Congressional Record, Volume 143 Issue 85 (Wednesday, June 18, 1997)

[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 85 (Wednesday, June 18, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3871-H3889]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1997

Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call
up House Resolution 164 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 164

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule
XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 437) to reauthorize the National Sea Grant
College Program Act, and for other purposes. The first
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate
shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour,
with forty minutes equally divided and controlled by the
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on
Resources and twenty minutes equally divided and controlled
by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee
on Science. After general debate the bill shall be considered
for amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the
amendment recommended by the Committee on Science now printed
in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original
bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule
the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the
Congressional Record and numbered 1 pursuant to clause 6 of
rule XXIII. Each section of that amendment shall be
considered as read. At the conclusion of consideration of the
bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the
bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House
on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the
bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made
in order as original text. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit with or without instructions.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rogan). The gentleman from Florida [Mr.
Goss] is recognized for one hour.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley],
my friend, ranking member, former distinguished chairman of the
Committee on Rules, pending which I yield myself such time as I may
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is
for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, this rule is straightforward, fair, was reported without
dissent by the Committee on Rules. Under House Resolution 164, any
Member seeking to improve the bill by offering a germane amendment may
do so. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate, 40 minutes
equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of the
Committee on Resources and 20 minutes afforded to their counterparts
from the Committee on Science, as we heard from the reading from the
Clerk.
The rule also reconciles a slight difference between those committees
by considering an amendment in the nature of a substitute as the base
text for consideration. It is a sensible process that allows us to
consider the bill in a timely fashion without restricting the rights of
the minority or individual Members, the deliberative process at work in
the people's House.
H.R. 437 reauthorizes the National Sea Grant College Program. This
program leverages a small Federal investment of approximately 50
million a year which is matched by nonfederal funds to over 300 sea
grant institutions and affiliated schools throughout our Nation.
Located at the Nation's premier research universities, sea grant
focuses the skills of hundreds of researchers on issues affecting the
development and use of our marine and coastal resources. It is a
program that is working.
I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 437, especially as a
Representative from the great State of Florida and its wonderful
coastline and beaches. I am particularly pleased that my home State of
Florida is a leading participant in the program. All nine of our State
universities are involved in sea grant activities, along with several
private universities and marine research laboratories. Sea grant
provides a good example of the national benefits that can come with
local investment. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this
wide-open fair rule that makes this important bill in order.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I thank my colleague and dear friend, the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
Goss], for yielding me the customary half hour.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this open rule. It is a very, very
good program. The National Sea Grants College Act was created 30 years
ago to improve the marine resource conservation management and use.
Since that time, Mr. Speaker, the U.S. sea grants have provided our
country with priceless information about our marine resources, how best
to conserve them, how best to use them.
This marine science is not only limited to ocean life, Mr. Speaker.
It includes our coastal and Great Lakes areas as well.
Today there are over 300 sea grant institutions, two of which are in
my home State of Massachusetts: the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and Woods Hole. Woods Hole has been a national leader in
marine biotechnology research for many years. And Massachusetts
Institute of Technology has been a leading participant in sea grant
programs since 1969.
Today they are researching the northern right whale. This is an
endangered species whose last natural habitat is in the Stellwagon
Bank. Unfortunately, something in the environment is changing the
whale's breeding patterns and causing great concern not

[[Page H3872]]

only to the whales but to humans as well.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology is currently trying to find out
what is happening in the whales' environment and how we can fix it.
Their research really comes none too soon until there are only about
250 right whales living today. Massachusetts Institute of Technology is
also working with Massachusetts Water Resource Authority to study the
contaminants in Boston Harbor and what effect they have on shellfish
and other marine life indigenous to our area.
So I urge my colleagues to support this bill. It provides for
continued success in a great program which helps us protect and better
understand our marine resources.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that we both share, the
distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts and myself, appreciation for
this program. I have been to Woods Hole many times and applaud what a
marvelous facility it is, and I invite the gentleman to come to Florida
to some of our facilities. I know that he will have equal respect for
them.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella].
Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
I have also been to Woods Hole, and I also invite this group to the
Chesapeake Bay to see how the sea grant program operates.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, I support the open rule guiding the
consideration of the reauthorization of the National Sea Grant college
program, and I support the bill H.R. 437. I want to commend my
colleagues on the Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources
for working out a compromise version of H.R. 437 that deserves the
support of the entire House of representatives.
Sea grant is a program that enables us to understand how our complex
coastal and marine environments function, to develop novel ways to
benefit from our marine resources without overexploiting them and to
extend and communicate the benefits of scientific ocean research to our
Nation's citizens.
In my own State of Maryland, sea grant efforts have played an
important role in understanding, protecting and restoring the
Chesapeake Bay. I will give one example. Sea grant researchers in
Maryland, Virginia, Delaware and North Carolina have detailed over the
last decade through competitively funded research the life cycle of the
blue crab. Their findings about the blue crab are already proving
helpful in understanding threats to the last great Chesapeake Bay
fishery, and they will enable us to develop sound strategies to protect
this renowned resource.
In addition, sea grant leads the Nation in its support for peer
reviewed fundamental discovery in marine biotechnology in our Nation's
research institutions. Marine biotechnology research shows great
promise to help this Nation develop new industries of enormous economic
potential.
Sea grant also extends the results of that research to users through
sea grant's educational and outreach efforts. For example, the Maryland
sea grant extension program is administered by and works closely with
the Cooperative Extension Service to advance aquaculture, improve
environmental decisionmaking and provide citizens with information
needed for nonregulatory protection of our natural resources.
Maryland sea grant educational activities provide research
experiences for undergraduates, help instruct K through 12 students in
environmental science and biotechnology, and translate complex
scientific information into terms useful for the average citizen.
As a member of the Committee on Science and a cosponsor of this
excellent bill, I am in full support of this reauthorization, which
balances fiscal responsibility with the protection of important
programs that work for the good of our Nation.
I commend the author of this bill, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
Saxton], the chairs of my Committee on Science, the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] and the chair of the Committee on
Resources, the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young], along with the staffs
of both committees for their efforts to preserve and improve this
valuable program.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the rule and H.R. 437,
a bill that is good for the environment, good for education and
supportive of sound scientific solutions for the preservation of our
Nation's marine resources.
Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I did visit the State of the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. Goss], and I had great delight in seeing Shamu down there.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the communication from the
distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts. I want to explain to him
that he has experienced just the beginning. There is so much more than
Shamu, but that is a good start.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

{time} 1045

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). Pursuant to House Resolution
164 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 437.

{time} 1045

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 437) to reauthorize the National Sea Grant College Program Act,
and for other purposes, with Mr. Rogan in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having
been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] and the
gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] each will control 20 minutes;
and the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Sensenbrenner] and the gentleman
from Indiana [Mr. Roemer] each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton].
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 437, a bill to reauthorize
the Sea Grant College Program. I introduced H.R. 437 on January 9 of
this year. The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources and then
to the Subcommittees on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans,
which I chair.
I am pleased that the bill has the bipartisan support of 107
cosponsors, including the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young], chairman
of the Committee on Resources; the gentleman from California, Mr.
George Miller, the ranking Democrat; and the ranking Democrat on the
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, my good
friend, the gentleman from Hawaii, Mr. Neil Abercrombie.
I would also like to thank at this point the members of the Committee
on Science, particularly the chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin
[Mr. Sensenbrenner] who, incidentally, celebrated his 29th birthday
just 4 days ago, and we wish him every happiness in his 30th year on
this planet.
The gentleman from California [Mr. Calvert] was also very helpful.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SAXTON. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's calculator is a
little bit off, but we will excuse him for that.
Mr. SAXTON. Well, Mr. Chairman, we wish the gentleman a happy, happy
birthday, anyway.
I would also like to thank the gentleman from California [Mr.
Calvert] for his able assistance as a member of the Committee on
Science during this process.
H.R. 437 was reported to the Committee on Resources on March 12 and
an amended version of the bill was reported by the Committee on
Science, which I just mentioned, on April 22.

[[Page H3873]]

The committees have subsequently reached agreement on a compromise
text, which is the vehicle before the House today.
The National Sea Grant College Program was established by Congress in
1966 to improve our Nation's marine resource conservation efforts, to
better manage those resources, and to enhance their proper utilization.
H.R. 437, the National Sea Grant College Program Reauthorization Act
of 1997, authorizes funding for Sea Grant through fiscal year 2000;
simplifies the definition of issues under Sea Grant's authority;
clarifies the responsibilities of State and national programs;
consolidates and clarifies the requirements for the designation of Sea
Grant colleges and regional groups; repeals an international program
that has never been funded; prohibits lobbying with Federal funds, and
assures that Sea Grant research will be adequately peer reviewed.
By enacting this legislation we will be sending a clear message
supporting the conservation and research-based management of our marine
and coastal resources. I urge all Members to support the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume and I rise in strong support of the bill.
However, I would like to add that, hopefully, the funding for Sea
Grant, the funding numbers for the Sea Grant proposal here, are more
accurate than those recently assigned to the gentleman from Wisconsin
[Mr. Sensenbrenner]. This represents a compromise, Mr. Chairman.
Perhaps those numbers the gentleman from Wisconsin had assigned to him
by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] also represent a
compromise.
But this represents a compromise, Mr. Chairman, between the Committee
on Resources and the Committee on Science, which shares jurisdiction
with the Committee on Resources over the research component of Sea
Grant.
The bill reauthorizes the National Sea Grant College Program, which
for over 30 years has addressed important local, regional, and national
marine resource management problems through education, research, and
public outreach.
The compromise text, Mr. Chairman, reauthorizes Sea Grant for 3
years. It clarifies the roles of the national office and the Sea Grant
colleges. It strengthens competitive peer review, as the gentleman from
New Jersey mentioned, particularly for grants and contracts for
research, education and outreach, and generally brings Sea Grant up to
date as a modern education and research program.
The authorization levels in the bill will force some belt-tightening
at the national Sea Grant office but will provide for modest growth in
funding for programs and projects carried out by the Sea Grant colleges
themselves. These activities are the heart and soul of the Sea Grant
Program and are parts of the program that must be preserved, especially
in difficult budget times.
Since 1968, speaking from personal experience, Mr. Chairman, the
University of Hawaii's Sea Grant College Program has been a useful
resource in the areas of aquaculture, marine biotechnology, coastal
processes, coastal pollution and reef ecology. In the State of Hawaii
marine resources are vital. Hawaii's coastal resources, which are
world-renowned tourist attractions, generate nearly 40 percent of our
gross State product. The value of our coastal resources is dependent on
their health and beauty.
I want to express my appreciation for the cooperation the minority
has received from the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] and the
gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young] and their staffs. H.R. 437 is not
really a bipartisan bill, Mr. Chairman, it is a nonpartisan bill. I
think all of us who represent coastal areas have long appreciated the
benefits of this practical, noncontroversial program.

We would have been on the floor nearly 2 years ago reauthorizing this
popular and pragmatic program if ideology had not interfered. On that
note, I appreciate the cooperation extended by the leadership of the
Committee on Science in the person of the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
Sensenbrenner] and his staff in working out this compromise. Mr.
Chairman, I certainly appreciate the work, in addition, of my good
friend, whom I had the pleasure of working with in a previous
committee, the Minerals Subcommittee, the gentleman from California
[Mr. Calvert].
I hope this new spirit of cooperation leads to more timely
authorization of marine research and oceanography programs, which are
so vital not only to this Nation but to the planet, Mr. Chairman, over
which the two committees share jurisdiction. This is a good start on a
very good bill reauthorizing a popular program. I urge the House and
all of our colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 437, the National Sea Grant
College Reauthorization Act of 1997. This legislation reflects a
cooperative effort between the Committee on Science and the Committee
on Resources to craft a Sea Grant reauthorization bill that is in the
best interest of the program and of the taxpayers. I believe that the
product of that effort, the amendment in the nature of a substitute to
H.R. 437 brought by the gentleman from New Jersey, achieves these
goals, and I urge bipartisan support.
This amendment is a 3-year reauthorization that adds or modifies
various definitions, clarifies the duties of the program director, sets
forth the duties of the Sea Grant institutions and certain types of
entities conducting Sea Grant programs. The amendment includes merit
reviews of grant and contract applications, repeals the Sea Grant
International Program, which has never been funded, and reauthorizes
the Sea Grant program at $54.3 million for fiscal year 1998, $55.4
million for fiscal year 1999, and $56.5 million for fiscal year 2000.
It also authorizes, within these amounts for each fiscal year, up to
$2.8 million for competitive grants for university research on the
zebra mussel and up to $2.0 million for oyster disease research.
The amendment also promotes efficiency and to ensure that the
taxpayers' money is spent on research and not on bureaucracy. It limits
administrative spending to no more than 5 percent of the lesser of the
amount authorized or appropriated each fiscal year, and clarifies that
the maximum pay for voting members of the Sea Grant Board is determined
by the Secretary of Commerce.
Finally, the amendment prohibits the use of Sea Grant funds for
lobbying, and requires the Secretary of Commerce notice the Committees
on Science and Resources of any reprogramming of Sea Grant funds or
reorganization of any Sea Grant program, project or activity.
I believe the Committees on Science and Resources have crafted a
noncontroversial bill that is good for the Sea Grant Program and good
for the taxpayers, and urge my colleagues to support it.
In closing, I wish to thank the gentleman from California [Mr.
Calvert], the chairman of the Committee on Science's Subcommittee on
Energy and Environment, and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer],
the subcommittee's ranking member, for their hard work on this
legislation.
I would also like to thank the Committee on Science's ranking member,
the gentleman from California [Mr. Brown] for his bipartisan support.
I also want to commend the efforts of the gentleman from Alaska [Mr.
Young], chairman of the Committee on Resources; the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller], ranking member of the Committee on Resources;
my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], chairman of the
Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans;
and the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie], the subcommittee's
ranking member, even though the calculator in the Committee on
Resources on my age is way off, and I excuse them for that.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the House has a chance today to pass
H.R. 437, to reauthorize the National Sea Grant College Program. The
Sea Grant

