Lamar Smith

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The bill we consider today provides stability for our Nation's commercial launch providers so that they can remain competitive in the international market. The bill extends the existing system, which requires commercial launch providers to purchase insurance up to the maximum probable loss. It then provides that the government will compensate up to $1.5 billion, plus inflation, and any amount above that is the responsibility of the original commercial launch provider. Two weeks ago, the Space Subcommittee heard testimony from industry experts about the need to extend the Commercial Space Launch Act's risk-sharing system. Two of the witnesses who testified deal with this law on a regular basis. Mr. Stuart Witt, president of the Mojave Air and Space Port, is developing new launch systems and technologies that could revolutionize space by making it more accessible. He told the subcommittee that this law allows companies to continue to innovate and grow. Another witness, Ms. Patricia Cooper, president of the Satellite Industry Association, represents companies that add billions of dollars to the U.S. economy as a result of the current risk-sharing system. Ms. Cooper testified that the system's continuation is ``absolutely essential'' and that her association ``strongly recommends that it be renewed before it expires.'' The committee also recently received a letter signed by DigitalGlobe, Boeing, Virgin Galactic, Lockheed Martin, American Pacific Corporation, Aerojet Rocketdyne, ATK, Ball, Honeywell, AMT II, and Orbital Sciences which advocated the renewal of the risk-sharing system in order to keep the U.S. competitive in the global market. Last year, the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee held a separate hearing on indemnification and heard from the Federal Aviation Administration, the Government Accountability Office, DigitalGlobe, and the Aerospace Industries Association. At this hearing, Frank Slazer, with the Aerospace Industries Association, summed up his trade association's position by stating: Many foreign launch providers competing against U.S. companies already benefit from generous indemnification rules . . . We cannot afford to drive away highly skilled technical jobs to foreign countries, where the regulatory frameworks provide better critical risk management tools. Lastly, a nonrenewal could impede new U.S. entrants to the commercial launch market, discourage future space launch innovation and entrepreneurial investment. Without a level playing field for competition, new U.S. entrants could find it highly undesirable to begin their business ventures in the United States. The FAA launch indemnification authority has been in place for over 20 years, and the American commercial space industry has benefited significantly over this time. Thankfully, the provision has never been triggered by a serious accident, but the stability it provides allows the U.S. to remain competitive in the global market and to push the boundaries of space technology. The bill before us would extend indemnification for 1 more year with the hope that we can address a longer-term legislative solution. I would have preferred a longer extension. For instance, the NASA Authorization Act that the Science, Space, and Technology Committee passed last summer extended indemnification for 5 years, but we now have a bipartisan bill before us that provides stability to our commercial space industry by protecting companies against third-party liability claims. This provision expires on December 31, so time is short. This bill buys us time to work on a long-term extension as part of the larger Commercial Space Launch Act renewal that we will take up next year. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3547) to extend the application of certain space launch liability provisions through 2014.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3547, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, we are now on our last speaker, so if the gentlelady wants to yield back, we can proceed.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer), also a member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, we actually have two more individuals who will speak on this side, so if the gentlewoman from Oregon wants to reclaim some time after our next speaker, she is welcome to do so. Meanwhile, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber) who is a distinguished member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. We are prepared to close, so I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Collins), who is a member of the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, on the way to yielding time to the gentlewoman from Wyoming, I want to point out that the underlying bill, the science bill that is contained in the underlying bill, did pass by voice vote in the Science Committee. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis), who is also the chairman of the Energy Subcommittee on the Science Committee.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Each week there is more good news about the benefits of the energy revolution underway across America. Whether it is the manufacturing renaissance spurred by affordable natural gas or the new opportunities for good-paying energy jobs, the benefits of the shale revolution can hardly be overstated. For that reason, I am happy to support H.R. 2728, a bill that seeks to prevent redundant Federal regulations where States already have environmental protections in place. H.R. 2728 also incorporates legislation reported by the Science Committee--the Hydraulic Fracturing Study Improvement Act. Title II of this legislation holds the EPA accountable by requiring it to base its studies on the facts instead of worst-case scenarios that exist only in the EPA's imagination. In its zeal to regulate, the EPA has rushed to link water contamination to hydraulic fracturing. It has made this claim in three high-profile cases, only to be forced to retract its statements after the facts have come out. The EPA's track record does not instill confidence in their ongoing studies of the relationship between hydraulic fracturing and drinking water. The Science Committee has conducted numerous oversight hearings on EPA research. These efforts have revealed that the EPA's approach is to try to find problems without considering whether these problems would actually occur in the real world. Title II corrects this by requiring a real-world look at risk that gives an honest evaluation of probability. This will prevent the misuse of the EPA's studies by those simply looking for an excuse to scare people. Title II of this legislation will enhance our ability to ensure continued safe and responsible production of America's natural energy resources. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. We are on our last speaker now, to respond to the gentlewoman from Oregon.

