah to speak about the Red Rock bill. We greatly appreciate you taking the time from your busy lives to come to Washington, DC to discuss this importation legislation.

"The first version of the Red Rock bill was introduced in 1989 by the late Wayne Owens, who was a distinguished member of the House of Representatives from Utah and a good friend. When Wayne Owens left Congress in 1993, he asked me to continue introducing his bill, which I considered an honor. A lot has changed since, but we're still working to protect wild public lands in Utah and this year's bill reflects updated inventory information.

"The Red Rock bill is one of the great examples of a citizen-led initiative. The bill was developed in response to the Bureau of Land Management’s initial wilderness inventory in the 1980s that significantly undervalued the public wilderness resources in the state. Countless volunteers put in thousands of hours documenting the millions of acres and drawing boundaries around those areas that qualified as wilderness. This still stands as one of the largest non-governmental inventories of land ever.

"We are now in the twentieth year of this effort but it is just the latest chapter in a nearly 140 year effort to protect and preserve our nation's most pristine natural resources for generations to come. The first success in this effort was achieved in 1872 with the establishment of Yellowstone National Park. And yet, despite the vast amount of time that has elapsed since that great event, many of the arguments against this bill are the same one's that were made over a century ago when the first parcels of wilderness were designated for protection. There has always been a desire to push short-term, private interests over long-term, public interests. A century ago it was loggers trying to chop down the giant red woods; today it is the oil and gas industry trying to dig up the red rocks. Those of us who believe we should preserve our natural treasures for future generations have an obligation to do all that we can to continue the efforts of those individuals like Teddy Roosevelt who fought so hard to protect our wild lands.

"The Red Rock bill would designate as wilderness over 9 million acres of public lands, owned by the American people and managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Just as the Grand Canyon situated in the State of Arizona belongs to all of us, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge situated in Alaska belongs to all of us, so to do the splendid public lands in Utah that are the subject of this wilderness bill.

"The areas protected in this legislation are some of the great landscapes the world has ever seen. They include the vast areas of roadless desert in Tule Valley, red rock formations in Fisher Towers, and awe-inspiring Desolation Canyon, which is the single largest area in my bill. These lands are rich with archaeological remnants of prehistoric cultures and they are a haven for outdoor recreation enthusiasts, scientists, hikers, educators, wildlife enthusiasts, and many more.

"While photos do not do these great vistas justice, I have brought some along so that those present can see what we are trying to protect.

"They include:
1.      The Tule1 Valley and Cricket Mountains in Millard County
2.      The Fisher Towers in Grand County
3.      Desolation Canyon in Uintah County

"The Bureau of Land Management has already verified that over 75 percent of the public lands protected by this legislation have wilderness characteristics, through its past inventories of the land. This is a remarkable fact given the lack of progress on wilderness protection that we saw over the past eight years under the previous administration. The majority of the remaining lands have not received an updated inventory analysis, but we are confident that they will qualify if and when that new analysis takes place.

"To further put this legislation into perspective, we have to note that the lands that would be designated for wilderness by this bill encompass approximately 40 percent of the 23 million acres of public land inside Utah's border. The remainder of the public lands in Utah will still be open for development.

"Given the beauty and the awe these great landscapes inspire, support for protecting these public lands is widespread. The legislation before us has 146 bipartisan cosponsors. It has been endorsed by over 200 national, regional and local organizations. These are not just environmental organizations; they include recreation organizations, business groups, and religious communities.

"Support for this legislation is not limited to us "outsiders." There is also clear and growing support within Utah to protect these public lands. The bill itself was developed by Utahns. Multiple Utah newspapers, including the Salt Lake Tribune, have editorialized in support of more BLM wilderness in Utah. And a statewide poll of Utah residents conducted in the first week of September by Dan Jones and Associated, a respected research company based in Salt Lake City, found that over 60 percent of those surveyed supported designating as wilderness between 9 million and 23 million acres of the of public lands in Utah.

"Members of ten different religious communities in Utah worked together to create an interfaith statement about the about the spiritual importance of Utah’s wild lands and the need for action to protect these special places.

"Finally, protecting these public lands is not limited to a political party or ideology. The witnesses who are testifying in support of the Red Rock bill are evidence of that. Their views span the spectrum from the left, center, and right. They are all respected statesmen from Utah and we should strongly consider their views on the underlying legislation and the importance of designating these public lands as wilderness.