[[Page H3874]]

program was established by Congress in 1966 and has contributed much to
the marine sciences over the past 30 years.
The nationwide Sea Grant network is composed of 26 Sea Grant colleges
which act as centers for the participation of over 300 universities
from both coastal and inland States. The Sea Grant focus on research,
education, technology transfer and public service makes this a unique
program with a long record of accomplishment.
In 1994, the National Academy of Sciences conducted an indepth review
of the Sea Grant program and said, and I quote, ``Sea Grant has been
virtually the only source of funding in the United States for
activities in marine policy and has been a major contributor for the
fields of marine aquaculture, coastal and estuarine research, marine
fisheries management, seafood safety, marine biotechnology, marine
engineering, and marine technology development.''
Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the leadership of both the
Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources for working out an
agreement on Sea Grant reauthorization. It is clear that the Sea Grant
Program has always enjoyed strong congressional support from both sides
of the aisle and from all of the committees that have jurisdiction.
The administration has requested funding for the basic Sea Grant
Program but has continued to propose the termination of one project of
great importance to many Members of Congress who live in the Great
Lakes region. I refer to the zebra mussel research program that has
been carried out by some of the Sea Grant colleges.
The zebra mussel was first sighted in 1988 and has rapidly spread
throughout all of the Great Lakes, the Hudson River, the Saint Lawrence
River, and much of the Mississippi Basin. The zebra mussel infestation
has assumed nightmarish proportions and has affected electric power
generation, industrial water intake facilities, fishing, recreational
uses of waterways and beaches, and, Mr. Chairman, agriculture.
A female zebra mussel can lay up to 1 million eggs per year, of which
more than 5 percent will survive.

{time} 1100

They live up to 5 years and can colonize in a density of 10,000
mussels per square yard. There are no known predators, and we lack any
real understanding of what control strategies have any chance of
success.
Mr. Chairman, when the committee held hearings on the Sea Grant
Program, we discussed at length the short-sighted decision of the
administration to propose no funding for zebra mussel and other
invasive species research. Indeed, James Baker, the Administrator of
NOAA, agreed with us that this is a serious problem in need of Federal
attention.
A number of members of the committee, some of whom will speak today,
wrote a letter to the administration emphasizing our desire to see this
research funded. Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record that letter.
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science,
Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC, March 19, 1997.
Hon. D. James Baker,
Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC.
Dear Dr. Baker: We would like to express our strong support
for continued funding for Zebra Mussel research that has been
included in H.R. 475, the Marine Research Revitalization Act
of 1987. The impact of Zebra Mussel infestation has spread
far beyond the Great Lakes and now stands to threaten
waterways nationwide.
Your testimony before the Subcommittee affirmed the vital
importance of this problem. It is critical that control
strategies and eradication methods be fully explored on an
expeditious basis.
It is our intent to support funding for this program and we
look forward to working with you in ensuring that this
research is vigorously pursued over the next several years.
Sincerely,
Ken Calvert,
Chairman, Subcommittee
on Energy and Environment.
Vern Ehlers,
Vice Chairman, Committee on Science.
Tim Roemer,
Ranking Democrat, Subcommittee
on Energy and Environment.
Lynn Rivers,
Member of Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I am gratified that the funding we identified for zebra
mussel research has been retained in this bill that we have before us
today. This problem is not trivial and it is not parochial. It will
soon affect all coastal areas from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the
gulf coast. We desperately need to make progress in understanding more
about invasive species and how to control them.
The Sea Grant Program has performed a critical role in addressing
this problem. I would like to further thank the gentleman from
California [Mr. Calvert], who I have worked with very closely on this
bill in a very, very bipartisan way and particularly on this zebra
mussel problem. I would like to thank the gentleman from Michigan [Mr.
Ehlers] and the gentlewoman from Michigan [Ms. Rivers] and also our
distinguished chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
Sensenbrenner] who has also been very supportive and very knowledgeable
on this zebra mussel problem.
Mr. Chairman, I again want to thank the leadership of the two
committees in bringing this bill to the floor. I urge all of my
colleagues to support it.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the House has a chance today to pass
H.R. 437 to reauthorize the National Sea Grant College Program. The Sea
Grant Program was established by Congress in 1966 and has contributed
much to the marine sciences over the past 30 years.
The nationwide Sea Grant network is composed of 26 Sea Grant colleges
which act as centers for the participation of over 300 universities
from both coastal and inland States. The Sea Grant focus on research,
education, technology transfer, and public service makes this a unique
program with a long record of accomplishment. In 1994, the National
Academy of Sciences conducted an in depth review of the Sea Grant
Program and said ``Sea Grant has been virtually the only source of
funding in the United States for activities in marine policy, and has
been a major contributor for the fields of marine aquaculture, coastal
and estuarine research, marine fisheries management, seafood safety,
marine biotechnology, marine engineering, and marine technology
development.''
Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the leadership of both the
Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources for working out an
agreement on Sea Grant reauthorization. it is clear that the Sea Grant
Program has always enjoyed strong congressional support from both sides
of the aisle and from all of the committees of jurisdiction.
Unfortunately, it has not always enjoyed strong support from the
administration. From 1984 through 1990, no funding was requested by the
administration, yet the Congress continued to provide the needed
resources.
More recently, the administration has requested funding for the basic
Sea Grant Program but has continued to propose the termination of one
project of great importance to many Members of Congress who live in the
Great Lakes States. I refer to the zebra mussel research program that
has been carried out by the Sea Grant colleges.
The zebra mussel were first sited in 1988 and have rapidly spread
throughout all of the Great Lakes, the Hudson River, the St. Lawrence
River, and much of the Mississippi Basin. The zebra mussel infestation
has assumed nightmarish proportions and has affected electric power
generation, industrial water intake facilities, fishing, recreational
uses of waterways and beaches, and agriculture.

A female zebra mussel can lay up to 1 million eggs per year of which
more than 5 percent will survive. They live up to 5 years and can
colonize at a density of 10,000 mussels per square yard. There are no
known predators and we lack any real understanding of what control
strategies have any chance of success.
Mr. Chairman, when the committee held hearings on the Sea Grant
Program, we were unable to determine to our satisfaction why funding
for zebra mussel research and other invasive species was not requested.
Indeed, Dr. James Baker, Administrator of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration readily agreed with us that this is a
serious problem in need of Federal attention. I and other interested
members of the committee, some of whom will speak today, wrote a letter
emphasizing our desire to see this research funded.
I am gratified that the funding we identified for zebra mussel
research has been retained in the bill we have before us today. This
problem is not trivial and it is not parochial. It will soon affect all
coastal areas from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the gulf coast. We
desperately need to make progress in understanding more about invasive
species and how to control them. The Sea Grant Program has performed a
critical role in addressing this problem. I'd like to think Mr. Ehlers,
Ms. Rivers, Mr. Calvert, and others for their help on this.

[[Page H3875]]

Mr. Chairman, I again want to thank the leadership of the two
committees in bringing this bill to the floor. I urge all of my
colleagues to support it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Mobile, AL [Mr. Callahan], who also serves as the chairman of the
powerful Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and
Related Programs and does such a wonderful job for us.
(Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CALLAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from New Jersey, Mr.
Saxton, for yielding me the time, and I rise in support of H.R. 437,
the National Sea Grant College Program Reauthorization Act.
Mr. Chairman, this program is extremely important to all coastal
States, not just the State of Alabama. The National Sea Grant College
Program is a Federal-State partnership which works to support 29 sea
grant programs in coastal and Great Lakes States and Puerto Rico. It is
probusiness, proenvironment, and proeducation.
It is a relatively small program which supports fundamental marine
research, education, and outreach activities. It assists Federal,
State, and local coastal decisionmakers to make informed decisions on
issues which affect marine ecosystems, human health, and coastal
economies which depend on a healthy and viable research.
In the State of Alabama, Mr. Chairman, the National Sea Grant College
Program supports the continuing efforts of the Mississippi-Alabama Sea
Grant Consortium, which brings together people from different
occupations and scientific disciplines to address common problems and
opportunities that affect the coastal regions of the northern Gulf of
Mexico and the Nation and the world.
It promotes research on the endangered sea turtle recovery, blue
crabs, and oyster disease pathology. It conducts outreach and
educational efforts in coordination with Alabama's Dauphin Island Sea
Lab so that teachers and the public at large have access to the latest
scientific information.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 437 so that the
National Sea Grant College Program can continue to promote marine
research excellence, environmental conservation, and educational
outreach.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he might consume
to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Green].
(Mr. GREEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Hawaii, [Mr.
Abercrombie], for allowing me the time to speak today in support of
H.R. 437, the National Sea Grant College Program Reauthorization Act.
The Sea Grant College Program, established in 1966, provides wise
stewardship over our marine and coastal resources. It is a partnership
between our universities and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The mission of the Sea Grant Program is to promote and
sponsor research, education, and outreach aimed at the wise utilization
and conservation of our Nation's coastal and marine resources in order
to develop and maintain a sustainable economy and a healthy
environment.
I represent a district in Houston, TX. It is the Port of Houston; and
our Sea Grant College is Texas A&M at Galveston, with programs spread
all along the gulf coast of Texas and where a person can learn about
both the ocean and coast and environment and innovative marine
technologies.
The 29th District, like I said, is in the Port of Houston, about 50
miles away from the Texas A&M campus, but it is vital to all the ports
along the Texas coast and also to our Nation. Texas A&M Sea Grant
College provides business owners, fishermen, and community groups
information about how to achieve the most economically while
responsibly conserving the marine environment.
Without the Sea Grant Program, the citizens of Texas and our Nation
cannot stay current and competitive with the rest of the world. By
reauthorizing the Sea Grant Colleges through the year 2000, we have
ensured that we will help train future citizens who will not only look
to protect our oceans and coastal areas, but they also will be trained
to properly use our marine resources.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 437. This bill makes significant
improvements in the Sea Grant Program by streamlining the review
process, reducing administrative costs, and clarifying the Federal and
university roles in the program. This program is a 30-year success
story. It has proven its value and worth to our country. Again, I rise
in support of the bill and again thank my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle for putting together this effort.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume
to the gentleman from California [Mr. Calvert].
Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Chairman, I also want to wish a happy birthday to
the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner]. I found it
interesting that I am somewhat older than the chairman, until one of my
colleagues pointed out that, once you become chairman, you become 20
years younger, which explains why we have such longevity around this
place.
First, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska [Mr.
Young] and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] and the gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] for working together to iron out
their differences on this Sea Grant Program so we can move forward on
this bill.
In particular, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] is to be
commended for working diligently through two Congresses to authorize
this program. If our brethren in the other body will cooperate, we will
succeed this year.
The National Sea Grant Program has been an integral part of our
Nation's efforts to better conserve and manage our publicly owned
coastal marine resources, which are essential to our continued economic
growth.
In 1994, the Ocean Studies Board of the National Research Council
reviewed the Sea Grant Program and found that it has over the years
played a significant role in U.S. marine science, education, and
outreach. In California, the University of California operates the
largest of 29 Sea Grant Colleges. In fiscal year 1996, the California
program supported 36 research projects at 12 universities in all parts
of the State.
These projects have proved to be important for our coastal areas. For
example, UCLA's Sea Grant scientists are developing a revolutionary
technique that will allow us to determine the different types and
origins of bacteria in our coastal waters. Other projects funded by Sea
Grant have provided information on the probable movement of oilspills
under hundreds of different sea conditions.
Mr. Chairman, the Sea Grant Program is marked by high quality peer-
reviewed scientific research. The committee substitute, as agreed to by
both the Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources, is
fiscally responsible and limits bureaucratic overhead to 5 percent of
the program's funding.
I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer], who has been
very helpful in working with us in a bipartisan way to complete this
bill. I would urge my colleagues to support this bill and move it on.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished gentlewoman from the State of Michigan [Ms. Rivers].
Ms. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the
time.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to stand in support for funding for the
Sea Grant proposal, as well as funding in the area of invasive species.
For those of my colleagues who are not familiar with the Great Lakes,
and, amazingly, a significant number of people are not, there is a song
that refers to the Great Lakes as the inland seas. And for my
colleagues who have not actually viewed the Great Lakes, they are very
awesome. These are not small bodies of water.
In fact, 20 percent of the world's fresh water exists in the Great
Lakes basin. They contain 95 percent of the fresh water surface in the
United States. So when the Great Lakes are threatened, to a larger
extent our Nation is threatened. We rely on the Great Lakes for