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Goodlatte for yielding me time and for also bringing the bill to the House floor today, and for all of his hard work on this legislation. The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, known as LARA, is only 1-1/2 pages long, but it would prevent the filing of hundreds of thousands of pages of privileged lawsuits in Federal court. For example, in recent years, frivolous lawsuits have been filed against The Weather Channel for failing to accurately predict storms, against television shows people claimed were too scary, and against fast-food companies because inactive children gained weight. Frivolous lawsuits have become too common in our society. Lawyers who bring these cases have everything to gain and nothing to lose under current rules, which permit plaintiffs' lawyers to file frivolous suits, no matter how absurd the claims, with no penalty whatsoever. Meanwhile, defendants are faced with years of litigation and substantial attorneys' fees. These cases, and many like them, have wrongly cost innocent individuals and business owners their reputations and their hard-earned dollars. According to the research firm Towers Perrin, the annual direct cost of American tort litigation now exceeds $260 billion a year, or over $850 billion per person in America. Before 1993, it was mandatory for judges to impose sanctions, such as orders to pay for the other side's legal expenses, when lawyers filed frivolous lawsuits. Then the Civil Rules Advisory Committee, an obscure branch of the courts, made penalties optional. This needs to be reversed by Congress. As Chairman Goodlatte noted, even President Obama has expressed a willingness to limit frivolous lawsuits. If the President is serious about stopping these meritless claims, he will support mandatory sanctions for frivolous lawsuits to avoid making frivolous promises. LARA requires lawyers who file frivolous lawsuits to pay the attorneys' fees and court costs for innocent defendants. Further, LARA expressly provides that no changes ``shall be construed to bar or impede the assertion or development of new claims, defenses, or remedies under Federal, State, or local laws, including civil rights laws or under the Constitution of the United States.'' So civil rights law would not be affected in any way by LARA. Opponents often argue that reinstating mandatory sanctions for frivolous lawsuits impedes judicial discretion, but this is not true. Under LARA, judges retain the discretion to determine whether or not a claim is frivolous. If a judge determines at their discretion that a claim is frivolous, they must award sanctions. This ensures that victims of frivolous lawsuits obtain compensation, but the decision to find a claim frivolous remains with the judge. LARA applies to both plaintiffs and defendants. It applies to cases brought by individuals, as well as by businesses, including business claims filed to harass competitors and illicitly gain market share. The American people are looking for solutions to obvious problems to lawsuit abuse. LARA restores accountability to our legal system by reinstating mandatory sanctions for attorneys who file frivolous lawsuits. Though it will not stop all lawsuit abuse, LARA encourages attorneys to think twice before filing a frivolous lawsuit. I thank Chairman Goodlatte again for bringing this much-needed legislation to the House floor, and I ask my colleagues who oppose frivolous lawsuits and who want to protect hardworking Americans from false claims to support the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act. Madam Speaker, I want to make one other point, and this goes to the earlier discussion we just had about judicial surveys. 751 Federal judges responded to the 1990 survey in which they overwhelmingly supported a rule 11 with mandatory sanctions. In the 2005 survey, only 278 judges responded, and over half of the judges who responded to the 2005 survey had no experience whatsoever under the stronger rule 11 because they were appointed to the bench after 1992. So the 2005 survey tells us very little about how judges comparatively view the stronger versus the weaker rule 11.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare, needs to be repealed and replaced with better legislation. There is no administrative or legislative fix that will repair this flawed law. Millions of Americans across the United States are receiving notices that their health insurance plans are being canceled. Jeff is a constituent of mine in San Antonio, Texas. His insurance company sent him a notice informing him that his current coverage will be canceled at the end of the year. His new ObamaCare policy will cost 98 percent more than his current plan. After the administration's announcement today, Jeff and his family may be able to keep their health care insurance coverage, but only for 1 year, and at what cost? We need to replace ObamaCare with commonsense solutions that lower costs, expand access to care, and eliminate unfair mandates and penalties.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Society of Professional Journalists has given Americans some bad news about the state of the media. Their previous code of ethics specifically affirmed that: News reports should be free of opinion or bias and represent all sides of an issue. This line has been removed. In fact, the revised code makes no mention that news reports should be free of bias. How can we expect journalists to cover events in a fair and objective way when their own code of ethics no longer discourages biased reporting? Maybe that explains the slanted coverage we see so often today when news stories have become editorials. The Society of Professional Journalists should reclaim their ethics and restate their commitment to fair and balanced reporting. The media should provide the American people with the facts, not tell them what to think.