Tom Davis

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas and others who have been involved in getting this legislation before us. Let me just say I share the frustration that many Members of this body feel at the time it has taken to get this measure to this floor, in a conference report form, and then send it on to the President's desk for signature. We passed this legislation with bipartisan support a year ago, and it languished over in the other body until it was rescued by Senator Frist. The time is late, but the time is now. I urge my colleagues to adopt and support this legislation. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 15, the Project Bioshield Act of 2004. The bill provides the government with the necessary tools to develop and purchase vaccines and other drugs to protect Americans in the event of a bioterrorist attack. The President first announced this proposal during his 2003 State of the Union address, and it serves as the cornerstone of the administration's strategy to prepare our Nation against the possibility of bioterrorism. A few minutes ago, we were privileged to hear from the chairman of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox); and I will include for the Record an editorial written by the gentleman from California that appeared in the Washington Times and published July 12, 2004. [From the Washington Times, July 12, 2004] Intercepting Bioterrorism (By Christopher Cox) America is at a very dangerous crossroads. Not only al Qaeda but also terrorist groups such as Jemaah Islamiah are working on acquiring or developing new terrorism capabilities, including bioweapons. Will we be prepared? Evidence in an Egyptian terrorism trial two years ago indicated Osama bin Laden may already have access to dangerous biological agents. Meanwhile, the risk of proliferation to terrorists continues growing, with at least eight nations running bioweapons programs, including genetic engineering of pathogens and developmental programs for new production and delivery methods. Winning the war on terrorism will require our nation not only to defeat attacks with explosives and military-style weapons, but also to be prepared to overcome potential assaults with weaponized anthrax, ricin, smallpox, plague, tularemia, botulism toxin and viral hemmorhagic fevers (such as the Ebola virus). Just how vulnerable are we to such attacks today? The United States now can fully meet only a handful of the 57 ``top echelon'' bioterror threats. That's not an acceptable level of preparedness for the greatest power on Earth. We can launch a Tomahawk cruise missile and thread it down the smokestack of a munitions factory from 1,000 miles away--once thought to be a million-to-one shot at best--yet we aren't prepared to deal with the frightening prospect of an anthrax or sarin gas attack against our civilian population. It's vital that we put our best minds to work round-the- clock on new ways to prepare for a biological or chemical attack here at home. But according to a study published in the May 2004 issue of the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, only six of 506 drugs currently in development are antibioltics--even though drug-resistant bacteria are a growing threat. This is only because the proper incentives and funding aren't there, not because the scientific challenge is too great. Indeed, the germs that cause anthrax and plague are not nearly as difficult to analyze as a virus such as HIV. Vaccines and treatments for biological weapons such as these can be developed. Certainly, America has made some progress in preparing for possible germ warfare on our own soil, but we're not ready to combat a major bioterror assault at this time and our enemies know it. Worse, they're looking for ways to exploit our weaknesses. We are now on the threshold of changing that. Project Bioshield, expected to receive final legislative approval tomorrow and then be sent to the president for his signature, will shortly unleash the greatest force in world history: American ingenuity. By guaranteeing a market for successful vaccines and antidotes, Project BioShield will provide incentives for private-sector scientists, physicians, and researchers to develop lifesaving treatments. Congress has made available $5.6 billion over 10 years to purchase and stockpile a national supply of drugs and vaccines for use if a biological weapon is set loose by terrorists on an unsuspecting American public. BioShield will speed research and development on new drugs and antidotes at the National Institutes of Health and in our national laboratories. And it will allow, if germ warfare breaks out, distribution of developmental lifesaving drugs on a fast-track approval basis to save innocent lives, so long as the benefits outweigh potential risks. President Bush asked Congress to move immediately on his plans for Project BioShields in the 2003 State of the Union address. The House quickly responded. Last July, the Homeland Security Committee, which I chair, worked closely with other House committees to turn the president's vision into legislation. Unfortunately, after our bipartisan bill passed the House by a wide margin, it languished in the Senate nearly a year before being rescued by Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican. But now that both chambers have worked out their differences, America finally is ready to prepare in earnest for a potential terrorist attack that won't yield to bullets or bombs. Now, we'll be using the very best weapon in our defensive arsenal--our brainpower. By approving Project BioShield, Congress is saying: ``Let the race to find lifesaving countermeasures begin.'' America's leaders have heeded the advice of experts who have estimated that without BioShield it could take 10 years, and cost up to $800 million or more, to bring a single new vaccine from development through clinical trials to market. The war won't wait that long, of course: Terrorists could strike us at any minute. And once a bioweapon is released, every second will count. In many ways, the war on terrorism is like a chess game. We must anticipate our enemy's moves, and mount an impenetrable defense. In their pursuit of bioweapons, the terrorists have revealed some of their game plan. Project BioShield will ensure we stay one move ahead of them. Someday soon, when it comes to bioterrorism, Americans will be able to say: Checkmate. Mr. Speaker, the bipartisan bill we are considering today is similar to H.R. 2122, which was passed by the House on July 16, 2003. S. 15 is a good bill that serves a compelling national interest. Over the past few decades, we have seen rapid progress in the development of treatments for many serious, naturally occurring diseases. Pharmaceutical and biotech companies are highly capable of producing diagnostics and