[[Page H3876]]

water, for fish, and for other kinds of foods.
Right now, the Great Lakes are suffering a plague, a plague of
incredible magnitude, in that zebra mussels, an invasive species who
originated in the Caspian Sea, have become predominant across the Great
Lakes basin.
Damage attributable to zebra mussels during the 1990's is estimated
to be as high as $5 billion. That is billion with a ``b.'' They are
causing extreme difficulty in every manner possible for municipalities
who are trying to maintain their water systems, for individuals who may
own property on the shore, for sport fishermen and any other number of
individuals who take advantage of the Great Lakes.
It is imperative that we maintain funding for zebra mussel research.
It is imperative that we recognize the intensity of this problem and
the enormity of the effects of this problem. Zebra mussels, as has been
said earlier, reproduce prodigiously and their colonies can cover
nearly any solid surface in a very short period of time. Inlets become
clogged. Docked boats become fouled. And most aquatic habitats have
been covered by dense masses of mussels.
The Great Lakes Sea Grant network has frequently taken the lead in
addressing the zebra mussel problem through their research, education,
and outreach activities. Within a month of the first confirmed sighting
in Lake Erie, Sea Grant scientists were researching ways to control
them.
It is imperative that we maintain these research programs, that we
make this a top priority in Sea Grant research. For those reasons, I
support continuing funding of Sea Grant and continuing funding for
zebra mussel research.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn], who is also the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Benefits.
Mr. QUINN. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. Saxton] yielding me the time.
Mr. Chairman, I rise today to join others and associate myself with
the remarks of the previous speakers in favor of H.R. 437, a bill
reported by the Committee on Resources that would reauthorize the
National Sea Grant College Program.
Mr. Chairman, it is interesting that we have heard from speakers this
morning from Texas and Alabama and Indiana and California and Michigan;
now I rise from New York to talk about this program. Sea Grant is an
outstanding research and public outreach program that seeks useful
answers to many of the nagging problems that affect the Nation's
oceanic and Great Lakes coastline.
The program is a model for what all Federal research and outreach
programs should be. This one, of course, is characterized by peer-
reviewed competitive awarding of research grants, strong focus on
research that will solve the real coastal problems that people are
dealing with, a strong commitment to translating and extending the
results of research to potential users, a shared funding with State,
local, and private resources, and finally an emphasis on results that
will benefit the lives of our citizens, communities, and businesses.
Along the Great Lakes shores, as my colleague just pointed out, the
New York Sea Grant is playing a key role in helping individuals, water
and power authorities, Government agencies, and marine business cope
with the spread of zebra mussels and other exotics that impact the
Lakes' shoreline and ecosystem.
Sea Grant specialists in nearby Brockport, New York, the district of
the gentleman from New York [Mr. LaFalce] operate NOAA's Zebra Mussel
Information Clearinghouse, which has helped thousands across the State,
Nation and the globe to address virtually every aspect of this exotic
pest.
Sea Grant specialists continue to assist the watersheds through their
public education programs. And lastly, Sea Grant has been an accessible
and an impartial source of policy and engineering information on the
issue of Great Lakes water levels as well as erosion.
I am also proud to say that the Sea Grant field office, located at
the State University of New York at Buffalo, has played a key role in
the University's faculty and administration to develop an excellent
Great Lakes program that focuses faculty attention and resources on
pressing Great Lakes issues and reaches out educationally to all
audiences in the greater Buffalo area on the same issues.
H.R. 437 will allow Sea Grant to continue its excellent efforts, and
it also takes steps to improve the program. The Committee on Resources
has appropriately succeeded in streamlining aspects of the program and
has removed previously authorized aspects of the same program that were
not warranted to be continued.
I ask all our Members, not only from this area, to make sure that
they understand the program is a good program. It enjoys bipartisan
support from all sections of the country. All Federal programs, I
believe, should reflect the track record of success, low cost, and
effectiveness that this program, the Sea Grant program, has
exemplified.
I ask all my Great Lakes colleagues, as well as Members of the House,
to support H.R. 437 as reported by the Committee on Resources, and I
commend the committee members on both sides for the great work that
they have done.

{time} 1115

Ms. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the
gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] and I ask unanimous consent
that he be permitted to control that time.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman
from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to
the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton] and I ask unanimous consent
that he be permitted to control that time.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Could the chairman kindly tell me how much allotted
time remains both with the Science Committee and with my committee?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Hawaii has 17 minutes remaining and
the gentleman from New Jersey has 12\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Chairman, we all know how valuable the National Sea
Grant College Program is and we know how important it is as a catalyst
for scientific research, but I want to say a word about how the program
helps young people learn through outreach and education.
The Michigan Sea Grant Extension offers shipboard education for K
through 12 students through their Great Lakes Education Program. Sea
Grant's K through 12 program stresses hands-on exploration of our
environment to stimulate interest at an early age in scientific
studies. The program based in Mount Clemens, MI, targets fourth graders
and is offered to all grade school students throughout the country.
I had the good fortune recently to join 40 fourth graders from Saint
Joan of Arc Elementary School in Saint Clair Shores on a trip down the
Clinton River and into Lake Saint Clair. This is a program that
operates throughout the spring and the early months in the fall. It
takes fourth graders and it teaches them about the whole process of the
lake. The Great Lakes, especially Lake Saint Clair and the connecting
waters in my district, are going through a huge change in the
eutrophication process that has resulted because of the zebra mussels
cleansing the water and letting the sunlight come in, letting the weeds
grow and then trapping some of the fecal matter that have created
really a disastrous situation in our Great Lakes.
This program educates our young people on how that happens and how to
avoid it from happening. The young people on this vessel move from one
point on the vessel to another point, and they do experiments for about
2 hours. It is a wonderful program. It educates them about the
environment, it teaches them about their lake and how important it is
to not only their environment but to the economy of the area. It is
something that Sea Grant has done and done very well. I just

[[Page H3877]]

want to commend all the folks who worked on this program.
On the day of our trip, the Sea Grant Extension celebrated the
participation of its 10,000th student. That is 10,000 students who now
know more about the ecology of our lake and about how to use our water
resources wisely.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington [Mr. Metcalf].
Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman, as an original cosponsor of H.R. 437, I
rise in strong support of this excellent reauthorization bill for the
National Sea Grant College Program. I want to commend the gentleman
from Alaska [Mr. Young], chairman of the Committee on Resources, for
introducing this bill to reauthorize a valuable program.
The Sea Grant Program was designed to identify marine resource issues
at the grassroots level and bring the scientific expertise of
university researchers to bear in addressing them. Sea Grant has a
broad network of over 300 colleges, universities, and research
institutions which conduct competitive, peer-reviewed scientific
research on problems affecting coastal areas.
The sound scientific research that Sea Grant provides is critically
important in helping many coastal communities like those I represent in
Washington State to improve their economies and our competitiveness in
world markets. As former chairman of the Washington State Senate's
Environment and Natural Resources Committee and as a member of
Washington Sea Grant's Ocean Resources Assessment Advisory Committee, I
have had the opportunity over the years to observe Sea Grant's
effectiveness. For example, Washington's Sea Grant Program has achieved
broad ranging successes, from human lives saved as a direct result of
Sea Grant fishing vessel safety training, to reduced bycatch and waste
at sea through the development of new fishing techniques. Sea Grant
represents an effective partnership between the Federal Government and
the States, in which each Federal dollar must be matched at least 50
percent by funds from the States, the private sector or other non-
Federal sources.
H.R. 437 is consistent with and authorizes appropriations at exactly
the same level as the fiscal year 1997 House-passed Commerce
appropriations bill. It also makes significant improvements in the Sea
Grant Program by streamlining the proposal review process, reducing
administrative costs and capping total program costs below the service
level. The National Sea Grant College Program plays a vitally important
role in maintaining the health and usefulness of our coastal and marine
resources.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote with me in support of this
important bill.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Rhode Island [Mr. Weygand].
(Mr. WEYGAND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WEYGAND. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr.
Abercrombie] for yielding me this time. I appreciate the opportunity to
be here to voice my strong support for H.R. 437.
Mr. Chairman, Rhode Island, my State, is known as the Ocean State. It
has a long and valiant history and a reliance upon Narragansett Bay and
the Atlantic Ocean for its economic well-being. The bay creates jobs,
it attracts tourists and supplies the foundation of commercial and
recreational fishing that is a real mainstay in our economy, not only
for Rhode Island but for New England. Narragansett Bay generates an
immediate economic impact of over $2 billion for my small State just on
fisheries and things immediately associated with the bay and well over
$10 billion when we think about all the tourism and other aspects that
it provides.
The Rhode Island Sea Grant Program and the University of Rhode
Island, one of the most distinguished oceanographic institutions in the
country, are indispensable contributors to the knowledge base that
enables us to be good stewards of our valuable resources. The Rhode
Island Sea Grant Program is also, though, more than just that. It is
a collaboration of many agencies, like the university, our Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management, the Rhode Island Coastal
Resources Management Center, the Environmental Protection Agency and a
host of environmental and community groups like Save the Bay, one of
the largest environmental groups in the country. At the university,
much of our money that comes in for marine research is from Sea Grant.

Currently, the Sea Grant Program is involved in improving long-term
forecasting of changes in fishing stocks, allowing us not only to
develop long-term sustainability of fisheries in Rhode Island and New
England but throughout the world; conducting biotechnical research that
may result in potential sources of anticancer compounds, certainly one
that has great impact not only to the country but to the world. Also,
the Sea Grant Program offers advisory services on harbor management,
seafood quality and safety, safety at sea, and educational and career
activities for our youngsters as well as our college students.
One of the great new areas of Sea Grant is the area of aquaculture,
an area that in Rhode Island and New England's economy which has been
very stagnant, is very important, because it will provide new sources
of revenue through sea farming and the aquaculture community. We think
this is extremely important.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I ask all of my colleagues to strongly
support this bill. I think that the Sea Grant Program not only is
helpful to the Ocean State, Rhode Island, but to the Great Lakes, to
all parts of our country, our economy, our tourism but, most important,
the resources of our great country.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Kennedyville on Maryland's beautiful Eastern Shore [Mr. Gilchrest].
Mr. GILCHREST. I thank the gentleman from the Garden State for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
Saxton], the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie], and the gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] for this compromise bill that goes a
long way into understanding the nature and the usefulness and the
resourcefulness of the Sea Grant Program.
Mr. Chairman, this program, Sea Grant, takes young idealists and
inculcates into them knowledge, experience to become pragmatic,
idealistic scientists, to become a piece of the infinite puzzle to
understand the mechanics of creation.
What are the problems in the Great Lakes with zebra mussels and how
do we solve that? What is the problem in the Chesapeake Bay with MSX
and dermo? Where did it come from and why is it so tenacious? What is
the problem of fishkills in North Carolina? Millions of fish have died
in the estuaries of North Carolina. The tragedy of the commons in the
Gulf of Mexico; the coastal fisheries of the United States, where there
are more people, better technology, catching fewer fish. How do we
solve this?
To understand the complexities of the power and the weaknesses, the
endurance and the sensitive limitations of the Earth's natural
processes, we need educated, knowledgeable, dedicated young people to
begin a lifetime of service to this environmental end.
Mr. Chairman, our resources on planet Earth are limited. There are no
more new frontiers on the other side of the horizon on the ground. Our
horizons physically are limited and to a certain extent they have come
to an end. What is our next frontier? Our next frontier is an
intellectual frontier. If we use up our resources in the manner in
which we are using them now, especially the resources from the marine
ecosystem, we cannot go anywhere in this infinite, hostile environment
we call the universe. We are here.
Mr. Chairman, we need science, we need knowledge, and we need the
technique to implement that science and that knowledge to preserve the
natural processes, which is to preserve the natural resources on this
planet.
One of the solutions to this puzzle, Mr. Chairman, is the Sea Grant
Program. I encourage my colleagues to vote for this legislation.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
Mr. PALLONE. I want to thank the gentleman from Hawaii for yielding
me this time.

[[Page H3878]]

Mr. Chairman, I will not use the entire 3 minutes, but I did want to
say in my prior life, before I was in Congress and before I was a
politician really, I was a Sea Grant coastal law specialist. I mention
that, because I learned a lot about the Sea Grant Program and
particularly how it benefits the average person. Sea Grant really is a
very valuable program because it reaches out to help so many people in
very positive ways. I think that many Members of Congress and certainly
the public at large are not aware of how far-reaching its positive
efforts are. When I was a coastal law specialist, basically I worked
with various user groups, if you will, whether it was marina owners or
commercial or recreational fishermen or longshoremen, anyone really who
was involved in the coastal environment took advantage of what we
called the New Jersey Marine Advisory Service, which was basically an
outreach program financed through Sea Grant to help those people,
working people mostly, who made their living from the sea or from the
coastal area.

