H5674 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 White Wolf Young (FL) may have 5 legislative days within oversight hearings that we have been Whitfield Woolsey Zeliff Wicker Wynn Zimmer which to revise and extend their re- conducting. I just want to make cer- Wise Young (AK) marks on the material covered in the tain that any inaccuracies that were debate on H.R. 3322 yesterday. stated during that time are in fact cor- NAYS—43 The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there rected, but I hope that we did see that Barrett (WI) Lewis (GA) Ramstad Becerra Lofgren Rangel objection to the request of the gen- there is a contrast of views when the Beilenson Luther Roemer tleman from Pennsylvania? Democrats present their side and we Bryant (TX) Markey Royce There was no objection. present our side. Camp Martini Sensenbrenner f Now we will proceed ahead with the Campbell Matsui Stark bill and we will go through the amend- Conyers McDermott Stockman OMNIBUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE Cooley McKinney Upton ment process here, and I hope that that Frank (MA) Minge Vento AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996 amendment process will in fact Furse Nadler Watt (NC) The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu- produce the result of a bill that can be Hancock Neumann Weller Johnston Oberstar Williams ant to House Resolution 427 and rule supported on a bipartisan basis on both Kleczka Owens Yates XXIII, the Chair declares the House in sides of the aisle. Klug Petri the Committee of the Whole House on AMENDMENT NO. 24 OFFERED BY MR. WELDON OF LaHood Rahall the State of the Union for the further FLORIDA NOT VOTING—22 consideration of the bill, H.R. 3322. Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- man, I offer an amendment. Bachus Ford Molinari b 1325 Brown (OH) Gutknecht Mollohan The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- Chapman Hayes Paxon IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ignate the amendment. Clay Houghton Peterson (FL) The text of the amendment is as fol- de la Garza Jefferson Quinn Accordingly the House resolved itself Fattah Kennelly Wilson into the Committee of the Whole House lows: Fields (LA) Lincoln on the State of the Union for the fur- Amendment offered by Mr. WELDON of Foglietta McDade ther consideration of the bill (H.R. Florida: Page 26, line 12, strike b 1322 3322) to authorize appropriations for ‘‘$2,167,400,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$2,107,400,000’’. So the bill was passed. fiscal year 1997 for civilian science ac- Page 30, line 11, strike ‘‘$1,957,850,000’’ and The result of the vote was announced tivities of the Federal Government, insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$2,017,850,000, of which as above recorded. and for other purposes, with Mr. BUR- $1,594,550,000 shall be for personnel and relat- A motion to reconsider was laid on TON of Indiana in the chair. ed costs, $35,000,000 shall be for travel, and the table. The Clerk read the title of the bill. $388,300,000 shall be for research operations support’’. f The CHAIRMAN. When the Commit- tee of the Whole House rose on Wednes- MODIFICATION OF AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. ORDER OF CONSIDERATION OF day, May 29, 1996, title II was open for WELDON OF FLORIDA AMENDMENTS AND POSTPONING amendment at any point. Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- VOTES ON AMENDMENTS DUR- Are there any amendments to title man, I ask unanimous consent that my ING FURTHER CONSIDERATION II? amendment be replaced with a new OF H.R. 3322, OMNIBUS CIVILIAN Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I move amendment. SCIENCE AUTHORIZATION ACT to strike the last word. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- OF 1996 Mr. Chairman, before we started the port the modification. The Clerk read as follows: debate today, I thought it would be Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I ask Modification of amendment offered by Mr. useful maybe to explain the reason for unanimous consent that during further WELDON of Florida: Page 26, line 12, strike consideration of H.R. 3322, pursuant to the debate sequence and the way it ‘‘$2,167,400,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof House Resolution 427, it shall be in took place yesterday on the Democrat ‘‘$2,107,400,000’’. order to consider the following amend- substitute. Our side simply decided Page 28, line 2, strike ‘‘$410,600,000’’ and in- ments, or germane modifications that it was appropriate to allow the sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$405,600,000’’. Democrats to present, in any way they Page 28, line 3, strike ‘‘$95,500,000’’ and in- thereof, in sequence: The amendment sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$92,500,000’’. numbered 15 printed by Representative wished to do and as broad as they Page 28, line 11, strike ‘‘$281,250,000’’ and LOFGREN; the amendment numbered 6 wished to present it, their substitute to insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$276,250,000’’. printed by Representative KENNEDY of our bill. Page 30, line 11, strike ‘‘$1,957,850,000’’ and Massachusetts; and the amendment We think that our legislative product insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$2,030,800,000, of which numbered 5 printed by Representative stands on its own, that it is a good $1,611,000,000 shall be for personnel and relat- ed costs, $31,500,000 shall be for travel, and JACKSON-LEE; the Chairman of the science bill, it is good for the environ- ment, it is a good long-term bill. The $388,300,000 shall be for research operations Committee of the Whole may postpone support’’. until a time during further consider- Democrats were obviously proud of their work. We have them the oppor- The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection ation in the Committee of the Whole a to the modification offered by the gen- request for a recorded vote on any of tunity to fully describe that work be- fore going to a vote, and we thought tleman from Florida [Mr. WELDON]? those amendments or any amendments Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. that was the right way to accommo- thereto; and the Chairman of the Com- Chairman, reserving the right to ob- date the debate in the House. mittee of the Whole may reduce to not ject, we have not had an opportunity to I do regret that in the course of that less than 5 minutes the time for voting review this amendment, and we are debate there were a couple of inaccura- by electronic device on any postponed looking to determine the offset that cies particularly represented by the question that immediately follows an- has been represented by the gentleman gentleman from Texas when he referred other vote by electronic device without from Florida [Mr. WELDON] at this to the work of the committee. At one intervening business, provided that the time. point he referred to the work of the time for voting by electronic device on Further reserving the right to object, committee as only producing one re- the first in any series of questions shall I yield to the gentleman from Florida port last year. I do wish to get that be not less than 15 minutes. [Mr. WELDON] to explain his particular corrected be in the RECORD, and I will The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. amendment. LAHOOD). Is there objection to the re- submit for be the RECORD a list of 16 re- b quest of the gentleman from Penn- ports filed by this committee over the 1330 sylvania? year last year that indicates that this Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- There was no objection. committee was working. man, if I may proceed, I believe the f I do think that there is a need to gentlewoman will agree my amend- produce quality rather than quantity ment is a good amendment. GENERAL LEAVE as the mark of a legislative committee, The bill on the floor of the House has Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I ask and that is what we have been doing a shortfall for NASA personnel fund- unanimous consent that all Members both legislatively and in terms of the ing. The gentleman from Pennsylvania, May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5675

Chairman WALKER, and I, as well as the sides of the aisle, particularly if both and she has objected to an amendment gentleman from Texas, Mr. STOCKMAN, Members rose at the same time, both to do just that. have worked hard to find a way to members of the committee? Given that situation, the fact is what overcome the shortfall. My amendment The CHAIRMAN. In this case the the gentleman from Florida, if I under- would avoid possible furloughs of Chair is exercising discretion properly. stand it correctly, is attempting to do NASA employees, which would ad- Mr. BROWN of California. In other is to find offsets for this money in versely affect every NASA center and words, the Chair is utilizing his unfet- other places. every NASA program by restoring all tered power to recognize whomever he One of the things that we had in- of the funding shortfall. It provides for wishes, and does he intend to continue creased substantially in our budget, full offsets so there is no impact to the in that practice? which means that we really are keep- budget. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will state ing our commitment to good environ- Specifically, my amendment in- that in this case he is exercising proper ment, good science, all of the things creases funding for NASA program discretion. that we have said, is to plus up the management by $81.5 million. It fully Mr. BROWN of California. Then we space science accounts. The No. 1 prior- offsets the increase by decreasing fund- may expect that we will have dis- ity of the program as defined some ing in space science by $60 million, cut- regarded the precedent of alternating years ago by the Augustine report, we ting $8.5 million from NASA’s travel between the two sides, Mr. Chairman. have put $250 million more, even after account, and cutting $13 million from The CHAIRMAN. The Chair always the gentleman’s amendment, into that various other accounts. tries to be fair. account. Even with my amendment, the space Mr. BROWN of California. We appre- It is one of the real commitments we science account, which I know is an ciate that very much and hope the have made to the future of the NASA important account for the ranking mi- Chair is correct. science programs. The gentleman pro- nority member, still receive a net in- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman tects that space science account. It crease of $250 million above NASA’s fis- from Florida [Mr. WELDON] is recog- takes some money out of it, but pro- cal year 1997 request. nized for 5 minutes. tects it in many ways. The gentle- Many of my colleagues on the other Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- woman comes here and she wants to side of the aisle have referred to the man, I want to do a little bit of expla- strip all of the money out of the space need to fix the shortfall, and my nation as to what has been going on accounts and put it all back into per- amendment would do just that. I urge here. sonnel. We simply think this is a better ap- all of my colleagues on both sides of I think we all, on both sides of the proach. I am disappointed she objected. the aisle to support my amendment. aisle, share a desire to see this account It makes the job more difficult if we The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection restored to avoid any possibility of any cannot get cooperation on this, but I to the modification of the amendment furloughs and any significant financial think what the gentleman is doing is offered by the gentleman from Florida? shortfall on the part of NASA in terms Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. of paying their employees. an excellent amendment. It is my understanding that the gen- Chairman, I do object. The issue and the debate that has tleman from Wisconsin will offer an The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. been going on is how do we do this in The gentleman from Florida [Mr. a fashion that is consistent with our amendment to the amendment here that will get us back to the right place, WELDON] is recognized for 5 minutes on responsibility to stay within the budg- his original amendment. et to fulfill our obligation to get the and I personally want to thank the Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. budget balanced, the commitment that gentleman for all the hard work he has Chairman, I object. Mr. Chairman, I ob- we have made to the American people, put in that is moving us in the right di- ject and I have an amendment that has and in that sense come up with appro- rection. Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- been prefiled at the desk as No. 13. priate offsets that do not adversely af- man, reclaiming my time, I thank the The CHAIRMAN. This is the original fect any other accounts in excess, and gentleman, and let me just reiterate amendment of the gentleman from something that is consistent with the that I think we all share a desire to Florida. He is entitled to 5 minutes to overall philosophy of the committee in have the proper level of funding in this speak on his amendment. terms of what our investment in future important account which pays the staff Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Are we science and technology is. for NASA. They are a very, very hard- back to the original amendment, Mr. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will working work force, very, very dedi- Chairman? the gentleman yield? cated to the future of our space pro- The CHAIRMAN. Yes; it was Mr. WELDON of Florida. I yield to gram. preprinted in the RECORD. the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I know in my particular district, I PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY Mr. WALKER. First of all, Mr. Chair- have Kennedy Space Center, the launch man, I want to thank the gentleman Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- center for NASA, and we have the shut- for his amendment and his good work man, I have a parliamentary inquiry. tle program there, we have a very, very out on the floor to attempt to correct The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will dedicated work force. By restoring the situation that rose largely because state his inquiry. these funds, I think we are sending a Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- the administration was unable to pro- message that we support the staff, we man, for purposes of ascertaining on vide us with good figures from the very support the personnel and we recognize what basis the Chair is making rec- outset. them for the outstanding job that they ognition, I would like to inquire as to We had an $81.5 million reduction in have been doing. who was recognized for the last amend- program management largely because AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SENSENBRENNER ment to this bill? NASA told us those were the projected TO THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. WELDON The CHAIRMAN. Yesterday, the gen- levels for employment back in March. OF FLORIDA tleman from Michigan [Mr. EHLERS] They have since come back and said Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- was, but it is at the discretion of the that this is an unacceptable cut and man, I offer an amendment to the Chair to determine which Member that we were, in fact, cutting the num- amendment. gains recognition, and both Members bers below what they thought were The Clerk read as follows: who sought recognition at the begin- prudent. Amendment offered by Mr. SENSENBRENNER ning of the bill today are members of We are attempting to, in good faith, to the amendment offered by Mr. WELDON of the committee. The Chair has that dis- change that situation on the floor, and Florida: After the item relating to page 26, cretion and the Chair chose to recog- the gentleman from Florida has agreed line 12, insert the following: nize the gentleman from Florida. to try and help in this regard. I am as Page 28, line 2, strike ‘‘$410,600,000’’ and in- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- disappointed as I can be that the gen- sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$405,600,000’’. Page 28, line 3, strike ‘‘$95,500,000’’ and in- man, may I further continue my in- tlewoman from Texas has been stop- sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$92,500,000’’. quiry? Has it not been the practice to ping us. We are trying to add back the Page 28, line 11, strike ‘‘$281,250,000’’ and alternate recognition between the two 81.5 million she was in favor of doing insert in lieu there ‘‘$276,250,000’’. H5676 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 Strike ‘‘$2,017,850,000, of which $1,594,550,000 The amendment that I offer will re- say that we expect that NASA will RIF shall be for personnel and related costs, store $81.5 million to ensure to the per- a total of 1,400 employees by October 1, $35,000,000 shall be for travel,’’ and insert in sonnel account that we have the most 1996. Why are we forcing them to do lieu thereof ‘‘$2,030,800,000, of which responsible and safe staff to do the mis- $1,611,000,000 shall be for personnel and relat- even more and then furloughing for ed costs, $31,500,000 shall be for travel,’’. sion of NASA. It is not an increase, it now from 12 to 14 days? is in recognition of the administra- This is an outrageous cut. I ask my Mr. SENSENBRENNER (during the tion’s budget, and is, as well, in rec- colleagues to join me in providing for reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unani- ognition of the work that has been an $81.5 million restoration to allow mous consent that the amendment to done by NASA already. the amendment be considered as read NASA to do the job that it has to do. I think it is important to note that Mr. Chairman, I offer my amendment to cor- ECORD. and printed in the R we have had a NASA restructuring The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection rect a problem within this legislation which, if process going on since fiscal year 1993. to the request of the gentleman from it goes uncorrected, will fall upon the backs of We started with civilian service em- Wisconsin? the thousands of loyal, hardworking NASA There was no objection. ployees of 24,900, at a 5-to-4 ratio in su- employees across this country. Mr. Chairman, Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- pervisors. We are now at a civilian I am referring to language in H.R. 3322 which man, this is the amendment that service of 21,000, going to a 7-to-8 ratio. will result in an $81.5 million reduction in the makes the personnel account whole. It We now will move forward in the future NASA personnel account, from what the Presi- adds a total of $81.5 million to the per- to 17,000 civil service with a ratio of 11 dent has requested. sonnel account, $73 million comes as a to 1. NASA is already a lean, mean op- I do not understand why an agency which result of reductions in other accounts, erating machine. has been at the forefront of streamlining itself and there is a transfer of $8.5 million With the amendment presently on and lowering its cost to the American taxpayer from travel into personnel. the floor, it does not in any way con- should be punished for its accomplishments. The biggest reduction in the other sider what NASA has already done. Under Mr. Goldin, the NASA Administrator, the accounts is space science, which is re- When Mr. Goldin set forth to restruc- agency has taken extraordinary steps, without duced by $60 million, mission commu- ture NASA, he began a trip down a congressional prodding, to reinvent itself into nications by $5 million, academic by $3 path of personnel reduction which had an organization which is more focused on its million, and space communications by at its center a logical and employee- mission and the people it serves. $5 million. This, I think, is the proper caring philosophy. That is why we will When Mr. Goldin set forth to restructure way to go about making sure that the result in the number of only 17,000 em- NASA, he began a trip down a path of person- personnel account is enough to avoid ployees with a supervisory ratio of 11 nel reduction which had at its center logical furloughs. It is done in a fiscally re- to 1. and employee-caring philosophy. When this sponsible manner in providing offsets Mr. Chairman, that is real progress. restructuring began, NASA had 24,900 civil to other accounts. NASA has demonstrated its commit- servants with a supervisor ratio of 5.4 to 1. I would urge the adoption of the ment to this process in achieving these Now, the agency has 21,325 civil servants and amendment to the amendment, which personnel levels. But let me say to my when it is all said and done, the agency will would bring the amendment of the gen- colleagues what will happen if we fol- have a mere 17,488 employees with a super- low the present amendment on the tleman from Florida [Mr. WELDON] visor ratio of 11 to 1. Mr. Chairman, that is back in the shape that he wanted it in floor, that of the gentleman from Flor- real progress. NASA has demonstrated its prior to the objection to his request to ida [Mr. WELDON]. To put it bluntly, commitment to this process and achieving the salaries and expenses reduction is modify it. these personnel levels, but we must allow it to impossible to achieve, according to AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON-LEE OF do so in an orderly and caring fashion for its NASA, without drastic action. Unless a TEXAS AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE AMEND- employees. Many in this Chamber have as- miracle occurs, and we have both MENT OFFERED BY MR. WELDON OF FLORIDA sailed the way many corporations are throwing buyout legislation and a lot of takers, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. aside their loyal and valuable employees for there is simply no feasible way to im- Chairman, I offer an amendment as a the sake of Wall Street and quarterly returns. plement this reduction without resort- substitute for the amendment. I call upon these same Members to practice ing to furloughs, and that furlough The Clerk read as follows: what they preach and help NASA treat its em- would be an estimated time of 10 to 12 Amendment offered by Ms. JACKSON-LEE of ployees fairly. Texas as a substitute for the amendment of- days. I ask my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, NASA has accomplished all of this through fered by Mr. WELDON of Florida: For the the use of buyouts, hiring freezes, redeploy- amendment No. 24 offered by Mr. WELDON of what does that do to both the loyal em- Florida. In lieu of the matter proposed in ployees at NASA and, more impor- ment, privatization, and outplacement, to amendment No. 24 insert: tantly, what about the many calls I get name a few. It has a plan and a schedule. I Page 30, line 11, strike ‘‘$1,957,850,000’’ and into my office about the questions of encourage my colleagues to allow it to con- insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$2,039,350,000’’. safety. We have already begun the tinue. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I re- process of downsizing. Why would this If this egregious cut should become law, serve a point of order on the sub- legislation pointedly go at the person- there will be serious repercussions for the stitute. nel and not respond to what has al- men, women, and families of NASA. The Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. ready been occurring by Dan Goldin? agency will be forced to furlough, for up to Chairman, it is interesting to hear my Mr. Chairman, I encourage my Re- possibly 3 weeks, most of its employees. colleagues debate about now their re- publican colleagues to join me on this When was the last time anyone in Congress cently obtained concern about the per- amendment. I appreciate the sincerity went without pay for such an extended time? sonnel at NASA and the various cen- with which they have attempted to This $81.5 million cut in salaries and ex- ters around the Nation. I appreciate modify what I have already done. We penses is ill-conceived, cannot be achieved my colleague from Florida and his sin- need to go forward with restoring the without drastic action affecting all NASA cen- cerity. We have had discussions, but I $81.5 million that says to NASA we ap- ters, and it jeopardizes NASA's ability to safely might note that my amendment was plaud what you are doing, we recognize deliver its programs. The impacts envisioned prefiled much earlier than those who the sacrifice that has already been by the agency are a reduction in force [RIF] have now offered both amendments and taken by your employees, and, yes, we total 1,400 employees by October 1, 1996, a perfecting amendments. are concerned about the safety and the physical and legal impossibility or an agency- Let me first say to the chairman that lives of both our employees but as well wide furlough of approximately 21,000 employ- the head of NASA does not want the those astronauts that take their lives ees for 12 to 14 days. $300 million in space science, would in their hands on behalf of the Amer- In addition a $34 million cut, as some have prefer to continue the progress that he ican people and on behalf of American proposed will still put an unacceptable strain has made in downsizing, but, most im- science. on implementation of the zero-based review portantly, is concerned about the un- recommendations, including major changes in timely abuse that will come through b 1345 center roles and missions and consolidation of this legislation of NASA personnel that It is my intent, Mr. Chairman, to center capabilities; NASA needs the full have been downsized and outsized. offer this amendment and to be able to amount of requested funding to accomplish May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5677 the complex agency restructuring currently un- terrible cut, which will have the effect Mr. Chairman, I, of course, represent derway. of causing a layoff or furlough of a sub- the Marshall Space Flight Center, and The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman stantial number of employees. And, as those Marshall employees there are from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER] insist I say, in their wisdom they have finally certainly concerned about where they on his point of order? recognized that this is not the right fit into NASA’s budget picture. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I with- way to go. I want to say in behalf of the gentle- draw my point of order. But since I offered the amendment to woman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON-LEE], Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- correct this in the full committee and I know that she represents the Houston man, I move to strike the last word. I offered it in my substitute yesterday, Johnson Space Flight Center, or at Mr. Chairman, it is unfortunate that I take considerable umbrage at the least parts of that area down there. I this little tiff should develop. There is aura of sanctimoniousness that is now want my Marshall NASA employees to a mistake in the bill, and an effort is enshrouding the majority which they know that we respect them, that we being made to correct it. That mistake seek to correct a mistake of their own are working for them. was pointed out by the ranking mem- making, and I ask that the amendment Mr. Chairman, I am concerned that ber of the Subcommittee on Space and of the gentleman from Florida [Mr. with the offsets that will be occurring Aeronautics, the gentleman from Texas WELDON] be rejected and the substitute under the Sensenbrenner-Weldon ap- [Mr. HALL], when the bill was in the of the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. proach to this same issue, that we are subcommittee. It was pointed out when JACKSON-LEE] be adopted. having to raid other parts of NASA’s the bill was in markup in the full com- Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- budget. I wish, in fact, we could have a mittee, and an amendment was offered man, I rise in opposition to the sub- more complete NASA budget so that to correct it in the full committee. stitute amendment. we did not have the raid those things. Mr. Chairman, that amendment to Mr. Chairman, I think the difference But I do want to say that I support the correct the problem in the full commit- between the substitute amendment of- Jackson-Lee amendment and would en- tee was resisted by both the chairman fered by the gentlewoman from Texas courage the Members to support it as of the full committee and the gen- [Ms. JACKSON-LEE] and the Sensen- well. tleman from Florida [Mr. WELDON] and brenner-Weldon amendment shows the Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Chairman, all of the Republicans together, who at difference between the two parties in will the gentleman yield? that point did not feel that they had the House of Representatives. Mr. CRAMER. I yield to the gentle- made a mistake. Mr. Chairman, the Jackson-Lee sub- woman from Texas. Now they have come to realize that a stitute is an add-on. There are no off- Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. mistake was made, I think, when they sets. It adds on $81.5 million to make Chairman, I thank the gentleman from saw that the gentlewoman from Texas the personnel account whole. They do Alabama for his comments. I think [Ms. JACKSON-LEE] had filed an amend- not look at reordering priorities. They both of us have had the opportunity, ment which would have corrected the do not look at keeping the total appro- along with our Republican colleagues, error and might be recognized to priation or total authorization for to talk about the effectiveness of what present that amendment and the case NASA the same. They just want to has already occurred with NASA in for adopting her amendment would spend some more money and not offset terms of the downsizing and the impact have been overwhelming. any of the accounts, even those that that has occurred on our respective But, Mr. Chairman, that led then to they think have been set at too high a centers, Marshall, Kennedy, Johnson, undoubtedly some strategic discussions level by the majority on the commit- and many others. on the other side. Should those on our tee. Mr. Chairman, I would like to cer- The Weldon amendment, as amended side who had pointed out the problem tainly emphasize that the key point by my amendment, provides the same at the subcommittee level, the full and distinction between the Weldon- amount of money for the NASA person- committee level, and by filing an Sensenbrenner amendment proudly nel account as the Jackson-Lee amend- amendment to correct it on the floor, shows that we are restoring moneys ment, $81.5 million to stop all of those be allowed to correct it, or should the that do not impact negatively on other terrible things that the gentlewoman majority now in their new-found wis- programs. Their amendment includes from Texas and the gentleman from dom be allowed to correct the mistake? California say will happen. some deletions from the ROS accounts, Apparently, they decided that in But what the Weldon and Sensen- which provides for safety measures and their new-found wisdom they would be brenner amendments do is to offset other operational needs in our various allowed to correct the mistake, and other parts of NASA, so that our centers. they are riding roughshod over the nor- amendment is budget neutral. It does This amendment emphasizes the mal processes of the House and over not increase the total amount of NASA staff, the work they have done, the position of the minority that this money that will be spent on NASA. It the safety necessities that we need to is something which ought to be cor- is budget neutral. have in terms of keeping the appro- rected in the simplest possible way. So, Mr. Chairman, if Members are for priate amount of staff. It also reaf- So, Mr. Chairman, they have pre- just plussing up the NASA account firms, if you will, already the RIF pro- sented an amendment which, though without making offsets, vote for the gram that is in place where we will be slightly flawed in its original aspect, Jackson-Lee amendment. If Members seeing some 1,400 employees go by Oc- will be attempted to be corrected by are not for that, vote to reject it and tober 1996. the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. vote for the Sensenbrenner amendment This causes NASA to be able to con- SENSENBRENNER]. The flaws in the and then the Weldon amendment, as tinue its mission without the tragedy original amendment, including finding amended by the Sensenbrenner amend- of a furlough of some 2 weeks. How dis- a whole series of offsetting cuts which ment. ruptive that will be for that to occur in would do, if not equal, at least consid- Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I move the business of what NASA has to do. erable damage to the program at to strike the last word. It will allow for the opportunity for NASA, and I think they hope to avoid Mr. Chairman, I want to enter this travel for monitoring the cooperation this possibility. But the whole point of debate or this conversation here and between Russia and our space station this is really a game-playing operation. say first, as I enter it, I respect the partners. The NASA budget has been cut by opinions of both sides and I know that So, Mr. Chairman, I think that with several hundred million dollars. It has we have all worked together very hard respect to what has been offered by the been plussed up in order to substan- to make sure that we find a way to Republicans, after my amendment was tiate the chairman’s frequently reiter- make NASA the kind of organization offered on May 8, I believe the restora- ated position that he is a strong pro- that NASA needs to be. Most of us here tion of $81.5 million, which is not an in- ponent of science. It has been plussed today have given long years doing that; crease but a restoration of funds that up to add money that the agency did many people much longer than I have. would meet the needs of these NASA not ask for and will find difficulty However, I am concerned about the di- employees with the downsizing occur- spending, and then they have made this rection that we are talking. ring, is a more appropriate direction to H5678 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 take, and I would ask my colleagues to hard-working people that have a vi- from Texas that he might want to re- support wholeheartedly this amend- sion, and that vision of America is a consider his facts. Here we are, on the ment. first-class space program. We look House floor, complaining about $81.5 Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- around the world, and, Mr. Chairman, million straight up for the NASA per- man, will the gentleman yield? as we are looking around the world, we sonnel. The Committee on Appropria- Mr. CRAMER. I yield to the gen- see Japan and we see Russia. Every- tions has already authorized some $600 tleman from California. body is going into space. But, Mr. million more than what the authoriz- Mr. BROWN of California. This con- Chairman, without this amendment, ing committee has done, which has Re- versation from the other side dealing we are not going to have a space pro- publican leadership. wih the budget and no offsets is really gram, because we need to make sure we Mr. Chairman, let me say to my col- sort of a shell game, which we all are responsible to our grandchildren leagues that the question your wife know. The majority has cut the Presi- and our children that the budget is bal- will ask you, have they cut the ROS? dent’s budget by several hundred mil- anced so that we can pay for the space And you have cut the ROS by $34 mil- lion dollars. This would partially re- program. lion. That does not go to the safety store that, this amendment of the gen- Mr. Chairman, I come home at night issue. It takes away from safety. The tlewoman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON- and on weekends, and I meet my wife right way to go is to support the Jack- LEE]. and she tells me of the passion and love son-Lee amendment. The fact is, Mr. Chairman, the Sub- with which people work at NASA. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I know my friend from committee on Appropriations has al- Chairman, you may not know this, but Texas would want to be on the right ready marked this bill up and has a the engineers that work at NASA could mark by supporting the right amend- larger figure in it than the majority go out in other sectors of this country ment. has in their authorization bill. and get more money, but they are Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I So, whatever discussion of budget im- doing it because they love NASA and move to strike the requisite number of pact that is being made here, and I they love this Nation. They are taking words. hear it all too frequently, is in the pay cuts. And they took RIF’s. That is Mr. Chairman, I yield to my col- mind of the chairman of the commit- true. And we want to make sure that it league, the gentlewoman from Texas tee, nothing more, because the Com- is a sound financial planning. [Ms. JACKSON-LEE]. mittee on Appropriations has already Let me say something to you, Mr. Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. moved to correct the problem that is Chairman, when we sit around the Chairman, I thank my colleague from represented here, and we are not add- table and we discuss our budget, we Texas for yielding. More importantly, I ing to or subtracting from the budget have to make decisions. We have a thank him because he has been cer- in the slightest. fixed income in what we get every tainly a hard worker on the issues in- Mr. STOCKMAN. Mr. Chairman, I time. And this amendment which the volving Texas and Texas economic op- move to strike the last word. gentleman from Florida has offered is portunities and the needs of working Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak the same thing as American families Texans. on behalf of the Weldon amendment. do. They sit around the table and make This bill is for working Americans. My dear friend and colleague who is in those hard decisions. We are incor- Particularly as it relates to NASA, I the district right next to mine, the porating the money that was inadvert- cannot seem to get my Republican col- gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. JACK- ently taken out and put it back there leagues to understand that this is a SON-LEE], and I are very good friends to ensure the viability of the space pro- restoration, some $81.5 million, so and we try to work together and en- gram. much less than the authorization al- sure, Mr. Chairman, that we have a And I know one day when I grow old ready appropriated by the Committee safe and sound NASA. and look back and look at my tenure on Appropriations. When we begin to My dear friend and colleague from here, Mr. Chairman, serving in this fine look at the Weldon-Sensenbrenner, we Texas made a statement that we are institution, I will know we did the begin to see the chipping away to what cutting funds from the safety program. right thing by supporting this amend- NASA has already accomplished. It has I want to reiterate and clarify that we ment because what we are doing is we accomplished a sufficient and efficient are not doing that. are looking out for the budget and we downsizing. By October, we will find In fact, Mr. Chairman, I am a little are looking out for the space program. some 1,400 who will be RIF’d. bit concerned about the fact that when And we are going to see a great and If we do not pass the Jackson-Lee we offered this amendment to restore glorious space program. amendment, we will begin to see under- the money, the gentlewoman objected. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the cutting of safety issues by the under- I think what we are trying to do here chairman of the committee and also cutting of ROS. We also are going to is to make sure we have a balanced my chairman of the subcommittee, Mr. see cutting of academic programs, budget and we have a space station. SENSENBRENNER, for coming down to space communications, the inability to Frankly, my belief is if we do not the district and telling the folks first- work with our foreign space station balance the budget and have a space hand just what it means to us in Con- partners, like Japan and Russia, be- station, then we will not have a space gress that we are dedicated to restor- cause we will have no travel budget program. This is a reasonable accom- ing those funds. and, of course, science. modation on both viewpoints. What we On behalf of the people in my dis- I think we really have to maintain a have done is restructured it so that we trict, Mr. Chairman, I would like to truth in speaking here, and that is that can fully employ the people of NASA. thank the gentleman for the consider- we are simply trying to restore the Mr. Chairman, I have to speak from ation of this amendment and also like $81.5 million, one for safety and one for my heart because my wife currently to say that I give my full support for the responsible carrying out of NASA’s works there, and I saw the pain and the it, and I am also going to tell my wife mission with the right kind of person- suffering when our President of the that we fought for the people of Texas nel. United States cut Space Station Free- and also for the people of NASA. Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, I dom. I went to a party in which they Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. yield to my colleague, the gentleman were saying good-bye to Space Station Chairman, will the gentleman yield? from California [Mr. BROWN], the rank- Freedom. And I more than anyone else Mr. STOCKMAN. I yield to the gen- ing member of the full committee. want to see space station be completed. tlewoman from Texas. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- I want to see NASA whole again. And I man, this entire bill that is before us, b have to tell you, Mr. Chairman, this 1400 including the NASA part, is built on amendment makes NASA whole again, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. this gigantic fiction that we have to do and it protects the people. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from this in order to influence the Commit- Mr. Chairman, we have a great con- Texas. Feeling his passion, I would tee on Appropriations and in order to cern for the integrity and the people want him to do the right thing. But I keep the budget, to balance the budget, down in our district. They are very do have to emphasize to the gentleman neither of which are true. We do not May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5679 have to cut the President’s budget by crease spending, increase spending, in- to spend the money. Just plus up the several hundred million dollars in crease spending, and balance the budg- accounts, and live with the fiction that order to balance the budget because his et. Now, if anybody has ever figured by spending more and more and more budget is balanced. out a way to do that in their own and more and more and more you can We are not influencing the appropri- household, I congratulate them. I truly balance budgets and stop us from ators. They have already acted to ap- would love to think that we can con- having deficits. I just do not believe propriate, to recommend the House ap- tinue to increase spending, increase that that works anymore. I just think propriate an amount roughly what was spending, increase spending, increase that is the old way of doing things. in my substitute, may be a little bit spending and end up balancing our That is the old status quo argument. more. Now the gentleman from Penn- budget at the end of the day. But that We have had that for 40 years in the sylvania [Mr. WALKER] and the gen- is exactly what we are being told, that House of Representatives of spending tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSEN- somehow money just drifts out of no- more and more and more on every bill BRENNER] and others can keep harping where, that the American people will and somehow not ending up with bal- on this fact that this bill, their bill is just continue to ante up, empty their anced budgets, ending up with huge absolutely essential to balancing the pocketbooks to give to Government so deficits. budget and to influence the appropri- that people in Washington can increase Mr. Chairman, now we have started a ators. The facts belie their statement. spending. That is what the gentle- new day. We have decided that we are Mr. Chairman, I urge the Members on woman does with her amendment. going to set priorities for real. I know the other side to try looking at the Now, the gentleman from Florida has the gentleman from Texas resents that facts for a change instead of the fig- offered another amendment, combined idea. He thinks it is a terrible thing ments of the imagination of the gen- with the gentleman from Wisconsin. our committee has had to live with, tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALK- What they say is, yes, let us make setting priorities. But it is a good ER]. NASA whole, where a mistake was thing for us as a country to set real Mr. COLEMAN. If I might, reclaim- made by the administration in what priorities to make real decisions and ing my time, Mr. Chairman, only add they submitted to the Congress. But fundamentally making the direction of that I think it is time for all of us to let us do it by taking out of some other this country back toward balanced wake up and recognize that a good deal accounts. budgets and toward giving the Amer- of the downsizing that went down at Now, we have heard from the other ican people back more of what they NASA went on long before the new ma- side that, well, that is an irresponsible earn for themselves. jority became the new majority in the approach; you cannot take it out of That is what we should be about Congress. Indeed, this President and other accounts. Well, why not? Let us here, not adding spending but doing the right thing and doing it within the con- Vice President, AL GORE, had done a think of the other accounts we are tak- great deal in attempting to make Gov- ing it out of. First of all, we are taking text of what we can afford. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- ernment work for the United States it out of an account that he other side man, I move to strike the requisite and for its citizens. said in their debate is an account that number of words. I think that what we have done at the administration does not even want. Mr. Chairman, I am always deeply Now, I happen to disagree with the NASA is a shining example of what can challenged when the chairman of the be done when we all agree to put our administration on that. I think committee ups and makes one of his shoulder to the wheel. I would hope plussing up space science is in fact a great orations. I will be very brief, ac- that my colleagues in the majority good thing for the country. In fact, I tually. would not walk about and continue to have a letter from Carl Sagan and some The gentleman is talking to the talk like they are the ones who in- other members of the Planetary Soci- wrong audience. He should be address- vented economy in government. After ety that endorse the numbers in our ing his remarks with regard to bal- all, a lot of us know that much of this bill because they feel very strongly ancing the budget and keeping spend- began in 1993. Many of us, when this ad- that plussing up those numbers is the ing down to his Republican colleagues ministration came into office, said it is right way to go. But we have lowered on the Committee on Appropriations, about time. them a little bit in order to accommo- who have already marked up a bill that We want very much, Mr. Chairman, date this mistake that was made. spends at least $600 million more than to not harm the employees at NASA. The other side does not want to do his bill authorizers. Now, maybe he We want very much, Mr. Chairman, to that. The other side does not want to wants it that way. I do not know. But not harm the issue of science for the plus up that account for space science. I suggest he may need to make that United States. We think that, without Stick with the President’s budget. The speech to some of those on the Com- the amendment offered by my col- President’s budget, which over the pe- mittee on Appropriations and get them league from Houston, that could occur. riod of 7 years drops over a cliff and to go back and bring their bill down to Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I rise drops into a valley. That is what they what he has in this bill. in opposition to the substitute and support. That is what they are out here Now, is this a good bill? He cited the move to strike the requisite number of defending. But there is one other place commendations he received from Carl words. where we take a good deal of money. Sagan. Here is a letter which each Mr. Chairman, this has been a fas- We take a good deal of money out of Member got from the National Space cinating discussion. First of all, again I the travel accounts. Now, what they Society, which is the recognized pre- am disappointed that the gentleman are claiming is that NASA needs $45 mier civilian organization in this area. from California, a ranking member of million for travel. It says as follows: the committee, feels it necessary as We say that perhaps that NASA The administration is seeking to fund part of these debates to personalize could get along with $31 million for NASA in 1997 at $13.8 billion, a $400 million them and attack me as though this is travel. I guess that is one of those reduction from the current year’s budget. all being done personally. The fact is things where we can have a debate. Is The House science authorization bill would that what we are attempting to do is it 31 or is it 45? We think that, in order cut that down to only $13.5 billion, a $300 make some changes in the direction of to preserve the integrity of the person- million cut. Members of the National Space Society strongly object to the proposed re- government. nel process at NASA, maybe they can duction in NASA’s budget and believe the Now, listen carefully to what the get by with $31 million for travel. That cuts in funding undermine America’s leader- other side is telling us. The amend- is the main difference here, whether or ship in advanced technology and lessen our ment that I am opposing here, and it not you want to cut the space science Nation’s ability to create economic opportu- has been presented by the gentlewoman account some to accommodate this and nities. from Texas, increases spending by $81.5 whether or not you want to cut the Obviously their point came across million in this bill. Now, what we keep travel accounts. The rest of them are very well to the appropriators, because hearing from the majority is we can in- minor matters. the appropriators proceeded to appro- crease spending, increase spending, in- The gentlewoman from Texas does priate even more than is in the author- crease spending, increase spending, in- not want to cut at all. She just wants ization bill and even more than was in H5680 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 my substitute. I am establishing my So far as I know, that is correct with We have both agreed to try to reach record as a conservative Member of respect to the administration’s NASA a balanced budget, and it is not accu- Congress by the fact that I went below proposals for spending in subsequent rate to refer to 1 year of any budget the appropriators in my substitute. fiscal years as rated by the Congres- and not show what the other effects Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, I move sional Budget Office, that both sides would be. to strike the requisite number of have agreed to use to monitor spending Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of words. and evaluate spending, would have Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike Mr. Chairman, I think there are two deeper cuts in future years than is pro- the requisite number of words. important aspects of this debate. The posed in the House-passed budget reso- Mr. Chairman, my concern is not first is how much money can we add to lution. If I am wrong on that, I would whether or not we bust the budget. My various spending proposals and at what appreciate the figures being submitted concern is not that we are cutting the point. I would like to point out that during this debate. But so far as I budget; it is how we are cutting the this is still the beginning of the proc- know, this is a proposal for higher budget. It does not add up when we say ess, not the end of the process. In fact, spending at one point to be followed by we are protecting the personnel and we an amendment that I offered yesterday a lot deeper spending cuts elsewhere. take away all their tools. It does not with respect to the National Science Mr. Chairman, I think that the ma- do anything but cause for more ineffi- Foundation increased spending for the jority’s proposal is best here for NASA, ciency. It is a problem being created by National Science Foundation in its re- as well as for other Government agen- this amendment of Mr. WELDON’s, and search and related activities account cies. that is why I think that the more sen- without an offset, because the Commit- b 1415 sible way is with the amendment of- tee on the Budget, which is working on fered by the gentlewoman from Texas this same issue, along with us and Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will [Ms. JACKSON-LEE]. along with the Committee on Appro- the gentleman yield? For example, when he cuts the travel priations, had found a means to pay for Mr. SCHIFF. I yield to the gentleman budget by 30 percent, he will then jeop- its within the House-passed budget res- from Pennsylvania. ardize the ability of NASA civil service olution. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I just personnel to perform necessary As we proceed through the system, if want to point out that when AAAS did project-related travel, like the trips to the different committees of respon- their evaluation and compared what we Russia to monitor Russian progress on sibility find ways to increase spending, did to the administration’s plan that the space station program, space sta- in this particular case on civilian re- they are now defending, the AAAS, the tion-related trips between Kennedy search and development, which I very authority on all this, the American As- Space Center and the Johnson Space much support, then I personally could sociation for the Advancement of Center, travel to support launch oper- at that point certainly support that. Science, in their R&D analysis said ations of scientific payloads et cetera. At this point, however, dealing with that NASA would fare slightly better I just do not think it makes sense the the bill before us, therefore, I intend under the House’s plan, losing 23 per- way that he is cutting. with regret, because I understand the cent instead of 29 percent in the admin- As my colleagues know, we can cut gentlewoman’s motivation, to vote istration’s projections. the budget, but if it does not coordi- against the Jackson-Lee amendment, So when the gentleman from Texas nate, if we leave NASA without utili- in favor of the Sensenbrenner amend- [Mr. COLEMAN] a few minutes ago when ties, without money for custodial serv- ment and Weldon amendment. he spoke said that the President and ices, then we really have not done any- However, I would like to say there is the Vice President have slashed NASA thing to improve operations; we have a larger debate here. Our ranking mem- employees, he is absolutely right, and simply cut without thinking. And that ber, the gentleman from California now when we look out into the future, is exactly what the Weldon amendment [Mr. BROWN], referred to the fact that as the gentleman points out, the AAAS does. I do not think it makes sense. we do not need to make any changes says in their report that we are better I think it does make sense to have a from the President’s proposals because in our House plan than the administra- orderly downsizing, as they are doing the President’s budget is balanced. Al- tion is in their plan, and I thank the now, that they have already accom- though we are now talking about gentleman for yielding. plished, and they are continuing to ac- NASA, I think the same subject comes Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. complish. But when they say that they up again, as we discussed yesterday Chairman, will the gentleman yield? are protecting the personnel, they take with respect to the National Science Mr. SCHIFF. I yield to the gentle- away all their tools, then how irrespon- Foundation, and which will come up woman from Texas. sible is that? I do not believe that we with respect to almost every spending Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. want to go that irresponsible way. proposal I could think of. That is, Mr. Chairman, I am not sure what the gen- I believe that the way we must go, Chairman, that the President proposes tleman from Pennsylvania is directing and it does not bust the budget, it does in almost every account more spending his comments toward. We are talking not exceed what the Committee on Ap- for the next fiscal year, which is fiscal about real numbers, we are talking propriations has recommended, is to year 1997, beginning October 1 of this about what is occurring now and not adopt the Jackson-Lee amendment. year. prospectively, and what is happening Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will But the point is we are voting on fis- now is that real numbers are $81.5 mil- the gentlewoman yield? cal year 1997 now, during 1996, which is lion being eliminated with additional Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of the calendar year of the election year. cuts from ROS of $34 million, which Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Therefore, there is a proposed bump in does not allow us to respond to already Pennsylvania. spending almost everywhere by the ad- downsize NASA in its present form. Mr. WALKER. So if I am to under- ministration, frankly to enhance their Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Chairman, if I may stand, the gentlewoman from Texas posture in the election. The point I reclaim my time very briefly, I want to thinks that NASA should spend $45 want to make, I think this is going to say that we are all proposing to add million for travel rather than $31 mil- be paid for elsewhere by the adminis- the money back right now, but what is lion for travel; is that correct? tration by deeper cuts than proposed more important is the gentleman from Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of by the majority in Congress in later California, the senior member of the Texas. I think that we need to coordi- years. Committee on Science and former nate the real basic needs for what trav- I know that is the case with respect chairman, made a specific reference to el it is and look at those figures rather to the National Science Foundation’s the President’s budget, and my only than deciding we just want to slash salaries accounts, because we debated point was to show that the President’s something. that yesterday. I know the administra- budget means all of the President’s Mr. WALKER. Just so I understand, tion proposed a bump up, followed by a budget, just like a congressional budg- the decision here is between $45 million steep decline in spending, well below et means all of the congressional budg- for travel and $31 million for travel. congressional majority proposals. et. The gentlewoman mentioned traveling May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5681 to Russia. We do not understand why way they can, and the gentleman from ployees where planning but not author- they would have to do that since we al- Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER], living in izing funding for them, to furlough ready have a full-time NASA office in this land that he does, it is time to them for 10 to 12 to 21 days sometime Russia. But nevertheless what she is make the case that what he is doing is during the year. Again that is not the saying is that what she believes is that prudent when he is merely asserting way anybody should run their business, we ought to be spending more money his values, with which I strongly dis- and we should not expect the Govern- for travel rather than saving that agree. ment to run that way either because money. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will we are just authorizing it today. Is that correct? the gentlewoman yield? Do I under- The future of our work force depends Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of stand the gentleman from California is on the high-skilled and the skilled jobs Texas. Let me say that the gentleman opposed to tax cuts for the middle that the space station, the aerospace from Pennsylvania can make a simplis- class? industry provides, and again we should tic argument like that, and it might The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. not treat those employees, whether sound like it makes sense, but it does CHAMBLISS). The time of the gentle- they are NASA or whether they are not make sense unless the gentleman woman from Texas, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE contract, in saying, ‘‘Well, we’ve sorry can relate it to reality, relate it to JOHNSON has expired. we’re going to lay you off for 21 days basic needs of a program. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. because we don’t have the authoriza- We can all pay with numbers. But un- Chairman I move to strike the req- tion to spend the money even though less those numbers make sense in re- uisite number of words. one hand we could do it, but on the ality, we are wasting other dollars. (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked other hand we are not giving it to Mr. WALKER. If the gentlewoman and was given permission to revise and you.’’ That just does not make any sense. from Texas would continue to yield, extend his remarks.) Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- she is the one that mentioned travel to Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me talk about the Jack- man, will the gentleman yield? Russia. She says that is one of the Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. son-Lee amendment for a few minutes, things this money was used for. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of and I think the Members who are here from California. Texas. Mr. Chairman, I am saying ex- and who are watching it now realize Mr. BROWN of California. With re- actly what it would cut. If the gen- that we are talking about authoriza- gard to this money that the gentleman tleman would tell me exactly what the tion bill here. The Committee on Ap- from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER] is dollars he is talking about would pay propriations has already appropriated pointing to that he now wants to save for, then we can relate. But I am talk- $600 million more than this bill author- the difference in the transportation ing about cutting essential travel to izes, and what we are trying to do with items, I would like to point out that carry out the duty of NASA. my colleagues from Houston, Ms. JACK- the figure which is referred to here, the Mr. WALKER. And the gentlewoman SON-LEE’s amendment, is to provide amount for transportation, was in the does not think they cay do that on $81.5 million in additional authoriza- bill at the subcommittee level, it was $31.5 million. tion to make sure we do not have as in the bill when it was marked up at Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of much as 3 weeks’ furlough of the em- the full committee level, it was in the Texas. I think we ought to look back in ployees there. That is really not a way bill yesterday, as a matter of fact. And that testimony and see. I do not know to run a government, a business, or an now Mr. WALKER has decided, without that they can do it with $31 million. It airline, or a railroad, or anything else hearings, I might say, or any other in- might not make sense. where we plan to authorize less than dication, that that is really too much I think that the gentleman from what we are going to spend so we can and it is wasted. So he is going to cut Pennsylvania ought to be the one ex- lay off those workers there because we $15 million out of it in order to correct plaining to me why they can make all are not planning for it. this waste. these trips with $31 million rather than Again, it does not make any sense be- Now my real question to the gen- talking about and trying to excite the cause all we are doing is authorizing, tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALK- public. we are not spending a penny with this ER] is: Mr. WALKER. If the gentlewoman bill today. The Committee on Appro- Why did he suddenly find that this would continue to yield, I am perfectly priation and the appropriations bill money is being wasted instead of at the willing to have them do it on $31 mil- will spend the penny; we are just au- subcommittee level, which he did not lion. thorizing them to do it. And since they allow markups in, or the full commit- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- have already come up with $600 million tee level, which he did allow markups man, will the gentlewoman yield? more, again my colleagues may dis- in, or even smaller in the debate? Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of agree with that, well, then let us talk If they were wasteful expenditures, Texas. I yield to the gentleman from to the Committee on Appropriations. he should have proposed in his man- California. But NASA has already downsized and ager’s amendment that all this waste Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- done everything they can. NASA has be removed. But, no he did not find out man, the gentleman from Pennsylvania already downsized, and they have be- about it until it was necessary to cor- rect the mistake which he also should [Mr. WALKER] is making the point that come leaner, meaner. In fact, whether have corrected in the full committee my colleagues want to engage in it be the administration or those of us level and did not. profilgate spending and he wants to in Congress who have made them pro- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will save this 15 or whatever million dollars vide a better value for the American the gentleman yield? it is. We discussed that yesterday, and taxpayer, they have cut 4,000 civil serv- Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. I yield we came to the conclusion that this ice jobs since 1993 and plan to continue to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. money was not being saved, and we to cut another 4,000 by the fiscal year Mr. WALKER. Since the Committee know it is not, but it is going to be 2000. And the reduction in work force on Appropriations has come up, I think spent in other directions. He wants to will not generate the savings for this we should clarify, before we get too spend it to increase the military budg- coming year because NASA cannot much misinformation on the floor: In et by $12 billion or $14 billion, and I technically execute a reduction in our appropriation bill we cut $309 mil- said that, and then he added also we work force or a RIF, one early enough lion out of essentially the operating ac- want to make a very substantial tax to generate that savings even if it is counts of NASA. The appropriators cut cut for what he calls middle-income not authorized. $542 million out of the operating ac- America. That is what I think we need to go counts of NASA and in their bill. Now It is not a matter of saving, never back to, and from what I understand, their total is higher, in large part be- has been. It is a matter of priorities. If this $81.5 million that is needed for the cause there are some fixed asset ac- my colleagues’ priority is spending authorization to make sure that we do counts that they count into their num- more for defense and for tax cuts for not have that furlough of those em- bers, but if we look at the operating ac- the wealthy, they want to cut it any ployees, these are full-time NASA em- counts that NASA has to spend before H5682 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 going out to brag about what has hap- give the personnel of the NASA a Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. pened in the appropriation committee, chance to operate like personnel of Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman take a look, folks, because the fact is other industries. from Florida. I think it is extremely there is $558 million in a fixed asset ac- All the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. important. count that is counted in there, and we JACKSON-LEE] is asking, and I am here Let me indicate that the Sensen- actually—— to support her amendment, all she is brenner-Weldon amendment simply Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. In re- asking is that we restore the NASA robs from Peter to say Paul. That is claiming my time, Mr. Chairman, we personnel account to the level that was the clarification we need. Though they are talking about the Jackson-Lee requested by the President. I am hear- are belatedly offering to restore these amendment, $81.5 million. The Com- ing different things on that, standing funds, which the Jackson-Lee amend- mittee on Appropriations has author- here, but that is what her amendment ment does straight up, they then gut ized $600 million. that $81.5 million is asking. I agree with that. academic programs, they gut the space could come out of that $600 million, Mr. Chairman, if we do not pass her communications, they gut travel, so we and I could be corrected, but that is amendment, according to what is cur- cannot relate to our foreign space part- what I have been told. I do not know rently going on on the floor now, these ners in the space station, and they gut about the fixed asset part of this personnel members, these are human science. amendment. beings, just like us in the Congress. We And NASA has indicated that we will We are talking about saving employ- do not want our benefits cut, we do not see no savings with their reductions in ees from having a reduction in work want our salary cut due to the whims 1997, fiscal year 1997, none whatsoever, force for 10 to 12 to 20 days by having and whimsical ideas that people have. because they cannot move that quick- some reasonable planning in the au- We want to be sure that if they are cut, ly. They are already downsizing, cut- thorization, and that is what author- there is a sound reason. ting jobs, cutting employees, as of Oc- izations are supposed to be about, Mr. Think about what this will do, Mr. tober, 1996. The gentlewoman is abso- Chairman, that we plan for those em- Chairman. What this will do is put lutely right that Florida, Texas, and ployees to do their work full-time. them on a furlough. Have we not had Alabama will be hurt drastically. Mr. Chairman, I encourage adoption enough furloughs here in the Federal Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chair- man, I move to strike the requisite of the Jackson-Lee amendment. Government? Have we not had enough Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chair- Government employees and contrac- number of words. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will man, I move to strike the requisite tors of Government, to cause their per- the gentleman yield? number of words. sonnel benefits and cause their pay to be cut? Have we not had enough of Mr. WELDON of Florida. I yield to Mr. Chairman, I am concerned as I the gentleman from Pennsylvania. have listened now, this is the second that? When will we learn our lesson? Another thing, in dealing with the Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I just day I have listened to this debate in agency, I am hoping that somebody think we ought to have a clarification the Committee on Science and here on spoke to this agency, to NASA, and from the last set of remarks we just the floor, and I am just a little bit sur- said, how can we best cut the personnel had. The gentlewoman from Florida ac- prised that one of my dear colleagues that will not negatively impact on cused my colleague, the gentleman from Florida really wants to cut per- you? I am not sure that this was ever from Florida [Mr. WELDON], of seeking sonnel in such a way that it will affect done, because we are dealing pretty to slash personnel. Thank goodness the Florida employees and citizens of Flor- much with the budget here. We are not gentlewoman from Texas tried to make ida. dealing with how these agencies should a clarification on that. But I am concerned about all of the be run. I do not think any of us know The fact is that both of these amend- appropriations. I am concerned, first of that much about what is going on back ments put back in the full money for all, to say that any time we are dealing in these agencies. I am not sure they personnel accounts. The only question with personnel, we cannot just jump even talked to them before they de- here is whether or not we are going to without some studies. I do not think cided to bring up these cuts. save some money out of travel ac- any one has ever looked at the nega- I am only talking about common- counts and out of some other accounts tive impact of this particular issue sense administration, commonsense, in order to pay the personnel, or that would cut money out of personnel. humane things that a government whether or not we are going to do sim- First of all, the question I would like should not be doing; that is, cutting ply an add-on that adds on deficit to ask is: Has anybody looked at the personnel without consulting the agen- spending. inflationary increase that these people cy and saying to the agency, these are Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to will have to use to live by? our objectives, these are our goals, how clarify that. There was very little good information in that last set of re- b 1430 can we best reach that? That has not been done because, as I understand it, marks, because it simply did not relate Have Members looked at the benefits there was no consultation with the to the topic before us. Again, the gen- that will be due to them in this forth- agency and there is no basis for this tleman needs to be congratulated. He is coming budget which we are trying to sharp reduction. doing the responsible thing here of authorize here? If we are arguing about I close, Mr. Chairman, by saying if plusing up those personnel accounts, figures, we had better think about there is going to be a sharp reduction, but doing so in a way that we can af- some of the things that influence fig- particularly in personnel, it should be ford it and the taxpayers do not end up ures. Things that influence figures are thought through, it should go through having it taken out of their pocket- not just the way we feel philosophi- the authorizing committee, and then book. cally. What influences figures should submit it, naturally, as we have to do Mr. WELDON of Florida. I thank the be what impact will this have on the to appropriations, but think about the gentleman. I will try to make my com- employees who make up the personnel impact, first. I beg the Members to sup- ments briefly. of NASA. That is the first thing we are port the amendment offered by the Mr. Chairman, this has been a going to think about. gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. JACK- lengthy debate. I think it has been fair- Then, if we are just thinking about SON-LEE]. It is a humane amendment. ly productive. I just want to explain a budget cutting, we could cut any budg- It is based on the future of the person- little to my colleagues how we got into et that each committee has put on. If nel of NASA. They are dedicated people this situation. Our staff on the com- we are just going to do that, then just in that agency, Mr. Chairman. I would mittee sat down with the NASA offi- wantonly cut the budgets, instead of appeal to the House to pass the amend- cials and were given figures on the going into a personnel budget and re- ment offered by the gentlewoman from amount of money they needed for the ducing it by so many million dollars. Texas. support of their staff, the full-time Mr. Chairman, I do not have this ar- Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. equivalents. Then 2 days before we gument with what the President’s Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield? went to committee markup, they came budget is. I am talking about the pol- Mrs. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the in with a whole new set of numbers and icy of authorizing something that will gentlewoman from Texas. said they needed $81.5 million more. May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5683 It is true that the ranking member cut. That has been pointed out. It has partners, to not be able to have space did seek in his substitute to restore been claimed, of course, that that is communications, and taking away that money, and I commend him for political manipulation, that the Presi- from the science program. that. But he also sought about $1.5 bil- dent is keeping the R&D budget artifi- I am not sure where they are trying lion additional of spending that we did cially high, that the only true budget to go, but I would solicit my colleagues not have. It would amount to borrow- handed down from heaven itself is the to do the right thing and support the ing more money from our children to Republican budget, which is roughly $2 Jackson-Lee amendment that is a res- pay for what we are doing now. I think billion per year less than the Presi- toration, not an increase, a restoration that was irresponsible, and his sub- dent’s budget. of $81.5 million, that gives to our NASA stitute was defeated in committee, as Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- employees the ability to downsize ap- it was on the floor. Nobody on the mi- man, will the gentleman yield? propriately, without safety factors nority side presented an amendment Mr. COSTELLO. I yield to the gen- being damaged, as well as putting them that would exclusively restore this ac- tleman from Wisconsin. on a 2-week or more furlough where count. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- they cannot work and they cannot con- Mr. Chairman, I have been working man, I noticed that when the Presi- tinue the mission of NASA, and cannot diligently with the subcommittee dent’s budget came up on the floor of continue the mission of this Nation chairman, the gentleman from Wiscon- the House, it was overwhelmingly re- with respect to space exploration and sin [Mr. SENSENBRENNER], with the full jected, and only 10 of the 23 Democrats science. committee chairman, the gentleman on the Committee on Science voted for Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER], as the President’s budget. The gentleman move to strike the requisite number of well as with the chairman of the Sub- was one of them, I give him credit for words. committee on VA, HUD and Independ- consistency, but evidently the gen- Mr. Chairman, this discussion here ent Agencies, the gentleman from Cali- tleman was less persuasive then than today on the two amendments really is no different than the discussion yester- fornia, Mr. JERRY LEWIS, to make sure he is today. day concerning the substitute offered these funds are restored. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- I think my amendment, with the per- man, I thank the gentleman for that by the gentleman from California [Mr. fecting amendment offered by the gen- pertinent comment. I have said many BROWN] and the original bill sponsored by the chairman of the committee. I tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSEN- times that in the 7-year runout, I do could say the same remarks about BRENNER], is a good, reasonable, re- not like either the Republican budget them, because basically what it is a sponsible way to accomplish the goal. or the President’s budget. I have also question of funding programs that need And we all agree on the goal, we just said that since the main differences to be funded, and still balancing the disagree on how we do it. occur in the year 2000, and nobody can budget. Mr. Chairman, I would urge my col- predict what is going to happen in the Mr. Chairman, the majority, which year 2000, and that will be in the first leagues to vote in support of the emphasizes balancing the budget, will administration of President GORE, I am Weldon-Sensenbrenner amendment. lead us to believe that if we do not Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I going to let President GORE worry make these cuts in the TDRSS and move to strike the requisite number of about that problem when we get to it. other parts in order to fund back the In the meantime, I am going to sup- words. personnel money for NASA, that we Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- port the budget, which is $2 billion a are not going to have a balanced budg- man, will the gentleman yield? year higher for R&D, and I urge my et. Mr. Chairman, it ain’t so. It really Mr. COSTELLO. I yield to the gen- friends on that side to think carefully ain’t so. That amount of money, to tleman from California. before rejecting it, because it will be begin with, is not going to make the Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- an issue. I am spending most of my difference in the next 7 years. man, I really do not like to belabor time trying to make the votes in sup- Second, under the coalition budget, this, but sometimes it seems necessary port of a reasonable R&D program for which very few of their Members, the to keep saying the same thing over this country an issue in this campaign. vast majority, did not support, this again to get it across. The gentleman may think his posi- program for the personnel is fully fund- The gentleman from Florida [Mr. tion will stand up better than mine, ed, and so is the TDRSS and the re- WELDON] is acting properly here to re- and we will let the voters decide. search and development fully funded as store funding that, whether as he Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. is necessary, and we have a balanced claims, it is the fault of the adminis- Chairman, will the gentleman yield? budget by the year 2002. tration, or as I claim, it is the fault of Mr. COSTELLO. I yield to the gentle- As has been pointed out earlier today the committee chairman himself, we woman from Texas. by the gentleman from California, our both realize it needs to be corrected. Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. ranking minority member, it is a ques- Then we repeat the mantra, that if Chairman, I thank the gentleman very tion of establishing priorities: What do we do not take away from some of much for his kindness in yielding to we really want? There is no question in these other things, travel and so forth, me. my mind that the radical right, under the budget is not going to be balanced. Mr. Chairman, let me clear up sev- the leadership of the majority, does not What does that means? That means eral points. Let it be perfectly clear, as want research and development. It is that it does not conform to the Repub- one of President used to say, that this clear and simple. Why else are they lican budget. The Democratic budget, side of the aisle is not against a bal- cutting the program in this amend- which the President offered, it is still anced budget. We have voted time and ment, in the amendment of the gen- below that, and it is still in balance. time again, and as a freshman I can say tleman from Florida? Why else? They are going to contend, of course, I have voted for a balanced budget. The I would also like to know from the that the President’s balanced budget is misnomer we have here is that we are gentleman from Florida, who offered phony and all that sort of stuff, so against giving middle-income tax cuts. the original amendment, what are they maybe it is. But it has been certified That is not accurate. We are against going to do about the TDRSS contract by the Congressional Budget Office as bashing middle-income workers at the as presently existing, and we have a being in balance in 2002. NASA centers around this Nation by TDRSS contract to replace the present What is the difference? The Presi- borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, as TDRSS that are in orbit, when we cut dent’s budget, has been pointed out, is the Weldon-Sensenbrenner amendment these funds? Where are we going to get higher for both NASA and for the en- has. It may restore belatedly $81.5 mil- the money? They are not going to get tire discretionary research and devel- lion, but it guts other programs, and the money, so we are in violation of a opment account up to year 2000. It is we do not know if we are going to have contract. But so what? To them it does substantially higher than the Repub- any savings by cutting other programs not mean anything. It is all in the lican budget over that same period of and requiring NASA, that has already name of balancing the budget. time by an amount of roughly $2 bil- downsized, to not be able to commu- That is a lot of baloney. It is not in lion per year. Then it takes a sharp nicate with its foreign space station the name of balancing the budget. It is H5684 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 in the name of following, basically, suggest, the gentleman from Florida, if [Roll No. 202] what the chairman of the committee, he really wants to save money, that he AYES—142 the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. can cut this program when we get to Abercrombie Gejdenson Owens WALKER], feels is his straitjacket; and the appropriation bill. Barcia Gephardt Pallone his straitjacket is that this is the only He can cut back NASA if he wants to. Becerra Geren Pastor Beilenson Gibbons Payne (NJ) amount of money we are going to There is no reason that he cannot. He Bentsen Gonzalez Pelosi spend. I do not think it makes a dif- can cut it back. We do not have to have Berman Gordon Rahall ference to the gentleman from Penn- a space station. He can vote against Bevill Green (TX) Rangel Bishop Gutierrez Richardson sylvania whether we have the money the space station. He can do that. He Bonior Hall (OH) Roemer there or not. If he does not want to can vote against the operation of the Boucher Hall (TX) Rose spend it, he is not going to spend it. shuttle. He can do that and save a lot Brewster Harman Roybal-Allard of money. It is easy to do. Instead of Browder Hastings (FL) Rush b 1445 Brown (CA) Hefner Sabo cutting back on other things, why does Brown (FL) Hilliard Sanders It does not make any difference he not cut back on those things that Brown (OH) Hinchey Sawyer about balancing the budget. I will say are important to his district? That Bryant (TX) Hoke Schroeder it again and again. It has nothing to do really shows self-sacrifice. I would rec- Cardin Hoyer Schumer with balancing the budget. It has all to Chapman Jackson (IL) Scott ommend the gentleman think about it. Clay Jackson-Lee Serrano do about the whims of the gentleman Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I Clayton (TX) Skaggs from Pennsylvania and how he feels Clement Johnson, E. B. Skelton move to strike the requisite number of about programs. Clyburn Johnston Slaughter words. And, lo and behold, all the rest of the Coleman Kennedy (MA) Stark Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Collins (IL) LaFalce Stenholm Members over there, they follow him Jackson-Lee amendment. The Brown Collins (MI) Lantos Stokes down the road just like the rest of the Conyers Levin Studds substitute would have corrected this body, the vast majority follows the Cramer Lewis (GA) Stupak but we failed on that. We think this is Cummings Lofgren Tanner Speaker right down the road. They just a cut that should have never been made DeFazio Lowey Taylor (MS) keep following him down that road, DeLauro Maloney Tejeda in the first place. We have talked about and I am sure that the American public Dellums Manton Thompson this in committee, we have talked Deutsch Matsui Thornton is going to take a good look at the road about it on the floor earlier. I think to Dicks McDermott Thurman that they are taking this country put it succinctly and to the point I Dingell McHale Torres down: a road that leads to very little Dixon McKinney Torricelli need to quote Mr. Peterson, who is the research and development, basic re- Doggett McNulty Towns NASA comptroller, who says: Dooley Meek Traficant search, a road that makes mistakes Durbin Menendez Velazquez now and then, as the gentleman from To put it bluntly, the S&E reduction is im- Edwards Millender- Vento Pennsylvania made the mistake, why possible to achieve without drastic action. Engel McDonald Volkmer Unless a miracle occurs and we have both Eshoo Miller (CA) Waters else are we having the original amend- buyout legislation and a lot of takers, there Evans Mink Watt (NC) ment? And later on we will have other is simply no way feasible to implement this Farr Moakley Waxman amendments to clean up the bills that reduction without resorting to furloughs. At Fattah Nadler Williams came out of committee. $81.5 million, we estimate a 10-to-12 day fur- Fazio Neal Wilson Filner Olver Woolsey It is not necessary to make those lough would be necessary to make this num- Flake Ortiz Wynn mistakes. The mistakes are basically ber. Frost Orton Yates made when they try to follow that We do not want furloughs. I know no NOES—271 straitjacket that is self-imposed by the one on the other side wants furloughs. Allard Coble Furse gentleman from Pennsylvania on the I believe that this comptroller knows Andrews Coburn Gallegly actions of the committee. what he is talking about, and submit Archer Collins (GA) Ganske As I said yesterday, I will say it this to Members for their consider- Armey Combest Gekas again. As I have looked at this legisla- Bachus Condit Gilchrest ation. I urge the adoption of the Jack- Baesler Cooley Gillmor tion, the original bill that came out of son-Lee amendment. Baker (CA) Costello Gilman committee, in comparison to all the The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Baker (LA) Cox Goodlatte other ones we have had in the 20 years Baldacci Coyne Goodling the amendment offered by the gen- Ballenger Crane Goss I have been here, it is the worst one tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSEN- Barr Crapo Graham and it is not necessary to be that way. BRENNER] to the amendment offered by Barrett (NE) Cremeans Greene (UT) It is only that way because of the dic- the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Barrett (WI) Cubin Greenwood tates of the leadership of the Repub- Bartlett Cunningham Gunderson WELDON]. Barton Danner Hamilton lican Party. It can be a good bill. It The amendment to the amendment Bass Davis Hancock could be one that has positive features was agreed to. Bateman Deal Hansen instead of negative features, but it is Bereuter DeLay Hastert The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Bilbray Diaz-Balart Hastings (WA) not going to be a good bill because they the amendment offered by the gentle- Bilirakis Dickey Hayworth do not want it to be one. woman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON-LEE] Bliley Doolittle Hefley Blumenauer Dornan Heineman The CHAIRMAN. The time of the as a substitute for the amendment of- gentleman from Missouri [Mr. VOLK- Blute Doyle Herger fered by the gentleman from Florida Boehlert Dreier Hilleary MER] has expired. [Mr. WELDON], as amended. Boehner Duncan Hobson (By unanimous consent, Mr. VOLK- Bonilla Dunn Hoekstra The question was taken; and the MER was allowed to proceed for 2 addi- Bono Ehlers Holden Chairman announced that the ayes ap- tional minutes.) Borski Ehrlich Horn peared to have it. Brownback Emerson Hostettler Mr. VOLKMER. They would like the Bryant (TN) English Hunter American public to believe that some- RECORDED VOTE Bunn Ensign Hutchinson how through the authorization process, Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I de- Bunning Everett Hyde mand a recorded vote. Burr Ewing Inglis not even the appropriation process but Burton Fawell Istook in this authorization process, they are A recorded vote was ordered. Buyer Fields (TX) Jacobs going to lead us down, this Congress, The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause Callahan Flanagan Johnson (CT) 2(c) of rule XXIII, the Chair may re- Calvert Foley Johnson (SD) down to a balanced budget. A lot of ba- Camp Forbes Johnson, Sam loney. Nothing further from the truth. duce to a minimum of 5 minutes the Campbell Fowler Jones Lo and behold, we will wait until we period of time for any vote by elec- Canady Fox Kanjorski see what the appropriation process tronic device, if ordered, on the pend- Castle Frank (MA) Kaptur Chambliss Franks (CT) Kasich brings along. That is where the money ing amendment. Chenoweth Franks (NJ) Kelly is really spent in this whole area. This The vote was taken by electronic de- Christensen Frelinghuysen Kennedy (RI) bill only authorizes. If the gentleman vice, and there were—ayes 142, noes 271, Chrysler Frisa Kildee wants to really save money, I would not voting 21, as follows: Clinger Funderburk Kim May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5685 King Myers Shaw Baker (LA) Fazio Lucas Smith (WA) Tejeda Watts (OK) Kingston Myrick Shays Baldacci Fields (TX) Maloney Solomon Thomas Waxman Kleczka Nethercutt Shuster Ballenger Flanagan Manton Souder Thompson Weldon (FL) Klink Neumann Sisisky Barcia Foley Manzullo Spence Thornberry Weldon (PA) Klug Ney Skeen Barr Forbes Markey Spratt Thornton Weller Knollenberg Norwood Smith (MI) Barrett (NE) Fowler Martinez Stearns Thurman White Kolbe Nussle Smith (NJ) Bartlett Fox Martini Stenholm Tiahrt Whitfield LaHood Oberstar Smith (TX) Barton Franks (CT) Mascara Stockman Torkildsen Wicker Largent Obey Smith (WA) Bass Franks (NJ) Matsui Studds Torricelli Wilson Latham Oxley Solomon Bateman Frelinghuysen McCollum Stump Traficant Wolf LaTourette Packard Souder Bentsen Frisa McCrery Stupak Upton Woolsey Laughlin Parker Spence Bereuter Frost McHale Talent Velazquez Wynn Lazio Payne (VA) Spratt Berman Funderburk McHugh Tate Vucanovich Young (AK) Leach Peterson (MN) Stearns Bevill Gallegly McInnis Tauzin Walker Young (FL) Lewis (CA) Petri Stockman Bilbray Ganske McIntosh Taylor (MS) Walsh Zeliff Lewis (KY) Pickett Stump Bilirakis Gejdenson McKeon Taylor (NC) Wamp Zimmer Lightfoot Pombo Talent Bishop Gekas McNulty NOES—60 Linder Pomeroy Tate Bliley Gephardt Meehan Lipinski Porter Tauzin Blumenauer Geren Menendez Barrett (WI) Gutierrez Rangel Livingston Portman Taylor (NC) Blute Gilchrest Metcalf Becerra Hastings (FL) Rush LoBiondo Poshard Thomas Boehlert Gillmor Meyers Beilenson Hinchey Sawyer Longley Pryce Thornberry Boehner Gilman Mica Bonior Jackson (IL) Schroeder Lucas Quillen Tiahrt Bonilla Gonzalez Miller (FL) Brown (CA) Jackson-Lee Schumer Luther Radanovich Torkildsen Bono Goodlatte Mink Clay (TX) Scott Manzullo Ramstad Upton Borski Goodling Moakley Clayton Jacobs Skaggs Markey Reed Visclosky Boucher Gordon Montgomery Coleman Johnson (SD) Stark Martinez Regula Vucanovich Brewster Goss Moorhead Collins (IL) Lewis (GA) Stokes Martini Riggs Walker Browder Graham Moran Collins (MI) Luther Tanner Mascara Rivers Walsh Brown (FL) Green (TX) Morella Coyne McCarthy Torres McCarthy Roberts Wamp Brown (OH) Greene (UT) Myers Dellums McDermott Towns McCollum Rogers Ward Brownback Greenwood Myrick Dixon McKinney Vento McCrery Rohrabacher Watts (OK) Bryant (TN) Gunderson Nadler Doggett Meek Visclosky McHugh Ros-Lehtinen Weldon (FL) Bryant (TX) Hall (OH) Neal Engel Millender- Volkmer McInnis Roth Weldon (PA) Bunn Hall (TX) Nethercutt Fattah McDonald Ward McIntosh Roukema Weller Bunning Hamilton Neumann Filner Miller (CA) Waters McKeon Royce White Burr Hancock Ney Flake Minge Watt (NC) Meehan Salmon Whitfield Burton Hansen Norwood Frank (MA) Olver Williams Metcalf Sanford Wicker Furse Owens Yates Buyer Harman Nussle Meyers Saxton Wolf Gibbons Rahall Callahan Hastert Oberstar Mica Scarborough Young (AK) Calvert Hastings (WA) Obey Miller (FL) Schaefer Young (FL) NOT VOTING—20 Camp Hayworth Ortiz Minge Schiff Zeliff Chabot Hayes Mollohan Montgomery Seastrand Zimmer Campbell Hefley Orton Canady Hefner Oxley Conyers Houghton Murtha Moorhead Sensenbrenner de la Garza Jefferson Paxon Cardin Heineman Packard Morella Shadegg Fields (LA) Kennelly Peterson (FL) Castle Herger Pallone Foglietta Lincoln Quinn NOT VOTING—21 Chambliss Hilleary Parker Ford McDade Wise Chapman Hilliard Pastor Ackerman Hayes Mollohan Gutknecht Molinari Chenoweth Hobson Payne (NJ) Chabot Houghton Moran Christensen Hoekstra Payne (VA) de la Garza Jefferson Murtha b 1519 Chrysler Hoke Pelosi Fields (LA) Kennelly Paxon Clement Holden Peterson (MN) Mr. MCDERMOTT and Mr. HAST- Foglietta Lincoln Peterson (FL) Clinger Horn Petri Ford McDade Quinn INGS of Florida changed their vote Clyburn Hostettler Pickett Gutknecht Molinari Wise from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ Coble Hoyer Pombo Coburn Hunter Pomeroy Mr. SHAYS and Mr. BERMAN b 1511 Collins (GA) Hutchinson Porter changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ Combest Hyde Portman Messrs. HOLDEN, SMITH of Michi- So the amendment, as amended, was Condit Inglis Poshard agreed to. gan, MASCARA, BORSKI, COYNE, and Cooley Istook Pryce BLUMENAUER changed their vote Costello Johnson (CT) Quillen The result of the vote was announced Cox Johnson, E. B. Radanovich as above recorded. from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ Cramer Johnson, Sam Ramstad VACATING PASSAGE OF GEKAS AMENDMENT NO. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts and Crane Johnston Reed 3 AND AMENDMENT NO. 3, AS MODIFIED, OF- Mr. STUDDS changed their vote from Crapo Jones Regula FERED BY MR. GEKAS ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ Cremeans Kanjorski Richardson Cubin Kaptur Riggs Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Chairman, I ask So the amendment offered as a sub- Cummings Kasich Rivers unanimous consent that the committee stitute for the amendment was re- Cunningham Kelly Roberts proceedings of yesterday, wherein my jected. Danner Kennedy (MA) Roemer amendment No. 3 was adopted, be va- The result of the vote was announced Davis Kennedy (RI) Rogers Deal Kildee Rohrabacher cated and a new amendment also titled as above recorded. DeFazio Kim Ros-Lehtinen No. 3 be inserted in its place in lieu of The CHAIRMAN. The question is on DeLauro King Rose the amendment yesterday. We had the the amendment offered by the gen- DeLay Kingston Roth Deutsch Kleczka Roukema wrong language submitted. tleman from Florida [Mr. WELDON], as Diaz-Balart Klink Roybal-Allard Mr. Chairman, I checked with the amended. Dickey Klug Royce gentleman from California [Mr. BROWN] The question was taken; and the Dicks Knollenberg Sabo and he indicated that he has no objec- Chairman announced that the ayes ap- Dingell Kolbe Salmon Dooley LaFalce Sanders tion. peared to have it. Doolittle LaHood Sanford Mr. CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- RECORDED VOTE Dornan Lantos Saxton Doyle Largent Scarborough port the modified amendment. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- Dreier Latham Schaefer The Clerk read as follows: man, I demand a recorded vote. Duncan LaTourette Schiff Amendment No. 3, as modified, offered by Dunn Laughlin Seastrand A recorded vote was ordered. Mr. GEKAS. Page 87, after line 21, insert the Durbin Lazio Sensenbrenner The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5- Edwards Leach Serrano following new subsection: minute vote. Ehlers Levin Shadegg (h) BI-AGENCY WORKING GROUP.—The Na- The vote was taken by electronic de- Ehrlich Lewis (CA) Shaw tional Weather Service is encouraged to fol- vice, and there were—ayes 354, noes 60, Emerson Lewis (KY) Shays low through on the recommendation con- English Lightfoot Shuster not voting 20, as follows: tained in the document entitled ‘‘Secretary’s Ensign Linder Sisisky Report to Congress on Adequacy of NEXRAD [Roll No. 203] Eshoo Lipinski Skeen Coverage and Degradation of Weather Serv- Evans Livingston Skelton AYES—354 Everett LoBiondo Slaughter ices Under National Weather Service Mod- Abercrombie Andrews Bachus Ewing Lofgren Smith (MI) ernization for 32 Areas of Concern’’, dated Ackerman Archer Baesler Farr Longley Smith (NJ) October 12, 1995, to initiate a dialogue with Allard Armey Baker (CA) Fawell Lowey Smith (TX) the Federal Aviation Administration to form H5686 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 a bi-agency working group to further assess that time, they made no mention of severe was not showing severe characteristics)— the potential for National Weather Service weather in the Harrisburg area at the time DM. operational use of Federal Aviation Adminis- of the tornado. The Harrisburg Weather CASE 3—AUGUST 4, 1994 tration weather radar data, and to define en- Service office issued a severe thunderstorm Attachment 5: Entry from Harrisburg’s gineering considerations that would be in- warning for this storm based on the radar at station log book. At 5:28 pm, the weather ob- volved in implementing a data sharing link Harrisburg. server at the Middletown International Air- between the Federal Aviation Administra- Substantial damage occurred in uptown port issued a weather observation reporting tion and the National Weather Service. Harrisburg and near the State Hospital that a wind gust of 50 knots (58 mph). A wind gust evening. Mr. GEKAS (during the reading). Mr. of 50 knots warrants a severe thunderstorm Chairman, I ask unanimous consent warning according to the severe weather cri- CASE 2—JULY 20, 1994 that the amendment, as modified, be teria used by the National Weather Service. Attachment 2: Note from person on duty at considered as read and printed in the The person on duty at Harrisburg sent State Harrisburg describing a severe thunderstorm College a message through the NWS com- RECORD. event in Huntingdon County. (The NEXRAD Mr. Chairman, I include for the puter system pointing out the observation. radar site is in Centre County; Huntingdon The weather office in Mt. Holly, New Jersey RECORD communications and related County is adjacent to Centre County). Har- sent a similar message to State College at articles on the subject of my amend- risburg radar showed this storm to be severe, approximately the same time. ment. and the person on duty at Harrisburg issued At 5:55 pm, the person on duty at State CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, a severe thunderstorm warning based on the College called the Harrisburg office to ask if HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Harrisburg radar (after being advised by the Harrisburg radar showed any severe Washington, DC, February 23, 1995. State College personnel that their NEXRAD weather in the vicinity of the airport (be- ELBERT W. FRIDAY, Jr., did not indicate any severe weather in Hun- cause their radar showed no strong storms in Assistant Administrator, National Weather tingdon County.) that area). By that time (25 minutes after Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Sil- Attachment 3: The severe thunderstorm the report), the Harrisburg radar showed the ver Spring, MD. warning issued by Harrisburg. storm was well below severe warning cri- DEAR MR. FRIDAY: Throughout the imple- Attachment 4: Station log documenting teria. mentation process of the Next Generation the report of damage from the storm. The re- No warning was ever issued by the State Weather Radar (NEXRAD) system by the Na- port was received by NWS Harrisburg from College office for this event. tional Weather Service (NWS), serious con- Emergency Management officials in Hun- cerns were raised regarding deficient cov- tingdon County. EMA officials indicated 20 EMERGENCY LOG BOOK to 30 trees down and damage to homes. erage of the Harrisburg metropolitan area. July 29, 1994, 3 p.m.—Pit’s 88D is down and Unfortunately, my concerns were repeatedly Comments: The NEXRAD radar has the ability to archive paper copies of its radar 57 is up until sometime Saturday (7/30/94). rebuffed by the NWS with claims that Har- They will be taking radar observations until risburg weather coverage was appropriate. display. I requested archive copies of the radar display for the time of the storm in then—GC. Now that the NEXRAD system has been fully July 29, 1994, 11 p.m.—Left HAR radar on implemented it is clear that my earlier cau- Huntington County. Apparently the NEXRAD did not show anything alarming in overnight per request by Art Krause (PHL)— tions and predictions have become reality. GC. While the NEXRAD radar beam projects a Huntingdon County at that time, because State College personnel did not start to ar- August 4, 1994—At 5:30 p.m. the observer further distance than traditional radar, due (MDR) issued an observation reporting a to the earth’s curvature coverage originating chive until 7:40 pm that day, the damage oc- curred at 6:50 pm. windgust to 50 kts. I sent them a message from 120 miles north of Harrisburg in State pointing that out. At 5:55 p.m., State College College creates a gap from the earth’s sur- The damage in Huntingdon County oc- curred less than 40 miles from State College. called and ask if the Harrisburg radar face to a level 16,000 feet above Harrisburg, showed a strong cell in that area. By that completely missing the city. Physical limi- Harrisburg, York and Lancaster are more than twice that distance from State College. time (30 minutes after the report) the cell tations of the NEXRAD radar beam have left was down to 25,000; VIP 5 to 8,000. No warning open an unmonitored area which is densely BULLETIN—IMMEDIATE BROADCAST RE- was issued by State College.—GC. populated and prone to flooding. August 4, 1994, 10:35 p.m.—Left the radar on At the time this concern was raised, I was QUESTED, SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WARNING, overnight per request by PHL (Tony Gigi). told by the NWS that coverage would be ade- NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE, HARRISBURG August 12, 1994, 10:35 p.m.—Art K. wanted quate. I content that coverage of the area is PA, 6:31 P.M. EDT WED, JULY 20, 1994 radar left on—DPM. not sufficient. A NWS employee submitted to The National Weather Service in Harris- August 13, 1994—Radar left on—DPM. me the enclosed sampling of documented burg has issued a severe thunderstorm warn- cases illustrating severe weather conditions ing effective until 7:15 p.m. EDT for people in [From the Harrisburg (PA) Patriot-News, which went undetected by the NEXRAD sys- the following location: May 14, 1996] tem. In south central Pennsylvania: Huntingdon Unfortunately, while some areas of the County. IT’S OFFICIAL: IT WAS A TORNADO country may enjoy improved radar services, At 6:30 p.m. Harrisburg radar showed a se- (By Mike Feeley) Central Pennsylvania has been diminished vere thunderstorm between the town of Hun- National Weather Service investigators service due to the lack of attention to this tingdon and the Mifflin County line. This confirmed yesterday that a small tornado flaw in the NEXRAD coverage. I believe the storm was moving toward the northeast at 10 touched down Saturday at a truck-parts most significant responsibility entrusted to miles an hour. manufacturing shop along Cameron Street in the NWS is to ensure the public’s safety. I This is a dangerous storm. If you are in its Harrisburg and danced along the treetops for urge you once again to reconsider this situa- path you should prepare for damaging wind a half-mile before dissipating. tion which the NWS has created and confirm in excess of 55 mph, large hail, and deadly Relying mostly on witness accounts and that your job of ensuring public safety has lightning. People outside should move to a damage to the Dayton Parts plant, weather been satisfied. shelter, preferably inside a strong building service officials said the tornado—which Thank you for your consideration; I look but stay away from windows. never showed up on radar—lasted less than a forward to your response. minute. Very truly yours, EMERGENCY ACTION LOG But in that time, it reduced part of the GEORGE W. GEKAS, Date/Time, July, 20, 1994 Information Re- Dayton plant at Cameron and Herr streets to Member of Congress. ceived, city/town/time of event, source/event. rubble, ruptured a gas line, toppled trees and Action Taken, calls made, warnings, etc. Ini- forced the evacuation of a city housing CASE 1—APRIL 30, 1994 tials, DM. project. Attachment 1: Summary of Severe Weath- 6:05 p.m.—Bob Fenner called—quarter-size The tornado was coupled with a thunder- er Reports. The station log sheets from NWS hail in State College, Warning issued 6:05 storm that dumped an inch of rain on the Harrisburg were not available for this event. PM—DM. area in less than 30 minutes. However widespread severe weather occurred 6:10 p.m.—CTP called—dime-size hail at Either the tornado or severe winds blew over central Pennsylvania during the the office in State College—DM. over a 16-ton caboose on the Conrail yards in evening of April 30. As noted on Attachment 9:15 p.m.—Rich Moore (Huntingdon Coun- Harrisburg, said Mayor Stephen R. Reed. In 1, damage from a severe thunderstorm was ty) called—20 to 30 large trees blown down; all, the storm caused $5 million worth of reported in uptown Harrisburg at 10:46 pm. trees blown onto houses causing an esti- damage in the city. This damage was later determined by the mated $2,000 damage; 1⁄2 mile by 1⁄2 mile patch About 150 people in the Harrisburg and National Weather Service to be caused by a of wind damage in Mill Creek at 6:50 p.m.; Camp Hill areas still were without phone tornado. Although forecasters in the State (DVIP 5 to 270 top 55,000 ft shown on WSR-74c service this morning, said Shirley Risoldi, College office had called the Harrisburg of- radar just before warning issuance) (I also spokeswoman for Bell Atlantic. Risoldi said fice about severe weather appearing on their called CTP about the storm just before warn- service should be restored to all homes by NEXRAD in other areas of the state prior to ing issuance. According to this the storm the end of the day. May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5687 Saturday’s twister followed a path roughly Storm warnings had been posted for Juni- kinds of aircraft popular with the 200 yards from that of a tornado that hit in ata and Franklin counties, then there was newer economy airlines and the aging 1994, Reed said. These types of tornadoes are nothing until the storms had already passed airframes used by the United States not uncommon for the region, investigators through Dauphin County and were entering military. said. Lebanon County. At that time a warning was Subsonic research in jeopardy also Radar maps used by the weather service to issued for Lebanon and Lancaster counties. declare weather warnings showed no signs of My police and fire radio is alive with com- includes cooperative activities with tornadoes in Dauphin County, said Bruce W. munications regarding severe damage to pri- the FAA to improve safety and effi- Budd, NWS meteorologist-in-charge in State vate homes, apartment buildings, even a ciency in the Nation’s air traffic man- College. school . . . several of the incidents involving agement system so we do not lose con- Dauphin County was under only a severe possible injury or entrapment. trol of the increasing volume of com- thunderstorm warning when the tornado hit. It appears Lower Paxton Township has es- mercial and military air traffic. The radar maps showed the potential for a caped the brunt of the storm. The city of Also in jeopardy is R&D on advanced twister in Schuylkill County, however, and Harrisburg seems to have experienced seri- technologies that could result in quiet- that county was under a tornado warning. ous damage. er, more fuel efficient aircraft and an ‘‘The indicators show a strong outflow of This is another glaring example that the wind [in Harrisburg],’’ said Budd, as he re- realignment of the National Weather Serv- understanding of how aircraft oper- viewed radar maps of the area. ‘‘What we ice, especially in closing its Harrisburg of- ations affect the environment. don’t have is any indication of a tornado. fice, is not providing adequate coverage of Mr. Chairman, I acknowledge and But this type of light tornado is not easily this meteorologically dynamic area. As com- support the need to cut Government detected. Any severe thunderstorm can petent and well-equipped as the meteorolo- spending where appropriate in order to produce a brief tornado.’’ gists at the Weather Service Office in State meet our budget responsibilities. How- Budd and meteorologist Richard W. College might be, standing barefoot on my ever, a cut in NASA’s aeronautic au- Winther came to Harrisburg yesterday to in- front steps in Lower Paxton Township I thorization program is extremely coun- vestigate the report of a tornado. Most of the could tell there was a severe storm immi- terproductive to our shared goals of in- damage indicated a ‘‘straight-line’’ storm— nent. similar to that of a severe thunderstorm. How many more times must the safety of creasingly stronger economy and a But witnesses—including a motorcyclist the residents of my township and all other stronger America. who was knocked off his bike by a piece of communities in this region be compromised Mr. Chairman, the American aero- debris—told the investigators they saw a before something is done to end this threat nautics industry has an annual sales of funnel cloud touch down at the Dayton to public safety? over $60 billion and is responsible for plant. And wreckage at the plant was strewn I urge you to employ whatever avenues this country’s greatest positive balance in such a way as to indicate a tornado had available to rectify this situation. If I may of trade. struck, Budd said. be of any assistance, I would welcome con- Without the research and support of There’s evidence the tornado spent much tact from your office. NASA, the U.S. aeronautics industry of its short life moving along 20 or 30 feet off Respectfully, would not be competitive in the global the ground, doing damage to larger trees in JAY PURDY, its path but leaving the smaller trees rel- Supervisor, Lower Paxton Township. marketplace. This was in fact the pur- atively undamaged. pose for which Congress created NASA The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection in the first place. It is important to re- The tornado will be classified as an ‘‘F–1,’’ to the request of the gentleman from or light tornado, capable of winds of between member that in 1917 Congress created 73 and 112 mph. Saturday’s winds were in ex- Pennsylvania? NASA’s predecessor for the express cess of 100 mph, Winther said. There was no objection purpose of regaining America’s com- The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection ‘It’s amazing that there were about 30 kids petitiveness in aviation at a time when around an ice-cream truck and with trees on to the initial request of the gentleman dominance in this area had been lost to both sides of the truck damaged, no one was from Pennsylvania? the Europeans. hurt,’’ he said. There was no objection Now at a time when the Europeans RECENT TORNADOES IN THE MIDSTATE The CHAIRMAN. The question is on are in high gear, supporting the re- May 1996: A small tornado cuts through the amendment, as modified, offered by search and development of the Airbus, Cameron Street in Harrisburg, reduces part the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. we are poised to shoot ourselves in the of a truck-parts manufacturing shop to rub- GEKAS]. foot again by cutting the very pro- ble, ruptures a gas line and forces the evacu- The amendment, as modified, was ation of a housing project. grams that kept the United States aer- agreed to. onautics program competitive. This May 1995: A weak tornado touched down in The CHAIRMAN. Are there other Millersville, Lancaster County, destroying a amendment will enable these subsonic barn, toppling trees and other structures. amendments to title II? programs to continue at a reasonable July 1994: A tornado hits the Delwood AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SCOTT level. Manor housing development in northern Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an Mr. Chairman, recently I had the York County, tossing sheds and blowing off amendment. chance to see firsthand how this pro- pieces of roofs. The CHAIRMAN. The clerk will des- gram works and the results of this pro- April 1994: In uptown Harrisburg, a tornado ignate the amendment. gram because I had the opportunity to rips parts of roofs off four row homes and The text of the amendment is as fol- shatters school windows. participate in celebrations commemo- August 1992: Winds of 80 to 90 mph swoop lows: rating the production of the new Boe- into Locust Grove Trailer Park on Route 22 Amendment offered by Mr. SCOTT: Page 27, ing 777, and also another program com- in Lebanon County, displacing a mobile line 14, strike ‘‘$823,400,000’’ and insert in lieu memorating the McDonnell Douglas C– home and uprooting trees. thereof ‘‘$857,800,000’’. 17. Both programs use the wing design Page 27, line 19, strike $152,800,000’’ and in- and composite materials developed LOWER PAXTON TOWNSHIP, sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$187,200,000’’. more than a decade ago by NASA. Harrisburg, PA, May 11, 1996. Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I am of- These aircraft, one commercial, one Hon. GEORGE GEKAS, fering an amendment to restore fund- military, are now on the cutting edge Member of Congress, Rayburn HOB, Washing- ing for NASA’s Advanced Subsonic of aircraft technology and greatly ad- ton, DC. Aeronautic Research Program to the DEAR CONGRESSMAN GEKAS: As I write this, vance the competitive position of the the thunder is still rumbling in the distance level contained in the President’s budg- United States in the world market- from a severe storm that has just slammed et. H.R. 3322 cuts the advanced sub- place. Without the research under the Dauphin and Cumberland counties with no sonic program by 34.4 million, money advanced subsonic program, we are in warning from the National Weather Service. that is vitally important to maintain- jeopardy of losing our competitive edge As a former weathercaster in the nation’s ing NASA’s longstanding leadership in 5, 10, and 15 years from now. tornado alley and through my own interest subsonic research. Mr. Chairman, we should not contrib- in meteorology, I can see no excuse for the For those not familiar with subsonic ute to any effort which might lead to lack of warning before this storm struck. research, let me briefly outline the the loss of U.S. preeminence in aero- There was not even a severe thunderstorm watch. All this despite the fact that an hour kinds of activities being affected. Ac- nautics. I urge Members on both sides before the storm hit, radar was showing a tivities such as research and develop- of the aisle to support this amendment line of intensifying storms west of Harris- ment to address aging aircraft, safety and therefore support this country’s burg. concerns, and aging aircraft are the economy. H5688 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- It is my contention, of course, that not, it is corporate welfare. I urge sup- man, I rise in opposition to the amend- this is one of the crucial programs in port for the Scott amendment. ment. NASA’s portfolio. It is doing something Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Mr. Chairman, in fiscal year 1994, that specifically helps a major U.S. in- Chairman, I move to strike the last this program was funded at $106 mil- dustry, which is faced with intense word. competition from around the world, lion. The bill before us has a funding Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the specifically from Europe and the Air- level for this program at $152.8 million amendment of the gentleman from Vir- bus consortium. If we cannot do some- for fiscal year 1997. Now, that is an in- ginia. I think that clearly again I em- thing to provide an adequate level of crease of about 45 percent over a 3-fis- phasize the creation of work for the cal-year period. support for U.S. industry engaged in this competition, we are going to lose 21st century, and I think we are doing I believe that that increase is gener- a disservice by eliminating those dol- ous enough in light of the extreme fis- to the Europeans where the Airbus is a government-funded consortium. lars for that direction. So I rise to sup- cal situation that we are facing and the port the Scott amendment. bipartisan drive to try to balance the We can argue that we want to be budget. pristine in this. If there is a healthy I would also like to add a comment Also, the amendment that has been aircraft industry, they ought to be tak- regarding the amendment that I would offered by the gentleman from Vir- ing up the whole cost for this. That has offered, Mission to Planet Earth, and ginia, while well-intentioned, is an not been the case for the last 75 years. would ask if I could enter into a add-on without corresponding offsets. They know it, and part of their revolu- colloguy with the gentleman from Cali- We went through that entire issue in tion is to change things that have been fornia [Mr. BROWN]. the last amendment, and the House going on for the last 75 years, even As the gentleman knows, I had con- voted very strongly in favor of, where though it was this program of working sidered offering this amendment and we do have add-on, to have a cor- cooperatively with the industry that had raised this with the committee on responding offset so that the bill will made us the preeminent supplier of air- NASA’s Mission to Planet Earth Pro- maintain its fiscal neutrality. craft to the world, preeminent because gram. But instead I would like to take This amendment does not maintain we were the best. the time to ask a few questions about Mr. Chairman, now we have decided fiscal neutrality. It ends up increasing the National Research Council’s review that we no longer need to continue the authorization by $34 million-plus, of the Earth Observing System and that path for subsonic aircraft re- and that means $34 million-plus of defi- how the Brown recommendation is search. Now, I do not see a similar atti- cit spending should the Committee on compared to the actions taken in this tude toward the hypersonic aircraft re- Appropriations match the authoriza- bill. It is true that last year the chair- search. It appears that this is not quite tion level. man of the Committee on Science as much corporate welfare, although it In summation, I do not think that we asked the well-respected National Re- is the same basic type of research. need this additional money. I think search Council to undertake a review Maybe the reason is that we know that that it is important that there be on of NASA’s Mission to Planet Earth there will not be a commercial market Program and the Earth Observing Sys- offset, not an add-on. I believe that for hypersonic planes. Even though this program has been given generous tem? In fact, I believe we discussed this is applied research, the that in committee. increases over the last 3 fiscal years hypersonic, on behalf of American cor- under both Democratic and Repub- porations, and this normally is the cri- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- lican-controlled Congresses and the teria for corporate welfare, in this case man, will the gentlewoman yield? amount that is in the bill unamended we will not call it corporate welfare for Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield is enough. some reason or another. to the gentleman from California. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- I have not quite figured that out, but Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- man, I move to strike the last word. the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. man, the gentlewoman is absolutely Mr. Chairman, I intend to support WALKER] will have a good explanation correct in her statement. this amendment. I think it is a vitally which he will give you shortly, I am Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. If the necessary amendment. Of course, my sure. gentleman will continue to yield, is it critiera is whether or not it was in my Now, it is my view, and I take delight also true that the National Research substitute, and it was in my substitute; in pointing this out, that the position Council panel validated the scientific or it must be a very good amendment. taken by the majority in these situa- goals of Mission to Planet Earth and I am not quite sure how to deal with tions is full of contradictions. They, for recommended, and I quote: NASA the arguments on the other side. Of example, have language in their report should implement most of the near- course, part of the argument is maybe which provides certain direction to term components of Mission to Planet that this is corporate welfare and we NASA with regard to applied research. Earth/Earth Observing System, includ- do not fund corporate welfare. If it ben- It says the committee encourages ing Landsat 7, AM–1, PM–1 and the efits corporations, we do not do it. So NASA to review funding levels for Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission they want to keep the program consid- polymer matrix composite programs to without delay in reduction in overall erably below the level that is being rec- achieve a balance between composite observing capability, and the Chem- ommended by the administration. and metallic technologies. Aluminum istry–1 mission should not be delayed? b 1530 has been the material of choice for all significant commercial aircraft struc- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- Well, maybe it is just that they do tures and continues to offer opportuni- man, if the gentlewoman would con- not want to do anything the adminis- ties for cost-effective improvements in tinue to yield, she is absolutely correct tration wants, no matter how good it aircraft structural performance. in the citation that she has made. In is. Of course, they are raising again the Now, this sounds to me an awful lot addition, the National Research Coun- subject of the budget; it does not have like a recommendation to pursue a par- cil went on to conclude, and I quote: any offsets in it. Now, that was the ticular line of advanced subsonic re- Based on a series of reviews, a series of same argument that we heard on the search because it has a more direct ap- reviews, the program has evolved from previous amendment and on various plication to existing commercial air- its original plans to a reshaped pro- other amendments. craft design. Is that a good idea? Pos- gram that is more responsive to the It is quite obvious that on the major- sibly. Or is this an example of cor- science, more resilient, more open to ity side, they have a great deal of wis- porate welfare, telling the government the introduction of new technologies. dom, shared by almost every one of how to spend its money in support of There has been a shift from a fixed se- them, as evidenced by the fact that certain technologies which are already ries of large vehicle missions to a they all, in that wisdom, decided to well developed and have a large base in mixed fleet exploiting small- to me- vote against the prior amendment. So, industry? dium-class spacecraft. However, any I do not want the belabor these things Apparently, if they like the program, further structural changes to the near- too much. it is not corporate welfare. If they do term EOS missions would cause severe May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5689 program dislocations. Further budg- through conference and be able to en- Cummings Kennedy (MA) Regula Deal Klink Richardson etary reductions or imposed con- sure that what we do have is the rea- DeFazio LaFalce Rivers straints on technical options would re- soned response to the National Re- DeLauro Lantos Roemer quire the elimination of key sensors, search Council’s review and be able to Dellums LaTourette Rose slips in schedule, loss of data continu- comply with that most timely study. I Deutsch Levin Rush Dicks Lewis (GA) Sabo ity and the elimination of all advanced thank the gentleman and I yield back Dingell Lofgren Sawyer technology development that could en- my time. Dixon Lowey Schroeder hance future research and lower cost, Mr. HOKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong Doggett Maloney Schumer Dooley Manton Scott end of quotation. support of the Scott amendment to restore Durbin Markey Serrano Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. $34.4 million in funds to NASA's Advanced Edwards Martinez Sisisky Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would Subsonic Program. This increase would bring Engel Matsui Skaggs take from that statement that that funding back to the requested level and rein- Eshoo McCarthy Skelton Evans McDermott Slaughter was nothing but a clear and strong vest vitally needed resources in maintaining Farr McHale Spratt message from the National Research NASA's longstanding global leadership in aer- Fattah McKinney Stark Council, I might add, an independent onautics research. Fazio McNulty Stenholm council, that assessed the Mission to Filner Meek Stockman While advanced subsonic technology may Flake Menendez Stokes Planet Earth and the Mission to Planet seem like science fiction to some, this re- Frank (MA) Millender- Studds Earth directives in H.R. 3322 consistent search does in fact help address safety, fuel Frost McDonald Stupak with the recommendations of that Na- efficiency, and environmental impact concerns Furse Miller (CA) Tanner Gejdenson Mink Taylor (MS) tional Research Council’s independent for today's and the next generation of com- Gephardt Moakley Tejeda review, a review that was in fact, as we mercial aircraft. For anyone who has ever ex- Gonzalez Moran Thompson understand it, requested by the chair- pressed concern about the aging aircraft used Green (TX) Nadler Thornton man of the Committee on Science? Hall (TX) Neal Thurman by some domestic airlines and the U.S. mili- Harman Oberstar Torres Mr. BROWN of California. If the gen- tary, subsonic research is not just a smart in- Hastings (FL) Obey Torricelli tlewoman will continue to yield, the vestment, it is peace of mind. Hefner Olver Towns gentlewoman is correct. That review And, although I fully recognize the need to Hilliard Ortiz Traficant Hinchey Owens Velazquez was requested by the chairman of the cut the budget deficit, aeronautics research Hoke Pallone Visclosky Committee on Science. The legislation and technology spending has a tremendous Horn Pastor Volkmer before us would actually cancel the net beneficial impact on our national economy Hoyer Payne (NJ) Ward PM–1 and Chemistry–1 spacecraft, cut Jackson (IL) Payne (VA) Waters and international balance of trade. The aero- Jackson-Lee Pelosi Watt (NC) the funding available for the Mission to nautics industry has annual sales of over $60 (TX) Petri Waxman Planet Earth Program by 27 percent billion and produces a positive balance of Johnson (SD) Pickett Wilson and would fundamentally unravel the trade of $25 billion. In Ohio alone, the aero- Johnson, E. B. Rahall Woolsey Johnston Rangel Yates integrated scientific program that has space industry is responsible for approxi- been put in place. mately 300,000 jobs and injects some $13.5 NOES—250 The actions taken in H.R. 3322 fly in billion into the State's economy. Allard Cunningham Heineman the face of the conclusions and rec- While a $34 million cut from the request Andrews Danner Herger ommendations of the National Re- Archer Davis Hilleary level may not seem like a lot of money, it is Armey DeLay Hobson search Council’s review. I might point about 20 percent of the program's funds. I be- Bachus Diaz-Balart Hoekstra out that the chairman of the commit- lieve such a deep cut in this important pro- Baesler Dickey Holden tee, when he asked for advice from the Baker (CA) Doolittle Hostettler gram is unwarranted and exacerbates the Baker (LA) Dornan Hunter scientific body, has a tendency to ig- overall funding cuts suffered by the Agency Ballenger Doyle Hutchinson nore it unless it conforms with his own since 1993. Barr Dreier Hyde preestablished conclusions. I noted Our trading partners throughout the world Barrett (NE) Duncan Inglis that the gentleman referred favorably Barrett (WI) Dunn Istook are increasing their investments in research Bartlett Ehlers Jacobs to the AAAS report when he thought it and technology and are consequently snatch- Barton Ehrlich Johnson (CT) substantiated his conclusions. Nor- ing markets away from our domestic compa- Bass Emerson Johnson, Sam mally he does not agree with the report Bereuter English Jones nies. Faced with intense competition in a Bilbray Ensign Kanjorski that they make each year with regard growing global aerospace market, we should Bilirakis Everett Kaptur to R&D funding and the budget. do all we can to promote our aerospace indus- Bliley Ewing Kasich Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Re- try and maintain NASA's preeminence in aero- Blute Fawell Kelly claiming my time, it is interesting as Boehlert Fields (TX) Kennedy (RI) nautics. Boehner Flanagan Kildee we discuss this, and that is why I think I urge Members to support this important Bonilla Foley Kim the amendment would have been appro- amendment. Bono Forbes King priate, but I wonder if the gentleman Brownback Fowler Kingston The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Bryant (TN) Fox Kleczka shares the view of at least one of our the amendment offered by the gen- Bunn Franks (CT) Klug Republican colleagues that indicated tleman from Virginia [Mr. SCOTT]. Bunning Franks (NJ) Knollenberg that money spend on global change re- The question was taken; and the Burr Frelinghuysen Kolbe search is money down a rat hole. Burton Frisa LaHood Chairman announced that the noes ap- Buyer Funderburk Largent Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- peared to have it. Callahan Gallegly Latham man, is this the same Member who says Calvert Ganske Laughlin RECORDED VOTE it is liberal claptrap also? Camp Gekas Lazio Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I demand Campbell Geren Leach Canady Gilchrest Lewis (CA) Chairman, sounds familiar. Very much a recorded vote. A recorded vote was ordered. Castle Gillmor Lewis (KY) so. Chambliss Gilman Lightfoot Mr. BROWN of California. I do not The vote was taken by electronic de- Chenoweth Goodlatte Linder share that view. In my opinion, such vice, and there were—ayes 157, noes 250, Christensen Goodling Lipinski not voting 27, as follows: Chrysler Gordon Livingston research is imperative if we are to Clinger Goss LoBiondo truly understand the planet on which [Roll No. 204] Coble Graham Longley we live including the complex inter- AYES—157 Coburn Greene (UT) Lucas Collins (GA) Greenwood Luther Abercrombie Blumenauer Cardin actions that determine our climate and Combest Gunderson Manzullo Baldacci Bonior Clay develop the policy options that offer Condit Hall (OH) Martini Barcia Borski Clayton Cooley Hamilton Mascara the most benefit to all our citizens. Bateman Boucher Clement Costello Hancock McCollum Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Re- Becerra Brewster Coleman Cox Hansen McCrery Beilenson Browder Collins (IL) claiming my time, I thank the gen- Crane Hastert McHugh Bentsen Brown (CA) Collins (MI) tleman from California [Mr. BROWN], Crapo Hastings (WA) McInnis Berman Brown (FL) Conyers Cremeans Hayworth McIntosh and I would certainly agree with him. I Bevill Brown (OH) Coyne Cubin Hefley McKeon hope that we will be able to pursue this Bishop Bryant (TX) Cramer H5690 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 Meehan Reed Stearns There was no objection. big manufacturing interests in the Metcalf Riggs Stump The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Meyers Roberts Talent space station, and they are going to Mica Rogers Tate from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER] will be rec- help the taxpayers pay for this, is just Miller (FL) Rohrabacher Tauzin ognized for 30 minutes, and the gen- not accurate, not according to the lat- Minge Ros-Lehtinen Taylor (NC) tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSEN- est article in Scientific American. Montgomery Roth Thomas Moorhead Roybal-Allard Thornberry BRENNER] will be recognized for 30 min- Members might say, as we approach Morella Royce Tiahrt utes. some very, very difficult circumstances Myers Salmon Torkildsen The Chair recognizes the gentleman in reaching a balanced budget over the Myrick Sanders Upton from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. next 5 or 6 years, that we have to make Nethercutt Sanford Vento Neumann Saxton Vucanovich Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield some tough choices around this body. Ney Scarborough Walker myself 6 minutes. Based on science and merit, the space Norwood Schaefer Walsh Mr. Chairman, I guess I ask for the station is the most logical choice to Nussle Schiff Wamp patience of this body, since we seem to Orton Seastrand Watts (OK) eliminate. Oxley Sensenbrenner Weldon (FL) go through this argument on eliminat- When President Reagan first came up Packard Shadegg Weldon (PA) ing the space station a couple of times with the idea in 1984, he said the space Parker Shaw Weller a year. Certainly people on both sides station would cost us $8 billion. Does Peterson (MN) Shays White Pombo Shuster Whitfield could dust off their talk from 1992 or anybody in this body have any idea Pomeroy Skeen Wicker 1994 and virtually give almost the iden- about the projected cost today? It is Porter Smith (MI) Williams tical talk for cutting the space station not $18 billion, it is not even $58 bil- Portman Smith (NJ) Wolf or for supporting it. lion, it is close to $90 billion when we Poshard Smith (TX) Young (FL) Pryce Smith (WA) Zeliff I am not going to give the previous add in the costs of what we have spent, Quillen Solomon Zimmer speech, because it seems that we on the of what the space shuttle will cost us Radanovich Souder opposing side of the space station con- to put these different platforms up into Ramstad Spence tinue to get more and more arguments the atmosphere, the cost of protecting NOT VOTING—27 in favor of cutting the space station, it, the cost of maintaining it for the 10 Ackerman Gutierrez Mollohan especially from the scientific commu- or 12 years it is up there in space. Chabot Gutknecht Murtha nity. So let me give some background Mr. Chairman, we are talking about Chapman Hayes Paxon Clyburn Houghton Peterson (FL) as to why this is not good science. This $90 billion. Some may argue, well, de la Garza Jefferson Quinn is not in the interests of the scientific Members of Congress, we have already Fields (LA) Kennelly Roukema community or in the interests of tax- spent about $12 billion or $13 billion, we Foglietta Lincoln Wise payers in America today. might as well finish it. Do Members Ford McDade Wynn Gibbons Molinari Young (AK) Mr. Chairman, Scientific American, want to justify an expense of $70 or $75 which is one of the most distinguished billion more of the taxpayers’ money b 1601 periodicals written in the United because we have spent $12 billion or $13 Mr. BEREUTER changed his vote States today, the June issue, has a billion bad dollars? I do not think that from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ very interesting article on the space makes a whole heck of a lot of sense. Mr. SCHUMER and Mr. BEILENSON station this month. Let me quote from That does not make sense to people changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ it: ‘‘Scientific panels, such as the Na- who are working so hard for so long for So the amendment was rejected. tional Research Council’s Space Stud- their tax money to pay their bills and The result of the vote was announced ies Board, have warned that, although to try to insist on a fair cost here in as above recorded. some interesting research will be pos- Washington, DC, when we do expend a The CHAIRMAN. Are there further sible on the station, the expected re- dollar. amendments to title II? turns cannot, cannot justify the facili- Mr. Chairman, I have the utmost re- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. ROEMER ty’s overall cost.’’ spect for people on the other side of Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer Another quote from this ‘‘Science in this issue, including the gentleman an amendment. the Sky’’ article in the Scientific from Texas [Mr. HALL] and the gen- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- American, dated June 1996: ‘‘To date, tleman from Alabama [Mr. CRAMER], ignate the amendment. no large companies are planning major who was elected the same year and The text of the amendment is as fol- research or manufacturing efforts on serves with me on the Committee on lows: the Space Station.’’ Science, and Members on the other side AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. ROEMER We hear from a host of proponents of of the aisle. But we have to have the Page 24, line 20, insert ‘‘and’’ after ‘‘Ad- the space station that this is going to courage in this body to make some ministration;’’. solve everything from cancer to AIDS, tough spending cuts to get to a bal- Page 24, lines 21 through 24, strike para- to making, manufacturing, and testing anced budget. graph (2). new crystals. This is absolutely not If Members look at science and look Page 25, line 1, redesignate paragraph (3) as what Scientific American says. They at merit, this space station just does paragraph (2). Page 25, lines 13 and 15, and page 26, lines go on to look at what is good in the not pass the test of what hardworking 4 and 6, redesignate paragraphs (2) through space station and what, out of the American families will ask in terms of (5) as paragraphs (1) through (4), respec- eight original missions that the space return on their tax dollar. It is not tively. station had, what are we going to do going to return good science. It is sure- Page 26, line 14, strike ‘‘$498,500,000’’ and now, in 1996, from when it was first de- ly not going to return any kind of good insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$230,700,000’’. signed in 1984. return for these high-tech objectivity Page 27, line 4, strike ‘‘$711,000,000’’ and in- With regard to high-technology prod- measures that people do not even have sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$679,400,000’’. Page 38, line 14, through page 43, line 6, ucts, it says in Scientific American: interest in at the manufacturing level, strike subtitle C. ‘‘No larger companies are currently in- according to Scientific American, and Page 43, line 7, redesignate subtitle D as terested in manufacturing in space.’’ we definitely have to make some of subtitle C. Astronomy, remote sensing for dif- these tough choices to get to a bal- Amend the table of contents accordingly. ferent platforms put on the space sta- anced budget. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- tion, those are certainly gone now Citizens Against Government Waste man, I ask unanimous consent that de- since 1984, but there is no research cur- endorses this amendment offered by bate on this amendment and all amend- rently planned from inside or outside myself and the gentleman from Iowa ments thereto be limited to 1 hour, or anywhere on the space station. [Mr. GANSKE] and a host of other with the time equally divided between On biotechnology, it says that groups do as well, too, that I will list the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ROE- ‘‘NASA and its partners are planning in the next few minutes. I urge the MER] and myself. some experiments, but the commercial body to support this elimination of the The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection interest is limited only to subsidized space station, in the interests of to the request of the gentleman from research.’’ So these claims that there science and in the interest of balancing Wisconsin? is all this private sector interest and the budget. May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5691 Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- sored this amendment, in support of search money building the space sta- man, I yield myself 3 minutes. this amendment. tion? Mr. Chairman, I am afraid that Mr. Chairman, we are going through Mr. Chairman, this should not be an well-intentioned but misguided efforts one of the annual rites of spring in annual rite of spring. We should elimi- to complete this project will not give Washington. The tulips bloom, the nate this funding. James van Allen, a us what we want. These concessions dogwoods become very beautiful, and respected scientist at the University of cost millions of dollars. We have the the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ROE- Iowa, and many other scientists have delay of completion of scientific MER] introduces his amendment to kill said that we will get much more bang projects in other areas. This is a black the space station. for our buck by funding unmanned sci- hole. The money goes in, nothing Let me say that I will match my entific explorations. The space sta- comes out. record on spending issues against that tion’s spending is already $43 million For example, our offer to launch Rus- of the gentleman from Indiana and over budget, or, as NASA would say, sia’s science power platform will upset anybody else in this House, and I sup- the expenses have experienced cost the station construction schedule by port the space station. The Citizens growth. causing a 5-month delay in launching Against Government Waste has given Despite these higher expenditures, Japan’s science module and an 8-month me their Taxpayer Hero Award consist- NASA has fallen behind in the con- delay in launching the centrifuge ently. The National Taxpayers Union struction schedule. According to the which some say is essential for life has named me the tightwad of the dec- GAO, we will sink $94 billion into this sciences research. I think we just ade in terms of my votes on taxes and orbiting erector set before it is over, if should not throw more good money spending, and I am proud of that, and I NASA does not go any further over after bad. It is time to cut our losses. support the space station. budget. I believe that we should face reality, I am not going to belabor this point Our share of the price tag is not the we should stop the money vacuum very much, but I do wish to make two only problem. The space station is sup- known as the space station now. Vote points for the committee’s consider- posed to be international, so let me ‘‘yes’’ on this amendment. ation. The first is that the United speak to comments made by my friend Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- States taxpayers have already put $12 and colleague, the gentleman from man, I yield 3 minutes to the gen- Wisconsin. The memoranda of under- billion into designing the space station tleman from Texas [Mr. HALL]. and building 50,000 pounds of hardware. standing between NASA and the space Mr. HALL of Texas. I thank the gen- If the amendment of the gentleman agencies of our partners has not been tleman for yielding me the time. from Indiana is adopted, that $12 bil- finalized. We have no definitive agree- Mr. Chairman, I, of course, like all lion investment will just evaporate. We ments with any of our partners, whose the other Members who will speak and contributions are necessary for the just chalk that up to experience, and who have spoken, have the highest re- completion of this space station. this vote is really a vote on whether or gard for the gentleman from Indiana NASA insists that Russia has made [Mr. ROEMER] and those who support not to stiff the taxpayers the $12 bil- commitments to the project. However, him. We just differ with him. We just lion that they have invested in this. none of these agreements are in writ- The space station is on time, it is on think he is still wrong and probably ing. NASA must know something that budget. We have settled on a design. will be wrong in the next Congress and Russia does not know. For example, We are not redesigning it. We are build- in the Congress after that and the one NASA states that an American will al- ing the hardware now and we are look- after that. Because he is a fine young ways be in command of the space sta- ing forward to the launches of the first man, he will be reelected, and he will tion. The Russians, however, say that elements sometime next year. be here when I am in the corner room question has not been settled. The second point is that America’s The fact that we have no written of the Rockwall Nursing Home, but I credibility is on the line, because we agreement with Russia I think is par- will still be calling out to save the are the leaders of an international con- ticularly problematic. Russian Presi- space station for us old folks. As I mentioned to the gentleman sortium that includes Russia, the dential elections will be held this June, from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER] at the re- member nations of the Russian space and it is uncertain who the successor cent full committee markup of the bill, agency, Canada, and Japan. Should the to Yeltsin will be. amendment of the gentleman from In- the space station amendment, as the diana be adopted, the United States b 1615 gentleman has said, is one of the en- will unilaterally cancel the space sta- Should Mr. Yeltsin lose, it is likely dearing traditions here. I respect his tion, and the investments that have that Mr. Zyuganov will be the Presi- convictions. been made by the taxpayers of all those dent of Russia. As most Members Mr. Chairman, the value of research other countries will similarly be know, he hates the West, and I would today is already demonstrated in a lot waived. That is about 4 billion U.S. dol- doubt that we would see any coopera- of ways, but in a limited way by experi- lars. tion with the space station. ments that are being conducted on the So if we end up stiffing our inter- Another ally, Canada, will not decide space shuttle. In previous sessions, we national partners and our allies, we are whether they will pay for completion have held hearings and we have held a going to make sure that they are not of the robotic arm until 1997. What if number of hearings where we heard going to want to get together with the they decide not to? I suppose NASA from some of the leading medical re- United States, either on scientific en- will be back here in Congress asking searchers of our day. deavors or on any other endeavor, for for another chunk of change. Dr. Michael DeBakey walked these fear that the Congress will change its While NASA’s overall budget has halls 3 days, going in to visit with mind and pull the rug out from under- been declining and will continue to de- Members to tell them of the value of neath them. cline, the space station seems to be im- the space station and the hope that the Let us stay the course. Let us vote mune to scrutiny. NASA has consoli- space station holds out; in his early against the Roemer amendment. Let us dated control of the entire space sta- 80’s, Dr. Mickey LeMaistre, head of build the space station, and then let us tion budget with the program manager, M.D. Anderson, who knows the attacks operate the space station and benefit giving him an additional $300 million that cancer makes on the citizenry, from the scientific research that goes per year. These funds were previously and all of us have someone in a cancer on. controlled by various research offices ward. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance responsible for scientific experiments I think there is one word that the of my time. to be conducted on the space station. space station holds out and that one Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield This consolidation has made it possible word is so important to people that are 4 minutes to the distinguished gen- for funds allocated for research to be wasting away in the cancer wards. It is tleman from Iowa [Mr. GANSKE], co- used for construction of the space sta- so important that we are even talking author of this bipartisan amendment. tion. about revolutionizing the FDA because Mr. GANSKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise, What good will building the space of that one word, and that one word for not surprisingly, since I have cospon- station do if we spend all of the re- people is hope. They have hope that H5692 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 there is medication for them. They How can we tell millions of homeless This would be equivalent, in my opin- have hope that there is a break- people that there isn’t enough money ion, to saying to go out to dinner with through. We have not found that here to put a safe roof over their heads, and your wife and see a movie does not cost in this environment. We hope and they then, continue to fund the space sta- $30, you have to factor in the cost of hope that we will find it in the weight- tion? It is unconscionable to pour bil- paving the roads to get back and forth less environment of space. lions of dollars into this science fiction from the restaurant and the cost of Yes, it is a large expenditure of experiment, when we cannot afford to heating or cooling your house while money, but the American people have take care of our own citizens. you are in the restaurant. This kind of cried out that they want this station, My colleagues, the real question be- accounting is very, very deceptive. and if you really want to hear a hue fore us today is whether millions of The truth is the space station is on and cry all across the universities of Americans will be forced to go without time and on budget, and there are very, this country, from children in the first the most fundamental of needs—hous- very few programs run by this Federal grade on up to the senior colleges, do ing—in favor of an expensive space toy. Government that can make that claim. something to the space station. Spending cuts to balance the budget The space station program has been We almost lost the space station sev- must be applied to all domains, not through downsizing. NASA has been eral sessions ago but we have never just to the social programs. It is wrong through downsizing, and they have lost it. This body has always said yes, to place this burden on the backs of the learned to be able to be lean, mean and that this gives that one thing called defenseless poor, without asking others efficient. This program is on time and hope. And when we talk about Russia to pay as well. it is on budget. and whether or not they are going to Let us not pour any more of our What this program is about is about stay hitched, it has been certainly my scarce funds into building a luxury the future. When we look at the cost of finding in Russia itself that they seem hotel in the sky—especially after we the space station and compare it to not to have money for other things, but just demolished public housing for the what we are going to spend over the for educational pursuits and for the needy down here on Earth. next 7 years on defense, on health care, space station they seem to allocate and I urge my colleagues to vote ‘‘yes’’ on roads and highways, this comes out have money to set aside for it. on the Roemer amendment to cancel to be less than 0.1 percent. I think it is Both sides requested that AL GORE funding for the space station. about 0.01 percent of what we as a Na- give us some assurance as to what Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- tion are going to spend. The American their intentions were and what they man, I yield myself 30 seconds just to people have said over and over again thought the Russian intentions were. I rebut the gentlewoman from New York over the past 5, 6, 7 years, yes, we want read to you a letter from AL GORE ad- [Ms. VELA´ ZQUEZ]. to make this investment in the future, dressed to us dated May 9. It says: There is a cut in the NASA budget. It because that is what this is all about, As you are aware, I recently wrote to is a pretty significant cut. We went the future. Prime Minister Chrnomyrdin regarding the through all of that in terms of the de- I am told by teachers in my district status of funding for the Russian Space bate on the personnel. But just to set that there is nothing that we can get Agency’s cooperative activities with NASA the record straight, from fiscal year children more excited about in the area on the international Space Station program. 1996 to fiscal year 1997 this bill cuts the of math and science than talking about In response, the Prime Minister has firmly total NASA budget by $325 million. space and manned space and the future. pledged that Russia will meet its commit- Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to Support the station, vote ‘‘no’’ on the ments to the ISS program in full. the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Roemer amendment. It goes on to say other things. Mem- WELDON]. Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield bers all have copies of this letter. I in- Mr. WELDON of Florida. I thank the 5 minutes to the distinguished gen- vite them to read it. But its assurance subcommittee chairman for yielding tleman from New Jersey [Mr. ZIMMER], to us that the leaders of this country, me the time. who used to serve on the Committee on the leaders of that country, certainly Mr. Chairman, I rise to take part in Science and was a strong supporter and the investment that Japan and other this traditional rite of spring, to op- coauthor of this amendment in the countries have made ought to cry out pose the Roemer amendment and speak past. to us: Save this space station and give out in support of the future, in support Mr. ZIMMER. I thank the gentleman these people hope. of our children, in support of the space for yielding me the time. Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I would station. I would like to address several Mr. Chairman, 5 years ago when the just say to the distinguished Member of the arguments that have been made gentleman from Indiana and I were from Texas that he certainly will prob- by the people who would favor killing freshmen and both rookie members of ably never be in a nursing home. As our space station. what was then the Science, Space and talented and as fired up as he is, he will One of them is that they bring out Technology Committee, we took the probably be on the space station if it is articles and quotations from bench re- well of this House to warn that the built some day. searchers that say, no, do not spend the space station was going to be an orbit- Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to money on space station, spend the ing white elephant, that it was going the hardworking gentlewoman from money on my research. I have done to be a black hole in space that would New York [Ms. VELA´ ZQUEZ]. bench research. I have done life suck up billions of tax dollars and radi- Ms. VELA´ ZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I sciences research. I can tell my col- cally expand the deficit, and we said rise today in strong support of the Roe- leagues they could go into any univer- that it simply was not worth the mer amendment to eliminate funding sity anywhere in the United States and money. for the space station. say, ‘‘Would you rather we spend $17 Now, 5 years later, I wish I could say Just 3 weeks ago, we debated a bill billion on the station or on more bench that we were wrong, but every day pro- that drastically cut housing aid to research?’’ And they would gladly say, vides us with new evidence that we lower income Americans. In the name ‘‘Give us the money for more bench re- were right. In a period of declining of deficit reduction, this body elimi- search.’’ The question before us is, is NASA budgets, the space station, nated housing assistance for hundreds that the more appropriate use of our which is now estimated by the GAO to of thousands of Americans. The argu- resources? cost more than $94 billion, has already ment we heard was that, as a nation, Another point that is being made by begun to cannibalize more valuable we simply could not afford it. the opponents of the space station is programs in space. But today, many in this Chamber are this $90 billion figure. The space sta- Bill Clinton’s proposed NASA budget singing a different tune. This bill is tion is costing $17 billion to construct. drops from $13.8 billion next year to definitely not about reducing spending. The $90 billion figure comes from a $11.6 billion in the year 2000, and when This bill continues the foolish proposal GAO study where they added in the inflation is factored in, the cut is even to spend billions of dollars for an orbit- cost of running the shuttle program for deeper. The Republican budget provides ing public housing project, for just a those 7 years and the cost of all the re- somewhat more money for NASA, but few astronauts. search on the space station. even so, the amount of available funds May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5693 is drastically less than we thought it and our remaining international part- they want to do with their education would be just a few years ago. There is ners would have to develop and fund a and their careers. Let us not tell those simply not enough money to build the new escape vehicle. young people that we are the kind of space station and to meet the Nation’s Now, regardless of who wins the up- country that can in fact turn our back more pressing needs for scientific re- coming elections for President in Rus- on this kind of investment, that can search in space and on Earth. sia, it is clear we will be dealing with turn our back on the space station pro- According to this month’s Scientific a nation that is characterized by inter- gram. American, NASA’s research and devel- nal political strife, by Space station is the centerpiece of opment outlay, bloated by the space ultranationalism, authoritarianism, what NASA is all about. We have, in station, represents almost 40 percent of and perhaps insurgent imperialism as fact, many scientific projects that our the Nation’s total nonhealth, non- well as tremendous corruption. While doctors are planning to conduct on the military research and development we should, obviously, support Russia’s space station. In my first year here I budget. The huge annual costs of the struggle to become a democratic, cap- sat down with my colleague from Texas space station are sucking the life out italistic nation, we cannot afford to and a number of Texas doctors that of more cost effective programs of gamble $94 billion on it. were here that had joined with doctors NASA, such as our magnificent orbit- We just can not be certain that there from all over the world, and again they ing observatories, unmanned interplan- is going to be a happy ending to the said the advances we had made in etary missions, the mission to planet Russian melodrama. It is not too late NASA technology that has given them Earth, as well as the development of to cut our losses on this space station. benefits of robotics and surgery bene- cheaper launch systems which will We should support the Roemer-Ganske fits and valves for artificial hearts, make it possible for us someday to amendment. that we would lose our ability to com- have an affordable space station. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- plete those technologies if we, in fact, This spring NASA has already used man, I yield 3 minutes to the gen- turn our back on the space station. reserve funds to cover $144 million in tleman from Alabama [Mr. CRAMER]. So I say we have had a fair fight. It cost growth of the space station pro- Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank is the irresponsible thing to do to turn gram, $100 million is attributable to my colleague and chairman of the Sub- your back on this project at this par- the program being behind schedule, and committee on Space and Aeronautics, ticular point. Let us kill this killing $44 million is due to the cost growth in and I again rise in opposition, strong amendment and let us also kill the some of the contracts. The Congres- opposition, to the amendment of the amendment that the gentleman from sional Research Service reports that gentleman from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. Indiana [Mr. ROEMER] will offer next, NASA officials are worried because This is, in fact, getting to be an an- which intends to maim the NASA space these increases are occurring so early nual ritual, I say to my colleague. I station program. Let us stop this and in the construction phase of the pro- feel like one of those toys kids buy for let us get on with it. gram. Christmas, where you pull the back of Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- the toy and the conversation comes out man, I yield 3 minutes to the distin- b 1630 ‘‘Save Space Station’’, ‘‘Save Space guished gentleman from Texas [Mr. There is one aspect that I think de- Station’’, ‘‘Kill Space Station’’, ‘‘Kill STOCKMAN]. serves particular attention this spring, Space Station.’’ Mr. STOCKMAN. Mr. Chairman, I and that is our relationship with Rus- There have been 10 votes on the floor have only been here a few short sia as a partner in the space station. of the House since 1991 over this issue. months, but I already feel like I know When Bill Clinton and AL GORE pro- As I count it, there have been 32 total the gentleman from Indiana like a posed the Russian partnership, it gen- votes both in the committee and on the brother. We voted on this so many erated greater support in this body be- floor on this very issue. I think we times now that I am being called an old cause it seemed like a diplomatic coup. have had a fair fight and I think, I say bull in the Committee on Science. A symbol of the cold war was becoming to my colleague, it is time for us to get This is something that we apparently a symbol of international cooperation. off of NASA’s back. do around here as a ritual, but let me But, unfortunately, it looks like our There is not an agency that has been tell my colleagues what this is really partnership with Russia is turning out under more scrutiny than NASA has all about. When I was a child I looked to be a colossal mistake. The gen- been over the space station project. at the TV and I watched us go up in tleman from Texas [Mr. HALL], says They have redesigned it since 1991, Apollo to the Moon. I believed and saw Russia always comes up with money they have cut the budget, they have and realized America was about some- when it is needed for space, and he re- cut their personnel, they have come to thing greater than I could ever imag- fers us to a letter from the Vice Presi- Congress, they have dealt with us in an ine; that was America has a vision for dent and promises from the Prime Min- open, direct way, and yet we keep say- the future. ister of Russia. But the Russian Gov- ing every year now is the time to turn America is a country and a nation ernment has already delayed funding our back on it. seeking out new places. We were found- for its service module, a critical com- We have invested billions of dollars. ed by a man that had that vision, and ponent of the space station, and work Our international partners have their we continued throughout, as we looked on the service module has fallen 5 partnership with us at stake in this to the West to develop, to search and months behind because the prime con- project. They have invested billions of look for new solutions, and to go, as tractor has received only $10 million of dollars. Now is not the time to turn our they say in ‘‘Star Trek,’’ boldly where the $55 million that has been requested. back on it. no one else has ever gone. The Russian Government still has I want to echo some of the comments What we are saying here is if we not approved a timetable for making that my colleague from Florida, Mr. eliminate space station, we eliminate these payments. The Russian service WELDON, made about children and the vision for America. We will not module is scheduled for launch in 1998. mathematics and science. We happen hear anybody coming up here and say- If it is not delivered on time, it could to have the international space camp ing we will have a new solution. This is devastate the schedule and the budget there at the Marshall Space Flight what we are going to do. of the space station. NASA Adminis- Center, there in Huntsville in my dis- Mr. Chairman, of all the money we trator Dan Goldin has said, ‘‘If we do trict, and I get to go out there two or spend in Government research, I sub- not have the service module, we cannot three times a year and see all these mit this is the most important thing complete construction of the space sta- young people come in from all over the we do: Create new cures for illnesses tion. world with their parents, young people and develop new processes to which we If Russia withdraws from the station, that are inspired by NASA and by the can feed the world. NASA estimates that assembly would space program, young people that want We are obligated. We do not have a be delayed by 18 months and would cost to commit their careers to mathe- choice in this. We have to build the the United States an additional $2 bil- matics and science, young people that space station, because up there in the lion. Additionally, the United States are using NASA as their image of what skies are the solutions to here on H5694 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 Earth. Mr. Chairman, there is no other Now, again, I hear over and over from [Roll No. 205] purpose for the United States in this my colleagues this is great science. AYES—127 greatest quest. Again, I refer to Scientific American. Ackerman Jacobs Owens Right now we look at the movies and High-tech products: Who is going to Barrett (WI) Johnson (SD) Pallone the different things across the country build them? Who is the company? Ac- Bass Kanjorski Payne (NJ) Bereuter Kaptur Payne (VA) and we know that Americans want a cording to this article, no large compa- Blute Kennedy (MA) Pelosi space station. We voted on this many nies are currently interested in manu- Brown (OH) Kildee Peterson (MN) times, and I submit to my friends that facturing in space. Where are they? Camp Kingston Pomeroy it is the wisest use of money. In fact, it How much money are they putting up? Christensen Kleczka Porter Coble Klink Portman has been researched that for every dol- I want to know. That is a fair question. Collins (IL) Klug Poshard lar we spend in space we get $7 back. Astronomy: No research currently Collins (MI) LaFalce Ramstad That is not an expense, that is an in- planned, according to this article. Sub- Conyers Lantos Rangel sidies are required in biotechnology. Costello Largent Reed vestment. Coyne Latham Rivers As an accountant, I look and see They are not going to do it on their Cummings Lazio Roemer things differently, and if my wife and I own. More taxpayers’ money. Danner Leach Roukema have trouble with our budget, we do And when we talk about more tax- DeFazio Levin Rush payers’ money, we are coming back to Dellums Lipinski Sabo not say, ‘‘Honey, let us cut the bonds’’; Dickey LoBiondo Sanders ‘‘Honey, let us cut the investment.’’ the American taxpayer over and over Dingell Longley Sanford No, we say let us cut the expense, but and over again, with this budget going Dixon Lowey Schroeder do not cut the investments. from $8 billion to $90 billion, whereas Doyle Luther Schumer our taxpayers are sending the Russians Duncan Maloney Shays Space station is an investment in our Durbin Manzullo Shuster future. It is an investment in the next $100 million of our hard-earned money, Ensign Markey Slaughter generation for work. If we cut research yet that is not going down. On the Eshoo Martini Smith (MI) same hand, the gentleman from Wis- Evans McCarthy Solomon and development, tomorrow’s jobs will Fattah McHugh Stark be in Japan and in Germany because consin [Mr. SENSENBRENNER] said we Frank (MA) McKinney Studds they are continuing their space pro- are cutting NASA. Well, we are cutting Franks (NJ) McNulty Stupak gram. I submit we have to support this NASA in all the wrong places to pro- Furse Meehan Towns tect the space station. Ganske Menendez Upton not for us, but for the next generation. Gibbons Miller (CA) Velazquez Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, may I The space station is cannibalizing, it Goodlatte Minge Vento ask how much time is remaining on is eating up these other programs, like Gunderson Mink Visclosky both sides? Mission to Planet Earth, like new con- Gutierrez Moakley Wamp struction, like shuttle upgrades. These Hamilton Myrick Waxman The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Herger Nadler Wilson from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER] has 13 min- programs are being cut back and dis- Hilleary Neumann Woolsey utes remaining, and the gentleman placed. That is not in the best interest Hoekstra Nussle Yates Holden Oberstar Zimmer from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSENBRENNER] of good science. So we have the space station within Hutchinson Obey has 15 minutes remaining. Inglis Olver Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the science and the NASA project that NOES—286 myself 4 minutes to just reply to some is eating up more and more of our of the questions and comments that available good dollars to do good pro- Abercrombie Castle Fowler grams when NASA is doing some good Allard Chambliss Fox have been made. Andrews Chapman Franks (CT) Mr. Chairman, certainly this vote is things in areas like the Clementine Archer Chenoweth Frelinghuysen a tough one. It is a tough one to elimi- project and the Hubble and the Galileo Armey Chrysler Frisa that went to Jupiter. We are doing Bachus Clay Frost nate the space station because people Baesler Clayton Funderburk think that they do not want to make some marvelous things in NASA, but Baker (CA) Clement Gallegly any votes in this body to move toward we will not be doing anything in NASA Baker (LA) Clinger Gejdenson before long if the space station contin- Baldacci Clyburn Gekas a balanced budget. There are some Ballenger Coburn Gephardt Democrats here in the House of Rep- ues to gobble up all these moneys. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues Barcia Coleman Geren resentatives that do not want to vote Barr Collins (GA) Gilchrest to cut anything. There are some Re- that we are not going to be disappoint- Barrett (NE) Combest Gillmor Bartlett Condit Gilman publicans in this body that will vote to ing the American taxpayer when we say that $14 billion already spent is Barton Cooley Gonzalez cut everything but defense and the Bateman Cox Goodling space station. We here, a bipartisan going to be chased by another $70 bil- Becerra Cramer Gordon lion before this is over. Let us save the Beilenson Crane Goss group, have come together and tried to Bentsen Crapo Graham put together an amendment based upon taxpayer that $70 billion now. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- Berman Cremeans Green (TX) science and merit and the taxpayers’ Bevill Cubin Greene (UT) ance of my time. Bilbray Cunningham Greenwood interests. Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- Now, this question is asked over and Bilirakis Davis Hall (OH) man, I yield myself the balance of my Bishop Deal Hall (TX) over and over, why do we keep doing time. Bliley DeLauro Hancock this? Why do we keep making us go Mr. Chairman, this is the key vote on Blumenauer DeLay Hansen through this ritual every year of vot- Boehlert Deutsch Harman the space station this year. I would Boehner Diaz-Balart Hastert ing on the space station? It is because hope that the committee will stay the Bonilla Dicks Hastings (FL) groups like the National Taxpayers course. I ask the membership to vote Bonior Doggett Hastings (WA) Union support this amendment; Citi- Bono Dooley Hayworth no on the Roemer amendment. Borski Dornan Hefley zens Against Government Waste sup- Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- Boucher Dreier Hefner port this amendment; Citizens for a ance of my time. Brewster Dunn Heineman Sound Economy support this amend- The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Browder Edwards Hilliard ment; Taxpayers for Common Sense; Brown (CA) Ehlers Hinchey the amendment offered by the gen- Brown (FL) Ehrlich Hobson the Concord Coalition. A bipartisan tleman from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. Brownback Emerson Hoke group of people dedicated to balancing The question was taken; and the Bryant (TN) Engel Horn the budget support this amendment. Chairman announced that the noes ap- Bryant (TX) English Hostettler Bunn Everett Hoyer This is not a bunch of Members of peared to have it. Bunning Ewing Hunter Congress running around trying to de- RECORDED VOTE Burr Farr Hyde vise some way of balancing the budget Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I de- Burton Fawell Istook on their own and taking away a vital Buyer Fazio Jackson (IL) mand a recorded vote. Callahan Filner Jackson-Lee project to the United States’ research A recorded vote was ordered. Calvert Flake (TX) interests. These are grass roots organi- The vote was taken by electronic de- Campbell Flanagan Johnson (CT) zations that feel that we should not be vice, and there were—ayes 127, noes 286, Canady Foley Johnson, E. B. building this. not voting 21, as follows: Cardin Forbes Johnson, Sam May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5695 Johnston Nethercutt Souder tleman from Indiana, I ask unanimous Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Jones Ney Spence Kasich Norwood Spratt consent that debate on this amend- Chairman, I thank my good friend from Kelly Ortiz Stearns ment and all amendments thereto be Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. There is not a Kennedy (RI) Orton Stenholm limited to 10 minutes equally divided person on the Committee on Science Kennelly Oxley Stockman between the gentleman from Indiana that I do not have the greatest respect Kim Packard Stokes King Parker Stump [Mr. ROEMER] and myself. for, like the gentleman and his integ- Knollenberg Petri Talent The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection rity on this issue. But just like I dis- Kolbe Pickett Tanner to the request of the gentleman from agreed with the gentleman on the pre- LaHood Pombo Tate Wisconsin? LaTourette Pryce Tauzin vious vote and the previous effort to There was no objection. eliminate the space station, let me Laughlin Quillen Taylor (MS) The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman Lewis (CA) Radanovich Taylor (NC) argue vigorously against the decrease from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER] will be rec- Lewis (GA) Rahall Tejeda because I would simply say that we Lewis (KY) Regula Thomas ognized for 5 minutes, and the gen- cannot do any more. Lightfoot Richardson Thompson tleman from Wisconsin [Mr. SENSEN- Linder Riggs Thornberry The space station has already done as BRENNER] will be recognized for 5 min- Livingston Roberts Thornton much cutting back through a series of utes. Lofgren Rogers Thurman restructuring and redesigns. We do not Lucas Rohrabacher Tiahrt The Chair recognizes the gentleman have any more slack in the program. Manton Ros-Lehtinen Torkildsen from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. Martinez Rose Torres Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield What we have done is we have got a Mascara Roth Torricelli $2.1 billion program that will see us Matsui Roybal-Allard Traficant myself such time as I may consume. McCollum Royce Volkmer Mr. Chairman, I believe that the launch in about a year and a half. We McCrery Salmon Vucanovich House has spoken on eliminating the have got a privatization program going McDermott Sawyer Walker space station in that last amendment. on that efficiently uses both the civil- McHale Saxton Walsh ian employees as well as our private McInnis Scarborough Ward They do not think that we should McIntosh Schaefer Waters eliminate the space station. This sector employees or our civil service McKeon Schiff Watt (NC) amendment that I offer now for the employees. Meek Scott Watts (OK) consideration of this House is not the I will simply say to the gentleman Metcalf Seastrand Weldon (FL) from Indiana that we know that there Meyers Sensenbrenner Weldon (PA) elimination of the space station. It is Mica Serrano Weller very, very different than eliminating are priorities, and those priorities have Millender- Shadegg White the space station. All this amendment to be that we share with the American McDonald Shaw Whitfield offered by myself and the gentleman people. But I do believe that the space Miller (FL) Sisisky Wicker Montgomery Skaggs Williams from Iowa [Mr. GANSKE] does is to cut station creates jobs for the 21st cen- Moorhead Skeen Wolf $75 million out of a $2.1 billion alloca- tury. I would ask my colleagues to vote Moran Skelton Wynn tion for the space station every single against the gentleman from Indiana Morella Smith (NJ) Young (AK) year. They get $2.1 billion. We are just and support the space station. Myers Smith (TX) Young (FL) Neal Smith (WA) Zeliff saying in this year’s budget cut 3 per- Mr. Chairman, I have the utmost in respect cent, $75 million out of $2.1 billion. for my fellow committee member and Demo- NOT VOTING—21 Now, when everything else is being cratic colleague, Mr. ROEMER, but I happen to Chabot Gutknecht Mollohan cut around here, when we argued about believe that his position with regard to the de la Garza Hayes Murtha Doolittle Houghton Pastor a cut in Head Start for a month and a space station is patently wrong. The Nation Fields (LA) Jefferson Paxon half, when we argued about cuts in has always expanded its horizons and ex- Fields (TX) Lincoln Peterson (FL) Medicare, when we have been arguing plored all its frontiers and the international Foglietta McDade Quinn about cuts, some of the safety nets for Ford Molinari Wise space station Alpha continues in the tradition some of our senior citizens and some of of American know-how and fortitude. Alpha b 1704 our schoolchildren, certainly a space has had a long and tortuous history, and fi- The Clerk announced the following station that gets $2.1 billion each year nally, after many years, several redesigns, nu- pair: should be a part of balancing the budg- merous congressional votes and several ad- On this vote: et. ministrations, this Nation, along with its inter- Now, the other side, Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Chabot for, with Mr. Gutknecht national partners are on the cusp of beginning going to say this is a killer amend- against. the constant human presence in space; our ment, this is going to kill the space final frontier. With the first momentous launch Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut and Mr. station. A 3-percent cut? Three per- of Alpha hardware almost upon us, hardware JACKSON of Illinois changed their cent, $75 million out of $2.1 billion, is is being cut, tested, and assembled even as vote from ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ not going to cut this space station. It we speak. So the amendment was rejected. is not going to eliminate the space sta- Alpha will allow us to do research that can- The result of the vote was announced tion. This is just a way of saying what not be done here on mother Earth. The station as above recorded. is fair is fair in terms of getting to a will provide opportunities for research in the PERSONAL EXPLANATION balanced budget. areas of materials, life sciences, physics, as- Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Chairman, on re- So in conclusion, before I yield a few tronomy, and many other sciences. In addi- corded vote No. 205, I was incorrectly seconds to the gentlewoman from tion, the very effort of designing and building recorded as voting ‘‘aye.’’ Please let Texas, I urge Members to consider vot- the space station has created new building the RECORD show it was my intention ing not for an elimination of the space and engineering techniques, light-weight mate- to vote ‘‘no.’’ I have been and continue station but for a 3-percent cut in a $2.1 rials, and many new technologies. to be a strong supporter of the space billion budget. This is what would be NASA has accepted the funding cap Con- station. fair to the American people. gress has held it to and has testified and The CHAIRMAN. Are there further This is the fairest way to get to a pledged that barring unforeseen acts of God, amendments to title II? balanced budget in the next 6 years. This is fair to NASA when they are they will complete the project on time and on AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. ROEMER cutting the shuttle, when they are cut- budget. Period. Our international partners Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer ting new construction and a host of have promised their full economic and oper- an amendment. other important programs. Do not let ational support, and NASA has a strong The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- the space station continue to cannibal- record of working with them to solve problems ignate the amendment. ize the other programs in NASA. that arise as the program progresses. The text of the amendment is as fol- Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of I have always supported the space station, lows: my time to the gentlewoman from and I continue to do so, as evidenced by my Amendment offered by Mr. ROEMER: Page Texas [Ms. JACKSON-LEE] who is going vote today. I support the project, its goals, and 25, line 12, strike ‘‘$1,840,200,000’’ and insert to argue against me. its efforts. I also support the motivated and in lieu thereof ‘‘$1,765,200,000’’. (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked hard working employees of NASA, its many Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- and was given permission to revise and contractors, and all those involved in putting man, with the agreement of the gen- extend her remarks.) this project together. Let's honor them and H5696 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 their efforts by voting against the Roemer ing medicine, the environment, transportation, Hoekstra McInnis Roukema Holden McKinney Rush amendments, one to eliminate the space sta- and even communications. And the benefits Hutchinson McNulty Sanders tion and the alternative to reduce its funds. don't just stop there. Since the inception of the Inglis Meehan Sanford Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- U.S. space program, the secondary applica- Jacobs Menendez Schaefer man, I yield myself 5 minutes in oppo- tions of space technology have yielded $9 to Johnson (SD) Miller (CA) Schroeder Kanjorski Minge Schumer sition to the amendment. the economy for every tax dollar spent. The Kaptur Mink Serrano Mr. Chairman, this is a very decep- returns are clearly well worth the investment. Kennedy (MA) Moakley Shays tive amendment because it says that, if The partnerships created through the space Kennelly Montgomery Shuster we just take a little bit of money out Kildee Myrick Slaughter station serve as an exceptional model for fu- Kingston Nadler Smith (MI) of a $2.1 billion program, we will be ture international ventures. The partners of Kleczka Neumann Spratt able to save some money and nothing this program have already contributed billions Klink Nussle Stark is going to happen to it. That conclu- of dollars to the space station, demonstrating Klug Oberstar Studds LaFalce Obey Stupak sion is absolutely false. their commitment to completing the largest co- LaHood Olver Tauzin One of the reasons why NASA operative science program in history. Largent Owens Thompson brought itself into disrepute in the last The international space station will be a Latham Pallone Torkildsen decade is that both NASA and Congress Lazio Payne (NJ) Towns world-class orbiting laboratory, which will Leach Payne (VA) Upton decided to reduce costs in many of the serve as a test-bed for hundreds of science Levin Pelosi Velazquez accounts. The reduced costs saved and technology experiments that could not be Lipinski Peterson (MN) Vento money in the next fiscal year, but it conducted on this planet. We will learn new LoBiondo Pomeroy Visclosky Lowey Porter Wamp ended up resulting in projects not research techniques for growing tissue sam- Luther Portman Waters being completed and projects were ples outside of the human body, for use in Maloney Poshard Watts (OK) completed late and cost overruns. All cancer research and bone injuries. There will Manzullo Ramstad Waxman of the engineers stayed on the payroll Markey Rangel Williams be new understandings of the aging process, Martini Reed Woolsey to complete the project when the meter with subsequent developments in counter- McCarthy Rivers Yates is ticking. acting the effects of aging. McHugh Roemer NASA Administrator Dan Goldin, Imagine the possibilities of academic in- NOES—269 who I believe has done a marvelous job volvement in the space station's activities. Abercrombie Cremeans Horn in making NASA faster, better and Through the cooperative efforts of NASA and Andrews Cubin Hostettler cheaper, has written me a letter. I academic institutions throughout the world, the Archer Cunningham Hoyer want to quote it in part. It says, simply space station will launch future generations Armey Davis Hunter put, an arbitrary reduction of $49 to Bachus Deal Hyde into a brand new dimension of learning about Baesler DeLay Istook $100 million means a slowdown of work. space science. Baker (CA) Deutsch Jackson (IL) A slowdown of work means a schedule Author J.G. Holland said, ``Heaven is not Baker (LA) Diaz-Balart Jackson-Lee slip, and schedule slip means increased Baldacci Dicks (TX) reached by a single bound. But we build the Ballenger Doggett Johnson (CT) cost. Analytically, the impact to the ladder by which we rise.'' We are currently Barr Dooley Johnson, E. B. station schedule is up to 3 months, re- building that ladder, in a series of bounds. Barrett (NE) Doolittle Johnson, Sam ferring to the amendment of the gen- What we find at the top of this ladder will in- Bartlett Dornan Johnston tleman from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER], and Barton Dreier Jones spire future generations to imagine, explore, Bateman Dunn Kasich the increased cost as much as $200 mil- and actually see, first-hand, the unprece- Becerra Edwards Kelly lion, or at least twice the amount dented advances that the space station will Beilenson Ehlers Kennedy (RI) saved by the proposed amendment. Bentsen Emerson Kim provide. We must retain funding for the space Berman Engel King This is an unacceptable risk to our station. I urge a ``no'' vote on the Roemer- Bevill English Knollenberg careful balance of hardware elements Ganske amendment. Bilbray Eshoo Kolbe and payroll deployment. What the gen- Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chair- Bilirakis Everett Lantos tleman from Indiana is doing here Bishop Ewing LaTourette man, I yield back the balance of my Bliley Farr Laughlin today in the name of saving money is time. Boehlert Fawell Lewis (CA) to set this House and NASA up for a Boehner Fazio Lewis (GA) complaint that the station experiences Bonilla Filner Lewis (KY) b 1715 Bonior Flake Lightfoot cost overruns because of the stretch- Bono Flanagan Linder out and the schedule slip that is caused The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Borski Foley Livingston by the gentleman from Indiana’s the amendment offered by the gen- Boucher Forbes Lofgren amendment. Then he will be back next tleman from Indiana [Mr. ROEMER]. Brewster Fowler Longley The question was taken; and the Browder Fox Lucas year when the dogwood bloom and the Brown (CA) Franks (CT) Manton tulips sprout saying NASA has not Chairman announced that the noes ap- Brown (FL) Frelinghuysen Martinez been able to hold to its schedule; there peared to have it. Brownback Frisa Mascara Bryant (TN) Frost Matsui RECORDED VOTE has been a cost overrun; let us kill the Bryant (TX) Funderburk McCollum Space Station. Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I de- Bunn Gallegly McCrery Well, the way to prevent the gen- mand a recorded vote. Bunning Gejdenson McDermott tleman from making that argument is A recorded vote was ordered. Burr Gekas McHale Burton Gephardt McIntosh by rejection of his amendment today The vote was taken by electronic de- Buyer Geren McKeon because the $75 million he proposes to vice, and there were ayes 146, noes 269, Callahan Gilchrest Meek save now will cost the taxpayers $200 not voting 19, as follows: Calvert Gilman Metcalf million according to the NASA Admin- Campbell Gonzalez Meyers [Roll No. 206] Canady Goodling Mica istrator, who says he works for the AYES—146 Cardin Goss Millender- President of the United States. Castle Graham McDonald Ackerman Costello Ford Chambliss Green (TX) Miller (FL) Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he Allard Coyne Frank (MA) Chapman Greene (UT) Moorhead Barcia Cummings Franks (NJ) may consume to the gentleman from Chenoweth Greenwood Morella Barrett (WI) Danner Furse Florida [Mr. STEARNS]. Chrysler Hall (TX) Myers Bass DeFazio Ganske Clayton Hancock Neal (Mr. STEARNS asked and was given Bereuter DeLauro Gibbons Clement Hansen Nethercutt permission to revise and extend his re- Blumenauer Dellums Gillmor Clinger Harman Ney Blute Dickey Goodlatte marks.) Clyburn Hastert Norwood Brown (OH) Dingell Gordon Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Chairman, heav- Coleman Hastings (FL) Ortiz Camp Dixon Gunderson Combest Hastings (WA) Orton en is not reached by a single bound. Christensen Doyle Gutierrez Condit Hayworth Oxley But we build the ladder by which we Clay Duncan Hall (OH) Cooley Hefner Packard Coble Durbin Hamilton rise. Cox Heineman Parker Coburn Ehrlich Hefley Mr. Chairman, the international space sta- Cramer Hilliard Pastor Collins (GA) Ensign Herger Crane Hobson Petri tion has, and will continue, to provide Ameri- Collins (IL) Evans Hilleary Crapo Hoke Pickett cans with substantial benefits in areas includ- Collins (MI) Fattah Hinchey May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5697 Pombo Shaw Tiahrt (5) in section 31(c)(2)(B)(ii), by inserting to enable the National Oceanic and Atmos- Pryce Sisisky Torres ‘‘or any successor standards thereto,’’ after pheric Administration to carry out the pub- Quillen Skaggs Torricelli ‘‘Association Standard 101,’’. lic warning and forecast systems duties of Radanovich Skeen Traficant the National Weather Service, $64,991,000 for Rahall Skelton Volkmer SEC. 305. TERMINATION OR PRIVATIZATION OF Regula Smith (NJ) Vucanovich FUNCTIONS. fiscal year 1997. Such duties include the de- Richardson Smith (TX) Walker The Administrator of the United States velopment, acquisition, and implementation Riggs Smith (WA) Walsh Fire Administration shall transmit to Con- of major public warning and forecast sys- Roberts Solomon Ward gress a report providing notice at least 60 tems, including the upgrade of computer fa- Rogers Souder Watt (NC) days in advance of the termination or trans- cilities. None of the funds authorized under Rohrabacher Spence Weldon (FL) fer to a private sector entity of any signifi- this subsection shall be used for the purposes Ros-Lehtinen Stearns Weldon (PA) for which funds are authorized under sub- Rose Stenholm Weller cant function of the United States Fire Ad- Roth Stockman White ministration. section (e). None of the funds authorized Roybal-Allard Stokes Whitfield SEC. 306. REPORT ON BUDGETARY REDUCTION. under this subsection shall be used for the Royce Stump Wicker The Administrator of the United States purposes for which funds are authorized Sabo Talent Wilson Fire Administration shall transmit to Con- under section 102(b) of the National Oceanic Salmon Tanner Wise gress, within three months after the date of and Atmospheric Administration Authoriza- Sawyer Tate Wolf tion Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–567). None of Saxton Taylor (MS) Wynn the enactment of this Act, a report setting forth the manner in which the United States the funds authorized by such section 102(b) Scarborough Taylor (NC) Young (AK) shall be expended for a particular NEXRAD Schiff Tejeda Young (FL) Fire Administration intends to implement installation unless— Scott Thomas Zeliff the budgetary reduction represented by the (A) it is identified as a National Weather Seastrand Thornberry Zimmer difference between the amount appropriated Service NEXRAD installation in the Na- Sensenbrenner Thornton to the United States Fire Administration for Shadegg Thurman tional Implementation Plan for moderniza- fiscal year 1997 and the amount requested in tion of the National Weather Service, re- NOT VOTING—19 the President’s budget request for such fiscal quired under section 703 of the National Oce- year. Such report shall be prepared in con- Chabot Hayes Moran anic and Atmospheric Administration Au- sultation with the Alliance for Fire and Conyers Houghton Murtha thorization Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–567); de la Garza Jefferson Paxon Emergency Management, the International or Fields (LA) Lincoln Peterson (FL) Association of Fire Chiefs, the International (B) it is to be used only for spare parts, not Fields (TX) McDade Quinn Association of Fire Fighters, the National as an installation at a particular site. Foglietta Molinari Fire Protection Association, the National Gutknecht Mollohan (2) Of the amounts authorized under para- Volunteer Fire Council, the National Asso- graph (1), $42,935,000 shall be for NEXRAD 1733 ciation of State Fire Marshals, and the program management, operations, and main- International Association of Arson Inves- tenance. Mr. SAWYER changed his vote from tigators. ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ (c) NEW NEXRAD INSTALLATIONS.—No The CHAIRMAN. Are there any funds may be obligated for NEXRAD instal- Ms. DELAURO and Mr. MARKEY lations not identified in the National Imple- changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ amendments to title III? If not, the Clerk will designate title mentation Plan for 1996, unless the Sec- So the amendment was rejected. retary certifies that such NEXRAD installa- The result of the vote was announced IV. The text of title IV is as follows: tions can be acquired within the authoriza- as above recorded. tion of NEXRAD contained in section 102(b) The CHAIRMAN. Are there further TITLE IV—NATIONAL OCEANIC AND of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- amendments to title II? ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION ministration Authorization Act of 1992. If not, the Clerk will designate title SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE. (d) ASOS PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.—Of the sums authorized in subsection (b)(1), III. This title may be cited as the ‘‘National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration $10,056,000 for fiscal year 1997 are authorized The text of title III is as follows. Authorization Act of 1996’’. to be appropriated to the Secretary, for the TITLE III—UNITED STATES FIRE SEC. 402. DEFINITIONS. acquisition and deployment of— ADMINISTRATION For the purposes of this title, the term— (1) the Automated Surface Observing Sys- SEC. 301. SHORT TITLE. (1) ‘‘Act of 1890’’ means the Act entitled tem and related systems, including multi- This title may be cited as the ‘‘Fire Ad- ‘‘An Act to increase the efficiency and re- sensor and backup arrays for National ministration Authorization Act of 1996’’. duce the expenses of the Signal Corps of the Weather Service sites at airports; and (2) Automated Meteorological Observing SEC. 302. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. Army, and to transfer the Weather Bureau to the Department of Agriculture’’, approved System and Remote Automated Meteorologi- Section 17(g)(1) of the Federal Fire Preven- cal Observing System replacement units. tion and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. 653); 2216(a)(1)) is amended— (2) ‘‘Act of 1947’’ means the Act entitled and to cover all associated activities, includ- (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- ‘‘An Act to define the functions and duties of ing program management and operations and graph (E); the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and for other maintenance. (e) AWIPS COMPLETE PROGRAM AUTHORIZA- (2) by striking the period at the end of sub- purposes’’, approved August 6, 1947 (33 U.S.C. TION.—(1) Except as provided in paragraph paragraph (F) and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘; 883a et seq.); (2), there are authorized to be appropriated and’’; and (3) ‘‘Act of 1970’’ means the Act entitled to the Secretary for all fiscal years begin- (3) by adding at the end the following new ‘‘An Act to clarify the status and benefits of ning after September 30, 1996, an aggregate subparagraph: commissioned officers of the National Oce- of $271,166,000, to remain available until ex- ‘‘(G) $27,560,000 for the fiscal year ending anic and Atmospheric Administration, and pended, to complete the acquisition and de- September 30, 1997.’’. for other purposes’’, approved December 31, 1970 (33 U.S.C. 857–1 et seq.); ployment of the Advanced Weather Inter- SEC. 303. FIRE SAFETY SYSTEMS IN ARMY HOUS- active Processing System and NOAA Port ING. (4) ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Adminis- trator of the National Oceanic and Atmos- and to cover all associated activities, includ- Section 31(c)(1)(A)(ii)(II) is amended by in- ing program management and operations and serting ‘‘, or in the case of housing under the pheric Administration; and (5) ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of maintenance through September 30, 1999. control of the Department of the Army, 6 (2) No funds are authorized to be appro- Commerce. years after such date of enactment’’ after priated for any fiscal year under paragraph ‘‘date of enactment’’. Subtitle A—Atmospheric, Weather, and (1) unless, within 60 days after the submis- SEC. 304. SUCCESSOR FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS. Satellite Programs sion of the President’s budget request for The Federal Fire Prevention and Control SEC. 411. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE. such fiscal year, the Secretary— Act of 1974 is amended— (a) OPERATIONS AND RESEARCH.—There are (A) certifies to the Congress that— (1) in section 29(a)(1), by inserting ‘‘, or any authorized to be appropriated to the Sec- (i) the systems meet the technical per- successor standard thereto,’’ after ‘‘Associa- retary to enable the National Oceanic and formance specifications included in the sys- tion Standard 74’’; Atmospheric Administration to carry out tem contract as in effect on August 11, 1995; (2) in section 29(a)(2), by inserting ‘‘or any the operations and research duties of the Na- (ii) the systems can be fully deployed, successor standards thereto,’’ after ‘‘which- tional Weather Service, $445,668,000 for fiscal sited, and operational without requiring fur- ever is appropriate,’’; year 1997. Such duties include meteorologi- ther appropriations beyond amounts author- (3) in section 29(b)(2), by inserting ‘‘, or any cal, hydrological, and oceanographic public ized under paragraph (1); and successor standards thereto,’’ after ‘‘Associa- warnings and forecasts, as well as applied re- (iii) the Secretary does not foresee any tion Standard 13 or 13–R’’; search in support of such warnings and fore- delays in the systems deployment and oper- (4) in section 31(c)(2)(B)(i), by inserting ‘‘or casts. ations schedule; or any successor standard thereto,’’ after ‘‘Life (b) SYSTEMS ACQUISITION.—(1) There are au- (B) submits to the Congress a report which Safety Code),’’; and thorized to be appropriated to the Secretary describes— H5698 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 (i) the circumstances which prevent a cer- in subsection (a), there are authorized to be retary, to enable the National Oceanic and tification under subparagraph (A); appropriated to the Administrator $70,757,000 Atmospheric Administration to carry out (ii) remedial actions undertaken or to be for fiscal year 1997, to remain available until marine prediction research activities under undertaken with respect to such cir- expended to procure up to three additional the Act of 1947, the Act of 1890, and any other cumstances; Geostationary Operational Environmental law involving those activities, $14,808,000 for (iii) the effects of such circumstances on NEXT Satellites (GOES I–M clones), instru- fiscal year 1997. the systems deployment and operations ments, and supporting ground systems. (b) NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PRO- schedule and systems coverage; and (d) NATIONAL POLAR-ORBITING OPERATIONAL GRAM.—(1) Section 212(a) of the National Sea (iv) a justification for proceeding with the ENVIRONMENTAL SATELLITE SYSTEM PROGRAM Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1131(a)) program, if appropriate. AUTHORIZATION.—Of the sums authorized in is amended to read as follows: (f) CONSTRUCTION OF WEATHER FORECAST subsection (a), there are authorized to be ap- ‘‘(a) GRANTS AND CONTRACTS; FELLOW- OFFICES.—There are authorized to be appro- propriated to the Secretary, for fiscal year SHIPS.—There are authorized to be appro- priated to the Secretary to enable the Na- 1997, $39,500,000, to remain available until ex- priated to carry out sections 205 and 208, tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- pended, for the procurement of the National $34,500,000 for fiscal year 1997.’’. tion to carry out construction, repair, and Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental (2) Section 212(b)(1) of the National Sea modification activities relating to new and Satellite System, and the procurement of Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. existing weather forecast offices, $11,000,000 the launching and supporting ground sys- 1131(b)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘an for fiscal year 1997. Such activities include tems of such satellites. amount’’ and all that follows through ‘‘not planning, design, and land acquisition relat- (e) ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AND INFORMATION to exceed $2,900,000’’ and inserting in lieu ed to such offices. SERVICES.—There are authorized to be appro- thereof ‘‘$1,500,000 for fiscal year 1997’’. (g) STREAMLINING WEATHER SERVICE MOD- priated to the Secretary to enable the Na- (3) Section 203(4) of the National Sea Grant College Program Act (33 U.S.C. 1122(4)) is ERNIZATION.— tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- amended by striking ‘‘discipline or field’’ (1) REPEALS.—Sections 706 and 707 of the tion to carry out its environmental data and and all that follows through ‘‘public admin- Weather Service Modernization Act (15 information services duties, $44,898,000 for istration)’’ and inserting in lieu thereof U.S.C. 313 note) are repealed. fiscal year 1997. Such duties include climate ‘‘field or discipline involving scientific re- (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—The Weath- data services, geophysical data services, and search’’. er Service Modernization Act (15 U.S.C. 313 environmental assessment and information OASTAL OCEAN PROGRAM.—There are note) is amended— (c) C services. authorized to be appropriated to the Sec- (A) in section 702, by striking paragraph (3) Subtitle B—Marine Research retary, to enable the National Oceanic and and redesignating paragraphs (4) through (10) Atmospheric Administration to carry out as paragraphs (3) through (9), respectively; SEC. 421. NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE. the Coastal Ocean Program, $17,300,000 for and (a) MAPPING AND CHARTING.—There are au- fiscal year 1997. (B) in section 703— thorized to be appropriated to the Secretary, to enable the National Oceanic and Atmos- (i) by striking ‘‘(a) NATIONAL IMPLEMENTA- Subtitle C—Program Support pheric Administration to carry out mapping TION PLAN.—’’; SEC. 431. PROGRAM SUPPORT. (ii) by striking paragraph (3) and redesig- and charting activities under the Act of 1947 (a) EXECUTIVE DIRECTION AND ADMINISTRA- nating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as para- and any other law involving those activities, TIVE ACTIVITIES.—There are authorized to be graphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively; and $36,500,000 for fiscal year 1997. appropriated to the Secretary, to enable the (b) GEODESY.—There are authorized to be (iii) by striking subsections (b) and (c). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- appropriated to the Secretary, to enable the SEC. 412. ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH. tration to carry out executive direction and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- (a) CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY RESEARCH.— administrative activities under the Act of tration to carry out geodesy activities under There are authorized to be appropriated to 1970 and any other law involving those ac- the Act of 1947 and any other law involving the Secretary to enable the National Oceanic tivities, $20,000,000 for fiscal year 1997. those activities, $20,163,000 for fiscal year and Atmospheric Administration to carry (b) CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT.— 1997. out its climate and air quality research du- There are authorized to be appropriated to (c) OBSERVATION AND PREDICTION.— ties, $99,272,000 for fiscal year 1997. Such du- the Secretary, to enable the National Oce- (1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be anic and Atmospheric Administration to ties include internannual and seasonal cli- appropriated to the Secretary, to enable the mate research and long-term climate and air carry out central administrative support ac- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- tivities under the Act of 1970 and any other quality research. tration to carry out observation and pre- (b) ATMOSPHERIC PROGRAMS.—There are au- law involving those activities, $33,000,000 for diction activities under the Act of 1947 and thorized to be appropriated to the Secretary fiscal year 1997. any other law involving those activities, to enable the National Oceanic and Atmos- (c) RETIRED PAY.—There are authorized to $11,000,000 for fiscal year 1997. pheric Administration to carry out its at- be appropriated to the Secretary, for retired (2) OCEAN AND EARTH SCIENCES.—In addition mospheric research duties, $43,182,000 for fis- pay for retired commissioned officers of the to amounts authorized under paragraph (1), cal year 1997. Such duties include research National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- there are authorized to be appropriated to for developing improved prediction capabili- tration under the Act of 1970, $7,706,000 for the Secretary, to enable the National Oce- ties for atmospheric processes, as well as fiscal year 1997. anic and Atmospheric Administration to solar-terrestrial research and services. (d) MARINE SERVICES.— carry out ocean and earth science activities, (1) SERVICE CONTRACTS.—Notwithstanding SEC. 413. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAT- $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1997. ELLITE, DATA, AND INFORMATION any other provision of law and subject to the SERVICE. (d) ESTUARINE AND COASTAL ASSESSMENT.— availability of appropriations, the Secretary (a) SATELLITE OBSERVING SYSTEMS.—There (1) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be shall enter into contracts, including are authorized to be appropriated to the Sec- appropriated to the Secretary, to enable the multiyear contracts, subject to paragraph retary to enable the National Oceanic and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- (3), for the use of vessels to conduct oceano- Atmospheric Administration to carry out its tration to support estuarine and coastal as- graphic research and fisheries research, mon- satellite observing systems duties, sessment activities under the Act of 1947 and itoring, enforcement, and management, and $308,473,000 for fiscal year 1997, to remain any other law involving those activities, to acquire other data necessary to carry out available until expended. Such duties include $2,674,000 for fiscal year 1997. the missions of the National Oceanic and At- spacecraft procurement, launch, and associ- (2) OCEAN ASSESSMENT.—In addition to mospheric Administration. The Secretary ated ground station systems involving polar amounts authorized under paragraph (1), shall enter into these contracts unless— orbiting and geostationary environmental there are authorized to be appropriated to (A) the cost of the contract is more than satellites, as well as the operation of such the Secretary, to enable the National Oce- the cost (including the cost of vessel oper- satellites. None of the funds authorized anic and Atmospheric Administration to ation, maintenance, and all personnel) to the under this subsection shall be used for the carry out the National Status and Trends National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- purposes for which funds are authorized Program, the Strategic Environmental As- tration of obtaining those services on vessels under section 105(d) of the National Oceanic sessment Program, and the Hazardous Mate- of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- and Atmospheric Administration Authoriza- rials Response Program, $21,925,000 for fiscal ministration; tion Act of 1992 (Public Law 102–567). year 1997. (B) the contract is for more than 7 years; (b) POES PROGRAM AUTHORIZATION.—Of the (3) DAMAGE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM.—In ad- or sums authorized in subsection (a), there are dition to amounts authorized under para- (C) the data is acquired through a vessel authorized to be appropriated to the Sec- graph (1), there are authorized to be appro- agreement pursuant to paragraph (4). retary $147,664,000 for fiscal year 1997, to re- priated to the Secretary, to enable the Na- (2) VESSELS.—The Secretary may not enter main available until expended, for the pro- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- into any contract for the construction, lease- curement and launch of, and supporting tion to carry out the Damage Assessment purchase, upgrade, or service life extension ground systems for, Polar Orbiting Environ- Program, $1,200,000 for fiscal year 1997. of any vessel. mental Satellites, K, L, M, N, and N1. SEC. 422. OCEAN AND GREAT LAKES RESEARCH. (3) MULTIYEAR CONTRACTS.— (c) GEOSTATIONARY OPERATIONAL ENVIRON- (a) MARINE PREDICTION RESEARCH.—There (A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraphs MENTAL SATELLITES.—Of the sums authorized are authorized to be appropriated to the Sec- (B) and (C), and notwithstanding section 1341 May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5699 of title 31, United States Code, and section 11 (14) National Weather Service Regional anic and Atmospheric Administration as a of title 41, United States Code, the Secretary Climate Centers. member of the civil service, if the Adminis- may acquire data under multiyear contracts. (15) National Weather Service Samoa trator considers that individual to be the (B) REQUIRED FINDINGS.—The Secretary Weather Forecast Office Repair and Upgrade best available candidate for the position. No may not enter into a contract pursuant to Account. new civil service position may be created this paragraph unless the Secretary finds (16) Dissemination of Weather Charts (Ma- pursuant to this paragraph. with respect to that contract that there is a rine Facsimile Service). (4) The Administrator shall, before Decem- reasonable expectation that throughout the (17) The Southeast United States Carib- ber 1, 1996, transmit to the Committee on contemplated contract period the Secretary bean Fisheries Oceanographic Coordinated Science of the House of Representatives and will request from Congress funding for the Investigations Program. the Committee on Commerce, Science, and contract at the level required to avoid con- (18) National Coastal Research and Devel- Transportation of the Senate a report listing tract termination. opment Institute Account. all officers employed by the National Oce- (C) REQUIRED PROVISIONS.—The Secretary (19) Global Learning and Observations to anic and Atmospheric Administration under may not enter into a contract pursuant to Benefit the Environment program. paragraph (3), a description of their respon- this paragraph unless the contract includes— (b) REPORT.—Not later than 60 days after sibilities as members of the NOAA Corps, (i) a provision under which the obligation the date of the enactment of this Act, the and a description of their responsibilities as of the United States to make payments Secretary shall submit to the Committee on civil service employees of the National Oce- under the contract for any fiscal year is sub- Science of the House of Representatives and anic and Atmospheric Administration. ject to the availability of appropriations pro- the Committee on Commerce, Science, and (d) REPEALS.—(1) The following provisions vided in advance for those payments; Transportation of the Senate a report cer- of law are repealed: (ii) a provision that specifies the term of tifying that all the programs listed in sub- (A) The Coast and Geodetic Survey Com- effectiveness of the contract; and section (a) will be terminated no later than missioned Officers’ Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. (iii) appropriate provisions under which, in September 30, 1996. 853a–853o, 853p–853u). (B) The Act of February 16, 1929 (Chapter case of any termination of the contract be- (c) REPEAL OF SEA GRANT PROGRAMS.— 221, section 5; 45 Stat. 1187; 33 U.S.C. 852a). fore the end of the term specified pursuant (1) REPEALS.—(A) Section 208(b) of the Na- to clause (ii), the United States shall only be tional Sea Grant College Program Act (33 (C) The Act of January 19, 1942 (Chapter 6; liable for the lesser of— U.S.C. 1127(b)) is repealed. 56 Stat. 6). (I) an amount specified in the contract for (B) Section 3 of the Sea Grant Program Im- (D) Section 9 of Public Law 87–649 (76 Stat. such a termination; or provement Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 1124a) is re- 495). (II) amounts that were appropriated before pealed. (E) The Act of May 22, 1917 (Chapter 20, sec- tion 16; 40 Stat. 87; 33 U.S.C. 854 et seq.). the date of the termination for the perform- (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 209 ance of the contract or for procurement of of the National Sea Grant College Program (F) The Act of December 3, 1942 (Chapter the type of acquisition covered by the con- Act (33 U.S.C. 1128(b)(1)) is amended by strik- 670; 56 Stat. 1038. tract and are unobligated on the date of the ing ‘‘and section 3 of the Sea Grant Program (G) Sections 1 through 5 of Public Law 91– termination. Improvement Act of 1976’’. 621 (84 Stat. 1863; 33 U.S.C. 857–1 et seq.). (4) VESSEL AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary (H) The Act of August 10, 1956 (Chapter (d) ADDITIONAL REPEAL.—The NOAA Fleet shall use excess capacity of University Na- Modernization Act (33 U.S.C. 851 note) is re- 1041, section 3; 70A Stat. 619; 33 U.S.C. 857a). tional Oceanographic Laboratory System pealed. (I) The Act of May 18, 1920 (Chapter 190, vessels where appropriate and may enter section 11; 41 Stat. 603; 33 U.S.C. 864). into memoranda of agreement with the oper- SEC. 442. LIMITATIONS ON APPROPRIATIONS. (J) The Act of July 22, 1947 (Chapter 286; 61 ators of these vessels to carry out this re- (a) MAXIMUM AMOUNT.—No more than Stat. 400; 33 U.S.C. 873, 874). quirement. $1,765,359,000 are authorized to be appro- (K) The Act of August 3, 1956 (Chapter 932; (5) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.— priated to the Secretary for fiscal year 1997, 70 Stat. 988; 33 U.S.C. 875, 876). There are authorized to be appropriated to by this Act and any other Act, to enable the (L) All other Acts inconsistent with this the Secretary, to enable the National Oce- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- subsection. anic and Atmospheric Administration to tration to carry out all activities associated Following the repeal of provisions under this carry out marine services activities, with Operations, Research, and Facilities. paragraph, all retirement benefits for the $56,292,000 for fiscal year 1997. (b) REDUCTION IN TRAVEL BUDGET.—Of the NOAA Corps which are in existence on Sep- (e) AIRCRAFT SERVICES.—There are author- sums appropriated under this Act for Oper- tember 30, 1996, shall continue to apply to el- ized to be appropriated to the Secretary, to ations, Research, and Facilities, no more igible NOAA Corps officers and retirees. enable the National Oceanic and Atmos- than $20,000,000 may be used for reimburse- (2) The effective date of the repeals under pheric Administration to carry out aircraft ment of travel and related expenses for Na- paragraph (1) shall be October 1, 1996. services activities (including aircraft oper- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- (e) ABOLITION.—The Office of the National ations, maintenance, and support) under the tion personnel. Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act of 1970 and any other law involving those SEC. 443. TERMINATION OF THE CORPS OF COM- Corps of Operations and the Commissioned activities, $9,153,000 for fiscal year 1997. MISSIONED OFFICERS. Personnel Center are abolished effective Sep- (f) FACILITIES REPAIRS AND RENOVATIONS.— (a) NUMBER OF OFFICERS.—Notwithstanding tember 30, 1996. There are authorized to be appropriated to section 8 of the Act of June 3, 1948 (33 U.S.C. Subtitle E—Miscellaneous the Secretary, to enable the National Oce- 853g), no commissioned officers are author- SEC. 451. WEATHER DATA BUOYS. anic and Atmospheric Administration to ized for any fiscal year after fiscal year 1996. (a) PROHIBITION.—It shall be unlawful for carry out facilities repairs and renovations, (b) SEVERANCE PAY.—Commissioned offi- any unauthorized person to remove, change $7,546,000 for fiscal year 1997. cers may be separated from the active list of the location of, obstruct, willfully damage, Subtitle D—Streamlining of Operations the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- make fast to, or interfere with any weather SEC. 441. PROGRAMS. ministration. In lieu of separation pay, offi- data buoy established, installed, operated, or (a) PROGRAMS.—No funds are authorized to cers so separated shall be eligible only for maintained by the National Data Buoy Cen- be appropriated for the following programs severance pay in accordance with the terms ter. and accounts: and conditions of section 5595 of title 5, Unit- (b) CIVIL PENALTIES.—The Administrator is (1) The National Undersea Research Pro- ed States Code, and only to the extent pro- authorized to assess a civil penalty against gram. vided in advance in appropriations Acts. any person who violates any provision of this (2) The Fleet Modernization, Shipbuilding, (c) TRANSFER.—(1) Subject to the approval section in an amount of not more than and Construction Account. of the Secretary of Defense and under terms $10,000 for each violation. Each day during (3) The Charleston, South Carolina, Special and conditions specified by the Secretary, which such violation continues shall be con- Management Plan. commissioned officers subject to subsection sidered a new offense. Such penalties shall be (4) Chesapeake Bay Observation Buoys. (a) may transfer to the armed services under assessed after notice and opportunity for a (5) Federal/State Weather Modification section 716 of title 10, United States Code. hearing. Grants. (2) Subject to the approval of the Secretary (c) REWARDS.