Frank Lucas

Mr. LUCAS

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber), the ranking member of the Energy Subcommittee.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we must invest in the long-term, early-stage research that will strengthen our energy infrastructure against a range of emerging threats. The Department of Energy is uniquely qualified to lead this endeavor, and the partnerships that exist between its national laboratory systems, universities, and industry has the potential to modernize and transform U.S. energy delivery systems. H.R. 5760 authorizes the advanced grid security R&D activities that will make the future U.S. electrical grid reliable, resilient, and secure for all Americans. I, again, thank my friends across the aisle for working with us on this bill. We need to come together and have serious conversations about how to make real progress on next-generation energy issues. I am glad to see us doing that today. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to this bloc of amendments and to express my profound disappointment with this process. As I said yesterday, climate change is a generational challenge, one where our work today will have an impact for decades to come. I believe our work on something of this importance deserves thoughtful consideration, careful analysis, and substantial debate. After all, what is at stake here is no small matter. The policy decisions we make on this issue will not only impact our greenhouse gas emissions; they will also have a direct effect on what Americans pay to cool and heat their homes. They will determine whether we hamstring our energy sectors or give them a global advantage. Congress has an established process to make smart policy decisions on important issues like this. We consider issues in hearings, debate and vote in committees, and then bring legislation to the House floor. That is not what happened here. Instead of following regular order on individual policy proposals, we were given 1 week to review 900 pages of legislation. In an effort to have a voice in this process, Members offered 176 amendments to this bill. Only 99 were made in order. And now, Mr. Speaker, we don't even have the chance to debate and vote on those amendments individually. Instead, we are expected to vote to pass or reject 26 amendments en bloc right now. With only one exception, this is how we will vote on all 99 amendments made in order. That is a problem because it forces us either to vote in favor of policies we don't support or to vote against the ones we do. That is where I find myself right now. Not surprisingly, I strongly support my own amendment in this bloc. It expresses the sense of Congress that in order to reduce emissions, the Secretary of Energy must prioritize funding for fundamental research infrastructure and for basic research and development activities carried out through the Office of Science. Office of Science programs have long served as the cornerstone of U.S. energy innovation. Our clean energy future will be built on next- generation technology areas like grid-scale energy storage, advanced grid security, and integrated carbon management strategies. These technologies are dependent on Federal support for basic research programs and infrastructure. The Office of Science at DOE is behind some of the most groundbreaking scientific discoveries and technology developments in recent history. Without the innovation that has come from DOE basic research, we wouldn't have successfully reduced emissions through clean, affordable natural gas. That is why a clean energy legislative package that fails to include comprehensive Office of Science provisions is not a serious proposal even if it is 900 pages long. I would urge my colleagues to remember that Americans need affordable and reliable energy, and that has to be a central goal in our policy to address climate change. We can reduce emissions, keep energy prices competitive, and ensure that the U.S. remains a world leader in science and energy technology by committing to prioritize basic research and critical infrastructure supported by the Office of Science. I believe my amendment would improve H.R. 4447 by establishing that Congress is fundamentally committed to research and development of breakthrough clean energy technologies. Unfortunately, I can't support my amendment because it has been lumped in with so many others that actually worsen the underlying legislation by increasing our support of well-funded applied research programs that are duplicating the work that private industry can and should be doing on its own. But that is what happens when you force through a massive, partisan messaging bill instead of allowing for individual policy consideration. This shows a lack of good faith from the House Democrats and is no way to pass legislation for the public good. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bloc, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I would note to my colleague that I have no additional speakers, and I am prepared to close whenever she has concluded with her speakers.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. As the Chamber of Commerce noted in a letter to Congress, there is a growing consensus that the research, development, and commercialization of new technologies is an important factor that will determine how quickly and at what cost greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced. The Chamber has recently taken issue with this package because of the inclusion of a number of provisions that diverge from its core focus area, threatening to undermine the otherwise favorable bill. I am sorry to say it again, but too many provisions of this bill have undermined areas where we could have found bipartisan consensus. The same is true of the bloc of amendments. I, therefore, must urge my colleagues to oppose this bloc. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed in its current form.