Heather Wilson

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out certain things about H.R. 2419 that leave me troubled. I am quite concerned by significant reductions made in critical programs that are necessary for our nation to maintain a credible long-term nuclear deterrent. The appropriations for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) related to weapons activities was $6.63B in FY 2005. That amount was reduced to $6.18B by the committee, a reduction of almost $0.5B, or nearly 10%. The Advanced Strategic Computing (ASC) Campaign has made great advances over the past 10 years. We are now able to model things with more fidelity than ever before. This modeling is used to certify the reliability of our nuclear stockpile without nuclear testing. The ASC Campaign was funded last year at a level of $698M. The administration request for FY06 is only $661M--a reduction of $37M over last year's levels. The administration's request was further reduced by the appropriations committee from $661M to $501M, coupled with nearly $22M of earmarks out of the $501M for extraneous projects, results in a final budget of less than 70% of last year's budget. These reductions come at the same time we are asking our nation's nuclear laboratories to recertify our nuclear weapon stockpile with science and computing rather than nuclear testing. The committee states that its ``recommendation recognizes the Department's inability to achieve the promises of Stockpile Stewardship effort and redirects ASCI funding to maintain current life extension production capabilities pending the initiation of the Reliable Replacement Warhead program.'' One cannot remove funds from the Advanced Strategic Computing program to fund the Reliable Replacement Warhead program--not expected to yield fruit for a number of years--and expect the labs to continue to certify our stockpile. These programs are not substitutes for each other. Once again the committee has removed all funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator Study. This is a worth while study, designed to answer whether or not a nuclear earth penetrator is even feasible as a means of holding Deeply Buried Hardened Targets (DBHTs) at risk. It is my understanding that this study will now move to the Department of Defense and outside of the jurisdiction of the Energy and Water Appropriations subcommittee. Inconsistent reductions and increases seem to have been made to the infrastructure construction projects for NNSA. The $55M administration request for the Chemistry Matallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory was zeroed out. On the other hand the Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility Y-12 National Security Complex recommended funding at a level of $81M, an increase of $11M over the request. The committee's reasoning zeroing ``the CMRR facility should be delayed until the Department determines the long- term plan for developing the responsive infrastructure required to maintain the nation's existing nuclear stockpile and support replacement production anticipated for the RRW initiative.'' It is my understanding that this determination will be made by the Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board subcommittee which is due to report out in June. The committee claims that its ``recommendation does not prejudge the outcome of the SEAB's subcommittee's assessment of the NNSA weapons complex.'' However, if the committee does not want to prejudge the outcome of the SEAB's study, it would seem more appropriate to only put a hold on the CMRR funds until the SEAB study has reported its findings. There is considerable use to be made of the CMRR in supporting the general science mission of the laboratory as well. It is not a facility to only support manufacturing as the committee suggests. We should not expect our critical nuclear laboratories to be held up to the safety and security standard that are set by industry if we do not provide for ways to update sorely needed facilities around the nuclear weapons complex. I find particularly troubling the reductions made to and restrictions placed upon the Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) and like programs within DOE. Section 311 of the Bill limits the amount of LDRD funding to $250M. This is in comparison to the $400M in FY2005. This will severely restrict fundamental R&D that is so vital to our DOE complex in meeting the needs of national security. Section 312 of the bill is particularly troublesome since it subjects funds already subjected to overhead rates to those same rates yet again. LDRD funds have historically been used as indirect funds since they are redirected funds that have in essence already been taxed by the overhead charges. Section 313 restricts LDRD funds derived from DOE funded programs to be used only on DOE related research, as if other funded projects (generally referred to as ``Work for Others'' projects) do not help fund the LDRD programs. This is in fact not the case. In general, all funding for projects at the laboratories help to fund the LDRD programs at equal rates. The accounting nightmare that would be created if the installations were forced to keep the funding separate would be particularly onerous and waste even more resources. But beyond all these arguments, the LDRD program is designed expressly to investigate basic and applied research that has broad application across the potential customer base.