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, in the weeks leading up to the government shutdown, ABC, NBC, and CBS tried to make sure that it would be the Republicans who were responsible. A Media Research Center analysis found that from September 17 through September 30, the networks' evening newscasts ran a total of 39 stories about a possible government shutdown. Of these stories, over half blamed Republicans for the potential shutdown. Not one news report placed the blame on the Democrats. Yet it is Republicans who have passed such bills as keeping the National Institutes of Health open and making sure that veterans get their benefits. These bills are opposed by the President and the Senate Democrats. Republicans want to reduce the pain of the shutdown for the American people, but they are blocked by those who want the entire government to remain shut down. Americans deserve a national media that gives them the facts rather than one that is in the pocket of the Democratic Party.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today we honor Major General Patrick Henry Brady of the United States Army. Major General Brady was awarded the Medal of Honor for extreme heroism on January 6, 1968, in the Republic of Vietnam as a member of the 54th Medical Detachment. Major General Brady rescued dozens of seriously wounded men from an enemy-held territory blanketed by fog. He braved heavy enemy fire and risked his own life to save the lives of them. By the end of the day, Major General Brady had employed three different aircraft to evacuate 51 wounded men, most of whom would otherwise have perished. It is for his unwavering courage that we are proud to honor and appreciate the actions of Major General Patrick Henry Brady, who lives in New Braunfels, Texas. honoring colonel roger Hugh charles donlon

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chair, I strongly support of the REINS Act. The American people today face an onslaught of unnecessary Federal regulations. From the President's health care law to the never-ending list of EPA rules, government regulation has become a barrier to economic growth and job creation. Congress hears from employers daily about the threat of Federal regulations to their businesses. These employers are rightly concerned about the cost of compliance that regulations impose on their businesses. Overly burdensome regulation diverts limited money and resources away from business investment and expansion to meet the government's demands. This harms the ability of business owners to create more jobs and boost local economies. That should motivate us to take action today. Rather than halt its efforts to expand government, the administration seeks to use the regulatory agencies to accomplish what it cannot get approved by Congress. The REINS Act ensures that Congress has the final say over whether Washington will impose major new regulations on the American economy. Specifically, the bill establishes a procedure for Congress to approve all new major regulations proposed by the administration. The President himself has expressed the risks that excessive regulations pose to our economy. He has called for reviews of existing regulations to provide relief. He has also made a commitment to make the regulatory process more transparent. However, the President has failed to deliver on these promises. Instead, the Obama administration has proposed four times the number of major regulations than the previous administration over the same time period. It is time for Congress to reverse this harmful trend in overregulation. The REINS Act holds the administration accountable for its unjustified regulatory assault on job creators. It guarantees that Congress, not unelected bureaucrats, will be the final arbiter of all new major regulatory costs. The American people want job creation and economic growth, not more regulation. The REINS Act reins in out-of-control Federal regulations that burden the economy. I thank Mr. Young of Indiana for introducing this important legislation and I thank Chairman Goodlatte for taking up the REINS Act.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Madam Speaker, two-thirds of the American people want the border secured before other immigration reforms are implemented. The Senate bill ignores them. Most Americans feel that legalizing millions of illegal workers would take jobs away from U.S. citizens. The Senate bill ignores them. Most Americans want to stop illegal immigration. The Senate bill only reduces illegal immigration by 25 percent. Most Americans feel that legalizing millions of illegal immigrants would be a drain on government services. The Senate bill ignores them. Most Americans don't want to increase the number of immigrants beyond the very generous 1 million admitted every year. The Senate bill doubles that number. Those considering the Senate bill should stop, look, and listen to the American people.