portion of a very large increase in funding to an important program. don't get me wrong. a very important program. but to take a small portion of an increase in order to support this kind of work that the a.t.f. is doing when if i could turn to the a.t.f. and say use your increased budget to fund this, i'd be certainly willing to say that. but in this case we see with the a.t.f. with a modest reduction over what was being proposed, what was requested and the budget within nasa that i'm addressing seeing $191 million added. it's a question of competing important priorities, i understand. where i live, and where i come from, it is very difficult for me to find a higher priority than getting resources to help make cases against the bad guys who are killing kids on the

streets of america's most violent cities. with that i yield. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. wolf: i strike the requisite number of words. the gentleman raise as good point and i'm going to oppose the amendment and i'll get into it but we'd be glad to work with him to see what we could. because i think when you have, you know, mr. fattah knows, when we've had different areas, we'll be glad to meet with you and a.t.f. to get them to do this. their budget really hasn't been cut. it's flat. i think they're $1 million off. this is the only agency that didn't get a big hit in sequestration. but the reason i oppose the amendment and i'll get to your issue at the end is it would take a reduction from nasa's commercial crew. you have seen the stories where putin said and the head of their space program and general said, if we want to get their space station we're going to have to use a trampoline. the funds for this program are

critical to allow nasa to remain a development schedule and end our reliance on the russians. so we can get up there. right now we pay them roughly $60 million a ticket to get up there. less funding would mean fewer development testing activities being carried out which in turn will put pressure on the overall program. so for that reason i oppose the amendment and ask for a no vote but i would say, you know, let's talk after this and we can have a meeting with you and mr. fattah and myself with the a.t.f. and see if we can get them as we have in some communities to kind of focus like a laser beam on your community because rightly so, i mean, your people ought to know they can live in safe areas. we'll be glad to do that, no matter what the outcome of the amendment is. but i urge a no vote on the amendment because of where it takes it from and the impact it would have on the commercial crew. with that i yield back the balance. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania, for what purpose?

mr. fattah: i move to strike the requisite number of words. early one morning i went over and visited the a.t.f. and met with todd jones, the administrator, and met a large number of his critical leaders there at the agency. they're doing an extraordinary job on the difficult circumstances. the chairman points out that they've had success where they've been able to focus and i'd be willing to work with the gentleman on his area of concern, to try to get some focus. but to his broader point, it is true that we need to be doing more to make the lives of americans safer. so we have 1,000 marines off the coast of libya today because we're going to evacuate americans and we have had eight or so hearings and we have a new investigation over the tragic attack that took place, that took the lives of our ambassador and three others in libya. but we saw a shooting right here in america over the weekend in california and you

won't see a big clamor here for us to have hearings or to do a lot and we do need to rebalance these issues. we need to be doing more, it's our responsibility to do more, to protect the american people, not just when they're abroad but here at home. and a.t.f. and these other agencies play a critical role. so, this amendment, its offset is problematic. i would hope, as the chairman said, that we could work with you on this so that we can try to provide more resources to a.t.f. and not necessarily take it away from this particular activity in terms of what we have to do in terms of commercial crew. so i hope that the gentleman will find a way to work with us on this rather than to proceed forward for vote and he would have my pleasure, we'd -- pledge, we'd work with him and the chairman as we go forward into conference. mr. kildee: thank you. i thank the chairman and

ranking member. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. he amendment is not adopted. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will read. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar of arizona. page 33, line 4, after the dollar amount insert, reduced by $6 million. page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $6 million. page 48, line 11, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $6 million. the chair: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today to stand with veterans throughout the country and offer a simple amendment that seeks to bolster funds in this act for the veterans

treatment corps initiative. my amendment pays for this modest increase for this critical initiative by reducing funds for salaries and expenses from the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives by $6 million. the bureau salaries and expenses were increased by $21 million from fiscal year 2014 levels. with the proposed appropriations of $1.2 billion overall in this bill for the agency. my amendment redirects funds from the bureau -- bureaucrats and in the mismanaged bureau agency to a worthy treatment program for our nation's veterans. vet rans corps promotes -- drug s corps promotes rehabilitation. veteran treatment corpses have been extremely successful -- courts have been extremely successful since they were created in 2008 by a buffalo judge to combat veterans appearing before the court that were addicted to drugs and

alcohol as well as suffering from mental illness. many of our nation's heroes returning from combat are traumatized due to the associated violence and pressure of war and often cope with such feelings with substance abuse. they need focused treatment and a helping hand and these courts provide such an avenue. the alternative to funding the veterans treatment court initiative is jail. i think we would all agree that providing treatment for our veterans through a community partnership at the local level is a far better option. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the passage of my commonsense amendment and this worthwhile program and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. i have no objection to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fattah: i strike the last word. i want the house to take note that week of increased this account already in last night's action. so this would be duplicative.

plus it would take away funds from the agency that we were just referring to, that is alcohol, tobacco and firearms. and so it doesn't make sense for us to take money away from this agency at a time when we need to be providing more resources to it. therefore i ask and i would stand in opposition to this amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. he amendment is adopted. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 34, line 1, federal prison system salaries and expenses, including transfer of funds, $6,865,000,000. >> mr. chairman. mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? ms. jackson lee: i have an amendment at the desk,

amendment number 8. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 8 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the chairman very much and again let me offer my appreciation to mr. wolf and mr. fattah for leading this appropriations justice, n, commerce, state, state, justice, commerce, commerce, state, justice. many of us are on the authorizing committee that is impacted greatly by the appropriators. i sit on the judiciary committee and have sat on the foreign affairs committee and now sit on homeland security which has a very, very important relationship to the issue of human trafficking. just a few weeks ago on march 20, in houston, texas, we held a field hearing on human trafficking. interestingly the day before

115 people were found in a stash house, women and children , all compounded, living in dire and devastating conditions. the witness testimony was overwhelming and i know the leadership that both the chairman and ranking member have given to this issue, i want to thank them for their funding on the violence against women act, as it has grown -- as it has grown to provide more resources for those who are impacted by domestic violence but also by human trafficking. my amendment is very straightforward. in the testimony given to us by law enforcement officers, one of the local law enforcement officers in fact a local sheriff, indicated the importance of providing local law enforcement officers the training needed to ensure that these victims who are traumatized will be willing to testify against the perpetrator and the perpetrators are vial. they're vial -- vile. they're vile. they've about become one of the largest businesses in this -- they've become one of the largest businesses in this nation. billions of dollars.

human trafficking and sex trafficking. because it's an ugly thing to say but in sex trafficking the product can be used over and over again as interpreted by the person who has the business. and in houston, houston has been known to be called the epicenter of human trafficking, sex trafficking. but it is a scourge on this nation. so my amendment strengthens the ability by providing a half a million dollars to the violence against women act, it strengthens the ability of state and local law enforcement to identify, apprehend and prosecute domestic child traffickers by requiring the attorney general to make available the training and education that will empower them to gain the cooperation and active assistance of victims of human trafficking who would otherwise refuse for fear of reprisal. this in fact, as i indicated, was clear in our testimony that was given and explained by those who were victims, who

were witnesses in they'ring, and others -- in this hearing, and others. just recently in the board of security markup, i added an amendment to address the question of human trafficking resources in another agency, department of homeland security. but trafficking in humans and especially domestic child trafficking have no place in a civil sized -- civilized society. in fact, it has been called modern day slavery. those who engage in this illicit trade should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. we need the cooperation of victims. sometimes they're scared and there are various resources ch as visas for nonimmigrant -- for immigrant persons who are fearful of their present condition. that means we need to ensure that state and local law enforcement agencies have the tools, resources and training necessary to identify, apprehend and prosecute criminals who ruthlessly traffic in children and young persons. i think it is important that ommerce, state, justice is

involved in this particular area. and covers this particular area. as i said, my amendment would cover the education on the availability of certain immigrant, nonimmigrant visas for victims trafficked who cooperate in the investigation and the prosecution, or the prosecution of the crime, which was the individual -- which the individual was a vic stim of. so in essence -- victim of. so in essence this helps the victim. it gives them time, it gives them the ability to understand and it starts sometimes with the local law enforcement. in the instance of these 115 persons in houston, the arrest came, the notice came, the call came to the local law enforcement who later called i.c.e. and others. so i would hope that this amendment would be passed because it again adds to our commitment to eliminate human trafficking. and it commits us to recognizing the vileness of

child trafficking. and sexual abuse of these individuals who come and the repetted -- repetitiveness of this. in houston, 99 were men, 16 were women and 19 were juveniles. this happens over and over again. so the jackson lee amendment does strengthen the idea of making sure we are linked to local law enforcement and that we are committed not only in the federal system but we're committed in the system that we are in locally. let me conclude, mr. chairman, by indicating that commerce, justice, science, that is the appropriate name, i had state on my mind, but i want to make sure commerce, justice, science, i hope that this committee will accept this amendment. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia. mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. i think the gentlelady makes a very powerful case and i think she's absolutely right and i support the amendment and would accept it.