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak. We will have a manager's amendments later on this afternoon that will strike the language limiting the assignment of women in the military. I believe that those provisions were unnecessary and unhelpful, and I appreciate the willingness of the chairman to remove them from the bill. I also wanted to thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), the leadership and the staffs of the various committees in their efforts to craft an alternative that I think is worthy of support. It strikes all of the language with respect to the women on assignment in the military, and increases from 30 days to 60 days the amount of time that the Defense Department would have to give us notice that they are changing policy. That seems, to me, to be the appropriate thing to do. In the history of this country, there has never been a law limiting the assignment of women in the Army, and we will not do so this year. Throughout the history of this country, 2 million women have served in the uniform of this country. Every single one of them has been a volunteer. We thank them for their service and we honor them today.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for the time. We have heard references tonight to the financial condition of this country in the summer of 2001 and the fact that we have bigger deficits today. Most of us in this chamber were here on a cool September morning when the world changed. Any other country in the world would still be on its knees, but America is back on its feet, in part because of the leadership of this body, and all of us should be proud of that. All of my colleagues in this chamber know that I was very concerned about Medicaid. It is the safety net for people in this country who are very vulnerable, and it is very important to the Americans who depend upon it. We have worked together, and I wanted to thank the chairman for allowing a budget that will put us on the path to reform which can drive the budget. Let policy drive the budget and not the other way around. There are no reductions in the projected growth of Medicaid in fiscal year 2006, and this budget funds a commission, a bipartisan commission, to put us on the path for reform. Annual increases in Medicaid are 7.1 percent over the next 5 years. But why does all this matter? All of us have stories from the people we have met who have touched our lives. I was at a rehab hospital not too long ago in New Mexico and a doctor came up to me. He had been treating a patient that morning who was a diabetic, who was eligible for Medicaid. He had had both of his legs amputated, and he said: Mrs. Wilson, this morning I taught my patient how to use a glucometer to monitor his disease. Can you tell me why is it that we have a Federal Medicaid program that will pay $28,000 to a hospital to cut a guy's legs off but I need a waiver from the Federal rules to help him learn to monitor his disease? Today I am teaching how to go back home and live on his own, even though he is in a wheelchair. We deserve Medicaid reform for the people who depend upon it. We deserve a system that is not prejudiced toward institutional care for our parents when we all know that they want to stay in their own homes for as long as they can. We deserve a Medicaid system that does not encourage States to take foster children and put them into residential treatment centers and define them as mentally ill and that allows States to use that money to recruit and support foster parents, so that teenagers can have families, real forever families, instead of learning the new rules on the wall of their latest institutional placement. That is why we need Medicaid reform. Our chairman has brought us a budget bill that protects our country, that supports our troops and puts us on the path toward real reform, and I would ask my colleagues to vote for it.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Albuquerque Biological Park Title Clarification Act on behalf of myself and Representative Udall and Representative Pearce. This legislation would assist the City of Albuquerque, New Mexico (City) clear title to two parcels of land located along the Rio Grande. The Albuquerque Biological Park is a distinctive environmental museum comprising four facilities: Albuquerque Aquarium, Rio Grande Botanic Garden, Rio Grande Zoo and Tingley Beach Aquatic Park. In 1997, as part of an effort to improve these facilities, the City purchased two properties from the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District (MRGCD) for $3,875,000. The City had been leasing the first property, Tingley Beach, from MRGCD since 1931. The City had been leasing the second property, San Gabriel Park, from the MRGCD since 1963. Both properties had been used as public parks. In 2000, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation interrupted the City's plans when it asserted that it had acquired ownership of all of MRGCD's property associated with the Middle Rio Grande Project in 1953. This called into question the validity the City's title to the properties. The City cannot move forward with its plans to improve the properties until the titles are cleared. The legislation is narrowly drafted to affect only the two properties at issue and leaves the main dispute concerning title to project works for the courts to decide. This important legislation will allow the City to move forward with a project that will provide residents and visitors with exciting new recreational opportunities.