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, my amendment contained within this en bloc emphasizes a critical priority for House Republicans. It expresses the sense of Congress that the United States must prioritize investment in domestic energy sources and supply chains, as well as in research and development of exportable next-generation energy technologies. This is absolutely necessary if we are going to maintain U.S. competitiveness in science and technology while reducing emissions. These priorities should play a key role in any realistic and responsible global clean energy strategy. With the current public health crisis, the need for sustainable domestic energy chains has never been more important. Whether it is medical supplies or energy sources, we need to be able to depend on our own resources if foreign supply is voluntarily or involuntarily cut off. That requires us to invest in basic research, which drives breakthrough technologies. For example, due in part to Federal investment in R&D that has led to new horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technology, the American shale revolution has led the U.S. to be a net exporter of natural gas since 2018. This is how basic research results in energy independence, an achievement our Nation must prioritize for long-term success. Basic research is also instrumental in the fight against climate change. For emissions reduction technologies like carbon capture, storage, and utilization to be effective, they must be used globally. Over the past 20 years, Asia has accounted for 90 percent of all coal-fired capacity built worldwide, and these plants have potentially long operational lifetimes ahead of them. We can't force them to change their energy profile and amount of emissions, but we can make cleaner energy technology appealing by making it efficient, inexpensive, and commercially marketable. If fundamental clean energy research is conducted here in the United States and developed into deployable technology, we can export the resulting knowledge, tools, and energy itself, as I mentioned with natural gas. By investing in this way, we can grow U.S. industry, reduce our reliance on foreign countries for innovation, and, most importantly, make a significant impact on mitigating the effects of global climate change. If we want to innovate, and we want to export our technologies, we have to focus on breakthrough science, not on propping up mature energy technologies and slowing the development of new ones. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this position, my amendment, and this en bloc.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, my motion will ensure that none of the $135 billion in taxpayer funds authorized in H.R. 4447 will be used to build up foreign countries' intellectual property and technology at the expense of our own. Specifically, in order to receive Federal grants, loans, or demonstration money through H.R. 4447, organizations must certify that the results of that funding, whether technology, intellectual property, or data, will not become the property of a foreign state-owned enterprise. Mr. Speaker, China has made it an explicit goal to surpass the United States as the global frontrunner in science and technology. The Chinese Communist Party's Made in 2025 initiative outlines a clear strategy to get ahead of us in critical technologies and industries of the future. Part of the CCP strategy is acquiring U.S. technology and intellectual property, whether through investment, coercion, or theft. Let me repeat that: through investment, coercion, or, yes, even theft. This isn't a hypothetical situation. Already, China has recruited U.S.-funded researchers for things like the Thousand Talents program. This is much more than a single recruitment program or an exchange of knowledge. Researchers joining the Thousand Talents program sign legally binding contracts that require them to transfer information and property to China. We have seen a consistent pattern where China expresses interest in a specific technology and then the U.S. experiences intellectual property theft in that same technology. The full scope of the CCP's influence and presence in the U.S. is not entirely known to the public, but FBI Director Christopher Wray has said that the Bureau is opening a new China-related counterintelligence case about every 10 hours. Simply put, we are spending the time, the money, and the effort to plant the seeds of new technologies, but China is the one harvesting the crop. We cannot afford to spend $135 billion in taxpayers' funds on technologies that China will then steal and use to compete against us. We must protect our Nation's research and intellectual property. The Trump administration has taken good steps towards protecting American IP from Chinese aggression, but we must do more to work together to protect sensitive American research while maintaining the spirit of open science that has fueled, literally, generations of discoveries. Mr. Speaker, this motion provides commonsense, practical protections for taxpayer-funded research and the incalculable innovations it creates. I urge my colleagues to support this motion and ensure that we are not spending billions of dollars on research that China will then use to outcompete us. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LUCAS

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I am disappointed that we are here today to consider a massive, impractical messaging bill instead of voting on real clean energy solutions. At the very first Committee on Science, Space, and Technology hearing this Congress, I committed to addressing climate change and global greenhouse gas emissions through science and technology. My Republican colleagues and I have worked in good faith to create bipartisan legislation that supports much-needed research and development into nascent, clean energy technologies. And when I say bipartisan, I mean truly bipartisan. My friend across the aisle will try to characterize H.R. 4447 as bipartisan. But that is not strictly accurate. This bill was written without Republican input, and we were given one week to read and consider 900 pages of legislative text. Some provisions in this bill were considered and passed with bipartisan support at the committee level, but they were changed without consultation before they were included in this bill. Other provisions have a single Republican cosponsor, which technically makes them bipartisan, but certainly doesn't indicate that there is widespread support from both parties. Madam Speaker, we do have truly bipartisan bills on research and development of clean energy technologies. We could be considering those today. For instance, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has a long history of strong support from both sides of the aisle for basic research. Why? Because without fail, basic research has generated breakthrough technologies that have revolutionized energy production in America, making it cleaner, cheaper, and more efficient. Basic research at our national labs is pioneering technologies that capture carbon emissions from