the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fattah: strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognize. mr. fattah: i enthusiastically support the chairman's decision to accept this and thank the gentlelady from texas. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. who seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. delaney of maryland.

page 34, line 8, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $8 million. page 49, line 11, after the dollar amount insert increased by $1 million. the chair: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for five minutes. mr. delaney: thank you. my amendment pays for success within the existing evidence-based justice program account by a modest $1 million. and while it's a modest number it does increase the account by 5% which we think it's important and we think it's important for two reasons. first, as it relates to the merits of the program but secondly because we think, mr. chairman, that the government should be embracing the pay for success framework across all aspects of government services. and we believe this for three reasons. first, the pay for success

model has been proven and we believe we've been ton to prove out it delivering beater service to our citizens. and it does that by encouraging innovation and best practices within government, and the method it uses to do that is a ueniege partnership model where the government partners with the private sector or the philanthropic sector in developing specific practices that are designed to have better outcomes at lower costs. that's the first reason we like the pay for success model. the second reason we like the pay for success model is because, mr. speaker, the model encourages the development of better metrics and better tracking of outcomes and that encourages creativity and the advancement of best practices within the government sector. and the third reason, mr. speaker, we like the pay for success model is because it's very taxpayer friendly. by definition, under a pay for success framework, the government is only paying when certain predetermined outcomes are in fact delivered.

so in addition to putting the government in position where the only paying when outcomes are in fact met, it also encourages through the process the development of not only more effective methods but more cost-effective methods. so for all of these reasons we encourage pay for success generally across government services, and in this particular program, we think the additional $1 million, while modest, will encourage the development of innovative programs that are designed to reduce the burdens on our prisons. so i encourage passing our amendment and with that i yield back, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. wolf: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i have no objection to the amendment. i support the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the the gentleman from

maryland. mr. delaney: i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. he amendment is adopted. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 35, line 12, buildings and facilities, $115 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. connolly: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. connolly of virginia. page 32, line 21, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $225,000. page 35, line 24, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $2,200,000. page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount insert increased by $1 million. page 48, line 11, after the dollar amount insert increased

by $1 million. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for five minutes. mr. connolly: i thank the chair, and i want to thank -- i want to thank chairman wolf and ranking member fattah and their staff for working with me and my staff and other members on a bipartisan basis to support this and similar amendments. this amendment would increase funding for veterans' treatment courts by $1 million. it does not cut the census bureau, however, to do it. with the additional funds provided by the amendment, total $6 million would be available for veterans' treatment courts in fiscal year 2015. our nation's heroes are returning home from more than a decade of war, including the longest war in american history in afghanistan. upon their return, they bear the physical and the invisible wounds of deployment.

substance abuse, posttraumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, various disabilities, various mental health disabilities can lead our returning heroes often down a difficult and lonely road in their attempt to transition to civilian life. 20% of iraq and afghanistan war veterans suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder or major depression. one in six battle with substance abuse. left undiagnosed or untreated, these illnesses can result in an encounter with the justice system. worse yet, these illnesses can lead to suicide, which veterans commit at twice the rate of the civilian population. fortunately specialized veterans' treatment courts are being developed across the country to assist veterans who do find themselves in the justice system and suffer from

substance addiction or mental health disorders so they can alter their course and find the assistance they deserve. the first such court was established in buffalo, new york, in 2008. virginia is home, my home state and that of the distinguished manager of the bill, is home to the sixth largest metro population in the united states ith nearly 850,000 veterans, a large number of whom live in my district and that of mr. wolf, the distinguished manager. i'm pleased that locally our state and local leaders in fairfax county have had preliminary conversations about creating their own veterans' treatment docket and that's great. we have 76 veterans in our local detention centers today. that's just in fairfax county. more than half of whom are there for nonviolent

violations. of course, those are just the veterans who self-identified themselves as veterans. so clearly we need to look at our intake process to make sure we're identifying those veterans who are in need of assistance. by bringing veterans' service organizations, state veterans' departments and mentors into the courtroom, veterans' treatment courts promote community collaboration and can connect veterans with the programs and benefits they've not only earned but need. having a veteran-only court docket ensures that everyone from the judge to the volunteers specialize in veteran care, and the involvement of fellow veterans ensures the camaraderie which he or she has become accustomed within the military itself. we know this model works, and the our hope this amendment provides veteran treatment courts with some of the resources they need to help veterans who fall into the justice system get back on the right track and transition back

into the society they swore to defend and we swore to protect them when they came home. mr. chairman, finally, before closing, let me take a moment of personal privilege to congratulate my friend and colleague, frank wolf, on shepherding on what is his last appropriations bill in the congress. frank has been leader on gang prevention in our community, transportation, the silver line going to dulles airport and human rights all across the world. our community and congress will be very grateful for his service and especially for the integrity he brought and brings to this institution. i'm proud to call him a colleague. i'm even prouder to call him my friend. i will miss him. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. mr. wolf: i move to strike the last word. -- i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. as he stated better than i

could, we're seeing the veterans' increased involvement in the justice system. we established this court program in fiscal year 2013, increased the funding. i thank the gentleman for offering the amendment. i urge an aye vote for it and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor, please say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes have it the amendment is adopted. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 36, line 5, federal prison, industries, incorporated. federal pri industries is offered to make such expenditures to make such contracts and commitments as may be necessary in carrying out the program. limitation on administrative expenses, federal pri industries, incorporated, $2,700,000. state and local law enforcement

activities, office on violence against women, violence against women prevention and prosecution programs, $425,500 000. the chair: who seeks recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gallego of texas. on page 38, line 2, after the dollar amount insert increased by $2,500,000. on page 39, line 23, after the dollar amount insert increased by $2,500,000. on page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount insert reduced by

$2,500,000. on page 45, line 9, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $2,500,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. r. gay yageo: -- mr. gallego: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to start by thanking chairman wolf and wishing him the best of luck on his retirement and i want to thank representative john culberson and cory gardner for helping on this amendment and making this effort bipartisan. this amendment seeks to add additional revenue to the domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking assistance program. it's a rural program that enhances the safety of children, youth and adults who are victims of domestic violence or victims of stalking, dating violence, sexual assault. frankly, in rural areas across the 23rd district and much of

the country, domestic violence shelters survive on grant programs of various kinds, and many like this is the lifeblood of many of these shelters. and this amendment provides additional revenue to keep these shelters opening and operating and protecting these victims of crime who so need desperately need protection. in addition, what this does, mr. speaker, is add additional revenue to the violence against women prevention and prosecution programs and that is a program that helps victims of crime and in addition to that helps to make sure that we put these people behind bars. i will tell you, mr. speaker, that i have had a long history involved in the criminal justice movement and had the opportunity in the texas legislature to serve on the committee with jurisdiction over crime victims and crime victims' rights and i can think of no better way than to spend revenue than to make sure that

victims are protected and taken care of and particularly victims who are children and so in need of our assistance. so mr. speaker, i ask that this amendment be adopted and, again, i thank my colleagues, mr. culberson and mr. gardner and chairman wolf and our ranking member as well for their help in drafting the amendment and making sure that all the i's were dotted and the t's were crossed. the chair: the gentleman has yielded his time. for what purpose does -- mr. wolf: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i thank the gentleman for the amendment. i think it helps those who need help particularly in rural areas and i thank him and we accept the amendment. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: in rural areas, a lot of times these challenges go without the same notice that they may bring in a large metropolitan area. i think it's so useful that the

gentleman has brought this matter to our attention, and i'm glad we were able to work through this and i indicate our support for this amendment and i thank the gentleman. the chair: the gentleman has yielded back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek -- >> strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i rise in support of the amendment to h.r. 4660. mr. gardner: it transfers $2.5 million to the office on iolence against women. this provides additional resources for domestic and child abuse enforcement. sorry, i had to hustle over here this afternoon. catch my breath. excuse me. my colleague from texas and i each represent significantly rural districts and large geographic districts. in fact, my district is the size of south carolina. and i appreciate the gentleman's willing tons bring this bill to the floor today and ask for its adoption. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yields

back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. he amendment is adopted. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 41, line 13, office of justice programs, research evaluation and tatistics, $124,250,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will read the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar of arizona. page 42, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert, reduce by $4,250,000. page 42, line 14, after the dollar amount insert, reduced by $2,250,000. page 42, line 21, after the dollar amount insert, reduced by $2 million.

