PCa Inside the Beltway

Blogging at ZEROCANCER.ORG

2008-10-09T11:02:00.004-04:00

This blog has officially moved to the Community section of ZeroCancer.org. Thank you for reading my blog and I hope to see you on the new website.

House Resolution 353 and Other Prostate News on the Hill

2008-06-29T21:56:00.002-04:00

Nearly three weeks have passed since I last posted and I apologize. If you don't keep up with what's going on in DC, then all of this post will get you caught up. If you do keep an eye on Congress on a regular basis then only part of what I'm about to talk about will be news to you.

So, first with the big news: House Resolution 353 passed on Thursday (the last day of business in the House of Men's Health Month) under suspension of the Rules (see definition). The resolution is statement that there is a need to invest in research for early diagnosis of prostate cancer specifically imaging technology. Passage of H. Res. 353 is the first step toward the larger goal of increasing federal research for imaging technology as a dianostic tool for prostate cancer.

In other news, the Senate Appropriations Committee marked up the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Act - the largest domestic appropriations bill that includes funding for HHS and NIH - on Thursday by a 26-3 vote. Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (IL) is on record that he does not expect any Appropriations bills to be considered on the Senate floor prior to the August recess except for the Defense Appropriations bill. The report accompanying the Labor-HHS bill also included a short statement about the need for the NCI to focus on imaging technology and recognizing the role that imaging technology played in the advancement of diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

There are other exciting things going on up in the Capitol as well, but I'll fill you in on some of that later this week.

Don't forget about the Prostate Cancer Congressional Fly-In and Summit from September 23-25. Check out our website for more information or better yet, just contact me or our new public policy associate Marie mblessinger@fightprostatecancer.org.

September Dash for Dad

2008-06-09T16:22:00.004-04:00

In the category of shameless promotion, I am going to post a snippet about our September 28 event -- the Dash for Dad! I particularly encourage those of you local to the Washington, DC area to participate or volunteer, but if you're not -- don't let that discourage you from helping out.

Below is a basic description from the website (which you can visit at http://www.dashfordad.com/):

Join us on Sept. 28 for the first Dash for Dad Run, a 10K race to support the National Prostate Cancer Coalition's mission to eradicate prostate cancer through awareness, outreach, advocacy and research. The Washington, D.C. metro area leads the country in prostate cancer death rates. Nationwide, a man dies from the disease every 18 minutes. But there is hope - education about prostate cancer risk and access to screenings can save countless lives. All proceeds will go to prostate research and free screenings in the Washington, D.C. area to those at risk.

Herding More Cows

2008-06-06T16:05:00.003-04:00

I hope that you have all heard about our Summit in September (previously called the Prostate Cancer Congressional Fly-In). I am very excited about this year's event as we expanded the event from 1-1/2 days to 2-1/2 days. We will be covering a range of topics with Tuesday afternoon focused on early detection and imaging technology, Wednesday dedicated to treatment and prevention as well as training about crafting the message to legislators, and closing the week on Thursday with visits to Member offices.

I have several invitations out to people from other organizations and groups to speak, but would also like to have your input.

What would you like to learn more about? What specific topics (particularly in terms of research) are you interested in? I am trying to promote a format that will encourage people to be involved and asking questions as opposed to just sitting and listening. I am a big fan of the "round table" discussion and working in smaller groups to come to solutions for larger problems.

So, with all of that said, I welcome your feedback either by posting a comment or simply by emailing me at kjohnson@fightprostatecancer.org.

Thank you in advcance for your input.

Herding Cows

2008-06-06T14:23:00.002-04:00

Skip has been using an analogy around the office about not creating one big cow for the prostate cancer community but to get the herd to face in the same the direction. It's been quite popular except among the staff who have heard it makes its way into nearly every conversation he has with someone.

It is however, a pretty good analogy for us to go by -- we (prostate cancer advocates, doctors, patients and others involved in the community) are all trying to help prostate cancer patients, survivors, future patients and family members and friends. It makes sense that we should do so together in cooperation with each other as we walk down the path of eliminating prostate cancer from our lives. I have been transforming the public policy division to try to incorporate as many issues as possible to help others increase awareness about their part in fighting prostate cancer as well as to be a repository of information in regards to issues, legislation and policy.