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Yogi Bhajan, a leader, and friend to me, the State of New Mexico and many others ranging from America to his native country of India. Yogi died peacefully in his sleep at age 75 surrounded by his family in Espanola, New Mexico. Upon his arrival to America in the 1960's, Yogi immigrated to northern New Mexico and founded the Sikh Dharma in Espanola. By 1971 Sikh Dharma was officially recognized as a religion in America due to Yogi's determined efforts. Through Yogi Bhajan's non- profit 3H, Healthy, Happy, Holy Organization, he touched the lives of millions throughout the world. Yogi's name has been a staple throughout New Mexico for decades through his many business endeavors throughout the State. Among his many businesses, Akal Security, founded in 1980 by the Sikh Dharma, now thrives in multiple States and throughout the country by providing security to numerous military installations as well as private corporations throughout the world. Over 200 books have been written based on his teachings, as well as CD's, videos, paintings, and sculptures. Yogi wrote over 30 books including The Teachings of Yogi Bhaian, Furmaan Khalsa, Masters Touch, and Mind and Its 81 Facets. Yogi Bhajan believed ``It is a birthright to be healthy, happy, and holy'' and lived his life accordingly. He will be missed but Yogi Bhajan left a legacy in New Mexico, America, and the world that will not be forgotten.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, December 17, 2004, the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People's Congress (NPC) announced they would include an ``anti-secession'' law, aimed at Taiwan, in the March 2005 agenda of the National People's Congress. China's ``anti-secession legislation'' indicates that China may be willing to make decisions unilaterally to change the status quo of relations between China and Taiwan. The proposed law if adopted will not foster an atmosphere favorable to cross-strait goodwill between China and Taiwan.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Cesar Hernandez. Cesar died on July 5th of this year at age 61. His contribution to New Mexico lives on. Cesar was publisher of the Spanish language newspaper, La Razon. With a circulation of 17,000 copies, Cesar's newspaper is a major source of news and information for the substantial Spanish-speaking population of New Mexico. This newspaper's importance to the population it serves is difficult to over-emphasize. We live in an era of news up-to-the minute and always available, but to a person who reads or understands primarily Spanish, the sources of information are often rare or incomplete. La Razon fills that gap and offers its readers valuable, practical information for their day-to-day lives. Cesar's family will never forget the day they became New Mexicans, because it was September 11, 2001. Cesar started his newspaper one week later. Cesar logged decades of experience in radio and newspaper, and got his start in Chicago, Illinois. Today, his work goes on in New Mexico under the direction of his wife, Antoinette, and his family. In 3 years, Cesar contributed much to his adopted state, New Mexico. As his daughter Leslie put it, ``My father loved the newspaper.'' We're proud to recognize Cesar Hernandez, and we honor his memory and contribution to New Mexico.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, the following students of Highland High School, with the aid of their teacher, Steve Seth, have received the Unite Five award at the national finals of the We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution program. This event took place in Washington, DC, where the students competed against classes from all over the country and achieved the highest award through their demonstration of a complete and comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the ideals and values of the American constitutional government. Influencing over 26.5 million students from elementary to high school, the competition is a simulation of an actual congressional hearing, in which students have the opportunity to speak as constitutional experts before a panel of judges. History does not happen in the past, we are experiencing it now. These students, by way of their knowledge and outstanding achievement, have demonstrated their knowledge and understanding of our Constitution and the important role our founders played in the structure of our government. They have a strong foundation for citizen involvement in my community and in our country. I am both proud and honored to recognize these students and their teacher not only for their achievement, but for their hard work and dedication to something so important. Highland High School Students: Michael Alberti, Celina Baca, Desirae Brown, Aaron Blackwell, Kenyon Bradley, Christina Davis, Rachel Fredman, Iris Garcia, Lucy Gilster, Kegan Godbey, Kori Higgins, Randall Holt, Kelsey Jackson, Samuel Martinez, Carri Pence, Roshoan Ross, Collin Joseph Spears, Deann Lynn Torres, Barbara Wilson, Cassandra Wilson, James Williams, and Ashlee Wright.

