by Aaron Ross, news editor & Alex Coopersmith, opinions editor

A Q&A with our now favorite Congressman, Bill Flores:

Q: What is a typical day in the life of a member of congress?

A: Well actually today is a fairly typical example. I had my first meeting this morning at 8:00 am of the steering committee of the Republican Study Committee. The Republican Study Committee is group of about a 170 members in the House and I’m the chairman of that organization and the steering committee is essentially a board of directors. We had what would be in the private sector a board of directors meeting to talk about our strategy moving forward, that lasted about an hour. Then at 9:00 I had a meeting with Senator Vitter from Louisiana and he came over to see me he wanted to talk about problems that are coming up out of Obamacare. Then at 10:15 I had a hearing with the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Energy and Commerce Committee is one of the oldest committees, it’s been around since 1795. It has got a huge breath of jurisdiction, everything from telecommunications, to healthcare, to pharmaceuticals, to energy to the environment. It has a huge portfolio in its jurisdiction. There were two panels one was on energy efficiency and the other was on the strategic petroleum reserve. During that meeting I had a group of middle school graduates that came up from Waco to Washington so I had a meeting with them and the adult chaperones they had with them in their group. Then went back to the ECC hearing and then since its Thursday, on every Thursday the Texas delegation gets together, the two Senators and the members of the House. So we had lunch for about an hour then I had to go to the floor and vote. Then in the afternoon I had a series of meetings with constituents: the medical device industry, the orthopedic surgeons. We had folks from Domino’s Pizza come by to talk about food labeling requirements that are hard for Domino’s because they have 34 million potential combinations for pizzas. I had a couple of media interviews then I went back to the floor to vote. Now I got an interview with you following this I’ve got a meeting with some of the folks from the class of 2010. Then there are a couple of receptions this afternoon with groups that want to talk with members of congress. Then we’re going to be voting probably until midnight or one tonight. With any luck I’ll get home to the apartment about one in the morning that’s a typical day in the middle of appropriation season

Q: What has been your biggest surprise serving in congress?

A: Actually the biggest surprise I’ve seen is, let me set the stage here. When I was elected I knew the federal government had severe fiscal challenges: that the country was spending a lot more than it was bringing in, that its obligations were huge, that the promises it made to others. When I became a member of Congress and began to participate as a member of the budget committee, that’s where the magnitude of the fiscal challenges became crystal clear. The federal government has borrowed a lot of money. It spends more money than it takes in. But the worse thing is it has made about a hundred trillion dollars in promises that it is unlikely to be able to keep. So those promises are in the form of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, federal retirement benefits things like that. So in order to fund those obligations the federal government has to reach into the pocket of your generation and transfer that wealth and opportunity from your generation to older generations. That was one of the biggest surprises, how big that problem is and so one of the things I’ve been challenged to do is to try and make sure that we don’t rob from your generation to pay other generations. We need to stop this inter-generational shifting of resources so you have the same opportunities to pursue your career that I had when I began my pursuit of my career.

Q: What was your favorite Accomplishment?

A: Given the partisan divide in congress it’s hard to get a lot done because the House has passed lots and lots of pieces of legislation and the Senate views the world differently than the house did the last four years. So that these things would die in the Senate and even if they pass the Senate there is some likelihood the President would have disagreed and he would have vetoed. It is real hard to point to a bill for instance and say that was a huge bill that made a difference. With that in mind, that means you’re not going to be throwing touchdowns, you’re going to be making a bunch of three yard running plays. A lot of people come up here and they want to throw touchdowns, but you can’t throw touchdowns in this environment because you are likely to throw an interception or the receiver is going to drop the ball. So you have to hold the ball and try to get first downs one piece at a time. It feels like small ball, but it’s made a difference to a lot of people. The constituents services side, in our three local offices we have folks called caseworkers and those caseworkers help constituents with the problems they’re having with the federal government. For instance a veteran may not be able to get his hearing aids and so it is up to them and sometimes me to go to the veterans’ administration and say, “Will you please get to see this guy or gal and get them their hearing aids because they served their country. This is part of their benefit package give them that hearing aid.” Sometimes the IRS has lost their tax refund and they won’t generate a new one. Sometimes somebody is trying to get their visa extended and the immigration service won’t extend it and they are facing deportation and so we will go and we will intercede on their behalf with the agency. So these caseworkers do that and I’ll tell you, what its really neat when you get a letter from one of these constituents, and a lot of them don’t support me, but I still represent them. I represent them whether they are a democrat or an independent or a republican or anything else I represent all 700,000. We treat everybody irrespective of who they are or how they vote. It is really neat when you get a letter from somebody who says, “Well I didn’t vote for you but I really appreciate the service we got from” and they will name the caseworker. That’s really neat. A couple of other things we did and this is getting in the weeds but helium is a really important resource for this country. Helium is used in the manufacture of electronics. If we didn’t have helium you wouldn’t have your smartphone. It is used in healthcare, it is used in partying balloons you name it. The United States has this huge helium resource and Congress has designed and planned for the helium reserve that wasn’t working. It was getting ready to shut down and the high tech sector was freaking out about this. The Healthcare Committee was freaking out about it. So it never got any press because nobody knows how to describe this. I was part of a group of people on the Natural Resource Committee who came up with a solution to fix the helium problem in this country and it was bipartisan. It came out of the Natural Resource Committee, it went to the senate, the president signed it and now it is a law. Our helium reserves in this country are stable for a number of years so that’s one thing. Another thing we had a bunch of people from Waco come to us and say that they wanted to honor a World War II hero. They felt like he ought to receive recognition and so I was able to get the veterans’ health care center in Waco named after him. That became law late last year February, we where in Waco and we unveiled the renaming of the facility. That was neat; his family was there, his community was there. Again its small stuff but it made a difference to the community and I was glad to be a part of it. I led the effort in the House, and Senator Cornyn led the effort in the Senate. We got 100% of the Texans in the House and Senate to help me out. We are working on transition benefits for veterans as they transition out from military into the civilian world. We’re working on programs for them that are making a difference in their lives. Again it’s not stuff you are going to read about in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal but it does make a difference to people in Texas and District 17.