coal, natural gas, batteries that store energy from intermittent energy sources like wind and solar, and advanced nuclear reactors that can provide cleaner, more affordable power. This is the kind of work that private industry generally can't perform because it is simply too risky to invest in. Government-funded basic research makes groundbreaking discoveries and American industry then translates that into marketable technologies, making our economy stronger, our energy production more efficient. So why does this bill largely ignore basic research? H.R. 4447 doesn't include any support for the Department of Energy's Office of Science, which drives basic research and represents more than half of the Department's entire civilian Federal R&D portfolio. Instead, the bill before us today spends $35 billion to increase funding for every applied energy office at the DOE. While applied energy programs play an important role in improving efficiency in various industry sectors, they can only do so much. This bill is throwing money at renewable energy industries that are already mature and competitive, instead of investing in the next generation of clean energy technology. If you will pardon the farming analogy, this is like spending all your money to build a better plow instead of investing in a tractor. If we truly want clean, affordable, sustainable energy for Americans, we can and must do better than this. Madam Speaker, I have introduced legislation designed to boost American competitiveness and address climate change. H.R. 5685, the Securing American Leadership in Science and Technology Act, will double funding for the Office of Science, update our research facilities and infrastructure, and improve tech transfer. It is a thoughtful investment in the future of American science. And there are other bipartisan bills we could be considering today, all of which have close Senate companions and strong bipartisan Senate interest: H.R. 4091, the ARPA-E Reauthorization Act, was passed out of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology last year after both sides came together to negotiate a consensus bill that doubles our investment in ARPA-E's high-risk, high-reward research while establishing guardrails to make sure we are using our limited research dollars wisely. H.R. 5347, the Advanced Geothermal Research and Development Act, authorizes cutting-edge geothermal research and development so we can take advantage of this vast and largely untapped renewable resource. And H.R. 2986, the Better Energy Storage Technology Act, or the BEST Act, authorizes a crosscutting research and development program to accelerate high-priority energy storage technology. This is critical to more efficient and consistent use of renewable technologies, like solar and wind. Giving any one of these bills consideration today, would guarantee more progress on clean energy technology than this messaging bill. If we are serious about addressing climate change and providing Americans with clean, affordable energy, we need to be serious about the basic research that supports the goal. Madam Speaker, I hope we can put aside partisan performances like this and instead focus on supporting research into the next generation of clean energy technology. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Waltz), an esteemed member of the Science Committee.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Waltz).

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Fulcher).

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, as I said in my opening statement, as ranking member of the Science Committee, I am disappointed we are debating a messaging bill today, rather than a substantive bipartisan bill, the kind that we worked on to address clean energy and climate change. I would like to thank my Republican colleagues, Energy Subcommittee Ranking Member Weber, Space Subcommittee Ranking Member Babin, Research and Technology Ranking Member Baird, and Representatives Waltz, Crenshaw, and Fulcher, and many others for their hard work in championing energy R&D issues that will truly deliver on the promise of our clean energy future. It is not too late to make progress. If there is one thing to take away from this, it is that Science Committee Republicans are ready and willing to work with our shared priorities. So let's set aside this bipartisan messaging exercise and start having serious conversations about supporting the basic research needed to make real progress in clean energy. Madam Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 881, the Promoting Research and Observations of Space Weather to Improve the Forecasting of Tomorrow Act, commonly referred to as the PROSWIFT Act. Fluctuations in solar magnetic activity create variations in the environment between Earth and the Sun that can affect technologies in space and here on Earth. This phenomenon is what we refer to as space weather. For the most part, space weather has a minimal effect here, but increased solar activity and severe events can create widespread problems and even disrupt our electric grid. Satellites that have less protection from Earth's magnetic field are especially vulnerable. Significant space weather events are not a new phenomenon, and we have evidence dating back more than 150 years of severe space weather events affecting human activity. However, the impact of these events is much greater now that we rely on satellites and remote sensing for everything from cell phone communication to energy production to GPS navigation. For example, farmers in Oklahoma have been at the forefront of utilizing precision agriculture to help ensure the most effective use of our resources when planting crops, a technology dependent on GPS. Space weather is also a national security issue. Our military has a variety of assets in orbit around the Earth, which could potentially be harmed by electromagnetic interference. They rely on satellites built by NASA and operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, for timely and accurate information about potential space weather events. It is not only technology that is threatened by space weather events. There are the astronauts who currently work on the International Space Station more than 200 miles above the Earth's surface and will one day serve on missions to the Moon and Mars. While we have developed techniques and technology to reduce the threats posed by increased radiation exposure due to a severe solar event, we have more work to do to mitigate these hazards to our astronauts as we