Ms. WILSON of New Mexico

Ms. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support S. 643, the Hibben Center Act. S. 643 is identical to H.R. 3258, a bill that I introduced on November 7, 2003 and that was favorable reported by the House Resources Committee on September 9, 2004. For six centuries, massive prehistoric structures lay untouched in a remote area of northwestern New Mexico. Chaco Canyon was the home of many indigenous southwestern peoples from between A.D. 850 and 1250. The Pueblo peoples of New Mexico, the Hopi of Arizona, and the Navajo consider Chaco Canyon to be part of their ancestral homelands. In recognition of its significance, President Theodore Roosevelt designated Chaco Canyon a national monument in 1907 and Congress changed the park's designation to a national historical park in 1980. The University of New Mexico (UNM) has participated in exploring, preserving, and documenting Chaco Canyon's extensive archaeological sites since Chaco Canyon National Monument was founded in 1907. In 1949, UNM deeded its lands in Chaco Canyon National Monument to the United States Government in exchange for continued rights to conduct scientific research in the area. Since then, UNM and the National Park Service (NPS) have been partners in researching and reserving the Chaco Canyon collection. S. 643 is an authorization bill, allowing the NPS to spend money away from Park Service lands for this collection. Specifically, this bill will allow the Park Service to design and construct a museum, storage facility, and workspace in the Hibben Archaeological Research Center on the University of New Mexico campus in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Funding for this project has already been appropriated in the National Park Service Line Item Construction Program 5-year budget, for funding in FY 2006. This project will require no additional or new money from Congress. Continuing the longstanding relationship with UNM, the shell of the Hibben Center and academic spaces have already been built by UNM with an area unfinished for the Park Service to build out for its Chaco Collection if Congress authorizes it. Additionally, there will be no ongoing operational costs for the Park Service because UNM has agreed to be responsible for 100 percent of the ongoing utilities, maintenance, and operation costs associated with the project. Over 5 million artifacts excavated from Chaco Canyon are stored at UNM. Unfortunately, they are currently housed in three substandard facilities that have water pipes that leak on the collection; inadequate or non-existent security and fire protection systems; and no environmental controls. In one instance, the tin roofing was blown off a storage facility exposing artifacts to leaking tar. A primary component of the project is to create a single storage facility for the artifacts that will provide enhanced security, environmental controls such as proper temperature and humidity levels, and a fire detection and suppression system. In addition to storing the Chaco Canyon collection, the Hibben Center will provide Chacoan descendents, researchers, and students a single location from which to access artifacts, archives, and data collections. In closing, I would like to thank Chairman Pombo and Subcommittee Chairman Radanovich for a their work on this bill and for moving this bill through the House Resources Committee. I urge swift passage of this legislation.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Cesar Hernandez. Cesar died on July 5th of this year at age 61. His contribution to New Mexico lives on. Cesar was publisher of the Spanish language newspaper, La Razon. With a circulation of 17,000 copies, Cesar's newspaper is a major source of news and information for the substantial Spanish-speaking population of New Mexico. This newspaper's importance to the population it serves is difficult to over-emphasize. We live in an era of news up-to-the minute and always available, but to a person who reads or understands primarily Spanish, the sources of information are often rare or incomplete. La Razon fills that gap and offers its readers valuable, practical information for their day-to-day lives. Cesar's family will never forget the day they became New Mexicans, because it was September 11, 2001. Cesar started his newspaper one week later. Cesar logged decades of experience in radio and newspaper, and got his start in Chicago, Illinois. Today, his work goes on in New Mexico under the direction of his wife, Antoinette, and his family. In three years, Cesar contributed much to his adopted state, New Mexico. As his daughter Leslie put it, ``My father loved the newspaper.'' We're proud to recognize Cesar Hernandez, and we honor his memory and contribution to New Mexico.