"Opponents of this bill will try to detail it to death. They'll talk about how this is a proposal pushed by outsiders, but as I've already indicated that is hardly the case. They'll claim it blocks access to critical oil and gas resources, yet the Red Rock lands hold less than a few days worth of oil and a few weeks worth of gas, according to the Energy Information Agency. This is less than 1 percent of the nation's oil reserves and less than 2 percent of the nation's gas reserves. Additionally, the industry already has more than 5 million acres of oil and gas leases in Utah, yet only 1.5 million, or 30 percent, of those leased lands are actually in production.

"Some may even try to argue that there are no maps to identify which lands this bill affects. In case there is any confusion, here is a map of the lands we are discussing.

"I could continue, but I think the point is clear. These are small arguments designed to distract us from addressing a big responsibility.

"Fortunately, we have seen a lot of progress on wilderness designation in Utah over the last twenty years. Some of the people who are opposed to this bill support alternative methods to protecting wilderness, like the Washington County bill that passed in the Omnibus Public Lands Act earlier this year.

"I, and others I work with, am absolutely open to alternative methods for protecting our wild public lands in Utah. However, I am concerned that if we choose a small piecemeal strategy for protecting the lands in the Red Rock bill, by designating a few hundred thousand acres each Congress, it could take at least another twenty years before we designate as wilderness just 50 percent the precious resources we seek to protect in this bill.

"While I know the bill and its supporters are in this for the long-haul, I find this unacceptable. That is why I will continue to push this legislation.

"Many people are asking, why are we even having this hearing today? My response to that is that it couldn't come at a more important time. The great wild lands of Utah that are owned by the American people are under threat.

"At the tail end of the previous administration, BLM released six resource management plans that would decimate the lands we seek to protect in this bill by opening 2.5 million acres of the lands to oil and gas development and designating over 3500 miles of new off-road vehicle routes. While these management plans are legally deficient and will likely be overturned, they exemplify the need for Congress to permanently protect these wild public lands.

"It is fitting that we are having this hearing while PBS is airing Ken Burns's new documentary The National Parks, America's Best Idea. While we aren't seeking to establish new parks, the sentiment is the same -- that the most special places in the nation should be preserved, not for royalty or the rich, but for everyone."

0 Comments

Protecting Our Drinking Water Supplies from Hydraulic Fracturing

Maurice Hinchey — 09/16/2009 10:49

Every person deserves access to safe, clean drinking water -- our most precious natural resource. New York, in particular, has long prided itself on having some of the nation's most naturally pure drinking water supplies. It has achieved that high standard, and continues to do so, under New York state laws passed more than two decades ago. I'm determined to maintain that high standard.

That's why I'm working so hard in Congress to restore the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to protect drinking water supplies in other states across our country. Fracking is used to extract natural gas buried in rock formations by injecting a fluid into the ground composed of sand, water, and chemicals, some of which are toxic like benzene and toluene. The EPA had the authority to regulate fracking under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) up until 2005 when a misguided energy bill, which I vehemently opposed, stripped the agency of this authority. As a result, the oil and gas industry is now the only industry in the U.S. that cannot be regulated under the SDWA.

Natural gas drilling, when done properly, has an important place in our national energy policy. The Marcellus Shale provides New York with a real opportunity for economic growth if the proper environmental protections are in place. However, we cannot afford to get this wrong. While the economic benefits of drilling are potentially great, the potentially disastrous economic and public health consequences of failing to protect our water supplies would be exponentially greater.

That's why I've coauthored the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act of 2009. This important legislation would reverse the 2005 exemption and restore the EPA's authority under the SDWA. Additionally, the bill would require companies to honestly disclose the contents of fracturing fluid in order to increase public awareness and to enable state and local regulators to properly control the chemicals being pumped into the ground.

It's important to note that should this bill become law, it would enable the EPA to establish a minimum federal standard that New York's regulations would most likely exceed. This bill would not adversely impact the New York Department of Environmental Conservation's efforts to protect the public. The measure would help increase protections in other states, including those neighboring New York, and it would also provide a federal safeguard against any future efforts in New York to weaken the state's guidelines.

To clarify some misconceptions about the bill: it doesn't ban fracturing or natural gas drilling in New York or anywhere else; it doesn't prescribe new regulations that would stifle natural gas development; and it doesn't impose any delays on utilizing natural gas resources. The bill simply restores commonsense protections that were in place prior to 2005.

