the clerk: h.r. 6540, a bill to require the secretary of defense, in awarding a contract for the kc-x aerial refueling aircraft program, to consider any unfair competitive advantage that an offeror may possess. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 325. the nays are 23. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the house will be in order. members, please clear the well. the house will be in order. will members please clear the well. the house will be in order.

members, please clear the well. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. mcgovern: by direction of the committee on rules i call up h.res. 1781 and did for -- and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: house calendar number 258. house resolution 1781, resolved that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the speaker's table the bill h.r. 5116, to invest in innovation through research and development, to improve the competitiveness of the united states, and for other purposes. with the senate amendment thereto and to consider in the house without intervention of any point of order except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21 a motion offered by the

chair of the committee on science and technology or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment. the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on science and technology. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion. section 2, upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the speaker's table, the bill h.r. 2751 to accelerate motor vule savings nationwide and provide incentives to registered ownors of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient automobiles with the senate amendment thereto and to consider in the house without intervention of any point of order except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21 a single motion offered by the chair of the committee on energy and commerce or his designee that the house concur 2349 senate amendment -- in the

senate amendment. the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without a motion or demand for division of the question. section 3, upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the speaker's table the bill h.r. 2142, to require quarterly performance assessments of government programs for purposes of assessing agency performance and improvements and to establish agency performance improvement officers and the performance improvement council, the senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the house without intervention of any point of order except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21 a motion offered by the chair of the committee on oversight and government reform or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment. the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided

and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and government reform. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members, please take their conversations off the floor. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the the gentlewoman from north carolina, dr. foxx. all time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i also ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.res. 1781. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, house resolution 1781 -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman from massachusetts deserves to be heard. the gentleman from

massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, house resolution 1781 provides for the consideration of the senate amendment to h.r. 5116, the american competes re-authorization act of 2010. the rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the committee on science and technology or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 5116. the rule provides one hour of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on science and technology. the rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21. the rule provides that the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the rule also provides for the consideration of the senate amendments to h.r. 2751, the f.d.a. food safety modernization act. the rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the committee on energy and commerce or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 2751. the rule provides one hour of

debate on the motion equally divided an controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. the rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21. the rule provides that the senate amendment shall be considered as read. the rule also provides for the consideration of the senate amendment to h.r. 2142, gpra modernization act of 2010. the rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair on the committee of oversight and government reform or his designee that the house concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 2142. one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and government reform. the rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except those arising under clause 10 of rule 21. finally, the rule provides that the senate amendment shall be considered as read. mr. speaker, all three -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend.

the gentleman from massachusetts deserves to be heard. will members please take their conversations off the floor. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, all three pieces of legislation deserve to be approved by this house. i have a long and very informative statement in support of all three of these bills. but in the interest of time i will ask that they be entered into the record. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from massachusetts for yielding time. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from -- the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: i rise very disturbed by the lack of respect the rule of the american elites have shown the will of the american people since election day. having lost 60 seats in the house and six seats in the senate, one would think the liberal democrat regime would think twice about continuing their reckless spending of spending that's been so

overwhelmingly rejected by the american voting public. however these washington elites have spent their last days grasping frantically to their waning power and continuing to spend, spend, spend. even in the final hours before christmas. this rule is a slap in the face to the institutional integrity of congress and the way this body is intended to operate. mr. speaker, i have mr. speaker, i have an article that i'd like to insert in the record from "the wall street journal" of november 30. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: it talks about what has been happening since we have come back into session, and i think it is something that we need to be talking about. also, i want to say that rather than having conference

committees meet to work out the differences between the house and senate versions of bills, democratic leaders have waited until the last minute, and the house will now concur with the senate-passed measures sending them to the president. thus far in the 111th congress, only 11 conference reports were considered in the house and 25 amendments between the house and the senate which denies the minority a motion to recommit. in the 109th congress, 25 conference reports were considered. only one amendment between the houses which the rules committee made a motion to recommit in order. the 109th was when the republicans were last in control. in pelosi's new direction for america, page 24, it states, quote, bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full and fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the minority the right to offer alternatives, including a substitute. it's clear that house democrats

in the rules committee have not lived up to this promise. instead of allowing sufficient time for debate on these separate measures which collectively authorizes billions upon billions in new spending and grant federal regulators even more overreaching power, the democrat elites are arbitrarily presenting us with one overafternooning closed rules for an enormous piece of legislation. with that, mr. speaker, i will urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule and no on the underlying bills. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, at this point i don't think we have any request for time. i'd yield to the gentlelady if she has other requests for time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield five minutes to my distinguished colleague from oklahoma, mr. lucas. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for five minutes. mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, once again i must rise in opposition to the rule to consider the senate language for s. 510, the food safety modernization act now contained in h.r. 2751, a bill related to the cash for clunkers program. as i stated before, i believe our nation has the safest food supply in the world. i also believe that we must continually examine our food production and regulatory system and move with changes that improve food safety. i'm very disappointed in the process by which this legislation is being considered. what we have here is another expansion of federal power without benefit of thorough consideration. this is the stimulus bill, cap and trade and the health care bill all rolled all over again. the house version of this legislation was rolled out in draft form and marked up in the energy and commerce committee over a couple weeks during the summer of 2009.

during all that time, members of the house agriculture committee stood ready and willing to work on this legislation. it's unfortunate that despite a clear jurisdictional claim, the house agriculture committee did not demand that the bill be referred, conduct hearings on its provisions and work our will to make improvements. during a committee hearing in the summer of 2009, on the general topic of food safety, not a single producer witness would support the bill. it was a stunning failure to put forward our legislative responsibilities. despite this, the house democratic leadership chose to attempt to pass this legislation under a suspension of the rules. because of the flawed legislative process and lingering concerns about the contents of the bill, it was can he feeted -- it was defeated. the leadership had a closed rule denying members the opportunity to participate in the legislative process and rammed

it through the house in the summer of 2009. this simple legislation languished over a year. the senate sent us its version of food safety legislation with an unconstitutional revenue measure which effectively killed the bill. then, the house leadership won another closed rule which prohibited any reasonable debate on the provisions of the legislation and sent it back to the senate in a mammoth irresponsible long-term continuing resolution which failed in the senate. so now the senate sent its bill back to us as a free-standing measure. this time it stuffed is into a cash for clunkers bill in order to once again bypass any reasonable debate. and here we are again with the same legislation negotiated outside of regular order. the senate was originally unwilling to conduct a conference with the house claiming there wasn't enough

time. the senate continues to offer its bill to us on a take it or leave it basis. mr. speaker, i've had nearly a month in which this side of the aisle was ready, willing and able to sit down and resolve our differences and to move forward. unfortunately, the majority leadership in this season of giving has chosen to once again bypass the normal legislative process, exclude nearly every member of this body other than a select few in the speaker's inner circle and ram this legislation for all intents and purposes could have been a bipartisan victory. instead, what we're left with is another example the -- of the sort of nonsense that the american people rejected a few weeks ago. our constituents were not subtle when they spoke last november. mr. speaker, let me return to where i started. we have the safest food supply in the world. anyone that follows the current

events knows that our food-producing system faces ongoing food safety challenges. unfortunately, neither this legislation nor the process by which it is being considered will address those challenges. our nation's farmers, ranchers, packers, processors, retailers and most importantly, consumers deserve better. i urge all of my colleagues to vote no on this rule. and, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i don't want to prolong this debate but if i could make a couple of oh,s in the aftermath of the gentleman's -- couple of observations in the aftermath of the gentleman's speech, more than 300,000 of people are hospitalized and more than 5,000 each year die. we heard about tainted eggs, tainted spinach, tainted peanut butter, tainted cookie dough.

we have not updated our food safety laws in decades. so here's the deal, if you want to do a better job of protecting the american consumer, you'll have an opportunity if you vote for this rule to vote for the food safety bill. if you don't then vote down the rule and vote against the bill when it comes up. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from north carolina. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. lucas has spoke very eloquently about one piece of the legislation rolled into this rule. i'd like to speak about all three of them briefly. one piece is h.r. 5116, the competes act, a behemoth authorizing nearly $86 billion which is $22 billion above the fiscal 2010 base amount and $8 billion above the original

10-year doubling pass. this is in addition to the $5 billion, nearly $5 billion in additional funding that was provided in the so-called stimulus bill. when h.r. 5116 was authorized in 2007 it enacted approximately 40 new programs. the new spending under h.r. 5116 would create at least seven new government programs, many that are not associated with research and development and others that are duplicative and unnecessary. this is plain wrong, mr. speaker. it's worth recalling that when h.r. 5116 was originally considered by congress earlier this year, republicans attempted to make several constructive changes which were systematically blocked by the ruling majority. one would save billions of taxpayers money by reducing the authorizing levels to f.y. 2010 levels and freezing them for 10

years. however, in an effort to obstruct republicans, the liberal democrats signed a series of parliamentary tricks by shoving their bill through without having any republican input. mr. speaker, in these difficult economic times american families across the country are tightening their belts and cutting their spending. why then are the democrat elites increasing spending by $22 billion with this legislation and creating new duplicative government programs? the american taxpayers cannot afford this bill. the second bill encompassed by this closed rule which the democrat elites have brought before us today is h.r. 2751, the f.d.a. food safety modernization act, again, which my colleague from oklahoma, mr. lucas, has spoken on so eloquently. this bill increases spending by $1.4 billion, subsequently increasing the price of food and increasing the size of government without actually

improving food safety. this hastily considered closed rule provides for consideration of yet another bill, h.r. 2142, the government efficiency, effectively and performance improvement act. last week it failed to pass under a suspension of the rules. instead of taking this as an opportunity to fix the flaws and address the other concerns prompting the bill's failure, the ruling liberal democrats predictably chose to ram it through by any means necessary. and since they wasted so much time, they find themselves in the waning days of this lame duck congress scrambling to discuss issues that should have been dealt with through a responsible legislative process. as they wait for the senate to

act, they're refusing to have any free moment to pursue one of their last opportunities to slam through another so-called rule unworthy even to be called a rule, providing for consideration of flawed legislation such as h.r. 2142. this bill would amend the government performance and results act of 1993, gpra, a law which requires agencies to develop five-year strategic plans, annual performance plans and annual performance reports. unfortunately, under the rules of debate provided for by this rule, the ruling democrat majority refuses to allow members to offer these types of real reform ideas or any other amendments leaving this legislation unlikely do anything to change the incentives facing decisionmakers and will not end the perpetual funding of failing federal programs. as has been made perfectly clear to the ruling liberal democrat

leadership, many are concerned that although there's no offsets for this version of the bill, it authorizes $75 million over five years to establish agency performance officers and interagency councils but does not contain an effective means in which to consolidate or eliminate ineffective programs of each agency. if you add the 17,800 employees that the food safety bill is contemplating and then the new employees that will be required under the gpra bill, we are adding to the number of federal employees. but we should be decreasing the number of federal employees. i want to talk a minute about what is happening in terms of federal employees since the democrats took over the congress. in 2007 there were 1,832

executive branch agencies, and the total civilian agencies 1,173. excuse me. employees. there were 1,832,000,000. and in the civilians, 1,873,000. in 2010, it goes to 2.148,000, and 1,428,000. federal employment has grown by a remarkable 17% since 2007 to an estimated 2.1 million nonmilitary full-time workers. this is the largest federal work force since 1992. also, mr. speaker, according to a recent analysis by "usa today"

total compensation for federal workers has risen 37% over 10 years after inflation compared to 8.8% for private workers. federal workers earned average compensation of $123,000 in 2009, double the private average of $61,000. mr. speaker, our country cannot afford this expansion of the federal government. we need to be reducing the federal government not expanding it. i'd like to say further this version of the bill does not contain an amendment considered in committee markup by republican representive schock and supported by congressmen cooper and quigley that would have established a more thorough process for evaluating agency performance and eliminating programs that fail performedance standards were found to be duplicative or determined to be unnecessary. h.r. 2142 mandates the creation

of several new governmentwide and agency specific management plans, however it does not, does not increase executive accountability for failing programs. mr. speaker, again this bill is going in the wrong direction. what it does is it allows agencies to design their performance plans and then measure their own results using their own performance indicators rather than requiring agencies to focus on achieving measurable outcomes, the bill makes the creation of outcome oriented performance measures optional. this would be like, mr. speaker, letting students set the criteria for getting their own grades. we all know that doesn't work very well. strangely enough, also, in the process the bill directs agencies to identify low priority program activities which is ridiculous because even if agencies had a incentive to label their own

programs as low priority, they do not. this begs the question of why such programs are funded at all. mr. speaker, we should vote down this rule and vote down the underlying bills. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i have no further speakers except myself. i would inquire of the gentlelady how many more speakers she has. ms. foxx: i can make closing comments. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from north carolina close. -- the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. the evidence is in the liberal democrat ageppeda has failed. they need to go back to the drawing board and come back to the american people with real solutions to their real problems. this isn't the time to dither and blame the republican minority for the disappointing collapse of governance we have seen since the liberal majority seized control of congress in 2007.