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, when Joe Skeen was elected to the Congress, one of the first acts that he introduced in 1981 was legislation to name the Federal building in Las Cruces, New Mexico, after the man he replaced, the late-Congressman Harold Runnels, and I believe it is appropriate 23 years later to return the favor. Joe Skeen won his election with a successful write-in campaign. It was only the third such victory in the history of the United States Congress, and during his nearly 22 years in the House of Representatives, he was a defender, a staunch defender, of New Mexico's rural lifestyle and its farming and ranching interests. Even as Parkinson's began to claim his speech in his later years, Joe's sense of humor remained intact, and it is one of the things that all of us here treasure about him. Just about everybody in this body has a Joe Skeen story, something that makes us smile. One always knew if they had to go to talk to Joe about something, they might as well start smiling because before it was over he was going to make them laugh. After 11 terms in the United States Congress, Joe decided to return to his ranch, a place that he described as being ``at the center of my upbringing and which shaped my character and principles in life.'' Joe's ranch in Picacho is 17 miles from pavement, and Joe was never a gentleman farmer. He was a farmer, a rancher and a gentleman. He could be fixing fences and working with his one hired hand, and hop in the truck and drive to Roswell, fly out, take a shower at his apartment in Washington and come to the floor of the House. Throughout his service in the Congress, he kept a foot in both worlds, and the country and New Mexico benefited from it. He leaves behind a proud tradition of public service in which he has been a positive influence on many people's lives, including my own. Joe died peacefully in his sleep of Parkinson's disease and its complications in Roswell, New Mexico, on December 7, 2003. His wonderful wife Mary was with him. Joe was truly a great New Mexican. He will be deeply missed, and now, near his hometown in Roswell, New Mexico, there will be a building with his name on it. Every time people in Roswell walk by that building, they will look up and smile.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 455 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Amendment Offered by Mr. Moran of Virginia

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 442 I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding to me. I appreciate the gentleman's willingness to enter into a colloquy with me, and I wanted to commend him for all his work on funding for global efforts to fight tuberculosis. This bill will allocate $185 million for infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, from the United States Agency For International Development, $46 million more than the President requested. This is in addition to the roughly $68 million for TB in the Global Fund and $17.5 million from other accounts. In a bill where several other programs received cuts in funding, I appreciate the gentleman's efforts to continue our commitment to combat global TB at a level at least equal to last year. I am concerned about funding for the Global TB Drug Facility. The United States contributed $3 million to the Global TB Drug Facility last year and would do so again next year in this bill. The STOP TB partnership, which includes 50 world organizations, including the WHO, recommended a commitment by the U.S. of $50 million each year to reach the most people possible. The Global TB Drug Facility has successfully treated 3 million people in three years for tuberculosis. Funds from the facility can successfully treat tuberculosis for just $10 per person. I would ask that the gentleman from Arizona and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) who has worked with me so hard on tuberculosis issues work together as this bill goes to conference to try to increase the funding for the Global TB Drug Facility to try to help get vital medicines out to the people who need them most.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise to address serious problems with this bill and particularly with its Report, which cannot be fully remedied by the amendment I propose. The problem is not so much with the bill, which we have before us, but with the directive report language that goes along with it. As members, we rarely focus on report language and our vote in favor of the bill does not approve the report language. Usually, report language tracks the provisions of the bill. In the case of this appropriations measure, the report language goes far beyond the authority of the appropriations committee, directly contradicts recorded votes taken by this House, and is inconsistent with the FY05 Defense Authorization Act which the House has passed. I will vote for this Bill, which in itself generally provides funds necessary for Department of Energy to execute its important responsibilities in scientific research, energy, and national security. In fact, I applaud its increase in research funding for the Office of Science. But with my ``yes'' vote today, I also feel compelled to speak in favor of the majority in this House and put in the record our well documented objection to a number of directions to the Department of Energy in the accompanying Report. The Report language seeks to undermine initiatives supported by recorded votes in the Defense Authorization bill for the past two years, supported by votes on the House floor for two years, and sustained in the other body for two years. These initiatives have been advocated by the House majority in a policy statement; have been supported and requested by the Department of Defense and the Defense