{time} 1130

It was a very unique program in a way because it is one of the few
times, I think, when people who are in the Federal employ actually are
in the working area, if my colleagues will, and actually helping people
on a daily basis with their problems. I thought that it was
tremendously valuable, and of course I have also had contact with the
Sea Grant program because here in Congress and Federal agencies we have
Sea Grant fellows, and I know that this reauthorization legislation
specifically provides for the continuation of the Sea Grant fellowship
program, again another way to get young people involved, to help
interaction here in Washington, as well as with the Federal agencies,
to learn more about how we at the Federal Government can be a positive
force in the field, so to speak.
In my own State of New Jersey the Sea Grant program is managed by the
New Jersey Marine Science Consortium which is an alliance of about 30
colleges, universities, private organizations and individuals
interested in marine affairs, and New Jersey Sea Grant is very cost
effective. I have to stress that; very cost effective in that all
resources are shared by the institutions that participate in the Sea
Grant program, thereby avoiding duplicative purchases statewide, and
collective State and Federal funds are used for administration of a
summer marine science program for college students as well as operation
and maintenance of a small research fleet and state-of-the art sampling
equipment.
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take much more time, but I wanted to,
say, just give some recent examples of Sea Grant-supported research and
outreach activities in New Jersey that have positively impacted the
lives of the residents of my State.
Right now Sea Grant is funding two biotechnology research projects
that help develop products with practical uses in the pharmaceutical
and pulp industries. It is sponsoring a commercial fisherman's safety
training program. It is supporting a red tide research effort, and the
list goes on.
Sea Grant is a valuable program, and we should support this
legislation.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
the State of Washington, [Mrs. Linda Smith].
Mrs. LINDA SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the
Committee on Resources from the beautiful State of Washington, I rise
in strong support of this bill. The National Sea Grant College Program
is very important to the Pacific Coast, but especially to my district.
I want to commend the gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young] of the
Committee on Resources and especially the gentleman from New Jersey
[Mr. Saxton] who is also the bill's sponsor. But never to forget the
subcommittee staff because they actually do so much of the work in
making sure that the bill works right.
The National Sea Grant program is a network of over 300 colleges,
universities and research institutions throughout the country focused
on the wise use of marine resources. Literally thousands of coastal
communities and small coastal businesses depend on Sea Grant for a wide
range of services and for critical, impartial, scientific advice and
help. Over half of our Nation's population resides in coastal districts
and Sea Grant plays a significant role in improving the lives of our
constituents through high-quality competitive research, education and
community outreach.
For example, in my home State of Washington, Sea Grant has helped
save our State's shellfish industry which is dominated by small family-
owned operations. They have done this through the development of a
high-quality, year-round triploid oyster. Sea Grant's information on
strategic planning and financial management of public ports has been
unmatched, in our area at least, and the program's effort in small
coastal communities in our area are demonstrating economic and social
benefits of waterfront revitalization.
H.R. 437, as reported by the Committee on Resources, makes
significant improvements in the program by streamlining the proposed
review processes and reducing administration. Now this is capping the
overall program costs while still serving the communities, and this is
what this Congress is all about, doing it better, balancing the budget
and still serving.
I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I again want to
thank the chairman for introducing it and for its sponsor.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Stupak].
(Mr. STUPAK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 437.
I thank the gentleman from Hawaii for yielding, and would like to
congratulate Mr. Saxton and Mr. Ambercrombie for their leadership on
this important issue.
Mr. Chairman, the National Sea Grant College Program plays a vital
role in protecting the fragile ecosystem of the Great Lakes. When the
National Sea Grant College Program was originally authorized, it
directed that funds be used to research aquatic nuisance species in the
Great Lakes region. Typically, most of this money has gone toward zebra
mussel research and has been successful in stemming the flow of zebra
mussel infestation.
As many of you know, the zebra mussel is a nonindigenous species that
infiltrated the Great Lakes in the 1980's when it was dispensed with
bilge water from a Black Sea cargo ship. Since then, zebra mussels and
other aquatic nuisance species have caused substantial damage to water
infrastructure systems. A recent Sea Grant survey of Great Lake
facilities using surface water showed the cost of battling zebra
mussels from 1989-94 was over $120 million, in recent years it is up to
$30 million per year.
In addition, a recent study by the Office of Technology Assessment
estimates that the power industry alone may spend more than $3 billion
over the next 10 years just to control zebra mussel infestation in
water intake systems.
Apart from these economic costs, there is evidence that the zebra
mussel may disrupt the lower food chain and deplete valuable Great Lake
fish stocks. This could severely impact a $4 billion sport and food
fishery in the Great Lakes region.
Zebra mussel infestation is not a problem that is only limited to the
Great Lakes. The zebra mussel is spreading rapidly across the United
States, having been found throughout the Mississippi Valley, the Gulf
Coast, the Chesapeake Bay, and in locations as far away as California.
In fact, the zebra mussel has now spread to 20 States and continues to
spread. To give you an idea how fast zebra mussels multiply, it is
possible that one zebra mussel could produce as many as 1 million eggs.
The National Sea Grant College Program's research into aquatic
nuisance species is crucial and must be maintained and even enhanced if
the spread of these species is to be prevented and controlled. The
zebra mussel research is especially important, as lessons learned from
this research can be applied to the prevention and control of other
aquatic nuisance species.
H.R. 437 continues the Federal Government's commitment to zebra
mussel research and to fighting the spread of this aquatic nuisance
species, which is more than just a nuisance.
In addition Mr. Chairman, Michigan Sea Grant plays a pivotal role in
my district in addressing a wide range of issues that are vital to the
Great Lakes. For example, Sea Grant is a leader in developing new
approaches for the responsible management of Great Lakes fisheries,
working with over 600 seafood processors and fishermen to improve
seafood safety, coordinating citizen volunteers in my

[[Page H3879]]

district to monitor Great Lakes water quality, and helping State and
local governments create new economic opportunities in coastal
recreation and tourism, while managing development wisely in an
industry whose economic impact on my State now rivals that of
automobile production.
My Chairman, I strongly urges the passage of this bill.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from California [Mr. Farr].
Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I want to wish the Chair of the
Committee on Science, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner],
a happy birthday, and I also want to thank the Chair of the
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans for his
very kind comments on the passing of my father.
Mr. Chairman, we see that there is strong bipartisan support for this
effort, and I want to tell Members why. I think that America believes
and understands that it may be the land masses of the world that
separate the peoples, but it is the oceans that bring us together.
I co-authored the reauthorization of the Sea Grant program basically
because I believe it is a great program, one that enables important
efforts in marine resource conservation to be properly managed. When we
think about our oceans and our coasts and the Great Lakes, they are
tremendous resources and of great importance not only to our economy
but also to our social and to our cultural vitality. But our
population, over half of which lives on 10 percent of the land defined
as coastal, puts incredible pressures on these environments. We harvest
the fish and other living organisms. We alter the physical environment.
We fill in wetlands. We dredge our harbors. We bulkheaded our
shorelines. We pollute. We introduce alien species into our ecosystems.
We are adding substances to the atmosphere that increases the
ultraviolet radiation and alter the globe's climate.
We should see it as a priority to have high-quality, competitive,
peer-reviewed science to better understand these dynamic resources, our
effects on them, and to propose ways to minimize negative impacts while
enhancing economic benefits. Hand in hand with this must come programs
to get this information out to the public and user groups with the goal
of wise, sustainable use.
For nearly 30 years this is exactly what the Sea Grant program has
been doing, and it is doing it in a fiscally responsible way. Federal
funding for Sea Grant must be matched by non-Federal contributions.
Over half of the funding of Sea Grant programs come from non-Federal
sources. Funded at about $50 million annually, we need to support its
reauthorization.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan [Mr. Ehlers].
(Mr. EHLERS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I join the gentleman from Maryland [Mr.
Gilchrest] in commending and complimenting the chairman and ranking
members of these two committees for an excellent bill, and I rise to
speak in favor of this bill and encourage my colleagues to support it
and vote for it.
Over a hundred years ago this Nation established land grant
universities which have served this Nation well. One of their primary
purposes was to conduct research in the uses of our land, particularly
for agriculture, and today we still have a network of agricultural
research which is second to none in the world and which has been of
great benefit to the farmers and the citizens of this country.
More than half, in fact considerably more than half, of our planet's
surface is occupied by oceans and large lakes, and yet we have devoted
far less of our resources to research upon the water ways of this
planet than we have to the land of our Nation. The good feature of this
bill is that it begins and continues the process of research that we
have instituted for the oceans and the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes of
this Nation are a valuable resource. They hold more than 90 percent of
the fresh water in this Nation and are the primary source of fresh
water throughout the world.
Michigan alone has greater shoreline than any other State of the
Union other than Alaska. We have over 3,000 miles of shoreline which
indicates the importance of aquaculture, fisheries, and things of this
sort to the State of Michigan. But research and the science necessary
to really maintain the fisheries of this planet and the resources of
the Great Lakes has been lacking.
This bill will help continue the research we have begun in places
such as Ann Arbor and other resource facilities in the Great Lakes
area, but throughout this Nation this bill will provide the funding
that is needed to do the research necessary to continue to ensure that
our fisheries are adequate to supply the needs of our Nation and of
other nations.
A new problem has arisen in the recent past and is also addressed in
this bill, and that is the problem of invasive nonindigenous species. A
major problem at the moment, of course, is the zebra mussel which is
creating havoc in the Great Lakes and is rapidly spreading across this
Nation. It is plugging water supply lines to power plants,
municipalities, creating problems for boaters, ship owners, and we need
a great deal more research in understanding the zebra mussel and other
invasive species.
I am very pleased that this bill specifically addresses the zebra
mussel problem, and I hope in the future we will be able to increase
the funding for the study of invasive species so that we can in fact
tackle the problem, reduce the difficulty of dealing with these species
in the Great Lakes and in other bodies of water in and upon the shores
of this Nation.
It is a good bill, and I urge the support of my colleagues. Vote for
it.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I believe that the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton] has the duty to close the debate. I have four more
speakers. I am not sure whether he has more speakers and how much time
is left for him, and I wonder if I might impose upon him to allow our
speakers to catch up so that we can conclude properly.
Mr. SAXTON. I have no objection to that, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Hawaii has 7 minutes remaining.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Traficant]. Other speakers have had more time but, as we
know, the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Traficant] will be able to conclude
his remarks within 1 minute.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] and the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
Saxton] for this job, and the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie]
and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].
Now no parts of the Great Lakes touches my district, and I have no
ocean frontage, but I am working on that, and the Congress should know
that, and I support this bill, but I will be offering an amendment, and
that amendment is very simple and straightforward. If we buy American-
made products and an American company continues to have business, an
American worker gets a paycheck. From that paycheck we get some taxes,
and from those taxes we can provide these grants, and it works for all
of us.
So we are going to reach out and touch somebody like the phone
service, and I will be offering that amendment, and I would appreciate
my colleagues' support. But again I would like to commend both of the
committees for the compromises and the efforts they made to bring a
good bill that will be helpful to science and research in America.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. Johnson].
Mr. JOHNSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I join with my other
colleagues, especially as a representative of Wisconsin, wishing a
happy birthday to my colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
Sensenbrenner].
I rise in strong support today of the National Sea Grants College
Program Reauthorization Act as another representative of a Great Lakes
district with a wide array of boating and marine interests. I know well
the importance of this bill before us. In this bill we are investing, I
think, up to $2.8 million next year to research the control of the
zebra mussels in the Great

[[Page H3880]]

Lakes. For those colleagues who are not familiar, and I am sure many of
them are with this devastating problem of nonindigenous species, I can
tell them the invasion of zebra mussels has caused a great burden to
the Great Lake States in the past decade. The zebra mussel: A mollusk
that was carried to the Great Lakes in the late 1980's traveling in the
ballast water of European freighters. Here in an environment without a
natural predator the mussels spread widely, quickly attaching
themselves to any hard surface in sight. They have clogged water
intakes of sewer systems, utilities and factories, filling boat holes,
covering beaches with their sharp shells. They cause great economic and
ecological hardship to our region; I used to live on the Great Lakes
and know about them.
Currently there is no answer for this disease. If my colleagues can
imagine, every female mussel can produce 30 to 40,000 offspring several
times a year, every mussel lives up to 8 years. I know it sounds like a
bad horror movie, but the problem is real, and unless we contain the
research on this species and how to control it, we expect the zebra
mussels to continue to spread to other waters and bring their
destruction to other regions.
In this bill we will spend up to $2.8 million to continue the
research on the zebra mussel, exploring methods of control, examining
how to prevent invasions in the future. If my colleagues think this is
a large investment, I ask them to think of businesses all over the
Great Lakes which are forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars
every year to filter and scrape out zebra mussels from their pipes and
intake systems.

