Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. I enthusiastically support the chairman's decision to accept it. I thank the gentlelady from Texas, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, in rural areas, a lot of times, these challenges go without the same notice that they might bring in a large, metropolitan area. I think it is so useful that the gentleman has brought this matter to our attention, and I am glad that we were able to work through this. I indicate our support for this amendment, and I thank the gentleman. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FATTAH. I rise to object to the amendment, not because of the purpose thereof, but because of the offset. The Byrne-JAG Grant Program has enjoyed a great deal of support in the chairman's mark, and obviously we need to do more, if we could. But the gentleman seeks to take money away from the research efforts at DOJ, and I want to make a point about this. The notion that we should continue to do what we have been doing as a country flies in the face of all the facts. We imprison more people than any other country on the face of the Earth on a per capita basis. We have created a circumstance in which we have violent crimes at levels that are not seen in any other developed country on Earth. We need to be thinking anew about this. That is what the Criminal Justice Task Force that the chairman and I have worked on has been created to do. That is why we moved to evidence-based justice investment activities, so that we can measure safety of communities based on what is being done. The idea that being tough on crime is going to make our families safer hasn't worked out all that well. What we need to do is to be smart on crime. So the idea that we want to take money away from researching and understanding what works and what doesn't work works against-- normally--the position of the other team. The other team usually is here on the floor saying that we should fund those things that work and not fund those things that don't work. The research efforts at DOJ are designed exactly for that purpose. They are designed to determine what is actually working. I met with the heads of court systems and criminal justice efforts throughout our country, Democrat and Republicans alike. They say that this research effort has enabled them to focus in on what can make communities safer in terms of policing in criminal justice and prison- related activities. So I support his goal, but I reject his offset. I would ask for Members to oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FATTAH. There is no one in this House that has been more focused on the problems of gangs and has talked about it more than Chairman Wolf. So when he says that this is a matter he is concerned about, he has shown that over the years. This is an important effort. It is a program that, if we can find a way to fund it, we should. My colleague, who served as mayor of one of America's great cities and is now a Member of the Congress, is right to point this out. I look for an opportunity where, perhaps as we move to complete this bill in conference, we can see if there are other resources available. I think in the offset there probably is some wiggle room, but we need to pay a little bit closer attention to it. So I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment, but I may have some concerns about the offset. And whatever the result of the amendment, you have heard the chairman say--and I join in--that we would be glad to work with you on this effort. Thank you for offering the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, when you listen to our highest law enforcement officials in the country and our national security officials, they join the Chairman's very early point. When he was saying it, no one was paying attention, I think, that cyber attacks are the greatest threat in terms of our economic infrastructure and some of our national military infrastructure is challenged by cyber attacks also. There is an account in DOJ that is the target of affection for this amendment; that is cyber and high economic crimes. This is a very important area. We remember the fiasco with the retailers being attacked by cyber attacks, mainly centered from Ukraine, and the disaster that occurred over the holiday shopping season. This is a very important area. I would be glad to work with the gentleman to see whether we can do something to make sure that this account has the resources it needs. Aeronautics, on the other hand, we are well above $100 million or so than the requested level, but it is a very important area, and I join with the chairman in prioritizing it. I went out to Washington State. I visited Everett, a plant of almost 100 acres under one roof, the largest and widest building anywhere in the country, and saw them constructing these Dreamliners, tens of thousands of Americans working every day. We don't want those secrets stolen either, however, through cyber attacks; so we need to find a happy medium that meets the country's interests. I don't know that we want to cut that account. The chairman is right. Our balance of trade in aeronautics is well over $200 billion. It is our most significant export on the manufacturing side, so we have to be careful as we proceed. I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment, and whatever the result of the amendment, I think that the chairman and I want to work to make sure that we are doing everything we can do to protect against cyber attacks. In the economic atmosphere that the country is in and the competition that we face, we don't need to be innovative and then have our innovation stolen by others. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. I would like to be heard, Madam Chair, if the gentleman would reserve his point of order.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, this program has not been reauthorized by the Congress. So let's go back to that. This is a program that was created to provide support to local communities to be able to hire 1 million additional police officers nationwide, and it was put into place. It has operated well, and ever since this became the law of the land in the Clinton administration, the crime rate nationwide has gone down. We have not reauthorized it, but we have funded it each and every year because it is the right thing to do. On one level, the American public is paying taxes, and safety, to them, is having police officers in their communities and that when they dial 911, there is someone there to respond. At the same time that we have had this back and forth about the COPS program, we have provided well over $6 billion of the American taxpayers' money for police officers and training in Iraq and in places like Afghanistan to provide police officers in communities in countries far away from the streets of the gentleman's city, New York City, or my hometown of Philadelphia. Now, it is true that the Congress has not done its work. We haven't reauthorized the transportation bill or the education bill or the COPS program. There is a whole line of bills that we have not found the ability to come together around, and there are a host of programs in these appropriations bills that are being funded, even though the authorization has lapsed. So I think that in this particular instance, even though the point of order is correct and proper, it moves aside what should be the primary concern, which is to have cops on the street and connecting young people up with cops, which is the point of this amendment, to say that law enforcement officers are paid for under this grant program. I want to let every Member know that when this bill is finished, when it comes out of conference, there will be money for the COPS program. The only thing that this amendment seeks to say is that some of those cops should have, as their primary responsibility, interacting and intervening in the development of youth gangs because we know that if we can grab ahold of these young people while the concrete has not yet hardened, we can prevent them from taking on a life of criminal or antisocial activity. So I thank the gentleman for offering the amendment. I think it is correctly on point, and I appreciate the chairman reserving his point of order so that I can make the point that, even though unauthorized, we have the authority to appropriate this money--and we will, as we did last year and the year before and the year before that. Because at the end of the day, cops on the street, when someone dials 911, they are not dialing in the hopes of help. They are dialing because they really need help, and we need to have police officers who can respond. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Yes.