Others from our organization have also been reaching out broadly to create partnerships with folks in hopes of increasing our visibility in the general public, in media and on Capitol Hill. So far, things are going very well -- we are beginning to work with folks like AUA Foundation, expanding the issues we work on with the AACU, talking to groups and companies like the Admetech Foundation and Navigenics as well as working with more and more people from around the country and getting them involved in the things that we do as well as things that other people do.

As for our organization, we are very excited about the direction we are heading. We have recently transitioned to new leadership -- Skip Lockwood is our new CEO/President, Jamie Bearse is now COO and Betsy London is a Senior VP along with myself (Betsy is taking the lead on most of our events and has been a BIG help with this year's September summit).

The Summit (formerly the Prostate Cancer Congressional Fly-In) is nearly to the full capacity of 50 participants. The event is going to be an exciting 2-1/2 days on Capitol Hill and I'm really looking forward to it. In addition, we will be announcing a fundraising event before the fly-in soon that will be a lot of fun. Another event that is being planned for September 28 is the Dash for Dad (www.dashfordad.org) -- a 10k race in Alexandria, Virginia to help us raise awareness and fight prostate cancer.

So, there's a lot going on here in DC and we're hoping that it will help us to kick off another BIG announcement coming (hopefully) in August. Stay tuned for that one.

One final announcement I have to make is about Heather. Many of you have worked with Heather or heard from Heather about our policy events and initiatives, but she is no longer with our organization. She came to us from the Red Cross and while she grew to love the work we were doing in policy here at NPCC, her true love was always helping disaster victims through the Red Cross. So, they came and offered her a great job with the regional chapter here in the DC-VA-MD area and she took it. Her last day was today (Friday, June 6) and we will miss her a lot and I will miss her the most. BUT -- I have hired a replacement. Her name is Marie and you will hear from her soon enough. Her first day is June 16 and I'm excited to get her here and taking up where Heather has left off.

Memorial Day Recess

2008-05-23T10:27:00.002-04:00

Yes, Congress has left the city...well for the most part. I don't think there are any votes today (there are rarely votes on Friday until at least the 2nd or 3rd week of September...and even then it really depends upon the urgency of getting things done...yadda yadda).

Anyway, they don't call it "recess" anymore...it's a "District Work Period". They started that at some point while I was a staffer on the Hill, but it will always be "recess" to me. However, just because they call it recess, it doesn't mean that work isn't getting done. In fact, offices on the Hill are very accessible during this period because the bosses are back home doing things that are important to staying in office (whether it is actually work in the district or campaigning).

The Capitol Hill staff though has time to catch up with office work and with no Committee meetings or legislative briefings or policy lunches to take up their time, it's a good week not only for them to catch up, but also for us to get some face time.

So, if you happen to be in DC during a recess (Memorial Day, Independence Day or any of the others), it's a very good time to talk shop with a legislative staff member...OR if you are back home, it's also a good time to get face time with the Congressman because the district work schedule is usually a little less demanding than their schedule in Washington. Feel free to contact me (kjohnson@fightprostatecancer.org) or Heather (hgordon@fightprostatecancer.org) if you have any questions about setting up a meeting with your Representative or their staff.

UPDATE: If you haven't been watching, and why would you with the pace legislation moves on Capitol Hill, we've been adding co-sponsors to both the Manton Bill (early detection and treatment program) and the House resolution for Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. Keep writing your letters and making your phone calls, and we'll keep pounding pavement in Washington. Thanks to everyone who is involved in keeping these important initiatives alive.

Realistic Expectations - Manton

2008-05-20T14:39:00.008-04:00

Heather and I recently met with Rep. Marshall - the original sponsor of H.R. 2131, the Thomas J. Manton Early Detection and Treatment Act. I am going to assume that you are already familiar with the bill and what it is intended to do, but if you are not you should go to the NPCC website and look up more information. You can also get information such as the bill language and current status of the bill on Thomas (the legislative resource run by the Library of Congress).

The inside scoop is that the bill is actually getting some attention on the House Committee (which is good). We continue to add co-sponsors (also good) and we're up to 76 as of today - but you could find that out on Thomas, so it's really not earth shattering news.

