U.S. Rep. David McKinley, R-W.Va., makes every minute count. He’s on a mission to change the image the public has of Congress, and he’s not interested in partisan problems. He spent time in Charleston recently and stopped by The State Journal to answer a few questions about himself and his priorities. He spent more than an hour discussing his ideas and his frustrations with Congress, among other things.

The answers have been truncated for space, but his full answers will be included in the online version of this story at statejournal.com.

The State Journal: You’ve recently written about West Virginia’s need for a strong high-tech sector — what specifics do you think need to be done for that to happen?

U.S. Rep. David McKinley, R-W.Va.: I think political leaders, for the last half century at least — if not longer — have helped to form some of this problem because we didn’t diversify our economy. We had a powerful coal economy back in the ’40s and ’50s and eventually in the ’60s and ’70s again. The exploration of gas put us at the forefront; now, I think we’re the fourth largest producer of gas in America, ahead of Oklahoma, so we became very dependent on just two or three industries. Steel used to be big. I have argued for quite some time we should have been diversifying our economy, so I’m trying from this perspective, from the Congress; how we can diversify our economy?

It’s really twofold. High tech-slash-research is really what I’m talking about when I’m saying that. …  I have been asked several times to go out to be a guest lecturer at Purdue (University), and every time I come back frustrated because I see at (University of Pittsburgh), Ohio State (University),  and at Purdue the explosion of economic opportunity that occurs around these centers of excellence, centers of research in the country.

Purdue used to be just farmland around the campus; now it’s high-rise buildings, laboratories, all because of the research being done at Purdue. So (West Virginia University President) Gordon Gee and I have had long conversations about this. He has the same vision, we are absolutely on the same page, and I love him for that. He understands that economic development can follow if we put more money into research.

Pitt gets a billion dollars in federal dollars for research annually; Virginia Tech, $700-$800 million; and the same with (Pennsylvania State University) — similar numbers, just short of a billion dollars for each of them — Ohio State, $1.2 billion in research. With those research dollars, the other business follows. We look at this because they’ve had real good success in Pittsburgh reinventing itself, going from steel town to high tech, research, all because of the work Pitt is offering and Carnegie Mellon (University) and the like.

How much money is WVU getting in research money? Federal research money, $160 million a year — one-sixth the amount spent at Pitt. We’ve got to refocus how we can better utilize our centers of excellence — the university, WVU is one; same thing with Marshall (University), how they can be the cornerstones of real growth for West Virginia by doing research because then the other companies will locate in and around there. We’re blessed, (Alan) Mollohan and (Robert) Byrd made right choices years ago when they established the High Tech Park down in Fairmont. It works very well with Fairmont State (University), has some contracts with WVU, but just think how much bigger that could be if we did more for that type of research.

Having said that, we need to go back to the fundamentals. Are we teaching at the secondary level? Our education — as well as our colleges — are we teaching them that skill? For example, in West Virginia, where are we on STEM education? We’ve got to attract kids at that early level to want to be scientists, engineers, mathematicians. Nationally only 4 percent of our undergrads at our colleges are in STEM; China is 20 percent. Just by sheer numbers, percentages like that, you see why we’re going to fall further behind and not be that shining city on the hill.

Right now I think we’ve got to get our secondary education level understanding the importance of technology. Not everybody is going to go to college. We need to teach them to be technicians. Some people are just particularly good with their hands in skills we can use in our other industries. Other things we can do? I want to develop from what we have down at the High Tech Park in Fairmont, the university, I want to help them.

I don’t think people understand in Morgantown, we have largest Department of Energy lab in the country, the National Energy Tech Lab with 700 physicists. They develop clean coal technology, new fracking technology — there is a series of things underway. How we could capitalize on that if we had the workforce development to go even further with that? A long answer to a short question, but if we don’t diversify, our kids are going to continue to find jobs out of state. We don’t have enough diversification. I see that huge impact that Hi-Tech Park has had on the Fairmont area, the Biometric program WVU has and Fairmont has been able to be a feeder for the FBI and biometric program down there, has justified them being here.

Just think what could be the next? That’s up to us. We’ve got to have institutions geared toward not just producing people that are in coal and natural gas. Not all kids are going to go that route. I’ve got two daughters working on the west coast who couldn’t find meaningful jobs in West Virginia. They didn’t want to work in steel or chemicals. High tech, research is huge — there’s nothing but upside. We should be focused in West Virginia to get up to the $500million, $600 million at least — shouldn’t we? We’re the only ones holding ourselves back.