Additionally, I've authored a separate legislative measure that urges the EPA to conduct a study on the impact that fracking poses to drinking water supplies across the country. This measure, which has already passed the House, would help the EPA gain a true understanding of the impact that fracking has on drinking water supplies so that the agency will be ready to take any necessary protective action should we successfully restore its regulatory authority to oversee fracking.

The oil and gas industry maintains that fracking is a practice that's been safely used for decades. If that's the case then the industry has nothing to worry about because the EPA wouldn't find anything objectionable in the practice. However, while the practice of fracking has been around for some time, energy companies are now using new concoctions of toxic chemicals on a grander scale than ever before. Evidence from drilling sites across the country gives reason for concern. In just the last month, the EPA opened a formal investigation into links between contamination at 11 drinking wells in Wyoming and nearby natural gas development, including fracking.

The true environmental impact of fracking is not entirely known, but there are enough red flags that make it absolutely worth restoring the EPA's authority to protect drinking water supplies from any chemicals that are planned to be pumped into the ground. We cannot put ourselves in a position where 5, 10, or 50 years from now, people are left wondering how our current generation was so foolish as to not take commonsense precautions to safeguard our most vital resource. We have nothing to lose by restoring the EPA's authority, but we could lose everything if we don't.

0 Comments

Improving Medicare

Maurice Hinchey — 09/08/2009 16:31

The primary focus of any health care legislation before Congress this year is to insure the nearly 46 million Americans with no coverage, to improve coverage for those who already have some form of insurance, and to reduce the skyrocketing cost of health care. It's also an important opportunity to strengthen Medicare, the health insurance program already used by 45 million seniors and disabled Americans. For more than four decades, Medicare has provided quality health care for those members of our population who need it most while serving as a remarkable example of the good that government can do for our people. It's also been cost-effective: approximately 5 percent of Medicare spending is devoted to administrative fees while private insurance companies spend up to 30 percent of their budget on administrative, advertising, and overheard expenses.

Medicare beneficiaries receive coverage to see doctors, undergo surgeries, receive prescription drugs, and get many of the benefits offered by traditional health care plans at a lower cost. However, as we're seeing with the entire health care system and as the result of more Baby Boomers turning 65, costs continue to rise and benefits are not as thorough as they should be. Far from hurting Medicare, as some have suggested, the pending health reform bill takes several steps to expand benefits and prevent the insolvency of the program in the future. The current health care reform legislation pending before the House provides us with the right vehicle through which to enact positive reform that will strengthen Medicare by enhancing benefits, improving care and access to doctors, and containing costs.

Seniors should take comfort in knowing that this bill would take important steps to ensure that they can continue to see the doctors they like and gain access to more choices of doctors. The House health care bill eliminates the 21 percent Medicare reimbursement cut for doctors that was scheduled to go into effect, ensuring that these doctors will remain Medicare providers. Without reform, 40 percent of doctors said they would reduce the number of Medicare patients they treat. Additionally, the bill seeks to reverse the shortage of well-trained doctors in the country by providing new scholarships, loans, and loan repayment assistance to help recruit qualified people into the medical field.

The bill also tackles the rising costs of prescription drugs. Each year, approximately 165,000 seniors in New York, including 7,200 seniors living in the congressional district I represent, enter what is known as the donut hole -- a gap in prescription drug coverage that forces Medicare Part D enrollees to pay 100 percent of the cost for drugs once they exceed $2,700 in annual drug costs. Beneficiaries must spend $3,454 in out-of-pocket expenses, on top of their monthly premiums, before the donut hole closes and they can begin receiving drug coverage again. The proposed health care bill in the House would provide seniors with immediate relief by shrinking the donut hole so that prescription drug coverage resumes earlier, saving many seniors $500 in 2011. The measure then continues to further shrink the donut hole, ultimately eliminating it altogether several years down the line. Further, seniors who fall into the donut hole during this transition period would receive brand name drugs at a 50 percent discount in order to help ease the burden. This provision has the potential to save seniors thousands of dollars in extra costs they are forced to pay each year for prescription drugs they need.

Also included in the House bill is a provision that would finally grant the government the authority to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for discounts on drugs that are being bought in bulk for the Medicare Part D program. The legislation that established the drug benefit program several years ago explicitly prohibited any such negotiations. As a result, it's enabled drug companies to take advantage of seniors and run up prices without any restraint. This bill would put the government on the side of seniors, instead of the drug industry by enabling the government to negotiate for better prices.