i urge my colleagues to take this opportunity to force the ruling liberal democrats to rethink their misguided proposals by rejecting this rule and underlying legislation to protest the liberal agenda that continues to distract from private sector job creation and getting the economy back on its feet. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself the balance of the time. mr. speaker, oh, my goodness, there are a lot of things that come before the members of this body that i think are worth getting all worked up about, and i think sometimes understandably lead to partisan bickering. what we are talking about here today to me -- i think to me and to most people who are watching should be -- this should be fairly noncontroversial. what we are talking about is a rule that will allow us to

consider three bills. one is called the competes re-authorization act of 2010, and what does this radical bill do? it authorizes funding increases for the national science foundation, the national institute for science and technology, and the department of energies office of science for fiscal years 2000 and 2013 on a path toward increasing substantially our investment in research and development over the next 10 years. it's not even an appropriation. it's an authorization. so the appropriations committee next year can work their will and decide whether to invest more in science so that we can compete in this global economy. or will we not invest in science and actually do as my friends on the other side of the aisle talk about take a meat axe to these programs and putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage. this is a bill worth supporting and expanding american energy technology so we are not so

reliant on foreign oil, so we don't go to war over oil is a national security issue. but this somehow is a controversial bill. this should pass easily. the other bill that is so radical, according to my colleague on the republican side of the aisle, is called the government performance and results modernization act. what does this bill do? it basically says to agencies and departments, look, you need to work to come up with a plan to prevent unnecessary and wasteful spending and help eliminate federal government waste and by working with us to help us find where those wasteful areas are. now, this is what is causing such consternation on the other side of the aisle. rather than just taking a meat axe and saying an arbitrary percentage cut across the board , what this bill says is let's think about what we are doing. maybe we can cut 5%, maybe we can cut 10%, maybe more.

let's do this in a sensible way where we don't adversely impact services that directly impact the american people for the good. let's have a plan. let's not do this senselessly. let's do this sensibly. that somehow is this radical awful bill that has caused all this noise by my colleague on the other side of the aisle. the final bill is the food safety modernization act. mr. speaker, as i said earlier, it's worth repeating again, in this country, literally, hundreds of thousands, millions, 76 million americans on a yearly basis are sickened by contaminated food that they digest. 76 million americans a year. more than 300,000 of them go to

hospitals. 300,000 in hospitals on a yearly basis. 5,000 die. what is this congress trying to do? we are trying to find a way to protect consumers. my colleague on the other side of the aisle is all upset about it. what a terrible, awful idea to protect the health and well-being of the citizens of this country by updating our food safety rules and regulations which haven't been updated in almost 30 years? come on. i mean, let's move forward with this rule. let's consider these bills. i'm sure they all will pass. and with that, mr. speaker, i urge a yes vote on the previous question on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the aye vs. it. the resolution is agreed -- the ayes have it.

the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. gordon: pursuant to house resolution 1781, i call up h.r. 5116 with the senate amendment thereto and i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill, designate the senate amendment, and designate the motion. the clerk: h.r. 5116, an act to invest in innovation through research and development to improve the competitiveness of the united states and for other purposes. senate amendment, mr. gordon of

tennessee moves that the house concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 5116. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 181781, the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on science and technology. the gentleman from tennessee, mr. gordon, and the testimony texas, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill h.r. 5116. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. gordon: mr. speaker, thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. gordon: on october 12, 2005, in response to a bipartisan request by the science and technology committee, and some of our colleagues in the senate, lamar zearned and jeff big ham, the national academies released the

report rising above the gathering storm. this distinguished panel paint add very scary picture. the report made it clear without action the future was bleak for our children and grandchildren. this report was without question a call to arms. this september of this year, the report was revised rapidly approaching category five. how progress has been made in the past five years, including enactment of the original america competes act, but it's underscored that america's competitive position in the world now faces greater challenges and that research investments are even more critical today. the message from the report is clear, we need to double down on our investment in science and technology. the worst thing we could do would be to downshift while the rest of the world kicks into high gear. as chairman of the committee and former chairman and c.e.o.

lockheed martin, norm augustine said in all the years he was an aircraft engineering and dealing with the dilemma of trying to make an overweight aircraft fly, the solution was never to lop off the engine. science funding is the engine of a knowledge based economy. if we remove it, our economy will crash and burn. more than half of our economic growth since world war ii can be attributed to the development and adoption of new technologies. these investments are a path towards sustained economic recovery and growth and a path toward prosperity for the next 50 years. there is an undeniable relationship between investment in r&d and the creation of jobs, the creation of companies, and economic growth. the science coalition, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization of the nation's leading research universities, released a report entitled sparking economic growth, how federally funded university research creates innovation,

new companies, and jobs. this report tells the stories of 100 companies, including google, cisco, gentech, sun power, hewlett-packard, and many others all created based on research funded at the federal dollars. the u.s. chamber of commerce, the business round table, the national association of manufacturers, the council on competitiveness, and the task force on american innovation all understand the benefits of u.s. companies of making a sustained commitment to research and stem education. we have a huge opportunity before us to make progress toward that goal. why there have been concessions made in light of the economic environment. this bill preserves the intent of the rising above the storm report and america competes. it keeps our agencies on a doubling path. it continues to invest in high risk, high reward energy technology development, it will

help improve stem education, and it will help unleash america's spirit of innovation. competes is and will continue to be a bipartisan, bicameral effort about which every member can feel proud. and i applaud all the people who have worked on this bill, including all the members of the science and technology committee and my dear friend, ralph hall. this has been a team effort across the aisle and across the capital. i also want to take a moment to extend a sincere and heartfelt thanks to the staff of the committee of science and technology, both minority and majority. their tireless effort in crafting the house version of this legislation, working through the tough spots and shepherding it to a final passage today deserves special acknowledgement. without them this re-authorization of competes would not have been possible. we are all familiar with the legions of smart, talented professionals who grace the corridors of this institution, and i'm sure each of us is

impressed on the regular basis with the knowledge and expertise of the staff we work with most closely. however, i am always amazed at the wealth of knowledge lodged with the staff of the science and technology committee. i simply can't say enough about the staff's talent, insight, and institutional knowledge. their hard work has made the science committee more productive and it has made me a better chairman. mr. speaker, i'm proud that in the two terms that i have had the privilege to lead the science and technology committee, the committee has had 151 bills and resolutionsed pass the house, all with bipartisan support. . but there is nothing that i am more proud of than the america competes act. there is nothing that we have done that will have deeper, longer lasting and more positive impact on this nation than this bill. and i cannot think of anything i'd rather be doing on what is likely my final act on this house floor after 26 years of

service than spending this bill to the president's desk. it's important to me personally because i have a 9-year-old daughter, and if we do not want our children and grandchildren to inherit a national standard of living less than their parents, a reverse of the american dream, we need to support research, foster innovation and improve education. the business community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, foster innovation and improve education. the academic community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, fostering innovation and improve education. the scientific community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, foster innovation and improve education. and every one of our colleagues in the senate has agreed that this bill needs to be sent to the president's desk so the u.s. can support research, foster

innovation and improve education and create 21st century jobs. i urge my colleagues to stand with the business community, the academic community, the scientific community and to send a strong message that the u.s. must maintain its scientific and economic leadership. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of a very robust basic research and ask for as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hall: this competes act is back again. it's been here before and it's living proof when one said you can hate the sand but love the center. i'm fond of bart gordon. i've worked with him. we are going to miss him when he leaves here. but i'd never like to have a

bill, a great bill like competes with so many hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars piled on it that has never really been debated on either floor. i -- i've stated on this floor a lot of times this year, i remain committed to the goals of the original competes. unfortunately, the senate omnibus language before us today includes a hodgepodge of so many extraneous measures that is indeed most surprising that we're considering this five days before christmas. like the house-passed version, it continues to take us off track from what we set out to do in a bipartisan fashion more than five years ago. in 2007, congress responded to the recommendations of many experts that the federal government must increase its investment in basic research and in science and math education by developing the america competes act. the principles behind the legislation was sound, bipartisan and well understood. when competes first passed, our

budget deficit was projected at $160 billion, and the national debt was $8 trillion. sadly today just three years later, the deficit is projected not $160 billion but $1.5 trillion, and the national debt is over $13 trillion, a 60% increase in less than three years. this dramatic collapse in our fiscal condition demands that we get spending under control and work harder than ever to patronize taxpayer dollars. let me discuss the process that brought us to this point. the senate negotiated amongst themselves and hotlined a bill, then passed it -- a bill by unanimous consent, a bill that is different out of the conference committee in july. a report on that bill was not filed until december 10 and we didn't see the actual text of the amendment before we -- until last friday, this past friday. we still don't have a complete

c.b.o. cost estimate. we're under a closed rule. we're considering a bill that the senate has spoken on by in the house are having to either reject or accept it with no opportunity to offer amendments. this is not the way the american people want us to do our business. they told us in november that they want us to do things differently, and this lame duck congress is going against those wishes to carefully review the items in this $46 billion amendment. most men are much smarter than me like norm augustine and even my own local congressman asks me to support this bill. it's hard for me to say i can't support a version of competes, not this version. if this senate amendment is defeated today, i pledge as chairman of the science and

technology committee to pass fiscally responsible pieces of this legislation agency before agency and issue by issue, given each to be reviewed and valid by each member. if we want to remain globally competitive, this bill should be considered in smaller pieces, not on the last day of a lame duck congressional session. yes, our friends in the senate made it a three-year authorization bill and, yes, they nearly cut the cost in half, but this $46 billion still contains $7.4 billion in new spending. my good friend and chairman of the committee will tell you that the senate stripped a number of provisions from the version previously passed and trimmed this bill considerably. i, too, think the senate missed an opportunity to retain some of the house-passed language, particularly language to assist institutions serving our nation's veterans and those with disabilities and language to eliminate pay for federal

employees officially disciplined from viewing or downloading or exchanging pornography on their work computers. unfortunately, it it does not include two bipartisan interagency bills that passed the house as standalone legislation, bills that would re -authorize our technology r&d. on the other hand, i'm heartened to see that the senate removed a number of expensive and many cases duplicative initiatives added by the house both in committee and on the floor. among them energy hubs, clean energy consortium. never been funded stem programs that the department of education, our laboratory science program and a decades old infrastructure program at the national science foundation. also, it is the items that they did not remove or have not removed on their own without our input that caused me the most heartburn. i still have great concern that

we authorize and operate to the tune of $900 million. this program was never voted on by the house or senate outside a conference report nor has it ever received appropriate funding outside the stimulus bill. yet, we're going to authorize $900 million to a program that focuses on late stage technology development and commercialization activities often already supported by the private sector. the amendment before us also keeps and expands a loan guarantee program to build or renovate science parks and develop, quote, regional innovation clusters, unquote, alters the program to grant construction and green energy companies and puts n.s.f. of replicating programs for stem teachers. america competes is about making this nation more competitive and ensuring that our basic research agencies have the funding they need to improve the breakthroughs that propel us into the future.

it's not about turning these agencies into the infrastructure contractors and leaders or oracles. for that matter who just pick winners and losers. as much as i want to support competes, as much as i respect and admire this author, i see n.s.f., nist and the d.o.d. of science re-authorized, i simply can't support this version. just like i stated when the house took up the measure on all three previous occasions, this measure continues to be far too expensive, particularly in light of the new and duplicative programs it creates. further, we have not had the opportunity to give proper oversight to the programs we put in motion in the first competes before authorizing new additional programs. and unfortunately this bill still goes way beyond the goals and direction of the original america competes taken from us good, solid, fundamental research and much too far in the world of commercialization which many of us on this side of the aisle do not believe is a proper role for the federal government. i know a number of my colleagues

wish, also, to speak on this bill and to this process, and before i reserve the balance of my time, i want to again thank mr. bart -- bart gordon for the good services he's rendered and will render in the great state of tennessee. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from tennessee. goornedgoorned mr. speaker, i yield -- mr. gordon: mr. speaker, i yield to the gentleman from illinois, mr. lipinski, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. lipinski: as unemployment remains painfully high and see our students falling behind in math and science, americans are asking, what can we do to make america better? it is a critical step forward. this approach to research,

education, innovation will lead to a better prepared and better educated domestic work, an economy built for long-term success. i'm particularly grateful for the leadership of chairman bart gordon, the driving force behind both the original competes bill and its re-authorization, who has accomplished much in his 26 years in congress and has fought tirelessly to make congress and all americans realize that science and engineering advancements mean economic growth. as a former college professor and engineer for america manufacturing, i think this bill will have a higher standard of living for future generations. much of the national science foundation title of this bill comes in the research and science tex subcommittee. though as much as i don't like to see, this has a steady responsible research and commercialization. the bill also includes language

based on a genius act i introduced with frank wolf to authorize -- offer cash prizes for solutions to our most difficult scientific problems. perhaps most important are provisiones that will help reinvigorate american manufacturing, including the manufacturing research program, an initiative that helps smaller manufacturers reduce costs and increase quality through high performance commuting. and a bill calls for a national competitiveness strategy that includes some elements of my manufacturing strategy that the house passed this past summer. i urge my colleagues to join me, not only in voting for this today, but also fighting to fully fund it. if we want to maintain our economic strength, we cannot shortchange these critical investments made in this bill for our people or for our research infrastructure. i urge passage of this bill and want to thank chairman bart gordon for all the work in congress and all the things he accomplished which is a great testament to his great leadership.