{time} 1245

I hope we will continue our strong support for this vital research.
Part of the reason we have learned much about the zebra mussel is due
to this bill and the great Sea Grant College Program. I urge my
colleagues to support H.R. 437.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I have some additional time which I am not
going to use; and with the permission of the Chair, I yield 4 minutes
of my time to the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr. Abercrombie] for the
purposes of control, so that he can dispense it to Members on the other
side.
The CHAIRMAN. For the information of the majority, the gentleman from
New Jersey has 7\1/2\ minutes remaining, and 4 of those minutes,
without objection, are yielded to the gentleman from Hawaii [Mr.
Abercrombie].
There was no objection.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, as always, I am very grateful to the
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton]. This is in the spirit within
which this bill was concluded, and I very much appreciate it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
[Mrs. Tauscher].
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time.
I rise to discuss a nonnative aquatic weed which is taking over our
Nation's waterways and is rapidly becoming a national problem. While I
recognize the extreme threat that other nonnative aquatic species can
cause, and the zebra mussel infestation of our Great Lakes and rivers
throughout the Midwest is a prime example, I believe we need to begin
to focus national attention on directing research funds on controlling
and eliminating other nonindigenous aquatic species.
In my State of California we have more nonindigenous species
destroying our natural environment than any other State. One of the
worst offenders in the San Francisco Bay Delta includes Egeria Densa, a
water weed that originates in Brazil and has taken over not only our
local waterways but the canals, rivers, lakes, and bays around the
country, including the Mississippi River, the Florida Everglades, and
the Chesapeake Bay. This weed impacts water quality in the bay by
displacing native vegetation and choking the waterways, causing severe
damage to boats, loss of recreational area, and a dramatic reduction of
the property values along the deltas in my district.
Rooted in the bottom of the delta, this nonnative weed reproduces
when fragments of the plant break off and travel with boats or tidal
flow to be deposited and then grow in another area. The plant picks up
nutrients in the delta and, with the help of the Sun, spreads like
wildfire throughout the delta sloughs. In the past several years, this
spread has accelerated to the point that I fear any solution may soon
be too little too late.
Already there are areas that only a couple of years ago were open for
boaters, yet are now completely inundated by this weed. In fact, many
areas of the delta are now so full of Egeria Densa that it has turned
canals into clogged beds of weeds in which nothing else can compete.
I support this bill because it provides money for research into
aquatic nuisance species like Egeria Densa.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with the chairman and ranking
members of the Committee on Science and the Committee on Resources on
this very important issue in the future. Research is needed to develop
an effective and environmentally benign method to eradicate Egeria
Densa before it becomes a major epidemic in my delta and around the
Nation.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman
from Michigan [Ms. Stabenow] to conclude and close out our side of the
debate.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, to leaders who have worked so hard on
this issue, congratulations to both sides and I appreciate the
cooperation of the majority in yielding time for us today.
This is such an important bill to the great State of Michigan, as has
already been indicated by my colleague from Grand Rapids, MI, we have
more Great Lakes, more wonderful waterways than any other State in the
Union. It is incredibly important that the sea grant research project
be continued and be strengthened in order to monitor the Great Lakes.
The sea grant has contributed substantially to improving the use of
Great Lakes resources and understanding them. For instance, in our
State, there has been a great focus, as has been talked about already,
on the issue of zebra mussels. There is a very important program that
is called the inland lake monitoring program that has helped
constituents in my district. We have monitored over 100 lakes and found
45 lakes in which there have been zebra mussels identified.
The inland lakes program that is operated through this grant research
project allows citizens to learn important information about how to
prevent the spread of zebra mussels, how to identify zebra mussels
early in their life. It greatly relates to the ability to swim, to
boat, to enjoy the wonderful lakes that we have in Michigan as well as
around the country, and it is important that we continue our research
so that we can prevent zebra mussels in the long run.
I want to share one other important success story about the Michigan
Sea Grant Program that I have not heard discussed today, and that is
the development of revival techniques for victims of cold water
immersion, which is also a success story of the sea grant research
project. With the help of the sea grant research project, people who
have been underwater for periods of up to one-half hour are now being
successfully revived whereas in the past these people had been given up
as a drowning death. With the support of a successful sea grant
research project and outreach program, the entire approach to cold
water immersion has changed.
We know that there is success story after success story in this
research program. It is important for our quality of life; it is
important for our ecosystem; it is important for the country that we
maintain a vigilant research and outreach project through the national
sea grant program. I am very pleased to rise with my colleagues in
support of H.R. 437 and urge a strong bipartisan vote today.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just like to take a couple of minutes to close the general
debate by saying that this is obviously a program that is very
important all across the country. Nowhere is it more important than my
home State of New Jersey, where a full 10 percent of all of the marine
science consortium members are from New Jersey, headed up, of course,

[[Page H3881]]

by the sea grant university, Rutgers University. Through these 31
members of the New Jersey marine science consortium, a number of very
worthwhile projects have been carried out.
One of the projects is really a project which is at the forefront of
development of technology in marine research. That program is known as
the LEO 15 project. LEO is an acronym which stands for Long-term
Ecosystem Observatory, which is literally an observatory which is
stationed several miles off the New Jersey coast in the Atlantic Ocean.
And through fiberoptic connection to shore and satellite technology,
the data in a real-time situation is collected and transported via
fiberoptic and satellite technology to Rutgers University and directly
there into schoolrooms and university rooms all across the country. So
that on a real-time basis, people can have knowledge of, study, and
make use of the data that is collected from the LEO observatory. It is
a very worthwhile tool in helping us to understand on an ongoing basis
what is happening in the ocean, on the ocean floor, relative to a
variety of scientific issues that are important.
In addition to that, we in New Jersey are studying fish recruitment
in estuaries, which means essentially how do we enhance fisheries in
the breeding grounds and the spawning grounds in our estuaries. We have
a variety of projects with regard to water quality and the impacts of
sediments in some of our estuarine areas such as Barnegat Bay. We are
using a $600,000 sea grant each year to study and try and find the
answers to oyster diseases and research in that area. We have a
workshop ongoing with regard to environmental sustainability of the
marine industry, the marina industry, which essentially is a program to
enhance the understanding of environmental issues as they are affected
by boaters in marinas and those issues.
We also have an ongoing program in New Jersey on the industrial use
of marina biotechnology products. In other words, how can we develop
and use products which are friendly to the environment. So these
programs which are of vital importance to the future use of the marine
estuarine environment are of vital importance, and in each case they
are carried out because the sea grant program provides the resources to
do so.
So I would like to ask that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle,
it would be nice to get a unanimous vote on this. I have heard no
objections.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me say that this is another example of
a Committee on Resources bill emanating from the Subcommittee on
Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, which enjoys the
bipartisan nature of our good relationships with each other between
Republicans and Democrats and Members of the House.
So I ask for everyone to support this very, very worthwhile bill.
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 437 reauthorizes and amends
the National Sea Grant College Program Act of 1966. This bill was
introduced by Jim Saxton, and a number of Members, like me, who believe
that this has been an effective Federal program.
Sea Grant was established in 1966 in order to improve our Nation's
marine resource conservation efforts, to manage those resources more
effectively, and to enhance their proper use. The program is patterned
after the highly successful Land Grant College Program, which is
familiar to many of our noncoastal Members.
For over 30 years, Sea Grant has successfully achieved its goals
through a unique combination of research grants, marine advisory
services, and education. Alaska's Sea Grant Program has improved our
understanding of commercial fish stocks, the factors affecting the size
and health of those stock, and the best economic uses for fishery
resources. Using this information, we have developed effective
management regimes, and we continue to create more jobs with fewer
long-term impacts to our fisheries.
Alaska Sea Grant also supports a comprehensive Marine Advisory
Service, which has provided industry training programs on topics
ranging from marine safety and seafood technology, to business
management for fishermen and shoreside support facilities. Through
proper training, we ensure that our industries, businesses, and
individuals who depend on productive fisheries can continue to do their
jobs effectively. Ron Dearborn, who does an excellent job as Director
of the Alaska Sea Grant College Program, is serving as president of the
Sea Grant Association this year.
Sea Grant is a perfect example of the type of program that we should
support. The program produces tangible results and, most importantly,
it maximizes immediate and long-range returns by matching Federal
investments with State and private funds.
Unfortunately, during the last Congress, the Resources and Science
Committees were unable to reach an agreement on reauthorization
legislation. I am pleased that this year those disagreements have been
resolved, and we are able to bring this compromise text to the floor.
This bill is the product of 3 years of hard work and dedication.
Mr. Chairman, it is important that we reauthorize Sea Grant this
year, and I compliment Mr. Saxton for his efforts. This program is
important to the State of Alaska, our coastal communities, and every
American. Therefore, I strongly urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 437.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 437.
In 1966, Congress established the National Sea Grant College Program
in order to encourage the wise stewardship of our marine resources
through research, education, outreach, and technology transfer.
Today, there are 29 sea grant programs, one in every coastal State
and in Puerto Rico, working in partnership with the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.
Each program has a common goal: To foster the wise use, conservation,
and management of marine and coastal resources through practical
research, graduate student education, and public service.
The University of Delaware, designated the Nation's ninth sea grant
college in 1976, conducts research in marine biotechnology, coastal
engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, marine policy, and
seafood science--all vitally important to promoting coastal economic
growth and improving the quality of coastal environments.
It plays a key role in training graduate students in marine studies
and its outreach staff provides a variety of groups, from business
owners to school teachers, with a wealth of timely, objective
information and assistance in addressing coastal problems and
opportunities.
Delaware's Sea Grant Program and others like it across the country
are focused on making the United States the world leader in marine
research and the sustainable development of marine resources.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support the National Sea Grant
College reauthorization and help make that goal a reality.
Mr. LAZIO of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in strong
support of the National Sea Grant College Program and H.R. 437.
The National Sea Grant College Program is an integrated program of
research, education, and extension activities which has consistently
proven its value to the taxpayer throughout its nearly 30-year history.
Sea Grant works at the precommercial stage, with a focus on small,
family owned businesses, to improve the responsible use and development
of our Nation's coastal, marine, and Great Lakes resources.
Sea Grant is unique among university-based programs in that it
develops useful information through research geared toward improving
economic opportunities and conserving natural resources for future
generations.
Federal funding for Sea Grant is highly leveraged by contributions
from outside the Federal Government. Almost half the funding for Sea
Grant comes from non-Federal sources; investments made by Sea Grant are
heavily matched by each of the participating States, as well as by
universities and the private sector.
Sea Grant supports high-quality, competitive, peer-reviewed
scientific research to address critical marine resource issues and
opportunities and, importantly, to deliver the results of that research
to constituents through Sea Grant marine extension and education
programs.
In my home State of New York, Sea Grant has assisted agencies,
municipalities and constituents in understanding both the technical and
policy implications of prospective erosion control measures for our
coastal communities. On Fire Island in my district, and the Fire Island
National Seashore, this research has saved taxpayers needless
expenditures on approaches that would not work. Sea Grant has also
helped charter fishing operators understand the fishery resources they
depend on, and has assisted seafood retailers in maintaining the
quality and safety of products they sell to consumers.
I would like to commend my colleagues on the Resources and Science
Committees for bringing H.R. 437 to the floor today. This bill makes
significant improvements in the Sea Grant Program by streamlining the
proposal review process, reducing administrative costs, and clarifying
the Federal and university roles in the program. I urge my colleagues
to join me in voting for H.R. 437 to make Sea Grant an even better
program than the fine one it is today.

[[Page H3882]]