Q: You said you were chairman of the republican study committee. As chairman, and in that committee what ideas you are all coming up with that would benefit college students as well as those in K-12 education?

A: The solutions are going to be a little bit more macro. I’m going to one on point solution when it comes to K-12 education but speaking more globally you guys are going to school, you’re going to school to graduate and then you are likely going to go to college and you go to college to get a degree. That degree is the basic tool that you are going to put in your toolbox for your career. So what I’m trying to make sure is that when you graduate from college or say you’re a high school student who wants to go to trade school and learn how to do plumbing or wood working or welding. My goal is to help create an economic environment so that you have a great career whether you are going to be a welder, or whether you are going to be a rocket scientist or a doctor or a lawyer. I want you to have an economic environment where you got plenty of jobs and you got opportunities for great paychecks and so the things we are working on in the republican study committee to do that are tax reform, regulatory reform, litigation reform, and replacement for Obamacare that’s based on free market solutions. I’m working on immigration reform, those types of things. We have an economic plank for helping you all. Also a lot of young people are worrying about national security. I don’t know if the two of you are but I taught a class of political communication students at A&M a couple weeks ago and that was their number one issue. It kind of blew me away because most audiences say it’s the number two issue. So I want to make sure that we get the national security right. We need to have the right defense department size, we also need to have the right intelligence services but at the same time we need to make sure that our intelligence services respect your right to privacy so you don’t have to worry about your cellphone call being listened to, or your emails being read, things like that. So we’re trying to make sure we get that right. We are trying to make sure that the fiscal mess is fixed so that is not a burden to your generation. Those are the big things that will affect you over the next 2-4 years. Now K-12 education in particular if you talk to your teachers and to your parents and to your fellow students you are probably going to say “We’re tested too much, we don’t like the heavy hand of the federal government in our classrooms and we are being forced to do things that don’t educate you but they teach you to a test.” So we are in the process of rewriting a lot of the legislation relating to K-12 education that goes to a law called No Child Left Behind. If you talk to your teachers about it talk to your school administration at A&M Consolidated or the CSISD folks and ask them what they think about No Child Left Behind. They will tell you that it hurts them and it makes it more difficult to do what they want to do and that’s to help educate you guys. So we are working on a rewrite of no child left behind that basically pushes the authority for education back to local school districts and to the states because the government that is closest to the people is the most responsive to the people. I can guarantee you the school board of CSISD pays a lot of attention, those school board members are neighbors with your parents or your fellow student’s parents and they are paying close attention to what they are hearing. They are going to be more responsive to you than a bunch of folks in cubicles up here in Washington. I think what will happen is we’re going to have a better product going to you the students, and that your teachers and administrators are going to be a lot happier and a lot more fulfilled in what they do.

Q: Do you have a political hero?

A: Yes, well I have two. Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln are my political hero’s. They both took office at difficult times in the country’s history and they made bold decisions that set the course of our country back on track.

Q: Do you think congress deserves its 10% approval rating?

A: Candidly yes I think we do. The reason is that your typical American is pretty smart and they understand all the things that are going wrong with the country and they understand that they can’t get the job that they want that their paychecks aren’t growing that their costs are going up and they are frustrated. They see a bunch of people in Congress that can’t work together to come up with solutions so I can see why there is only 10% approval. I wish I could wave a magic wand and come up with all the answers to do it. I’ve introduced many bills but they don’t go anywhere because the other side of the aisle doesn’t want to go anywhere. Until we find a way to come to a consensus better which it’s going to be hard to have. There are some happening in this Congress that are bipartisan. There was a part of Medicare that was absolutely broken, it was called the Sustainable growth rate. We repealed that permanently. Because of that our Medicare patients are better off, our doctors that provide the healthcare services to them are better off. Everybody is pretty happy with that so maybe it gets us to an 11% approval rating. Congress is pretty united on how we ought to deal with Iran that may help us out; Americans are worried about what is happening with Iran. We are also going to pass the first Congressional budget in 10 years hopefully tomorrow. I think people are going to start to get happier, I hope. I don’t know that we’ll be really high.