The committee staff (the bill was referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee in the House) has examined the bill and is looking at it in two parts. Part one is a matching grant program to states and is viewed by the Committee as a relatively non-controversial program. This would be the screening portion of the bill.

The second part of the bill is a Medicare program. This is, of course, the treatment program. The committee views this as a more problematic issue for a couple of reasons.

Problem #1: Cost and funding. Most States (most likely every State) would elect to participate in the treatment program which would require federal Medicare/Medicaid funds. There is a question of exactly how much this cost would be and until we accurately answer that question or give an educated guess to that answer this will be a difficult hurdle to jump. Congress has a procedure to create cost estimates created by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), but our sponsors have been unable to compel CBO to create a report for this bill. Additionally, because of the way the current rules work on Capitol Hill (and this isn't a bad thing, politically speaking - just inconvenient for our purposes), if the Committee is going to markup the bill, there will have to be some sort of an "offset" to pay for the Medicare portion of this bill. An offset is achieved by decreasing budget authority for an activity in order to finance increases for another activity - the decrease is referred to as an offset. The fact that the committee must mark the bill up creates another problem.

Problem #2: The problem with marking up the bill. A markup is a meeting of the Committee to consider a particular bill where changes may be required and considered and the bill can be voted on by Members of the Committee. The problem here is purely political. The fear among Committee staff is that opening the bill up to the markup process (which is required because of the mandatory spending invoked by the treatment portion of the bill) will allow other Members to offer amendments and "add-ons" that may or may not be germane (related) to the bill itself in order to advance their own political desires. This is problematic from a procedural point of view and the Chairman is concerned that not all of the amendments would be easy to deal with. Amendments like this also can cause problems for a bill when it comes to the floor for full consideration before the House of Representatives.

So, how do we get past these obstacles? Rep. Marshall and his staff continue to work to find a way to move this bill. They have talked about splitting it into two bills - one for the screening and one for the treatment - but this creates a situation that will never fully realize the program that is needed (IE. passing a program to provide matching grants to States for screening is relatively easy, but funding to cover Medicare payments for treatment is not and would never pass as a stand alone bill). The real answer relies in us - the prostate cancer community. If we can create overwhelming Congressional support (by adding co-sponsors), this will protect the bill and its programs from non-germane amendments and force the Committee the committee to find solutions to the other problems. That is why it is vitally important to continue to press Congress on this issue and raise awareness about prostate cancer on Capitol Hill. That is why we continue to meet with offices every week to discuss this as well as other issues. And it is why we ask you to write your Congressman and your Senators and ask them to co-sponsor the Thomas J. Manton Early Detection and Treatment Act.

Our collective voice on Capitol Hill cannot be ignored and we can succeed, but not without each other.

DC in September!

2008-05-14T15:03:00.002-04:00

As you hopefully know, September is Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. We will be hosting once again the Prostate Cancer Congressional Fly-In that is being renamed the Summit to End Prostate Cancer. We are planning to make it bigger and better than ever. We will have opportunities to discuss current trends and recent research discoveries in early detection, diagnosis and treatment. We will also be discussing how to take this information and turn it into ammunition for increasing federal funding for research and promoting awareness of prostate cancer and the need to get screened.

We are providing 50 scholarships to this event that will cover airfare and accomodations as well as most of your meals and other incidentals. Once these are gone, we can help you to get the best rates possible to DC and for the hotel stay.

If you are able to help us by paying part of your own expenses or by donating to help us bring others as well, that help is very much appreciated.

If you are interested in attending or if you have any questions about the event, please contact us.

If you would like to support this event with a donation or sponsor this event, please click here.

It's a New Year!

2008-05-13T10:50:00.009-04:00

Earlier this year, Malecare launched an initiative to the next President of the United States a petition calling for increased emphasis on prostate cancer research in the federal programs that provide the most funding for cancer research generally and prostate cancer research specifically.
This is a great project to make a difference at the White House and in the Executive Branch where policy is made and budgets are initiated, and also in Congress where priorities can be set and funding can be provided.

Below is the text of the letter. I hope you will consider signing on by visiting their website at www.prostatecancerpetition.org.

January 21, 2009

To the President of the United States,

Prostate Cancer incidence rates are comparable to Breast Cancer rates. Yet, federal funding is significantly higher for Breast Cancer research than for Prostate Cancer.
In 2008, there were the same number of new cases of Prostate Cancer (186,320) as Breast Cancer (184,450), as estimated by the American Cancer Society.

