Talk:United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce

Untitled

This is not a copyright violation because it comes from a federal government page and is therefore in the public domain. MicahMN | Talk 03:41, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

POV

Can't we do a little better than merely a copy and paste job from the committee's website for this article? Sure, the history stuff is useful, but the fluff job that is the "achievements" section currently is laughably bad POV. Does anyone know of a source where we can find out what the committee has actually accomplished? How it has screwed up? - Jersyko·talk 22:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• nope..we can't. ahahaha (user unknown)
• I agree with you that we need to re-do the point of view section and therefore I am moving that part of the article to this discussion. Here is the text. We should discuss how we can improve this and still maintain a favorable yet NOV section. I also made some changes in the text and posted the new section on the main page.Edward Lalone 00:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Neutral?

Achievements and Goals (Original Text)

The wide-ranging work of the Committee on Energy and Commerce today builds upon a long record of achievement, which has tracked the dynamic growth of the nation from the early days of the Republic. The Committee’s initial achievements overseeing the Federal health service for sick and disabled seaman developed, eventually, into its oversight now of the Public Health Service and National Institutes of Health. Its historic jurisdiction over health, safety, and commerce generally also can be traced in the evolution of and continued oversight through such landmark legislation as the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Clean Air Act, as well as the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the U.S. Code’s Motor Vehicle Safety provisions. Today, when the public reads about the auto safety goals of the TREAD Act or about national energy policy, it can trace these measures back to the seminal legislation produced by the Committee over the years.

From a broader perspective, the Committee’s place in Congress can be can observed in how it has kept pace overseeing the changing avenues of commerce in the nation -- and the world – over the past two centuries. The Committee’s role in assuring a vibrant economy has evolved with changing times – underscored recently by its groundbreaking work on legislation that provides for innovation in and expanded access to high speed Internet services.

Proposed Text

The work of the Committee on Energy and Commerce today builds upon a long record of service, which has tracked the dynamic growth of the nation from the early days of the country. The Committee’s initial functions overseeing the Federal health service for sick and disabled seaman developed, eventually, into its oversight now of the Public Health Service and National Institutes of Health. Its historic jurisdiction over health, safety, and commerce generally also can be traced in the evolution of and continued oversight through such landmark legislation as the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Clean Air Act, as well as the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the U.S. Code’s Motor Vehicle Safety provisions. Today, when the public reads about the auto safety goals of the TREAD Act or about national energy policy, it can trace these measures back to the seminal legislation produced by the Committee over the years. The Committee’s role in assuring a vibrant economy has evolved with changing times – underscored recently by its work on legislation that provides for innovation in and expanded access to high speed Internet services. Edward Lalone 00:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Resource for member articles

You can copy and paste from the list below when adding subcommittees to Representatives' biographies. -Pete (talk) 21:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection
• Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
• Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials
• Subcommittee on Health
• Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
• Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet

'Achievements and Goals' inherently NPOV: deleted

As the neutrality of the 'Achievements and Goals' entry had stood in dispute for at least four years when I stumbled across it, with no parties arguing for the suitability of the text, and a clear suggestion on the talk page that the text originally came from a webpage published by the United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce itself, I have decided to delete it from this wikipedia entry.

My reasoning was that:

1. an assessment of the 'Achievements and Goals' of a committee did not quite make sense, as the committee was not an independent nor continuous entity
2. the language did not seem particularly encyclopedic or scholarly, and the section did not appear to contain a serious evaluation of the comittee's acomplishments over 200 years
3. the second appeared to be based on text written on behalf of the committee itself
4. there were no citations
5. no information would be lost that would not be better placed in the preceding 'History of the Committee' section
6. no-one had spoken in favour of retaining the current text, and the dispute had stood for over four years.

Please feel free to revert and discuss this with me if you feel the NPOV should still be regarded as 'disputed' rather than 'resolved against'. 0x69494411 02:08, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

exclusive

Could we add that this is one of the 'exclusive committees', that is, a member usually can't sit on another? 74.69.11.229 (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with United States House Select Investigative Panel on Planned Parenthood

It probably doesn't make sense to have a separate article every time a couple of politicians decide to have another temporary "panel" or "committee". WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:49, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

No offense, but it's a crazy idea. I vote staunchly against such a merger. MaynardClark (talk) 05:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Oppose These congressional committees, say what you will about their true intent, are independently notable of the "scandals" they investigate. See Watergate scandal and United States Senate Watergate Committee. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think we should merge the articles, per Muboshgu. The select committee is drawing plenty of media coverage in its own right already. APerson (talk!) 01:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Oppose per Muboshgu, though it should certainly be mentioned somewhere on this page. Also, question, regarding any mention: it's called a select committee on its page, but does it have a similar standing to the Benghazi Committee, which has no jurisdictional oversight by a standing committee? Or is it functionally more of a select subcommittee of Energy and Commerce? Also, is there any information as to why this is called a "panel" or "investigative panel" in its title instead of "committee"? Therequiembellishere (talk) 06:08, 4 November 2015 (UTC)