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Brigadier General Walter Schellhase (Retired) for his service to his country, community and fellow veterans as he retires as the President of the Hill Country Veterans Council. During his nearly two decades as an officer and member of the Board of Directors of the Hill Country Veterans Council, General Schellhase has worked tirelessly as an advocate for the needs of veterans. In addition to his work with the Veterans Council, General Schellhase has served on the Boards of the Kerrville Economic Development Corporation, the Kerr County Historical Commission, and was named Citizen of the Year by the Kerrville Area Chamber of Commerce. General Schellhase's efforts on behalf of his fellow veterans and citizens are certainly commendable. We thank him for his many years of public service.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on June 18, 2013, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology adopted the attached amendment to its Committee Rules: Rule VI (b) of the Rules of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology is amended to read as follows: (b) Subcommittees and Jurisdiction. There shall be five standing Subcommittees of the Committee on Science, Sp-ace; and Technology, with jurisdictions as follows: The Subcommittee on Energy hall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: all matters relating to energy research, development, and demonstration projects therefor; commercial application of energy technology; Department of Energy research, development, and demonstration programs; Department of Energy laboratories; Department of Energy science activities; energy supply activities; nuclear, solar, and renewable energy, and other advanced energy technologies; uranium supply and enrichment, and Department of Energy waste management; fossil energy research and development; clean coal technology; energy conservation research and development, including building performance, alternate fuels, distributed power systems, and industrial process improvements; pipeline research, development, and demonstration projects; energy standards; other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman; and relevant oversight. The Subcommittee on Environment shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: all matters relating to environmental research; Environmental Protection Agency research and development; environmental standards; climate change research and development; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including all activities related to weather, weather services, climate, the atmosphere, marine fisheries, and oceanic research; risk assessment activities; scientific issues related to environmental policy, including climate change; remote sensing data related to climate change at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA); earth science activities conducted by the NASA; other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman; and relevant oversight. The Subcommittee on Research and Technology shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: all matters relating to science policy and science education; the Office of Science and Technology Policy; all scientific research, and scientific and engineering resources (including human resources); all matters relating to science, technology, engineering and mathematics education; intergovernmental mechanisms for research, development, and demonstration and cross-cutting programs; international scientific cooperation; National Science Foundation, university research policy, including infrastructure and overhead; university research partnerships, including those with industry; science scholarships; computing, communications, networking, and information technology; research and development relating to health, biomedical, and nutritional programs; research, development, and demonstration relating to nanoscience, nanoengineering, and nanotechnology; agricultural, geological, biological and life sciences research; materials research, development, demonstration, and policy; all matters relating to competitiveness, technology, standards, and innovation; standardization of weights and measures, including technical standards, standardization, and conformity assessment; measurement, including the metric system of measurement; the Technology Administration of the Department of Commerce; the National Institute of Standards and Technology; the National Technical Information Service; competitiveness, including small business competitiveness; tax, antitrust, regulatory and other legal and governmental policies related to technological development and commercialization; technology transfer, including civilian use of defense technologies; patent and intellectual property policy; international technology trade; research, development, and demonstration activities of the Department of Transportation; surface and water transportation research, development, and demonstration programs; earthquake programs and fire research programs, including those related to wildfire proliferation research and prevention; biotechnology policy; research, development, demonstration, and standards- related activities of the Department of Homeland Security; Small Business Innovation Research and Technology Transfer; voting technologies and standards; other appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman; and relevant oversight. The Subcommittee on Space shall have jurisdiction over the following subject matters: all matters relating to astronautical and aeronautical research and development; national space policy, including access to space; sub-orbital access and applications; National