In 2007, Breast Cancer received almost two thirds more funding ($127.5 million) from the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program as did Prostate Cancer ($80 million dollars) (59.5% difference).

In 2007, Breast Cancer received more than twice as much funding ($707 million) as did Prostate Cancer ($305 million) from our nation’s medical research agency, the National Institutes of Health (231% difference).

Breast and Prostate Cancer scientists should not be made to compete for limited research funding. Scientists must feel encouraged to develop prostate cancer research. Both Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer research funding must continue to grow. Breast Cancer and Prostate Cancer patients, equal in number, should receive equal and adequate funding and promotion for research.

We, the undersigned, call on the President of the United States and the Congress to make Prostate Cancer research a national public health priority. Specifically, we ask the President of the United States to ensure that promotion and funding for Prostate Cancer research is, at all times, comparable to those levels allocated for Breast Cancer.

Awareness Is Half the Battle

2008-05-06T13:58:00.003-04:00

Recent articles have chronicled the decreased death rates from prostate cancer. If you ask us here at NPCC, we will point to the use of the PSA test and increased awareness about prostate cancer. Others might not completely agree with us or might have a different explanation altogether. However, this article is not to spark some debate about why statistics show one thing or another - today, I'm writing about the public relations challenge we face on Capitol Hill on a daily basis.

To date, we have met with nearly 180 Congressional offices since Thanksgiving. Obviously we have friends on Capitol Hill who are very knowledgeable about prostate cancer - some who know from experience. These are the Members who traditionally help us by leading the Dear Colleague campaign, introducing legislation such as the Manton bill or resolutions like the one for National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month. Senator Sessions tells a great story about how his prostate cancer was discovered during a routine medical examination that all Senators must undergo prior to taking office. If not for that exam, he says he may not have ever discovered he had prostate cancer.

When I started this massive outreach effort on Capitol Hill, however, my goal was not to focus on offices where we are already a known entity, but to strategically target Members who should be supportive of what we do but had not recently (or ever) supported any NPCC legislative initiative.

So, we set out heading into Members offices who were supportive of other cancer initiatives and I was shocked at the number of Members and staffers who were unaware of some of the basic stats about prostate cancer. Many were unaware of the fact that more men are diagnosed every year with prostate cancer than women with breast cancer. I was particularly alarmed at the number of members who have large populations of African Americans in their district that were unaware of how much more devastating the disease is among that population.

What can we do about this? Well, we can only do so much. Physically, we do not have the manpower to visit every single Member and personally update them about prostate cancer. Advocates are the most important link here to make sure that the people you elect to office are aware of important issues like this. That is why we ask you to call, write, fax or email your Members of Congress and tell them about prostate cancer and let them know it is important to you.

What do you say? You talk about prostate cancer facts - diagnosis rates, mortality rates, you talk about lack of adequate funding for prostate cancer research (prostate cancer research is outspent by about 3 to 1 by breast cancer research), you talk about the need for your Representatives and Senators to be aware of legislation such as the Manton Bill and resolutions about Prostate Cancer Awareness Month (September).

In short, we can increase support for prostate cancer legislative initiatives by raising awareness on Capitol Hill.

What Do We Do?

2008-05-01T14:00:00.003-04:00

I was thinking that maybe people don't really understand what it is that we do or how we do it, and so I thought it might make for a good topic. It's not really rocket science, but knowing the process and understanding timing on the Hill is important. For instance, if your goal is to affect an appropriation (Congressional discretionary funding), early in the calendar year is an important (and very busy) time of year. Authorizing legislation or resolutions may or may not be on different timing, but knowing what your are asking for and at what point in the process the something that you're asking for is at is the first point.

Another important piece of being effective is building relationships. There are a lot of variables here, but the most important ones to me are being genuine and being prepared. You may or may not be able to answer all questions you are asked about your topic - whether its prostate cancer research funding, specific facts about prostate cancer, programs for prostate cancer screening or treatment, or whatever it might be. However, you cannot be afraid to say "I don't know". It's probably best though if that is not your answer to every question asked, though.