—The Administrator may (6) The Southeast Storm Research Ac- of Transportation and under terms and con- offer and pay rewards for the apprehension count. ditions specified by the Secretary, commis- and conviction, or for information helpful (7) National Institute for Environmental sioned officers subject to subsection (a) may therein, of persons found interfering, in vio- Renewal. transfer to the United States Coast Guard lation of law, with data buoys maintained by (8) The Lake Champlain Study. under section 716 of title 10, United States the National Data Buoy Center; or for infor- (9) The Maine Marine Research Center. Code. mation leading to the discovery of missing (10) The South Carolina Cooperative Geo- (3) Subject to the approval of the Adminis- National Weather Service property or the re- detic Survey Account. trator of the National Oceanic and Atmos- covery thereof. (11) Pacific Island Technical Assistance. pheric Administration and under terms and SEC. 452. DUTIES OF THE NATIONAL WEATHER (12) VENTS program. conditions specified by that Administrator, a SERVICE. (13) National Weather Service non-Federal, commissioned officer subject to subsection (a) IN GENERAL.—To protect life and prop- non-wildfire Fire Weather Service. (a) may be employed by the National Oce- erty and enhance the national economy, the H5700 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 Secretary, through the National Weather ‘‘(1) The Secretary of the Navy, who shall the fiscal year in which the report is pre- Service, except as outlined in subsection (b), be the chairman of the Council. pared, for the programs, projects, and activi- shall be responsible for— ‘‘(2) The Administrator of the National ties of the program and the estimated ex- (1) forecasts and shall serve as the sole offi- Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, penditures under such programs, projects, cial source of weather warnings; who shall be the vice chairman of the Coun- and activities during such following fiscal (2) the issue of storm warnings; cil. year. (3) the collection, exchange, and distribu- ‘‘(3) The Director of the National Science ‘‘§ 7903. Ocean Research Partnership Coordi- tion of meteorological, hydrological, cli- Foundation. nating Group ‘‘(4) The Administrator of the National matic, and oceanographic data and informa- ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Council shall tion; and Aeronautics and Space Administration. establish an entity to be known as the (4) the preparation of hydrometeorological ‘‘(5) The Deputy Secretary of Energy. ‘Ocean Research Partnership Coordinating guidance and core forecast information. ‘‘(6) The Administrator of the Environ- Group’ (hereinafter in this chapter referred (b) COMPETITION WITH PRIVATE SECTOR.— mental Protection Agency. to as the ‘Coordinating Group’). The National Weather Service shall not com- ‘‘(7) The Commandant of the Coast Guard. ‘‘(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Coordinating pete, or assist other entities to compete, ‘‘(8) The Director of the Geological Survey Group shall consist of members appointed by with the private sector when a service is cur- of the Department of the Interior. the Council, with one member appointed rently provided or can be provided by com- ‘‘(9) The Director of the Defense Advanced from each Federal department or agency mercial enterprise, unless— Research Projects Agency. having an oceanographic research or devel- (1) the Secretary finds that the private sec- ‘‘(10) The Director of the Minerals Manage- opment program. tor is unwilling or unable to provide the ment Service of the Department of the Inte- ‘‘(c) CHAIRMAN.—The Council shall appoint services; and rior. the Chairman of the Coordinating Group. (2) the service provides vital weather ‘‘(11) The President of the National Acad- ‘‘(d) RESPONSIBILITIES.—Subject to the au- warnings and forecasts for the protection of emy of Sciences, the President of the Na- thority, direction, and control of the Coun- lives and property of the general public. tional Academy of Engineering, and the cil, the Coordinating Group shall have the (c) AMENDMENTS.—The Act of 1890 is President of the Institute of Medicine. following responsibilities: amended— ‘‘(12) The Director of the Office of Science ‘‘(1) To prescribe policies and procedures to (1) by striking section 3 (15 U.S.C. 313); and and Technology. implement the National Oceanographic Part- (2) in section 9 (15 U.S.C. 317), by striking ‘‘(13) The Director of the Office of Manage- nership Program. all after ‘‘Department of Agriculture’’ and ment and Budget. ‘‘(2) To review, select, and identify and al- inserting in lieu thereof a period. ‘‘(14) One member appointed by the Chair- locate funds for partnership projects for im- (d) REPORT.—Not later than 60 days after man from among individuals who will rep- plementation under the program, based on the date of the enactment of this Act, the resent the views of ocean industries. the following criteria: Secretary shall submit to the Committee on ‘‘(15) One member appointed by the Chair- ‘‘(A) Whether the project addresses critical Science of the House of Representatives and man from among individuals who will rep- research objectives or operational goals, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and resent the views of State governments. such as data accessibility and quality assur- Transportation of the Senate a report detail- ‘‘(16) One member appointed by the Chair- ance, sharing of resources, or education. ing all National Weather Service activities man from among individuals who will rep- ‘‘(B) Whether the project has broad partici- which do not conform to the requirements of resent the views of academia. pation within the oceanographic community. this section and outlining a timetable for ‘‘(17) One member appointed by the Chair- ‘‘(C) Whether the partners have a long- their termination. man from among individuals who will rep- term commitment to the objectives of the SEC. 453. NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC PARTNER- resent such other views as the Chairman project. SHIP PROGRAM. considers appropriate. ‘‘(D) Whether the resources supporting the (a) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—(1) Subtitle C of ‘‘(c) TERM OF OFFICE.—The term of office of project are shared among the partners. title 10, United States Code, is amended by a member of the Council appointed under ‘‘(E) Whether the project has been sub- adding after chapter 663 the following new paragraph (14), (15), (16), or (17) of subsection jected to adequate peer review. chapter: (b) shall be two years, except that any per- ‘‘(3) To promote participation in partner- son appointed to fill a vacancy occurring be- ship projects by each Federal department ‘‘CHAPTER 665—NATIONAL OCEANO- fore the expiration of the term for which his and agency involved with oceanographic re- GRAPHIC PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM predecessor was appointed shall be appointed search and by prescribing guidelines for par- ‘‘Sec. for the remainder of such term. ticipation in the program. ‘‘7901. National Oceanographic Partnership ‘‘(d) RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Council shall ‘‘(4) To submit to the Council an annual re- Program. have the following responsibilities: port pursuant to subsection (i). ‘‘7902. National Ocean Research Leadership ‘‘(1) To establish the Ocean Research Part- ‘‘(e) PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM OFFICE.—The Council. nership Coordinating Group as provided in Coordinating Group shall establish, using ‘‘7903. Ocean Research Partnership Coordi- section 7903. competitive procedures, and oversee a part- nating Group. ‘‘(2) To establish the Ocean Research Advi- nership program office to carry out such du- ‘‘7904. Ocean Research Advisory Panel. sory Panel as provided in section 7904. ties as the Chairman of the Coordinating ‘‘§ 7901. National Oceanographic Partnership ‘‘(3) To submit to Congress an annual re- Group considers appropriate to implement Program port pursuant to subsection (e). the National Oceanographic Partnership ‘‘(e) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Secretary of the Program, including the following: March 1 of each year, the Council shall sub- Navy shall establish a program to be known ‘‘(1) To establish and oversee working mit to Congress a report on the National as the ‘National Oceanographic Partnership groups to propose partnership projects to the Oceanographic Partnership Program. The re- Program’. Coordinating Group and advise the Group on port shall contain the following: ‘‘(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the pro- such projects. ‘‘(1) A description of activities of the pro- gram are as follows: ‘‘(2) To manage peer review of partnership gram carried out during the fiscal year be- ‘‘(1) To promote the national goals of as- projects proposed to the Coordinating Group fore the fiscal year in which the report is suring national security, protecting quality and competitions for projects selected by the prepared. The description also shall include of life, and strengthening science and edu- Group. a list of the members of the Ocean Research cation through improved knowledge of the ‘‘(3) To submit to the Coordinating Group Partnership Coordinating Group, the Ocean ocean. an annual report on the status of all partner- Research Advisory Panel, and any working ‘‘(2) To coordinate and strengthen oceano- ship projects and activities of the office. groups in existence during the fiscal year graphic efforts in support of those goals by— ‘‘(f) CONTRACT AND GRANT AUTHORITY.—The covered. ‘‘(A) identifying and carrying out partner- Coordinating Group may authorize one or ‘‘(2) A general outline of the activities ships among Federal agencies, academia, in- more of the departments or agencies rep- planned for the program during the fiscal dustry, and other members of the oceano- resented in the Group to enter into contracts year in which the report is prepared. graphic scientific community in the areas of and make grants, using funds appropriated ‘‘(3) A summary of projects continued from data, resources, and education; and pursuant to an authorization for the Na- the fiscal year before the fiscal year in which ‘‘(B) reporting annually to Congress on the tional Oceanographic Partnership Program, the report is prepared and projects expected program. for the purpose of implementing the program to be started during the fiscal year in which and carrying out the Coordinating Group’s ‘‘§ 7902. National Ocean Research Leadership the report is prepared and during the follow- responsibilities. Council ing fiscal year. ‘‘(g) FORMS OF PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS.— ‘‘(a) COUNCIL.—There is established a Na- ‘‘(4) A description of the involvement of Partnership projects selected by the Coordi- tional Ocean Research Leadership Council the program with Federal interagency co- nating Group may be in any form that the (hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the ordinating entities. Coordinating Group considers appropriate, ‘‘Council’’). ‘‘(5) The amounts requested, in the budget including memoranda of understanding, co- ‘‘(b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Council is com- submitted to Congress pursuant to section operative research and development agree- posed of the following members: 1105(a) of title 31 for the fiscal year following ments, and similar instruments. May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5701 ‘‘(h) ANNUAL REPORT.—Not later than Feb- Page 88, line 18, strike ‘‘$308,473,000’’ and ley County, TN that were not detected ruary 1 of each year, the Coordinating Group insert in lieu thereof ‘‘$287,997,000’’. from Morristown, TN because the radar shall submit to the Council a report on the Page 89, line 22, strike ‘‘$39,500,000’’ and in- is too high, so new Dopplers that are sert in lieu thereof ‘‘$19,024,000’’. National Oceanographic Partnership Pro- programmed in the system for these gram. The report shall contain, at a mini- Mr. WAMP (during the reading). Mr. mum, copies of any recommendations or re- three areas have been approved and Chairman, I ask unanimous consent certified by the Department of Com- ports to the Coordinating Group by the that the amendment be considered as Ocean Research Advisory Panel. merce. read and printed in the RECORD. Mr. Chairman, one of the best non- ‘‘§ 7904. Ocean Research Advisory Panel The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection partisan things we do here is the ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Council shall to the request of the gentleman from health and safety of the citizens of this appoint an Ocean Research Advisory Panel Tennessee? country, and local weather forecasting (hereinafter in this chapter referred to as the There was no objection. ‘Advisory Panel’) consisting of not less than Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, as we is as close to the ground as it gets. It 10 and not more than 18 members. is important that we come together in ‘‘(b) MEMBERSHIP.—Members of the Advi- move into this title, the National Oce- anic and Atmospheric Administration, a bipartisan way. I did not just want to sory Panel shall be appointed from among increase spending, so we offset it. We persons who are eminent in the field of ma- my amendment would add $20.5 million rine science, or related fields, and who are to the National Weather Service budg- worked with the chairman of the Com- representative, at a minimum, of the inter- et. Specifically, it increases the local mittee on Science. We hope that the ests of government, academia, and industry. warnings and forecast budget by $5 mil- committee, the full committee here ‘‘(c) RESPONSIBILITIES.—(1) The Coordinat- lion. It increases the computer facility will support this reasonable increase in ing Group shall refer to the Advisory Panel, upgrades budget by $4 million. It in- funding, since it is offset with another and the Advisory Panel shall review, each program that obviously does not need proposed partnership project estimated to creases the advanced weather inter- active processing system budget by the money, based on our latest defense cost more than $500,000. The Advisory Panel authorization bill. shall make any recommendations to the Co- $11.5 million, for a total of $20.5 mil- ordinating Group that the Advisory Panel lion. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BROWN OF CALI- considers appropriate regarding such The entire increase is offset by a re- FORNIA AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE AMEND- projects. duction of $20.5 million in the polar MENT OFFERED BY MR. WAMP Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- ‘‘(2) The Advisory Panel shall make any convergent satellite program, which is recommendations to the Coordinating Group man, I offer an amendment as a sub- a cost-shared program with the Defense regarding activities that should be addressed stitute for the amendment. Department. Since the defense author- by the National Oceanographic Partnership The Clerk read as follows: ization bill recently passed by this Program that the Advisory Panel considers Amendment offered by Mr. BROWN of Cali- appropriate.’’. body only authorized $19 million for fornia as a substitute for the amendment of- (2) The table of chapters at the beginning this program, yet the Committee on fered by Mr. WAMP: Page 83, line 1, strike of subtitle C of title 10, United States Code, Science’s mark still continued $39.5 ‘‘$445,668,000’’ and insert in lieu thereof and at the beginning of part IV of such sub- million, we are reducing that amount ‘‘$471,672,000.’’ title, are each amended by inserting after to offset this increase, so that this in- the item relating to chapter 663 the follow- Mr. BROWN of California (during the ing: crease is fully accounted for by spend- reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unani- ing reductions in other areas. mous consent that the amendment of- ‘‘665. National Oceanographic Part- Why would we do this? The impor- fered as a substitute for the amend- nership Program ...... 7901’’. tance of the National Weather Serv- ment be considered as read and printed (b) INITIAL APPOINTMENTS OF COUNCIL MEM- ice’s modernization effort. We know in the RECORD. BERS.—The Secretary of the Navy shall make great work has been accomplished The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection the appointments required by section 7902(b) through the Department of Commerce of title 10, United States Code, as added by to the request of the gentleman from subsection (a)(1), not later than December 1, upgrading our National Weather Serv- California? 1996. ice system, implementing the NEXRAD There was no objection. (c) INITIAL APPOINTMENTS OF ADVISORY radar system, in next generation radar Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I PANEL MEMBERS.—The National Ocean Re- nationwide. rise to offer an amendment to the amendment search Leadership Council established by Many outstanding Members of this in order to fully restore funding for the critical section 7902 of title 10, United States Code, body, like my friend, the gentleman personnel of the National Weather Service. as added by subsection (a)(1), shall make the from Huntsville, AL [Mr. CRAMER], H.R. 3322 proposes a $26 million reduction appointments required by section 7904 of have been very active in this effort. We from this account which I believe will seriously such title not later than January 1, 1997. (d) FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL are installing new, more powerful jeopardize the safety and well being of every OCEAN RESEARCH LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.—The Doppler radars and state-of-the-art sat- American. first annual report required by section ellite across the Nation. We have been informed by the National 7902(e) of title 10, United States Code, as However, there are some areas that Weather Service that in order to implement added by subsection (a)(1), shall be submit- have been identified as being deficient, this reduction, they would have to consider ted to Congress not later than March 1, 1997. where the service is degraded because elimination of midnight shift personnel in every The first report shall include, in addition to of soft spots in the system, and the De- weather forecast office and eliminate rush the information required by such section, in- partment of Commerce actually recog- hour forecast products nationally. In addition formation about the terms of office, proce- dures, and responsibilities of the Ocean Re- nized that three of those areas exist in they would have to close planned warning and search Advisory Panel established by the southeast Tennessee and northeast forecast offices and would have to defer the Council. Alabama, one area, actually two con- opening of any additional NEXRAD sites that (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—No gressional districts, the gentleman were recently identified as necessary by the funds are authorized to be appropriated by from Alabama, Mr. CRAMER’s, and National Research Council. There is no ques- this Act for the National Oceanographic mine, but one area; plus Indiana and tion that the proposed cuts in H.R. 3322 would Partnership Program for fiscal year 1997. Arkansas. endanger public safety. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. As reflected in the President's request, the amendments to title IV? SOUDER] and the gentleman from Ar- National Weather Service is already commit- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. WAMP kansas [Mr. HUTCHINSON] are affected ted to permanent reductions of over $25 mil- Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I offer an as well, and we have Doppler radar lion in base operations. They need, however, amendment. needs that the Department of Com- to make the transition to the modernized The Clerk read as follows: merce has certified to build these ra- weather office system in order to realize these Amendment offered by Mr. WAMP: Page 83, dars in our region, because the radars savings. Without the necessary operational in- line 1, strike ‘‘$445,668,000’’ and insert in lieu that are part of the NEXRAD system frastructure and personnel in place, the Na- thereof ‘‘$450,668,000’’. are too far from our area and are too Page 83, line 10, strike ‘‘$64,991,000’’ and in- tional Weather Service will not be able to uti- sert in lieu thereof ‘‘68,984,000’’. high up in the air to cover the storms lize the full operational capabilities envisioned Page 85, line 10, insert ‘‘of which up to that blow through our region. by the modernization plan. $116,483,000 may be available for fiscal year Specifically, this last weekend, My amendment does not attempt to numeri- 1997,’’ after ‘‘available until expended,’’. again, tornadoes touched down in Brad- cally offset this increase with any reduction H5702 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 elsewhere in the bill. I want to point out that back in the full committee really is which provides the same benefit that the bill we are considering today already seri- necessary to protect the health and the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. ously underfunds NOAA and the National welfare of the citizens of our districts WAMP] does, and does not go through Weather Service. The bill already reduces and our constituents. Part of the game the motions of trying to offset this NOAA's programs in our jurisdiction by $155 here is both sides are trying to protect with some more or less specious offset, million and will lead to great difficulty in carry- vulnerable Members by allowing them which is unnecessary, even if it was a ing out critical satellite, weather forecasting, to offer amendments which will be pop- real offset. and research activities. To propose an offset ular in their districts. Of course, on our b 1745 side, we do the same thing. We try and would only legitimize this ill conceived plan to I know that since a part of the ma- put the other side in the position of distort our national priorities. jority’s position is going to be to wave I also point out that yesterday on this same voting for something that will be very the flag and claim that they have to bill, Mr. SCHIFF offered an amendment to raise bad for them in their district. have these offsets in order to balance After finally weighing the situation, funding for the National Science Foundation the budget, which we pointed out we have decided that there are at least by $40 million with no offset. This had the full means to increase the budget where backing of the Republicans and passed easily. three or four instances in which the they want and cut it where we want, I I make this point to illustrate the fiction we are Republicans really cannot stand the urge that Members support my sub- being asked to participate in by pretending heat from the mistakes in this bill, stitute, recognizing that I probably there is some magic number that in some way that is, from the political mistakes in will not win. limits us in this authorization. This fiction this bill, so they are going to try and Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I move seems to be only enforced when it is conven- put the money back in to take care of to strike the last word. ient. the situation. The gentleman from California does I will close by reminding my colleagues that They are going to argue in front of not need to be cynical about the proc- the serious nature of this problem we are try- God and everybody that this is based ess. The fact is what he is watching is ing to address here has been clear since this upon some sudden new insight, but the legislative process at work. Mem- bill was first brought before the committee. I what it really amounts to is they have bers do have a right under an open rule have tried on several occasions now to offer decided that they do not want to take to come out here and offer amend- a substitute that addresses this and a number the political heat that they are going ments. We have to decide whether or of other problems in the bill. These attempts to get from, say, cutting back on not to accept some of those amend- have failed along party lines. weather service facilities and personnel ments or to fight some of those amend- I commend the gentleman from Tennessee in a district highly dependent on it, or ments. for his attempt at this late date to fix this prob- cutting back on personnel for a major It is not anything different than lem. However, my fear is that his amendment NASA lab in a district in which the what goes on in Congress. In fact, it is does not fully address the problem. If his economy depends on it, or a major en- the essence of the process to make amendment passes in its current form, the Na- ergy lab. That is the way politics some of these decisions as a Congress, tional Weather Service will still face the neces- works, and we might as well be frank and some of them change my bill, some sity to reduce service to the public. In addition, and admit it. of them enhance the bill. They in fact the gentleman may only be compounding the When we on our side try to point out are an important part of how we do leg- problem by cutting elsewhere in the bill. I urge that we had corrected all of these in islation. I do not resent the fact that my colleagues to support my substitute to his our substitute, they say you did not do the bill gets changed a little bit along amendment. Lets fully fund the Weather Serv- it the right way, or something like the way. It is the way the process ice Operations. that. Of course, they are using the fact works. I have even happily accepted Mr. Chairman, at the risk of appear- that our figures do not conform to some amendments along the way be- ing to be cynical, let me try and inter- their budget, as if this was holy writ, cause I thought they were the right pret what has been happening in con- and therefore, anything that we do is things to do. nection with this legislation. obscene, until they find out that it is Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- The bill before us, which was re- pretty nice to have something close to man, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WALKER. I yield to the gen- ported out of the full committee with our budget in order to elect one of little or no change from the chairman’s tleman from California. their Members. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- recommendations, contained a number Mr. Chairman, I hate to say this, be- man, I am happy to have the gen- of problems. I sought to offer a sub- cause it makes me look so cynical and tleman acknowledge this. I am not try- self-serving, but I thought that we stitute in the full committee, which ing to present this as some perverse or ought to have that on the record. My was rejected on basically a party line evil process. I just wonder why it is substitute is very simple. It provides vote, which corrected all of the prob- when I offered the same amendments in lems that have been brought up here, for the same additions that the gen- committee the Chair did not have the and which we are now acting on. tleman from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] perspicacity to realize that they might Yesterday the gentleman from New has, or it fully funds the restoration of be necessary. Mexico [Mr. SCHIFF] found a little the personnel that the gentleman from Mr. WALKER. When the gentleman problem in the National Science Foun- Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] only partially offered them in committee, in some dation budget, and he offered a $40 mil- funds and which was in the President’s cases we did not have the full informa- lion add-on which we had offered in the budget. tion available to us to evaluate it. In full committee and it had been re- It does not attempt to offset this other cases he offered them as a part of jected. He did not have an offset to it, with a numerical increase to offset it a substitute that contained many, but he admitted that we really did not from another portion of the bill. It many other items. In a number of the need an offset, so we proceeded to does, however, have in it the provision cases when the gentleman referred to adopt that. that the gentleman from Tennessee the fact that he had offered them in The gentleman from Florida [Mr. makes reference to. There is no offset. committee, he did not offer separate WELDON] offered this morning an We have decided to be honest and not amendments on the subject matters. amendment to add $81.5 million back have an offset. The gentleman from What he offered was a substitute that for NASA personnel, when they finally Tennessee found an offset in a pro- covered a whole variety of items, and discovered that the President’s budget gram, polar orbiting satellites, which we rejected his substitute as going the provided the funding that was needed, the agency had decided not to do any- wrong direction. and if they cut $81 million out of it, it thing about for the next 2 years any- Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, will the would result in layoffs and furloughs, way, so he is going to reduce the budg- gentleman yield? which would be bad for a lot of people’s et by that amount, which is a sort of a Mr. WALKER. I yield to the gen- health. subterfuge, but if he can get away with tleman from Tennessee. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. it, fine. Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I just WAMP] now has discovered that the $26 Mr. Chairman, I urge the Members to want to point out that at the full com- million which I recommended be put be honest and to accept my substitute, mittee level I was on record, and I May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5703 think our chairman will remember, reaucracy. We think that the money to job creation through invigorating stating that I wanted to address this on should go into some things with regard our science and technology policy, the House floor and I would be looking to headquarters, but there also ought going absolutely the wrong direction if actively for an offset so that we could to be money for modernization, and I our goal is to have more high-paying do the responsible thing. But I specifi- thank the gentleman from Tennessee jobs in this country based on science cally stated at the markup I wanted [Mr. WAMP] for what he has done. and technology. this addressed and detailed what I Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Chairman, I move I think the Wamp amendment today wanted addressed on the House floor. to strike the requisite number of provides another example of the do-lit- So it was not like it mysteriously ap- words. tle legacy of this committee, because it peared, Mr. BROWN, and in all fairness Mr. Chairman, I want to do some- is attempting to repair changes in our Mr. CRAMER and I think it worked in thing carefully here. I want to speak science policy that should never have about the most bipartisan way here. on behalf of the Brown substitute and been made in the first place. In any Let us not bring partisanship into this on behalf of the Wamp amendment as case, I was not here on the floor a little issue of NEXRAD radar system, please. well. I support the Brown substitute earlier this afternoon when the gen- I thank the gentleman for yielding. now because I supported the Brown tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALK- Mr. WALKER. The gentleman is cor- substitute for the entire bill. If that ER], the chairman of the committee, rect. He did reserve his rights for the fails, then of course I will support the asserted that my comments of yester- floor. I am pleased that we were able to Wamp proposal as well. I am concerned day were inaccurate. He particularly work something out. I am glad to mod- about the budget impact on the Na- took umbrage at my claim that the ify the bill to do that. tional Weather Service. committee had just one committee re- It seems to me, though, that we do I want to reaffirm what the gen- port to its credit for all of 1995. Take not want to do the Brown substitute. tleman from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] has note he did not disagree with my com- As the gentleman from California him- said. We are neighbors there, from ment that the committee had abso- self has said, this is not offset. It will north Alabama, northeast Alabama, up lutely zero, that is, a big goose egg increase the National Weather Service there into Tennessee. We have strug- when it comes to legislation signed local warning and forecast budget by gled hard to make sure our very vul- into law through its work last year but $26 million. That means that we are nerable area of the country is in fact he did quarrel with the fact that they not dealing in the same manner that included in the National Weather Serv- had only one committee report. He said the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. ice’s modernization plan. Budget has they had 16. In fact, I have the Com- WAMP] has done, in the responsible way impact on the service that the Weather mittee on Science calendar for last of assuring that we do this with an off- Service can offer to our area so we are year, and it confirms that there was set. concerned not only about the place- only one committee report for all of Unlike the Wamp amendment, which ment of a new NEXRAD, one place- last year. This is distinguished, of adds money for both modernization and ment that will accommodate two con- course, as my remarks did, from those local warnings and forecasts, the gressional districts and we have reports associated with the filing of Brown amendment eliminates all the worked hard together to make sure more and more of these bills to fulfill reductions that the Committee on that we not have to cause a budget the Gingrich ideological agenda. Science made to the National Weather item that would reflect for two A committee report, for those who do Service headquarters and specialized NEXRAD’s but that we join together not understand the difference, is a mat- weather programs, and does not in- and accomplish that with one place- ter of oversight, that we in Congress clude any money for the modernization ment of NEXRAD and I think we have have a responsibility to exercise over- program. That strikes me as being an in fact worked in a model bipartisan sight over NOAA, over all of these var- odd set of priorities. What you are way toward that and will accomplish ious bureaucracies to see that they are doing is plusing up the account for the that. doing their job. But this committee, headquarters staff and overhead while What I am concerned about that unlike the time when my good friend, not putting the money into the mod- causes me to support the Brown sub- the gentleman from California [Mr. ernization program that the Weather stitute as well, and, if that fails, as BROWN], chaired the committee and Service regards as its most important well as what the gentleman from Ten- had 13 oversight reports of committees, priority. So the Wamp amendment in nessee [Mr. WAMP] is proposing here has not kept pace with its work. fact moves us toward a much stronger today is that beyond just the True, the chairman of the Committee content level on it. NEXRAD’s, we have got a personnel on Science has been very involved in Why reduce the headquarters staff? issue that if we deny the National oversight of the Clinton administra- Why do we think that is important? We Weather Service this kind of budget tion, looking for any political exam- are going along there with the inspec- item, then we are saying to them that ples it can find that might be useful in tor general. This is not some ideologi- they will have to direct the con- this year’s elections. Perhaps that pro- cal kick. The inspector general said in sequences down to the level of mid- vides some of the reason why just his most recent report that the Na- night forecasts, they will have to ab- merely pursuing good science has got- tional Weather Service headquarters sorb this impact somewhere outside of ten second shift when it comes to over- staff could be identified as having over headquarters, somewhere in the field as sight. $32 million in potential savings, and well. So I think both of these ap- So I stand by my comments of yes- those reductions can be made in head- proaches will accomplish what I want terday regarding the lack of productiv- quarters staff. to see accomplished. I think the Brown ity of a committee that ought to be Why is that the case? Because as substitute does it in a much more com- central to a jobs policy for this coun- they modernize the Weather Service, plete way than what the gentleman try. But I would cite this Wamp the fact is that they are able to utilize from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] is propos- amendment as an example of more of some equipment to replace people, and ing, but I am concerned enough about the problem that when you pursue po- so the modernization program is actu- the impact of what we do to stand up litical rhetoric and political ideology ally resulting in the ability to reduce here and to say support the Brown sub- over good science, you make mistakes headquarters staff. That is what is re- stitute first and, if that fails, support like this. I believe that it is fair to say flected in what we have done in the the Wamp amendment. that there were not but a handful, if bill, what is reflected in the Wamp Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I that, of our colleagues on the Repub- amendment, and we think that it move to strike the requisite number of lican side who had the slightest idea makes sense to go along with what the words. what was being done in committee gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] Mr. Chairman, yesterday I referred to when these cuts to NOAA were made wants to do here. the Committee on Science as a do-lit- and now that probably one or two peo- We believe that, in the case of the tle committee that was, through this ple in the body have the slightest idea Brown substitute, that it puts the piece of legislation, offering a do-little whether the restoration level that the money that is not offset into a bu- agenda for this country when it comes gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP] H5704 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 is proposing is the appropriate level or potential impact that a removal of the Let me quote Mr. WALKER from the debate whether the offset that he would pro- Erie weather station would have on over the inclusion of fiscal year 1997 author- pose will guarantee the integrity of local forecasting. In the meantime, ization in the Walker amendment, Science NOAA services. And, of course, since Erie will continue to receive its cur- Committee Chairman WALKER stated, ``I never the Committee on Science rarely rent radar coverage until January 1998 contended that I brought this matter before the meets, it goes 4 or 5 months without when the National Weather Service Committee. I brought it to the floor as my own even convening, there is no committee will complete its study. At that point amendment.''ÐCONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Oc- record of any type. There has not been the National Weather Service will rec- tober 11, 1995ÐH9847. bringing in any expert or any citizen ommend whatever arrangement is best The claim of the gentleman from Pennsylva- concerned with this to look at the to guarantee the continued safety of nia that, because he wrote a fiscal year 1997 NOAA issues. So we have no evidence the local communities in northwestern energy R&D budget on the floor last October, or record upon which to support this Pennsylvania. there is no need to review these accounts is amendment. Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. I ap- incredible. This is an absolute contradiction to I would say that what we have had in preciate receiving those assurances our treatment of the National Science Founda- the Committee on Science is amply from the distinguished chairman of the tion budget, which like the DOE accounts re- demonstrated by this, not legislation committee. ceived 2 year authorization in last year's that could be passed on a bipartisan The CHAIRMAN. Are there further science authorization, but unlike DOE, which basis as occurred under both Repub- amendments to title IV? is apparently not worthy of our consideration, licans and Democrats in previous ad- Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I move to the NSF budget was included in H.R. 3322. ministrations, not committee reports strike the last word. What is the reason for doing so? I imagine exercising the oversight policy; rather, Mr. Chairman, there are many problems it may have something to do with the lack of with this legislation. One of the most signifi- we have just had an example that the support for the chairman's vision of our future cant is the lack of title dealing with the Depart- main kind of science coming out of this energy research needs. ment of Energy's R&D programs. Why not? I committee is political science and we I had considered offering an amendment on believe the explanation is that a bipartisan ma- have had more excellence in pursuit of energy R&D, but have decided not to, as it jority of the committee, and probably the error. has become apparent that it is a waste of the House, would fund them at a much higher The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Members' time to in any way improve upon level than the chairman would like. this meaningless and irrelevant legislation. the amendment offered by the gen- These members recognize the role energy Instead, I will submit for the RECORD, at the tleman from California [Mr. BROWN as plays in preserving our economic well-being a substitute for the amendment offered proper place and time, a letter to Appropria- and national security. What Mr. WALKER tions Chairman LIVINGSTON from members of by the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. purports to be the relevant House action in the Science Committee, Republicans and WAMP]. this area guts funding for almost every sector Democrats, expressing our concern over en- The amendment offered as a sub- of energy research: conservation, solar and ergy R&D authorization levels and the contin- stitute for the amendment was re- renewable, nuclearÐincluding fusionÐas well ued irrelevance of the back-of-an-envelope jected. as important fossil R&D efforts to reduce the The CHAIRMAN. The question is on budget the committee chairman has endorsed. environmental impacts of what will continue to the amendment offered by the gen- In closing, I want to reemphasize that this is be the source of over 85 percent of energy tleman from Tennessee [Mr. WAMP]. in no way an ``Omnibus'' bill. Semi-omnibus production. The amendment was agreed to. If we were to follow the Walker budget, we would be a more accurate description, and in The CHAIRMAN. Are there further would be practically zeroing out conservation, many instances, what is contained in the bill is amendments to title IV? solar and renewables, and fossil energy. not worthy of our support. Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. When we marked up this bill in committee, Mr. Chairman, I include the following for the Chairman, I move to strike the last we were promised a subcommittee markup on RECORD: word. an energy authorization in the ensuing weeks. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage This did not happen. Washington, DC, May 7, 1996. in a colloquy with the distinguished Then, when H.R. 3322 was originally sched- Hon. BOB LIVINGSTON, gentleman from Pennsylvania, the uled for floor action, we were told that there Chairman, Committee on Appropriations, Wash- chairman of the Committee on Science. would be a subcommittee markup the follow- ington, DC. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: As Members of the Mr. Chairman, I am greatly con- ing week. cerned that the replacement of the Erie House Science Committee, we are writing to It would be cynical to suggest that this an- express our concern over House-passed au- Weather Service Office at Erie, PA, nouncement was made merely to allay the thorization levels contained in H.R. 2405 for with radar service from Pittsburgh, concerns of numerous members of the major- civilian research and development activities Cleveland, and Buffalo would increase ity who are concerned over the chairman's vi- for the Department of Energy. weather-related accidents on Penn- sion of energy R&D. Even if there is no further action by the sylvania’s north coastal region. Re- However, it is interesting to note that once Science Committee on its DOE accounts, ports issued by both the General Ac- H.R. 3322 was pulled from the floor schedule your Committee needs to understand that counting Office and the National Re- the energy markup was canceled. the Science Committee provided for flexibil- search Council support this conclusion It is also interesting to point out that it has ity in the setting of FY 1997 funding levels in H.R. 2405. This is due to the continued rel- by identifying radar coverage gaps and been 3 weeks since the Energy and Environ- evance of the Davis amendment to these au- other shortcomings with the new na- ment Subcommittee has met for any reason, thorizations. The Davis amendment clarifies tionwide NEXRAD coverage system. so it is not as if we have been overwhelmed that authorization for these programs should After the terrible consequences of un- by the schedule. Perhaps someone who is be reconsidered if in the budget and appro- foreseen tornadoes in 1985 that dev- setting the committee's schedule could tell us priations process, more funds become avail- astated a number of communities in when energy policy is going to be a high able. our region and the ever-present danger enough priority for us to act. Last October, when the House considered When we began the debate on this bill, the H.R. 2405, an amendment offered by Chair- of unpredictable lake-effect weather on man Walker was adopted which raised au- Lake Erie, the communities of north- committee chairman claimed that we handled thorization levels for FY 1996 to meet the west Pennsylvania in my view must the energy accounts on the floor last year. He previously appropriated level, but also set have weather service they can depend refers us back to H.R. 2405, which the House FY 1997 levels. While the action taken re- upon. passed last October. Let me remind Members garding FY 1996 levels was in keeping with Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will that the genesis of this so-called vision of our the Davis Amendment adopted during the gentleman yield? energy futureÐa vision that calls for a $500 Science Committee mark-up, the Committee Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. I million reduction in energy researchÐnot from had not considered DOE funding for FY 1997 yield to the gentleman from Penn- at all. the request, but from fiscal year 1996Ðwas In the debate over the inclusion of FY 1997 sylvania. based on an amendment that the gentleman authorization in the Walker amendment, Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I want from Pennsylvania brought to the floor on his Science Committee Chairman Walker stated, to assure the gentleman that the Na- own and did not reflect the will of the commit- ‘‘I never contended that I brought this mat- tional Weather Service is studying any tee. ter before the Committee. I brought it to the May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5705 floor as my own amendment.’’ (Congres- (6) For lab and field expenses, $73,031,600. Administrator an annual report that con- sional Record, October 11, 1995—H9847) (7) For headquarters expenses of the Office tains the views of the Science Advisory Since the House acted on H.R. 2405, there of Research and Development, $9,254,800. Board on proposed research programs as de- have been several developments which war- (8) For multimedia related research ex- scribed in the President’s budget for re- rant reconsideration of these numbers. For penses, $174,060,100, of which $5,000,000 shall search, development, and demonstration ac- example, the Congressional Budget Office be for graduate student fellowships. tivities at the Environmental Protection has revised its economic assumptions, result- (9) For program management expenses, Agency. Such report shall be submitted to ing in greater flexibility in making discre- $6,399,000. Congress as soon as practicable after the tionary spending decisions. Also, the Energy (10) For pesticide related research, submission of the President’s budget to Con- & Environment Subcommittee has held a se- $20,632,000. gress. The Administrator shall cooperate ries of hearings on energy research and de- (11) For research related to hazardous with the Director of the Science Advisory velopment, which have proven to be very waste, $12,000,000. Board, particularly with respect to the time- (12) For environmental research labora- helpful in our ability to judge the value of ly provision of budget information to the tories, $51,000,000. the various programs in question. Science Advisory Board, to allow the Science (c) ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS.—There We are very grateful to Energy & Environ- Advisory Board to carry out its duties under are authorized to be appropriated to the Ad- ment Subcommittee Chairman Rohrabacher this subsection. ministrator for fiscal year 1997— for scheduling these hearings. However, they (1) for oil pollution related research, (b) EVALUATION.—The Science Advisory will be for naught if the Committee is unable $2,076,900; and Board shall conduct periodic evaluations of to act on this hearing record in a timely (2) for research related to leaking under- selected areas of the current and planned re- manner. ground storage tanks, $769,000. search development, and demonstration ac- The need to revisit DOE R&D funding is (d) LIMITATIONS.—No funds are authorized tivities of the Environmental Protection apparently shared by Chairman Walker and to be appropriated by this title for— Agency. The areas of evaluation shall be se- Subcommittee Chairman Rohrabacher, who (1) the Environmental Technology Initia- lected by the Science Advisory Board in con- have publicly pledged their willingness to tive; sultation with the Administrator, the Office move a FY 1997 DOE R&D authorization bill. (2) the Climate Change Action Plan; of Research and Development, other Agency While we support this action, we are con- (3) Indoor Air Research; programs and appropriate committees of the cerned that the mark-up of this legislation (4) North Dakota Center for Air Toxic Met- Congress. Reports containing the Science will occur too late to influence your Com- als Research; Advisory Board’s evaluations and rec- mittee’s consideration of these accounts. (5) drinking water research conducted by ommendations shall be filed with such com- We recommend that your Committee not the American Water Works Association Re- mittees and the Administrator. The Admin- consider itself bound in any way by the FY search Foundation, other than amounts istrator shall provide to such committees a 1997 levels passed in HR 2405. Energy policy awarded through a competitive process; written response to the Science Advisory is too important to our national security and (6) the Water Environmental Research Board’s evaluation and recommendations economic strength to be based on last year’s Foundation; within 60 days after the Science Advisory information. Thus, Congress should not act (7) the National Urban Air Toxic Research Board’s report has been submitted. presumptively to drastically reduce these Center; (c) REVIEW OF CERTAIN RESEARCH ACTIVI- vital accounts. (8) the Gulf Coast Hazardous Substances TIES.—The Science Advisory Board shall an- Sincerely, Research Center; nually review the research activities of the Mike Doyle; Sherwood Boehlert; John (9) urban waste management research at Environmental Protection Agency and shall Tanner; John W. Olver; Steve Largent; the University of New Orleans, other than include the results of such review in the an- George E. Brown, Jr.; Tim Roemer; amounts awarded through a competitive nual report required by subsection (a). process; Eddie Bernice Johnson; Paul McHale; (d) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—The Admin- (10) the Resources and Agricultural Policy Zach Wamp; Lynn N. Rivers; Zoe istrator shall submit to the Congress any re- Systems Program at Iowa State University Lofgren; Bart Gordon; Jane Harman; port required by law to be submitted to the Tim Holden; Mike Ward; Robert E. or (11) the Oil Spill Remediation Research Administrator by the Science Advisory Cramer, Jr. Center. Board. The Administrator shall make any The CHAIRMAN. Are there further such submission not later than 60 days after SEC. 504. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH REVIW. amendments to title IV? the Administrator receives the report from (a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator shall the Science Advisory Board. If not, the Clerk will designate title assign to the Assistant Administrator the V. duties of— The CHAIRMAN. Are there any The text of title V is as follows: (1) development a strategic plan for sci- amendments to title V? entific and technical research activities TITLE V—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION b 1800 AGENCY throughout the Agency; (2) integrating that strategic plan into on- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. LOFGREN SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE. going Agency planning activities; and This title may be cited as the ‘‘Environ- (3) reviewing all Agency research to ensure Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I offer mental Research, Development, and Dem- the research— an amendment. onstration Authorization Act of 1996’’. (A) is of high quality; and The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- SEC. 502. DEFINITIONS. (B) does not duplicate any other research ignate the amendment. For the purposes of this title, the term— being conducted by the Agency. The text of the amendment is as fol- (1) ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Adminis- (b) REPORT.—The Assistant Administrator lows: trator of the Environmental Protection shall transmit annually to the Adminis- Agency; trator and to the Committee on Science of Amendment offered by Ms. LOFGREN: Page (2)‘‘Agency’’ means the Environmental the House of Representatives and the Com- 118, line 17, strike paragraph (2). Protection Agency; and mittee on Environmental and Public Works Page 118, line 18, through page 119, line 12, (3) ‘‘Assistant Administrator’’ means the of the Senate a report detailing— redesignate paragraphs (3) through (11) as Assistant Administrator for Research and (1) all Agency research the Assistant Ad- paragraphs (2) through (10), respectively. Development of the Agency. ministrator finds is not of sufficiently high Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I rise SEC. 503. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. quality; and today in opposition to one of the most (a) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to (2) all Agency research the Assistant Ad- egregious research bans in this bill. be appropriated to the Administrator ministrator finds duplicates other Agency The very thought of Congress banning research. $487,126,600 for fiscal year 1997 for Science areas of scientific research should be SEC. 505. GRADUATE STUDENT FELLOWSHIPS. and Technology activities, including pro- offensive to all of us and to all Amer- gram management and support, in the areas In carrying out the graduate student fel- specified in subsection (b). lowship program for which funds are author- ican citizens. (b) SPECIFIC PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES.—Of ized to be appropriated by this title, the Ad- H.R. 3322 attempts to restrict the the amount authorized in subsection (a), ministrator shall ensure that any fellowship EPA from spending money on the cli- there are authorized to be appropriated the awarded to a student selected after the date mate change action plan, a research following: of the enactment of this Act is used only to program designed to identify cost ef- (1) For air related research, $74, 119,900. support scientific research that would fur- fective ways of limiting carbon emis- (2) For global change research, $1,400,000. ther missions of the Office of Research and sions in the future. The genesis of this Development in fields in which there exists (3) For water quality related research, program was the international concern $26,294,000. or is projected to exist a shortage in the (4) For drinking water related research, number of scientists. expressed at the Rio Convention that $26,593,700. SEC, 506, SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD. increased emissions of greenhouse (5) For toxic substances related research, (a) ANNUAL REPORT.—The Science Advisory gases will lead to an increase in global $12,341,500. Board shall submit to Congress and to the temperatures or climate change. H5706 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 The Committee on Science has held Now, there are a total of five prohibi- focuses on technologies for methane recovery several hearings on the issue of climate tions here that prohibits funds from from coal mines, land fills, and natural gas change, and I believe this has been a being spent for any of these five, and I systems. reasonably productive exercise. We expect amendments to eliminate some The administration estimates that without have heard from the world’s experts, of these other prohibitions as well, but the action plan, greenhouse gas missions who represent the vast majority of sci- what I consider to be the most egre- would grow from 1,462 million metric tons in entists on climate change, and we have gious is all of these are important pro- 1990 to 1,674 million metric tons by 2000. The also heard from some skeptics who grams already in place by this adminis- program thus far has been very successful al- have participated in the public debate. tration. They fall within that category though we have a long way to go to achieve It is fair to say most Members on of research and development which the the targets suggested by the Rio treaty. both sides of the issue have come away distinguished gentleman from southern It is important to point out that this issue has from these hearings better informed, California [Mr. ROHRABACHER] came up involved two administrations and virtually all whether or not they were swayed by yesterday and acknowledged that he the other nations of the world. Building a sus- the arguments. One of the few points of considered to be liberal claptrap, and tainable future is not a partisan issue but it is agreement, however, has been that the as a result of that categorization, a serious issue. Simply prohibiting funds from potential for climate change is plau- which apparently is accepted by every- being spent to explore our options is irrespon- sible and we must continue to carry body on the Republican side, they pro- sible. out the research to understand how pose to just categorically not fund any I urge the adoption of the Lofgren amend- much and how soon. research within these various areas. ment. At the same time, we must under- Now, this particular kind of research, Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I move stand how to achieve a reduction in our actually it is not research as much as to strike the last word. consumption of fossil fuels and emis- it is a program to act on the potential I think we ought to get to the facts sions of greenhouse gases. This has rel- impact of certain new research find- about what this amendment does. What evance far beyond the obvious environ- ings, what these amendments do is pre- this amendment does is sets off an area mental concerns. It is simply good eco- clude us from using scientific knowl- of research within EPA, which means nomics. Whether we do only the most edge no matter where it comes from, that the money that would be spent for cost effective things that are justified, the Federal Government, universities, this research would come from all regardless of whether there is climate or the private sector. If this research other environmental research, and the change or whether we go beyond the indicates that a certain program of ac- money that would thereby be given to so-called no regrets policy to do the tion is necessary to alleviate the pro- other environmental research of equal more difficult things, it makes good spective damage revealed by this re- standing, and perhaps more important sense to examine the issue. This is search, we are prohibited from develop- priorities, would actually be given now what the climate action plan does. ing a program to do that, an action to global climate change. The climate action plan is based on plan to accomplish that. Now, the reason why we have this an array of voluntary programs that, if Mr. Chairman, I do not care what the particular language in the bill right successful, will save almost $2 billion field is, I think that is the wrong way now, which the Lofgren amendment annually by the year 2000. These in- to approach any kind of public policy eliminates the termination of EPA’s clude programs such as the Green activity. We cannot just blindly pro- global climate change research pro- Lights Program, the Energy Star Com- hibit certain kinds of things from tak- gram, is because we had good reason to puter, Natural Gas Star, and other vol- ing place. This reminds me of the kind decide that this was not high priority. untary efforts that are strongly sup- of thing that would get done in an First, the Office of Research and Devel- ported by industry. autocratic dictatorship or a theocracy opment, which is authorized in this Mr. Chairman, I personally believe or something of that sort. title, is intended to support the Envi- that the evidence is mounting that If the results of scientific research ronmental Protection Agency with human actions have had an impact on indicate that action is necessary, we good science. Currently we do not regu- the Earth’s climate and will have an should not prohibit that activity. The late CO2 emissions. EPA does not regu- increasing influence. I recognize, how- amendment offered by the gentle- late CFC’s, and in this bill we have au- ever, that other well-meaning Members woman from California [Ms. LOFGREN] thorized EPA’s stratospheric ozone re- may disagree. We should all agree, would strike that language from the search above the level requested by the however, that we have a responsibility bill and, in my opinion, improve it con- President. to more fully understand this issue. We siderably. In other words, where EPA has real should also agree that we should move Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentle jurisdiction we have decided to actu- toward a more energy efficient future lady's amendment to strike the prohibition on ally increase the amounts of money beginning with voluntary programs EPA's climate action plan. The goal of the cli- going into that research. Now, if we such as those in the climate action mate action plan has been to identify actions adopt this particular amendment, what plan. that could be undertaken to return U.S. green- we will do is run the risk that we will This is hardly money down a rat house gas emissions to 1990 levels by the take money away from places where we hole, as was stated in our Committee year 2000. This is essentially the nonbinding are increasing the money and give it to on Science markup. The climate action target which the U.S. agreed to as part of the global climate change. plan will have far-reaching economic Framework Convention on Climate Change Second, the agency has been using its benefits as well as potentially impor- which came out of the 1992 Earth Summit in research to do impact assessment of tant environmental benefits. I hope Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. global warming not improving the Members will join me in striking the The action plan consists of 44 separate ac- models it will tell us if and by how prohibition on this program. Let us tivities directed toward all sectors of the econ- much the world may warm. That, in leave science to the scientists, not to omy. The programs and activities are vol- my mind, is not exactly the priority the politicians. untary. A number of them also derive from the that most of us would choose. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- Energy Policy Act because of the dual nature Now, we are currently spending al- man, I rise in support of this amend- of the problemÐthat is, building a sustainable most $2 billion across the Federal Gov- ment. future based on cost effective, environmentally ernment on global climate change re- Mr. Chairman, this amendment is in- safe energy sources. search. It is important we prioritize tended to reverse what I consider one In addition to Federal funding, a substantial that research. This is not a case of cut- of the more egregious portions of this amount of private capital has been committed ting out all the money for global bill, which is found on page 118, line 14, to this problem. This will achieve energy sav- change. I happen to think that global under the title of limitations. And it ings valued at $61.2 billion out to the year change research is a very, very appro- says that no funds are authorized to be 2000. Eighteen of the forty-four activities are priate thing to be funded. I think $2 appropriated by this title for, and in designed to increase energy efficiency in the billion being spent by the Federal Gov- this case paragraph 2, the climate residential, commercial, and industrial sectors ernment is a lot of money, being spent change action plan. of the economy. EPA's part of this plan also for a lot of programs. What we ought to May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5707 do is make certain it is being spent until we have a critical situation which which was to just ask industry to vol- wisely and well. requires mandates, I think, is just untarily find ways of keeping our lev- The administration has spread cli- plain silly. els of carbon dioxide emissions down to mate change research through 12 agen- When we look at the rising trade the 1990 levels. cies right now, including the Depart- deficits that occur in the United States b 1815 ment of Defense, the Department of month after month after month, lit- Commerce, the Department of Energy, erally 50 percent of our annual trade It seems to me that this is not re- the Department of Interior, NASA, deficit goes for one product, and that is quiring any kind of mandate. It is not NSF, and NOAA. EPA has a relatively importing foreign oil. Why not get be- in any way suggesting that we have to enforce those levels on industry. All it small piece of that climate change hind a program which voluntarily asks is saying is if we voluntarily get these budget, roughly about $20 million. We industry to participate in ways of cre- industries to participate in this pro- do not need 12 agencies doing essen- ating energy conservation instead of gram, we can keep jobs here in the tially the same kind of research. sending off our petroleum dollars to United States, we can cut down on our EPA, in this particular office, is not the OPEC’ers overseas? Why not keep balance of trade deficit, and we can es- the place to conduct global climate the jobs here? Why not do it in a vol- sentially strengthen the economy of change research. The research they are untary way? Why not support the America. conducting is of a lesser value than amendment by my colleague from Cali- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, if the that done by their agencies and should fornia, Ms. LOFGREN, in a way that will gentleman will continue to yield, that be terminated in favor of better re- make sense for people in this country is not what this particular program search elsewhere. and that will create jobs for the people does. In fact, what the gentleman is The bottom line is if we choose to of the United States? talking about is a $20 million expendi- spend this $20 million in this place on Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will ture that largely is going right now to climate change impact assessment out the gentleman yield? impact assessments of global warming. of the EPA budget, the hire priority re- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I It is not going to the voluntary pro- search, such as maybe endocrine dis- yield to the gentleman from Penn- grams. rupter research, that we approved yes- sylvania. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. terday, drinking water research, clean Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, the Chairman, reclaiming my time, I ap- air research, a lot of the other things gentleman may not be aware that ear- preciate the gentleman’s comments, are going to suffer. This money comes lier in the Congress, over the objec- but the fact is that I have been assured out of other high priority regulatory tions of many in the minority, we that the purpose of this amendment is type matters in order to go into this passed a bill to concentrate attention in fact to do just what I have sug- account where we are already in other on hydrogen research. It is something gested, which is to make a 27-percent agencies spending $2 billion. we have pushed very, very heavily be- cut in the Climate Change Action Plan, If that is what people want to do in cause we think that what the gen- which the amendment of the gentle- the name of environment, then perhaps tleman says is absolutely correct, that woman from California [Ms. LOFRGEN] they will vote for this particular one of the ways in which we can essentially restores the budget cuts amendment. But we had exactly this achieve energy independence is to de- for. same amendment on the floor last year velop a new kind of energy regime. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, if the and this exact same amendment was That bill is now in the Senate. We hope gentleman will continue to yield, in turned down last year. It seems to be it will come back. other sections of EPA, the gentleman that the Congress wisely understood I would hope the gentleman would is absolutely right. But this is the re- last year that there are very important support us and what this committee is search account. In the research ac- environmental matters to be re- attempting to do in terms of count, that Action Plan is not a part of searched at EPA. This is not one of the transitioning to a new hydrogen econ- what is being done here. The $20 mil- ones that should be done there. It omy as a way of addressing those kinds lion is not being spent on the Action should be done elsewhere, where they of issues. Plan, it is being spent on impact as- do a better job than what is being done Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. sessments and things of that kind. at EPA. Vote against the Lofgren Chairman, reclaiming my time, I ap- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I yield amendment. preciate the gentleman’s concern. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. There is a question about whether or to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. LOFGREN] for a clarification of Chairman, I move to strike the req- not hydrogen energy is the best meth- whether or not this is a restoration of uisite number of words. odology that we ought to be using in the 20 percent cut or whether some Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong sup- the future, and it seems to me, if that other account is being affected. port of the amendment offered by my is nothing more than corporate welfare Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, if the colleague from California. It is no se- for the nuclear power industry, it is gentleman from Massachusetts will cret by now that this committee is something we should take up. yield, basically if the gentleman looks committed to gutting the global cli- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will at page 188 of the bill, line 18, there is mate research program. H.R. 3322 pro- the gentleman further yield? a prohibition on the utilization of vides 27-percent fewer resources than Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I funds already appropriated for the Cli- the administration requested in the fis- yield to the gentleman from Penn- mate Change Action Plan. And I would cal year 1997 budget in some of the sylvania. add, in addition to line 17. strictest fiscal discipline applied to Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I would The CHAIRMAN. The time of the any of the programs under the bill. say to the gentleman that, in fact, we gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. The ban on using funds for the global are trying to move the research away KENNEDY] has expired. climate change action plan is based on from any association with the nuclear (On request of Mr. WALKER, and by ideology, not information. Before I side of it in the bill, and we are at- unanimous consent, Mr. KENNEDY of came to the Congress of the United tempting to address exactly that issue, Massachusetts was allowed to proceed States, I started two of the most suc- and hydrogen, the gentleman must for 3 additional minutes.) cessful energy conservation companies admit, is an absolutely clean energy Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I in the United States. They are still, source, in fact, if we can utilize it. yield to the gentlewoman from Califor- today, two of the largest energy con- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. nia [Ms. LOFGREN]. servation companies in this country, Chairman, reclaiming my time, I ap- Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, if the and I can tell Members that energy preciate the gentleman’s concern, and I gentleman would read further on page conservation simply makes sense. do not have a problem with trying to 118, extending on to page 119, there are We now have a growing body of infor- develop other resources, but I do have also prohibitions on research in the mation about the carbon dioxide gases a problem when we try to use those ar- area of indoor air, drinking water re- which are choking off the overall envi- guments to oppose the basic fundamen- search conducted by the American Wa- ronment of this world. For us to wait tal requirement of this legislation, terworks Association, as well as a H5708 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 number of other prohibitions on sci- case. What we are doing is simply try- that our debate in this body grows entific research activities. ing to deal with global change research from knowledge rather than from igno- Mr. Chairman, it is my view that it is on a priority basis. rance. a tremendous error for Members of Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Sound policy requires us to incor- Congress, most of whom are not sci- Chairman, I appreciate that. porate sound scientific research and entists, I think we have three or four Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, I move to reasoning in order to have any kind of scientists among our 435, to substitute strike the requisite number of words. semblance of sound policy. It seems to our judgment for those of scientists. Mr. Chairman, I am rising today in me the truth is out there and we should This is clearly an area that we know, support of the amendment which the not be running from it, we should be, if as you referenced earlier, is of signifi- gentlewoman from California [Ms. anything, concentrating our global cli- cant impact not only to the United LOFGREN] has offered on this underly- mate change action in the EPA, which States but to the world. My children ing bill which allows the EPA to con- is charged with environmental protec- are 11 and 14. I do not want them to be tinue their work on the climate change tion, because it is a matter of greatest adults and live in a world where cli- action plan. possible significance to us in climate mate change is too late to impact, as But I would like to just comment for change for what our environment is the climate change action plan at- a moment on the comments by the dis- going to be in the future. tempts to do on a voluntary basis be- tinguished gentleman from Pennsylva- So I would hope that we would adopt fore it is too late. nia [Mr. WALKER], who is arguing here the amendment by the gentlewoman Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- in his previous set of comments that from California and strike that little man, will the gentleman yield? all they are really doing is eliminating clause in paragraph 2, the words cli- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I the consideration of the global climate mate change action plan. yield to the gentleman from California. change action plan from any involve- Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- ment in EPA, that there are at least 11 Chairman, will the gentleman yield? man, the climate change action plan, if other places in the budget where global Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman I understand properly, is a small por- climate change is covered in some way from Massachusetts. tion of the overall Global Warming by research. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Program, which is the subject of a 27- But it seems to me that the one per- Chairman, I would just like to continue percent cut here. In the case of the cli- haps most significant and most coher- the dialog I had with the gentleman mate change action plan, there is a 100- ent locus of that research is right here from Pennsylvania on the global cli- percent cut in this particular portion, under the EPA, which has a respon- mate change action plan, and the im- but that is part of the overall 27 per- sibility given to it by the Congress to plications that this has for technology. cent cut. deal with global climate change in the My understanding in checking with Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. climate change action plan. the staff is that, in fact, when you say Chairman, reclaiming my time, I ap- So for that reason at least, if we were that no funds are authorized to be ap- preciate the clarification. If I might re- going to be doing anything, we ought propriated for this title for the climate spond, let me read what the bill cur- to be concentrating in this area where change action plan that you are, in rently says. the Environmental Protection Agency fact, cutting $6.2 million that would go No funds are authorized to be appro- has the responsibility given to it by for the research on these new tech- priated by this title for, No. 1, the envi- Congress to deal with the climate nologies and their impact. So I would ronmental Technology Initiative; No. change action plan. just like to understand exactly what 2, the climate change action plan; No. Now, the amendment of the gentle- the gentleman’s point is. 4, indoor air research, which I know we woman from California corrects what I Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will are going to come back to in a few min- think is a serious wrong-headedness of the gentleman yield? utes so I will be very kind about this; the Republican budget ax. Her amend- Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman and, four, the Center for Air Toxics. In ment allows the EPA, the Environ- from Pennsylvania. any event, the appropriate portion of mental Protection Agency, to meet the Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, the this is that the climate change action responsibilities which have been right- gentleman is correct on the $6.2 mil- plan will not receive any funds under fully assigned to it by the Congress. lion, but if he will look further, he will this legislation. Climate research has far-reaching find that we transferred that money to Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, if the implications for environmental protec- plus up the account on the strato- gentleman will continue to yield, the tion, and this Congress has a respon- spheric ozone research, and the at- action plan is not tied to the research sibility to recognize the need for such tempt here is to be sure that we are program. The two Members on that research into our local as well as our doing work in real areas in the EPA. It side have quoted absolutely accurately, global environment. is a tradeoff. We happen to think that but the only thing we have in our pro- But once again the majority has in terms of the immediate priorities gram relates to the Office of Research. demonstrated their carelessness and in- the stratospheric ozone question is The Office of Research does not do the sensitivity where broad issues of envi- more important to address. action plan. ronmental protection are concerned. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Mr. Chairman, in the wake of what gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, as I un- has been a record-breaking winter and OLVER] has expired. derstand, the ORD portion does take up then the current crowd that, if sus- (On request of Mr. KENNEDY of Massa- some significant technology aspects tained, could create a sand dune desert chusetts, and by unanimous consent, that are included in the cut that has the size of the great State of Texas Mr. OLVER was allowed to proceed for 1 been taken up by this bill. Some of the covering much of the southern high additional minute.) new technologies are in, in fact, cut plains of this country, it seems to me Mr. OLVER. I yield to the gentleman under the portion of this bill which is it is preposterous for this Congress to from Massachusetts. granted coverage under the limitations turn its back on understanding climate Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. which I just cited. change. Chairman, I would just point out that Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, if the During the 104th Congress I have there was some confusion in the last gentleman will continue to yield, there heard much about cost-benefit analy- interchange that I had with the gen- is practically no impact here because sis. Apparently, some of my colleagues tleman from Pennsylvania, because I the action plan that the gentleman re- on the other side of the aisle have a thought he was trying to suggest the ferred to earlier of doing business problem with the analysis part of that last time around that, in fact, there hookups is, in fact, not in the Office of cost-benefit analysis. But you do have was not a cut. Research, and that is all I am trying to to have data in order to do analysis. Now I am understanding in this say to the gentleman; to portray what Whether you agree or disagree with the present exchange that there is, in fact, is being done here is eliminating that concept of global warming, let us at a cut, but he has just taken the money program is inaccurate. That is not the least be willing to gather the data so and used it for some other purpose. I May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5709 understand that he is taking the how it is changing as a result of human together the various components that money and using it for some other pur- input and how we can further deal with are all important into our plan. It is pose, but the truth of the matter is this climate change that is, under- not, that function, so far as I can tell that he cut the program and the gen- standably from all the scientific data as a member of the committee, is not tlewoman from California [Ms. that we read, inevitable. provided for elsewhere in the budget. LOFGREN] is attempting to put the So, the research portion of this $6 Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, re- money back in the program, which I million, I think, is being well spent. claiming my time, there are still large think has finally been clarified. Now, the climate action plan is a pro- dollars in the climate action plan. There is an attempt in this bill to gram that I fully endorse, and while it The CHAIRMAN. The question is on gut the Global Climate Change Action has taken a bit of a cut here, there still the amendment offered by the gentle- Plan which will, in fact, hurt the tech- is probably, I am not sure what the woman from California [Ms. LOFGREN]. nologies. The gentleman is going to use exact amount is, but it is probably The question was taken; and the the money for some other purposes, close to $100 million. And I think we Chairman announced that the noes ap- which I am sure are very, very good should continue to pursue that climate peared to have it. and helpful and strong, but we still action plan. It is a solid program that Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I de- want some money put into this pro- meshes government and the private mand a recorded vote, and pending gram. sector together. that, I make the point of order that a Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, reclaim- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will quorum is not present. ing my time, as a matter of fact, it is the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the not that we are specifically putting Mr. GILCHREST. I yield to the gen- order of the House of today, further money back into the program, but tleman from Pennsylvania. proceedings on the amendment offered Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I ap- merely removing the language that re- by the gentlewoman from California preciate the points that the gentleman quires that no money be authorized for [Ms. LOFGREN] will be postponed. has made. The fact is that we get ac- the Global Climate Change Action The point of no quorum is considered cused all the time of being opposed to withdrawn. Plan. I would hope that the amend- the Global Climate Change Program. I The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the ment by the gentlewoman from Cali- am sure there are some, the gentleman fornia would be adopted. order of the House of today, it is now from California [Mr. ROHRABACHER], for Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I in order to consider amendment No. 6 example, is not particularly enthusias- move to strike the requisite number of tic. by the gentleman from Massachusetts words. Mr. Chairman, I happen to support [Mr. KENNEDY]. Mr. Chairman, I am trying to work the research. I think it does good AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. KENNEDY OF my way through all of this. I started things too. I think it should be prop- MASSACHUSETTS out this morning worrying about the erly prioritized. I thought that when Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Climate Change Action Plan because I we were dealing with some of the ozone Chairman, I offer an amendment. think it is a significant, though not the issues, that was also a part of the gen- The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- overall major, part of this plan to eral pattern here of trying to under- ignate the amendment. study global warming, to study global stand the atmospheric conditions that The text of the amendment is as fol- climate change, which I happen to be a produce some of the changes that are lows: firm believer we need the exact sci- potential problems for us. Amendment offered by Mr. KENNEDY of entific data to produce. Massachusetts: Page 118, line 18, strike para- So I have been working my way b 1830 graph (3). through trying to figure out where the So, in transferring the money Page 118, line 19, through page 119, line 12, cuts are coming from, and I was happy around, it is important to realize that redesignate paragraphs (4) through (11) as to hear that we are not cutting $20 mil- we are setting priorities. For instance, paragraphs (3) through (10), respectively. lion out of the Global Climate Action only NOAA and EPA, to my knowledge, Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Plan, but it is actually $6 million, but do stratospheric ozone research. We Chairman, the truth is that Americans it is in an area of research so that the have 12 different agencies doing the spend about 90 percent of their lives in- chairman of the subcommittee places global climate change research. It doors. While we spend 90 percent of our the money in this area of research to seems to be the right kind of priority, lives indoors, we spend billions and bil- stratospheric ozone research, which I to me, for us to do it in the way we lions of dollars cleaning up outdoor air. think is appropriate. have done it here. And I would agree Indoor air happens to be about 1,000 I understand, though, in the EPA’s with the gentleman. I think he has times more polluted than outdoor air. budget in the area of the environ- every reason to be supportive of some So we have a kind of a crazy situation mental programs and management, of the programs at EPA that move where, despite the fact that we are liv- there is tens of millions of dollars for some of these programs forward and ing inside buildings, we are working in- the Climate Change Action Plan. does recognize, I am pleased, that what side buildings, we are living and work- Now, I want to stand here and agree we have done here is simply attempted ing in areas that are much, much more with the gentleman from Massachu- to utilize research dollars a little bit polluted than the areas where we end setts and the gentlewoman from Cali- better. up spending the vast majority of our fornia in that we need a significant Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I dollars to clean up. role to play as far as the Government yield to the gentlewoman from Califor- Now, I just believe that it makes is concerned to produce more energy- nia [Ms. LOFGREN]. sense for us to get a better handle on efficient cars, lighting, using fuel. And Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I just exactly the kinds of indoor air pollut- a number of the Fortune 500 companies wanted to make a point, because I do ants that are potentially causing great in the United States are part of this think that to fail to enact the amend- harm to the American people and peo- green light program and a part of many ment I proposed would run contrary to ple throughout the world. I know that other programs which significantly re- the goals that my colleague is espous- my friend from Pennsylvania, Mr. duce the costs of their production and ing that I share. I do not oppose re- WALKER, agrees that this is an impor- at the same time significantly reduc- search in stratosphere ozone research. tant issue and one that we should work ing the amount of hydrogen fuels going However, we do have much research together to try and understand, both into the atmosphere which produce going on pursuant to our international the causes as well as some of the solu- global climate change. treaty on ozone. As a matter of fact, tions. But in this particular amendment I we found a number of things already. Mr. Chairman, in this very building, urge my colleagues to vote ‘‘no.’’ Basi- As my colleagues are well aware, the if we take a deep breath, we will be cally, the $6 million coming out of the Nobel Prize was awarded for some of breathing in more fungus and bacteria action plan is going into solid research the significant findings in that arena. and molds than we want to shake a so that we can understand the nature But the action plan, the climate stick at. So I would not suggest that of the atmosphere and the nature of change action plan is where we bring all of my friends on the other side of H5710 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 the aisle stop breathing, although from there have been health problems associated We have had plenty of indoor air quality time to time it seemed like a good with faulty air-conditioning and ventilation sys- problems in my State. idea. Nevertheless, I do think that try- tems. Individuals who suffer respiratory prob- A statewide 1995 survey by the U.S. Gen- ing to find out some better research lems as a result of contaminants present in eral Accounting Office estimated that more and some better understandings about their homes and workplaces would like to than 30 percent of Massachusetts' 1,794 pub- how we can deal with the serious issue know what the contaminants are and how they lic schools suffer from poor air quality and that of indoor air problems is an area where can be controlled. about 42 percent of them have ventilation I hope we can both agree. The committee will try to tell us that this re- problems. Mr. Chairman, if my friend from search program is really part of a plot to regu- In February, 26 students at Peabody Veter- Pennsylvania has some thoughts on late the air in people's homes. This is ridicu- ans Memorial High School in Boston were this, I would be happy to yield. lous. This program's purpose is to empower pulled out of school by parents concerned Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will citizens to make informed choices about prod- about the quality of air in the building. Their the gentleman yield? ucts and services available to them to improve children had severe headaches, dizziness, Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I air quality in their homes. For nearly 10 years sleepiness, and some developed rashes. yield to the gentleman from Penn- this program has generated information that My district has had other sick building syn- dromes recently that stretch from the Boston sylvania. has been used to disseminate information to Registry of Motor Vehicles, to a county court- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I have State indoor air programs and to building own- house, and to Bringham & Woman's Hospital. talked to the gentleman about his ers and managers on how to avoid and miti- amendment. Also, the gentleman from But problems with indoor air quality are not gate indoor air quality problems. unique to my district. Just yesterday, the De- Virginia [Mr. DAVIS], on our side of the The Indoor Air Research Program is an ex- partment of Transportation headquarters evac- aisle, has talked to me some about this cellent example of how science can be used uated 5,500 workers because of the discovery particular amendment. On behalf of to achieve environmental quality goals without of a toxic airborne mold in the building. The Mr. DAVIS, I am prepared to accept the regulation. problem of poor indoor air quality is not going gentleman’s amendment. The question is do we want to have the to go away on its own. Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. facts about indoor air quality or not? Do we EPA's Science Advisory Board has ranked Chairman, I very much appreciate and want people to have information to make in- indoor air pollution as one of the highest I want to pay particular thanks to the formed decisions about how they can improve health risks meriting EPA attention. While gentleman from California [Mr. BROWN] their home and work environments or not? I there is considerable information about some who has been a great supporter of re- urge my colleagues to support knowledge over indoor pollutants, scientists know little about search on indoor air quality for every ignorance by supporting the Kennedy amend- the relative magnitudes of the potential risks year that I have offered this amend- ment. associated with different indoor environments ment for the last 10 years. I appreciate Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chair- and exposure levels. it once again. man, poor indoor air causes flu, pneumonia, All evidence points to the fact that we need We will let him smoke his cigar tuberculosis, and dozens of other diseases. more research on indoor air contamination, wherever he wants, but I do appreciate Air we breath indoors can contain dan- not less. his help. gerous levels of radon, asbestos, carbon mon- Fortunately, though, my friend from Penn- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- oxide, lead, and chlorine. sylvania, the chairman of the Science Commit- man, will the gentleman yield? Americans spend an average 90 percent of tee, Mr. WALKER, has agreed to accept my Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I their time indoors, yet air in homes, schools, amendment. yield to the gentleman from California. workplaces, airplanes, can be 1,000 times By accepting this change to the underlying (Mr. BROWN of California asked and more toxic. bill, we are sending a positive message that was given permission to revise and ex- This bill would eliminate EPA's nonregula- we are going to continue supporting the type tend his remarks.) tory indoor air research programÐending im- of research that consumers, homeowners, and Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- portant research that would fuel future discov- builders need to make informed decisions man, I thank the gentleman very much eries enabling us to prevent illnesses related about safeguarding their health. for yielding. to indoor air contamination. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on I do want to rise in support of the In 103d Congress, we passed a bill that I the amendment offered by the gen- gentleman’s amendment. I appreciate have introduced every year, the Indoor Air tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. KEN- the willingness of our friends on the Quality Act, with bipartisan support. We ad- NEDY]. other side to accept that effort to move journed before the bill could be signed into The amendment was agreed to. the proceedings along here, which I law, but support for increased indoor air re- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the know is of interest to all of us. search was clearly validated by this Chamber. order of the House of today, it is now Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the The Science Committee report that accom- in order to consider amendment No. 5 amendment offered by my colleague from panies this bill claims that EPA should not do by the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Massachusetts. Here we go again. It seems indoor fair research, but that the research arm JACKSON-LEE]. just a short time ago, 7 months ago actually, of OSHA, NIOSH [National Institute for Occu- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON-LEE OF that we were having this same discussion. Un- pational Safety and Health], should. TEXAS fortunately, the majority continues to believe But this seems odd, considering the fact Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. that indoor air quality is an area where sound that in the 1997 budget resolution, NIOSH is Chairman, I offer an amendment. science is no science. scheduled to be terminatedÐthe very agency The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will des- ignate the amendment. This belief is not based upon any testimony the committee claims should conduct this re- The text of the amendment is as fol- that we received, since we have never held search. lows: hearings on this program. Ironically, one of our Who, then, will do indoor air research? The Amendment offered by Ms. JACKSON-LEE of most extensive discussions of indoor air in bill, as written, prohibits the EPA from doing Texas: Page 118, line 16, strike paragraph (1). committee occurred during the markup of H.R. the research. And with NIOSH scheduled to Page 118, line 17, through page 119, line 12, 3322 when a unanimous-consent request was be terminated, we end up with a situation redesignate paragraphs (2) through (11) as made that committee members refrain from where nobody is able to do indoor air re- paragraphs (1) through (10), respectively. smoking in the committee room during the search. Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. markup. At any moment, 21.2 million Americans are Chairman, I solicit Chairman WALKER In H.R. 3322, the majority is making a re- working in 1.4 million offices, schools, fac- to accept this one as well because I quest that EPA refrain from gathering informa- tories, and other structures where indoor air think it tracks certainly our mutual tion about indoor air contaminants. I object to quality may be a problem. How can we ignore concern on fiscal responsibility and the that request. these numbers? combination of commitment to the en- Indoor air pollution continues to be identified The cost of indoor air pollution is staggering vironment along with an effective part- as a significant health risk and an area worthy as well. Americans spend an extra $1.5 billion nership with business. of study by EPA's Science Advisory Panel. each year in medical bills, and the loss in pro- Beyond the science authorization We all spend significant amounts of time in- ductivity for businesses translates into tens of bill, there is language which specifi- doors these days, and we all recognize that billions of dollars more. cally prohibits any money from being May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5711 appropriated for the Environmental environment, we are told that we must We were harangued again and again about Technology Initiative, or the ETI Pro- replace the outdated approaches of the hamstringing the executive branch. But with gram, of the Environmental Protection past with common sense, flexible, and Republicans in the majority, we find that Agency. effective approaches that build on con- micromanagement is in the eye of the be- Let me emphasize that my amend- sensus, private property ownership, holder. ment is revenue neutral. It simply says free enterprise, local control, sound The Environmental Technologies initiative is that the administrator, if they see fit scientific evidence, and the latest tech- precisely the sort of action that should be to implement this program, they must nology. Here lies the Environmental taken to achieve what the majority claims is its find ways to fund it and offset it by Technology Institute. intentÐto reduce the EPA's impact on busi- utilization of funds from a particular I would suggest that by disinvesting ness while maintaining environmental protec- location and offset it from that loca- from direct technology projects except tions. EPA is working with business to find tion. My amendment would simply in specific areas where private sector new ways to accomplish what the law de- strike this language. research and development is not avail- mands. Rather than encouraging Administrator Though I cannot speak as to the rea- able and focusing on reducing policy Browner for her leadership, the Republicans sons for the chairman’s desire to zero and regulatory barriers, this is the way stop her cold. Am I alone in finding something out the program, I can tell how this for the EPA to go. wrong with this picture? program has benefited our country and ETI funding is an integral part of EPA is not alone in supporting the environ- its citizens. As recently demonstrated EPA’s research efforts to streamline mental technologies initiative. The Depart- by speeches and votes on the floor of its regulatory and permitting processes ments of Defense and Energy are searching the House, many of us in Congress are to ensure that new rules and policies for faster and more affordable methods of deeply concerned about the environ- do not inhibit the use of better, more dealing with the overflowing waste pits at mili- ment and what can be done to har- effective technology. With my amend- tary bases around the country and at the Na- monize human existence within it. ment I seek to ensure that the Envi- tion's nuclear weapons production facilities. Mr. Chairman, as I am sure my col- ronmental Technology Initiative con- The Government can offer access to facilities leagues are aware, many people have tinues to direct an appropriate way to such as the National Laboratories and help for voiced their opinions about the EPA ensure an effective partnership be- small businesses hoping to improve their tech- and its regulations. As an example, tween Government and the private sec- nologies; in return the Government gets prov- many businesses leaders have said that tor and to allow the EPA to do its job. en techniques for addressing its own prob- complying with EPA regulations is ex- I simply ask that in a bipartisan lems. pensive. manner we allow the EPA to do its job Mr. Chairman, no idea is so dangerous that Here lies the basis of support of the with current and new technologies, and we can't even talk about itÐexcept in this Re- ETI. The goal of the Environmental that is to support the reinclusion of al- publican Congress. We held no hearings on Technology Initiative is to promote lowing the Environmental Technology the merits of the environmental technologies improved levels of health and environ- Initiative to continue forward and to initiative, probably because the results would mental protection by accelerating the allow it not to be stricken and for the contradict the policy the majority wanted to im- development and use of innovative en- Administrator to be able to determine pose anyway. Banning research on cleanup vironmental technologies. Most of technologies is hardly a smart move, and so these technologies may be put under how best to utilize it and to fund it. This is revenue neutral. I ask for bi- I urge support for the Jackson-Lee amend- the better, cheaper label and benefit partisan support on the amendment. ment. industry by both being cheaper and ex- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- The CHAIRMAN. The question is on ceeding current standards. the amendment offered by the gentle- Environmental technologies prevent man, I move to strike the last word, and I include a statement for the woman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON-LEE]. pollution, control and treat air and The question was taken; and the RECORD: water pollution, remediate contami- Chairman announced that the noes ap- Mr. Chairman, with her amendment, my col- nated soil and groundwater, reduce peared to have it. greenhouse gas emissions, assess and league from Texas seeks to remove another Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. monitor exposure levels and manage- of the majority's ill-considered bans on re- Chairman, I demand a recorded vote. ment environmental information. search conducted at the Environmental Pro- The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the It is the private sector’s job to pro- tection Agency. Our Republican colleagues, in order of the House of today, further mote innovation, but it is the Govern- this bill, deny EPA the authority to continue proceedings on the amendment offered ment’s job to create a climate where the Environmental Technologies Initiative. by the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. technology innovation is rewarded, not Rather than contest the merits of the program, JACKSON-LEE] will be postponed. penalized, so that the private sector the majority simply does away with it. This SEQUENTIAL VOTES POSTPONED IN COMMITTEE can function free of government inter- theory of Republican policymaking reminds me OF THE WHOLE ference. However, there are many bar- of Mencken's famous line: ``There is always a The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the riers, both internal and external to the well-known solution to every human problemÐ order of the House of today, proceed- EPA, that limit private sector invest- neat, plausible, and wrong.'' ings will now resume on those amend- ment and innovative environmental The environmental technologies initiative ments on which further proceedings technologies. has as its goal increasing the speed with were postponed in the following order: These barriers include: statutes, reg- which new and better technologies become Amendment No. 15 offered by the ulations, policies and procedures, like available to protect public health and environ- gentlewoman from California [Ms. permitting and enforcement that favor mental quality. The initiative seeks to prevent LOFGREN]; and amendment No. 5 of- the use of conventional technologies pollution, or to reduce the cost and increase fered by the gentlewoman from Texas and then essentially lock these tech- the speed at which hazards are removed from [Ms. JACKSON-LEE]. nologies into place; insufficient re- the environment. The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes sources at the State level to provide It is passing strange that at the same time the time for any electronic vote after credibility to vendors by verifying the the majority complains bitterly about EPA's im- the first vote in this series. performance and cost of promising new pact on the private sector, it would here pre- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. LOFGREN technologies; and lack of established vent the Agency from learning new ways to re- The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- networks and sources of information duce the burden of environmental compliance. ness is the demand for a recorded vote that provides users access to better, Republicans complain that EPA does not on the amendment offered by the gen- cleaner, safer, lower cost technologies. weigh the costs and benefits of pollution con- tlewoman from California [Ms. Mr. Chairman, many of the 274 ETI- trol strategies before issuing regulations, but LOFGREN], on which further proceed- funded projects are beginning to show let the Agency act to gain real-world experi- ings were postponed and on which the results, and EPA is disinvesting from ence with the costs and benefits of new tech- noes prevailed by a voice vote. direct technology development nologies and the majority cannot interfere The Clerk will redesignate the projects. What more can we ask for? quickly enough. The majority once complained amendment. Mr. Chairman, let me add a note. In about congressional micromanagement of The Clerk redesignated the amend- the Republican-based task force on the agencies during the Reagan and Bush years. ment. H5712 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 RECORDED VOTE Dunn Knollenberg Rohrabacher The vote was taken by electronic de- Ehlers Kolbe Ros-Lehtinen The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Ehrlich LaHood Roth vice, and there were—ayes 192, noes 209, been demanded. Emerson Largent Royce not voting 33, as follows: A recorded vote was ordered. Ensign Latham Sanford The vote was taken by electronic de- Everett Laughlin Saxton [Roll No. 208] Ewing Lewis (CA) Scarborough AYES—192 vice, and there were—ayes 197, noes 211, Fawell Lewis (KY) Schaefer not voting 26, as follows: Flanagan Lightfoot Schiff Abercrombie Gillmor Nadler [Roll No. 207] Foley Linder Seastrand Ackerman Gilman Neal Fowler Livingston Sensenbrenner Andrews Gonzalez Oberstar AYES—197 Fox Longley Shadegg Baldacci Gordon Obey Abercrombie Gonzalez Oberstar Franks (CT) Lucas Shaw Barcia Green (TX) Olver Ackerman Gordon Obey Frisa Manzullo Shuster Barrett (WI) Gutierrez Ortiz Andrews Green (TX) Olver Funderburk McCollum Sisisky Becerra Hall (OH) Orton Baesler Gutierrez Ortiz Gallegly McCrery Skeen Beilenson Hall (TX) Owens Baldacci Hall (OH) Orton Ganske McHugh Smith (TX) Bentsen Hamilton Pallone Barcia Hall (TX) Owens Gekas McInnis Smith (WA) Berman Hastings (FL) Pastor Barrett (WI) Hamilton Pallone Geren McIntosh Solomon Bevill Heineman Payne (VA) Becerra Hastings (FL) Pastor Gilchrest McKeon Souder Bishop Hilliard Pelosi Beilenson Hefner Payne (VA) Gilman Metcalf Spence Blumenauer Hinchey Pomeroy Bentsen Heineman Pelosi Goodlatte Meyers Stearns Boehlert Hoke Porter Berman Hilliard Peterson (MN) Goodling Mica Stenholm Bonior Holden Poshard Bevill Hinchey Pomeroy Goss Miller (FL) Stockman Borski Horn Rahall Bishop Hoke Radanovich Graham Montgomery Stump Boucher Hoyer Ramstad Blumenauer Holden Rahall Greene (UT) Moorhead Talent Brown (CA) Jackson (IL) Rangel Bonior Horn Rangel Greenwood Morella Tate Brown (FL) Jackson-Lee Reed Borski Hoyer Reed Gunderson Myers Tauzin Brown (OH) (TX) Richardson Boucher Jackson (IL) Richardson Hancock Myrick Taylor (MS) Bryant (TX) Jacobs Rivers Brewster Jackson-Lee Rivers Hansen Nethercutt Taylor (NC) Cardin Johnson (SD) Roemer Browder (TX) Roemer Hastert Neumann Thomas Chapman Johnson, E. B. Roukema Brown (CA) Johnson (CT) Rose Hastings (WA) Ney Thornberry Clay Johnston Roybal-Allard Brown (FL) Johnson (SD) Roukema Hayworth Norwood Tiahrt Clayton Kanjorski Rush Brown (OH) Johnson, E. B. Roybal-Allard Hefley Nussle Traficant Clement Kaptur Sabo Bryant (TX) Johnston Rush Herger Oxley Upton Clyburn Kennedy (MA) Sanders Bunn Kanjorski Sabo Hilleary Packard Vucanovich Coleman Kennedy (RI) Sawyer Cardin Kaptur Salmon Hobson Parker Walker Collins (IL) Kennelly Saxton Chapman Kelly Sanders Hoekstra Paxon Walsh Collins (MI) Kildee Schumer Clay Kennedy (MA) Sawyer Hostettler Petri Wamp Conyers Kleczka Scott Clayton Kennedy (RI) Schroeder Hunter Pickett Watts (OK) Costello LaFalce Serrano Clement Kennelly Schumer Hutchinson Pombo Weldon (FL) Coyne LaHood Skaggs Clyburn Kildee Scott Hyde Porter Weldon (PA) Cramer Lantos Skelton Coleman Kleczka Serrano Inglis Portman White Cummings Levin Smith (NJ) Collins (IL) Klink Shays Istook Poshard Whitfield Danner Lewis (GA) Spratt Collins (MI) LaFalce Skaggs Jacobs Pryce Wicker DeFazio Lipinski Stark Conyers Lantos Skelton Johnson, Sam Quillen Wolf DeLauro LoBiondo Stenholm Coyne LaTourette Slaughter Kasich Ramstad Young (AK) Dellums Lofgren Stokes Cramer Lazio Smith (MI) Kim Regula Young (FL) Deutsch Longley Stupak Cummings Leach Smith (NJ) King Riggs Zeliff Dicks Lowey Tanner Davis Levin Spratt Kingston Roberts Dingell Luther Tejeda DeFazio Lewis (GA) Stark Klug Rogers Dixon Maloney Thompson Thornton DeLauro Lipinski Stokes NOT VOTING—26 Doggett Manton Dellums LoBiondo Stupak Dooley Markey Thurman Deutsch Lofgren Tanner Barton Gutknecht Molinari Doyle Martinez Torkildsen Dicks Luther Tejeda Chabot Harman Mollohan Durbin Martini Torres Dingell Maloney Thompson de la Garza Hayes Murtha Edwards Mascara Torricelli Dixon Manton Thornton Engel Houghton Payne (NJ) Eshoo Matsui Towns Doggett Markey Thurman Fields (LA) Jefferson Peterson (FL) Evans McCarthy Traficant Dooley Martinez Torkildsen Fields (TX) Jones Quinn Farr McDermott Velazquez Doyle Martini Torres Foglietta Lincoln Studds Fattah McHale Vento Durbin Mascara Torricelli Forbes Lowey Wilson Fawell McKinney Visclosky Edwards Matsui Towns Gibbons McDade Fazio McNulty Volkmer English McCarthy Velazquez b 1901 Filner Meehan Waters Eshoo McDermott Vento Flake Meek Watt (NC) Evans McHale Visclosky Messrs. GREENWOOD, FRISA, and Forbes Menendez Waxman Farr McKinney Volkmer GOODLING changed their vote from Ford Millender- Weller Fattah McNulty Ward ‘‘aye’’ to ‘‘no.’’ Frank (MA) McDonald Williams Fazio Meehan Waters Franks (NJ) Miller (CA) Wise Filner Meek Watt (NC) Mrs. KELLY and Mr. WELLER Woolsey changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ Frost Minge Flake Menendez Waxman Furse Mink Wynn Ford Millender- Weller So the amendment was rejected. Gejdenson Moakley Yates Frank (MA) McDonald Williams The result of the vote was announced Gephardt Montgomery Zimmer Franks (NJ) Miller (CA) Wise as above recorded. Gilchrest Moran Frelinghuysen Minge Woolsey PERSONAL EXPLANATION Frost Mink Wynn NOES—209 Furse Moakley Yates Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. Gejdenson Moran Zimmer 207, I was unavoidably detainedÐhad I been Allard Bunning Cubin Gephardt Nadler present, I would have voted ``no.'' Archer Burr Cunningham Gillmor Neal Armey Burton Davis AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON-LEE OF Bachus Buyer Deal NOES—211 TEXAS Baesler Callahan DeLay Allard Bono Collins (GA) The CHAIRMAN. The pending busi- Baker (CA) Calvert Diaz-Balart Archer Brownback Combest ness is the demand for a recorded vote Baker (LA) Camp Dickey Armey Bryant (TN) Condit on the amendment offered by the gen- Ballenger Campbell Doolittle Barr Canady Dornan Bachus Bunning Cooley tlewoman from Texas [Ms. JACKSON- Baker (CA) Burr Costello Barrett (NE) Castle Dreier Baker (LA) Burton Cox LEE] on which further proceedings were Bartlett Chambliss Duncan Ballenger Buyer Crane postponed and on which the noes pre- Bass Chenoweth Dunn Barr Callahan Crapo vailed by voice vote. Bateman Christensen Ehlers Barrett (NE) Calvert Cremeans Bereuter Chrysler Ehrlich The Clerk will redesignate the Bilbray Clinger Emerson Bartlett Camp Cubin amendment. Bass Campbell Cunningham Bilirakis Coble English Bateman Canady Danner The Clerk redesignated the amend- Bliley Coburn Ensign Bereuter Castle Deal ment. Blute Collins (GA) Everett Bilbray Chambliss DeLay RECORDED VOTE Boehner Combest Ewing Bilirakis Chenoweth Diaz-Balart The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has Bonilla Condit Flanagan Bliley Christensen Dickey Bono Cooley Foley Blute Chrysler Doolittle been demanded. Brewster Cox Fowler Boehlert Clinger Dornan A recorded vote was ordered. Brownback Crane Fox Boehner Coble Dreier The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute Bryant (TN) Crapo Franks (CT) Bonilla Coburn Duncan vote. Bunn Cremeans Frelinghuysen May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5713