That means a change in philosophy. President Gordon Gee, I really appreciate him. You’ve got to have a mindset and faculty has to be inclined to do research. In the past, we didn’t hire people with those kinds of inclinations. We’ve got to find people willing to do research; we’ve got to find funding for them in health care, defense & energy. We’re trying to do a little miniature version of this. Right now we’re trying to orchestrate it in the Northern Panhandle, to pull the universities together. I’ve talked to all of them, and they’ve agreed to meet, but we’re looking for a date — West Liberty (University), Bethany (College) Wheeling Jesuit (University) and (West Virginia Northern Community College) then the Franciscan University of Steubenville and Ohio University Eastern … how could we work together to find some magic in the Panhandle? To train a workforce that is uniquely qualified so people will be able to find employment? Could be in home health care. With our aging populations, should we be training more people to be able to provide that?

Our limitation is our own vision. The answer all depends on those basic industries. We’ve seen how one president changed our whole outlook, didn’t he? Think about it, Ann. Just seven years ago, we had the seventh best rate of unemployment in the nation and the seventh best in West Virginia. I’m a lifelong resident. Things were booming, there was a lot of activity, people coming in, hotels being constructed. Now we’re 51st. He just shut the tap off. We did not have a diversified economy, and I’m going to work with any university president willing to work to diversify our economy.

TSJ: What do you like the most and the least about being in Congress?

McKinley: What I like the most is our ability to help people, and it’s one that I didn’t see coming when I went to Congress. That’s our case workers: Chelsea Kisner in Wheeling, Bob Villers in Parkersburg, Linda Wooldridge in Morgantown. They’re just incredible advocates for people in the state in the 1st district; in fact, we get calls from people out of the district because they’re so effective. We will open and close about — it may not mean a thing to you or your audience — about 1,000 cases a year. There are 250 days during the work week, and we’re opening and closing four (cases) a day. People that are trying to get their father into the VA and they’ve been turned down; someone’s got a problem with a Medicare claim that they can’t pay it or something that’s wrong with it; a Visa, someone was supposed to go on a trip and can’t. We had someone on insulin and he had new problems develop. He couldn’t take his treatment the old way; Medicare and Medicaid in this case said, “We’re done.”

Those things just quietly — our three people work through the system and make government work for the people, and I really like that. You don’t see it on any of our literature, but I’m really proud of them, and I’m proud of what they’ve done. It’s not headline stuff, but we’ve just changed their life in one way or another. The man that can’t get in the VA, he was to have surgery. They said because of the type of surgery they’re going to do, they have to do it up in Butler, Pennsylvania. That’s three hours away from his home, so we didn’t take no for an answer. Now it’s going to be done somewhere else, only 15 minutes from his house. There has got to be away to show we care. This is our way to show government is not distant, but we can touch people’s lives. It’s probably the thing I’ve had the most fun with. I’m proud of our staff. We’ve helped people, and that ain’t publicity.

The least? Boy, Ann, I come from the business sector. I’m used to making decisions, and even if they’re wrong, we can change them the next day. We have to be nimble, and Congress and the process is not that way — it’s a plodding process. I’ve really been frustrated with that, and how long it takes to make a difference and make a change. Contrast that with being able to take four people and help them out back in the district when it doesn’t require Washington’s approval? Going over to Washington, it takes years to make something happen. I don’t think enough people in Washington understand, in the real world, these are people’s lives we’re playing with.

OSHA wants to make a change on silica, from 250 micro grams per cubic meter down to 50. So some young man or woman in Washington that’s never been involved in this issue but has written a rule, and now this country is going to have to live under it and it’s going to take us — it may take us years to reverse it, the work of one person writing a rule. We’re going to have to have hearings, legislation; we run the risk in trying to roll something back on this. I’m not going to say it’s not a health hazard, but I understand it’s much like coal ash and other things we’ve thought through. I want people to concern themselves in the solution with the cost-benefit ratio. To do what they look like they want to do with silica, I know it can be a health risk; I understand that. But to go from 250mg down to 50mg is a significant change, and I don’t know whether people understand. Someone’s going to bear that cost. Are we in America ready to take that on? That additional cost? It’s those kinds of things. The bureaucracy is so big; I get frustrated with the schedule, the time. We need to be more nimble and be more understanding that these rules that are being written by an administration — Republican or Democrat — are really touching people’s lives, causing them uncertainty.