Aeronautics and Space Administration and its contractor and government-operated labs; space commercialization, including commercial space activities relating to the Department of Transportation and the Department of Commerce; exploration and use of outer space; international space cooperation; the National Space Council; space applications, space communications and related matters; Earth remote sensing policy; civil aviation research, development, and demonstration; research, development, and demonstration programs of the Federal Aviation Administration; space law; her appropriate matters as referred by the Chairman; and relevant oversight. The Subcommittee on Oversight shall have general and special investigative authority on all matters within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the 2013 Service Academy appointees from the 21st Congressional District of Texas. The following individuals have accepted academy appointments: Liam Thomas Catoe, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Naval Academy; Lucas Adrian Fumagalli, New Braunfels High School, United States Air Force Academy; Nathaniel Robert Guney, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Naval Academy; Dillon Mitchell Launius, Vandegrift High School, United States Air Force Academy; Adam S. Lee, East Central High School, United States Air Force Academy; Kevin Michael McGinty, MacArthur High School, United States Naval Academy; Joshua Andrew McMillen, International School of the Americas, United States Air Force Academy; John Edward Monday, Jr., Boerne--Samuel V. Champion High School, United States Military Academy; Clara Elizabeth Navarro, Rice University, United States Naval Academy; James Lyn Pazdral, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Military Academy; Albert Dixon Patillo Ill, Heritage School, United States Military Academy; Rafael David Ramos-Michael, Brackenridge High School, United States Military Academy; and Kirsten S. Redmon, United States Military Preparatory School/Sam Houston High School, United States Military Academy. Again, congratulations to these outstanding students. I know they will serve our country well and I trust success will follow them in all their endeavors.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the 2013 Service Academy appointees from the 21st Congressional District of Texas. The following individuals have accepted academy appointments: Liam Thomas Catoe, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Naval Academy; Lucas Adrian Fumagalli, New Braunfels High School, United States Air Force Academy; Nathaniel Robert Guney, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Naval Academy; Dillon Mitchell Launius, Vandegrift High School, United States Air Force Academy; Adam S. Lee, East Central High School, United States Air Force Academy; Kevin Michael McGinty, MacArthur High School, United States Naval Academy; Joshua Andrew McMillen, International School of the Americas, United States Air Force Academy; John Edward Monday, Jr., Boerne--Samuel V. Champion High School, United States Military Academy; Clara Elizabeth Navarro, Rice University, United States Naval Academy; James Lyn Pazdral, Greystone Preparatory School at Schreiner University, United States Military Academy; Albert Dixon Patillo III, Heritage School, United States Military Academy; Rafael David Ramos-Michael, Brackenridge High School, United States Naval Academy; and Kirsten S. Redmon, United States Military Preparatory School/Sam Houston High School, United States Military Academy. Again, congratulations to these outstanding students. I know they will serve our country well and I trust success will follow them in all their endeavors.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, sometimes it's hard to believe that the immigration debate is taking place in the United States of America. Those who favor the Senate immigration bill talk a lot about helping foreign workers and undocumented immigrants, but you never hear them talk about helping American workers and American taxpayers. They can't, because the immigration bill will cost many American workers their jobs or decrease their wages. That's what happens when you give work permits to 10 million illegal immigrants. As for the cost of additional government services, the American taxpayer picks up that bill--about $43 billion every year. The air is coming out of the Senate bill fast. It doesn't secure the border, and it hurts American workers and taxpayers.

Mr. SMITH of Texas

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Center for Immigration Studies has analyzed the Senate immigration bill and found that it threatens our national security. For example, it allows examiners to grant asylum on the spot to arriving claimants without giving them background checks. It prohibits the prosecution of claimants for any criminal passport or visa fraud violation if they have a pending claim for asylum, whether or not it is frivolous. The bill fails to create an entry and exit tracking system at land ports where most foreigners enter. It waives existing grounds of ineligibility for illegal immigrants seeking amnesty, including bars for terrorism risks. So it appears that even the 9/11 terrorists could qualify for legalization under the Senate immigration bill. Incredibly, it even allows the reentry and legalization of those from terrorist- sponsoring countries who have been deported. How bad does it have to get before there is a popular uprising to oppose this bill?