Science Board; and have been a sustained part of this Administration's development of a strategic forces policy for the 21st century consistent with reducing our nuclear forces to the lowest levels possible. Mr. Chairman, we all know that Committee Staff sometimes overreach in reports, and I would bet a dozen Krispy Kreme Donuts that fewer than half a dozen members of this House are even aware of what has been included in the report accompanying this bill in very prescriptive terms. But this report seeks to give legitimacy to policy positions directly contravened by recorded votes in this House and we cannot allow there to be any confusion about where we stand. The Bill appropriates $6,514,424,000 for Weapon Activities. The Report seeks to give the appearance that the House has limited funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator. But we have not. We will vote today to spend those funds and we voted in the FY05 Authorization bill on May 20th of this year to authorize $6,577,953,000, including $27.6M for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator study, approving that bill by a vote of 391-34. An amendment to explicitly remove authorization for this study failed on that same day by a vote of 214-204. The Report seeks to give the appearance that we would like to restrict Laboratory Directed Research and Development at Department of Energy Laboratories. But we have not. We will vote today to fund out laboratories. Only the House Armed Services Committee can pass legislation to limit the LDRD program. On May 20 we passed the FY05 Defense Authorization Act that continued the previously authorized LDRD program at our laboratories. After September 11, 2001, we were grateful that those Laboratories had been doing this kind of exploratory research under the LDRD program. The fact they have done so has helped secure our homeland and aid our troops in the field. To chill such research would be unwise. Further, the Report would have you believe that we are voting to restructure the future LDRD program. But we have not. This bill does not change the LDRD program in any way. Further, the Report language would have you believe that we are voting to have the NNSA focus solely on its missions of life extension of the existing stockpile and the current stockpile stewardship program. But we are not. The bill does nothing of the sort. In fact, if we were to pay any attention to the report language, we would be threatening those priorities. The Report suggests that we make major reductions in one Life Extension Program unsupported by an assessment of the impact and risks this would imply. It would also require a higher priority for dismantlement activities in a way that will likely come at the expense of meeting current Life Extension milestones for the Department of Defense. It would make significant reductions to numerous areas of the stockpile stewardship program that were designed by the NNSA to address technical needs to assess with adequately small uncertainty the safety, reliability, and performance of our weapons without nuclear tests. None of this makes any sense and the report language would not stand up to any serious review by elected Members of Congress. The Report suggests that by voting for this bill we are changing the way NNSA operates with other entities within the DOE. But it does not. The report suggests that we are adding a burdensome procedure for approval of NNSA activities at the request of, other elements of the DOE, and would hold hostage numerous unique activities of the NNSA labs within these energy and science programs. The Report would suggest that we are approving a review of future requirements for the weapons complex development plan, to be conducted only by people with no experience in doing that work. That would be silly and the bill includes no such thing. The reason we cannot vote to amend report language under the rules of the House is because report language is not law and does not have the authority of law. The law we are voting on is in the bill before us. In most cases, report language explains and supports the bill. In this case, those writing the report went far beyond any reasonable authority as staff members and I think we need to make it clear that the measures included in the Report are inconsistent with statute, inconsistent with the FY05 Defense Authorization Act, inconsistent with recorded votes taken by this House and have no force or authority whatsoever. An error of this magnitude must be jettisoned in the conference committee so that agencies affected are not confused by the mixed messages sent here. Mr. Chairman, the problems in this Report are many. I felt it important to clarify for the record that members of the House are approving the text of the Bill. We do not approve of the Report language, which is replete with practical problems and inconsistent with the law.