TSJ: If you had to pick just one piece of legislation to sponsor this year that would pass, not legislation made as a statement, what would it be?

McKinley: I’ve been working on it now, three and-a-half years. It has to do with our miners, our coal miners’ pension and health care. If something doesn’t happen — legislation is introduced, something to provide resources, into their pension and health care fund, 120,000 coal miners in this country are going to start losing first their health care benefits and eventually their pension. That, to me, ought to be a sense of urgency for all of Congress to understand. This problem is not of their making and it’s been exacerbated by this administration. It looks like Hillary (Clinton) will continue it by closing down more coal mines. ...

When coal mines close down, they’re typically acquired by someone else, and one of the conditions often is: “I don’t have any responsibility with the liability of the employees that were here,” and bankruptcy court often will approve that. Fewer and fewer coal companies operating are paying in for these people’s pension and health care. More and more coal miners are retiring because of their age and closures of these mines, 120,000 miners — they’re struggling; they don’t know about tomorrow. It’s already under actuarial tables, funding is going to stop. Their funds and accounts are all going to go in the red between eight and nine years from now. That’s based on a 7.5 percent return and no one is getting a 7.5 percent return, so we think they might start collapsing in four to five years. Miners know this, and they’re scared. We get a lot of calls asking what can be done? We’re working on that. The White House is on board with us, but getting it through the House and Senate is a whole different thing. You’ve got the attitudes of people, and we only mine in 27 of the 50 states. You’ve got to make the other states be cognizant of the impact this has. …

(U.S. House Speaker) Paul Ryan, I’ve come to respect him more now having worked with him for the last five years. He’s put out a plan, and he’s trying to communicate that around the country. I don’t know whether the country is listening to his plan or not, but he’s got a plan for 2016, to help guide, possibly into 2017. He wants to show the public where his leadership team and where he could take the country. He’s got a plan, and five things he’s talking about. The first is national security. When we do polling, it’s come up now because of what happened in Paris, what’s happened in San Bernardino, the machete incident in Columubs, in Fort Hood and in Boston. Iisis has people concerned; as a result I think it’s creeped into conversations across America and people have to understand they can’t — it shouldn’t be something they worry about. The federal government has complete responsibility to give national security, and in the last few years there doesn’t seem to be the focus on giving us peace of mind. So the Mildred Schmitts of the world I talk about, she sits at her breakfast table and worries. I don’t want Mildred worried about security. It should be defense and the administration leading charge to make sure the nation feels safe. …

Second is the economy. We’ve got to get the economy stronger. Economic rejuvenation slash regulatory reform is another big thing because we’re not growing as a nation. We’re only growing at 2 percent, so his plan is how we’re going to rejuvenate.

Third is health care and entitlement reform. That’s something we know the American public wants to see. “Obamacare” has helped, I know, thousands of families; it’s wrong to say that it hasn’t, but it’s also caused a lot of angst as it raises taxes. It’s one of the most expensive things Congress has ever done. …

Fourth is poverty. There are 46 million people today on food stamps in America. That is just an incredible number. Think about it; we have 115 million people eligible for energy assistance because the cost of our energy bills is so high. Our per capita income is not growing as it has in the past, so more and more people are eligible for the government to pay their energy bills. Wouldn’t you think, Ann, our mission should be lowering the cost of utility bills instead of realign them? That’s not what we’re doing.

The fifth is Constitutional reform. On Friday we passed a bill that just reinforced that. That was this Texas vs. United States, saying make sure people understand there’s a separation between Article 1 in the constitution and Article 2. That means the difference in responsibilities in a democracy between the executive and legislative; the executive is creeping over more and more into the legislative. Paul’s fifth point, and they’re not necessarily in priority order, is to make sure that’s better defined. Friday, Texas has sued the U.S. government for what they’re doing in Texas over immigration. Immigration is not the issue; the constitutional overreach is the issue. We’re going to file now, as a result of house action, an amicus brief to get involved in that and make sure there is a clearly delineated area and it is defined, what is legislative, what’s exactly in the constitution.

I put those five points out because I want to tie back into it now — this thing I’ve been working on, this is going to effect health care for our miners. It’s going to effect poverty, because without this legislation they’re going to slip into poverty when they’ve worked years of their life and don’t deserve to be treated this way. I think this has a good chance in the House. I’ve been able to work on the Senate, but 120,000 people could lose health care and pension benefits — that’s a big number.

Click here to read the entire article.