page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $4,250,000. page 44, line 8, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $4,250,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: mr. chairman, i rise today to offer an amendment which seeks to bolster a critical law enforcement program within commerce, justice, science and related agencies appropriation act. that program is the edward byrne memphis just assistance grant program also known as byrne jag. my amendment is fully paid for by cutting unnecessary spending elsewhere in the bill and specifically the office of justice program's research evaluation and statistics budgets were increased by $4.2 million from the f.y. 2014 levels. this amendment takes that increase and redirects those funds to the byrne j.a.g. grant program to bolster law enforcement nationwide. as we all know, one of the federal government's core

responsibility is to secure the feast. the government establishes a national guard and a standing military for security purposes, but it can also assist local law enforcement with funding, critical information and joint efforts between local, state and federal officials or any of these combined. my home state of arizona in particular has some serious issues and needs when it comes to law enforcement. being that arizona shares an international border with mexico, we have seen increased amounts of illegal trafficking operations from noncitizens to illegal drugs to illegal firearms. i believe the federal government in conjunction with state and local law enforcement has a duty to uphold the rule of law and to combat these activities in the best ways possible. my state of arizona uses multijurisdictional task forces or mjts. it also funds probation -based drug monitoring programs and other probation -related services including drug courts, pro bono defense services and other metric-based programs

aimed at curbing drug abuse. in the 2010 fiscal year, byrne j.a.g. contributed to 58 worthwhile arizona programs. this assisted arizona's 16 multijurisdictional drug task forces with arresting over 6,000 drug offendsers. these same drug task forces seized over 870,000 grams of cocaine, nearly 50,000 grams of heroin, more than 200,000 grams of methamphetamines, over 300 pounds of marijuana and more than 40,000 marijuana plants. finally, and perhaps morse satisfying, the combined efforts of these task forces in tandem with prosecution resulted in over $23 million in forfeited assets. these byrne j.a.g. programs nationwide have proven themselves worthy of sustained federal resources. as a member of the congressional law enforcement caucus, i will strive to keep america's homes and communities safe by providing important resources to worthwhile law enforcement programs that protect the local communities.

i thank you, mr. chairman, and i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my commonsense amendment and with that i will yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. wolf: i have no objection to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fattah: strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: i rise to object to the amendment. not because of the purpose thereof, but because of the offset. byrne grant the programs have enjoyed a great deal of support and obviously we need to do more if we could, but the gentleman seeks to take money away from the research effort at d.o.j. and i want to make a point about this. the notion that we should continue to do what we've been doing as a country flies in the face of all the facts. we imprison more people than any other country on the face of the earth on a per capita basis.

we have created a circumstance in which we have violent crimes at levels that are not seen in any other developed country on earth. we need to be thinking anew about this. that's what the criminal justice task force that the chairman and i have worked on has been created to do. that's why we've moved to evidence-based justice investment activities so we can measure the safety of communities based on what is being done. the idea that being tough on crime is going to make our families safer hasn't worked out all that well. and what we need to do is to be smart on crime. so the idea that we want to take money away from researching and understanding what works and what doesn't work works against normly the position of the other team. the other team usually is here on the floor saying that we should fund those things that work and not fund those things that don't work. well, the research efforts at

d.o.j. is designed exactly for that purpose. to design and to determine what is actually working. and i met with the heads of court systems and criminal justice efforts throughout our country and democrat and republicans alike and they say that this research effort has really enabled them to focus in on what can make communities safer in terms of policing and criminal justice and prison-related activities. so i support his goal but i reject this offset and i would ask for the people to oppose this amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. he amendment is adopted. the clerk will read.

the clerk: page 43, line 4, state and local law enforcement ssistance, $1,235,615,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will read the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. sis listen -- cicilline of rhode island. page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $8,500,000. page 66, line 16, after the dollar amount insert, decreased by $8,500,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. cicilline: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to begin by acknowledging the extraordinary leadership of chairman wolf who i was rounting earlier i remember as a young law student arriving in washington and hearing about the work of congressman wolf. so his work has been longstanding and i particularly want to acknowledge his work on

gang violence and gang violence reduction and thank him. this will be his last appropriations bill. but thank you for your many years of service to our country and i also want to thank and recognize our ranking member, congressman fattah, for his great work. i rise today to offer an amendment that will invest in making our communities safe from gangs and gun violence. this amendment restores $8.5 million in funding for the violent gang and gun crime reduction program, also known as project safe neighborhoods. it provides the same level of funding that was provided for this critical program in fiscal year 2014. project safe neighborhoods is a proven, effective program for intervening in communities in order to enhance public safety and combat gang violence. today this competitive grant program invests in partnerships led by the u.s. attorneys and it allows local and state law enforcement, community leaders and prosecutors to collaborate together on efforts to fight gang crime and reduce gun violence. and to do it in a strategically thoughtful way and to bring resources to this important

work. project safe neighborhoods provides communities from across the country with the resources they need to coordinate effectively and to prevent violence. most importantly this program plays a multifaceted approach to address the ongoing problem of gang and gun violence. many communities use this funding for both prevention and enforcement efforts. stakeholders that have abused funding to scale up efforts related to prosecuting and investigating gang activity, they've also used these resources to engage at-risk populations with innovative outreach and intervention strategies. the positive results of this initiative have been very well documented. a 2009 national institute of justice evaluation demonstrated that communities receiving project safe neighborhoods funding saw a four times greater decline in crime than those in cities that did not receive funding. when i was mayor of providence, i saw firsthand the importance of this approach to prevent and stop gang crime and gun violence. together we targeted gangs by

both prosecuting criminals and also dispatching street outreach workers through community leaders by the institute for the study and practice of nonviolence. these street workers would successfully convince our young people to end the cycle of violence, a program that has proven -- a really proven record of saving lives, by preventing gun violence and by proactively working in community to prevent violence. importantly this has always been a bipartisan experience. . i know my colleagues have also seen the tremendous benefit of project safe neighborhoods. in fisstal year 2013, 16 communities from nebraska and tennessee to rhode island and maine received funding and since its inception in 2001 dozens of other communities have also relied on funding from project safe neighborhoods to make communities safer and to reduce gun violence. so i'm asking my colleagues to support this proven program. this is literally about saving the lives of young people in this country and i urge my

colleagues to support the critical investments in this very collaborative public safety approach led by our u.s. attorneys and to support funning for project safe neighborhoods -- funding for project safe neighborhoods. the ability to reduce gun violence and gang violence really depends on it and with that i yield the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. i rise in opposition to the amendment. but i do appreciate what the gentleman said and as we move on and go to conference there may be something we can do. i know mr. fattah feels the same way with regard to gang violence in the inner city. but the underlying bill has already reduced nasa's construction budget by $69 million. further reductions, which this would do, would negatively impact nasa's ability to meet mission-critical construction needs for the human space flight program, address urgent safety-related rerepairs in centers around the country which certainly need them and

discharge legal requirements to remediate environmental damage. construction projects are by definition long lead items that must be started early in order to be ready. we need it. by cutting these funds now we will create a problematic ripple effect that will be felt in our high-priority space program for years to come. for these reasons, where the money is taken from, i urge a no vote and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. fattah: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fattah: there's no one in this house that's been more focused on the problems of gangs and has talked about it more than chairman wolf. so when he says that this is a matter he's concerned about, he's shown that over the years. this is an important effort, a program that if we can find a way to fund it we should. now, my colleague, who served as mayor of one of america's great cities, and is now a member of the congress, is right to point this out and i look for an opportunity where

perhaps as we move to complete this bill in conference, that we can see if there are other resources available. i think the offset here, there probably is some wiggle room but we need to pay a little bit closer attention to it. so i rise in support of the gentleman's amendment but i may have some concerns about the offset and whatever the result of the amendment, you've heard the chairman say and i join in, that we'd be glad to work with you on this effort. thank you for offering the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the amendment is not adopted. mr. cicilline: mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island will be postponed. ms. jackson lee: move to strike

the last word. the chair: the gentlelady from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me again express my appreciation for this appropriations and make a statement regarding some of the jurisdiction that comes under commerce and justice that is not particularly being discussed at this moment but i thought it was appropriate. because we do have discussions regarding civil rights and i wanted to mention that over the last couple of months we've had some unfortunate discussions around the national basketball of ciation regarding issues discriminatory conversations that were not responsible to the vastness of the nba or its regulatory scheme. we regulate on judiciary the national basketball association, the nfl and the major league baseball and many

other sports. over the years we've had the opportunity to raise questions about diversity and about the outreach into minority ommunities. in houston major league baseball is having what they call a civil rights weekend. and i will look into major league baseball to address some of the questions of diversity and race in their particular sport. it is interesting that they're having an event in houston now with not one local official present or respected or asked to be present. and to me that raises the question of whether or not major league baseball even gets it. we are delighted they have chosen to honor some icons and i honor them as well and we hope to recognize them by way of my office tomorrow. but again as we talk about justice questions, as i sit on the judiciary committee, over

the years have dealt with players associations and antitrust issues and questions of discrimination that across the gamut of sports organizations it is really disturbing that we come to the 21st century and 2014 and have these same issues being raised again. just as i turn for a moment to the nba, i just want to make the point as there is a decision to look at options for the clippers, i'm not from the area but i would hope as there are options to look at a purchase of the clippers that it is not done without opportunities for minority purchasers to be involved, investors. we're not where we need to be, and, again, the justice department deals with civil rights and the major league baseball is not where it needs to be when it comes to a city, has an event on civil rights, has no local officials that are engaged, no outreach programs that are extensive the way they

need to be. so i thank the chairman for allowing me to raise this point regarding the question of civil rights that falls under the jurisdiction of this committee, the funding of the civil rights division of the department of justice but also under my authorizing committee and raise the concern that we have worked to do, not only in this congress but we have work to do in these major sports organizations that represent diversity but they don't really have diversity. i yield back. the chair: the lady yields back her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington state rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. will the gentleman submit his amendment?

the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: an amendment offered by mr. kilmer. page 4, line 6, after the dollar amount insert increased by $2 million. page 46, line 8, after the dollar amount insert increased by $2 million. page 6 , line 19, after the dollar amount insert reduced by 2 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. wolf: reserving a point of order. we are looking at the amendment. in order to protect the time, i reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

the chair: the point of order is reserved. the gentleman from washington is recognized for five minutes. mr. kilmer: thank you, mr. chairman this amendment would increase funding for the economic, high tech and cyberprotection grant fund by $2 million. in my home state of washington, we develop some of the nation's most advanced software and aircraft and tools for our men and women in uniform. we need to be ready to help our private sector partners protect their intellectual property, competitive edge and the capabilities of our war fighters. the economic, high tech and cybercrime prevention program is one of the best opportunities for the federal government to assist state and local entities to address cybercrimes through the funding f training and technical assistance projects. it was designed to leverage state and local support to help national agencies involved in protecting our horton through the prevention of and law

enforcement against cybercrimes. cybercrime is not new, but it's becoming an even greater threat to our families, our businesses and to our national security. as far back as 2012, the federal bureau of investigation made headlines of arresting dozens of cybercriminals worldwide who were involved in a complicated screen. the director of the f.b.i. testified before the other chamber, the state sponsored cybercrime is, i quote, an enormous challenge. noting the department of justice recently issued a 31-count indictment against hackers backed by the chinese government. as a member of the house armed services committee, subcommittee on intelligence, emerging threats and capabilities, i know that we need to double down on protecting our intellectual property from electronic theft and intrusion. we cannot have innovation stifled out -- stifle fear of protection, loss of intellectual property and future profits. after all, innovation is the engine behind our economy and our national defense.

it's what keeps small businesses and large conglomerates devising the next tools to protect our service people and keep shipping lanes open. this amendment would help state, local and tribal law enforcement agencies with technical assistance, training and outreach activities. it would provide training in the investigation and prosecution of cybercrimes, increasing the odds that those who seek to do harm are brought to justice. moreover, it gives the federal government a greater opportunity to leverage their counterparts' abilities to obtain our national goals. one month ago i was privileged to join the washington state military department, academia and law enforcement to discuss ways to protect our nation's critical infrastructure from cyberattacks. this summit provided an opportunity for us to get all the stakeholders into the room to discuss known vulnerabilities and how we can help each other. one of the most important outcomes of that summit was the need to work together at the local, state and federal level, hand in hand with our private sector partners to fully address this threat.

that's what this amendment does. it would provide federal assistance to complement such efforts and would increase our security. and with my brief time remaining, i'd like to thank the ranking member and echo the good words of the previous speakers thanking the gentleman, the chairman for his excellent work and partnership. and mr. chairman, i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: i withdraw the point of order and i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i think we have -- we never saw the amendment. and it's really pretty tough to really -- by just looking at it quickly, i think we're at a record level for cyber ever in he history of this great body. and the gentleman has a good point. he picked away from aeronautics

and aeronautics is our number one export. we are not exporting aircraft from the gentleman's home state, our balance of payment. so to take away from aeronautics when we have fluffed up aeronautics so america can continue to be number one and put it in an area that's ill-defined but secondly we have given more for cyber than any other time, cyber, money and the f.b.i., national security, cyber, money and the u.s. attorney's office, in the criminal division, and because of that i would urge a no vote. cyber is important. every major company in this ountry has been hit by the chinese government. law firms in this town have been hit by the chinese government. 17 members of congress had heir computers stripped by the

chinese government. our committee had their computers stripped by the chinese government, so i think we should focus the cyber where we have it and not go after aeronautics. because of that i think the gentleman is well-intentioned and obviously boeing has been hit, but boeing is better served by what we're doing with regard to aiding the f.b.i. to deal with this and the u.s. attorney, and i commend and did a letter to the attorney general last week thanking him and thanking the f.b.i. for their cyber cases that they're bringing against the people's liberation army. in light of where we are, i would oppose the amendment. i think it's bad to take from aeronautics and i think we should focus on the cyber the way we have done in the bill with the f.b.i., the national security division, the u.s. attorneys and, again, want to thank the justice department and the f.b.i. for the great work they have done with regard to the people's liberation

army, and we expect them to do in the future. so i urge a no vote on the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek time? mr. fattah: i rise to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: when you listen to our highest law enforcement officials in the country and our national security officials, they join the chairman's very early point when he was saying and no one s paying attention, i think, cyberattacks, the greatest threat in terms of our economic infrastructure and some of our national military infrastructure is challenged by cyberattacks also. there is an account in d.o.j. that is the target for this amendment. it's cyber and high economic crimes. this is a very important area. we remember the fiasco with the retailers of being attacked by

cyberattacks, mainly centered from the ukraine, and the disaster that occurred over the holiday shopping season. this is a very important area. i had eab glad to work with the gentleman to see whether we can do something to make sure this account has the resources it needs. aeronautics, on the other hand, we are well above $100 million or so than the requested level, but it is a very important area. and i join with the chairman in prioritizing. i went out to washington state. i visited everett. a plant of almost 100 acres under one roof. the largest and widest building anywhere in the country and saw them constructing these dreamliners. tens of thousands of americans working every day. we don't want those secrets stolen, either, through cyberattacks. we need to find a happy medium that meets the country's

interests. i don't know we want to cut that account. the chairman is right. our balance of trade in aeronautics is well over $200 billion. it's our most significant export on the manufacturing side. so we have to be careful as we proceed. so i thank the gentleman for offering the amendment. and whatever the result of the amendment, i think that the chairman and i want to work to make sure that we're doing everything we can do to protect against cyberattacks in the economic atmosphere that the country is in and the competition that we face. we don't need to be innovative and then have our innovations stolen by others. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington state. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the amendment fails.

for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 18 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. grayson of florida. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. grayson: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment would increase from $3 million to $6 million the amount of funds appropriated for competitive grants to distribute firearm safety materials and gun locks under the edward byrne memorial justice assistance grant program. the edward byrne program is funded at $376 million total as recently amended up to $380 in this appropriations bill. the $300 million increase i'm seeking is less than 1% of the

total allocation of the program and has been received a budget neutral score from the congressional budget office. i think that increasing the level of gun safety in america is a priority, and i hope my colleagues would agree. nothing in this amendment would restrict any american's second amendment rights. the only thing this does is achieve gun literacy, safety and avoid accidents. this amendment makes good sense. it would save lives and i encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of it. i yield back the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from west -- from virginia. mr. wolf: i move to strike the last word. -- i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: we have no objections to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. he amendment is adopted.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the esk. the chair: the clerk will read. the clerk: page 49, line 20, juvenile justice programs. 223,500,000. public safety officer benefits, $16,300,000. community-oriented police officering -- policing services, community-oriented

policing services programs, $96,500,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. jeffries of new york. page 53, line 22, after the period insert, provided further that no less than $5 million is allocated to establish and implement innovative programs to increase and enhance proactive crime control and prevention programs involving law enforcement officers and young persons in the community, 42, u.s.c., 3796-ddb-11. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: i reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman reserves a point of order. the point of order is reserved. the gentleman from new york is

recognized. mr. jeffries: thank you, mr. speaker. let me first just thank the chairman and the ranking member for their tremendous effort in connection with this bill, as well as thank the chairman for his distinguished service and work as it relates to the issue of gun violence prevention, to which this amendment relates. in order to address the growing problem of youth gang violence, this amendment sets a minimum allocation amount with respect to funds issued under the department of justice's authority to make public safety and community policing grants. it would do so by requiring that no less than $5 million of funding for cops grants be used to establish and implement innovative programs to increase and enhance proactive crime control and prevention programs involving law enforcement officers and young persons in the community. this category is presently one of 17 uses of grant amounts

authorized under law. however, there is no funding minimum set in law to ensure that these program grants are being allocated to address youth violence. with the growing amount of gang activity that involves young people throughout our country, funding in this particular area is essential. ere are currently at least 1.4 million criminal street gang members and 33,000 street gangs in the united states. this represents a 40% increase since 2009. much of this rapid expansion of criminal street gang activity is caused by the active recruitment of juveniles. according to the f.b.i., almost 40% of gang members presently are young people under the age

of 18. in a report issued by the national gang threat assessment report, criminal street gangs caused 48% of violent crime in most jurisdictions. consequently there are neighborhoods throughout our country including many in new york city that continue to be plagued by violence attributed to rising street gang activity. this of course has led to increased drug trafficking, gun violence, human trafficking and the prostitution of minors, as well as school-based assaults, rivalries and thefts. the cops grant program has been a tremendous success. but more must now be done in the area of gang-related youth violence. this issue presents a discrete problem that requires targeted law enforcement solutions.

accordingly this amendment is designed to ensure that additional funding under the cops program is allocated to proactive law enforcement programs targeted at the reduction of criminal street gang activity and youth violence. by settinging faunding floor of -- by setting a funding floor of $5 million in total grants connected to a category already authorized under law, we can take an additional step toward providing state and lope local law enforcement with the -- ment with the ce resources need to protect communities throughout america. i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan objective by voting in favor of this amendment. thank you, mr. speaker, madam speaker, and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. wolf: madam chair, i make a point of order against the amendment because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized program and therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21.

that states in pertinent part, an appropriation may not be in order for an amendment for an expenditure not previously authorized by law. madam chair, the amendment proposed funds for a program that has not been re-authorized. it was last authorized in 2009. the amendment therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21 and i ask for a ruling of the chair. the chair: does any other member wish to be heard on the point of order? jeff mr. fattah: i'd like to be heard, if the gentleman will reserve his point of order for a second. r. wolf: i will. the chair: do you wish to withdraw the point of order? mr. wolf: out of courtesy, sure, absolutely. the chair: the point of order is reserved. mr. fattah: thank you. i move in to strike the last word. since -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: since this program has not been re-authorized by the congress, so let's go back

to this, this is a program that was created to provide support to local communities to be able to hire one million additional police officers nationwide. and it was put into place, it operated well and in every sense this became the law of the land in the clinton administration. the crime rate nationwide has went down. we have not re-authorized it but we have funded it each and every year because it's the right thing to do. on one level the american and c was paying taxes safety to them is having police officers in their communities. and when they dial 911 that there's some response. now, at the same time that we have had this back and forth about the cops program, we have provided billions of dollars of american taxpayers money, well over $6 billion, for police officers in training in iraq

and in places like afghanistan, to provide police officers in communities in countries far away from the streets of the gentleman's city, new york city, or my hometown of philadelphia. now, it is true that the congress has not done its work. we haven't re-authorized the transportation bill or the education bill or the cops program. there are a whole line of bills that we have not found the ability to come together around . and there are a host of programs in these appropriation bills that are being funded even though the authorization has lapsed. so i think that in this particular instance, even though the point of order is moves and proper, it aside what should be the primary concern, which is that cops on the street in connecting young people up with

cops, which is the point of this amendment, is to say that law enforcement officers, paid for under this grant program, and let every member know that when this bill is finished, when it comes out of conference, there will be money for the cops program. the only thing that this amendment seeks to say is that some of those cops should have s their primary responsibility interacting and intervening in the development of youth gangs because we know that if we can grab ahold of these young people while the concrete is not yet hardened, that we can prevent them from taking on a life of criminal or antisocial activity. so i thank the gentleman for offering the amendment. i think it's correctly on point and i appreciate the chairman reserving his point of order so that i can make the point that even though unauthorized we

have the authority to appropriate this money and we will, as we did last year and the year before and the year before that, because at the end of the day, cops on the street, when someone dials 911 they're not dialing in the hopes of help, they're dialing because they really need help and we need to have police officers who can respond. so i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: i'm going to make a point of order but before i do i want to say i do share what mr. fattah said. to tell the gentleman from new rk, it is -- it isn't only law enforcement. we had a similar problem, we had violent gangs. law enforcement is also what mr. fattah talked about, mentoring, it's after-school programs. so if you just go after the gang issue as a law enforcement issue you will never solve the problem. it has to be law enforcement,

the schools have to be involved, after-school programs. it's almost like a three-legged school -- stool. so as we move ahead we can look to see, because i think every area, everyone who lives in these areas that are being impacted on gangs, that's as much terrorism for them as somebody who is faced with terrorism from al qaeda. but having said that, so i do agree with what mr. fattah said. but i now make a point of order against the amendment because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized program and therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21, clause 2 of rule 21 states in pertinent part, quote, an appropriation may not be in order as an amendment for an expenditure not previously authorized by law, end of quote. madam chair, the amendment proposes to appropriate funds for a program that has not been re-authorized. and i agree with the gentleman, it probably should have been re-authorized, and it was last

authorized in 2009. the amendment therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21 and i ask for a ruling of the chair. the chair: does any other member seek recognition to speak on the point of order? if not, the chair will rule. the proponent of an item of appropriation carries the burden of persuasion on the question whether it is supported by an authorization in law. having reviewed the amendment and entertained argument on the point of order, the chair is unable to conclude that the item of appropriation in question is authorized in law. the chair is therefore constrained to sustain the point of order under clause 2-a f rule 21. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 53, line 23, general provisions, department of justice, section 201, in addition to amounts made

available, $50,000 shall be available to the attorney general for official receptions. section 202, none of the funds shall be available to pay for an abortion except where the life of the mother would be in dange -- endangered. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 19 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. grayson of florida. mr. wolf: madam chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i wish to reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. the chair: point of order reserved. the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes. mr. grayson: thank you, madam chair. i'd like to say at the outset of offering this particular perfecting amendment that i really wish this section 202 of 4 s bill located on page 5

didn't appear in it. it reads as follows. none of the funds appropriated by this title shall be available to pay for an abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered, if the fetus were carried to term, or in the case of rape. again, i disagree with this section of the bill in its limiting principle but i feel that we should at the very least perfect it in the manner that also includes the words or incest. in short, there is an allowance here for abortions in the case of endangering the mother, there's an allowance in the case of rape, but somehow or other this bill for bids abortions in the case of incest . throughout the u.s. code, whether it be in 10, u.s.c., 1093 pertaining to abortions for armed services personnel, jj, s.c., 1397-ee or dealing with exceptions to abortion limitations within the state children's health insurance program known as , a p, or 42, u.s.c., 180023

section containing provision of the affordable care act, federal law is clear, abortion acceptance consistently include protections to the life of the mother, cases of rape and cases f incest. were one to examine the statute and regulations of the nation, there are numerous such rules called the hyde amendment. i believe it's perfecting in nature, i think it's possible that the drafters inadvertently omitted incest from the bill and i think it carries a protection necessary for all merp women, incarcerated or not. i don't think the purpose of this bill was inadvertently or through silence to narrow the protections afforded to women under our constitution. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. a ecognize that there may be point of order to to be raised

here, but i encourage my colleagues to think twice before raising the point of order. a re talking about incest, horrible crime. there may be a point of order to be raised here but it is optional. i yield back the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i make a point of order against the grayson amendment on the grounds that it constitutes a violation of rule 2, it does seek to change statutory law in bail designed to appropriate money by amending a rule making a derges whether incest has occurred is not currently required by the statutory provision and would result in a requirement that the new determination be made so therefore it falls oufeds the standard of merely

perfecting because it requires a new determination that is not required under the current prosthrifplgs amendment expands the universe of exceptions, madam chair, in existing determinations whether the life of the mother is in danger or there has been a rape do mot provide the information that would allow the determination that incest occurs. therefore it violates clause 2 of rule 21 which states an amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be ined or fer changing existing law. i would ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: does any member wish to be heard on the point of order? >> yes. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise. mr. fattah: if the gentleman would reserve his point of order, i think what we have here, this is obviously -- i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: in every single instance when we deal with this question in law, we provide an exception for incest and for

some reason in the language that is missing in this instance. so i thank the gentleman for pointing that out. i do realize that we are on the -- we're -- we're probably not on the right side of the point of order, but i do think it's an important point and that none of us would want to create a circumstance where someone's choices were limited if they were the victim of incest. so hopefully we'll find a way to deal with this, not withstanding the point of order and i thank the gentleman for ielding. >> i do insist on the point of order and ask the chair for a ruling. >> i'd like to be heard on the point of order. the chair: the gentleman is recognize on the point of order. mr. grayson: laws have consequences. the scenario we're describing here is one where a female

prisoner is the victim of incest. if this law passes as currently written, that female prisoner will be forced to carry to term the child of an incestuous relationship. i regard this as absolutely ndefensible. mr. burgess: if i could ask the gentleman if to the reserve their remarks to if his law. ent changes existing mr. grayson: i encourage the gentleman to consider the consequences of his action and withdraw the point of order. i yield back my time. the chair: are there further members who wish to be heard on the point of order? if not, the chair will rule. the gentleman from texas makes a point of order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida proposes to change existing law in

violation of clause 2 of rule 21. under settled precedent where legislative language is permitted to remain in a general appropriation bill a germane amendment merely perfecting that language and not adding further language is in order but an amendment affecting further legislation is not in order. the chair finds that section 202 of the bill contains a legislative limitation on the use of funds in the bill for abortion. section 202 exempts from the limitation on funds those abortions involving rape and those involving endangerment of the life of the mother where the fetus carry -- were the fetus carried to term. the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida seek it is to expand the exemptions to include cases of incest. the chair finds the ruling of july 16, 1998, instructive. on that date, the committee considered a general appropriation bill prescribing

legislative exceptions to a limitation on certain funding for abortion. those legislative exceptions included rape, incest and life of the mother. in response to a point of order under clause 2 of rule 21, the exceptions were ruled out as requiring new determinations not required by existing law. while the exceptions in section 202 require certain determinations by the agencies funded in the bill, the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida requires an additional determination, to wit, whether the pregnancy to be terminated by abortion was the result of incest. as such, the amendment does not merely perfect the legislative limitations in section 202. the amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21. the point of order is sustained, the amendment is not n order.

the clerk will read. the clerk: page 54, line 12, none of the funds shall be used to require any person to perform an abortion. ction 2, nothing shall provide escort services to receive such services outside the facility. section 205, not to exceed 5% of any department may be transferred between appropriations but no such appropriations shall be increased by more than 10%. section 206. the attorney general is authorized to extend through september 30, 2015, the demonstration project transferred to the attorney general pursuant to public law 107-296. section 207. none of the funds may be used by the federal bureau of

prisoners purpose of transporting a prisoner other than to a prison appropriately secure for housing such a prisoner. section 208. none of the funds may be used to purchase cable television. section 209. none of the funds shall be obligated for any new or enhanced information technology program $100 billion. section 210. notification thresholds shall apply to deviations from the amounts designated for specific activities. section 211. none of the funds may be used to plan for a public-private competition under the office of management and budget circumstance la a-76 work performed by employees by the bureau of prisons. section 212. no funds shall be available for the salary of any united states attorney assigned by the attorney general that exempts the united states attorney from the residency requirements of section 545 of title 28, united

states code. section 213. at the discretion of the attorney general any amount that otherwise may be available . section 214. section 20109-a of subtitle a of title 2 of the violent crimes control and law enforcement act of 1994 shall not apply to amounts made available by this or any other act. section 215. none of the funds may be used by a federal law enforcement officer to facilitate the transfer of an open rabble firearm. section 216, none of the income retained pursuant to title 1 of public law 102-140 shall be available for obligation during fiscal year 2015. this title may be cited as the department of justice appropriations act, 2015. title 3, science, office of science and technology policy, $5,555,000. >> madam chair.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. broun of georgia, page 60, line 22, after the dollar amount, incest reduced by $1 ,000,000. page 52, line 13, after the dollar amount insert increased by $1 million. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. broun: thank you. this would reduce the office of science and technology policy by $1 million and apply that amount to the spend regular ducks account. as chairman of the house

science oversight subcommittee, it has come to my attention that there is, or at least was, an affordable care act information technology exchanges steering committee chaired by white house officials and established in may, 2012. almost a year and a half before the rollout of healthcare.gov. the white house steering committee's charter explicitly directed the formulation of working groups including one on security. it also turns out that a co-chairman of this obamacare website steering committee is the u.s. chief technology officer in the white house office of science and technology policy, mr. todd park. upon learning this, i, as chairman of the oversight subcommittee, along with full committee chairman smith and research and technology subcommittee chairman dr. michaud, sent a december 20, 2013, letter to the white house

requesting that mr. park make himself available to the committee to answer questions regarding the security issues with healthcare.gov by january 10. as we stand here today, oftp has ignored the request for mr. park to testify and have done so three times. don't the american people deserve answers from those in charge of overseing the implementation of the obamacare website security protocol? after all, mr. park is a deputy to oftp director holdren. but when asked at a march 26, 2014, hearing about mr. park's refusal to testify, director holdren stated that todd park, quote, doesn't report to me. i can't compel him come and testify. unquote. if he does not report to the

ostp director, why are he and his office of chief technology officer an official part of the office of -- office of science and technology policy? the ostp director supposedly directs, manages and supports. if mr. todd park does not in fact report to ostp, then his office should not be funded by ostp. and i think now, through this amendment, to make that correction immediately. i offered a similar amendment which passed by a voice vote during the committee on science, space and technology markup of h.r. 4186, the first act. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment as well. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes.

mr. wolf: i rise in opposition to the amendment but i would hope that we could work it out. if you wanted to offer a different type directing with regard to the health care issue, i will support it. if we can find a way there. but the concern i have is ostp is a small office, this is roughly cutting 20% of their entire budget, and in the last two years alone, and i agree with what the gentleman said on the health care aspect but our subcommittee has tasked ostp with coordinating a major interagency effort on neuroscience, overseing the implementation of policy across the government with public access to federally funded research, co-chairing an effort to streamline and prioritize federal stem education and spending and assessing the american supply chain vulnerability stemming from the lack of domestic access to rare earth elements which is another problem that we're beginning to have with china. so if we reduce the ostp by

20%, so if the gentleman would offer another amendment to reduce it by, you know, $50,000, i would accept the amendment or take the amendment, i can't speak for the other side but to cut it by 20% should just be too much. so until there's a different amendment that would meet the gentleman's needs, as i agree with him on the health care, we would accept it but to take 20% out, particularly since, and i know mr. fattah has been working on the whole issue of neuroscience and the brain, i would oppose the amendment. . the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: i appreciate the chairman's willing tons work this out. of course we don't have time to come back with another amendment. i expect as soon as we finish with this one we'll go forward. but i would like to work with you, mr. chairman, as well as the ranking member to try to

find something. mr. hultgren said mr. park doesn't answer to him and spotionedly this guy is a -- supposedly this guy a member of the ostp staff and he's refused to come before our oversight committee. we've got to find some way to, if he's not part of ostp, why should we fund anything dealing with what he's doing there? and that's the point of this. mr. wolf: if the gentleman would yield. i completely agree. what i will do is we will call the ostp and ask mr. hultgren to come up with the gentleman and get him and you can come to the meeting too and quite frankly if he doesn't come and they don't say -- i will offer when we go to conference to take a chunk out of this to -- so -- that you get we would like to bring mr. hultgren up so that chairman broun can have the opportunity to talk to the individual. so -- i will yield back but i

will help him get the individual up. it will be in your office, not in mine. we will ask hultgren to come up until we come back in. if that doesn't work, then we'll work with you. mr. broun: would you agree to $150,000 cut? mr. wolf: yes, if he doesn't come up, i would. if he does not come up, i would. i will. the chair: does the gentleman from -- mr. fattah: i move to strike the last word. the chair: does the gentleman from virginia yield back? mr. wolf: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia yields back. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. fattah: the cut to the agreement here, right? the chair: does the gentleman seek to strike the last word? mr. fattah: yeah, i move to strike the last word. ostp is doing enormously important work on behalf of our country. the congress also has an oversight role and if the chairman of the oversight committee is having difficulty

getting an answer to a question , i'd be glad to try to help facilitate that and work with the chairman. we do have some arcane rules here in washington about advisors to the president not having -- not being in a position to talk directly to the congress. but the head of the agency, as the chairman said, could be brought up with his sboord nate to answer whatever question -- subordinate to answer whatever questions there may be. i think we're closing the door on that particular issue relative to the affordable care act. but you deserve answers no matter what on this question. but when we talk about the budget of this agency, when there's 50 million americans suffering from brain-related diseases, when china now has almost an absolute monopoly on rare earth elements that we need to fight our away around for national security and other reasons, ostp's doing some vitally important work and we

can't take 20% of their budget. what we can -- but we can get to the point where you can get the answers that you desire and you are the -- anchor of the thursday prayer group and you are someone who is a responsible member of the congress. we want to make sure you get your answers. i'll work with the chairman. >> i appreciate that. we asked mr. park to come three times. then we asked mr. hultgren to come to the full committee and he said, and mr. park is in ostp, mr. hultgren is chairman of the ostp and he said, mr. park doesn't work for him. broun so if he doesn't work tier -- mr. broun: so he if doesn't work for him, why should we be paying salary and ex tenses? that's the point -- expenses? that's the point. mr. fattah: he said $150,000. mr. wolf: what kind of salary. mr. fattah: if we can't get a satisfactory answer to your

questions, there are some rules about executive branch individuals and advisors to the president not being compelled to testify. but when you have line staff people running an agency, hultgren is available and we can have him come with his staff and answer these questions. mr. broun: i appreciate, madam chairman, the offer of both gentlemen to work with me. certainly we need to have -- it's our responsibility in congress to have oversight. i'm the chairman of the oversight committee on science, space and technology. and we've had tremendous problems not only with this department but many others in getting people to come and just tell us what's going on. to testify before our committee. we've been rebuffed and rebuffed time and time again, ignored time and time again by this administration. e only way i see to get at these people is -- mr. fattah: let me reclaim my time and say to you, let's work

through it. we can work together. the chairman has given you his assurances that he'll work with you. but there's no possibility that we can afford to cut this agency by 20%. i need to oppose this amendment. we love the work -- we'd love to work with you to get you the answers because you're not trying to punish ostp, you're trying to get legitimate answers to legitimate questions and we want to help you facilitate that. mr. broun: i appreciate the offer. thank you. mr. fattah: i think that we've resolved this and i would yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. he amendment is not adopted.

he gentleman will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises.

the speaker pro tempore: madam chairman. the chair: mr. speaker. the committee of the whole on the state of the union, having heard the consideration of h.r. 4660, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thron. -- thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4660 and has come to no resolution thereon. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of h.r. 4660 in the committee of the whole, pursuant to house resolution 585, each amendment other than pro forma amendments addressed in this order shall be debatable for 10 minutes

equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, two, each amendment shall not be subject to amendment except by the chair and ranking minority members of the committees, each may offer one pro forma amendment to an amendment for the purpose of debate and the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations and the subcommittee on commerce, justice, science and related agencies thereof may offer pro forma amendments to the bill at any point in the reading for the purpose of debate. but that no other pro forma amendment to the bill be in order. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the gentleman's request? earing none, so ordered.

pursuant to house resolution 585, and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 4660. will the gentlewoman from tennessee, ms. black, kindly resume the chair? -- mrs. black, kindly resume the chair? the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 4660. which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: the bill making appropriations for the departments of commerce and justice, science and related agencies for the fiscal year ding september 30, 2015, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee

of the whole rose earlier today an amendment by mr. broun of georgia had been disposed of and the bill had been read hrough page 60, line 22. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 61, line 1, national aeronautics and space administration, science, $5,193,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. aeronautics, $666 million to remain available until

eptember 30, 2016. space technology, $620 million to remain available until eptember 30, 2016. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? ms. kaptur: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. capture of ohio, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $7 million. page 64, line 22, after the dollar amount insert, redulesed by $7 million -- reduced by $7 million. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house today, the gentlewoman from ohio, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from ohio. ms. kaptur: thank you. madam speaker, madam speaker, i rise today to offer an

amendment to shift $7 million in funding from the nasa space operations account to the nasa space technology mission. i strongly support and urge my colleagues to do so. the improvements to the overall nasa budget. but i'm concerned we're missing a critical opportunity in the space technology account. the space technology mission supports game-changing research and development that enhances our current missions and expands the opportunity for future missions. for example, at nasa, glen lewis in ohio, space technology research supports the solar, electric propulsion project developing critical energy technologies to enable cost-effective trims to mars. -- trips to mars. and across the inner solar system to enrich a variety of next generation journeys and to do so more energy effectively and efficiently.

this transformative work advances not only our space exploration program but our economy and our national well-being. with spinoff benefits to advanced manufacturing, our commercial energy sector, defense, automotive and commercial aviation industries and countless other applications. the space technology mission directs its focus on partnerships and strategic integration promotes technology transfer and commercialization within private sector companies sprouting new businesses and the important jobs that accompany the future. this exciting work challenges our brightest minds, including many of our young people, to excel and create a pipeline of innovation, driving our economy into the future. i understand limitations of the constrained budget we are working with and want to thank ranking member fattah and our esteemed chairman, frank wolf, to better fund nasa's space

technology program and other critical research and development efforts. my amendment merely shifts $7 million in funding to the space technology account from the space operations account. it's a small but important step in the right direction and space operations has been given quite a substantial increase. in addition my amendment would actually reduce outlays by $2 million for fiscal year 2015. so i think it's a win-win-win on all fronts. i look forward to continuing to work with the chairman and the ranking member and our colleagues as the bill moves forward in the senate and further address the needs of his important program. i urge support of the kaptur amendment. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized for five minutes. i rise -- mr. wolf: i rise in very, very strong support of the amendment. i appreciate the gentlelady's interest and advocacy for space technology as well as her cooperation in working with us to find a way to dedicate more resources to it. i have no objection and ask for a strong aye vote. ms. kaptur: i thank the chairman and this is my moment to add my voice to the other member who was celebrated and expressed gratitude to chairman wolf for his years of service to the people of the united states and this great republic. i don't think i'll ever hear the word darfur and not see frank wolf's face in my mind's eye. i don't think i will ever read articles that deal with child hunger or -- wherever it might exist, in some of the most forgotten places on earth and not think of frank wolf. i will always remember, sir,

your gentlemanly manner, your great passion, i will always recall the work that you have done to stand up for those who speak for liberty in places, forgotten corners in china, for religious leadess -- leaders who have been suppressed around the world, and what a great patriot you are and a gentleman who can work across the aisle and whose word is always gold. and so i thank you very, very much for your supported on this amendment. we wish you god speed in the years ahead. i know all my colleagues join me in wishing you well and thank you for your exemplary service. -- chair: the gentlewoman ms. kaptur: i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. fattah: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fattah: i share the sentiments of the chairman, i want to acknowledge the great work originally done by bobby

braun who is now at georgia tech, mike garza who is now the chief space technologist at nasa, doing an extraordinary job. but the resources are needed and i want to thank you for offering this amendment because it points us toward greater resources in that regard and i am familiar with the great work that is being done in your home state of ohio at the glenn research center. ms. kaptur: i want to thank the ranking member who had such a broad range, ranking member fattah, certainly in the space science arena but also in urban development, in energy, and so many other facets of what we do as a committee and as a country and i want to thank you very much for being able to work in a collegial way on theament and we thank you very much for remain truge to your commitment to true science. mr. fattah: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from ohio. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted.

the clerk will read. the clerk: page 63, line 10, exploration. $4,167,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. space operations, $3,885,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. education, $106,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. safety, security and mission services, $2,779,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. construction and environmental compliance and restoration. $446,000,000 to remain available until september 30, 2020. office of inspector general. $34,000,000 of which $500,000 shall remain available until

september 30, 2016. administrative provisions including transfer of funds, funds for any announced prize shall remain available until the prize is claimed or the offer is withdrawn, not to exceed 5% of any appropriation for the national err naughtic and space administration, may be transferred between such appropriations but no such appropriations shall be increased by more than 10%. the speeding plan -- the spending plan shall be treated as a reprogramming under section 505 of this act and shall not be available except in compliance with procedures set forth in that section. transfer of funds. unexpyred balances transferred shall be merged with the funds in the newly established account, national science foundation. research and related activities. $5,973,645,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. major research equipment and facilities construction.

$200,760,000. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i recognize mr. walberg. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walberg: i ask unanimous consent to strike the last word and enter into colloquy with chairman wolf. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walberg: thank you, madam chair. i rise today to highlight an increasingly abused law enforcement tactic known as civil asset forfeiture. this process is an ugly development that enables law enforcement to take legal action against property of individuals regardless of whether the property owner is guilty, innocent, or even charged with a crime at all. although criminal forfeiture is an a legitimate tool for law enforcement that has helped in the war on drugs and human

traffic, the civil forfeiture system has created the opportunity for local and state law enforce -- enforcement to police for profit in conjunction with the office of justice. specifically the practice of equitable sharing between local and/or state departments and 250% ount has increased over the last four years, reaching $257 million in 2012 alone. equitable sharing allows state and local agencies to work around state laws that prohibit civil forfeiture so long as the state partners with the department of justice and splits the profits. state and local governments, in their pursuit of the fruits of seizures have at times been too eager to seize property, with the result that innocent citizens have been adversely affected with little or no compensation for their damages and economic losses. the recent story of terry denco

from michigan exemplifies the problems that can occur under the civil asset forfeiture policy. on january 22, 201234erks i.r.s. obtained a secret warrant and use thared civil asset forfeiture powers to entry mr. denco's bank account based on spurious evidence that the longtime grocer was a money launderer. the i.r.s. offered to set they will case for 20 cents on the dollar. unfortunately, this is a normal procedure for i.r.s. department of justice and the law enforcement partners. seized property -- seize property, then negotiate without having to prove guilt in a court of law. it's time rethink our federal policies on civil asset forfeiture and end the abusive era of seize, forfeit and profit. law-abiding citizens should not fall prey to police department and their federal partners and i believe we can find a solution to this problem that

maintains legitimate policing tool while respecting our constitution. i will continue to work with the chairman, the judiciary committee, and my colleagues in the house to craft sensible forfeiture policy that helps law enforcement but protect ours constitutionally protected property rights. thank you, madam chair and i yield back. mr. wolf: i thank the gentleman for bringing this matter to the attention of the committee, and your leadership in making us aware of the pressing need to review federal forfeiture policies. as you were speaking, i thought, why don't we ask the inspector general to look into this. so we'll work with you to do a letter asking the i.g. to see if he has the authority to look into this because based on what you said, we don't want this to happen. an appropriations bill is not the best place to address civil asset forfeiture reform, we look forward to a constructive partnership to protect americans and we will work with you on crafting a letter to the

inspector general to see what we can find out, how we can make this not happen again. with that, i yield. >> i would join in signing such a request to the i.g. mr. fattah: secondly, i do think given what you said, given the overreach that we do need to see if we can work with the authorizing committee and if perhaps a package that could be acceptable to the authorizing committee could even be included in such a conference committee when we finalize this bill. because we should protect americans from the loss of property absent due process. so what you have explained is a process that is backwards under our system of law before someone is penalized, there should be an allegation, there should be a fact hearing, people should have a chance to answer and hear from their accusers, versus a circumstance where their property is taken and then they have to fight a rear guard action to try to get

it back. i'm very concerned about this and i'm glad to work with the chairman. i yield back. the chair: does the gentleman from virginia yield back? mr. wolf: i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerky report the amendment. the clerk: page 69, line 4, after the dollar amount -- amendment offered by mr. smith of texas. page 69, line 4 after the dollar amount insert reduced by $15,350,000, increased by $15,350,000. the chair: pursuant to thed or of the house today, the gentleman from texas and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: madam chair, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: first i want to thank the majority leader, mr. cantor, for his earlier comments about our national science foundation amendment. i appreciate his efforts to

hold the n.s.f. accountable for its grant funding decisions. the smith-cantor amendment reduces the fiscal year 2015 funding in the bill, the national science foundation cease social, behavioral and economic sciences direct rat, or s.b.e. direct rat, by more than $15 million. his reduction will freeze s.b. e. to its current level. the smith-cantor amendment maintains the overall level of national funding in the bill and redirects the amount of the s.b.e. cut to the physical sciences and engineering, the areas that were prioritized in the n.s.f. authorization act reported out of the science committee yesterday. much of the research funded through the s.b.e. direct rat has obvious science -- direct at has obvious science directorate has obvious scientific merit.

but they have funded hundreds of questionable grants. for example when the national science foundation pays a researcher more than $227,000 to thumb through the pages of old "national gree yo graphic" magazines to look at pictures, taxpayers feel the n.s.f. is thumbing its nose at them. the n.s.f. also spent $340,000 for a study of human-set forest fires 2,000 years ago in new zealand. american who was lost their homes and businesses to wildfires could ask how this helps them. and taxpayers can't help but wonder why n.s.f. spent $1.5 million of their money to study rangeland management in mongolia, rather than, say, in texas. we shouldn't reward frivolous use of taxpayer money with even more money. this is what the president has proposed. the smith-cantor amendment zeros out the s.b.e. increase for fiscal year 2015. this should encourage the

n.s.f. to apply higher standards when awarding its grants. yesterday the house science committee marked up the first act, legislation that re-authorizes n.s.f. programs. my colleagues and i approved an amendment to the bill that cuts $150 .e. directorate to million, $100 million less than the current fiscal year. that's where we think the discussion ought to start next year. this amendment is only the first step. i also want to point out the s.b.e. directorate isn't the only source of questionable n.s.f. grants. for instance, n.s.f. handed out $700,000 for the great immensity, a climate change musical and $5.6 million far climate change scavenger hunt and phone game. such grants make taxpayers even more skeptical about how their hard-herbed tax dollars are being spent and