Importantly, the health care bill also focuses on saving costs through preventative care. Currently, under Medicare, seniors must make a copayment in order to get a physical exam or screening if they believe they have an illness or a serious medical condition such as cancer. Preventative care is the last thing we should be charging seniors for because it deters people from getting screened. The health care bill in the House eliminates this copayment. If we can detect cancer and other diseases early on through preventative screenings, then not only are we better positioned to save lives but we will also save everyone significant long-term treatment costs.

By taking these worthwhile steps, the health care reform bill before the House will improve the quality of care for seniors and disabled Americans, save lives, and save money for all taxpayers.

0 Comments

Cost of Living Adjustments for Social Security

Maurice Hinchey — 09/02/2009 15:43

I strongly believe that Social Security is an essential program that we must preserve. For more than 70 years, Social Security has provided income security for retired Americans regardless of economic circumstances. Recently, it has been reported that there may not be a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) for Fiscal Year 2010, 2011, and 2012. This news greatly concerns me as well as all of the seniors out there who depend on this small but much needed increase from year to year.

I am committed to fixing this and understand that the Social Security Administration faces enormous challenges that Congress must help solve. We need to ensure that all Americans will receive their Social Security benefits once they retire and that those COLA increases take place every single year. I am dedicated to looking for ways to strengthen Social Security and would not support any plan that would jeopardize the economic security of today's seniors and the future of Social Security for the next generation of retirees. Please be assured that I will do everything possible to ensure seniors receive a cost of living adjustment in next year's benefits.

0 Comments

Where I Stand on Health Care Reform

Maurice Hinchey — 07/29/2009 13:20

I am very concerned with how expensive health care is and how many people go without it. All Americans should have access to quality health care and I think the best solution is to establish a national health care system. Over 45 million Americans have no health insurance today, and millions more have inadequate insurance. Employers who have long provided quality coverage for their employees are cutting back benefits and raising workers' out-of-pocket expenses to deal with the rising cost of health premiums. Most of those who do have health insurance have to rely on their employers to provide it and as a result they have little or no choice about what kind of coverage they will have, and little or no security about whether they will remain insured, should they lose their job.

There is no good reason why our country should not offer its people a universal and comprehensive health care plan. It is a disgrace that our country allows people to go without coverage. Today, more than 30 percent of the money spent on private health care in America is spent on administration and advertising by health insurance companies. That's more than enough to cover the cost of providing insurance to people who don't have coverage now. By contrast, the administrative costs of Medicare--our universal health care system for seniors--comprise only 2 percent of the program's spending.

The current House health care reform legislation would provide Americans with an array of high‐quality private and public health insurance options. Most importantly, if you like the insurance you already have, you can keep it. The bill helps ensure that more Americans will have access to greater choices in doctors and plans by taking away the insurance industry's ability to deny coverage and care because of a pre-existing condition. This legislation builds on what is currently working in the employer‐based system while ensuring that all Americans' health needs will be covered by insurance. No one will have to worry about being denied based on a pre-existing condition or being without coverage if their employer drops coverage, or if they lose their job, or change employers.

Currently, middle‐class families pay an enormous “hidden tax” of nearly $1,100 per year to provide care for the uninsured and underinsured. The House proposal will end this tax by containing overall costs and expanding access to affordable care for everyone. Additionally, the House proposal invests in reforms to help prevent the costs of health insurance from overburdening businesses, families and the federal budget.

I have been a committed cosponsor of legislation to create a single-payer health care plan since I took office in 1993. While I ultimately believe a single payer health care system is the best option for our country, I recognize that this goal is not achievable in this current session of Congress. As such, I strongly believe that the final health care reform package, which Congress is expected to approve this year, must include a public plan option that would provide Americans with a choice between health insurance provided through various private companies or through a public plan operated by the government. I, along with many of my House colleagues believe that any comprehensive health care reform legislation that comes before Congress must, at a minimum, include a public plan option that would enable people to buy into a public health insurance program that is on a level playing field with private health insurance plans.

0 Comments

Stopping the Misinformation Campaign about, HR 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act

Hinchey Legislative Office — 04/02/2009 11:50

Our office has received many calls and e-mails in relation to a misinformation campaign that makes false claims about H.R. 875, the Food Safety Modernization Act. These calls and e-mails falsely claim that the bill would, among other things, criminalize backyard gardens, close farmers’ markets, and eliminate organic farming by requiring them to use certain types of seeds and fertilizer. Furthermore, these correspondences claim that H.R. 875 will pass Congress soon without amendments or debate.