i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: mr. speaker, i yield to the gentleman from michigan, dr. ehlers, five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. mr. ehlers: irthank the gentleman for yielding. i did not expect to speak. i do not have any prepared comments or notes, but i'm going to speak on the issues of the science which i feel qualified to speak on because i am a scientist, specifically in nuclear physics. i also want to make it clear i have never received any grant money from the n.s.f. when i did research i was supported by the federal government directly or -- that was through the department of energy or by the u.s. navy. the federal government plays an important role in the guiding the economy of our nation. and much of that role is carried

forth by the national science foundation and some of the other funding agencies. let me just give one specific example, one i'm very familiar with because it's related to my area of research. my good friend, charlie towns, who won a nobel prize for developing the laser, discovered some years ago that he could make a laser, microid by stimulated radiation, and he decided he could do it with microwaves and he could do it with lights. he developed a laser and he won the nobel prize. how much money did he get from the federal government for his federal research? i don't know but i guess it's not more than $50,000. how much is that contributed to the economy of this nation? billions and billions of dollars. just like at the laser industry and the use of lasers today in so many ways. huge payoff on government investment in research.

also, we tend to fund the national institutes of health with a healthy amount every year because we're very interested in improving health. how many in this body know that some of the greatest discoveries in health were done by physicists, many of whom are supported by the national science foundation? x-rays. how would we get along without x-rays? discovered by a physicist. a guy from germany. what about the m.r.i.? the basic concepts developed by a physicist. same for the cat scan. basic idea developed by a physicist. not by doctors, not by m.d.'s, but physicists doing basic research. and that's what the national science foundation is all about and that's what keeps our economy stimulated in this nation. we have great to fear from the nation of china. china is investing huge amounts of money in training, more

engineers and scientists far more than we are producing. they are spending a lot of money on research. . 23 we are wondering why they are doing better than we are, it's largely because they are supporting the people who contribute to the development of technology, science, etc. now, i worked on this issue several years ago. i do not claim credit for the competes act, but i did work with a congressman who was sharing the science committee, frank wolf, chair of the appropriations committee dealing with science. at the suggestion of frank wolf, i arranged for a meeting with the white house. i tried to meet with president bush, instead i met with the director of office and management and budget. over breakfast i explained in far more detail than i can do here precisely what this country needed if we are going to compete in the international marketplace.

the director of management and budget said afterwards, you sold me, where are we going to get the money? i i have adecember for that, too, and presented those ideas. in the next state of the union speech president george w. bush developed the idea of the competes act. and it was a delight to work with the white house, with the president, with the office of management and budget in developing the compete act. i know some of you are concerned about some aspects of the compete act as it is before us today. i share some of those concerns, but certainly not all of them. but the basic point here is that if we do not act, we are letting down the manufacturers of america. and i was here for a debate on the rule and i noticed the gentleman from oklahoma come and against this act. we should not be supporting this sort of thing. that's very easy to say if you're representing a state where you simply drill holes in the ground and pull out money

in the form of oil. michigan does not have that. michigan has to work very, very hard to manufacture cars that would sell to the public and get its money. we all know what has happened there over the last few years. i think it's very important that we recognize we are not going to compete successfully in the international marketplace unless we invest more money in research. research which is then used by manufacturers to develop new products and to make money and provide jobs. i strongly urge us to pass this bill. i know it has shortcomings, but a lot of things i'm not happy with, either. but the republicans are taking over next year and we can then proceed to write the bill precisely the way we want it. i urge that we do not kill this bill at this time but rather that we pass it. thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: let me first congratulate dr. ehlers on a stellar congressional career.

his contribution to the science committee was enormous and he will be missed. having spent as much time as i have on the science committee, you develop an affection for the committee, for the people, members, and for the staff. so it is with really gratitude that i know that the gentlelady from texas, ms. eddie bernice johnson, is going to be the ranking member in the coming 112th cock and i yield -- congress, and i yield five minutes. the the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas yielded five minutes. ms. johnson: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i do rise in support of h.r. 5116, the america competes re-authorization act. and i'm proud to say that i worked with dr. ehlers, with our incoming chairman, mr. holt, as well as outgoing chairman. we all know that the re-authorization of america competes is to ensure that our future is more prosperous than

our past. it is about ensuring america's memories honored by investing in dreams that are even higher. the legislation before the u.s. congress today is a message and a message that makes america understand that we are not here just to compete but to lead the 21st century. as a member of the health -- science -- house science and technology committee for 18 years, i'm proud to be an author of this bipartisan legislation. as it returns to the senate, it is not the same deal that we sent over. but nothing is perfect around here and we are not headed in the future to be perfect, but we must stand up and make sure that our responsibilities to our country and to our future will be intact. and so therefore i will support this legislation and hope that we could improve it at another time.

i hope that we can continue to look at what this country needs to do to educate its young people so that we can be in the future. we are losing ground and i hope that we will find ways to regain it. i have in mind to try to bring with the chairman a group of c.e.o.'s, superintendents, teachers, together around the table so we can all understand what we must do to educate our young people for the future if we want to be anywhere near competing with the rest of the world. i'm pleased this bill re-authorizes the norris teacher scholarship program. a program which i helped to shape. this program helps to prepare thousands of qualified new teachers and provides current teachers with academic and professional development

courses. every bit of our research shows that's one of our major problems. we have teachers teaching courses where they have never majored. 70% of them. in this country are teaching courses where they never majored. it is not going to be what we want as long as we have teachers teaching math, science, engineering that have never majored in it in college. we have to have teachers who are more prepared. as women and minorities continue to be underrepresented in the sciences, it's unfortunate that the senate chose to cut out the fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering acts. i sponsored that for two sessions, i will again. i do not believe that we as a nation can compete ever with ignoring the fact that 50% of its brainpower is left behind. i am pleased that this bill does not prohibit -- does

prohibit the consolidation of programs that serve minority institutions and students in the national science foundation. we must be proactive. we have more work to ensure that all americans are afforded the same chance to compete in the 21st century. it is not in your face, it is not a civil rights act, it is to make sure that the majority of the students in this nation become prepared to save this nation. we cannot sit around and think that it's going to happen without effort. we need to help our schools around the nation to elevate them so that they can achieve the standard exemplified by the school of science and engineering in a high school in my district in dallas, texas, which is rated one of the best public schools in the nation. but that's only 20% of the students in the district. we must make sure that that quality of education is offered to all of our students.

i want to commend chairman gordon and ranking member soon-to-be chairman mr. hall for their hard work on the legislation and i believe that if nothing else gels on the committee, looking out for our young people and future of our nation will become really a real goal to achieve because it really represents what is bipartisan. it represents a concerted effort to create a more competitive science and engineering work force. i support this bill, mr. speaker. it is not perfect. but we've got to move on. look to the future. and i thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: mr. speaker, i will yield five minutes to dr. brown, the gentleman from georgia. before -- dr. broun, the gentleman from georgia. before i do i ask unanimous consent to say to my colleague who will be working side by side with me for the next two

years, my neighbor from dallas, i appreciate her, look forward to working with her. she was the very first person when i switched to parties to come in and say it didn't matter to her. i have always appreciated her for that and i still do and i will. dr. browne -- dr. broun. thank you, dr. ehlers, he's done a good job. for him we have gone a long way a lot of times. i yield to the gentleman from georgia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. brown: -- mr. broun: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i rise today in opposition to the senate amendment to h.r. 5116, the america competes re-authorization act of 2010. before sharing my views on this competes re-authorization, i want to take this opportunity to share my frustration and express the frustration of my constituents.

i know that i am not alone in the view that working on consequential pieces of legislation in a lame duck session outside of the proper legislative process is simply wrong. in fact, it could be argued that it's unconstitutional. the 20th amendment to the constitution moved the start date of new congresses from march to january to stop exactly what we are doing here today. passing important legislation in a lame duck session. in 1932 democrat representative cartwright of oklahoma stated this, quote, this amendment will free congress of the dead hand of the so-called lame duck. unquote. sadly he cannot have been more wrong. the democrats use this lame duck session to continue pursuing their rejected agenda. this is no different than a c.e.o. being fired and

continuing to make major decisions for the company that he was just fired from for another two months. we must stop this enron around electoral process and u.s. constitution by prohibiting further lame duck legislation. this competes re-authorization is the perfect example of why we need to end lame duck legislation. it contains reckless spending and miskinded policy initiatives. the closed door process through which it was developed is irresponsible at a time when the federal deficit has ballooned to $1.5 trillion and a national debt will soon eclipse $14 trillion. these unprecedented figures are not deterring our democratic colleagues from authorizing over $45 billion of spending. $7 billion of which is new

spending in this bill. beyond out-of-control spending, a clear shift in policy priorities away from those envisioned in the original competes process now exists in this bill. when the national academy of sciences unveiled a gathering storm report in 2005, it identified funding for long-term basic research as the top priority for science and technology. today's re-authorization emphasizes late stage technology commercialization activities and beyond two manufacturing and construction activities. priorities that should not be the responsibility of the federal government. for example, title 6 of this bill creates a loan guaranteed program to stabilize innovative manufacturing. a loan guarantee program to subsidize construction and renovation of research parks and vaguely defined regional

innovation program to support grants to create innovation clusters as well as con-- construct and renovate research parks. finally, i want to note my disappointment associated with the process on this bill. many republican amendments that were incorporated in the house-passed bill were changed or deleted without any member consultation. this was the case with an amendment i offered prohibiting any lobbying effort associated with activities authorized in the bill. this bill spends money that we don't have. on things we don't need. and in some cases on things the government simply should not be involved in. it is the product of backroom dealings that excluded house republicans and it simply should not pass at this late stage of the 111th congress. i urge opposition to this bill.

i urge a no vote. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: mr. speaker, for the purposes ever unanimous consent -- of unanimous consent, i yield to a very important contributor to this bill, the chairman of the education and labor committee. mr. miller: i thank the chairman for yielding. i ask unanimous consent to rise in support of this act and submit my statement for the record and thank the chairman for all of his work. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. . gordon gordon now, mr. speaker, i -- mr. gordon: now, mr. speaker, i yield to the subcommittee chairman, someone who made a great contribution to this bill, the gentleman from oregon, excuse me, mr. wu. the speaker pro tempore: how much time? mr. gordon: two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. wu: thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this re-authorization bill, and i just want to point out to my friend from georgia that not everything that one is opposed

to is unconstitutional, and i share the gentleman's concern about this lame-duck session, and if the gentleman wanted to propose a constitutional amendment to move our swearing in deet to the first tuesday in november, perhaps his concerns would be addressed. but pending that, we have a lot of legitimate activity for very, very important legislation. and i can think of no greater tribute to the outgoing chairman, mr. gordon, and mr. hall, who has worked with the chairman for a long time on this legislation than the passage of this bill. i'm particularly proud of the contribution that my subcommittee, the technology and innovation subcommittee, has made to this legislation because long-term investment in innovation is absolutely crucial to our nation's global competitiveness, and we have a responsibility to support the kind of economic environment that empowers our nation's private sector to innovate and

create high-wage private sector jobs. the bipartisan legislation we are considering today will strengthen our nation's economic competitiveness by helping to create an environment that encourages innovation and which facilitates growth. as the chairman rightfully pointed out, innovation accounted for greater than 50% of u.s. g.d.p. growth from world war ii to the year 2000, and innovation can help america grow our way out of our current anemic economic state. among other things, the bill makes crucial investments in the manufacturing extension partnership which will help us better address the needs of our nation's small and medium-sized manufacturers. the bill will also help ensure that students and trainees will have what is necessary to secure a good-paying job in their own community by requiring m.e.p. centers to work with community colleges to train for the skills

needed by local manufacturers. madam speaker, america competes -- 30 seconds, mr. chairman. mr. gordon: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. wu: this is great legislation. the chairman has done a great job. i urge passage. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. gordon: i note that wasn't 30 seconds. i'll reclaim what was not used. mr. hall: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to our resident authority on nuclear energy, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. garamendi: i thank you, mr. chairman, madam speaker. i want to commend you, mr. chairman, for an extraordinary piece of work and ranking member hall and the other members of the committee. i came to this committee halfway

through the year, and i was absolutely amazed and delighted to see the intensity of discussions. 35 separate hearings. and my colleague from georgia who thinks we ought to put this off, i cannot imagine leaving a job half done. not half done but 90% done and then let it go after all the work that's been put together here. this is a good bill. i don't ever like what the other house does to my legislation, and i'm sure all of us feel the same way, but what i'd like to point out here in this bill is that there are basically five things that this nation needs to do if we're going to succeed economically. best education, best research, make the things that come from that research, have the infrastructure and then be international. this is about three of those things. three very important things. the education, the stem education is in this legislation. without it we will never be able to compete and we ought not wait until next year to get that going. secondly, with regard to the research.

