F. Sensenbrenner

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be passed over without prejudice.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2684, the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2000 is the most critical funding bill for American science. All scientific endeavors we marvel at today started with intensive basic research. Today's basic research is the seedcorn for our future economic endeavors and basic research has provided the scientific foundation for all the significant discoveries we have made in medicine, telecommunications and manufacturing. This conference report recommends a level of $3.912 billion for NSF and will provide a $240 million boost to NSF activities over the FY 1999 enacted level. Included in this amount is $2.996 billion for the Research and Related Activities account. This is nearly $200 million or 7% over the FY99 level and will support crucial research activities at NSF. Key among these activities is the support for basic research in Information Technology (IT). The conferees have increased funding for IT by over $126 million from last year's level, more than was apportioned in either the House or Senate FY 2000 bills. Included in this amount is $36 million for Terascale computing. These large increases are in keeping with the legislative intent set out in H.R. 2086, the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act (NITRD) of 1999. H.R. 2086 charts a new course for IT research at the federal level. The Committee on Science passed the bill by a vote of 41-0. I expect the bill will be taken up by the full House prior to our recess. The bill has been endorsed by the co-chairs of the President's Information Technology Advisory Commission (PITAC) as well as numerous other university and industry groups that recognize the need for long-term support of IT research. I thank the conferees for appropriating sufficient funds for NITRD and making the programs authorized in H.R. 2086 a reality. This investment in IT research will pay large dividends for future generations of Americans. NSF is not the only agency that falls under the purview of IT research in this funding bill. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are both funded at levels consistent with H.R. 2086. Both of these agencies have important roles to play in furthering basic IT research. Also included in this bill is a provision to rename the United States-Mexico Foundation for Science in commemoration of the Science Committee's former Chairman and Ranking Member, George E. Brown. George was dedicated to improving scientific collaboration between the United States and Mexico. The George E. Brown/United States-Mexico Foundation for science is a fitting tribute to a man known by his colleagues as ``Mr. Science.'' The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is funded at an overall level of $7.592 billion. Within this amount, $645 million is devoted to EPA science and technology programs. This is adequate funding for EPA's science and technology needs. Under this conference agreement, NASA is funded at $13.653 billion. This amount is $75 million above the President's request and $12 million below the FY1999 enacted level. Within this amount, the International Space Station is funded at $2.33 billion, $30 million more than FY 1999 and $152 million below the President's request. In the past, the cost growth associated with the Space Station program has resulted in cuts to critical science programs at NASA. The $2.33 billion level should enable NASA to meet station obligations without robbing from critical science programs. Likewise, a recent NASA Inspector General's report raises serious questions over whether the Triana spacecraft represents the best use of NASA's limited research dollars. This bill requires a study by the National Academy of Sciences regarding the scientific merit of the Triana project before work can proceed. I can only hope that the Academy will look at the relative merit of funding Triana as it compares with other NASA programs such as Space Science. Unfortunately, it appears that the review will not focus on how the mission was originally selected, thus, leaving the NASA IG's questions unanswered. Certainly, the NASA resources committed to Triana would be better spent on science projects selected through a peer review process. Restoring funding to Space Science, which has made such strides in performing NASA missions ``faster, cheaper, and better'' would be a better use of limited resources. Unfortunately, despite the strong commitment to science incorporated within this bill, NASA's decision to end-run the joint efforts by House and Senate authorizers by insisting on the inclusion of a damaging legislative rider requires my opposition to this bill. NASA's legislative rider threatens the future of space commercialization and was slipped into this otherwise scientifically sound bill without a single hearing or any public debate. This new commercial development program puts NASA in the untenable position of weighing business risks, market potential, and an individual venture's probability of success. NASA, as a federal agency, is not competent to make these decisions, which are best left to private markets. The Science Committee has been working with NASA and the private sector to address the area of space commercialization. Yet NASA decided to skirt public debate and secure its own preeminence in an area outside of its capabilities. This demonstrates a callousness and arrogance that I cannot support or condone. As a long-time supporter of NASA, I'm deeply disappointed the agency would choose to intentionally circumvent the Science Committee, its strongest congressional advocate. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that I support the increased funding levels for science in this measure, I cannot support this conference report.