The third point to being an effective advocate is ASK FOR SOMETHING. There is a purpose to every visit and even if you are just "stopping by to say 'Hi'", you have to leave every office with a request. So many people enter a meeting with a staffer or Congressional member and don't actually ask them for anything. Keep in mind that what makes us 'advocates' as opposed to 'lobbyists' is that we are educating and the requests that we make are towards programs (as opposed to earmark projects that would directly benefit us - in other words, we ask for increased funding for research funding, but we are not going to profit from those increased funds - at least monitarily). I hope that we do profit from the research funding in finding betting tools for early detection, treatment and eventually a cure.

Unfortunately, the terms 'lobbying' and 'lobbyist' are bad words, and thus we use words like 'advocating' and 'advocates'. It's scandals like the never-ending Abramoff saga that ultimately hurt the organizations like ours who try to bring important issues like prostate cancer to the people that we elect to set forth our government services to fight these devastating diseases.

So we use our skills, abilities and knowledge to forge relationships on Capitol Hill with Members of Congress and the people that work for them to educate them about the different aspects of prostate cancer issues, inform them of the many ways they can help, and ask for their support.

What are the issues? The issues are increasing research funding (for early detection, treatment, causes and so much more), creating programs to educate about, and screen and treat for prostate cancer, and using their influence as public figures to help educate men about the dangers of prostate cancer. These three broad topics contain a lot of detail that cover a number of bills and resolutions, but it's a relatively simple process.

The truly important thing to walk away from your computer with is NOT that you need to know how to do all of this or that there's too much to learn for you to get involved - the important thing to know is that we can handle most of the details of the content and the process, but WE NEED YOU. We need you, the advocate, the voter, the constituent to add volume to our voice. I can talk and talk and talk (can't you tell from my long posts?), and I will have mixed results - some Members and staff I know from my days as a staffer or through other connections, some Members or staff are simpathetic because of their own personal story - but to be truly consistent and to create broad-based support, we need people from around the country to make sure the people you elect to represent you are paying attention.

What's Happening Now?

2008-04-24T15:34:00.002-04:00

Heather and I spent the first part of year visiting with Members and their staffs educating them on the current federal funding issues (which I will write about sometime soon). All told including meetings that I conducted in November and December, we visited with over 150 offices in about a 5-month span. We have had very promising visits with most of them and it has been surprising how much education we have to do. We just finished a big push to get Members and Senators to join Reps. DeLauro and King and Senators Johnson and Crapo respectively in sending a letter requesting the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee to provide $100 million for prostate cancer research in their funding bills that will begin to navigate the legislative process sometime in the next couple of months.

The bills that we are currently monitoring are the Manton Bill - to create a federal prostate cancer screening and treatment program - and the Defense Appropriations bill.

The Manton Bill has been slowly and surely gaining momentum over the past weeks. Not only have co-sponsors been added to the bill, Members in the Energy and Commerce Committee (the Committee with jurisdiction) have been asking for more information about the bill. We are hoping to get something moving and will continue to bring the bill to the attention of Members and their staffs.

The Appropriations process right now is in the middle of budget hearings with the various government agencies. While they have begun the process of drafting the main parts of most of the bills, we won't see any real action on these until mid- to late-May at the very earliest.

We will be gearing up our office visits again in a week or two. Our focus will turn now to Manton and the Prostate Cancer Awareness Month resolutions. There is a new House resolution for PCAM that we would like to pass this year and we're hoping to add co-sponsors onto this year's Senate resolution.

In addition to the blog, I have also had a form added to the website that will allow you to lookup your elected officials at both the federal and state levels. I hope you all have a chance to try this out. Unfortunately, I'm unable to connect it to email addresses, but it does give you phone, fax and snail mail options.

Please feel free to contact me with comments, suggestions or questions.

Prostate Cancer Screening Program Leads To Big Fall In Death Rates

2008-04-22T15:17:00.002-04:00

Here's is a truly interesting study about prostate cancer screening. I'm not sure how this would stand up to a large scale study, however, not enough is being done to defend the practice of screening and this is a step in the right direction.