it is fundamental. i come from california, the great silicon valley and all of those new technologies come from the research at the universities in the surrounding area. this legislation promotes that research agenda across the nation, not just to california but every other research institution throughout the united states. and finally, there's a major piece of this legislation that talks about making it in america. if we're going to have a strong middle class, a strong economy, we must once again make it in america. this legislation provides some fundamental elements necessary for us to do that. for example, the loan guarantee that was degraded just a few moments ago is exceedingly important because that's the valley of death. how does an entrepreneur, how does a new business get through the valley of death? that's what this is about. this legislation also provides a way in which we can coordinate our manufacturing expertise. with that we ought to pass this

bill and acknowledge the enormous amount of work that was done over the last -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. garamendi: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i request the amount of time that i have left remaining. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee has 12 1/2 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from texas has 13 minutes remaining. the chair will receive massachusettsage. the messenger: madam speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed 3181, an act to amend the federal water conserve act in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the

gentlelady from maryland, who's been a very active and articulate member of our committee, ms. edwards. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from maryland is recognized. ms. edwards: thank you, madam speaker, and thank you to the chairman for your service and your leadership and your vision. and i rise today in the strong support that you put in on america competes. it's legislation that's going to usher in a new era of economic leadership and education in our country. i want to highlight an amendment that i offered that will give special consideration to high-need schools and underrepresented students and teachers in stem fellowship grants. we come together to discuss the importance of education, laying the groundwork for economic prosperity. and here america competes is an important step forward to laying that foundation, to ensuring that opportunities provided in this legislation will be available to all of our young people, regardless of race or economic circumstance. this is a game changer, not a hail mary pass but a playoff

strategy for the future and for the long-term success of our children and we need all of these players on the field. so today let's put our shared sentiments into action, sent america competes to the president's desk so we can continue to generate competitiveness, creating high-wage jobs and educating and preparing all our young people for the future, and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserves. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam chairman, i yield another minute to an active member of our committee from michigan who has been active in the advanced vehicle technology, mr. peters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. peters: madam speaker, the america competes act supports american manufacturing, innovation and global competitiveness. competes recognizes the challenges facing america's 21st century manufacturers as well as the importance of healthy

manufacturing base. the bill includes new manufacturing loan guarantees, groffed research and development and strengthens -- improved research and development. the bill places a much-needed emphasis on science education from grade school to the university levels. we need a highly educated work force to advance the next vehicle technology or another innovative product that will produce high-quality jobs in america. competes supports innovative clusters around the country and creates a focus of innovation within our federal programs and agencies. america simply cannot afford to sacrifice its innovative edge to growing economies like china and india. the investments made by competes are critical to america's long-term economic health, and i hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i continue to reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko, who has brought his energy expertise to our committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. tonko: thank you. i rise today in support of the america competes act. a debate that has continued for many months and negotiations have followed and we're finally one step away from this bipartisan victory. this legislation will create prosperity through science and innovation, reassert our economic and technological leadership throughout the world and give future generations greater opportunity to achieve the american dream for decades to come. i have seen firsthand the impact science and innovation can have in our communities. recently the albany, new york, area in my district was named the third fastest growing high-tech job market in the country. this growth, coupled with today's legislation, is vital if the capital region of new york and the rest of our nation are to continue on a path toward an

innovation economy that, quote, makes it in america. we must also educate the next generation of mathematicians and scientists. this bill does that by providing opportunities for stem students to participate in hands on scientific research. finally, i would like to thank chairman gordon for his leadership on this issue. without his tireless work and that of the committee staff, along with ranking member hall, we would not be here today. mr. chair, you and your leadership will be southerly missed. i wish -- will be sorely missed. with that i wish you the best. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to an alumnus of our committee, the gentlelady from texas, ms. sheila jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker, i ask to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker,

let me personally thank you for your leadership and continued focus on important issues here in this congress. i rise today to celebrate and to thank the chairman of the science committee, chairman gordon, for his years of commitment and intensity as it relates to the importance of this work. and i also add my appreciation to chairman-elect hall, whom i have worked with, as i did congressman gordon, for some 12 years on the science committee and once on the science committee one can never leave its values and its importance. as i sat on the science committee in the end of the 20th century, i always said that science was the work of the 21st century. and although bills are not perfect, and this bill that's come over from the other body is not, it is where we need to go. and i would simply remind my colleagues of the history of the model t when henry ford

developed the model t, that technology generated into an enormous industry in the united states that created new technology and millions of jobs, i might say. and so here we are today with a great need to reignite, restart our manufacturing journey, and i'm delighted that this bill has seen the vision of getting elementary, middle school, high school students involved in the sciences. that's where our achilles' heel are. that's where the vision comes to invent things, to make things, to develop. the next generation of jobs. and so it establishes an interagency with stem education coordination committee. it proadvise an interagency committee for coordination of manufacturing r&d. and to listen to my colleagues talk about subsidy, do they realize that every country around the world is subsidizing their manufacturing to make them

more competitive, to have a greater competitive edge? there's nothing wrong with creating jobs for america. can i have an additional -- i thank the distinguished gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is acknowledged for two more minutes. ms. jackson lee: there's nothing wrong with us subsidizing good work, good science, the opportunity for jobs. i don't know what the structure was. maybe i'll go and research it, what happened with henry ford. i'm sure in those days he put together his family's pennies, he made the model t and here we are today. well, we live in a different economy. we live in a changing time of the dollar, and we live in a time when our countries have no shame in subsidizing business. we're on floor earlier today where germany is subsidizing airbus. that's their right. but the question is, what are we doing to promote manufacturing? this re-authorizing the national science foundation, authorizes grants and manufacturing

research and education. that's a good thing. it authorizes program grants for 21st century graduate education and as well it authorizes program dealing with research for undergraduates. that's exciting. innovation is part of what happens here. and then, of course, it authorizes research experiences for high school students as part of the research grant. so overall i guess my bottom line is i'm ready to go. i'm excited about the opportunities in the 21st century. i want us making things again. whether it's submarines, whether it's airplanes, whether it's new technology for our military personnel, whether or not it's a new space shuttle, a c.e.v., i want us to make things again. that's how you put people back to work. that's how you keep people's minds churning. what's the next invention i can get? there's no shame for subsidizing this work, and i'm delighted that not only are we doing that when we expand the manufacturing loan guarantee program to small and medium-sized manufacturers.

i tell my colleagues, these companies are out here waiting. they want to get going. there's unlimited opportunity for access to credit. i tell you they are excited about this opportunity. government not involved in helping their country go forward in manufacturing? whoever heard of that. that's what everybody else is doing. it's time for us to stand up as well. so let me thank you, chairman gordon, for service, and i know that you're going on to great things. thank you for allowing me to share some time with you on the science committee and the same to chairman hall. again, vote for this. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. . the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to our example of the benefits of stem education, the gentleman from new jersey, dr. holt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. holt: madam speaker, i thank the chairman. for decades it's been clear that our investments in scientific research and education underwrite our national prosperity. yet we have continued to underinvest in these economic

drivers. the national academy has issued a call for action five years ago with rising above the gathering storm. and congress responded by holding a number of national town meetings, arranged by then minority leader pelosi. and then passing the america competes act under the leadership of chairman gordon. that legislation is now set to expire. and the national academy has issued an update on our progress. it is an ominous warning. it says, bluntly, quote, our nation's outlook has worsened, end quote. now, as a member who has conducted n.s.f. funded research and who continually argues that our economic health depends on investment in research, i would have preferred the moreau bust funding authorization levels passed by this house earlier this year. however this legislation does maintain a 10-year doubling path for funding for our basic research agencies.

i'm especially pleased the bill requires the development of a comprehensive national competitiveness and innovation strategy, a provision i wrote. the nations that are outcompeting us already have national innovation strategies in place. we should, too. to guarantee a secure economic future for our children and our nation, we must not fail to provide robust funding forethe programs in this legislation. -- for the programs in this legislation. i want to commend chairman gordon for writing and taking action on this legislation. it is another part of a good legacy of his distinguished career. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield one minute to our great majority leader and my great friend, steny hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. hoyer: thank you very much,

speaker halvorson, i appreciate your presiding over this historic piece of legislation. i want to thank my friend, bart gordon, chairman gordon has been an extraordinary leader of this committee. extraordinary member of the energy and commerce committee, and in both of those venues he's focused on making sure that america could, in fact, compete. and compete successfully. be the great nation it has been, is now, and will continue to be as long as we keep investing in that which grows an economy, education, science, mathematics, engineering. i know he has worked with some of the great industrial leaders of our nation on this legislation. mr. augustine comes to mine. we are very proud of him in maryland. i want you to know how proud i am of bart gorton.

he said i was one of his close friends. i think he's one of the closest friends not just in congress but life. he and i have been here a long time together. the good news is the ranking used to be democrat now republican ralph hall is also a very close and dear friend of mine whom i have known all of my service here. he and i came together in the same class. he's a very good friend of bob schlegel who is a good friend of mine as well. i want to thank him for his service to our country. the america competes act expands support for research and development, helping the united states to remain the world's innovation leader. it creates jobs for the short term and lays foundation for long-term prosperity. that is its key, of course. it is an important part of the make it in america agenda. a series of important bills

designed to help america regain its manufacturing strength. let me say just a word about make it in america. earlier on about made in america, things that were made yesterday in america, things that we did in the past, make it in america is about what we are going to do in the future. make it in america is a nonidea logical, nonparty, nonpartisan premise and that premises is i shared widely by the american public if we are going to be successful in the future and continue to grow our economy, it's going to be in part because we make it in america. we make things in america. we manufacture things in america. we grow it in america and sell it abroad. our products, whether they be hard products or soft products. we sell them throughout the world. america is one of -- is the

inknow vative center of the world. one of the enterprising nations of the world. we invent things, innovate, and bring to scale. strike that, we don't bring them to scale often enough. andy grove, who was one of the co-founders of intel, wrote an excellent article in "the new yorker." i tell my friends on the republican side and democratic side, this is an issue that could bring us together to make america better. to grow america. to provide the kinds of jobs that americans need. make it in america. not only means manufacturing in america. that we make it, we succeed, people believe and have the confidence there will be an american economy which will provide them with jobs and they'll be able to provide for themselves and their families. this is a significant step in

making sure that america makes it in america. one of the things andy grove said in his article was that the problem that we have is, innovation, invention, enterprise exist here more than any other place in the world. but what we are doing is we are inventing, innovating, enterpridesing and taking it overseas to take it to scale, to manufacture it. the kindle, i bought one for my grandson last christmas. about $185, about $40 to $45 of those dollars are u.s. the rest is overseas. andy grove's premise is if we do that, what is essentially going to happen over the years is the innovators and the enterprisers and the inventers are going to follow where we are making it. whether it's in china or any

other place. america, we cannot let that happen. this bill is a critical step in ensuring america's prosperity and job creating capacity in the long term. bart gordon, congratulations to you. you will leave here in a few days. you will not be a member of the congress of the united states. you'll never leave here in the sense that you will always be in our hearts and you're going to be on this floor. we'll see you regularly. but you will leave an extraordinary legacy for your country for decades and a century to come in this bill. the bill establishes innovative technology, federal loan guarantees for small and medium-sized manufacturers. make it in america. those loans will help american businesses respond to the needs of a changing economy. increased productivity, and keep pace with overseas competition. further, the competes act makes

important investments in science, technology, engineering, and math as i said earlier, because helping our children excel in these fields is absolutely crucial to our economic competitiveness. finally, the bill strengthens the crucial national science foundation. funds cutting-edge research which funds qutting-edge research in fields from computer science to mathematics to genomics. that's our future. america does it well. let's do it here. let's make sure we are investing so that that will be the future as well as the present. federal support for research and innovation is one of the best investments we can make. federal support helped create g.p.s., the computer mouse, computer aided design, and internet. and there is no telling the ways in which it might shape our lives in the years to come. but surely there is no doubt that shape it it will.