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2607, the Commercial Space Transportation Competitiveness Act of 1999, provides a 5-year extension for what is commonly referred to as indemnification. This extension is necessary to protect space transportation companies from uninsurable levels of liability and to enhance the international competitiveness of the American companies. The current indemnification provision expires at the end of this year, so we need to move quickly in order to get this extension enacted before the end of the year. H.R. 2607 also includes a reporting provision on whether the current risk-sharing regime should be modified. The report calls for separate sections from the Federal Government, the U.S. space transportation providers and customers, the insurance industry and the general public. This report will provide the basis for Congressional hearings and public debate in the future and should provide the framework for the new regime in plenty of time before this extension expires in 2004. The bill also includes authorizations for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation and the Office of Space Commercialization, and requires a report on the objectives, activities and plans of the Office of Space Commercialization. In short, this is a straightforward bill. It only contains, one, the indemnification extension; two, a report on how indemnification might be structured in the future; three, authorizations for two small commercial space offices; and, four, a section requiring a GAO report. I strongly support this bill, and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher). (Mr. ROHRABACHER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2607, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2607) to promote the development of the commercial space transportation industry, to authorize appropriations for the Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, to authorize appropriations for the Office of Space Commercialization, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 356) to provide for the conveyance of certain property from the United States to Stanislaus County, California, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 356, as amended.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 356 requires NASA to convey property at the Ames Research Center to Stanislaus, California. NASA retains the right to use the property for aviation activities on mutually acceptable terms. The conveyance does not relieve any Federal agency of its responsibility for any environmental remediation of soil, groundwater, or surface water. NASA relinquishes legislative jurisdiction over the property to the State of California. Any additional terms may be negotiated by the NASA Administrator to protect the interests of the United States. The bill is sponsored by the gentleman from California (Mr. Condit). Last Congress, the Committee on Science supported this bill; and the House passed it. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, my good friend from Texas (Mr. Doggett) has a very short memory. He tells the House and the American people to give us a Democratic majority and we will show them what we can do. Mr. Speaker, I remember the last time there was a Democratic majority and the Speaker from Texas, and the House passed no appropriations bills at all by the 30th of September, and all 13 appropriation bills ended up being put in one huge massive and continuing resolution that the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, plunked on that desk there, stack after stack after stack, and said no way will I ever sign one of those continuing resolutions again. Now that is what happened the last time there was a Democratic majority, and I hope that we never have that happen again under either a Republican or Democratic majority.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2392, a bill to reauthorize the Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, program through Fiscal Year 2006. As Chairman of the House Science Committee, I am pleased that H.R. 2392 continues to recognize the important role that small businesses play in supporting federal research and development efforts. SBIR is designed to promote innovation in federal research by increasing the participation of small businesses across the country through a 2.5 percent set-aside of an agency's extramural R&D budget. Currently, 10 federal agencies participate in the SBIR program. In order to allow H.R. 2392 to move forward expeditiously, the Committee on Small Business agreed to incorporate into the legislation certain provisions authored by the Science Committee. The provisions are of importance to the science community and allow for greater accountability of the multibillion-dollar program. For example, H.R. 2392 takes important steps to enhance Congressional oversight by requiring each agency that participates in the SBIR program to submit to Congress a performance plan consistent with the Government Performance and Results Act. Next, the Small Business Administration will be required to maintain an electronic database that will enable Congress, the Administration, and participating agencies to accurately evaluate the program's performance. In that same light of evaluation, H.R. 2392 calls for the National Research Council to conduct a comprehensive review of the SBIR program. This review follows up on the earlier report done by the NRC at the request of the Science Committee, on how best to evaluate federal research and development. The SBIR study should use that report as its guideline in developing its evaluation methods. Finally, the bill also allows for awards to exceed the Phase I and Phase II caps on time and duration, provided that the awarding agency justifies such action to the Administration. Preference is to be given to small businesses that have commitments for second and third phase funding from sources outside the SBIR program. This provision improves the program's administrative flexibility. I would like to thank the Ranking Member of the Science Committee, Mr. Hall, the Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Technology, Mrs. Morella, and the Ranking Member Mr. Barcia for their work in bringing this bill to the floor. I would also like to thank the Chairman of the Small Business Committee, Mr. Talent, and Ranking Member Ms. Velazquez, for working with the Science Committee. Madam Speaker, H.R. 2392 is a good bill and I urge all members to support its swift enactment.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the distinguished minority leaders of both the House and the other body for settling what to me has long been a confusing issue. In spite of all the legislation the Republican Congress has passed so far, the Social Security lockbox, tax relief, and debt reduction, the Ed-Flex bill, and the military readiness bill, to name just a few, we have listened for months to Democrats bluster about the do-nothing Congress. When I picked up my copy of The Hill yesterday, I finally began to understand what they mean by a do-nothing Congress. They mean themselves. On the front page, the distinguished minority leader of the other body proclaimed his disappointment that the first session of the 106th Congress was not more productive, while only a few lines of newsprint away the distinguished minority leader of the House claimed that the Democrats have dominated the Congressional agenda since 1994. So, Mr. Speaker, if the Democrats are in control and nothing is being done, then I ask the Members, who is to blame?