venture beyond low- Earth orbit. In short, severe space weather can have significant effects on each and every one of us. That is why timely and accurate information from agencies like NASA and NOAA is so important. These agencies play an important role in better monitoring and forecasting space weather. The bill before us today represents a good faith effort by the House and Senate to provide a framework that will provide for better coordination across the Federal Government. This is especially timely given that we are about to enter a period of increased solar activity, which will create more space weather events. I am pleased this legislation includes an amendment I introduced during the markup of this legislation. My amendment creates a pilot program that will ensure that emerging private-sector companies will have a seat at the table and will be able to provide monitoring and forecast data, which the Federal Government can purchase and utilize in their space weather forecasts. I thank the sponsors of this legislation for their work on this important topic. I ask my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time, Madam Speaker.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I, again, would like to thank the sponsors of this legislation for their hard work on this important topic. I encourage all my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4979, the Rural STEM Education Act. I am pleased to be leading this important bipartisan bill and would like to thank Congressman McAdams, Congressman Baird, Congresswoman Johnson, and the other 43 Members of Congress who cosponsored this bill for their support. Now more than ever, America's prosperity and security depend on an effective, inclusive science, technology, engineering, math, and computer science workforce, or STEM. Nationally, 80 percent of the fastest growing occupations depend upon mastery of STEM skills. The number of STEM jobs is growing three times faster than non-STEM jobs. Over the next decade, the STEM shortage is anticipated to reach 1 million positions, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. To succeed in this job market, our students need to be equipped with solid skills in science and engineering. Meeting this demand starts in the classroom. With STEM education becoming so fundamental to success in any industry, finding ways to improve the quality of STEM learning everywhere is of critical importance. Over 9 million students in the United States, nearly 20 percent of the K-12 population, attend rural schools. In Oklahoma, that number is even higher. One-third of our students attend rural schools. These students face a number of barriers to accessing high-quality STEM learning, including a shortage of trained science and math teachers, single teachers teaching multiple grade levels, a lack of access to advanced STEM courses, and few local university and industry partners. Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, we have seen even further proof that rural students are at a disadvantage, given the unreliability or nonexistent broadband access many must deal with while currently distance learning. The Rural STEM Education Act supports research and development activities to improve our understanding of the challenges rural communities are facing in providing and sustaining quality STEM education programs and take steps to address them. H.R. 4979 helps develop best practices for accessing and using computer-based and online STEM education courses. It will help schools combine online STEM education with hands-on training and apprenticeships, to give students both theoretical and practical understanding of science and math skills. This bill will also take steps to address one of the great key obstacles to rural STEM education: reduced connectivity and, in particular, the lack of broadband access. Of the 21 million Americans who lack access to broadband, the majority live in rural areas. With the increase in online learning, we need to prioritize connectivity for all students. This bill directs the National Institutes of Standards and Technology to establish a prize competition to stimulate innovations in technologies to deploy broadband connectivity to underserved rural communities. It also establishes a working group to set key research priorities for improving broadband access so rural communities can enjoy the same connectedness as the rest of the country. This bill includes a number of provisions to help provide rural educators with the tools they need to be successful, both in the classroom and online. It supports opportunities for rural educators to refresh and enhance their own STEM knowledge, such as training in computer science and research opportunities at Federal laboratories and universities. These experiences provide rural educators with high-quality STEM skills and practices they can take back to their classrooms and pass on to their students. Lastly, the major focus of the bill is broadening the participation of rural students in STEM. One way we can do this is by emphasizing place-based learning, which gives students direct access to the STEM knowledge in their communities and local environments. Place-based learning connects students to the science that is right outside their doors, whether it is studying animal science with FFA, learning about local ecosystems out on the prairies or in forests, or developing the technological skills required to operate increasingly complex and computerized farm equipment. That direct experience engages students and helps them understand that STEM skills matter to everyone, not just scientists in white lab coats. Taken together, the measures in this bill will dramatically improve rural STEM education. I believe rural areas represent one of the greatest yet most underutilized opportunities for talented students to enhance the United States' future STEM workforce. I am pleased this bill has gained the endorsement of the STEM Education Coalition, the Afterschool Alliance, Battelle and STEM-X, National Science Teaching Association, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, Microsoft, Girl Scouts of the USA, National FFA Organization, and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. I again would like to thank Chairwoman Johnson, Representative McAdams, Representative Baird, and their staff for working with me on this bill. I strongly encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to better STEM education for America's rural students, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird).