Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. I join the chairman in saying that there are two things that are going to happen when this bill becomes the law of the land. There's going to be additional dollars for COPS, and NASA's not going to be cut. So I understand that the makers of the amendment have to find an offset. It's an offset that's not going to be acceptable when we come to a final resolution on this bill, but you need an offset to come to the floor. And you came to the floor to make a point that needs to be made, which is that when people call 911, there needs to be a cavalry on the way and not just the hope that there might be some help. So we thank you for bringing the amendment forward. When we finalize this bill, there will be additional dollars for the COPS program. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. FATTAH. In part, I rise out of a desire to have my cake and eat it, too. I agree with the gentleman, Mr. Peters, that trade enforcement is critically important. This administration has put a premium on it in that regard, bringing case after case--the tire case--against the Chinese. We could go through the laundry list. There is an $11 million increase embedded in the bill, as it has come to the floor, over last year's appropriation. I am not sure you can find a part of this budget in which there has been a more significant increase. However, it is not at the level of what the administration had requested. I could support moving additional dollars in this direction, but this target of the Cross-Agency account at NASA, which we're going to see repeated dozens of times on the floor, I think is not the appropriate way to go. We don't want to rob our space agency of the important resources it needs to protect our astronauts, to protect its cybersystems. We have to be careful here. So I would say to the gentleman that, no matter what the result on the amendment, I will be glad to work with him as we go forward in the conference to try to find additional resources for trade enforcement. I think this administration has done a great job in fighting the good fight, but they do need the resources. The chairman has provided $11 million in additional resources, but if we can find a few more dollars in that direction, I think it's a worthy investment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. I was trying to figure out if we cut 12 percent of the weather satellites budget, how would the satellite actually function with 12 percent less of its capacity? We have, in Georgia, which the gentleman is from, and from many of our others States the most severe weather that the country has ever seen over the last 20 months. We've had more billion-dollar-plus incidents than we've ever had. And when we have forecasting through our satellite systems that we're launching through the Weather Service, we actually save lives and money by being able to delineate exactly where the storms or tornadoes or hurricanes are going to hit. And it takes time to be able to evacuate people and the like. So his cuts to the National Weather Service under this 12 percent approach, especially with exempting certain agencies, would have a disproportionate effect. And I think that for farmers and for others, the lack of weather information would be very problematic in our economy and would actually threaten lives. So I would reject this amendment. I thank the gentleman for offering it. I hope the House has the wisdom to also reject it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I rise in opposition to this amendment. This amendment affects fisheries under the jurisdiction of NOAA, as written in the actual amendment in the South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, New England, Gulf of Mexico fishery management council areas; and it prohibits these catch shares from any funds being used. Now, I believe that the 15 Federal catch shares programs have worked well. I think that they have had a great deal of social, economic, and biological benefit. They deal with the essential challenge here, which is overfishing. And it also deals with some of the dangerous conditions related to kind of this race to fish, or derby kind of atmosphere because it creates some order. And order is useful, and is done at a local level. Now, our committee is an appropriations committee. It is not the place for this to be worked out. This is not the hour for it to be worked out. But if the House has to take a vote on this, I think that we should understand our responsibilities in terms of stewardship here. There's a difference between saying, well, it shouldn't be the regional council, it should be the fishermen and saying that there should be no funds of NOAA used to organize these catch shares. They're two different things. They are not the same. So I join the gentlelady from Maine, I join my ranking member from Washington State, and I ask the House and I'll be asking members of my caucus to vote ``no'' on this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. I just want the House to be aware that this would be a cut in the FBI budget of close to a hundred million dollars. There will be a cut to the DEA. We just had a major incident in which the Federal Government and our law agencies are working right now involving a mother and three children from Tennessee, where there's been a murder and kidnapping and trying to track these people down. The idea that cutting a dozen agents doesn't affect our ability to apprehend criminals or to protect the public, I think, really would be malfeasance on the House to just pass an across-the-board cut. If you want to cut an amount of money, let's examine where you want to cut it at. But it's very easy to come and just say, Well, let's slash across the board. It is true that we've held lots of hearings. It is true that we visited with our law enforcement agencies. I've been out to the counterterrorism training center. I've met with Director Mueller. This will be a cut that has an impact. So this is not frivolous, and the House Appropriations Committee has the responsibility of figuring out what needs the Nation has that need to be funded. It is the Ways and Means Committee, under our Constitution, that is supposed to figure out how to pay for it. I don't hear anyone running to the floor asking for an across-the- board tax increase because they see that as being onerous, but to cut FBI agents who are in hot pursuit of criminals, we think that's fine. I think it's wrong. I ask that we oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Okay. It would seem to me that you are limiting the committee's oversight of their ability to receive information about what is taking place; is that accurate? Is that your intent?

Mr. FATTAH. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FATTAH. I think that maybe if the gentlewoman would withdraw the amendment, we would work with her to make sure that we think we've met what is needed to make sure that every one of these kits is analyzed. And if that's not the case, then we can revisit it between now and conference. But the chairman and I would be glad to work with you to make sure this is done because, as he said, we agree that this is vitally needed. We think we've met the requirements as needed.

Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. We would agree to the amendment.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield to my good friend from Texas.

Mr. FATTAH. I'm saying if you go over to page 79, the top three lines, ``as approved by Congress; unless the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance.''

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Just so we can clarify, so section 505 begins on line 4 on page 78, ``none of the funds.'' It ends on page 79 on line 3, but lines 1 through 3 say, ``approved by the Congress; unless the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations are notified 15 days in advance.'' So everything that precedes this says you can't use any of these funds unless you notify us ahead of time and we don't disapprove. This whole section, 505, if the gentleman would follow, is a requirement to prenotify, for instance in this instance, the Republican majority here in the House, that an administration official is planning to do something. Right? And what you do by taking this out would say if they planned on doing a private contract, they wouldn't have to tell you. They wouldn't have to notify Chairman Wolf or the committee or the staff and they could go ahead and act, and there is no way that you would know about it. So all I'm saying is that this language actually is a notice to our committee of administrative action as delineated on page 78. And so I just think that the purpose of your intent and what you are actually accomplishing are two different things.

Mr. FATTAH. I thank the gentleman, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FATTAH. Is it your intent to deprive the Appropriations Committee of this important information?

Mr. FATTAH. I support my colleague in his amendment. Hopefully, he'll withdraw some of the other ones, and we're in business. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I thank the gentleman for yielding.