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, section 311 of the bill violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives prohibiting legislation on appropriation bills. Section 311 restricts funding in the bill for certain Department of Energy laboratory functions in fiscal year 2005 and any previous fiscal year. Because the language restricts funding not just for 2005 but for all previous years, it constitutes legislation on an appropriation bill. For that reason, it violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, the chairman of the subcommittee is certainly within his rights to try to restrict language to one year, but I would point out that the intent of this section of legislation seriously undermines the ability of the laboratories to do their work. And while he may be able to do this in a narrow way, this is a very important piece of law, and from a policy point of view, very unwise. I look forward to working with him in conference on substantive matters related to this problem, but I will have to be voting against this amendment.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, this amendment transfers $5 million from administrative accounts in the Department of Energy to two different programs in the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account. Those two programs do two things: first, accelerate the return of highly enriched uranium from Russian-built reactors abroad and transition those reactors to low-enriched uranium; and, secondly, convert other reactors to low-enriched uranium. All of us here understand the difficulty and the importance of nonproliferation efforts. One of the most successful efforts has been working with the Russians and with others to consolidate highly enriched uranium, because the material is the most difficult thing to get in order to build a nuclear weapon. In the House Committee on Armed Services we had discussions about whether these programs could be accelerated and how fast they could be accelerated. Unfortunately, we did not get answers to those questions before the Defense authorization bill passed this House, and we will have to address it in conference. Since this time, the administration has come forward with numbers and with a global threat initiative focusing, in particular, on consolidation of nuclear material. And the answer is, to accelerate this program significantly, they can do so with a very small amount of money, and that is the $5 million we are proposing to move. It takes that money from the administrative line in the Department. I would note that the Department administration has been increased by $28 million over the previous year, and I think that a priority must be for this House to make very clear that we wish to accelerate the consolidation of highly enriched uranium around the world. I would also, Madam Chairman, like to express my concerns about other problems in the report language to this, that accompanies this bill. I intend to vote in favor of this bill. We cannot amend report language, because report language does not have the status of law. But when I vote ``yes,'' I am not voting ``yes'' on the report language. There are serious problems with the report language: inconsistencies in the report language with actually other elements of law. But the overall numbers in the bill will allow the Department of Energy to carry out its important work for the Nation, and the weapons program in particular is funded at $6.5 billion. I would particularly like to applaud the chairman on his increase in research in the Office of Science, and I would urge support of my amendment and the acceptance of the amendment so that we can accelerate the consolidation of this material elsewhere and accelerate the transitioning of reactors around the world from using highly enriched uranium which can be used in nuclear weapons to low-enriched uranium, which cannot. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It seems to me that this is a small price to pay to accelerate one of the most important programs for the country in order to fight the problem of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It is a very, very small amount of money. And if we weigh the importance of administration and the importance of rapidly accelerating one of the most important programs and consolidating weapons-grade uranium that was formerly in the former Soviet Union, I think there is no question about what our priorities as a Nation should be. It is a small amount of money; and, frankly, I am a little surprised that it was not just accepted by the committee. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico

Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Madam Chair, I make a point of order that the final proviso of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission funding, appearing on page 39, lines 23 through page 40 line 4, violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the rules of the House of Representatives prohibiting legislation on appropriations bills. The proviso restricts funding to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to issue any commercial nuclear power plant licenses using fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water appropriations funds and funds from ``any other appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005 or any previous year.'' Because the language restricts funding not just for 2005 but for all previous years, it constitutes legislation on an appropriations bill. For that reason, the language violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the rules of the House and is subject to a point of order.