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 437, and I
want to commend my colleague, Chairman Don Young of the Resources
Committee, for his initiative in bringing this important piece of
legislation to the floor.
The National Sea Grant College Program is a network of over 300
colleges, universities, technical schools, and research institutions
located throughout the country which provide economic opportunities and
address real problems associated with our abundant coastal and marine
resources. Sea Grant represents a strong university-business-Government
partnership that responds to local, regional, and national needs.
Federal funding for the Sea Grant Program is highly leveraged by
contributions from outside the Federal Government. Almost half of the
funding for Sea Grant comes from matching grants funds from research
institutions. In South Carolina, Sea Grant funds are often used as seed
money to leverage funding from other Federal, State, local, and private
sources.
For example, the Sea Grant Program in South Carolina is part of a
nationwide network of university campuses and marine laboratories
involved with Operation Pathfinder, an educational initiative involving
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Navy, and
the U.S. Department of the Interior to train elementary and middle-
school teachers in multidisciplinary skills in oceanography and coastal
processes.
Of grave importance, Mr. Chairman, is the fact that South Carolina
and other Southeastern and Gulf States are subject to a number of
hurricanes and coastal storms annually. Risks to life and property
associated with these coastal natural hazards will increase with the
anticipated growth of coastal populations in this region over the next
several decades, from 36 million people currently to over 73 million by
the year 2010. According to the Insurance Institute for Property Loss
Reduction, these storms cost an estimated $58 billion in insured losses
attributable to wind alone, with total insured losses produced by
Hurricane Hugo, Andrew, Iniki, and the winter storms of 1993 and 1994
of $42.7 billion. The Sea Grant Program in South Carolina has initiated
a coordinated research and extension program on coastal natural hazards
which seeks to mitigate and reduce the amount of damage and subsequent
monetary loss to property owners and the insurance industry. Examples
of such efforts include research and development of low-cost,
structural retrofit strategies for homeowners, development of a
vulnerability mode for use by emergency management personnel to predict
storm damage and cleanup needs, the formation of a South Carolina
Association for Hazard Mitigation, and the development of a Community
Sustainability Center as an educational and training facility for
schools, planning and building code officials, and hazards engineers.
H.R. 437 makes significant improvements in the Sea Grant Program. It
streamlines the proposal review process, reduces administrative costs,
caps the total program costs below the current services level, and
clarifies Federal and academic roles in the program.
I would urge my colleagues to recognize and acknowledge the many
contributions to the Nation's economic development and resource
management made by the National Sea Grant College Program over the last
30 years by voting in support of this important bill.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the
National Sea Grant College Program Reauthorization Act of 1997, H.R.
437.
My home State of California is home to the largest Sea Grant Program
in the Nation. The California Sea Grant College system is a statewide,
multiuniversity program of marine research, extension services, and
education. Through the research it sponsors, California Sea Grant
contributes to the growing body of knowledge about our coastal and
ocean resources and helps solve contemporary problems in marine
ecosystems. Its extension services transfer this knowledge to a wide
community of users in California, the Pacific region, and the Nation.
Since the beginning of the Sea Grant Program in 1968, California has
become a leader in Marine Biology and the development of new products
in the areas of marine pharmacology, aquaculture, fisheries, water
quality, coastal habitat, and ocean engineering. The universities
participating in this program are known for their leadership and
accomplishments in the study of our oceans. We in San Diego are
particularly proud of the work done at Scripps Institute of
Oceanography, a part of the University of California at San Diego.
Scripps has achieved global recognition for its pioneering work in
oceanography, due in no small part to the Sea Grant Program.
Almost everyone living in southern California is affected by the
management of our oceans for jobs, recreation, goods and services. The
top seven ocean related industries in California generated nearly $20
billion in direct and indirect economic activity, supporting nearly
500,000 jobs. However, the preservation and study of our oceans is
important not only to those who live in California or along the coasts
but to the Nation as a whole.
I encourage all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this
program by voting for H.R. 437.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 437, the
Marine Resources Revitalization Act of 1997 and I want to commend both
the Resources and Science Committees for reaching a compromise on this
very important bill. We have needed to reauthorize the National Sea
Grant Program since October 1995 and I applaud Representatives Saxton,
Young, Abercrombie, and Farr on their leadership.
As a member from a coastal district, I am acutely aware of the
problems of the coastal marine environment, and of the excellent work
of the Sea Grant Program to address these problems. I remain a
supporter of Sea Grant's peer-reviewed research, education, and
outreach programs that deal with problems in Maryland such as oyster
disease and chemical contaminants in coastal waters.
Established in 1966 to improve the conservation, management, and
utilization of ocean and coastal resources, the Sea Grant College
Program has been a national leader in conducting scientifically based
marine research and distributing the results to hundreds of
universities throughout the country. The University of Maryland,
located in my district in College Park, is 1 of 26 designated Sea Grant
Colleges and is a national leader on living marine and estuarine
resources research.
Mr. Chairman, the Chesapeake Bay is arguably the world's greatest
estuary and offers the scientific community one of the most abundant
and important places to conduct research. Over the past several years,
the oyster population has become increasingly threatened by diseases
such as MSX and Dermo, and Sea Grant has been leading the way on the
Oyster Disease Research Program which is providing a better
understanding of shellfish disease.
Today, Sea Grant continues to provide scientific data and analysis
which are used in efforts to prevent oyster parasites from developing.
I will support H.R. 437, which will authorize the program through
fiscal year 2000, and continue to support appropriations for Sea Grant.
The Chesapeake Bay is one of Maryland's greatest natural assets, and in
my continued efforts to protect, preserve, and promote this magnificent
resource, I will remain a strong supporter of the University of
Maryland's work with the National Sea Grant Program.
Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation
to reauthorize this very important environmental program.
Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this
bill, which would fully reauthorize a program that has been vital to
our Nation's oceanic industries.
The Sea Grant Program was established in 1966 to improve our Nation's
marine resource conservation and management efforts, and is modeled
after the very successful Land Grant College Program.
The fishing industry in the Pacific Northwest produces about 55
percent of the Nation's seafood, and is a critical component of many
coastal economies in my State. The Oregon Sea Grant Program has been
highly successful in its research and marine extension programs, which
are oriented toward this industry.
One example of its research activities involves the utilization of
seafood wastes. Few people realize that between 30 and 40 percent of
the seafood raw material is actually used in food products, while most
of the remaining material typically goes to waste. The Oregon Sea Grant
Program helps fund research which examines the potential for using some
of this waste material in products such as fishmeal and bioactive
products including enzymes. These efforts have spawned new,
multimillion dollar industries in the Pacific Northwest. Researchers
are also studying ways to remove bioactive components of seafood waste
water to save money for both processors, municipalities, and customers.
The Oregon program has also been very successful in assisting fishing
dependent families adapt to the changing industry conditions, and has
been a major force in the development of the Pacific Whiting Industry
in Oregon. In addition, the Sea Grant Program is also involved in State
and local efforts to restore severely degraded salmon and watershed
habitats.
Other programs around the Nation, working closely with industries,
have developed new aquaculture techniques, designed improved coastal
planning schemes, created new methods of saving cold-water drowning
victims, and created a comprehensive data base on toxic contaminants in
an aquatic system. And again, I want to stress that the benefits of Sea
Grant extend beyond the applied commercial and environmental effects.
This university program has been instrumental in educating future
generations of researchers in the techniques and nuances of marine
science.

[[Page H3883]]

These successes clearly warrant support for fully funding the program
at levels consistent with those in recent years, as this bill
authorizes.
I am convinced that these and many other basic research programs are
wise investments in the Nation's economic future. We now have more than
anecdotal evidence that research pays off handsomely for our economy
over time, but it also pays off by significantly improving our quality
of life. Scientists have been doing more with less in recent years.
These advancements of efficiency should be commended and continued.
However, we must continue to acknowledge the invaluable
responsibilities shouldered by our research communities, especially on
university campuses. We must maintain strong support for important
scientific investigations and for the education of students across the
science, math and engineering disciplines.
I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.
Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 437,
a bill to reauthorize the National Sea Grant College Program within the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA].
In New York, the Sea Grant Program, based at the University of Stony
Brook on Long Island, has been a vital force in finding answers to
critical coastal issues that affect New York's fishing and tourism
industries. Stony Brook's Sea Grant supports more than 20 scientific
research projects annually and has provided more than $25.3 million in
support of research, education, and outreach projects since its
formation more than 25 years ago.
Over the past 4 years, Stony Brook's Sea Grant Program has focused a
great deal on the causes of periodic outbreaks of brown tide algae in
Long Island's coastal waters, particularly on the East End and in the
Great South and Moriches Bays. In fact, the Federal Coastal Ocean
Program [COP], under NOAA, has awarded $1.5 million in grants to
researchers studying the brown tide algae blooms that have plagued the
waters of Long Island's East End and South Shore. Administering the Sea
Grant Program at Stony Brook, the 3-year Brown Tide Research Initiative
[BTRI] is a coordinated effort by nationally recognized experts at
eight universities and research institutions, including the University
at Stony Brook.
The National Sea Grant Program is a network of 29 university-based
programs located in States with coastlines on either oceans or the
Great Lakes. In New York, the Sea Grant Program is a joint operation
between the State University of New York at Stony Brook and Cornell
University. New York Sea Grant conducts important research into the
forces of coastal erosion, providing invaluable insight for beach
protection programs.
The national investment in the Sea Grant Program is a tremendously
wise one, and not solely from an ecological standpoint. Financially,
the program works. Every Federal dollar is matched by $2 in State,
local, and university resources. Though outmatched by other sources, it
is the Federal investment that acts as the program's catalyst,
attracting much-needed support from other, diverse sources.
The Brown Tide Research Program undertaken at Stony Brook, is just
one example of how the National Sea Grant College Program works, but it
is indicative of the collaborative effort and broad commitment that is
the program's hallmark. It is the model for public, private, and
university partnerships that pool resources, facilities, and brain
power to tackle a serious problem that no single entity is capable of
addressing.
In the long run, an alliance like the New York Sea Grant Program at
Stony Brook will save Long Island taxpayers' money, while conducting
important scientific research that ultimately solves the problems that
afflict our most important industries: fishing and tourism.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 437 and in
support of the Sea Grant Program that serves as a model for all public
programs because of its ability to work smarter and more efficiently
for its customers, the American people.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the designated
place in the Congressional Record and numbered 1 shall be considered by
section as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, and pursuant
to the rule, each section is considered as having been read.
The Clerk will designate section 1.
The text of section 1 is as follows:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``National Sea Grant College
Program Reauthorization Act of 1997''.

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
remainder of the amendment in the nature of a substitute be considered
as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
The text of the remainder of the amendment in the nature of a
substitute is as follows:

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM ACT.

Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this
Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an
amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the
reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of the National Sea Grant College Program Act
(33 U.S.C. 1121 et seq.).

SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO DEFINITIONS.

(a) Sea Grant Institution.--Section 203 (33 U.S.C. 1122) is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(16) The term `sea grant institution' means--
``(A) any sea grant college or sea grant regional
consortium, and
``(B) any institution of higher education, institute,
laboratory, or State or local agency conducting a sea grant
program with amounts provided under this Act.''.
(b) Field Related to Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes
Resources.--Section 203(4) (33 U.S.C. 1122(4)) is amended to
read as follows:
``(4) The term `field related to ocean, coastal, and Great
Lakes resources' means any discipline or field, including
marine affairs, resource management, technology, education,
or science, which is concerned with or likely to improve the
understanding, assessment, development, utilization, or
conservation of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources.''.
(c) Secretary.--
(1) In general.--Section 203(13) (33 U.S.C. 1122(13)) is
amended to read as follows:
``(13) The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of
Commerce, acting through the Under Secretary of Commerce for
Oceans and Atmosphere.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--The Act is amended--
(A) by striking section 203(15) (33 U.S.C. 1122(15));
(B) in section 209(b) (33 U.S.C. 1128(b)), as amended by
this Act, by striking ``, the Under Secretary,''; and
(C) by striking ``Under Secretary'' every other place it
appears and inserting ``Secretary''.

SEC. 4. CONSULTATIONS REGARDING LONG-RANGE PLANNING
GUIDELINES AND PRIORITIES AND EVALUATION.

Section 204(a) (33 U.S.C. 1123(a)) is amended in the last
sentence by inserting after ``The Secretary'' the following:
``, in consultation with the sea grant institutions and the
panel established under section 209,''.

SEC. 5. DUTIES OF DIRECTOR.

Section 204(c) (33 U.S.C. 1123(c)) is amended to read as
follows:
``(c) Duties of Director.--
``(1) In general.--The Director shall administer the
National Sea Grant College Program subject to the supervision
of the Secretary. In addition to any other duty prescribed by
law or assigned by the Secretary, the Director shall--
``(A) advise the Secretary with respect to the expertise
and capabilities which are available within or through the
National Sea Grant College Program, and provide (as directed
by the Secretary) those which are or could be of use to other
offices and activities within the Administration;
``(B) encourage other Federal departments, agencies, and
instrumentalities to use and take advantage of the expertise
and capabilities which are available through the National Sea
Grant College Program, on a cooperative or other basis;
``(C) encourage cooperation and coordination with other
Federal programs concerned with ocean, coastal, and Great
Lakes resources conservation and usage;
``(D) advise the Secretary on the designation of sea grant
institutions and, in appropriate cases, if any, on the
termination or suspension of any such designation;
``(E) encourage the formation and growth of sea grant
programs; and
``(F) oversee the operation of the National Sea Grant
Office established under subsection (a).
``(2) Duties with respect to sea grant institutions.--With
respect to the sea grant institutions, the Director shall--
``(A) evaluate the programs of the institutions, using the
guidelines and priorities established by the Secretary under
subsection (a), to ensure that the objective set forth in
section 202(b) is achieved;
``(B) subject to the availability of appropriations,
allocate funding among the sea grant institutions so as to--
``(i) promote healthy competition among those institutions,
``(ii) promote successful implementation of the programs
developed by the institutions under subsection (e), and
``(iii) to the maximum extent consistent with the other
provisions of this subparagraph, provide a stable base of
funding for the institutions; and
``(C) ensure compliance by the institutions with the
guidelines for merit review published pursuant to section
207(b)(2).''.

SEC. 6. DUTIES OF SEA GRANT INSTITUTIONS.

Section 204 (33 U.S.C. 1123) is amended by adding at the
end the following new subsection:
``(e) Duties of the Sea Grant Institutions.--Subject to any
regulations or guidelines promulgated by the Secretary, it
shall

[[Page H3884]]

be the responsibility of each sea grant institution to--
``(1) develop and implement, in consultation with the
Secretary and the panel established under section 209, a
program that is consistent with the guidelines and priorities
developed under section 204(a); and
``(2) conduct merit review of all applications for project
grants or contracts to be awarded under section 205.''.

SEC. 7. REPEAL OF SEA GRANT INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM.

(a) Repeal.--Section 3 of the Sea Grant Program Improvement
Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 1124a) is repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 209(b)(1) (33 U.S.C.
1128(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``and section 3 of the Sea
Grant Program Improvement Act of 1976''.

SEC. 8. DESIGNATION OF SEA GRANT INSTITUTIONS.

Section 207 (33 U.S.C. 1126) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 207. SEA GRANT COLLEGES AND SEA GRANT REGIONAL
CONSORTIA.

``(a) Designation.--The Secretary may designate an
institution of higher learning as a sea grant college, and an
association or alliance of two or more persons as a sea grant
regional consortium, if the institution, association, or
alliance--
``(1) is maintaining a balanced program of research,
education, training, and advisory services in fields related
to ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources;
``(2) will cooperate with other sea grant institutions and
other persons to solve problems or meet needs relating to
ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources;
``(3) will act in accordance with such guidelines as are
prescribed under subsection (b)(2);
``(4) meets such other qualifications as the Secretary, in
consultation with the sea grant review panel established
under section 209, considers necessary or appropriate; and
``(5) is recognized for excellence in marine resources
development and science.
``(b) Regulations and Guidelines.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall by regulation
prescribe the qualifications required to be met under
subsection (a)(4).
``(2) Merit review.--Within 6 months after the date of
enactment of the National Sea Grant College Program
Reauthorization Act of 1997, the Secretary, after
consultation with the sea grant institutions, shall establish
guidelines for the conduct of merit review by the sea grant
institutions of project proposals for grants and contracts to
be awarded under section 205. The guidelines shall, at a
minimum, provide for peer review of all research projects and
require standardized documentation of all peer review.
``(c) Suspension or Termination of Designation.--The
Secretary may, for cause and after an opportunity for
hearing, suspend or terminate any designation under
subsection (a).''.

SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) Grants, Contracts, and Fellowships.--Section 212(a) (33
U.S.C. 1131(a)) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) Authorization.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this Act--
``(A) $54,300,000 for fiscal year 1998;
``(B) $55,400,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
``(C) $56,500,000 for fiscal year 2000.
``(2) Zebra mussel and oyster disease research.--Of the
amount authorized for a fiscal year under paragraph (1)--
``(A) up to $2,800,000 of the amount may be made available
as provided in section 1301(b)(4)(A) of the Nonindigenous
Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (16
U.S.C. 4741(b)(4)(A)) for competitive grants for university
research on the zebra mussel; and
``(B) up to $2,000,000 of the amount may be made available
for competitive grants for university research on oyster
disease.''.
(b) Administration.--Section 212(b) (33 U.S.C. 1131(b)) is
amended--
(1) by striking so much as precedes paragraph (2) and
inserting the following:
``(b) Administration.--
``(1) Limitation.--Of the amount appropriated for each
fiscal year under subsection (a), an amount, not exceeding 5
percent of the lesser of the amount authorized under
subsection (a) for the fiscal year or the amount appropriated
under subsection (a) for the fiscal year, may be used for the
administration of this Act, including section 209, by the
National Sea Grant Office and the Administration.'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by striking ``subsections (a) and (c)'' and inserting
``subsection (a)''; and
(B) by striking ``(2)'' and inserting ``(2) Limitation on
use of other amounts.--''; and
(3) by moving paragraph (2) 2 ems to the right, so that the
left margin of paragraph (2) is aligned with the left margin
of paragraph (1), as amended by paragraph (1) of this
subsection.
(c) Repeal.--Section 212 (33 U.S.C. 1131) is amended by
repealing subsection (c) and redesignating subsections (d)
and (e) in order as subsections (c) and (d).
(d) Prohibition on Lobbying; Notice of Reprogramming or
Reorganization.--Section 212 (33 U.S.C. 1131), as amended by
subsection (c) of this section, is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(e) Prohibition of Lobbying Activities.--None of the
funds authorized by this section shall be available for any
activity whose purpose is to influence legislation pending
before the Congress, except that this subsection shall not
prevent officers or employees of the United States or of its
departments or agencies from communicating to Members of
Congress on the request of any Member or to Congress, through
the proper channels, requests for legislation or
appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient
conduct of the public business.
``(f) Notice of Reprogramming.--If any funds authorized by
this section are subject to a reprogramming action that
requires notice to be provided to the Appropriations
Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate,
notice of such action shall concurrently be provided to the
Committees on Science and Resources of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.
``(g) Notice of Reorganization.--The Secretary shall
provide notice to the Committees on Science, Resources, and
Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the
Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and
Appropriations of the Senate, not later than 15 days before
any major reorganization of any program, project, or activity
of the National Sea Grant College Program.''.

SEC. 10. CLERICAL, CONFORMING, AND TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

(a) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) Section 203(3) (33 U.S.C. 1122(3)) is amended by
striking ``the term'' and inserting ``The term''.
(2) Section 203(6) (33 U.S.C. 1122(6)) is amended by moving
subparagraph (F) 2 ems to the right, so that the left margin
of subparagraph (F) is aligned with the left margin of
subparagraph (E).
(3) The heading for section 204 (33 U.S.C. 1124) is amended
to read as follows:

``SEC. 204. NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM.''.

(4) Section 209 (33 U.S.C. 1128) is amended by striking all
of the matter that follows the first full sentence through
``shall advise'', and inserting ``(b) Duties.--The panel
shall advise''.
(5) Section 205(b)(3) (33 U.S.C. 1124(b)(3)) is amended by
striking ``or section 206''.
(6) Section 204(d)(1) (33 U.S.C. 1123(d)(1)) is amended--
(A) by striking ``five positions'' and inserting ``one
position''; and
(B) by striking ``the maximum rate for GS-18 of the General
Schedule under section 5332'' and inserting ``a rate
established by the Secretary, not to exceed the maximum daily
rate payable under section 5376''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 204(b)(2) (33 U.S.C. 1123(b)(2)) is amended by
striking ``maximum rate for GS-18'' and all that follows
through the end of the sentence and inserting ``maximum rate
payable under section 5376 of title 5, United States Code.''.
(2) Section 209 (33 U.S.C. 1128) is amended--
(A) in subsection (b)(3) by striking ``colleges and sea
grant regional consortia'' and inserting ``institutions'';
and
(B) in subsection (c)(1) in the last sentence in clause (A)
by striking ``college, sea grant regional consortium,'' and
inserting ``institution''.
(c) Technical Amendment.--Section 209(c)(5)(A) (33 U.S.C.
1128(c)(5)(A)) is amended by striking ``the daily rate for
GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5,
United States Code'' and inserting ``a rate established by
the Secretary, not to exceed the maximum daily rate payable
under section 5376 of title 5, United States Code''.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Farr of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Farr of California:
Page 6, beginning at line 16, amend section 7 to read as
follows:

SEC. 7. SEA GRANT INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM.

(a) Amendment.--Section 3(a) of the Sea Grant Program
Improvement Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 1124a(a)) is amended in
paragraph (6), by striking ``living marine resources'' and
all that follows through the end of the paragraph and
inserting ``living marine resources.''.
(b) Program Sunset.--
(1) Repeal.--Section 3 of the Sea Grant Program Improvement
Act of 1976 (33 U.S.C. 1124a) is repealed.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 209(b)(1) (33 U.S.C.
1128(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``and section 3 of the Sea
Grant Program Improvement Act of 1976''.
(3) Effective date.--This subsection shall take effect
October 1, 2000.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment which
essentially maintains the Sea Grant International Program authorization
without limitation on the countries with which we can collaborate
through the year 2000.
We are now becoming more and more aware of how our oceans and Great
Lakes are truly international. We just heard of the issue of the zebra
mussels which obviously is not just a United States issue, it is a
Canadian issue. The very nature of the marine environment dictates that
ocean resources are seldom, if ever, conveniently contained within one
nation's boundaries.

[[Page H3885]]

On May 19 and 20 of this year, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Weldon] hosted an advisory committee on the protection of the seas here
in this Capitol. I attended that with Vice President Al Gore, with the
Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich];
Secretary of Defense, William Cohen; Secretary of the Navy, John
Dalton; and fellow Representatives including the gentleman from
Maryland [Mr. Gilchrest], the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr.
Kennedy], the gentleman from California [Mr. Brown], the gentleman from
California [Mr. Rohrabacher]; the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr.
Saxton], and others, as well as representatives from agencies and
countries from around the world. We were all here to discuss the
importance of oceans in the world's security.

{time} 1200

We must recognize that the need for international collaboration and
conservation is indeed international, and our goal is of sustainable
efforts. My amendment would extend the authorization through the year
2000, with the hope that in the intervening years we will dedicate
money to this program and revisit it in the 3 years to judge whether it
has merit.
It also opens up the program to be used to collaborate with any
country which we believe would be advantageous to us to work with for
marine resources issues. I want to make it clear that this program
provides for international collaboration on research, education, and
conservation, and that funding is only allowed to go to institutions of
higher education, laboratories, and institutes in the United States and
U.S. territories.
I will be glad to answer any questions on my amendment. I know of no
opposition, and I would ask for an ``aye'' vote.
Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record the following document:

Annex IV

potomac declaration: toward enhanced ocean security into the third
millenium

The Vice-President of the United States of America, Hon. Al
Gore; Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich;
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence of
Portugal, Senhor Antonio Vitorino; Executive Director of the
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Ms. Elizabeth
Dowdeswell; Assistant Secretary General of the United
Nations, Dr. Nay Htun; 215 governmental and other
participants from Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cambodia,
Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, India,
Japan, Korea, Mexico, Mozambique, Netherlands, New Zealand,
Norway, Philippines, Portugal, Russian Federation, the
Seychelles, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, Ukraine, United
Kingdom and the United States of America, including 18
ministers and deputy ministers; representatives of the
following intergovernmental organisations: United Nations;
UNEP; United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); the World
Bank; the International Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of
UNESCO; the Organisation of American States (OAS); and the
Commission of the European Union; as well as members of the
European Parliament and legislatures from Brazil,
Philippines, and the United States; representatives of ACOPS
and other non-governmental organisations (NGOs); and
representatives of the scientific community and private
sector adopted the following Declaration:

the conference

Recognising that:
Continuing intensification of human activity in coastal and
marine areas will adversely affect marine and coastal
ecosystems world-wide and threatens the well-being of the
human population. The natural resource base of world
fisheries is threatened by over exploitation, habitat
degradation, introduction of alien species and loss of
biological diversity. Human security is threatened by
unsustainable food production, increased public health
hazards and unemployment, which may contribute to escalating
human conflicts. Humans themselves have entered into conflict
with the very environment which supports them. It is vital to
take immediate action to strengthen environmental security if
global human security is to be sustained;
Climate change threatens to affect ocean levels and
temperature, the land and peoples living in low elevation
coastal regions, and species dependent on oceans and land
touched by oceans. The oceans play an essential role in the
planet's climate, though the mechanisms are poorly
understood; and
Sustainable development, including conservation of the
marine environment, can actually increase environmental, food
and economic security and therefore provide a foundation for
political security.
Recommended that:
1. Policies and action by all economic and social sectors
adversely affecting the marine environment and resources
should be made compatible with sustainable development in
order to promote environmental, food and economic security,
and to prevent conflicts over natural resources between and
within states. Consciousness of the fact that poverty is a
root cause of environmental problems must guide policy
making. Wasteful consumption patterns must also be addressed.
2. Management of marine and coastal ecosystems, carried out
within the framework of integrated coastal and watershed
areas management and responsible fisheries, should be based
on the full application of the precautionary principle and
ecosystem approach, thus achieving the conservation and
sustainable use of biological diversity and its components in
marine and coastal ecosystems.
3. Scientific research should be increasingly directed
towards the understanding of the marine and coastal
ecosystems thus providing a basis for policies and action for
their conservation and sustainable use. Such research would
profit from greater and improved access to data which has
been declassified or derived from national security systems,
and should include use of innovative techniques for
measurement of basic parameters. The possibilities of
satellite monitoring of the marine environment should be
exploited to the full.
4. International cooperation for the protection of the
marine environment and the sustainable use of marine
resources must be expanded following the framework of active
implementation of the United Nations Law of the Sea
Convention, and other relevant conventions and agreements in
the fields of environment, fisheries and marine transport,
among others. All governments that have not done so, should
ratify UNCLOS, as amended in 1994, given that it is an
historical international agreement which establishes global
maritime boundaries and provides a framework for balancing
governance of marine resources, conservation, and traditional
freedoms of navigation for trade and naval movements. Binding
agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and
the Framework Convention on Climate Change should also be
ratified by all governments as soon as possible. Moreover,
initiatives such as the Global Plan of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Sources
and the International Coral Reef Initiative, should also be
actively supported. Degradation of the marine environment,
not yet covered by international agreements, such as the
problems posed by hazardous organic substances, should be
addressed as soon as possible in an integrated manner.
Regional cooperation for the protection of the marine
environment and sustainable fisheries should be strengthened
and coordinated.
5. It is of paramount importance to deepen our current
understanding of the root causes of the environmental issues
in terms of market failures, inadequacies in policy and
governance, and deficiencies in information. A profound
interdisciplinary study, bridging social and physical
sciences and integrating seas and associated land catchment
areas, is required at a national, regional and global level.
This should lead to practical measures to address the root
causes of the problems themselves. Initiatives such as the
recently proposed GEF Global International Water Assessment
(GIWA) should be supported.
6. In order to preserve the availability and health of the
world's fisheries, effective conservation measures based on
the FAO Code of Conduct of Responsible Fishing and the UN
Agreement on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory
Fish, should be put into place. Harvesting capacities should
be controlled, management institutions established, fish
habitat protected and the necessary scientific knowledge and
data pursued. Major efforts should be made to strengthen
decision making in regional fisheries organizations or
arrangements.
7. Data gathering systems should be put in to place so that
the information and knowledge is available for wise decision-
making, especially in the coastal zones. These observation
systems should be used to ensure continuous benefit.
Governments should actively support global oceanic
observation systems at a national, regional and global level.
Scientific research and information should be directed
towards wise decision-making in marine and coastal areas.
8. The end of the cold war and diminution of the risk of
global conflict has opened up new possibilities for utilizing
national security systems formerly devoted to military
activities for peaceful purposes and, in particular, for
enhancing the capacity for environmental protection and for
sustainable development. The military establishment should
share with other societal sectors its enormous scientific and
technological capabilities in order to improve our
understanding of the functioning of the coastal and marine
ecosystems, a condition to enhance environmental security of
marine and coastal areas. Each nation should initiate a
review of their sensitive data and information, as pioneered
by Russia and the US, for declassification and use in
diagnosing environmental problems and expanding our knowledge
base.
9. Environmental considerations should be incorporated into
all sectors of government, while empowering environmental
ministries to actively promote this development. Civil
society should also be empowered through greater access to
environmental information and more active participation in
decision-