All of these claims are completely false. Annenberg Political Fact Check described the e-mail campaign promoting these myths as “Internet hysteria.” As far as claims that H.R. 875 would target organic farmers, benefits manufacturers of genetically engineered seeds, and threatens to uproot backyard vegetable gardens across the country, Annenberg Political Fact Check says simply – “It doesn't.” The Organic Trade Association and the Organic Consumers Association have asserted that these claims are false.

Organic farmers have a strong record in providing safe, high quality foods to American families. The bill would not ban organic farming or require organic farms to use certain types of seeds or fertilizer.

The Food Safety Modernization Act would fix systemic problems in our food safety system by establishing a Food Safety Administration headed by an expert in food safety within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The bill also contains many welcome changes to the food safety system, including: granting mandatory recall authority, requiring traceability, establishing a strong risk-based inspection regime for food companies; and creating a system for certifying the safety of imported foods. This legislation also would penalize companies for knowingly selling tainted products, such as what has happened with the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA).

Below you will find a ‘Myth and Fact’ sheet that sets the record straight on this important bill. The food safety debate needs to move beyond these outrageous myths and focus on implementing the types of reform necessary to protect our food supply.

Myths and Facts
H.R. 875 – The Food Safety Modernization Act

MYTH: H.R. 875 “makes it illegal to grow your own garden” and would result in the “criminalization of the backyard gardener.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would regulate, penalize, or shut down backyard gardens. The focus of the bill is to ensure the safety of food in interstate commerce.

MYTH: H.R. 875 would mean a “goodbye to farmers markets” because it would regulate and penalize “each farmer who wishes to sell locally.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would result in farmers markets being regulated, penalized by any fines, or shut down. Farmers markets would be able to continue to flourish under the bill. In fact, the bill would insist that imported foods meet strict safety standards to ensure that unsafe imported foods are not competing with locally-grown foods.

MYTH: H.R. 875 would result in the “death of organic farming” or “mandate the use of chemicals or certain types of seeds on organic farms.”
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would stop or interfere with organic farming. The National Organic Program (NOP) is under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The Food Safety Modernization Act only addresses food safety issues under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

MYTH: H.R. 875 was written by Monsanto and other large agribusiness companies because Stan Greenberg, Rep. DeLauro’s husband, is a consultant for Monsanto.
FACT: Monsanto and other large agribusiness companies did not write or express support for H.R. 875. Mr. Greenberg had no involvement in the drafting of the bill. Greenberg, Quinlan Rosner does no lobbying on any issue and its work is wholly independent. Mr. Greenberg never worked for Monsanto, and has not conducted surveys for Monsanto in the past decade. The bill is supported by several Members of Congress who have strong progressive records on issues involving farmers markets, organic farming, and locally-grown foods. Also, H.R. 875 is the only food safety legislation that has been supported by all the major consumer and food safety groups:
-- Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention
-- Center for Science in the Public Interest
-- Consumer Federation of America
-- Consumers Union
-- Food & Water Watch
-- The Pew Charitable Trusts
-- Safe Tables Our Priority
-- Trust for America’s Health

MYTH: H.R. 875 would implement a national animal ID system (NAIS).
FACT: There is no language in the bill that would implement NAIS, which is under the jurisdiction of the USDA. H.R. 875 addresses issues under the jurisdiction of the FDA.

MYTH: H.R. 875 will pass the Congress next week without amendments or debate.
FACT: Food safety legislation has yet to be considered by any Congressional committee. As legislation moves forward, the House Energy and Commerce Committee will consider H.R. 759 as its base bill. The Senate HELP Committee will consider S. 510 as its base bill.

0 Comments

Hinchey to Testify Before House Judiciary Committee

Hinchey Press Office — 03/24/2009 13:03

View my live testimony today at 2:00 p.m. before the House Judiciary Committee on the Military Malpractice Bill with the link below.

http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/caltoday.html

0 Comments

Hinchey's Office Gears Up for NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Featuring Binghamton and Cornell

Hinchey Press Office — 03/18/2009 13:15

Maurice's Washington office is showing its Binghamton University and Cornell University pride as the men's basketball teams from the two schools get ready to play in the NCAA basketball tournament. Here is a photo taken just outside of the congressman's Washington, DC office.