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1402. Frankly, I find it ridiculous that we are even discussing this bill here today. We all know that free markets are far preferable to out- dated government price control schemes, yet we are discussing a bill to block even modest market-oriented dairy policy reforms. The free market has served American producers and consumers exceptionally well. Car prices are not determined according to the distance that they are manufactured from Detroit, software prices are not set by the distance that they are produced from Silicon Valley, and orange prices are not established according to the distance from Florida to where they are grown. Instead, the free market is allowed to determine the prices for these products. Not coincidentally, these industries are thriving. Conversely, milk prices are determined by the distance of the producer from Eau Claire, Wisconsin, and small dairy farmers across the country are struggling to survive. It should be clear that the free market provides the best system for determining prices in America, no matter the product. The Department of Agriculture's milk marketing order reforms, though certainly less market-based than I had hoped, represent a common-sense step toward simplifying the pricing of milk. Dairy farmers across the country voted in support of this reform by 97 percent. Ignoring this vote, H.R. 1402 would essentially maintain the status quo in milk pricing and force dairy farmers to continue to struggle under the current antiquated government restraints. For the sake of farmers and consumers, I urge you to oppose H.R. 1402 and support market-oriented dairy reforms.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, the following is the agreement reached between Chairman Spence, Chairman Bliley, and myself in regard to the respective jurisdictions of each of our committees over the newly created National Nuclear Security Administration. Statement of Understanding Concerning Jurisdictional Implications of Title XXXII of S. 1059, the Conference Report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, September 14, 1999 This statement addresses the intent and understanding of the undersigned as it pertains to the impact of title XXXII (National Nuclear Security Administration Act) of S. 1059, the conference report for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, on the jurisdiction of the Committees on Armed Services, Commerce, and Science of the House of Representatives. The adoption of the conference report is not intended, and should not be construed as an attempt, to modify, expand, or diminish the jurisdiction of the Committees on Armed Services, Commerce, or Science over the Department of Energy, or any of its subordinate entities, programs, functions, or activities pursuant to Rule X of the Rules of the House. We agree that futures legislative referrals and other related matters shall remain consistent with referrals made under the Rules of the House of Representatives and the Speaker's understanding of applicable precedents. Consistent with these principles and section 3211(a) of S. 1059, which establishes a new National Nuclear Security Administration within the Department of Energy, the Committee on Commerce shall maintain jurisdiction over the general management and public health aspects of the Department of Energy. Further, the adoption of the conference report is not intended to modify or diminish the existing jurisdiction of the Committee on Science over all energy and scientific research, development, and demonstration, and projects thereof, commercial application of energy technology, and environmental research and development programs, projects, and activities conducted at the facilities to be included within the new National Nuclear Security Administration. In addition, the enactment of Title XXXII is neither intended to modify or diminish the existing jurisdiction of the Committee on Science over all federally owned to operated nonmilitary energy laboratories. Floyd D. Spence, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services. Tom Bliley, Chairman, Committee on Commerce. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Chairman, Committee on Science.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned in my opening statement, this manager's amendment is necessary to strike the authorization of certain FAA R&D activities from H.R. 1551. By agreement with the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the authorization of these specific activities were included in H.R. 1000, the Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century when it successfully passed the House earlier this year.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, let me say I support the amendment and will note that it is not an add on, but merely designates $2 million of the amounts in the account for this purpose. I think it is a constructive amendment and would urge the House to support it.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I am very happy to support the gentlewoman's amendment and hope that it will be promptly voted upon, unanimously.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, this is a manager's amendment. It does two things. One, it clarifies the provisions for a GAO report on sales or use taxes for the Spallation Neutron Source, and, secondly, at the request of the Committee on Armed Services, the amendment adds Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia National Labs and the Y-12 Plant to the list of labs in the bill excluded from the provision that prohibits citizens of a nation on the DOE's list of sensitive countries from entering any classified area of a federally- owned or operated nonmilitary energy laboratory. This provision was included in the defense authorization bill that was approved earlier today. I know of no controversy on this amendment.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1655, the bill just passed.