Frisa Lewis (CA) Royce (F) $13,085,000 shall be for Building and Fire gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. JOHN Funderburk Lewis (KY) Salmon Research; Gallegly Lightfoot Sanford TANNER. These sections require the (G) $43,076,000 shall be for Computer FAA to consider recommendations of Ganske Linder Schaefer Science and Applied Mathematics; Gekas Livingston Schiff (H) $18,950,000 shall be for Technical Assist- the FAA RE&D Advisory Committee in Geren Lucas Seastrand establishing R&D priorities; requires Goodlatte Manzullo Sensenbrenner ance; Goodling McCollum Shadegg (I) $28,772,000 shall be for Research Sup- the FAA RE&D Advisory Committee to Goss McCrery Shaw port; and review FAA’s R&D funding allocations Graham McHugh Shays (J) $2,987,000 shall be for the Malcolm and advise the Administrator as to Greene (UT) McInnis Shuster Baldrige National Quality Program under whether they will support FAA objec- Greenwood McIntosh Skeen section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler Tech- Gunderson McKeon Smith (MI) nology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. tives; and modifies requirements for Hancock Metcalf Smith (TX) 3711a); and the National Aviation Research Plan Hastert Meyers Smith (WA) (2) for Construction of Research Facilities by changing the time horizon to 5 Hastings (WA) Mica Solomon Hayworth Miller (FL) Souder of the National Institute of Standards and years and requires the FAA to respond Hefley Moorhead Spence Technology, $105,240,000 for fiscal year 1997. to the recommendations of the RE&D Herger Morella Stearns Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I Advisory Committee. Hilleary Myers Stockman Mr. Chairman, I recommend passage Hobson Myrick Stump move to strike the last word. Mr. Hoekstra Nethercutt Talent Chairman, H.R. 3322 takes an aggres- of the titles VI and VII. Hostettler Neumann Tate sive stance in title VI of the bill to en- b 1915 Hunter Ney Tauzin sure that the core science programs at Hutchinson Norwood Taylor (NC) the National Institute of Standards The CHAIRMAN. Are there amend- Hyde Nussle Thomas ments to title VI? Inglis Oxley Thornberry and Technology [NIST] are funded at Istook Packard Tiahrt levels which will permit the NIST Lab- If not, the Clerk will designate title Johnson (CT) Parker Upton oratories to perform their critical na- VII. Johnson, Sam Paxon Vucanovich The text of title VII is as follows: Jones Peterson (MN) Walker tional mission. Kasich Petri Walsh I commend the chairman of the com- TITLE VII—FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINIS- Kelly Pickett Wamp mittee, the gentleman from Pennsylva- TRATION RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, Kim Pombo Ward AND DEVELOPMENT King Portman Watts (OK) nia, for his support. Mr. WALKER has recognized the important work being SEC. 701. SHORT TITLE. Kingston Pryce Weldon (FL) This title may be cited as the ‘‘FAA Re- Klug Radanovich Weldon (PA) done at the NIST Laboratories and has search, Engineering, and Development Man- Knollenberg Regula White recommended a funding level which the Kolbe Riggs Whitfield agement Reform Act of 1996’’. Largent Roberts Wicker laboratories deserve. SEC. 702. FINDINGS. Latham Rogers Wolf NIST is integral to U.S. competition The Congress finds that— LaTourette Rohrabacher Young (AK) in the global marketplace, through its (1) considerable effort and expenditure has Laughlin Ros-Lehtinen Young (FL) interaction with industry, and by de- been devoted since 1981 to the modernization Lazio Rose Zeliff Leach Roth veloping and applying technology of the National Airspace System, with lim- measurements and standards. I am ited results; NOT VOTING—33 pleased that, despite our commitment (2) long-standing management, organiza- Barton Harman Payne (NJ) to achieve a balanced budget, and with tional, and cultural impediments at the Fed- Browder Hayes Peterson (FL) eral Aviation Administration have led to Chabot Hefner Quillen tight budget caps in place, the bill au- cost overruns, schedule delays, program ter- de la Garza Houghton Quinn thorizes a funding level for the NIST minations, and other wasteful inefficiencies; Engel Jefferson Scarborough Laboratories above the President’s re- Fields (LA) Klink Schroeder (3) a lack of coordination between the tech- Fields (TX) Lincoln Sisisky quest of $270.7 million. nology developers and operational sections Foglietta McDade Slaughter By not only matching but exceeding of the Federal Aviation Administration has Gibbons Molinari Studds the President’s funding request for the led to research, engineering, and develop- Gutknecht Mollohan Taylor (MS) scientific and technical research serv- ment programs that are unbalanced because Hansen Murtha Wilson ices account at $280.6 million, the bill they either are too technology driven or b 1908 funds projects which we were unable to have operational requirements that are unre- alistic or unwarranted; The Clerk announced the following fully authorize in the previous fiscal (4) the research, engineering, and develop- pair: year. These added increases will fund ment functions of the Federal Aviation Ad- On this vote: projects in semiconductor, metrology, ministration have been carried out without Mr. Browder for, with Mr. Gutknecht biotechnology measurements, ad- the benefit of critical management edu- against. vanced materials processing, and new cation and competencies; Mr. LONGLEY and Mr. STENHOLM Government coordinating responsibil- (5) the failure to employ contemporary changed their vote from ‘‘no’’ to ‘‘aye.’’ ities to make NIST the lead agency for management techniques and industry best So the amendment was rejected. standards and conformity assessment practices has led to inadequate contractor oversight and poor risk management; and The result of the vote was announced activities as mandated by the National (6) significant improvements in moderniz- as above recorded. Technology Transfer and Advance- ing the National Airspace System will re- The CHAIRMAN. Are there further ments Act of 1995. quire fundamental changes in the Federal amendments to title V? In addition, the bill authorizes the Aviation Administration’s acquisition man- If not, the Clerk will designate title NIST construction account to provide agement system and in the orientation of VI. necessary renovation and moderniza- the officials who implement the system. The text of title VI is as follows: tion of facilities. Without these funds SEC. 703. DEFINITIONS. TITLE VI—NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF for the state-of-the-art Measurement For purposes of this title— STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY and Calibration Laboratories to mod- (1) the term ‘‘affordable’’ means having life-cycle costs that are in consonance with SEC. 601. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. ernize their facilities, NIST cannot the long-range funding and operational de- There are authorized to be appropriated adequately fulfill its mission into the the following: sign plans for the National Airspace System; future. (2) the term ‘‘evolutionary acquisition’’ (1) For Scientific and Technical Research Mr. Chairman, I am also pleased that and Services of the National Institute of means an acquisition strategy in which a Standards and Technology, $280,600,000 for title VII of H.R. 3322 authorizes fiscal core capability is fielded with a modular fiscal year 1997, of which— year 1997 appropriations for FAA’s re- structure that allows for changes as require- (A) $38,407,000 shall be for Electronics and search, engineering, and development ments are refined; Electrical Engineering; [RE&D] activities; strengthens the role (3) the term ‘‘life-cycle costs’’ means the (B) $18,747,000 shall be for Manufacturing of the FAA RE&D Advisory Committee total costs to the Federal Government of a system over its useful life, including the Engineering; in setting priorities; and modifies re- (C) $33,939,000 shall be for Chemical Science costs of research, development, acquisition, and Technology; quirements. support, and disposal; (D) $28,048,000 shall be for Physics; Title VII includes sections authored (4) the term ‘‘nondevelopmental’’ means (E) $54,589,000 shall be for Material Science by the distinguished ranking member not requiring significant further develop- and Engineering; of the Technology Subcommittee, the ment to be made usefully operational; and H5714 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 (5) the term ‘‘pre-planned product improve- (2) by striking the period at the end of (3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the ment’’ means an acquisition strategy that paragraph (2)(J) and inserting in lieu thereof following new subparagraph: defers technically difficult or unknown sys- ‘‘; and’’; and ‘‘(D) annually review the allocation made tem requirements to mitigate risks or to (3) by adding at the end the following new by the Administrator of the amounts author- field a system that incorporates design con- paragraph: ized by section 48102(a) of this title among siderations that facilitate future changes. ‘‘(3) for fiscal year 1997— the major categories of research and devel- SEC. 704. MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES. ‘‘(A) $10,000,000 for system development and opment activities carried out by the Admin- The Federal Aviation Administration shall infrastructure projects and activities; istration and provide advice and rec- develop, implement, and maintain a dis- ‘‘(B) $39,911,000 for capacity and air traffic ommendations to the Administrator on ciplined acquisition management system management technology projects and activi- whether such allocation is appropriate to that facilitates the transforming of broadly ties; meet the needs and objectives identified stated requirements into affordable, oper- ‘‘(C) $20,371,000 for communications, navi- under subparagraph (A).’’. ationally effective and suitable products and gation, and surveillance projects and activi- SEC. 710. NATIONAL AVIATION RESEARCH PLAN. services to meet the needs of users of the Na- ties; Section 44501(c) of title 49, United States tional Airspace System. Such acquisition ‘‘(D) $6,411,000 for weather projects and ac- Code, is amended— management system shall be based on and tivities; (1) in paragraph (2)(A) by striking ‘‘15- incorporate the following principles: ‘‘(E) $6,000,000 for airport technology year’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘5-year’’; (1) The employment and integration of— projects and activities; (2) by amending subparagraph (B) to read (A) a process to establish and validate re- ‘‘(F) $37,978,000 for aircraft safety tech- as follows: ‘‘(B) The plan shall— quirements; nology projects and activities; ‘‘(i) provide estimates by year of the sched- (B) full life-cycle acquisition management; ‘‘(G) $36,045,000 for system security tech- ule, cost, and work force levels for each ac- and nology projects and activities; tive and planned major research and develop- (C) planning, programming, and budgeting. ‘‘(H) $23,682,000 for human factors and avia- ment project under sections 40119, 44504, (2) Full involvement of both acquisition tion medicine projects and activities; 44505, 44507, 44509, 44511–44513, and 44912 of and operational Federal Aviation Adminis- ‘‘(I) $3,800,000 for environment and energy this title, including activities carried out tration personnel in the processes described projects and activities; under cooperative agreements with other in paragraph (1)(A), (B), and (C). ‘‘(J) $1,500,000 for innovative/cooperative Federal departments and agencies; (3) Early and continuous involvement of research projects and activities; and ‘‘(ii) specify the goals and the priorities for National Airspace System operators and ‘‘(K) such sums as may be necessary for allocation of resources among the major cat- users, advisory committees, and industry other research, engineering, and develop- egories of research and development activi- vendors and experts in establishing and sta- ment activities described in the President’s ties, including the rationale for the prior- bilizing sound, realistic operational require- fiscal year 1997 budget request to the Con- ities identified; ments. gress under the category ‘Engineering, devel- ‘‘(iii) identify the allocation of resources (4) Assignment of acquisition officials opment, test, and evaluation’ of Facilities among long-term research, near-term re- based on demonstrated leadership, profes- and Equipment.’’. search, and development activities; and sionalism, and proven acquisition manage- SEC. 707. RESEARCH PRIORITIES. ‘‘(iv) highlight the research and develop- ment competencies, consistent with their po- Section 48102(b) of title 49, United States ment activities that address specific rec- sitional responsibility and authority. Code, is amended— ommendations of the research advisory com- (5) Full life-cycle, event-driven acquisition (1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as para- mittee established under section 44508 of this strategies which explicitly link major in- graph (3); and title, and document the recommendations of terim program decisions and contractual (2) by striking ‘‘AVAILABILITY FOR RE- the committee that are not accepted, speci- commitments to demonstrated accomplish- SEARCH.—(1)’’ and inserting in lieu thereof fying the reasons for nonacceptance.’’; and ments in research, engineering, and develop- ‘‘RESEARCH PRIORITIES.—(1) The Adminis- (3) in paragraph (3) by inserting ‘‘, includ- ment. trator shall consider the advice and rec- ing a description of the dissemination to the (6) The balancing of system design require- ommendations of the research advisory com- private sector of research results and a de- ments and constraints based on cost-benefit mittee established by section 44508 of this scription of any new technologies developed’’ sensitivity analysis. title in establishing priorities among major after ‘‘during the prior fiscal year’’. (7) Consideration of maximum practicable categories of research and development ac- use of nonmaterial, nondevelopmental, or tivities carried out by the Federal Aviation Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, commercial solutions before embarking on Administration. for this opportunity to briefly discuss title VII of protracted research, engineering, and devel- ‘‘(2)’’. H.R. 3322. This title authorizes fiscal year opment activities by the Federal Aviation SEC. 708. BUDGET DESIGNATION FOR FEDERAL 1997 appropriations for FAA's research, engi- Administration. AVIATION ADMINISTRATION RE- SEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AC- neering, and development [RE&D] activities; (8) Consideration of evolutionary acquisi- strengthens the role of the FAA RE&D advi- tion and pre-planned product improvement TIVITIES. strategies to mitigate risks and expedi- Section 48102(c) of title 49, United States sory committee; and modifies the national tiously field products and services. Code, is amended to read as follows: aviation research plan. (9) Use of contemporary management tech- ‘‘(c) DESIGNATION OF ACTIVITIES.—(1) The FAA efforts to modernize the national air- niques and industry best practices to— amounts appropriated under subsection (a) space system have suffered significant cost, (A) compare the current status of a pro- are for the support of all research and devel- schedule, and performance problems and, ac- gram to where it should be; opment activities carried out by the Federal cording to extensive testimony, the issues do Aviation Administration that fall within the (B) reassess the goals of a program and the not appear to be the appropriated funding or plans for achieving those goals; categories of basic research, applied re- search, and development, including the de- how it's allocatedÐbut to longstanding organi- (C) assess program risks and strategies for zational, managerial, and cultural impediments mitigating those risks; and sign and development of prototypes, in ac- (D) assess whether the program is afford- cordance with the classifications of the Of- within the FAA itself. With bold congressional able. fice of Management and Budget Circular A– help, the agency began an impressive first 11 (Budget Formulation/Submission Proc- SEC. 705. DOCUMENT OF APRIL 1, 1996. step by implementing a new acquisition man- ess). agement plan April 1. The Congress recognizes that the acquisi- ‘‘(2) The President’s annual budget request tion management system set forth in the When H.R. 3322 was introduced, it con- for the Federal Aviation Administration tained language to codify broadly-stated guid- document dated April 1, 1996, issued by the shall include all research and development Federal Aviation Administration, is substan- activities within a single budget category. ing principlesÐfor managing FAA R&D activi- tially compatible with the principles stated All of the activities carried out by the Ad- ties long after the tenure of current FAA lead- in section 704 of this title. The Federal Avia- ministration within the categories of basic ership. To expeditiously get the omnibus tion Administration may implement that research, applied research, and development, science bill to the House floor, we struck these proposed system as a suitable compliance as classified by the Office of Management important principles from this title. However, in with the requirements of this title, and may and Budget Circular A–11, shall be placed in the days ahead, we must maintain our focus modify elements of that system to the ex- this single budget category.’’. tent that those modifications conform with on these critical principles to avoid the costly SEC. 709. RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE. and protracted problems of the past. We look the principles stated in section 704 of this Section 44508(a)(1) of title 49, United States forward to working closely with Chairman BUD title. Code, is amended— SEC. 706. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara- SHUSTER and our good friends and colleagues Section 48102(a) of title 49, United States graph (B); on the Transportation and Infrastructure Com- Code, is amended— (2) by striking the period at the end of sub- mittee and Aviation Subcommittee Chairman (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of para- paragraph (C) and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘; JON J. DUNCAN and the respected members of graph (1)(J); and’’; and the Aviation SubcommitteeÐnot on a partisan May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5715 nor jurisdictional mission, but rather to bring TITLE VIII—NATIONAL EARTHQUAKE ance is awarded to members of the class ac- discipline and accountability to FAA programs HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM cording to a formula provided by law. that have drifted too long in the wilderness. SEC. 801. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any Section 12 of the Earthquake Hazards Re- amendments to title IX? I would like to thank my good friend and dis- duction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706) is amend- AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. SOLOMON tinguished gentleman from Tennessee, Mr. ed— JOHN TANNER, the ranking minority member on (1) in subsection (a)(7) by striking ‘‘and Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, I offer the Technology Subcommittee, for his leader- $25,750,000 for the fiscal year ending Septem- an amendment. ship in authoring sections of this title which ber 30, 1996’’ and inserting in lieu thereof The Clerk read as follows: strengthens the role of FAA's RE&D advisory ‘‘$25,750,000 for the fiscal year ending Sep- Amendemtn offered by Mr. SOLOMON: Page tember 30, 1996, and $18,825,000 for the fiscal committee in establishing R&D priorities and 137, after line 4, insert the following new sec- year ending September 30, 1997’’; tions: reviewing funding allocations, and increase the (2) in subsection (b) by striking ‘‘and SEC. 904. ROTC ACCESS TO CAMPUSES. viability of the national aviation research plan. $50,676,000 for the fiscal year ending Septem- (a) DENIAL OF GRANTS AND CONTRACTS.—(1) An additional section, also drafted by Mr. TAN- ber 30, 1996’’ and inserting in lieu thereof No funds appropriated for civilian science ac- NER, would have greatly simplified the analysis ‘‘$50,676,000 for the fiscal year ending Sep- tivities of the Federal Government may be of FAA R&D programs by requiring FAA to tember 30, 1996, and $46,130,000 for the fiscal provided by contract or by grant (including a consolidate all its R&D activities into a single year ending September 30, 1997’’; grant of funds to be available for student (3) in subsection (c) by adding at the end aid) to any institution of higher education budget accountÐper OMB guidelines. This the following new sentence: ‘‘There are au- section was also withdrawn to expedite con- that, as determined by the agency to which thorized to be appropriated, out of funds oth- the funds were appropriated, in consultation sideration of H.R. 3322 before the full House. erwise authorized to be appropriated to the with other appropriate Federal agencies, has Regarding FAA RE&D funding, the Presi- National Science Foundation, $28,400,000 for an anti-ROTC policy. fiscal year 1997, including $17,500,000 for engi- (2) In the case of an institution of higher dent requested $195.7 million for fiscal year neering research and $10,900,000 for geo- 1997. Management reform, based upon sound education that is ineligible for grants and sciences research.’’; and contracts by reason of paragraph (1), the pro- guiding principles, offers the promise of in- (4) in subsection (d) by adding at the end hibition under that paragraph shall cease to creased efficiencies and less waste. Accord- the following new sentence: ‘‘There are au- apply to that institution upon a determina- ingly, fiscal year 1997 RE&D budget authority thorized to be appropriated, out of funds oth- tion by the agency to which the funds were should not be increased above the fiscal year erwise authorized to be appropriated to the appropriated, in consultation with other ap- 1996 appropriationÐ$185.698 millionÐuntil National Institute of Standards and Tech- propriate Federal agencies, that the institu- nology, $1,932,000 for fiscal year 1997.’’. improvements in FAA's acquisition manage- tion no longer has an anti-ROTC policy. ment are apparent and efficiencies can be The CHAIRMAN. Are there any (b) NOTICE OF DETERMINATION.—Whenever an agency makes a determination under sub- more readily assessed. amendments to title VIII? If not, the Clerk will designate title section (a) that an institution has an anti- In summary, FAA's chronic delays in fielding IX. ROTC policy, or that an institution pre- new systems have not been caused by a lack The text of title IX is as follows: viously determined to have an anti-ROTC of funds or their allocation, but can be attrib- policy no longer has such a policy, the agen- TITLE IX—MISCELLANEOUS cy— uted to legendary organizational, managerial, SEC. 901. PROHIBITION OF LOBBYING ACTIVI- (1) shall transmit notice of that determina- and cultural impediments to changing its ac- TIES. tion to the Secretary of Education and the quisition process. The FAA, with our assist- None of the funds authorized by this Act Congress; and ance, has taken an enviable first step and we shall be available for any activity whose pur- (2) shall publish in the Federal Register no- are cautiously optimistic. But the road ahead pose is to influence legislation pending be- tice of that determination and of the effect is long and formidable. Working together in fore the Congress, except that this shall not of that determination under subsection (a) the Congress, we can help continue the trans- prevent officers or employees of the United on the eligibility of that institution for States or of its departments or agencies from grants and contracts. formation of a bureaucratic agencyÐlong communicating to Members of Congress on (c) SEMIANNUAL NOTICE IN FEDERAL REG- overdue for changeÐinto a world-class stand- the request of any Member or to Congress, ISTER.—Each agency shall publish in the ard of excellence for the 21st century. through the proper channels, requests for Federal Register once every six months a list legislation or appropriations which they of each institution of higher education that FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION RESEARCH, ENGI- deem necessary for the efficient conduct of is currently ineligible for grants and con- NEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT [RE&D] FY 97 REC- the public business. tracts by reason of a determination of the OMMENDED AUTHORIZATION SEC. 902. LIMITATION ON APPROPRIATIONS. agency under subsection (a). [In millions of dollars] (a) EXCLUSIVE AUTHORIZATION FOR FISCAL (d) ANTI-ROTC POLICY.—In this section, YEAR 1997.—Notwithstanding any other pro- the term ‘‘anti-ROTC policy’’ means a policy Fiscal year— vision of law, no sums are authorized to be or practice of an institution of higher edu- cation that— 1996 appro- 1997 PB re- 1997 au- appropriated for fiscal year 1997 for the ac- priated quest thorized tivities for which sums are authorized by (1) prohibits, or in effect prevents, the this Act unless such sums are specifically maintaining or establishing of a unit of the System development/infrastruc- authorized to be appropriated by this Act. Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps at ture ...... 10.000 16.822 10.000 that institution; or Capacity/ATM technology ...... 37.200 40.570 39.911 (b) SUBSEQUENT FISCAL YEARS.—No sums Comm/Nav/Surveillance ...... 23.000 20.371 20.371 are authorized to be appropriated for any fis- (2) prohibits, or in effect prevents, a stu- Weather ...... 6.493 6.411 6.411 cal year after fiscal year 1997 for the activi- dent at that institution from enrolling in a Airport technology ...... 6.000 6.000 6.000 unit of the Senior Reserve Officer Training Air safety technology ...... 37.978 38.999 37.978 ties for which sums are authorized by this System security ...... 36.045 36.045 36.045 Act unless such sums are specifically author- Corps at another institution of higher edu- Human factors/aviation medi- ized to be appropriated by Act of Congress cation, but does not include a longstanding cine ...... 23.682 23.682 23.682 with respect to such fiscal year. policy of pacifism based on historical reli- Environment/Energy ...... 3.800 3.800 3.800 gious affiliation. Innovative/Cooperative research 1.500 3.000 1.500 SEC. 903. ELIGIBILITY FOR AWARDS. (a) IN GENERAL.—The head of each Federal SEC. 905. RECRUITING ON CAMPUS. Total ...... 185.698 195.700 185.698 agency for which funds are authorized under (a) DENIAL OF FUNDS.—(1) No funds appro- Note: Capacity/Air Traffic Management Technology was adjusted upward this Act shall exclude from consideration for priated for civilian science activities of the slightly from the fiscal year 1996 appropriation. For fiscal year 1997, the Federal Government may be provided by President requested $2.629 million less for Communications/Navigation/Sur- awards of financial assistance made by that veillance and $0.082 million less for Weather than was appropriated for fis- agency after fiscal year 1996 any person who grant or contract (including a grant of funds cal 1996. These two amounts, totaling $2.711, were used to increase fiscal received funds, other than those described in to be available for student aid) to any insti- year 1997 budget authority for Capacity/Air Traffic Management activity from tution of higher education that, as deter- the fiscal year 1996 appropriated amount of $37.200 million to $39.912 subsection (b), appropriated for a fiscal year million. This budget category, which funds research and development for the after fiscal year 1996, from any Federal fund- mined by the agency to which the funds were free flight concept, was cited as the top priority by the FAA’s RE&D advisory ing source for a project that was not sub- appropriated, in consultation with other ap- committee. jected to a competitive, merit-based award propriate Federal agencies, has a policy of process. Any exclusion from consideration denying, or which effectively prevents— The CHAIRMAN. Are there any pursuant to this section shall be effective for (A) entry to campuses or access to stu- amendments to title VII? a period of 5 years after the person receives dents on campuses; or If not, the Clerk will designate title such Federal funds. (B) access to directory information per- taining to students, VIII. (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to awards to persons who are members for purposes of military recruiting. This The text of title VIII is as follows: of a class specified by law for which assist- paragraph shall not apply to a longstanding H5716 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 policy of pacifism based on historical reli- honorable careers to these young men ply antimilitary based upon a political gious affiliation. and women. position of the time but rather have (2) In the case of an institution of higher This amendment, the last time it was that deep-seated opinion, then they education that is ineligible for grants and offered to the defense authorization contracts by reason of paragraph (1), the pro- should have that exemption and should hibition under that paragraph shall cease to bill, received 271 votes, and therefore I still be able to apply for funds for le- apply to that institution upon a determina- would ask the Members accept it here gitimate scientific programs at their tion by the agency to which the funds were tonight so that we can continue the institutions. I thank the gentleman for appropriated, in consultation with other ap- success of our all-voluntary military including that language in the bill propriate Federal Agencies, that the institu- today. which will protect those schools. tion no longer has a policy described in para- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, will Mr. SOLOMON. The gentleman is graph (1). the gentleman yield? correct, and certainly because of his (3) Students referred to in paragraph (1) Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gen- are individuals who are 17 years of age or recommendation and that of the gen- older. tleman from Pennsylvania. tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALK- (b) NOTICE OF DETERMINATION.—Whenever Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I am ER], we have included it. an agency makes a determination under sub- prepared to accept the amendment if Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, will the section (a) that an institution has a policy my understanding is correct of some gentleman yield? described in subsection (a), or that an insti- language that the gentleman has added Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gen- tution previously determined to have such a to the amendment. tleman from California, who has been policy no longer has such a policy, the agen- As the gentleman knows, I had some one of the major sponsors of legislation cy— concerns about schools that have a his- (1) shall transmit notice of that determina- like this ever since he first came to the tion to the Secretary of Education and the toric pattern of practicing pacifism, Congress. Congress; and that are religiously oriented schools, Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, I thank (2) shall publish in the Federal Register no- and I wanted to assure that they were the gentleman for yielding. I rise in tice of that determination and of the effect not kept from participating in research strong support of the amendment. of that determination under subsection (a) programs as a result of that historic I think that it is an issue of fairness. on the eligibility of that institution for pattern and those religious beliefs. My It is an issue of fairness to our mili- grants and contracts. understanding is that the gentleman tary, to our young people who have (c) SEMIANNUAL NOTICE IN FEDERAL REG- has put language into his amendment chosen a military career. I also believe ISTER.—Each agency shall publish in the Federal Register once every six months a list to assure that those kinds of institu- it is extremely important that in our of each institution of higher education that tions can be exempted. Is that correct? universities across this country that is currently ineligible for grants and con- Mr. SOLOMON. That is correct, I say they make that an option for our stu- tracts by reason of a determination of the to the gentleman from Pennsylvania dents, for our young people, as an op- agency under subsection (a). [Mr. WALKER]. If he reads on page 3, on tion for a career that they should go (d) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this sec- line 1 and 2, it says that this does not into if they do choose to accept Federal tion, the term ‘‘directory information’’ include institutions who have a long- dollars and grants. I thank the gen- means, with respect to a student, the stu- dent’s name, address, telephone listing, date standing policy of pacifism based on tleman for offering this amendment and place of birth, level of education, degrees historical religious affiliations. and am in strong support of it. received, and the most recent previous edu- I understand that with the kind of Mr. SOLOMON. It is the Solomon- cational institution enrolled in by the stu- schools that the gentleman might have Pombo amendment. I certainly thank dent. in his district, as well as the gentleman the gentleman for speaking out for it. Amend the table of contents accordingly. from Virginia, who I think is seeking Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, will Mr. SOLOMON (during the reading). to be recognized here as well. the gentleman yield? Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con- Mr. WALKER. Just one more clari- Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentle- sent that the amendment be considered fication, if I could. It is my under- woman from California. as read and printed in the RECORD. standing that that exemption then Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, will The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection would be up to the agency that is going this include student loans? to the request of the gentleman from to grant the money and the respective Mr. SOLOMON. It has nothing to do New York? Federal agencies to make the deter- with student loans. There was no objection. mination. Ms. LOFGREN. I am seeking to un- Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Chairman, let me Mr. SOLOMON. The gentleman is derstand the amendment. Would the be very brief, because this amendment obsolutely correct. prohibition of funds going to a univer- in its two parts has previously passed Mr. WALKER. I thank the gen- sity include Pell grants or student this House and has become the law of tleman. loans or students in universities where the land. The amendment says that Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, ROTC is not offered? any institution of higher education will the gentleman yield? Mr. SOLOMON. No, it would not. that prohibits ROTC units on campus Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gen- These deal only with research grants. or prohibits the recruiters of our mili- tleman from Virginia. Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I tary to go on campus and offer honor- Mr. GOODLATTE. I thank the gen- move to strike the last word. able careers to the young men and tleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I realize that I may be women graduating from these colleges Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong sup- the only voice against the amendment will not be eligible for any of the port of the amendment. I think it is vi- here today, but I do so because there is grants that appear in this legislation. tally important. Campus recruiting is a a school in my district that for over a Mr. Chairman, these institutions just vitally important component of the long period of time reached the conclu- cannot expect to reject the people who military’s effort to attract our Na- sion not to have a ROTC program. I defend our country and the public on tion’s best and brightest young people. personally think ROTC is a good idea. one hand and dip into the public trough It is simply sound fiscal policy to deny I wish that ROTC did exist and I know with the other hand. For the last 15 Federal dollars to schools that inter- individuals who have had a great expe- years or so, this country has had to de- fere with the Federal Government’s rience and a measurable improvement pend on an all volunteer military. constitutionally mandated function of in their future and life because of their These young men and women come raising a military. participation in the program. However, from all walks of life from all across However, I have in my district, as the I would hate to see San Jose State Uni- this great country, and they are the gentleman from Pennsylvania has, reli- versity cut off from all of the fine re- best trained, the best educated, the gious denominations, Mennonite, search that they are doing because of a best motivated young men and women Amish and others that have hundreds decision made in another program of any military in the entire world of years of historical background of not area, supportive as I am of the ROTC today. But because it is an all-vol- participating in military activities program. I think it is a mistake to tie untary military, our military does based upon their deeply found religious in our research funds with our ROTC need access to be able to offer these beliefs, and I think if they are not sim- program support, because so much of May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5717 what is done by way of scientific re- fill what the full committee has de- lieu thereof ‘‘, cooperative agreements, and, search is not done just to benefit the cided to do, and it was not considered subject to the last sentence of this sub- universities that might participate in appropriate for the full committee to section, other transactions’’; those research programs but that re- act on that. (5) by adding after subsection (b)(4) the fol- lowing: search is to benefit the entire country, Mr. BROWN of California. Did the ‘‘The authority under paragraph (1)(B) and to benefit the future of the United full committee take some action that I paragraph (2) to enter into other trans- States by forging advances on one or am unaware of? actions shall apply only if the Secretary, another of critical questions that face Mrs. MORELLA. No, the full commit- acting through the Director, determines that us and our future. tee did not act on that. standard contracts, grants, or cooperative So I think although we must take Mr. BROWN of California. In other agreements are not feasible or appropriate, strong efforts to support our men and words, the gentlewoman is doing what and only when other transaction instru- women in the military, in the long run the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. ments incorporate terms and conditions that reflect the use of generally accepted com- it will do them no good to cripple those WALKER] says he is willing to accept? universities that might be doing re- Mrs. MORELLA. No, no, no, no, no, mercial accounting and auditing practices.’’; and search in the very areas that could no. The ATP bill, which was authorized (6) by adding at the end the following new benefit them in the future. by our Technology Subcommittee, was subsection: So with a great deal of respect for approved, did not come to the full com- ‘‘(k) Notwithstanding subsection those who have offered the amendment, mittee. And I am not offering it today, (b)(1)(B)(ii) and subsection (d)(3), the Direc- I would urge that we not willy-nilly but I am offering an amendment that tor may grant extensions beyond the dead- run down this path that may have con- was offered at full committee and then lines established under those subsections for sequences that are adverse and that we was withdrawn with a significant sum joint venture and single applicant awardees to expend Federal funds to complete their have not fully considered. attached to it. projects, if such extension may be granted As a member of the Committee on Mr. BROWN of California. As much with no additional cost to the Federal Gov- Science, I know that this was not con- as I respect and admire the gentle- ernment and it is in the Federal Govern- sidered by the committee. We did not woman, I am constrained to say that ment’s interest to do so.’’. have any hearings on it, at least in our her answer does not satisfy my require- Amend the table of contents accordingly. committee, and I think it would be ill- ments and I am going to offer, and I do Mr. BROWN of California (during the advised to approve the amendment. offer at this point an amendment to reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unani- The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the bill which had been approved mous consent that the amendment be the amendment offered by the gen- unanimously by the subcommittee but considered as read and printed in the tleman from New York [Mr. SOLOMON]. was objected to by the chairman of the RECORD. The amendment was agreed to. full committee. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection The CHAIRMAN. Are there further AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. BROWN OF to the request of the gentleman from amendments to title IX? CALIFORNIA California? If not, are there further amendments Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- There was no objection. to the bill? man, I offer an amendment. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I re- Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- The Clerk read as follows: serve a point of order on the amend- man, I move to strike the last word to Amendment offered by Mr. BROWN of Cali- ment. enter into a colloquy with the distin- fornia: Page 137, after line 4, insert the fol- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman guished gentlewoman from Maryland. lowing new title: from Pennsylvania reserves a point of Mr. Chairman, it was my intention to TITLE X—INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY order on the amendment. offer an amendment, a new title X SERVICES Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- which would add to the bill the provi- SEC. 1001. INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY SERVICES man, as I indicated earlier, this amend- sions unanimously reported by the AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIA- ment was considered in the Technology Technology Subcommittee chaired by TIONS. Subcommittee of the Committee on the gentlewoman earlier this year. There are authorized to be appropriated to Science and adopted unanimously as an Knowing of her interest in these pro- the Secretary of Commerce for the Industrial extremely innocuous indication of sup- Technology Services activities of the Na- grams, I would like to ask her what her port for two of the vital programs of intentions might be and if she would tional Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 1997— the National Institute of Science and intend to offer such an amendment, I (1) for the Advanced Technology Program Technology. These two programs were would allow her to do so. under section 28 of the National Institute of the Advanced Technology Program and Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, will Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. the Manufacturing Extension Partner- the gentleman yield? 278n), such sums as may be appropriated; and ships, as set forth in the amendment. Mr. BROWN of California. I yield to (2) for the Manufacturing Extension Part- There is not a specific amount au- the gentlewoman from Maryland. nerships program under sections 25 and 26 of thorized for these programs but only the National Institute of Standards and Mrs. MORELLA. In response, Mr. such sums as may be appropriated. In Chairman, to the ranking member of Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 278l), such sums as may be appropriated. other words, this leaves it up to the the Science Committee who is such a SEC. 1002. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS Committee on Appropriations to deter- dedicated, distinguished gentleman AND TECHNOLOGY ACT AMEND- mine the level of funding. But, if adopt- who knows that I do care about the MENTS. ed and signed into law by the Presi- ATP Program, the amendment I am Section 28 of the National Institute of dent, it continues an authorization for about to offer has to do with the Manu- Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. these two excellent programs which are facturing Extension Program. It is an 278n) is amended— an integral part of the work of the Na- (1) by striking ‘‘or contracts’’ in subsection excellent amendment. I know that the tional Institute of Science and Tech- gentleman would support it whole- (b)(1)(B), and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘con- tracts, and, subject to the last sentence of nology. heartedly. I would love to have the op- this subsection, other transactions’’; b 1930 portunity to offer it. We can then see (2) by inserting ‘‘and if the non-Federal whether the gentleman wants to do participants in the joint venture agree to Now, it turns out, of course, that the something else after that. pay at least 50 percent of the total costs of bill, as reported out of the Subcommit- Mr. BROWN of California. I under- the joint venture during the Federal partici- tee on Technology, was never taken up stand the gentlewoman’s position. I pation period, which shall not exceed 5 by the full committee. The gentleman infer that she is constrained from offer- years,’’ after ‘‘participation to be appro- from Pennsylvania [Mr. WALKER] has ing the version that was reported out priate,’’; many good reasons why he does not of her subcommittee by unanimous (3) by striking ‘‘provision of a minority want to continue authorizing these two share of the cost of such joint ventures for vote; am I correct in that? up to 5 years, and (iii)’’ in subsection programs, and his method of doing Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, if (b)(1)(B), and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘and’’; this, of course, was merely not to take the gentleman will continue to yield, I (4) by striking ‘‘and cooperative agree- them up in full committee, not to have feel that it would be appropriate to ful- ments’’ in subsection (b)(2), and inserting in them debated and marked up in full H5718 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 committee, and then not, therefore, to families in my district having taxes ed Technologies, Bell South, MCI, Al- be included with the other matters taken out of their pockets and brought lied Signal, Texas Instruments, Apple within the jurisdiction of the Commit- to Washington and then given to peo- Computers, Sun Microsystems, and a tee on Science and this so-called omni- ple, who do we think they should have whole bunch of other people. That is bus science authorization bill. the money given to? Well, in this pro- what Members are for doing. Now, I am offering something that I gram where the money goes is to Gen- I think it is a bad deal and I suggest feel is the easiest, simplest, least con- eral Motors, Ford Motor, AT&T, GE, we should reject the amendment of the troversial, and least expensive way to IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Unit- gentleman from California. go. The gentleman from Pennsylvania ed Technologies, Bell South, MCI, Al- Mr. TANNER. Mr. Chairman, I move [Mr. WALKER] has frequently argued lied Signal, Texas Instruments. to strike the last word. that we must never in our authoriza- This is a list of the Fortune 500 that Mr. Chairman, in the 5 minutes I tions go beyond the levels which the are getting money that is being taken have I will try to give the facts on this appropriators are going to go. As a con- out of the pocketbooks of working fam- amendment and what it was meant to sequence, of course, we many times end ilies and handed over to corporations. do. It was unanimously, Democrat and up going far below what the appropri- Now, if Members think that results Republican, passed out of our sub- ators are going to go. in good science, think a little bit about committee last year. Because of the Last year, for example, the appropri- what we were told when the GAO took comments of the previous speaker, one ators continued these two programs at a look at these programs. What we will knows where the bias of the chair on levels which did not satisfy me, but be told is, oh, well, we have to have our committee is toward these pro- they were continued on the books. I am these cooperative arrangements with grams, and I do not need, I do not now, at this point, offering this amend- these big companies in order to get de- think, to elaborate on that anymore. ment as a nominal way to maintain the velopment of new products. The fact is Let me simply say this. Trying to authorization for these two existing that we do not get development that is separate fact from fiction, these are programs, at the level that the appro- generic to all products, we get a few not corporate welfare grants, these priators in their wisdom fit within the hand-picked corporations singled out companies put up 50 percent of the budget, so that we cannot have the ar- that then get the money. money as these ATP programs, Repub- gument argued so often by the gen- Now, I realize the administration lican-administered, throughout the tleman that we are busting the budget. loves that because these are hand- country. And let me further say this. We cannot bust the budget in an au- picked corporations that just happen In an independent Silber & Associates thorizing committee, as all of those to give big political contributions ac- report, talking about the Advanced who have served in this body know. It cording to research done by one of the Technology Program, they said that it is only the appropriators who can bust foundations in town. They looked at does indicate the program is achieving the budget, and by passing the ball to the ATP program and found that there its objective; that there is no evidence them we will allow them to decide was this surprising similarity between that there is any linkage to any kind what the budget allows and we will those who gave money to political of political campaign, and that, fur- maintain the authorization for these campaigns and those who got money thermore, over half of the ATP cost- two finally important programs, which from the ATP program. So it fits a shared awards have gone to small busi- the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. very, very nice pattern for those who nesses and more than 100 universities WALKER], the chairman of the commit- think that corporate money into politi- have participated in more than 157 tee, considers to be corporate welfare. cal campaigns is a great idea, but I am projects. So he is bitterly opposed to them. not so certain it serves the needs of Now, we went through this in the Mr. Chairman, I very much hope that science. subcommittee at great length. I am the Members will see the logic of my The fact is that what we have at- sorry that the chairman of the sub- offering this minimal type of authoriz- tempted to do is reprioritize spending committee did not choose to try to ing amendment and will support it. by going away from some of these pro- bring our bill that we thought was so Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I with- grams that give money to big corpora- good in a unanimous vote to the floor. draw my point of order. tions and put money into industrial The full committee never took up the Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to subsidies and put the money into some unanimously passed bill in the sub- the amendment. This is an interesting of the places that we think are high committee for reasons that have here- point in the debate. The gentleman priority research. tofore been expressed, and I would just from California has essentially decided So the gentleman from California is simply say this. All we are asking for to bring an amendment to the floor to offering an amendment which is, in is a vote on this. authorize one of the favorite programs fact, an amendment to continue the Every person who has looked at these of the administration, and there is no pattern of corporate welfare. Despite programs who is not an ideologue or doubt this administration loves cor- the fact suggested that the government has a bias of some kind has said the porate welfare. The gentleman has of- ought to be backing out of corporate wave of the future, and I cited earlier fered the ultimate corporate welfare welfare, this administration, and now when I was talking about the Council amendment by reauthorizing the ATP the minority, has decided that cor- on Competitiveness, hardly a liberal program. porate welfare is the wave of the fu- claptrap organization, said that the Now, as the gentlewoman from Mary- ture. That is the way in which we have wave of the future is to get away from land had said, we were prepared to try to go in order to assure a better cli- this business of applied versus basic to reauthorize the manufacturing ex- mate for science in the country. science. The wave of the future is to tension program but the gentleman I just disagree. I think industrial pol- make government an ally of business from California was not satisfied with icy science makes no sense. It in fact in this country because the businesses that. He wants to go further and go impedes our competitiveness. It does in this country, because the vagaries of well beyond that and go into the ATP all the wrong things. It has us picking the marketplace are not going to be program. The ATP program is, in fact, winners and losers in the marketplace. able to invest in blue sky research industrial policy defined. It is all of the It does all the bad things in terms of without some thought of a product things that people are concerned about how we want to proceed ahead with that can be marketed to come back to when they hear about their tax dollars both research and development and the them in the future for commercializa- being spent. science of the country. tion. For middle class Americans who are So if Members are for the gentle- Therefore, it behooves us all, govern- concerned about where their tax dol- man’s amendment as presented to us at ment, industry, universities and Fed- lars go, here is a program they should the present time, they are for taking eral labs, to work together. That is ex- love because this particular chart talks money out of the pockets of middle actly what these two programs do. about those largest awards and where class Americans and giving it to Gen- They allow for industry to participate they went last year. Now, when we eral Motors, Ford Motor, AT&T, GE, in blue sky research with the help of think about $25,000-a-year working IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Motorola, Unit- the Federal Government, so that if May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5719 there is a technological breakthrough Department manufacturing extension The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman sometime down the line, American partnership program, managed by the from California [Mr. BROWN] insist on businesses will be able to take advan- National Institute of Standards and his point of order? tage of that in this worldwide market- Technology. Mr. BROWN of California. Having read the amendment, I withdraw my place. That it all it is. b 1945 Furthermore, this amendment does point of order, and I move to strike the nothing more than authorize these pro- This program is one which I, and last word. grams at whatever sum the appropri- many Members of this body on both Mr. Chairman, I must, to begin with, ators deem necessary, because we can- sides of the aisle, consider to be not suggest my very great admiration for not get in our authorization committee only valuable but essential to our na- the gentlewoman from Maryland. She a hearing on this bill in the full com- tional competitiveness. MEP’s State has been a stalwart of the committee mittee, notwithstanding the fact it was and regional centers provide consulta- for many years. I know of her dedica- passed unanimously by the subcommit- tion and guidance to manufacturers, tion to all of the programs at the Na- tee. both large and small, in the develop- tional Institutes of Standards and Be that as it may, we do not run the ment and implementation and ad- Technology and to the general policies committee, I understand that, but we vanced management techniques de- of technology development, technology have at this time an opportunity to let signed to enhance efficiency and manu- transfer and dissemination. She is one the Congress speak their will, not cost- facturing expertise. of the leaders in this House, and I have ing one dime, not one single cent, not Mr. Chairman, the substitute that I the very highest regard for her. a budget buster, only to say these pro- propose would provide an affirmative Mr. Chairman, I do not understand grams ought to be authorized because authorization only for the manufactur- why she does certain things in this sub- unbiased experts have said they are ing extension partnership program, and stitute. Of course, if she can explain it, working. it would allocate to it $10 million more I would be happy to listen to it. But Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- than was appropriated for fiscal year what she has done here is to offer a man, will the gentleman yield? 1996. The amount would be $90 million. substitute which takes a small part of Mr. TANNER. I yield to the gen- This money would provide the fund- the programs included in my amend- tleman from California. ing required for support of the centers ment, the Manufacturing Extension Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- that have now been established and Partnership, and eliminates the major man, I want to briefly comment, and I also for those that are planned during program, the Advanced Technology very much appreciate the gentleman’s the period of fiscal year 1997. So that Program. statement, and it illustrates exactly would bring the total number of cen- She authorizes a specific sum, $90 the reason I appear to be a little irked ters to 75 at the conclusion of fiscal million, here. I see nothing in the here on the floor. year 1997. amendment which accords with the This was the most arbitrary action I Mr. Chairman, I understand from the Chairman’s frequent admonition that have ever seen a chairman take when information that we have been pro- there must be offsets whenever an he rejected a unanimous subcommittee vided during the course of our commit- amendment is offered that increases report and refused to take up the bill. tee’s consideration of these spending the amount of money. Perhaps he has And then to categorize that as cor- authorizations that that figure would in mind how she is going to offset this porate welfare or industrial policy or represent the full complement of cen- $90 million. But until he does offer such as the grants going to, I gather, Demo- ters, 75, that are planned by the an offset, then I am constrained to feel cratic contributors is the most ridicu- present administration and that no that his previous admonitions that we lous, absolutely false statement, which new centers are planned for startup could not consider amendments that he has never been able to substantiate, after the conclusion of the fiscal year did not have offsets was slightly dis- that I have ever heard. 1997 period. ingenuous, to coin a phrase that I have A combination of arbitrariness, dic- I am persuaded in any event that at sometimes used. tatorialness and a misuse of facts is the conclusion of this 1997 fiscal year, Mr. Chairman, there is, also, despite what is ruining the activities of this it will be appropriate to pause and the strong protestations by the gentle- committee and of the Congress as a evaluate the performance of these cen- woman as to the excellence of this pro- whole to the degree it is infected by ters before considering the creation of gram for manufacturing extension the gentleman from Pennsylvania’s po- any new ones. partnerships, and I thoroughly concur sitions. Congress should consider, after gath- with her, that this is a prohibition AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MRS. MORELLA AS A ering the requisite information, the against extending this program. None SUBSTITUTE FOR THE AMENDMENT OFFERED record of the centers in achieving their of the funds authorized shall be used to BY MR. BROWN OF CALIFORNIA goals and the implementation of cri- establish a new center. If these centers Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I teria for continued Federal funding. are, in fact, as good as they are pur- offer an amendment as a substitute for Thus, the amendment also contains ported to be, and which we agree they the amendment. language that would preclude the open- are, they are generally funded for a The Clerk read as follows: ing of any new centers after fiscal year fixed term of years. When they have Amendment offered by Mrs. MORELLA as a 1997. This is not intended to be a per- finished that, they are supposed to substitute for the amendment offered by Mr. manent prohibition but merely to en- transition to, if possible, 100 percent BROWN of California: Page 137, after line 4, sure that there be a pause in expansion private sector financing. The money insert the following new title: until Congress has an opportunity to that is released should be used to con- TITLE X—FURTHER AUTHORIZATIONS review and affirmatively make a deci- tinue the work by establishing other SEC. 1001. FURTHER AUTHORIZATIONS. sion about the need for any additional centers. There are authorized to be appropriated centers. In the gentlewoman’s substitute, she $90,000,000 for the Manufacturing Extension I know, however, that we do have prohibits this. Not that it requires Parternships program under sections 25 and preliminary information on the impact more money; it could be done with ex- 26 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 278l) for of the MEP program in the form of two isting stream of funds, but she pro- fiscal year 1997. None of the funds authorized GAO studies which collected extensive hibits it. This denies the earlier state- by this section may be used to establish a assessments of customer opinion on the ments that she made that these centers new Center. value of the work done by the centers. are making a contribution to improv- Amend the table of contents accordingly: Those customer reports were positive, ing the quality of performance of our Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chair- spoke well for the fine work that is great small business community in this man, I reserve a point of order. being done by the dedicated partici- country, which is our goal. Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, the pants and the work of the centers. Now, for these reasons, and others, substitute that I propose will also add So, Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of having to do of course with the fact a new title X to the bill. It is for the my substitute to the Brown amend- that it does not include the Advanced purpose of authorizing the Commerce ment. Technology Program, I am going to H5720 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 ask that we reject the substitute of- is making the case that that is the Now, that is exactly what we do here. fered by the gentlewoman and pass the right direction to go, but let us not And so, in fact, this is one of the big- original amendment which contains ev- continue down this road of funding in- gest programs we have in the entire erything that her amendment, her sub- dustrial policy through ATP that gives Federal Government that takes money stitute, offers, plus additional benefits money to big corporations out of the out of the pocketbooks of Americans which I have already described in my pockets of poor and middle-class wage and hands it to big corporations. earlier remarks. earners. So, Mr. Chairman, in my view, this is Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I move Mr. Chairman, that is what the whole a definitional corporate welfare pro- to strike the requisite number of issue will be about here as we consider gram. It is certainly a corporate sub- words, and I rise in support of the sub- this: whether or not Members are for sidy program. It is certainly an indus- stitute. extending the MEP programs and prob- trial policy program, all the things Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from ably getting an overwhelming vote in that I think are bad. California [Mr. BROWN] has gone on a favor of the MEP, or whether or not The fact is we have had a recent re- couple of emotional tirades, and I what they are wanting to do is go the port on U.S. competitiveness in USA think we ought to clear up the record. route of corporate welfare by ensuring Today. In USA Today they in fact say The gentleman from California has that the ATP Program is that which is that the best things that we do in this suggested that, in talking about the funded, and it is funded at a huge level country are when we have entrepre- ATP Program, that this is ideologi- at a cost to the taxpayers and going to neurship and when we do the job of cally driven by the chairman of the big corporations. having better investment, not with committee. I would suggest that just Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the huge corporate subsidies. the opposite is true of the ideology. Let gentleman yield? Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I move to us correct the record with regard to Mr. WALKER. I yield to the gen- strike the requisite number of words. whether or not any responsible observ- tleman from Pennsylvania. I thought Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the ers have suggested whether there may the gentleman would give me the cour- Morella substitute, and I yield to the be a connection between the ATP tesy of allowing me to complete my gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. statement, but I yield to the gen- grants and politics. MORELLA]. It was done by the Cato Institute. I tleman. Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I just quote, just wanted to respond to the wording would like to ask the gentleman, he Many of the top recipients of technology in this particular amendment. There likes to quote the Cato Institute report are 75 centers that will, we understand, research grants awarded by the Clinton ad- a lot and says that these are contribu- ministration were also substantial contribu- be fully funded, including administra- tors to the Clinton campaign or the Demo- tors to Democratic causes. Only five of tive costs. Of the 75 centers, 15 are new. cratic National Committee. the corporations, AT&T, Boeing, Chev- Fifteen are new, already contracted ron, Shell and Texaco, received ATP Mr. Chairman, that is where I get the for, and we are providing the money for awards, and each of those companies information. It was not made up. It is, them for fiscal year 1997. gave more heavily to Republicans than in fact, very clear. We are asking that it is appropriate The next thing is, if this is a huge they gave to Democrats. at the end of that period of time to Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask philosophical issue with the gentleman simply look and review the 75 centers the gentleman too about corporate wel- from Pennsylvania, then I do not know to see how effectively they are operat- fare that he supports like the National how I have gotten so far into the sack Weather Service, NIST in-house R&D, ing. I think this is good accountability, with Robert Shapiro, with director of energy supply R&D, FAA, S&T. The good responsibility, good oversight on economic policy at the Progressive Cato Institute defines all of this as cor- the part of this Congress. The MEP program is one that our Policy Institute, which is, in fact, not porate welfare. ideologically associated with me. But If the gentleman is agreeing with committee has demonstrated a desire in looking at the ATP Program, he ex- Cato’s definition that corporate wel- to continue. We are budgeting it. We pressed some of the same concerns that fare is any program that involves gov- are offering in the authorization $10 I did. ernment cooperation with industry, million more than what was in the Mr. Chairman, he says with regard to then why is the gentleman supporting budget authorization for the last fiscal a grant that went to the Philips Cor- hydrogen R&D, which he supports? Is year that had been appropriated, and poration under ATP, he makes the that not corporate welfare? we feel it is a good amendment. I do statement: Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, re- not think it has any criticism. That is However, the Federal Government should claiming my time, does the gentleman adverse. And I say to this Congress, not be helping Philips, the largest lighting want a response or is he just interested pass it. company in the world, develop new commer- in pejoratives? Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, reclaim- cial applications for technology already used Mr. Chairman, the hydrogen R&D ing my time, I would just add, in sup- in street lights. Program that I supported was a basic port of this, that this House addressed That is the kind of thing that is research program. If the gentleman the ATP program last year, zeroed it going on in the program, and even peo- wants to go back and look at the bill, out. The gentlewoman from Maryland’s ple at the Progressive Policy Institute we supported a basic research program strategy is to come back and try to get in fact are finding some concerns with from hydrogen. We did not support any something for the MEP program. I those kinds of questions. industrial policy to research to that. think it is a realistic way that we can So we have a lot of lobbyists and big And the gentleman from Pennsylvania get the appropriate money for it, and I corporations that support this pro- does not accept the Cato Institute’s am happy to support it. gram, but the fact is that there are definition of corporate welfare. There Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I real concerns. are many different definitions around move to strike the requisite number of What the gentlewoman from Mary- here that the gentleman can come up words. land [Mrs. MORELLA] has done is she with. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to comment has said, okay, she has a strong faith in Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, that is briefly on this because I have heard some of these programs such as the the report the gentleman cited. some of the same things that I have MEP Program. She says, let us single Mr. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I did heard now for 18 months in the Com- it out and make sure that it gets all not yield to the gentleman. Is he going mittee on Science. I think there is a the money that it needs to fund the 75 to let me answer? philosophical difference, and I think it centers that the administration says Mr. Chairman, the fact is that the is fair that we discuss it. It is not are necessary; and the administration way I define corporate welfare is when about money to corporations. I was has requested no more than 75. we are taking money from hard-earn- here and voted against the agriculture The $90 million in the gentlewoman’s ing, middle-class Americans and put- bill. We shovel money at farmers, and amendment totally funds all 75 centers ting it in the hands of corporations they are corporations; that does not plus some administrative expenses. She through subsidies. seem to bother anybody. It bothered May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5721 me. So the problem is not about taking something that I think is going to be a Every private sector, every company tax money and giving it to others ap- critical matter for our country and representative, even those that did not parently. It is about industrial policy. whether we prosper or fail in the next receive ATP awards, spoke favorably And I have heard the Chairman use generation of computers. That is flat about this program. So I think, if we that word over and over again. panel display. There are several com- were serious about addressing this I think there is a difference. peting technologies being pursued at issue of so-called corporate welfare, b 2000 this point. It is not yet clear which of that we would have done it in a much them will emerge as the winner. We more substantial way rather than the I know that we are in a vicious eco- have one ATP program located in Sili- very narrow focus that the chairman nomic global competition. If we look at con Valley pursuing very sophisticated has taken in this program. what others around the world are doing approaches using photons as a base for In closing, I think the Brown amend- and compare them to what we will do the technology. ment is a far superior amendment be- it this bill passes with the Morella We have very little going on other cause it takes care of two programs amendment to the Brown amendment, than the ATP program in the United that are a success story. We do support I think we will agree, at least I believe, States. Our major competitors are in the MEP program and certainly are we are in trouble. Japan, in Singapore, in Korea. Mr. Chairman, Europe is accelerating going to support funding for that. If we were to pull out of this techno- Certain elements within the Science Com- its investment in commercial tech- logical research, we would be doing nologies through just the same kind of mittee have tried to bury NIST's technology great damage. For those who have and manufacturing support programs without programs that the ATP program rep- laptops, you cannot build a laptop un- resents for America through the Euro- ever having to endure the political inconven- less you can get a flat panel. When all ience of debating their merits or voting on the pean Union joint R&D initiative. Japan the flat panels are owned, when all the is doubling their government science record to kill them. flat panel technology is owned by our Our amendment is designed to correct this and technology budget in the next 4 economic competitors, our folks will years. China is tripling its investment situation and allow flexibility for the Appropria- not have a guaranteed supply of the tions Committee to find funding for these sup- in joint projects. Korea is also boosting key components for something that is its R&D efforts in key areas. posedly controversial programs. going to be a growth industry. What are the functions of these disputed They realize, as we should, that Mr. Chairman, let us not shoot our- precompetitive, precommercial re- programs? selves in the foot. I strongly urge that First, let's look at NIST's Manufacturing Ex- search is part of getting ahead in the we vote against the Morella amend- really rather strident and tough com- tension Program. The MEP, which originated ment. It kills the ATP program, and it during the Reagan administration, has been a petition that we face internationally. does damage to our country’s future. I would like to note that some people salvation to many American small manufactur- Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I move to ing businesses. Faced with increasing direct who I do not think the very political, strike the requisite number of words. global competition in the mid-1980's, small like the American Chemical Society, Mr. Chairman, I know it is getting American manufacturers needed to become has said, and I quote: ATP is a vital late, and I am not going to take a lot component of our Nation’s technology of time. I just think it is interesting to more efficient, but objective sources of mod- and competitiveness portfolio. note that, while the chairman of the ernization advice were costly or nonexistent. I would like to give just a couple of Committee on Science likes to talk Abroad, countries like Japan, Germany, Singa- quick examples of how this actually about Boeing receiving $2 million on pore, and Italy all launched manufacturing ex- works. One example from San Jose is the ATP program and labels that cor- tension programs to help their small manufac- Spectra Diode Laboratories, which porate welfare, he conveniently over- turers innovate, renovate, and compete. The joined with Xerox in 1991 in a project looks the $6 billion contract Boeing Manufacturing Extension Partnership program to develop integrated arrays of high- gets on the Space Station, which he [MEP] was NIST's response to the efforts of powered multi-wavelength laser diodes. supports. So I think there is just a lit- our global competitors to seize control of the Now the ATP funds that were provided, tle bit of a double standard going on international market for technology. and I would add in partnership; indus- here. The MEP demonstrates that the Federal try puts at least 50 percent of the There is some corporate welfare ap- Government, in partnership with local business money up and oftentimes more; en- parently that is good, and then there is groups, educational institutions, and State abled this firm, SDL, to move ahead of other corporate welfare that is not so governments, could provide small manufactur- where they otherwise would have been. good. ers with modernization services worth several It is true one of the three tech- I would say to the gentlewoman from times the Federal investment. Today, the MEP nologies they developed might have Maryland that we support MEP. All of program serves 32 States through a network been developed anyhow, but would not us over here support that program, and of 44 nonprofit centers. Federal funds are have happened in the time frame in we have tried to work in a bipartisan awarded on a competitive basis with States which it did. In Silicon Valley and high way to make sure what is clearly a suc- and local partners matching Federal funds. tech, time is very important. We are cess story continues. I would like to Each MEP center is tailored to meet the talking about products that have a life see the MEP program funded at $105 needs of regional industries by assisting small cycle of 12 months, 13 months, 14 million, at full funding. and medium size firms employing fewer than months. If you miss a step, pretty soon I would like to see other areas have 500 workersÐ381,000 manufacturers employ- you have got your competitors abroad MEP centers, like I enjoy in western ing 12 million workersÐto modernize in order just killing you in the business. Pennsylvania. The Southwestern Penn- to compete in the demanding marketplace of Mr. Chairman, I would note that sylvania Industrial Resource Center, I the 1990's and beyond. To date, MEP centers SDL’s early applications have tripled believe, has saved the manufacturing have reached 25,000 customer firms. Each their business in 2 years, and note that base in Pittsburgh and is a program MEP project on average adds or saves 5 jobs, in some measure their success has that not only needs to continue but increases sales by $360,000 and saves added to the 46,000 jobs that were added should be expanded because it is doing $430,000 in labor and investments. Total ben- in 1 year in Silicon Valley, CA. good things, too. efits to manufacturers amount to $8 for every None of us want to squander tax Similar good things have been hap- Federal dollar invested. money, but there are things such as pening in the ATP program, and I The MEP in my region, SPIRC, the South- squandering and then there are invest- think it is interesting to note that, western Pennsylvania Industrial Resource ments for the future. My voters tell me when we held hearings on ATP, most of Center, has made meaningful improvements in for the most part that, if we can do these so-called expert witnesses that numerous manufacturing plants throughout Al- something to invest in science and were presented were not from members legheny County. It's safe to say SPIRC is di- technology that boosts our economy, from the private sector or from indus- rectly responsible for maintaining our manu- that provides high-tech, good-paying try. They were these so-called experts facturing base in western Pennsylvania. jobs, that is a good investment. from these inside-the-Beltway think The MEP program's benefits have been Mr. Chairman, I would add just one tanks that talked negatively about widely recognized. The House and Senate other example, and that has to do with this program. have agreed on language that was included in H5722 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 the debt ceiling extension bill reaffirming the based solely on political considerations. From Program, just a few things. The Insti- importance of MEP centers in helping busi- the beginning days of the 104th Congress, tute of Electrical and Electronic Engi- ness comply with Federal and State-level envi- both the MEP and ATP programs were tar- neers continues its strong support for ronmental regulations. The language reads, geted as corporate welfare by certain Mem- the ATP program. A significant Nothing in this Act in any way affects or bers. amount of progress in technology limits the ability of other technical assist- What is the basis for my assertion that the transfer is the direct result of the ATP ance or extension programs to perform or attacks made on the ATP and MEP are politi- programs. These programs illustrate continue to perform services related to com- cal rather than any rational evaluation of the that government participation in the pliance assistance. program? In a hearing before the Technology R&D arena can be both efficient and This clearly covers current MEP activities, Subcommittee this past year, the only witness productive. which provide significant environmental assist- who spoke against the ATP and MEP were The American Chemical Society: As ance to small and medium-sized manufactur- expert witnesses with no technical business the gentlewoman from California [Ms. ers. This has been a recent point of emphasis backgroundÐtheir only experience was work- LOFGREN] alluded to, ATP support of within the MEP program. For example, the ing for inside the beltway think tanks. Every market incentives encourages compa- Tennessee MEP Center was awarded other private sector witness supported these nies to invest for the long term in $900,000 to develop a prototype program for programs and programs like them, regardless high-risk, high-payoff technologies. environmental compliance that can be emu- of whether their company received an ATP The American Electronics Associa- lated by other MEP centers. award. tion: ATP is based on government and Let's also look at another Reagan adminis- According to a July 1995 Congressional industry cooperation and the develop- tration effort, the Advanced Technology Pro- Budget Office [CBO] report, Federal Financial ment of technologies critical to Ameri- gram, which addressed another market failure. Support of Business, the ATP and MEP rep- ca’s long-term ability to compete in Technology partnership programs, such as resent less than 4 percent of the $12 billion the global marketplace. ATP, were crafted in direct response to the the Federal Government will spend on pro- The South Carolina Research Au- concern that too much of the scientific knowl- grams that support industrial technology com- thority in Columbia, SC: By supporting edge resulting from research projects was not mercialization. If the cities of these programs research in high-risk, leading-edge finding its way into our companies, where were truly interested in rooting out this so- technology, the ATP is advancing the technology could be turned into the products called corporate welfare, why are they silent state of the art, contributing to the and services, the profits and jobs that drive regarding the majority of programs, such as growth of our economy. our economy. Many factors, including the the almost $1 billion Small Business Innova- Finally, from a company in Valley globalization of markets, the rapid pace of tion Research Program [SBIR], or $3.7 billion Forge, PA: ATP is one vital approach technology cycles, and the focus on short term at the National Institutes of Health [NIH] for to maintaining our science and tech- investment, have led to the short term and applied biomedical research? If they were seri- nology leadership. These projects will narrow R&D focus in most companies. ous, we would be debating the entire range of never be undertaken without govern- As a result, U.S. industry tends to avoid in- technology commercialization programs which ment support to challenge industry to vestments in enabling technologies with broad the Government funds. The Science Commit- take the higher technology risk. This economic benefits, and focuses almost exclu- tee has not done this and the House has not could double or triple our R&D efforts sively on narrow mission-specific research done this. on projects that are beyond our current with short horizons. Technology partnerships The elimination of the ATP and attempts to core business and which we would oth- were conceived as a means to create some eliminate the MEP are using the corporate erwise never undertake. bridges to better connect basic research with welfare label to further another agenda. To be That says it better than any politi- the companies who can move ideas into the frank, the ATP and MEP were targeted, de- cian, Mr. Chairman. That says exactly marketplace. spite their initiation by a Republican adminis- what this amendment that the gen- The ATP, based on previous Government tration, because they were enthusiastically en- tleman from California [Mr. BROWN] experience in fostering technology transfer, is dorsed by Bill ClintonÐboth as a candidate has offered is all about. And that is a cost-shared partnership between Govern- and as President. Eliminating ATP and MEP why this almost, well, I do not know ment, industry, and universities. With funding does not mean that Congress is making hard the word to use, amendment, to mask of $341 million in fiscal year 1995, it rep- choices, it says Congress is making political what is happening here that has been resented less than 1 percent of total Federal ones. Rather than listening to the experts and offered by the chairwoman of our sub- civilian R&D investment. It is too early to de- building a Federal investment S&T that is committee to just limit it to MEP and termine the full economic benefits from a pro- based in economic reality and looks to the fu- then to cut that off saying no new cen- gram like ATP, which began in 1990, but has ture, opponents of these programs have only ters, that is why it should be rejected. at least a 10-year horizon for payoff. Already, used rhetorical arguments as justification for We ought to really and truly support there is substantial evidence that the ATP is attacking the ATP and MEP for purely political American business in this country. catalyzing unique, new enabling technologies reasons. Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of and thereby creating new economic opportuni- I want to emphasize that until this Congress Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike ties that would not have existed otherwise. the question of support for MEP and ATP has the requisite number of words. Also, I want to mention that in spirit of bipar- not been partisan. It is the effort to make this Mr. Chairman, the ATP program was tisan cooperation, Congressman BOEHLERT a partisan debate that many of us on both established in 1990 by President Bush. and I circulated a letter of support for MEP. sides of the aisle are working to counter. Even It seems to have worked very well. I do Well over 90 Members signed onto this letter, in the mark-up of this bill, Members of both not know what has caused the chair- including such notable Members as Congress- parties supported this amendment, which man of this committee to just turn man HASTERT, the majority's chief deputy failed on a tie vote. I have the utmost respect against it and seem like to have closed whip, Chairman SPENCE of the Armed Serv- for my colleagues in the majority who have not his mind on it. When the amendment ices Committee, Chairman MEYERS of the succumbed to the misguided effort to handi- was offered in committee, the majority Small Business Committee, and many others. cap our competitiveness. of the committee members I have a copy of the letter here, which I hope Mr. TANNER. Mr. Chairman, I move bipartisanly supported it. But he lit- Members will look at before voting. to strike the requisite number of erally went over in committee and in- Thanks to more thoughtful consideration of words. timidated a Member to change his these programs than that of the Science Com- Mr. Chairman, I will not take all of vote. It failed because it was a tie vote. mittee, Congress provided adequate funding my 5 minutes. I just feel compelled to It really says that most of us on this for the NIST laboratories and provided subsist- answer some of the charges, I guess we committee really do think about what ence funding for the Manufacturing Extension would call them, that have been made the future is all about. We really do un- Partnership. Unfortunately, funding for the Ad- on the floor here today, all without derstand that we have to be a partner vanced Technology Program was eliminated any foundation, from the benefit of the in creating these jobs and getting tech- for fiscal year 1996. standpoint of a hearing in our commit- nology that saves money. You know, Authorization levels for the MEP and the tee on these matters. there are a lot of success stories of the ATP were not the result of any objective anal- Let me tell Members what industry ATP program. They are many, they are ysis of the merits of these programs, but were says about the Advanced Technology varied. But in the health care industry, May 30, 1996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5723 for example, the ATP program for in- worldwide. Both programs are vision- This is not a corporate welfare pro- formation infrastructure is assisting ary and prove that government can be gram. What it is is an effective part- the industry in laying the foundation an effective partner with industry on nership between business and govern- for the efficient use of technology in technology development. ment. It says to business, ‘‘Where there doctors’ offices, hospitals, and clinics Mr. Chairman, let me just spend a is a great risk and we realize that you by cost-sharing with industry in the few moments discussing the MEP and, will not be taking the opportunity to development of technologies, to reduce in particular, California’s Manufactur- explore these technologies, we will paperwork and bring better health care ing Technology Center in Southern come in in competition with Japan and to rural areas. Many of our rural hos- California’s South Bay. Last year, 51 Germany and France and England and pitals are at risk for closing. small manufacturers hired 442 addi- stand alongside of you so that you Mr. Chairman, this is the kind of tional employees after implementing might be successful.’’ technology we need. Health care costs improvements recommended by the I am somewhat disappointed that the about $1 trillion a year in the United CMTC. These same manufacturers saw distinguished chairman of this com- States, and the process of information their sales increase by a total of $5.8 mittee would continue to call this cor- accounts for about 20 percent of that million. Those are private-sector dol- porate welfare. Is he aware that when total cost, or about $200 billion annu- lars, not taxpayer dollars. he sees the names of AT&T and IBM ally. If we can get technology to reduce It is all the more intriguing to me and Xerox, that they are, in fact, a that cost, thereby reducing the cost to why the Committee on Science major- partner with some 12 to 15 smaller individual patients, it is worth that ity has decided to turn the Federal companies that wind up on the grant small investment. Government’s back on small manufac- from the Advanced Technology Pro- There are other examples of the ATP turers, which have accounted for the gram? Again a helping hand. process. In Plano, TX, just outside my majority of manufacturing-sector job The chairman likes to always cite district but in the district of the gen- growth in the Nation during the last 25 Cato as the expert on what is corporate tleman from Texas, Mr. SAM JOHNSON, years. welfare, and of course the Cato Insti- there is Microfab Technologies that Equally important to our Nation’s tute suggests that the Advanced Tech- hired 18 people. But they have come up, high-tech development is the ATP, the nology Program is corporate welfare. a very small company. I do not think Advanced Technology Program, a Well, if they are so wise, let me offer to you consider 18 people a large com- unique partnership between govern- the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. pany, a big corporation. They have ment and industry to accelerate the de- WALKER] that Cato also says that his favorite projects are welfare, corporate come up with product development velopment of high-risk technologies. welfare; the National Weather Service, from major, other companies. This new That promises significant commercial the NIST in-house research and devel- technology will significantly reduce payoffs and widespread benefits for our opment, general science at DOE, en- hazardous waste. That is significant economy. Industry drives the ATP by ergy supply R&D, U.S. Geological Sur- because soon we will be talking about setting the program’s research prior- vey, the FAA, the Office of S&T Policy, Superfund reform and reauthorization. ities. Industry must keep its part of cooperative R&D agreements, tech- I should think we want to save dol- the partnership by adhering to strict nology transfer, high-performance lars when we have that technology. I cost-sharing rules. We must keep up computing, R&D university research- think it is not penny-wise but it is our end of the bargain by maintaining pound-foolish for us to just decide arbi- ers, and the Space Station. investment in high-technology indus- Might I say that we as a body have a trarily, almost single-handedly that we tries. bipartisan responsibility to insure that must not partnership for developing Mr. Chairman, we must drive tech- the science of America becomes the technology, bringing about more jobs nology forward into the 21st century. jobs of the 21st century? I have said it and reducing costs on things that are Government must be a partner with in- yesterday, I say it today, and I say it done in a way that could be improved dustry in this effort. This amendment tomorrow. The MEP program, along with technology. I really regret that is too little and very late. with the Advanced Technology Pro- we have forgotten that we hold the Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. gram, are effective partners, want to trust of the people in this country, and Chairman, I move to strike the req- emphasize small businesses, but as well we ought to try to bring about these uisite number of words. to emphasize partnerships between the changes because other countries will Mr. Chairman, there has been a long- government large corporations and pass us by and we will pay more for it. standing debate on this House floor smaller businesses to insure that risky Rather than reducing ourselves to that one party over another is good for scientific investigation and research is personality battles to show who is big- small businesses. I rise to support the carried on so that we can be competi- ger than the other, that is irrespon- Brown substitute that really does sup- tive worldwide. sible. I think that it is time for us to port small businesses and creates jobs. This is a bad amendment that ex- stop that and decide that we are here We realize that the MEP program, in cludes the ATP program. I would ask with the trust of people. We ought to fact, has kept thousands of smaller my colleagues to join me in supporting stand and be responsible for what we companies in business by giving them the substitute offered by the ranking are here about, and we cannot do it the technology and the understanding member, the gentleman from Califor- without these partnerships. to maintain their business and to keep nia [Mr. BROWN], for the committee of- Ms. HARMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move their doors open. But we have heard a fered in committee a bipartisan sup- to strike the requisite number of very striking and unfortunate debate port short of that one vote. I will sim- words. revolving around the ATP program. ply ask, Mr. Chairman, that we do that Mr. Chairman, I am extremely dis- b 2015 today and be victorious on behalf of re- appointed that a procedural maneuver search and businesses of America, par- may prevent a clean vote on the Tan- Might I, Mr. Chairman, simply call ticularly our small businesses. ner amendment, now called the Brown the roll? The CHAIRMAN. The question is on amendment, which I have enthusiasti- Plano, TX, an ATP program; Harris the amendment offered by the gentle- cally cosponsored. Instead we will vote County, TX, an ATP program; Farm- woman from Maryland [Mrs. MORELLA] on a watered-down compromise, much ington Hills, MI, an ATP program; as a substitute for the amendment of- less than we need. Danbury, CT, an ATP program; York- fered by the gentleman from California NIST technology programs never town Heights, NY, an ATP program; [Mr. BROWN]. used to be political hot potatoes. Both Valley Forge, PA, I might add in the The amendment offered as a sub- the MEP and ATP were established, as great State of Pennsylvania, ATP pro- stitute for the amendment was agreed we just heard, during the Reagan and gram; Hopewell Junction, NY, ATP to. Bush administrations. Both programs program; Wilmington, DE; San Diego, The CHAIRMAN. The question is on are embraced by Members on both sides CA; Potomac, MD; Columbia, SC; the amendment offered by the gen- of the aisle because they make our Na- Washington, DC; Santa Clara, CA, tleman from California [Mr. BROWN], as tion’s businesses more competitive among many. amended. H5724 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE May 30, 1996 The amendment, as amended, was HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, With one exception, the title’s programmatic agreed to. COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, scope is identical to the NOAA title passed The CHAIRMAN. Are there further Washington, DC, May 2, 1996. by the House last year as part of H.R. 2405, Hon. BUD SHUSTER, the Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization amendments to the bill? Chairman, House Committee on Transportation Act of 1995. If not, under the rule the Committee and Infrastructure, House of Representa- The one exception is a new section dealing rises. tives, Washington, DC. with ocean research partnerships. It is my Accordingly the Committee rose; and DEAR BUD: On April 24, 1996, the House understanding that your staff has taken part the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Committee on Science marked up and re- in every step of the drafting process of the ported out H.R. 3322, the Omnibus Civilian ocean research partnership language. In def- GOODLATTE) having assumed the chair, Science Authorization Act of 1996. Title VII erence to your concerns, however, I will be Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Chairman of of the bill contains provisions relating to the pleased to drop the provision from the bill. the Committee of the Whole House on authorization and administration of the Fed- Likewise, I am willing to drop language the State of the Union, reported that eral Aviation Administration’s Research, worked out between our two Committees that Committee, having had under con- Engineering and Development Program last year, and passed by the House, on the sideration the bill (H.R. 3322) to au- Several sections of title VII fall within the NOAA Fleet and NOAA Corps as well as re- thorize appropriations for fiscal year jurisdiction of your committee and as such lated program support accounts. I also am 1997 for civilian science activities of your committee received a sequential refer- willing to drop language authorizing the Na- ral of the omnibus bill upon introduction. the Federal Government, and for other tional Sea Grant College Program as well as Given the short time frame before the om- all National Ocean Service (NOS) programs purposes, pursuant to House Resolution nibus bill will be considered on the Floor of and the Ocean and Great Lakes Programs of 427, he reported the bill back to the the House. I realize that the Transportation the office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Re- House with sundry amendments adopt- and Infrastructure Committee will not have search (OAR). ed by the Committee of the Whole. sufficient time to consider those provisions As with last year, I am pleased to work out The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under within your committee’s jurisdiction. In any differences our two Committees may the rule, the previous question is or- order to expedite Floor consideration of H.R. have over the substance of authorization lan- 3322, I will drop Sections 702, 703, 704, 705 and guage covering the NOAA programs we dered. 708 of H.R. 3322 which mainly pertain to the share. If we cannot agree, however, I will Is a separate vote demanded on any management of the Federal Aviation Admin- oblige your desire to strike the authoriza- amendment? If not, the Chair will put istration. I also understand that you also ob- tion for the programs I have outlined above. them en gros. ject to Section 706(k) of the omnibus bill, I look forward to continuing our close The amendments were agreed to. and I will therefore not include that provi- working relationship on legislative matters sion when the omnibus bill is considered on our two Committees share. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The the House Floor. Cordially, question is on the engrossment and I appreciate your willingness to work with ROBERT S. WALKER, third reading of the bill. us to expedite the consideration of H.R. 3322. Chairman. The bill was ordered to be engrossed I look forward to continuing to work with and read a third time, was read the you on these issues. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, third, and passed, and a motion to re- Cordially, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION consider was laid on the table. ROBERT S. WALKER, AND INFRASTRUCTURE, Chairman. Washington, DC, May 2, 1996. Hon. ROBERT S. WALKER, f HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Chairman, House Committee on Science, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, Washington, DC. AUTHORIZING THE CLERK TO Washington, DC, April 30, 1996. DEAR BOB: Thank you for your letter of MAKE CORRECTIONS IN EN- Hon. FLOYD SPENCE, May 2, 1996, concerning H.R. 3322, the Omni- Chairman, Committee on National Security, bus Civilian Science Authorization Act of GROSSMENT OF H.R. 3322, OMNI- House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 1996. I appreciate the work your committee BUS CIVILIAN SCIENCE AUTHOR- DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Committee on is doing in this bill on matters of civil avia- IZATION ACT OF 1996 Science has marked up and introduced H.R. tion research and development within the ju- 3322, the Omnibus Civilian Science Author- Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I ask risdiction of the Science Committee. I look ization Act of 1996. The following provisions forward to working with you on these mat- unanimous consent that in the engross- may be within the jurisdiction of the Com- ters as we proceed to reauthorize the Airport ment of the bill, H.R. 3322, the Clerk mittee on National Security: Section 128, Improvement Program and as we continue to may be authorized to correct section Science Studies Institute and Section 453, pursue FAA reform. numbers, punctuation, and cross ref- National Oceanographic Partnership Pro- Because you have agreed to drop provisions erences, and to make such other tech- gram. within the Transportation Committee’s ju- nical and conforming changes as may The Committee on Science acknowledges risdiction from H.R. 3322, I have no objection the Committee on National Security’s juris- to its consideration in the House. be necessary to reflect the action of dictional interest in these provisions. It is With warm personal regards, I remain the House in amending the bill. my understanding that similar language to Sincerely, The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there Section 453 will be included in the FY 1997 BUD SHUSTER, objection to the request of the gen- Department of Defense Authorization bill. Chairman. tleman from Pennsylvania? Nevertheless, I ask that your committee There was no objection. waive any request for sequential referral HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COM- with respect to the provisions described MITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, above so that the House can consider H.R. Washington, DC, May 1, 1996. f 3322 without undue delay. I would of course Hon. ROBERT S. WALKER, support the inclusion of your Committee as Chairman, Committee on Science, EXCHANGE OF LETTERS BETWEEN conferees should H.R. 3322 go to a House-Sen- Washington, DC. COMMITTEES REGARDING JURIS- ate conference. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand the Thank you for your cooperation and I look Committee on Science has recently marked DICTION forward to hearing from you. up H.R. 3322, the Omnibus Civilian Science Mr. WALKER. Mr. speaker, further, I Cordially, Authorization Act of 1996. This legislation ask unanimous consent that the ROBERT S. WALKER, includes two provisions within the legisla- tive jurisdiction of the Committee on Na- RECORD include the exchange of letters Chairman. between the Committee on Science and tional Security—section 128, Science Studies HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Institute, and Section 453, National Oceano- the Committees on Natural Resources, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, graphic Partnership Program. Transportation and Infrastructure, and Washington, DC, May 1, 1996. In recognition of your committee’s desire Natural Security regarding the respec- Hon. DON YOUNG, to bring this legislation expeditiously before tive jurisdictions of the committees. Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of the House of Representatives, the Committee The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there Representatives, Washington, DC. on National Security will waive referral of objection to the request of the gen- DEAR DON: I am writing to follow up on our H.R. 3322, without, of course, waiving this conversation of May 1, 1996 about the Na- committee’s jurisdiction over the provisions tleman from Pennsylvania? tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- in question. This committee also will seek to There was no objection. tion (NOAA) title of H.R. 3322, the Omnibus have conferees appointed for these provisions The letters referred to are as follows: Civilian Science Authorization Act of 1996. during any House-Senate conference.