Prostate Cancer Screening Program Leads To Big Fall In Death Rates
ScienceDaily (2008-04-22) -- PSA testing can reduce overall death rates from prostate cancer and early, effective treatment reduces the chance of the disease returning and killing people when they get older. A PSA campaign with an 87 percent uptake rate reduced deaths to almost half the rate of surrounding areas not taking part in the program. ... > read full article

Screenings are less expensive than treating advanced cancer

2008-04-22T14:33:00.003-04:00

The following is an editorial from the Tennessean (Nashville, TN). Certainly, there are issues raised by this piece not the least of which is the exclusion prostate cancer despite the facts that prostate cancer is the 2nd highest diagnosed cancer in Tennessee behind lung & bronchus cancer, and has the 2nd highest death rate according to the 2008 Cancer Facts & Figures from the ACS.

April 12, 2008

Screenings are less expensive than treating advanced cancer

Today's topic: Cancer: the case for early detection
Our View

Statistics show that an increasing number of people are surviving cancer diagnoses. That number could be even higher if more cancer-screening assistance for the uninsured and underinsured were available.

And, it should be.

"I have thought often times that a lack of insurance plays a major role in people not being screened,'' Elizabeth Williams, a Ph.D. and associate director of minority affairs for the Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center, told The Tennessean recently. "Often times, people don't have insurance or the means to pay for access to screening tools and intervention, and they put off such preventive measures.''

Unfortunately, when cancer is finally discovered, it is often too late for many of these people to survive the disease that doesn't always have to be a death sentence.

Earlier in the current session of the General Assembly, the Tennessee Cancer Elimination Act had been introduced by Sen. Rosalind Kurita, D-Clarksville, and Rep. Joe Armstrong, D-Knoxville. The bill would allow officials to:

• Study the needs and successes of Tennessee's smoking-cessation and prevention efforts.

• Study the needs and successes of the breast and cervical-cancer screening program.

• Study the feasibility of creating a colorectal-cancer screening pilot program.

With Tennessee facing a major budget shortfall this year, the bill has been pulled from this legislative session, even though the fiscal note attached was less than $100,000.

"Our volunteers and staff from across the state worked hard to bring attention and awareness to the Cancer Elimination Act,'' said Brian Gillespie, state director for the American Cancer Society's communications and marketing division. The group emphasized the state's three main cancer killers — lung, breast and colorectal cancers, he said, and added that next year, the group will focus on strengthening a program that helps provide free Pap smears and mammograms to underinsured and uninsured women, and also ACS hopes to establish a pilot colorectal screening program along similar lines. "The ultimate goal there is to ensure that every Tennessean in need of a colonoscopy screening will be able to get one,'' he said.

And that is, indeed, an important part. The American Cancer Society estimates 3,290 cases and 1,130 deaths from colorectal cancer in Tennessee this year alone.

When detected early, the five-year survival rate for colon cancer is 90 percent, ACS says. However, it adds that only 39 percent of colorectal cancers are diagnosed at this stage, mostly because of low rates of screening. Five-year survival rates decline dramatically when colorectal cancer is diagnosed in later stages.

Statistics from the American Cancer Society show that colorectal cancer occurs disproportionately among those who are underserved and underinsured.

And it's not only the American Cancer Society that is pushing for access to more screening tools and intervention for the uninsured and underinsured.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says low-income men and women who have inadequate or no health insurance coverage are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer at later stages. When that happens, the chances for survival and a good quality of life aren't as good as they are for someone who is diagnosed with most types of cancer in its earlier stage.

But the most important reason why there should be more cancer-screening assistance for the uninsured and underinsured is that it costs a lot less to prevent a disease than to have to treat it. And that is certainly true when it comes to cancer.

The Legislative Process (Part II)

2008-04-22T12:29:00.006-04:00

Previously, I discussed the legislative process (actually, I summarized the Appropriations process). To recap and simplify the legislative process:

1. A bill or resolution is introduced on the floor of the House or Senate.
2. The legislation is then referred to an appropriate committee.
3. The committee will consider the legislation at the subcommittee level. Most bills introduced will "die" here. Once legislation is introduced, Congress (the legislative body) has until the end of that Congress (the legislative session) to take action on it. Each Congress is made up of a 1st and 2nd session -- we are currently in the 2nd session of the 110th Congress.

Each stage of this process is its own challenge -- in order to get a bill introduced, you have to have a "Champion". A Champion is a Member or Members of Congress who are willing to be your legislative agents. Unless you are an attorney or trained individual well versed in legislative drafting or maintain your own legislative counsel, your Champion would author the bill. Your Champion would then introduce the bill on the floor of the House or Senate.

Once legislation has been introduced, the process of added public support to the bill must be tackled. This is done by adding "co-sponsors" on a bill. The Member or Members who introduced the bill are called "original sponsors" and the original sponsor of a bill has the priveledge of adding co-sponsors. The more co-sponsors who support a bill increases the likelihood that the bill will be considered at the committee level and likewise on the floor of the House and the Senate.

This is probably a good place to stop and move on other things like activism and advocacy and some of the issues that are out there.

The Legislative Process (PART I)

2008-04-17T08:31:00.005-04:00

Well, you have to start somewhere, so here goes.

I'll start simple and then briefly touch on some more detail. I will also throw out a disclaimer that I am likely to not convey all of my thoughts as clearly on paper (or on screen as the case may be) as I do in my head, so hopefully, I will be clear enough to spark questions or debate about my view of the legislative process. My point of view of the legislative process is from the perspective of the Appropriations Committee, so I will take you through that specific process.

Let's start from the beginning of the Congressional calendar. Congressional sessions run in two-year terms. We are currently in the 2nd session of the 110th Congress. The 111th Congress will convene around the 3rd or 4th week of January 2009 following this November's elections. Not much really happens the first couple of weeks until the 1st week of February.

During the 1st week of February, the President submits his annual budget to Congress. From this budget Congress will determine funding for Departments, agencies, programs and projects (yes, projects...whether you like it or not, earmarks exist and are a useful tool in the Congressional Appropriations process).

Now, I'll begin a real debate. In my opinion, the entire Congressional calendar revolves around the Appropriations process. Congress begins working in a public fashion after the submission of the President's budget and usually adjourns soon after the final Appropriations action for the year. Appropriations bills are passed annually, the Committee on Appropriations is the only committee that is required to pass bills each and every year, and the bills that are passed out of the Committee allow the federal government to operate. That doesn't make it the most important committee on Capitol Hill, but certainly much of the schedule is defined by what happens in that Committee.

April and May are reserved for hearings with Executive Branch officials to discuss the individual budgets of each Department and many of the key agencies of the Federal Government. Also during this time, Members of Congress write letters to Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Subcommittees to ask that certain programs or projects receive adequate funding to accomplish their missions. This is not worthy because this is also the time table we are under to convince Members to sign letters asking for funding for the Prostate Cancer Research Program at DoD.

In June and July, Appropriations bills begin to be "marked up" meaning that the Subcommittees and then the full Appropriations Committee will recommend by voting to bring the bills to the floor. The bills are considered on the floor of the House and sent to the Senate for consideration. Often the House and Senate consider their own versions of the bill, but keeping the conversation simple, we'll assume that the Constitution sets the rules all of the time.

The Senate process will follow the same path first being considered at the Subcommittee level, then the full Committee level and then on the floor of the Senate. Usually there will be differences between what passes the House floor and the Senate floor given that the two chambers have different priorities and will have accepted different amendments during their respective floor debates.

Once each chamber has passed their versions of a bill, it is sent to a Conference Committee. The Conferene Committee is a committee made up of members from the House and from the Senate (typically from the respective subcommittee in which the bill originated because they have the most expertise on the topics of the bill). The two sides must decide how to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate bills. Once they have done that and it is voted on and passed by the separate House and Senate Members of the Conference Committee, the bill is taken to the floor of the House and then the Senate for consideration. The Conference Bill must pass both Chambers before it can be sent to the President to be signed into law.

There are obviously several things that can delay, sidetrack or even derail this process for any one or all 12 of these bills which must navigate this general process.

As far as where we are at right now, we have just finished our campaign to have Members of Congress send a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House and Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. In the House, 94 Representatives signed the letter to Chairman Murtha and Ranking Member Young while in the Senate 32 Senators signed the letter to Chairman Inouye and Ranking Member Stevens.

In general, any bill that passes through Congress whether it's an appropriations bill, an authorization bill or some other legislation -- it must follow this general pathway to becoming a law.

Over time, I will try to explore some of the individual processes in more detail.