and that's why we must invest. i urge my colleagues to boost american innovation by supporting this bill. and i end again as i started by congratulating bart gordon, my good friend, an individual who has given so much to his country for so long. an individual that makes us proud to be his colleague and who has given added luster to service in this house by his own service. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, we sometimes throw the term friend around here a lot. i do thank very much the majority leader for his friendship. i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the co-chair of the new democrats, who are our leaders of innovation policy, from wisconsin, mr. ron kind.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. kind: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kind: thank you, madam speaker. as one of the co-chairs of the new democratic coalition, i do rise in strong support of the re-authorization america competes act. and mend the chairman of the sigh -- science committee for his tenacious focus on making sure that america competes gets re-authorized in this session of congress and working with the senate in the waning days of this session to get it done. we are sorely going to miss his leadership on this issue, subject, as well as the leadership of our colleague from the state of michigan, mr. ehlers, who has given tremendous guidance on what it means for the united states to remain the most innovative and creative nation in the world. that's what america competes is all about. it's answering the question of whether or not we will remain the most innovative and on the cutting-edge of scientific, technology, manufacturing discoveries and break throughs -- breakthroughs, or continue

our slide in the investments we are seeing overseas. it builds on seminal studies by the national academy of sciences, gathering above the rising storm. even before that the john glenn commission before its too late warning us of the peril of losing our innovation and competitiveness if we continue to underinvest in the most crucial stem studies, science, technology, engineering, math. or the investments we have to make in basic and applied research which we accomplish in this bill through the national science foundation, national institute of science and technology. the program at the department of energy. new programs now at noaa and nasa, and now directing the department of commerce to come up after one year with an actionable plan of how all this comes together. i wonder if i have one more addition alt -- additional minute. can the gentleman yield me a minute? mr. hall: i yield the gentleman two minutes. mr. kind: i thank my colleague for yielding me the time. it really speaks to the

question many americans have on their minds as we continue our slow emergence of the worst economic recession since the great depression and that is where are we going as a nation economically and how are we going to get there? america competes act is a part of that equation. not only spurring the innovation that we need this this country, but helping to make sure that we make those products in this country, along with the good-paying jobs that come from it. will this be the end of the innovation agenda? i think not. but it's an important step forward. one that received huge bipartisan support in the previous congress with 357 of our colleagues supporting the original authorization of america competes. i commend former president bush and current president obama for recognizing the need for this type of legislation and all the members on the science and education committee that had a tremendous say in the product that's before us today. it's worthy of our support. more importantly it's worthy of a great nation, a great economy

that we can build upon. i encourage my colleagues to support the america competes re-authorization and the work that we have before us. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, how much -- i inquire how much i have left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee has 3 1/2 minutes. . mr. gordon: madam speaker, on many occasions, i heard our speaker, nancy pelosi, talk about the future of our nation. when she talks about the future of our nation she said there's three things we need to do -- science, science, science. she believes it. she has led us in that direction, and i yield one minute to the speaker of the house of representatives, nancy pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker of the house is recognized. the speaker: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and for his kind words. most especially i thank him for his great leadership. few people have ever served in

this congress and outside the congress have done more than promote that science, science, science, science agenda than bart gordon. sadly for that issue, mr. gordon, this will be the last bill that he'll bring to the floor, and i want to take the occasion to thank him for his tremendous leadership as chair of the science and technology committee. when the report came out about the gathering storm, he was the first to say we need this -- we need to not only respond to it, he had already taken initiative recognizing what would be in that report seeing what was happening to science, technology, engineering, math, all the rest of it in our country. his departure from the congress is a loss for us, but i know he takes with him this passion he has for science.

it has something that has served our country well in the congress, and i know he'll continue to do so outside the congress. so, mr. gordon, thank you for your tremendous leadership. i know i speak for everyone here when i say it is an honor to call you colleague. and that today would be today toward the end of this session that we would be taking up your bill. this is your bill, mr. chairman. on these occasions i am reminded of, madam speaker, that nearly 50 years ago in launching the initiative to send a man to the moon and back safely within 10 years president kennedy summed up america's common commitment to innovation and competitiveness when he said the bows of this nation can be fulfilled only if we are first and we, therefore, intend to be first. our leadership in science and industry, he said, our hopes for peace and security, our

obligations to ourselves as well as others all require us to make this effort. over half a century later since then americans have lived up to those words. science and technological innovation have formed the backbone of our progress as a people and our prosperity as a nation. and today we have the opportunity to play one more part in that same tradition to support the competes act, to reaffirm our leadership in science and technology, to keep america first. again, few have done more for this cause than chairman bart gordon who recognized the urgency of this challenge early on and has never stopped fighting to keep science and technology at the top of our agenda. and to the distinguished ranking member, i don't think one of the beauties of this agenda is innovation -- this innovation agenda is there's nothing

partisan about it. it isn't ideological. it's scientific. it is about keeping america number one and using the best resources intellectually in our country, technologically to have us be competitive in the world economy. in acting to update and extend the competes act, we will spur innovation, invest in cutting edge research, modernize manufacturing and increase opportunity. you know the provisions. others have spoken to them. mr. kind spoke about the importance of stem education, science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and how important that is. not only to the fulfillment of the people, our students, but also to our competitiveness internationally, the success of our economy. with this bill we will lay the foundation further for new industries that provide good jobs for our workers that open

new markets for our american markets, that offer more students, more young people and entrepreneurs a better chance to live out the american dream. simply put, we will continue to rise above the gathering storm and keep america number one. the competes act is a central component of our innovation agenda. five years ago we ensured our commuck competitiveness around the globe and double basic research funding. yes, as has been mentioned, the competes act was signed by president bush and now signed by president obama. it was until we got into the recovery act that we were able to get the substantial funding to move forward with these initiatives. we had little downtime before that, but we got serious about our commitment in the recovery act. as part of that effort, again, we passed a recovery act investing $17 billion for basic

research, $17 billion for basic research. $19 billion to promote the adoption of health i.t. we dedicated $11 billion to improve our smart grid capabilities and provided more than $7 billion to expand broadband access nationwide, very important for us to do so in rural areas. through a series of actions, the democratic-led congress has extended broadband to rural and underserved areas, invested in clean energy jobs and energy independence and helped spur the development of new technologies. the america competes act builds on that record of achievement. the bill is about good-paying jobs for american workers, strong american leadership in the global economy and investment in america's students and long-term prosperity for america's families and businesses. as was mentioned by mr. kind,

this bill passed the first time with overwhelming bipartisan support. i think the majority of republicans voted for the bill the first time it was put forth, and now we are re-authorizing it. and what we're doing today is about echoing president kennedy's call, once more, to fulfill our nation to strengthen america's future to be first. in voting aye today we can come together for innovation, for competitiveness and for our prosperity. i urge all of our colleagues to support the re-authorization of the america competes act, and as i close i once again want to salute chairman bart gordon for his tremendous, tremendous leadership. he has a wealth of knowledge, depth of understanding, boundless commitment to the future. thank you, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from texas. mr. hall: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. hinojosa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hinojosa: madam speaker, i rise today to urge my colleagues to support the senate amendment to h.r. 5116, the america competes act. chairman bart gordon and congressman ralph hall, i commend you for bringing this legislation to the floor. more than ever, our nation must be investing in the scientific block that bolster's america competitiveness in a 21st century global industry. the america competes re-authorization act of 2010 achieves this and by fostering innovation supporting manufacturers and industry,

preparing a stem work force and helping jobs. it helps women in stem fields. i want to recognize representatives eddie bernice johnson, ben lujan, sill vessey reyes, the members of the tri caucus in championing diversity issues in this re-authorization act. as subcommittee chairman for high education, lifelong learning and competitiveness, i am pleased that america competes will more fully integrate our nation's minority serving institutions into research, partnerships and federal programs and promote the inclusion and success of minorities in the stem fields. establishing strong regional university and industry partnerships at research and innovation at the national science foundation will spur economic growth and connect students to high-tech jobs.

i ask the gentleman, congressman ralph hall from texas, for one additional minute. mr. hall: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman. mr. hinojosa: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hinojosa: this bill will expand undergraduate research opportunities for women, minorities and persons with disabilities at the national science foundation. hands on learning experiences are the key to improving the recruitment and retention of underrepresented students in the stem fields and in preparing a new generation of scientists who will -- who will contribute to our nation's technological innovation and competitiveness. this bill compliments our work on the student aid and fiscal responsibility act, known as safra, enacted as part of the health care and education reconciliation act of 2010 in our efforts to improve science and math literacy in our nation's public schools. i strongly urge our colleagues to support senate amendment to

h.r. 5116. i again compliment chairman bart gordon for his tremendous leadership. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, i have no further speakers, and i would yield to -- ask mr. hall if he has any final comments. mr. hall: no, i have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. hall: i do yield myself the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hall: madam speaker, i reiterate and i remain committed to the underlying goals of an america competes act and believe that we ought to continue prioritize our investments in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, stem research and development, these long-term investments coupled with policies that reduce tax burdens, streamline federal regulations and balance the federal budget are necessary steps for our nation to resume a competitive and remain competitive in the global marketplace.

i hope my colleagues will join me in seeking to do just that when the 112 congress convenes. in the meantime, i thank everybody involved. i must regretfully oppose this amendment and i do yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from tennessee. mr. gordon: madam speaker, in closing let me just once again thank the members and staff on a bicameral, bipartisan basis that have done so much to bring this excellent piece of legislation to the floor. i doubt there's ever been a piece of legislation that has had as much outward support from the business community, the scientific community. it's a good bill. it will help move our country forward. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 1-c of rule -- all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 1781, the previous question is

ordered. pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 306-k of the public health service act, 14 u.s.c., 14, and pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair announces the speaker's appointment of the

following member to the national committee on vital and health statistics for a term of four years. pursuant to section 5605 of the patient protection and affordable health act, public law 111-148, and the order of the house of january 6, 2009, the chair announces the speaker's appointment of the following members to the commission on key national indicators. the clerk: dr. steven hinz of new york, new york, and in addition, dr. marta tienda of princeton, new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 2965, an act to

amend the small business act with respect to the small business innovation research program and the small business technology transfer program, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. cuellar: i ask unanimous consent that the speaker postpone proceedings on the following measures under clause 8-a, 1-a, motions to concur? senate amendment h.r. 2142 and h.r. 2751. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. cuellar: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution 1781, i call up the bill h.r.

2142 with the senate amendment thereto and i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: setting the senate amendments and designate the motion. the clerk: h.r. 2142, an act to require quarterly performance assessments of government programs for purposes of assessing agency performance and improvement and to establish agency performance improvement officers and the performance improvement council. senate amendment, mr. cuellar moves that the house concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 2142. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 1781, the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and government reform. the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar, and the gentleman from california, mr. issa, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the

gentleman from texas. mr. cuellar: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. cuellar: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. cuellar: thank you, madam speaker. h.r. 2142, the government efficiency and effectiveness and performance improvement act would do just what the title of the bill says, this bill will make the federal government more effective, more efficient, and improve the performance of federal agencies. this bill is a sweeping move to increase transparency and accountability by requiring federal agencies to establish performance goals that can be measured and reported to congress and to taxpayers. no one can afford to waste money, especially not the government and especially not now. it's time that we put a new system in place to review the results of each federal program and evaluate the effectiveness.

the message is simple, better information yields better decisions. this legislation will help congress invest in what works, fix what doesn't, and eliminate wasteful overlap. this will make our federal government more results oriented. this is a commonsense bill that received wide bipartisan support. the committee on oversight and government reform approved h.r. 2142 by a voice vote on may 20, 2010. the house passed this vote by voice vote on june 16, 2010, and the senate amendment amended the bill and passed it by unanimous consent on december 16, 2010. h.r. 2142 modernizes the government's perform answer results act of 1993. we have learned a lot in the past 17 years. it is time that we applied those lessons that we have learned so that the agencies in congress can have the information to make good decisions. h.r. 2142 improffers the 1993 law by requiring agencies to

identify ambitious goals and to perform frequent performance reviews. with this bill we can hold agencies more accountable by requiring them to consider input from congress and members of the public when developing program goals. the public can now have an input for the first time. just imagine that. the general public will have a say so in developing federal agencies' goals. some changes were made to the bill during the consideration by the senate and i support those changes which i believe will enhance and strengthen the bill. under the senate amendments, o.m.b. is required to develop a federal government performance band that addresses program efforts across agencies. it is also required to work with agencies to develop federal program priority goals that cut across different agencies and measure progress toward meeting those goals. this will help agencies avoid duplicating efforts and to become more efficient.

duplication and overlap at a time when so many americans are struggling to make ends meet isn't just a waste of resources. it's shameful. the senate amendment also established the position of chief operating officer in the 24 biggest agencies. key provisions for the bill are still intact. such as the establishment of performance improvement officers at each agency and establishment of performance improvement council. this provision codified in executive order issued by president george w. bush. and also in the house passed bill o.m.b. and the agencies are required to improve transparency of improvement reviews by making results available on line. senator coburn had an amendment mechanism to the bill that provides for increasingly stringent requirements for agencies that do not meet performance goals which can ultimately end for nonperforming agencies or program budget reduction or

even elimination. the congressional budget office estimates the implementation of the bill as amended by the senate will cost about $15 million a year. this bill does not have any mandatory spending requirements and it does not violate pay-go. also c.b.o. as you know does not estimate the cost savings that would have been generated by this bill. agencies will save money by identifying wasteful practices, consolidating and eliminating unnecessary reporting will also save taxpayers dollars. h.r. 2142 will make the government more cost-effective because it will require agencies to evaluate their performance. this will allow agencies to identify waste and inefficiencies and change what isn't working. this is what successful corporations in the private sector do regularly and this is what the government should do also. president bush top performance management official wrote in a letter supporting this

legislation in a bipartisan way, quote, i let performance measures during my tenure in the george w. bush administration, additionally while republican staff member in the legislative branch i oversaw agency's reports to measure and improve their performance. the provisions of this bill would greatly enhance this of effort had been in place nor some time. this is a timely, commonsense bill and i urge all members to join me in a bipartisan way in supporting this legislation. madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. issa: i ask the majority if they would provide us with that letter so we could review when it was written. and be more educated. thank you. madam speaker, merry christmas. but today is groundhog day. i know it is because we are getting the same bill we got

last week. it looks the same. matter of fact, it's so much the same that i recognized it from an earlier document. the president's budget. his package on performance and management the president had already determined to do pretty much what we are putting here. matter of fact, we are codifying in statute plus throwing in $75 million of additional cost what the president already was doing. we are not giving him anything he doesn't already have authority for and is doing. really what we are doing is simply allowing the president to say, it's ok for me to spend $75 million more on what i already wanted to do. it's ok because i'm under this mandate of congress. it's ok for this congress to go sine die really talking about things they were accomplishing when this doesn't accomplish anything. i'll be voting against this because i don't want to spend

$75 million doing what the president already put in his own document. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that this excerpt from the president's performance and management review be placed in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. issa: thank you, madam speaker. mr. cuellar did a good job last week in the first of these two appearances on the same bill. he said it was something he really wanted to pass. he said it was his bill. i don't think the fact that it's amended would make it less his bill, but it isn't his bill, really, it's written by the administration, codified by the senate, and sent over to us in the 11th hour when in fact it could in the next congress actually go through a review process to see if we could actually mandate something more than what the president's doing if we should mandate what the president is already doing, or quite frankly if we should tie the hands of the next president

by simply codifying the elective actions of this president. now, there was a letter that came purr for thedly, i'm sure it did, from somebody in the bush administration and i'll be interested to see when it was written. this president has systematically chosen to make changes in how the last president did performance. i'm not going to say that president bush was the best or that what president obama is doing is different. but there are differences and these differences are the elect ive right of the president to do these. with all due respect, madam speaker, i will still be voting no on this second groundhog day on this bill. i will still believe that if we had a chance in the next congress we could have done better and would have done better. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the chair will receive a message from the senate. the messenger: madam speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam

secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has agreed to the house amendment to the senate amendment with an amendment to h.r. 3082, an act making appropriations for military construction, department of veterans affairs, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010, and for other purposes in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. cuellar: thank you. again i want to thank the ranking member. the letter was written by rob buchet who worked with president bush. it was written in june of this year. mr. shea still supports the bill as has been passed by the senate. again when the bill first passed here, this was the bill that did get some changes. i believe the major change that the gentleman is referring to is a provision that he authored that would have required agencies to evaluate

performance goals twice a year. those provisions added significantly the cost of the bill and when his bill first passed the house it had $150 million cost. by taking those provisions, it was reduced down to $75 million which is $50 million a year. this is a bipartisan bill that updates the 1993 legislation. the original co-sponsors includes myself, several other members including congressman platts, congressman mccaul, in the senate senator collins, warner, who took the lead on in, carper, akaka, senator lieberman, and basically mr. coburn, senator coburn who added an amendment. members, this is a bipartisan bill. we are-l not add a single penny to the deficit t will save taxpayers dollars.

i would ask support of this. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. issa: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent we now suspend these and go to the bill that has been received from the senate. obviously the american people are desperately waiting to see us fund a government that is going without money as of midnight tonight and respectfully say it is appropriate to take up the business of the funding of this government at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would entertain this request only if the gentleman from texas yields. mr. issa: would the gentleman from texas yield for the important work of the american people? mr. cuellar: you yield -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. mr. cuellar: i do object -- the speaker pro tempore: the

chair did not hear the gentleman from texas' response. mr. cuellar: the gentleman objects. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the gentleman will suspend. mr. issa: point of order of order. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas to reclaim his time. the gentleman is recognized. mr. issa: thank you. point of order, i believe that the gentleman from texas -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his point of order. mr. issa: i believe the gentleman yielded time upon your request that he would only -- you would only consider my request to move to the business of appropriating for this coming fiscal year, this current fiscal year. that motion is still there. he yielded. i would like that motion to be heard that we suspend this and move to the business of appropriations for this fiscal year. the speaker pro tempore: the chair heard objection from the gentleman from texas. mr. issa: i hereby move not

unanimous consent that we do so. i make a motion that we suspend and that we move to the business of the american people's funding for this fiscal year. the speaker pro tempore: the chair advises the gentleman that motion is not in order. the chair continues to recognize the gentleman from california for purposes of debate on the pending resolution. mr. issa: i thank the speaker. . madam speaker, when robert johnson shea recommended this bill before us it wasn't this bill before us. this is a completely different bill dramatically changed. so i believe that when people who will come and vote on this consider this they should discount completely a recommendation from a bush administration official that speaks to a bill that mr. cuellar authored which bears very little resemblance to this one. as i said earlier, this bill today simply puts into statute what the president is already on an elected basis doing, ties the

hands of a future president without providing any new authority for the president to do a better job. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. cuellar: again, mr. shea, a bush appointee, supports this bill, even as it passed the senate. again, this is a bipartisan bill supported by both democrats and republicans, and i ask support of this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. i reserve the balance of my time to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. issa: i thank you, madam speaker. i think all was said that needed to be said in the 15 minutes assigned last week. the only thing that can be said in my closing is we're better than this, madam speaker. we should not accept something on a closed rule without any possibility of amendment when in fact the senate took what we had

passed, completely amended it and sent it back completely different. madam speaker, i know that process is not something that's often talked about on this floor as though it's important. but, madam speaker, in the next congress it is clear that process is important, that we not take what the senate takes, allows them to take it back bearing no resemblance. if this bill is so important that mr. cuellar says and passed in a lame-duck session of congress, then, madam speaker, isn't it important that it should have been through a conference process or that the leadership should have come to the committee of jurisdiction and at least asked us what needed to be changed in order to get our support? they didn't have that support. like any bill you'll pick off a few texans for a texans' bill or you pick off a few members.

that doesn't make it bipartisan. it certainly wasn't bicameral when in fact mr. cuellar's bill was rewritten in the senate, rewritten by the white house, as far as i can tell, to look more like his budget process procedures he wrote. madam speaker, we're better than that. in the next congress i certainly believe if the house and senate have differences of opinion it is appropriate that it be worked out through a process of conference and not simply take what the senate sends in a closed rule without anything but meaningless debate. and, madam speaker, debate without the opportunity to change one line is talking about a forgone conclusion. last friday the votes were counted. with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time hopefully for this lame-duck session.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. cuellar: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the gentleman for being brief. i wrote my dissertation in a comparative study of 50 states. i added 99% of all proposed budget in texas when right before bush -- president bush was the governor there. i know this legislation, and this legislation is probably the largest change we've had since 1993. members, it's a bipartisan bill, supported by both democrats and republicans in the house and the senate. so, madam speaker, i, again, i believe the gentleman has yielded -- the gentleman has yielded. so, madam speaker, i encourage all members to support h.r. 2142. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back his remaining time. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 1781 the previous question is

ordered. the question is on the motion by the gentleman from texas, mr. cuellar. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to and without objection -- mr. issa: madam speaker, on this i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to the order of the house of today, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to house resolution 1781, i call up h.r. 2571 with the senate amendments thereto and i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill, designate the senate amendment and designate the motion. the clerk: h.r. 2751, an act to accelerate motor fuel savings nationwide and provide incentives to registered owners of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient and less polluting automobiles. senate amendments. mr. dingell of michigan that the house concur in the senate amendments to h.r. 2751. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 1781, the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divide and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority

member of the energy and commerce -- committee of energy and commerce. the gentleman from michigan, mr. dingell, and the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous matter into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i now yield to the distinguished chairman to the committee of energy and commerce, mr. waxman, four minutes to speak on behalf of the legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, is recognized for four minutes. mr. waxman: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. dingell, i appreciate you yielding to me. i want to commend you, representative delauro, congressman pallone and stupak, mr. barton, mr. shimkus and former representative deal for the work on this legislation.

for a third time today the house considers legislation that will dramatically improve the safety of our nation's food supply. the house first passed this bill in july, 2009, on a strong bipartisan vote with 283 supporters. on november 30 of this year, the senate passed the f.d.a. food safety modernization act on a strong bipartisan basis by a vote of 73-25. that bill contains some constitutional defects that needed to be fixed, so on sunday night the senate again passed a corrected version of the bill by voice vote. congress has demonstrated that food safety is a bipartisan issue. food-borne illnesses can strike each and every one of us. in recent years, foods we never would have imagined to be unsafe, everything from spinach to peanut butter have sickened

an untold of americans. it's time once and for all to enact this legislation. there is no time for any further delay. f.d.a. needs a modern set of authorities to deal with the effects of our increasingly globalized food supply. this legislation will give f.d.a. the tools and resources it needs to better police the safety of the foods we eat every day. the bill makes significant improvements throughout the food chain, from the farm to the dinner table. the bill will require farmers to comply with science-based standards for safe production and harvesting. companies that process or package foods will be required to implement preventive systems to stop outbreaks before they occur. importers will have to demonstrate that the food they bring into this country is safe, and the bill strengthens f.d.a. enforcement authorities giving f.d.a. the ability to order a food recall when companies refuse to voluntary do so.

many of us in the house would agree that our bill was stronger. we also would likely agree that it's regrettable there was no time for a conference to allow us to make some improvements in the senate bill. but this is an opportunity that will not come again for a long time. there is no question this is a good bill and that it will provide f.d.a. with some critical new authorities. it will fundamentally shift our food safety oversight system to one that is preventive in nature as opposed to reactive. we simply must take this chance to make our food supply safer. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on h.r. 2751 and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. pitts. mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pitts: thank you, mr. speaker. at the energy and commerce committee, food safety has been a bipartisan priority. we've held numerous hearings

during the last two congresses, examining food safety problems involving peppers and peanut butter and what we can do to solve those problems. during those hearings we have heard about how much work our nation's farmers, manufacturers and distributors do to put low-cost, high-quality food on the tables of more than 300 million people every day. we also have heard about how much our nation's children and our nation's farmers and small businesses can be hurt when one irresponsible act sells contaminated food. due to the hard work by our committee members, we were able to come up with some good ideas to help solve those food safety problems. those ideas were found in the food safety enhancement act, which passed the house in july of 2009, and represented the

bipartisan work of chairman waxman, chairman emeritus dingell, chairman pallone, chairman stupak, governor-elect deal and ranking member shimkus. the food safety enhancement act passed more than 16 months ago. the senate finally passed its food safety bill, the food safety modernization act, senate 510, during the lame-duck session. the provisions of senate 510 are contained in the bill that we're considering today with no substantive changes from what passed the senate three weeks ago. i intend to vote against this bill because it represents such a gross departure from reasonable legislating. when the senate passed its food safety bill three weeks ago, we asked our majority to take the bill to conference. instead, we are forced to vote on the senate bill with no

substantive changes as part of the continuing resolution two weeks ago. during the 111th congress we have learned a great deal about how not to do things, and this bill presents us with another example. instead of just taking up the senate bill, we should have held a conference. we have been told we couldn't do that because there wasn't enough time. well, instead of naming post offices, we should have rolled up our sleeves and gotten to work on negotiating, and now three weeks and many post offices later the majority says we have to take it or leave it. one provision that raises question is the so-called tester amendment that was added to the senate food safety bill. this provision will provide exemptions from food safety requirements based on a facilities or a farm's size -- a facility's or a farm's size. while we don't want to overly

burden facilities and small farms, we learned in our committee hearings that food borne pathogens don't care if you are a big facility or big farm, small facility or small farm. it affects everyone. it can cause hundreds of illnesses and hundreds of millions of dollars in economic losses for farmers and small businesses. . by allowing facility exemptions from food safety requirements, we are setting our nation up for the potential of future outbreaks. our system is only as strong as it's weekest link and the tester amendment will set up a system full of weak links. this is just one example of the potential problems with this bill. these are problems we could have addressed through a conference, but instead we wasted three weeks and are being told take it or leave it. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this legislation so we can do it the right way in the next congress. i reserve the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i yield to the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, chairman dingell. i want to thank you for all the hard work you put in on this bill and also chairman waxman. we work on a bipartisan basis. i rise today in strong support of the food safety modernization act. after two years of hard work, we are finally on the cusp of enacting landmark comprehensive food safety legislation. the modernization of our food safety system is desperately needed. the current food regulatory regime was established in 1938 and hasn't been overhauled in 70 years. since this time the u.s. food supply has evolve food a global network made up of foreign products, processors, and growers over whom the u.s. has little or no control.

think about what a different world it was in 1938. that alone should be reason enough to update our food safety laws today. every time we have a food safety crisis, be it eggs or spinach or peppers or peanuts, we shake our heads at the volume nerblet of our food supply and -- vulnerability of our food supply and beknown the -- bemoan the fact we don't have the tools to protect it. millions of americans are sickened from contaminated food and as many as three to 5,000 of these people die. the food safety modernization act would give the f.d.a. the ability, resources to protect american consumers from contaminated food domestically and aproduct. f.d.a. will assure more food safety through food processing facilities, the development of a food trade fax system to pin point the source of illnesses, and enhance powers a sure imported foods are safe. most notably the bill emphasizes prevention and safety that helps ensure that food is safety, before it's

distributed, before it reaches the kitchens of american families. we have the most productive, most efficient food distribution system in the world, but we need to make sure we have the safest food supply. american families need to know the food they select from grocery stores and the meals they put on the kitchen tables are safe. i'll say the bill before us isn't perfect but it is a good bill and packed by a diverse coalition that includes grocery manufacturers and consumers. it has strong bipartisan support. last year the house passed its version by a vote of 283-142. the senate passed a bill nearly identical to the one before us today by a vote of 73-25. and this is an overwhelming show of support for legislation which will significantly protect the public health. i'm proud we are passing this bill one more time. today of course it will go to the president for his signature he has said he would sign it. i urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pith: at this time i yield four minutes to the ranking member on agriculture, representative lucas of oklahoma. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for four minutes. mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i rise again in opposition to h.r. 2751. originally dealing with the cash for clunkers and now containing the senate language s. 510, the food modernization act. as i stated repeatedly, i believe our nation has the safest food supply in the world. i also believe that we must continually examine our food production and regulatory system and move forward with changes that will improve food safety. this legislation is the product of a flawed process. it will lead to huge regulatory burdens on our nation's farmers and ranchers. it will raise the cost of food for our consumers, and it contains very little that will

actually contribute to the goal of food safety. it gives the food and drug administration lots of additional authorities with no accountability. in fact, with the inclusion of the so-called tester amendment, some argue that it is a step backwards. my concerns about the legislation are not limited to the unforgivable process, there are serious public policy concerns as well. the tester amendment is an ill strayive example intended -- illustrative example intended to shield producers from the new food safety law. it is opposed by virtually all of the major organizations representing farmers and ranchers. normally these groups would be expected to support a provision that sought to protect their farmers and ranchers. but they oppose the tester amendment and any legislation that contains it because it adds to the layer of food safety regulation, creating yet another tier of regulatory standards that will only confuse our consumers. further by exempting small

domestic companies from federal standards, i fear, this is a legitimate fear, that we will be required to exempt similar-sized companies in developing countries from our standards. this approach does not make food safer. it eliminates important consumer protection and puts our citizens at increased risk. with respect to the tester amendment, i question the value of any law that is so onerous to an industry that senators believe segments of that industry should be excluded from it. it would be wise to reconsider the entire legislative approach. now, there are other problems as well in the bill. new regulation authority for food processing facilities will create what amounts to a federal license to be in the food business. registration of food processing facilities was originally envisioned as a commonsense way to help f.d.a. identify facilities under the bioterrorism act of 2002.

this bill turns it into a license to operate making it unlawful to sell food without a registration license and allowing f.d.a. to suspend the company's registration. this is the type of government intrusion into commerce that americans rejected in early november this year. another provision of particular concern would mandate the food and drug administration set on foreign production performance standards. for the first time we would have a federal government prescribing how our farmers will grow crops. farming, growing of crops, and raising of livestock is the first organized activity pursued by man. we have been doing it for a long time. and we have been doing it without the f.d.a. on the farm. the vast majority of these provisions along with the record keeping requirements, mandatory recall authority will do absolutely nothing to prevent food foreign disease outbreaks from occurring. but will do plenty, do plenty

to keep federal bureaucrats busy. and these are all the sorts of things that we could be worked out through the normal legislative process. but only if there is a process. mr. speaker, let me return to where i started. we have the safest food supply in the world. anyone who follows current events knows that our food production system faces ongoing food safety challenges and i stand ready to work with my colleagues, all of my colleagues, to address those challenges. our nation's farmers, ranchers, packers, processors, retailers, and consumers deserve better. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: i yield to the distinguished gentleman from michigan, mr. stupak, who has been the chairman of our oversight and investigation subcommittee who has done the wonderful investigative work that has brought us to where we

are in exposing the dangers of our -- to our food supply by imports and other things. total of three minutes with my commendations and good wishes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. stupak, is recognized for three minutes. mr. stupak: i thank the gentleman for yielding and kind words. as i wrap up my 18 years in the u.s. house of representatives, this is a good bill in which to wrap up a career. i first introduced food safety legislation along with mr. dingell and mr. pallone and now senator brownback in 1997. for 14 years we have been fighting to try to update our nation's food safety laws. and then as chair of oversight and investigations, we have held over 13 hearings on food borne illnesses from spinach, peanut butter, jalapenos, and most recent tainted eggs. why was all this necessary? as has been noted our food laws have not been updated since 1938. and we know more and more of our food are come interesting different sources and different countries. but this year and each year

approximately 77 million americans because of district of columbia become ill because of food-bosch -- food-borne illnesses, and up to 5,000 americans will die. some of our most vulnerable americans such as children and senior citizens. those whose immune system have been weakened. if you are a young child and do survive. what kind of life do you have after you spent time in a hospital getting a new kidney? you face a lifetime of medication and bankruptcy of your family. we must act now to pass this bill. this bill contains many good provisions including the provision designed to make it easier to prevent and respond to outbreaks in food-borne illnesses. this bill also has mandatory recall. most americans are shocked to know that the f.d.a. does not have the right to recall food or unsafe drugs in this country. they do not have the right to have that recall, especially on food. so this will now make it mandatory. the f.d.a. can remove tainted

food as soon as possible. still despite all these improvements, more has to be done to protect americans. the f.d.a. needs subpoena power. one of the few regulatory agencies that doesn't have subpoena power. we have lost that when we went to the senate. if you are going to get the records, find where the food comes from, let's give the regulatory agency the power they need because corporate america, unfortunately, too often hide their records from us. we need an adequate funding source for this legislation to be successful. we have to have an adequate funding source as we had in the house. and country of origin label. more and more of our food, especially this time of year, come from other countries. we need to know exact where those sources of foods come from. i urge the next congress to make these improvements. and a word of caution. without this bill and greater improvements to this bill, we cannot fully protect americans from food-borne illnesses either accidentally or those intentionally put forth by america's enemies. and make no mistake about it.

our enemies will exploit our weak regulatory system where they know they can harm americans. i hope my colleagues today will join me in supporting this legislation. it's a great piece of legislation. i would like to thank my colleagues who have worked so hard on this over the years with me, including ms. delauro of connecticut. especially the members of the energy and commerce committee who worked with us, especially chairman dingell, chairman waxman, mr. pallone, mr. upton, mr. barton. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pits: i reserve the balance of my time -- mr. pitts: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro, the chairman of the agriculture appropriations subcommittee and very much interested in the matter before us. she's worked on it a long time. ms. delauro for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for five minutes. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, i

rise today in support of this bill as a good and necessary first step in reforming our food safety system. and better protecting our families from food-borne illness. i want to congratulate some of the long-time champions of food safety in this institution. such as chairman henry waxman, chairman john dingell, subcommittee chair mr. frank pallone, mr. bart stupak, and i say congratulations to them for successfully bringing this legislation through the house. i also want to acknowledge senator harkin, senator durbin for their work in facilitating passage of this bill in the senate. among the critical reforms in this bill are increased inspection of high-risk facilities. expanded authority to inspect recall records. the formation of a more accurate food facility registry. improve traceability in the event of an illness outbreak,

and improved surveillance of food-borne illness. the bill also requires certification of certain foreign food imports as meeting u.s. food safety requirements. alt of these tools will help improve the f.d.a.'s ability to respond to food-borne illness outbreak and hold industrial food production facilities to higher standards. for too long the cornerstone of our food safety system, the f.d.a., has had only ancient tools and an outdated mandate at its disposal. this bill will go a long way towards stemming the potential of a full-blown, food-borne epidemic in the future. recently the c.d.c. released an updated estimate on food-borne illness figures and it remains a major public interest health threat. with nearly 50 million illnesses, 100,000 hospitalization, and over 3,000 deaths each year, these estimates show that there is much work to be done in

identifying and combating the pathogen that caused food-borne illness. let me share with you this story of haley. a 17-year-old girl who lived in wilton, connecticut. when she was three years old she ate unwashed lettuce contaminated with e. coli. she soon became extremely ill with what happens -- extremely ill. haley experienced traumatic damage to her kidneys. she suffered severe bleeding in her brain and that blood caused her to be temporarily blind. the doctors at the hospital fought for 14 weeks to save her life, and to this day haley still suffers from health problems such as diabetes. all because of food contaminated with e. coli. this should not happen to anyone and as we know in this body, it can be prevented. .

with all of this in mind, our food safety efforts should and will not end today because this piece of legislation is not about roads and bridges and parks and other things that we do in this institution. this legislation is about life and death. while the f.d.a.'s charged with protecting a large majority of our food supply, the food safety and inspection service at usda is responsible for ensuring the safety of meat and poultry products. after passing this bill today, we must begin to lay the foundation for science-based reform at fsis as well. that's why i created a bill supported by a wide range of stakeholders to analyze the food safety standards at fsis and compromise a modernize system. this proposal is supported by the pertinent industry, consumer groups and unions. i should emphasize this plan would not interfere with the

good work currently being done by undersecretary elizabeth hagen at fsis, and i look forward to working with all of my colleagues in the next congress to move this proposal forward. ultimately, i believe, as do leaders across the aisle, that we must establish a single food safety agency. currently, food safety responsibilities are fragmented across 15 federal agencies and are governed by 71 interagency agreements. food safety and public health experts as well as the government accountability office have concluded that this fragmentation has created redundancies that have weakened our response. we must consolidate it under one roof. this will provide an updated regulatory structure and have surveillance activity to better protect our food supply. i will continue to fight for this single agency. i believe it is needed to ensure that the food in our fridges and on our kitchen tables is safe. nonetheless, the legislation we must pass today is a strong

first step toward a safer food supply and reducing the number of preventable food borne illnesses and deaths. and i urge my colleagues to face this public health threat and to pass food safety legislation. every parent who goes in to buy food needs to know they are taking it home and it's safe for their children. i thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes, again, to my good friend, the chairman of the committee on energy and commerce, mr. waxman, for purposes of correcting the record on certain erroneous statements made. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, is recognized for two minutes. mr. waxman: mr. speaker and my colleagues, the senate only passed this bill a couple of nights ago. and so we have now the

opportunity to vote to take it or reject it. some on the other side of the aisle, republicans are saying we should reject the whole bill because of the tester amendment which exempts small farmers, producers and facilities. we didn't have that in our bill and i would have preferred that the senate not adopted that provision, but i don't think it's a reason to vote against this whole bill. this bill is a good bill. it is supported by the consumer federation of america, the consumers union, the national consumers league, the trust for america's health, the american public health is association. it's supported by major industry groups, the food marketing institute, the grocery manufacturers association and the u.s. chamber of commerce. now, i would assume that some big operations don't like the fact that small ones are going to be exempt. they're only exempt from a

couple of the provisions which senator tester and the senate members -- and some of these small operations are limited in their income and, therefore, might be too burdensome for them. republicans suggested we should have gone to conference. if we had gone to conference only one senator could object and no conferees would be appointed by the senate. so the burden that we're being asked to achieve is something we could not achieve in the short time available to us. let us not let this opportunity go by. we must adopt this legislation. if there are efforts to change it later on, fine, but this is an important bill. it's been worked on for years. it had strong bipartisan support in the house. it had overwhelming bipartisan support in the senate, and i want to clarify the record to point out that almost all the groups, the consumer groups and

the industry groups, are urging an aye vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. pitts: continue to reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, we have only one further speaker on this side so i suggest to my good friend from pennsylvania if he desires to speak he should do so forthwith because it's our right to close. sorry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields the balance of his time? mr. pitts: yes, we have no further speakers. mr. dingell: well, the gentleman is a complete gentleman. i don't want to deny him any opportunity to be heard. mr. pitts: well, i have a couple of speakers that haven't shown up. so if you want to -- mr. dingell: well, i thank the gentleman. he's always kurt cis. i yield myself -- he's always courteous. i yield myself five minutes, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, this is not the first time we've seen this bill. it came out of the energy and commerce committee unanimously. it was informally referred to the committee on agriculture where they had a chance to look at it. it passed the house overwhelmingly on two occasions in a slightly different form. it then came back here and it was passed yet another time with the changes virtually to make it identical to that form which it is. those changes have been removed in some regards because they were mostly simply technical changes. so it has passed this body three times before this. this is the fourth time we have considered it, and the senate has passed it twice. on sunday night they passed it under a unanimous consent procedure. the bill has enormous support. all of the consumer organizations support it. almost every business group in the field of food manufacturing

and processing supports it. the grocery manufacturers association, the national association of manufacturers, the chamber of commerce, the consumer federation of america, the american public health so, the bakers association, the -- health association, the bakers association, the beverages association, few charitable trusts. the food marketing institute as well as centers for science in the public interest. there is literally little, if any, opposition to the consideration of this legislation. the senate took from last summer when the house passed the bill until just a few weeks ago to pass the bill over there. it only passed for the final time on sunday night, and there has -- and i want to agree with

my good friend from pennsylvania, the house as a legislative body is far superior to that of the other body. if they'd leave the legislation alone i think i could assure the house we could pass better legislation than they do over there. but having said these things, the -- we are now to be forced in the last minutes of this session to choose between not passing a superb bill and passing no bill at all because we want to achieve a greater level of perfection. this is the first significant change in food and drug law with regard to foods since 1938. at that time you could test foods down to a few parts per thousand. today you can do it percent per billion and parts per trillion and food is being affected by huge amounts of new, incredible

complex known and unknown molecules that are inserted. the bill before us serves as a basic and necessary and admiral -- admirable purpose. it will see to it that the american consumer can have confidence of the safety in our food supply. our manufacturers, our growers, our processors do the best job in the world. the problem is we now import something like about a quarter to a third of our food supplies, and those food supplies are coming from places like china and we have had some scandals of the most appalling character with regard to both domestic and imported food. but mostly with regard to imported food. bad seafood and shellfish from china, unsafe leafy vegetables like spinach and celery from china, bad berries and fruit from chile and other places like

that, peppers from mexico that got mixed in with salsa and caused a collapse of the american tomato industry. those are things that will be corrected by us having people available at food and drug to properly investigate, to properly correct and properly see to it that these unsafe foods don't get into our food chain. with the consequence they not only poison americans but worse, that they destroy american industry and cost us the faith of american consuming public for some of the best manufacturers and processors in the world. the chinese put melamin in milk. they sent us all manner of dangerous and unsafe food. now, we're giving the agency, food and drug, the authority it needs. this does not invade the jurisdiction of the agriculture committee and was very carefully kept to see to it that it stayed within the jurisdiction of the commerce committee. it creates a new focus on

prevention, and it shares responsibility between f.d.a. and the food manufacturers so that they can -- i yield myself two additional minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dingell: so they can work to keep the food supply safe working together. it also is going to require manufacturers to implement preventive systems to stop outbreaks before they occur. and it is going to allow our food and drug administration for the first time in history to police and to protect the entry into this country of foods coming from abroad. for most of the peril to our american consumers' lives. it is also going to allow our investigators and food and drug people to see to it that this is a work of art. that the american law with regard to manufacturing practices is carried forward in those other lands so that bad food cannot originate elsewhere

and then come into the united states because of shoddy manufacturing practices. it gives food and drug power to ensure that then foreign importers meet u.s. standards, and it will assure that foreign combrowers and producers will be treated -- growers and producers will be treated with the same care and attention that american growers and producers are. so our goal is that they can know that they are facing an evil -- an even and level playing field. it gives f.d.a. new enforcement tools, mandatory recall authority, authority to gain -- to detain tainted products and protections for employees who serve as whistleblowers. this legislation is long overdue. it will address a situation which is shameful. today, according to the latest

statistics, 48 million americans are sickened by bad food. some 128,000 are hospitalized and 3,000 are killed. we can go around and let the house and the senate wait until next year to perhaps pass a different bill, whether it will be better or not is a question. i yield myself an additional minute. whether it is better is open to question. but i tell my colleagues, during that time there will be americans sickened, there will be americans killed and there are going to be americans hospitalized. american manufacturers, processors and growers will have the quality of their food products impinged not by their carelessness or bad behavior but rather by the misbehavior of foreign producers, foreign manufacturers and others who are sending things in here like milk

products with melamin. it is a constituent, believe it or not, of for micah. it kills babies. and china sells these products to their own people. if they don't kill their own people with that trash, imagine the greed with which they will sell that trash over here to threaten the well-being and the safety and the trust of american consumers, businessmen, manufacturers, producers and growers. . i beg you the safety of our constituents, of our people is at stake and i hope that you will wrk with me to pass -- work with me to pass this legislation so that we can make our consumers not only trust the system but also to know that it is going to work to protect them. and i hope that if there is enthusiasm for doing more work on this -- i yield myself an additional minute. i hope that if there is

enthusiasm for doing work on this that my colleagues will join me next year in doing the same thing with regard to pharmaceuticals. and i remind you that the committee has worked not in opposition to american industry but rather the committee has worked with the american industry which supports the legislation. would it better if we were passing the house bill? absolutely. is it worse or weaker because we are passing the senate bill? of course. having said that you are making americans safe in spite of the fact that the u.s. senate has had to tinker with this legislation to the weakening of the legislation. i want to commend my colleagues who have participated, mr. waxman, mr. pallone, mr. stupak, ms. degette, ms. delauro. i want to commend the staff, katie whose last day this is,

virgil, rachel, eric, who have made this possible. our legislative counsel has labored mightily and we owe real thanks to warren burke and megan ren true. i -- renfrew. the harsh fact of the matter is they were very helpful in doing this in times past. i want to pay particular tribute to mr. shimkus, mr. deal, and mr. barton. but i do want it known were it not for the labors of three great men in the other body we would not be where we are. senator harkin, senator durbin, and senator reid have contributed mightily to the success which we have in making the american consuming public safe. i hope that the people will understand we have served them well and i urge my colleagues to vote for this bill secure in the knowledge that you are

protecting americans and you are saving their lives and the health and well-being of the american people by passing h.r. 2751. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 1781, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion by the gentleman from michigan, mr. dingell. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the agreed to. mr. pitts: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to the order of the house for today for the proceedings on this question will be postponed. pursuant to clause is-c of rule 19, proceedings will now resume on the motion to concur on h.r.

5116 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: h.r. 5116, an act to invest in innovation through research and development to improve the competitiveness of the united states, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion by the gentleman from tennessee, mr. gordon. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. the gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the 15-minute vote on the motion to concur on senate amendments to h.r. 5116, will be followed by five-minute votes on motions to concur with

respect to h.r. 2142, h.r. 2751, and the motion to suspend on s. 3243. members, this is a 15-minute vote. 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 228. the nays are 130. the motion is adopted. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the unfinished business is the vote on the adoption of the motion to concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 2142 on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2142, an act to require quarterly performance assessments of government programs for purposes of assessing agency performance and improvement, and to establish agency performance improvement officers and performance improvement council. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the adoption of the motion. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote.

[captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 205. the nays are 138. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 213. the nays are 139. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider --

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 216. the nays are 139. the motion is adopted. without objection, the the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the adoption of the motion to concur in the senate amendments to h.r. 2751 on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2751. an act to accelerate motor fuel savings nationwide and provide

incentives to registered owners of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient and less polluting automobiles. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the duping of the motion. members will record their votes by electronic device. -- the question is on the adoption of the motion. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 215. the nays are 144. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished -- for what purpose does the majority leader rise? mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. ladies and gentlemen, i know the consternation that exists with respect to our schedule and when we're going to leave. i want to announce what i believe to be the balance of the schedule tonight. i would hope that it would include but cannot assert at this point in time and i don't

believe this is the case that 9/11 will be ready for us. they're still talking about -- talked to senator reid. we will go to a you is spention bill on the child sex trafficking bill. we will then go to the rule for the continuing resolution. we will then do the continuing resolution. that would, unless we get 9/11, conclude the business for today. it is -- senator reid indicates to me that it's a high likelihood they will complete 9/11 sometime tomorrow. now, sometime tomorrow is, he says, no later than 4:00. as early as 2:00. now, ladies and gentlemen, i know we would all like to say, well, let's go home. as you know, the 9/11 bill does in fact impact literally tens of thousands of people who

participated subsequent to 9/11 and going into that building initially looking for those who might still be surviving and to look for those who did not survive and bring them out. so this is not a matter that does not have serious consequences. people who volunteered and as a result of the atmosphere which confronted them as they went in they became ill. so i think all of us understand the seriousness of this bill and the consequences of not doing it. so i would ask you to bear with us. we will have these votes and we will be in constant touch with senator reid, the jord leader, but my expectation is -- majority leader, but my expectation is there is a high likelihood of a vote on 9/11 sometime tomorrow. as a result, i would be asking all of you to stay tonight and be here tomorrow so that we can convene and do this very, very important business which is not

just important to the new yorkers. this is important to our country. at anytime we may have a catastrophe which people would volunteer and show heroic effort to save lives and to rescue people. so that is the schedule for the balance of the day. if 9/11 moves over here at any point in time and what is happening right now, i tell my friends, they're seeing whether or not during the course of the start of debate, which is going on now, whether they can get a time agreement and bring start to a close and a vote. if they can do that and then go to 9/11 and have a debate, which is relatively brief. they obviously had a long time to debate on that, and bring this bill to us tonight, i know that all of you would want and i would want and we will do it tonight. but i cannot assert that i think the senate is going to move it in that time frame. so that is our schedule. and hopefully our business will be concluded tomorrow on the

passage of 9/11. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the unfinished business is the question on suspending the rules and passing s. 3243 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: senate 4342 -- 3243, an act to require u.s. customs and border protection to administer polygraph examinations to all applicants for law enforcement positions with u.s. customs and border protection, to require u.s. customs and border protection to complete all periodic background reinvestigations of certain law enforcement personnel, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the unfinished business is the question on suspending the rules and passing s. 3592 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: senate 3592, an act to designate the facility of the united states postal service locate thed a 100 commerce drive in tyrone, georgia, as the first lieutenant robert wilson collins post office building. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. so many as in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that representative frank wolf be removed as a co-sponsor of h.r. 1762. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. polis: mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany

house resolution 1782, resolution providing for consideration of the senate amendment to the house amendment to the senate amendment to the bill h.r. 3082, making appropriations for military construction, the department of veterans affairs and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: madam speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill s. 2925, as amended.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members will clear their conversations from the well of the house. the house is not in order. the house is not in order. members will remove their conversations. from the house floor in order that we might proceed. the house is not in order. members will remove their

conversations.

the speaker pro tempore: members will clear the well and remove their conversations from the well of the house. the well of the house. the house will be in order.