0 Comments

Hinchey to Appear on Fox News Today @ 4pm

Hinchey Press Office — 01/28/2009 13:07

We just wanted to let everyone know that Maurice will be appearing on Neil Cavuto's show on Fox News today, Wednesday, January 28 at 4pm to discuss the expected House passage of the economic recovery bill. We hope you'll tune in to watch.

0 Comments

Reps. Hinchey & Arcuri Tour BAE Facilities in Johnson City; Discuss Congressional Efforts to Strengthen Manufacturing Sector

Hinchey Press Office — 12/16/2008 17:26

Maurice and Congressman Michael A. Arcuri today visited BAE Systems in Johnson City to take a tour of the company's facility and speak with employees about their efforts in Congress to strengthen the U.S. manufacturing sector through a major economic development bill.

With the U.S. economy in its worst shape since the Great Depression and a manufacturing sector that is shedding jobs at a staggering rate, Hinchey and Arcuri discussed ways in which they are working to strengthen U.S. manufacturers such as BAE. The congressmen highlighted a massive economic development bill that is expected to pass Congress in early 2009 and infuse the economy with hundreds of billions of dollars that will protect and create jobs, enhance the country's infrastructure, and expand on the transition to green technology. The economic development bill that Hinchey and Arcuri are pushing, which President-elect Obama has been talking about as well, will help provide a major boost to U.S. industrial development in an environmentally-friendly way. BAE is well-positioned to help lead in such a way.

Hinchey and Arcuri have both worked for years to direct millions of dollars in federal funding to BAE for a variety of projects, including its development of hybrid buses and electrical equipment for the U.S. military.

0 Comments

Hinchey Warned Long Ago Of Major Risks To Financial Market Because Of Deregulation

Maurice Hinchey — 09/26/2008 14:50

I have long pointed to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, as the source of much of the deregulation of the financial markets, which has led to the current financial crisis. Glass Steagall was put in place in order to keep investment banks separate from commercial banks. I was one of just 57 members of Congress to vote against the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. That bill essentially enabled both banks and investment firms to offer financial services. The bill allowed banks to not only sell mortgages, but also to take those mortgages and put them in risky investment schemes. I agree with many economists who have now concluded that the current sub-prime mortgage crisis came about as a result of this legislation.

Take a look at what I have said in the past about the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Hinchey Warns Against Economic Deregulation and Oversight

November 4, 1999 -- House Floor Debate of Gramm-Leach-Bliley that repealed critical market regulations.

Congressman Hinchey: "We have 1 hour to debate the most comprehensive change in financial services legislation in the Nation in the last 65 years. This is one of the most important bills to come before this Congress in decades, and we are going to spend 1 hour this evening debating here on the floor of the House of Representatives.

"And that 1 hour is divided thusly: two-thirds of that hour go to the people who are for the bill; only one-third of the hour goes to the people who are opposed to it. That is wholly consistent with the objectivity and fairness contained within the bill itself.

"This is a farce, it is a mistake, it is a day that we will rue. We are constructing here an apparatus that will come back and bite us severely.

"This country will suffer from it. Untold millions of our citizens will suffer from the contents of this bill. We will look back on the way we debated it, the short shrift we gave to the consideration of all the momentous consequences of this bill and the unfairness with which we allocated the time and we will regret it. We will regret it, the public policy point of view and politically. This is a big, serious mistake."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 16, 2008 -- U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government Hearing with Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox.

Congressman Hinchey: "And I think the main reason for that is the deregulation legislation, which was passed by this Congress and which opened up the ability for a number of financial operations to engage in practices which are not overseen by the government, and that is particularly true of hedge funds.

"But the confidence that they should have in their investment doesn’t come about without the regulation, the oversight of these investment operations. So the deregulation of investment I think has had a major impact on the way these hedge funds operate. And right now, they are very, very prominent. They control something in excess of $2 trillion of investment capital out there in the economy."

"I think that we need is to go back to regulation. Senator Grassley has introduced a piece of legislation in the Senate which would begin to move us in that direction."

"And I think a decline in the economy is primarily driven by the manipulative way in which investments have been engaged in, including the incorporation of large amounts of these mortgages into these hedge fund investments."

"One of the things that we have seen recently is a statement by the Energy Information Administration and a brief quote is, 'Weakness in the U.S. economy has led to softening gasoline demand.' And we know that is true. The demand has gone down because of the fact that there is a weakness in our economy, and particularly people throughout the middle class are having a very difficult time meeting their daily obligations, whether it is energy, food, whatever it might be."

"And a large amount of the increase in the price of energy, particularly oil, is going up based upon hedge funds intruding themselves in there and investing in those commodities. I have to laugh a little bit when I say intruding themselves in there because I mean they are gree and open to do that. There is no regulation against them. THey can just do it in whatever way they want to.

"But you do think that we ought to have some sort of regulation on these kinds of investments to ensure that people aren't doing this or these funds aren't doing it in ways that are making it more and more difficult to ordinary people to be able to drive their car back and forth to work, feed their family, all of the things that people are having a difficult time doing in this country today?"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

April 18, 2008 -- Keynote Address at Levy Economics Institutes of Bard College

Congressman Hinchey: "I believe, and I have believed for some time now, that we are in a recession. In my opinion, the only questions that we need to answer are how far, and how deep are we in this recession and how long will it last. To be honest, I do not think it would be a stretch to say we may be on the verge of a depression. Many of the economic and financial circumstances we are facing right now are similar to circumstances we faced in 1929."

0 Comments

Maurice to appear on FOX News at 4 p.m. 09/26/08

Hinchey Press Office — 09/26/2008 14:36

Congressman Hinchey is expected to appear on FOX News at approximately 4:00 p.m. EST to discuss the financial rescue that Congress is currently negotiating.

0 Comments

Hinchey Questions Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke at 10 a.m. Today

Hinchey Press Office — 09/24/2008 10:04

Congressman Hinchey will be questioning Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke at a Joint Economic Committee hearing today at 10:00 a.m. The hearing is to discuss the economic outlook. Click the link below where you will find the live stream:

JEC Hearing: Economic Outlook

0 Comments

Listen in to Maurice's live interview with Tony Russell at 10:30 a.m. 8/7/08

Hinchey Press Office — 08/07/2008 09:56

Maurice will be live on the air with Tony Russell at 10:30 am for approximately two hours to discuss issues of the day. He will be taking call-ins from listeners. Click here to tune in.

0 Comments

Maurice to appear on FOX News around 4 p.m. 7/16/08

Hinchey Press Office — 07/16/2008 15:42

Congressman Hinchey will appear on FOX News at approximately 4 p.m. to discuss the need for another economic stimulus plan.

0 Comments

Community Forum this Sunday, July 13 from 3-5 p.m.

Maurice Hinchey — 07/11/2008 12:07

Please join me this Sunday for a free community forum that will be held at the Frank D. Greco Memorial Senior Citizens Center in Saugerties, NY. I encourage everyone from Saugerties and the Hudson Valley to come out and attend what I believe will be an important forum on the most pressing issues we are confronting in New York and across the country right now. This community forum will present us with an opportunity to have an open and honest discussion on the current state of our economy, the enormous burden high gas prices are having on people, and what the U.S. must do next in Iraq. I look forward to hearing the thoughts of the people I represent and sharing what I've been doing on your behalf in Washington. Please find details for this event below.

WHAT:   Congressman Hinchey Holds A Community Forum

WHEN:   Sunday, July 13, 2008
              3:00-5:00pm

WHERE: Frank D. Greco Memorial Senior Citizens Center
              Cantine Field Complex
              207 Market Street
              Saugerties, New York

0 Comments

Hinchey to speak on House floor around 7 p.m. 7/9

Hinchey Press Office — 07/09/2008 15:40

Maurice is expected to speak on the House floor this evening about the Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act of 2008. This bill is named after the late Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez of Ellenville, New York, who died of skin cancer last year after a series of extraordinary mistakes made by military medical personnel. It is anticipated that Maurice will speak around 7 p.m.

0 Comments

New York Times Editorial

Maurice Hinchey — 06/19/2008 14:52

I wanted to pass along an editorial that was printed today in the New York Times which highlights the important work my colleagues and I are doing to compel the oil companies to use the 68 million acres of on-shore and off-shore public land already leased for oil and gas drilling companies. Please click here to read the article.

0 Comments

Maurice to appear on FOX News at 4 p.m. 6/19

Hinchey Press Office — 06/19/2008 13:37

Maurice will be appearing live on Neil Cavuto's show on FOX News at 4 p.m. today to talk about this plan to compel oil companies to drill on the 68 million acres of federal land they have already leased instead of opening up ANWR and more parts of the Outer Continental Shelf.

0 Comments

Maurice to appear on FOX News at 12:05 p.m. 6/18

Hinchey Press Office — 06/18/2008 10:51

Maurice will be appearing live on Fox News television at 12:05 p.m. to criticize the plan by President Bush and Senator McCain to open up the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling. John Scott will be the host.

Maurice will highlight the fact that oil and gas companies are not producing oil or gas on 68 million acres of federal land already under their control. He'll note that those 68 million untouched acres could nearly double current domestic oil production and could produce more than six times the estimated potential peak production form ANWR.

0 Comments

Watch Live as Maurice Chairs the Joint Economic Committee Hearing on Employment

Hinchey Press Office — 06/06/2008 09:54

Maurice is serving as chairman of the Joint Economic Committee's (JEC) hearing going on right now. The hearing addresses the May 2008 employment situation with a particular focus on the impact the economy is having on women.

The hearing consists of two panels. Mr. Philip L. Rones, Deputy Commissioner for the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is the only member of the first panel and the second panel features Dr. Heidi Hartmann, President of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, Dr. Eileen Appelbaum, Director of the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University, and Ms. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Director of the Center for Employment Policy and Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute.

To watch a live video feed of the JEC hearing CLICK HERE.

0 Comments

CBS Evening News story on Carmelo Rodriguez

Hinchey Press Office — 05/20/2008 16:28

Maurice appeared last night on CBS Evening News with Katie Couric to discuss the bill he authored that would allow members of the military and their family to hold the military accountable for medical malpractice. The bill is named after Carmelo Rodriguez, a Marine from Ellenville, New York who lost his life to skin cancer last year after being repeatedly misdiagnosed and misinformed by military medical personnel. This piece is very moving.

To view the CBS News segment please click here.

0 Comments

Maurice on CBS Evening News Tonight 5/19

Hinchey Press Office — 05/19/2008 15:51

Maurice will be appearing on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric tonight which airs in most places from 6:30-7:00 pm ET to discuss legislation that would permit medical malpractice claims against the military. The congressman is seeking to reverse an injustice that prevents armed service members and their families from holding the military accountable for negligent health care. The bill is called the Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act of 2008, and is named after the late Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez of Ellenville, New York, who died of skin cancer last year after a series of extraordinary mistakes made by military medical personnel.

0 Comments

Maurice on CNN Tonight 5/15

Hinchey Press Office — 05/14/2008 15:52

Maurice will be appearing on the Lou Dobbs show tonight airing 7-8pm ET on CNN to discuss credit card interest rates and the state of the middle class. The congressman will highlight legislation he introduced last week in Congress to put a maximum cap of 20 percent on the interest rate that credit card companies can charge consumers. He will also talk about the need to protect the middle class from the policies of the Bush administration that heavily favor the upper class at the expense of everyone else.

0 Comments

Maurice Meets with Mayor of Karachi, Pakistan

Hinchey Press Office — 05/01/2008 18:31

On Wednesday, April 30, Maurice met in his Washington, DC office with Mustafa Kamal, the mayor of Karachi, Pakistan -- the largest city in Pakistan and one of the largest cities in the world. The congressman and the mayor had first met during a congressional delegation trip to Afghanistan and Pakistan in late March 2008.

During their spirited meeting this week, they discussed the many dynamic challenges and opportunities in Pakistan with regard to local governance, trade issues, and development policies. Of particular importance to their conversation was the dialogue regarding the resurgence of pro-Taliban and al Qaeda organizations in the mountainous border region with Afghanistan and the approaches of the new Pakistani government in addressing the situation. Maurice continued to state his support of issues that are of mutual interest to the United States and Pakistan and thanked the mayor for his dedication to the people of Karachi and the improvement of the city.

0 Comments

Hinchey to Discuss Gas Prices on WAMC Today

Hinchey Press Office — 04/30/2008 11:33

Maurice will be on WAMC public radio during the noon hour today to discuss gas prices. In a discussion with reporter Susan Barnett, he will highlight what he's doing in Congress to combat soaring prices and discuss the Bush administration's opposition to strong, progressive energy policy.

To listen to Hinchey's appearance on WAMC click on the button on the top right of this page.

0 Comments

Welcome to my blog

Maurice Hinchey — 04/23/2008 16:14

Hello, and welcome to my new blog. I am always looking for new ways to communicate with my constituents on things happening in Washington and back home. This blog will allow me and my staff to keep you up-to-date on my legislative actions, alert you to upcoming events and help keep you informed about things I'm working on.

I am looking forward to posting items on a regular basis, and I am excited about the opportunity to give you more of an inside look into my job of representing the 22nd District of New York.

Thank you,

Maurice

0 Comments