Q: Why are you opposed to the FCC decision on Net Neutrality?

A: The FCC is trying to use a 1930’s law to regulate a 21st century technology and there are two problems with it. First is the law doesn’t fit the technology that exists today. There is so much that is happening in the whirl of telecommunications in the last 8 years. We need to rewrite the law to fit today, that’s the first thing. The second thing is that I don’t know if the internet needs to be regulated. I think we can make a few tweaks to make sure that internet providers don’t engage in bad practices to throttle traffic because that’s really what the issue is preferential throttling. I think can do this with a very light touch fix instead of having the federal government be heavy handed with the internet using outdated laws.

Q: So you are in Favor of treating all internet data equally?

A: Yes I am. I don’t think companies out to take advantage of constituents or restrict what you can look at. This wouldn’t have come out if they hadn’t engaged in the process.

Q: Is America in economic and moral decline?

A: When I have a town hall meeting and constituents ask me about different issues is what I like to do is to turn around and let the audience get engaged and answer the questions. What the audience is telling me is they feel like there is a basic set of moral structures that are under pressure, and so our constituents are worried about that. Our constituents are diverse so there is a whole bunch of differing opinions on this but I think in general they are telling me they are worried about the direction the country is going from a moral perspective. On the fiscal question yes America is having a lot of economic challenges because our growth rates for the last several years have been well below the growth rates that this country is capable of achieving so when it doesn’t grow at the rate it could that means you don’t have the career opportunities that you’d like, that your paychecks are going to be smaller than they could be, that your parents may not have the retirement they would like to receive that your teachers don’t get paid what they can cause the local tax base isn’t growing to support them those are problems, I feel that we are in an economic slump. We got new GDP numbers that came back yesterday for the first quarter. It was 0.2 percent a shock to the market. We should be growing at 3.5 percent per year we’re growing at the low twos and now the sub 1’s that’s a problem, and that substandard growth hurts your future.

Q: You linked gay marriage to Baltimore, could you explain what you were trying to say?

A: Well if you looked at the piece that picked it up, if you look at the media source that picked it up they tried to build a link I didn’t say. The studies have shown and there are a number of studies that show if you want to solve poverty, if you want to ensure that children are able to come out of poverty, to get out of poverty and have economic opportunity; the best single solution, now it may not be the only solution, but the best single solution is a two parent household. Now this is not right wing propaganda or anything like that, this is what the factual studies show. A two parent household with a mom or a dad is the best solution to do two things, one to keep from going into poverty and number two if you are in poverty to get out of poverty. So that’s what we we’re talking about. But somehow the message was I think inappropriately muddled and linked and it was just unfortunate that it was done that way because I’m trying to talk about how do we use strong families to lift people out of poverty. That’s the message.

Q: Do you think it’s hard to get your message across especially in the 24/7 political media world that exists?

A: Oh yeah I do because you see it every day. Both ideologies are guilty of it because the leftwing media will take something that somebody says and they’ll spit it out of context and put a racy headline on it and they’ll send it out there and it starts bouncing around to all the sort of leftwing organizations. Well the right wing is just as bad. They will take something that a more liberal person will say and they’ll take it out of context and build something and they’ll do a racy headline with that. Yeah its hard that’s not journalism. You guys are studying real journalism. You’re having a real life discussion with a person you’re not taking things out of context that someone else did and reporting on. You’re sitting down and having a conversation about issues. That’s journalism. When you can have that type of a conversation it’s easier to get your message out, but when you’ve got people behind a keyboard somewhere taking things and just running with the message it’s hard to make sure your message has the meaning you intend.

Q: The American association of Engineers gave a D+ to American infrastructure, what are you doing to ensure that our infrastructure improves?

A: Well we are working on transportation solutions now. The big issue we’ve got is the federal government is bankrupt and so everywhere the federal government spends money is suffering today because the federal government spends more money than it brings in and it already owes trillions and trillions of dollars. So the fiscal challenge of the federal government is what’s causing the decline in infrastructure. So what we we’re going to have to do is refocus on how do you produce the best infrastructure with the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer and the best possible results. So you’ve got two challenges. One is where do you find the money. Two is what is the best entity to be in charge of infrastructure for the country. So the money problem has been a big challenge that’s what we’re working on today where you find the money to pay for the trillions of dollars of infrastructure that we need that’s backlogged. The second part is who does it better one of the things we’re finding out is that the federal government because the way it runs the highway programs and transportation programs is not as efficient as the states are. So I think what we have to do is we have to look at a better balance between ownership of the transportation space and how much of it should be done with the federal government versus how much should be done by the state government. I think what you’re going to see is rebalancing that pushes it more to the state governments because the states wind up doing better projects more efficiently, more timely at less cost. So I think what you’ll see us come out with this year that rebalancing that the challenge where are we going to find the money.