Dana Rohrabacher

Mr. ROHRABACHER

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I think, at a time when we are having [[Page H 9929]] to make major budget cuts in so many programs, that we do have to make choices and that when we make choices in a situation just like today, and I think this does demonstrate a difference in philosophy, not in morality, not in values, but a difference in philosophy as to what Government should do, but when the Government is involved in helping fishermen or helping people who do coastal work, coastal shipping, or live near the coast, that perhaps other programs are more important than those programs, and perhaps when people are making money in the fishing industry or in the shipping industry, they could pay for those type of activities, especially at a time when our budget is too tight.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. If the gentleman would yield further, it just seems to me that what he is describing is a program that is very nice. We tried to save the really solid research end of this Sea Grant program. We tried to trim from it those things that were not essential. From what the gentleman has described today, and I know the people listening have to make their own determination, those are really nonessential items for the Federal Government to be involved in.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman, are the educational aspects that he was just mentioning not peripheral to the central point of Sea Grant? Are we really not supposed to be talking about research and development?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, the majority side accepts this amendment.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. This amendment is acceptable.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, is there a 1-year exemption on closure in this amendment?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman, is there any authorization that deals with this amendment?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, we are willing to accept this amendment.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I have two questions for the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman]. From what the gentleman has said, especially about the hearing on the ozone, is it the position of the gentleman that we should not have had a renowned scientist on the other side of the issue?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, just so my colleague will know, one of those scientists that was present to present another view on the ozone situation, contrary to what the current common knowledge is, had been threatened and had been told that she would not receive any more grants if she came to testify. I think the evidence is showing that people who are suppressing information are those who believe ozone is going to destroy us. [[Page H 9945]]

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, my colleague does know that the majority of scientists of the day thought the Earth was flat and thought that the Sun went around the Earth, and at times, the scientist order of the day was wrong.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. So the gentleman believes at this time when we are trying to find things in the budget and set our priorities, that helping these fishermen that he is talking about is really an important enough use of the taxpayer's money that we should cut other programs to support this?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I would be very happy to provide the gentleman a list of the 12 agencies in which global warming is a concern.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, global warming and ozone are two different issues. For the record, there is nothing in the language of our bill or our authorization that suggests that any work that has already been done by EPA should not be circulated or not be made available to anyone who would like to request it, or who they would like to send it to. What we are trying to do instead is in the future we would like EPA to focus on those many environmental issues that are significant and that they hold the responsibility for, rather than having this just another one of the many global warming projects within the Federal budget. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully disagree with my colleague's amendment.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would be courteous enough to yield to a question, I held the hearing, the hearings the gentleman was referring to, you were invited to, and I seem to remember you were supposed to be at those hearings. You did not show up. Now you are on the floor complaining about the hearings.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. If the gentleman will yield, what are the basic research cuts in this bill?

Mr. ROHRABACHER

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, this program is $80 million worth of industrial policy. It is the type of program that Vice President Gore may hold very dear, but the taxpayers of the United States expect us to make some changes here in Washington, DC, that will lead to a balanced budget, and this program has no relationship to science whatsoever. It is supposedly aimed at finding ways to streamline regulations. Well, giving $80 million to the government to streamline regulations is sort of like having the chickens give money to the foxes in order to protect them from foxes. It just does not make any sense. Our position was endorsed in the committee by a bipartisan vote of 26 to 16. The bottom line is we do not have to spend $80 million of the taxpayers' money in order to streamline regulations. We can do it, and Congress in fact is already doing it, and that is why we oppose the amendment of the gentleman from California [Mr. Brown].

Mr. ROHRABACHER

Mr. ROHRABACHER. This is one of the reasons why these types of requests should go through the committee and subcommittee and be presented there rather than just being basically voiced on the floor.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?