therapeutics when consumer demand exists. However, there has been little progress in treatments for deadly diseases like smallpox, anthrax, ebola, and plague that affect today few Americans. There is little manufacturer interest in developing treatments for these diseases since there is no significant market, other than the government. Drug companies have little incentive for the substantial investment required to bring treatments to these deadly diseases to market. Moreover, the potential liability for an adverse reaction by a patient far outweighs any potential financial benefit in some of these cases. Should the United States be attacked with these deadly pathogens, however, the need for vaccines, tests and treatments would be great and immediate. S. 15 is designed to ensure that our country is prepared. The bill provides the Secretary of Health and Human Services with a number of flexible acquisition tools based on existing streamlined procedures to promote research and development and procure necessary drugs and vaccines. These tools are instrumental to the success of the Bioshield program. S. 15 gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services streamlined authorities to promote the research and development of drugs and other products needed to protect Americans in the event of a public health emergency affecting national security. The Secretary will be armed with flexible acquisition tools for research and development projects and would also have expedited authorities to award research grants and to hire technical experts and consultants. It would not be burdened with the existing procurement processes that could take months. The bill authorizes the procurement of biomedical countermeasures for the Nation's stockpile, using a special reserve fund. The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security would be required to work together to recommend the countermeasures that are needed for the stockpile. Acquisition of countermeasures using the special reserve fund could only be made with the approval of the President of the United States. This bill would permit the use of simplified acquisition procedures only when the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that the mission of the Bioshield program would be seriously impaired without the use of such special procedures. Finally, during national emergencies, the bill would permit the government to make available new and promising treatments prior to approval by the Food and Drug Administration. I especially want to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), and his staff for working with us on this important legislation. I urge my colleagues to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia Mr

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the second provision under the heading ``Office of the Chief Financial Officer,'' beginning with the colon on page 3, line 25, throughout on page 4, line 6. This provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule XXI. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I object.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I think it is interesting, as we heard from the other side last week about tactics on this side that were overbearing and the like, to see that given the opportunity in this case to reciprocate and show some openness that they have declined to do so. Nothing is surprising. But all I can say is that I will object to their unanimous consent request and sit here.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, let me ask the distinguished chairman, will he, in light of what has transpired here, and I know that he was not up to this previously, work with me to amend this provision and make it appropriate in the conference or to ``X'' it out altogether?

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman is incorrect. It was my time. I was on the floor.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I just asked in comity if she would allow me to make the point of order that we are entitled to do under the rules.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. It is in order at any point to raise it, and I will continue to raise it.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. This is the second time this has happened. Right off the floor I was assured that this would come up after a vote on the gentlewoman from Ohio's (Ms. Kaptur) amendment. I stood here seeking recognition as I came on to the floor as the Clerk was reading other sections. I was not recognized. This is the second time I have been let down by the Committee on Appropriations when they knew I had a point of order and tried to give me time periods. In fact, I, in talking to the staff this morning, said maybe I should just stay on the floor. No. The last time this occurred, the minority was generous enough to allow us to go back and raise that provision. I would ask for the same courtesy here, or I will stand up today and object to every single unanimous consent.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I just want to say that I was off the floor. I walked on the floor, was seeking recognition. The Clerk continued to read as I got up here. I continued to request recognition. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that we be able to return to this section.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman knows, we are willing to work with some reporting requirements that our committee be included as part of the reporting as well as the appropriations because we have jurisdiction. But we will work to get it out altogether now because of their inability to compromise. Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Baca

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order against section 717. This provision violates clause 2(b) of House rule XXI. It proposes to change existing law and therefore constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill in violation of House rules.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mark F. Grady for his years of dedicated service to the George Mason University School of Law. Dean Grady has been a pivotal member of the George Mason community for six years. Not only has Mr. Grady acted as dean, but also professor. Students enjoy his wisdom and expertise in the area of law. As the dean of the School of Law, Mr. Grady has played an important role in the success of the school and its students. Through his guidance, George Mason has become the youngest law school ranked in U.S. News and World Report's top tier. Under Dean Grady's direction, the School of Law has become a national leader not only of law but also economics and technology. In 1999, The National Center for Technology and Law was established. This center examines the causality of the existing legal structure and the society's evolving economy. Through this relationship, new fields of course work were created that allow the student to gain the necessary skills to succeed in both technology and communications. George Mason School of Law is one of the most innovative schools in the country. Due to its emphasis on intellectual property, technology law and the legal application of economic methods, George Mason was also ranked in the top 10 in the nation for an outstanding faculty in law and economics in University of Texas Professor Brian Lieter's Ranking of Law Faculty Quality for 2003. Mr. Grady should be honored and commended for his dedication to not only the School of Law but also the surrounding community. With his instruction and guidance, he has enabled Mason Law graduates to pursue careers in numerous fields and become successful attorneys who practice law with great distinction and honor. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Dean Grady for his years of service and dedication to George Mason University. His contributions and efforts are noted and greatly appreciated. I wish him the best of luck in all future endeavors.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise here today to honor Cox Communications for hosting Movies Under the Moon, a series of nine free movies shown at George Mason University's Robinson football field during the summer of 2003. Movies Under the Moon drew over 75,000 Fairfax County residents. Through proceeds derived from on-site food vendors, the event raised $23,500 in proceeds for Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children and Special Love Camp Fantastic, a support group for families coping with cancer. This year's lineup of movies promises to be as popular. Mr. Speaker, Cox Communications developed a unique and rewarding program to provide entertainment to the people of Fairfax County while simultaneously assisting Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children and Special Love Camp Fantastic. The efforts made by Cox Communications to serve the Fairfax community are much appreciated and greatly admired. I call upon my colleagues to join me in honoring Cox Communications for a job well done.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Father John O'Neill for joining us as guest chaplain and offering this morning's prayer. Father O'Neill is the outgoing pastor of Our Lady of Good Counsel Catholic church in Vienna, Virginia, where he has served for the past 12 years. Father O'Neill received his undergraduate degree and master's degree in psychology from Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. He completed his theological studies at de Sales School of Theology in Washington, D.C., and was ordained in June of 1973. Father O'Neill served as a guidance director/teacher at Bishop Ireton High School for 10 years and then served as the academic dean and teacher at Paul VI High School in Fairfax, Virginia, for 2 years. Under his guidance as associate pastor and pastor, Our Lady of Good Counsel Catholic Church enriched the spiritual lives of its parishioners and the community around it. Father O'Neill's contributions both in northern Virginia and throughout the Commonwealth have made him an invaluable spiritual leader for my constituents. As he moves on to his sabbatical in Rome, he will be dearly missed by all of us. We thank him for offering today's prayer.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, there were several parts of this legislation on which the Committee on Government Reform could raise points of order. I have had discussions with the chairman on these issues, and I just want to go through them and through the agreements that I think the chairman and I have on these items. In section 108, the Personnel Management Demonstration Project through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. It permits bonus and incentive pay for more than 200 ATF forensic experts. We think this has merit. We wish that they had gone through the committee of jurisdiction on this instead of just writing this into the law, but we will not raise a point of order on that section. The section pertaining to the National Technology and Information Administration, Spectrum Management, this provision allows the NTIA to collect fees from Federal agencies for providing spectrum allocation services for those agencies. These fees provide approximately 80 percent of NTIA's budget. As was true last year, the Parliamentarians ruled those are within our committee's jurisdiction. We ask that in the future, as the appropriators look at these areas, they consult with us; but we will not raise a point of order on this issue. Section 201 permits the Department of Commerce to make advance payments on contracts without regard to the general prohibition on such advance payments and the narrow exceptions to provisions set out under title 31. Again, this is within the purview of the Committee on Government Reform. I understand this has been in the legislation in previous years. We ask in the future they work with us in crafting language so it is consistent with what we are seeing in other Federal agencies. Section 603 requires contracts for consulting services to be a matter of public record. We believe they already are and is redundant. We will not raise a point of order on that section. Finally, section 605 under the bill before us requires a 15-day notification to the Committee on Appropriations before any of the CJS agencies can engage in certain acts that would require their reprogramming of appropriated funds, including contracting out or privatizing. We believe this is within the purview of the Committee on Government Reform and would ask the chairman that as this goes to conference, if this provision remains in and we do not raise our point of order, if we include notification to the Committee on Government Reform as well. We think it is important we work in tandem and in partnership with the appropriators, both the authorizers and appropriators together. The chairman, I think, wants to do this. We have had some miscommunication at the staff level. I just want to clarify that as this moves forward they can include us in this language should we, as I intend, not raise a point of order on that.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia. I thank the chairman. Finally, Mr. Chairman, we did work closely with the gentleman, as he noted, on a number of other improvements to civil service which I think will make the FBI and some other agencies more effective in recruiting and retaining the best and brightest. Just for the chairman's notice, we do intend to raise a point of order on section 607 regarding the Buy America Act, as we have on every other appropriations bill. I thank the chairman for his courtesies and compliment him on what I think is otherwise an excellent bill.