Mr. FATTAH. If the gentleman would reserve his point of order.

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

Mr. FATTAH. In every single instance and when we deal with this question in law, we provide an exception for incest, and for some reason in the language, that is missing in this instance. So I thank the gentleman for pointing that out. I do realize that we are probably not on the right side of the point of order, but I do think that it is an important point and that none of us would want to create a circumstance where someone's choices were limited if they were the victim of incest. So, hopefully, we will find a way to deal with this notwithstanding the point of order. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, OSTP is doing enormously important work on behalf of our country, and Congress also has an oversight role, and if the chairman of the Oversight Committee is having difficulty getting an answer to a question, I would be glad to try to help facilitate that and work with the chairman. We do have some arcane rules here in Washington about advisers to the President not being in a position to be able to talk directly to Congress, but the head of the agency, as the chairman said, could be brought up with his subordinate, Mr. Park, to answer whatever questions there may be. I kind of think that we are closing the door on that particular issue relative to the Affordable Care Act, but you deserve answers, no matter what, on this question, but when we talk about the budget of this agency, when there are 50 million Americans suffering from brain- related diseases, when China has almost an absolute monopoly on rare earth elements that we need to find our way around for national security and other reasons, OSTP is doing some vitally important work, and we can't take 20 percent of their budget, but we can get to the point where you can get the answers that you desire and rightfully. You are the anchor of the Thursday prayer group, and you are someone who is a responsible Member of Congress, and we want to make sure that you get your answers. I will work with the chairman.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. FATTAH. What the chairman offered--he said $150,000 if we can't get you Holdren or someone to give you a satisfactory answer to your question. There are some rules about executive branch agents, individuals, and advisers to the President not being compelled to testify, but when you have line staff people running an agency, Holdren is available, and we can have him come with his staff and answer these questions.

Mr. FATTAH. Reclaiming my time, let me say: Let's work through it. We can work together. The chairman has given you his assurances that he will work with you, but there is no possibility that we can afford to cut this agency by 20 percent. I need to oppose this amendment. We would love to work with you to get you the answers because you are not trying to punish OSTP, you are trying to get legitimate answers to legitimate questions, and we want to help you and facilitate that.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I think we have resolved this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I share the sentiments of the chairman. Space technology is critically important. I want to acknowledge the work that was originally done by Bobby Braun, who is now at Georgia Tech, Mike Gazarik, who now is the chief space technologist at NASA doing an extraordinary job, but the resources are needed. I want to thank you for offering this amendment because it points us toward greater resources in that regard. I am familiar with the great work that is being done in your home State of Ohio at the Glenn Research Center.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.