[[Page H3886]]

making. This is of particular relevance for local communities
which have traditionally inhabited coastal zones and made use
of marine resources.
10. Concerted national and international efforts should be
undertaken to introduce environmental studies into all levels
of formal school curricula at a global level, in order to
eliminate environmental illiteracy, increase environmental
awareness, and promote deeper environmental ethics. Up-to-
date scientific knowledge about the oceans should be
popularised and disseminated to the public both through
formal education and creative communication channels such as
arts, music, and multi-media. In support of this effort, the
year 2000 should be declared as the ``Year of Environmental
Awareness'' by the UN General Assembly at its forthcoming
Special Session.
11. Efforts should be directed at national, regional, and
global levels for mitigation and adaptation to global climate
change, as it is likely to threaten the lives and livelihood
of millions of people via sea-level rise, changes in ocean
salinity, temperature, and production of fisheries and other
aquatic life. Climate change affects the economic,
environmental and food security of nations. Therefore
multilateral and bilateral cooperation should be enhanced to
reduce the negative effects of climate change.
12. Given the urgent and imperative need to fully implement
the above recommendations, a concrete action plan should be
developed to elaborate problems and root causes, and to
propose specific actions by ACOPS, and to recommend
appropriate organisations and parties to bear responsibility
for the implementation of the measures. Such an action plan
could be presented to the ACOPS/GLOBE Conference (Stockholm,
January 1998) and could be adopted at its ministerial
segment. The Conference will inaugurate the 1998
International Year of the Oceans.
13. The Potomac Declaration should be submitted, through
the host country, to: the Special Session of the General
Assembly of the United Nations, to be held in June 1997; to
appropriate United Nations Agencies and regional
organisations, including regional economic integration
communities; appropriate government agencies; legislative
bodies, including GLOBE, Asia Pacific Parliamentarians for
Environment and Development, and the International
Parliamentary Union; appropriate representatives of the
private sector; and local authorities and non-governmental
organisations.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, the Farr amendment will maintain authorization of the
Sea Grant International Program which promotes shared marine activities
in nations which have mutual interest with the United States.
As we all know, the world is 70 percent covered with water, and the
oceans and their resources recognize no political boundaries. It is
helpful to our national interests to have a mechanism through which we
can collaborate with other coastal nations on research that will
ultimately affect all of us, so I believe the Farr amendment is well-
intended, well-written, and I rise in support, and ask others on this
side of the aisle to support his amendment as well.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number
of words.
Mr. Chairman, I also rise in support of the Farr amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there further debate on the amendment?
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from California [Mr. Farr].
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further amendments?

Amendment offered by Mr. Tauzin

Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Tauzin:
Page 8, strike line 24 and all that follows through page 9,
line 3, and insert the following:
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this Act--
``(A) $55,300,000 for fiscal year 1998;
``(B) $56,400,000 for fiscal year 1999; and
``(C) $57,500,000 for fiscal year 2000.
Page 9, line 4, strike ``disease''.
Page 9, strike lines 14 though 16 and insert the following:
``(B) up to $3,000,000 of the amount may be made available
for competitive grants for university research on oyster
diseases and oyster-related human health risks.''.

Mr. TAUZIN (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Louisiana?
There was no objection.
Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I offer today is an amendment
to provide authority for up to $3 million of the amount that may be
available for competitive grants for university research on oyster
diseases and oyster-related human health risks.
Oysters are an important national resource in America. They are a
safe and nutritional meat protein that provides many benefits to those
who enjoy eating them. Of course, millions are consumed each year. But
research into health-related aspects of oyster growing and harvesting
and sales and consumption in America is very important.
Earlier this year the President called for the national food safety
initiative. The proposal we make today is consistent with the
President's approach of developing positive and practical solutions to
improve food safety. The program brings the Sea Grant scientists and
the oyster industry together to find solutions to concerns related to
oysters' health and particularly to diseases that might be related to
humans, who enjoy eating oysters in America.
This amendment provides for an increased authorization of $1 million
in each of the fiscal years 1998, 1999, and the year 2000, and the
authority to make available those moneys for competitive grants at Sea
Grant universities around the country.
Sea Grant universities are currently in fact doing a great deal of
work in this area. This amendment is meant to make sure that not only
the oyster diseases are studied but oyster-related health concerns to
humans who enjoy oyster products in America are also studied and,
indeed, identified, and taken care of in this country.
I urge the committee to adopt this amendment. It is very much in line
with the excellent work the Sea Grant College Program authorization has
already accomplished in many areas, and will compliment the work
already being done by many Sea Grant universities in this country in
this important health and food safety area.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
I rise to compliment the gentleman from Louisiana for a very well
thought out amendment, Mr. Chairman. Obviously New Jersey's Sea Grant
Program involves some research relative to oysters. This is a side of
the aisle, different but equally important angle. I offer my strong
support and ask others to do the same.
Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite
number of words.
Mr. Chairman, we have no opposition to the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin]. We are all oyster lovers.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there any further debate on the amendment?
The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin].
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Traficant

Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Traficant:
At the end of the bill, insert the following new section:

SEC. 11. BUY AMERICAN.

(a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--No funds
appropriated pursuant to section 212(a), as amended by this
Act, may be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees
that in expending the assistance the entity will comply with
sections 2 through 4 of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C.
10a-10c, popularly known as the ``Buy American Act'').
(b) Sense of Congress.--In the case of any equipment or
products that may be authorized to be purchased with
financial assistance provided under section 212(a), as
amended by this Act, it is the sense of Congress that
entities receiving such assistance should, in expending the
assistance, purchase only American-made equipment and
products.
(c) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing
financial assistance under section 212(a), as amended by this
Act, the Secretary of Commerce shall provide to each
recipient of the assistance a notice describing the statement
made in subsection (a) by the Congress.

Mr. TRAFICANT (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I too am concerned about zebra mussels
and oyster diseases. I certainly wish and hope that I never get any of
them.
My amendment is a little bit different. It deals with a buy-American

[[Page H3887]]

provision. Just briefly, 90 percent of American workers, according to
an analysis performed by the Philadelphia Inquirer, 90 percent, by
major print media, it says that 90 percent of American workers are
worried about losing their jobs, their homes, and maybe their pensions.
They have never seen so much fear in the workplace.
They also said for every $1 of income there is $2 of debt for
American workers. Individual bankruptcies hit an all-time record, an
all-time record level. Credit card debt is at an all-time level,
manufacturing jobs continue to leave, and the trade deficit with Japan
and China is so much we cannot count it.
So my amendment basically says when expending the dollars under this
Sea Grant Program, they shall comply with the buy-American laws and do
everything possible competitively to buy American-made goods and
products, and there shall be a notice made to recipients of assistance
of the concerns of Congress, and their encouragement of them to buy
American.
Mr. Chairman, I ask for an ``aye'' vote on the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there any further debate on the amendment?
If not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further amendments?

Amendment offered by Mr. Shadegg

Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Shadegg:
At the end of the amendment, add the following new tile:

TITLE II--GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN PREVENTION ACT

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

This title may be cited as the ``Government Shutdown
Prevention Act''.

SEC. 202. CONTINUING FUNDING.

(a) In General.--If any regular appropriation bill for
fiscal year 1998 does not become law prior to the beginning
of fiscal year 1998 or a joint resolution making continuing
appropriations is not in effect, there is appropriated, out
of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and
out of applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and
funds, such sums as may be necessary to continue any program,
project, or activity for which funds were provided in fiscal
year 1997.
(b) Level of Funding.--Appropriations and funds made
available, and authority granted, for a program, project, or
activity for fiscal year 1998 pursuant to this title shall be
at 100 percent of the rate of operations that was provided
for the program, project, or activity in fiscal year 1997 in
the corresponding regular appropriation Act for fiscal year
1997.
(c) Period of Availability.--Appropriations and funds made
available, and authority granted, for fiscal year 1998
pursuant to this title for a program, project, or activity
shall be available for the period beginning with the first
day of a lapse in appropriations and ending with the earlier
of--
(1) the date on which the applicable regular appropriation
bill for fiscal year 1998 becomes law (whether or not that
law provides for that program, project, or activity) or a
continuing resolution making appropriations becomes law, as
the case may be; or
(2) the last day of fiscal year 1998.

SEC. 203. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

(a) In General--An appropriation of funds made available,
or authority granted, for a program, project, or activity for
fiscal year 1998 pursuant to this title shall be made
available to the extent and in the manner which would be
provided by the pertinent appropriations Act for fiscal year
1997, including all of the terms and conditions and the
apportionment schedule imposed with respect to the
appropriation made or funds made available for fiscal year
1997 or authority granted for the program, project, or
activity under current law.
(b) Extent and Manner.--Appropriations made by this title
shall be available to the extent and in the manner which
would be provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.

SEC. 204. COVERAGE.

Appropriations and funds made available, and authority
granted, for any program, project, or activity for fiscal
year 1998 pursuant to this title shall cover all obligations
or expenditures incurred for that program, project, or
activity during the portion of fiscal year 1998 for which
this title applies to that program, project, or activity.

SEC. 205. EXPENDITURES.

Expenditures made for a program, project, or activity for
fiscal year 1998 pursuant to this title shall be charged to
the applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization whenever
a regular appropriation bill or a joint resolution making
continuing appropriations until the end of fiscal year 1998
providing for that program, project, or activity for that
period becomes law.

SEC. 206. INITIATING OR RESUMING A PROGRAM, PROJECT, OR
ACTIVITY.

No appropriation or funds made available or authority
granted pursuant to this title shall be used to initiate or
resume any program, project, or activity for which
appropriations, funds, or other authority were not available
during fiscal year 1997.

SEC. 207. PROTECTION OF OTHER OBLIGATIONS.

Nothing in this title shall be construed to effect
Government obligations mandated by other law, including
obligations with respect to Social Security, Medicare,
Medicaid, and veterans benefits.

SEC. 208. DEFINITION.

In this title, the term ``regular appropriation bill''
means any annual appropriation bill making appropriations,
otherwise making funds available, or granting authority, for
any of the following categories of programs, projects, and
activities:
(1) Agriculture, rural development, and related agencies
programs.
(2) The Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the
Judiciary, and related agencies.
(3) The Department of Defense.
(4) The government of the District of Columbia and other
activities chargeable in whole or in part against the
revenues of the District.
(5) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education, and related agencies.
(6) The Departments of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban
Development, and sundry independent agencies, boards,
commissions, corporations, and offices.
(7) Energy and water development.
(8) Foreign assistance and related programs.
(9) The Department of the Interior and related agencies.
(10) Military construction.
(11) The Department of Transportation and related agencies.
(12) The Treasury Department, the U.S. Postal Service, the
Executive Office of the President, and certain independent
agencies.
(13) The Legislative Branch.
Before section 1, insert the following:

TITLE I--NATIONAL SEA GRANT COLLEGE PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION

Mr. SHADEGG (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the
Record.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Arizona?
There was no objection.

Point of Order

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I object that this amendment is
not germane to the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from California [Mr. Farr] reserve
his point of order, or is the gentleman from California making his
point of order at this time?
Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order on the
amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman makes a point of order that the amendment
is not germane.
Does the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Shadegg] wish to be heard on the
point of order?
Mr. SHADEGG. I do, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Shadegg] is recognized
on the point of order.
Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me this is in fact very
germane. It has to do with the operations of the Federal Government. It
is clear to me we do not need to see another Federal Government
shutdown. It is important that we take steps now to ensure that Federal
employees not lose their jobs, and that we not go through that scenario
again.
This is a proposal to assure the American people that we do not once
again face the prospect of shutting down the Government, and to assure
that neither side blackmails the other to ensure or to force increased
spending. It seems to me that is germane to this measure. It seems to
me it will place this Congress and the U.S. Government in the position
that we all agree it should be in.
The President has said that we should never again shut down the
Government. He made that statement both in January, twice in January,
and once again in March of this year. This measure, I believe, is
germane in that it assures that Federal employees, veterans, Social
Security recipients, all of those who depend upon the services of the
Federal Government, would not lose their jobs.
In addition, Mr. Chairman, it assures that we will not face a
situation where one side can blackmail the other side into increasing
more spending. It is identical to the provision which was offered by
the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Gekas] last week, and it takes
important steps that this Government needs to take to assure that

[[Page H3888]]

operations continue when we reach the end of the fiscal year.
It seems to me that if that is not germane to this legislation and
the operations of this Government, then it ought to be germane and it
ought to be allowed to have a vote at this particular time. I would
urge that it is germane, I would urge that it is important that we make
it clear to the people of America that we will not ever again shut down
the Government, nor will we allow one side to threaten the other side
in a blackmail.
It is quite evident that the President wants to use the threat of a
shutdown in this Congress in order to force increased spending. I think
that is inappropriate. This is a proposal offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. Gekas] to accomplish a very important task for this
Nation. It seems to me essential that we act upon it and that we act
upon it now.
Whether we send it to the President as a freestanding bill or we send
it to the President attached to this measure, it is important that we
assure all of those who rely upon Government services that spending
will continue, that certain minimal services will be preserved.
It is also important for those who pay the tax bill that we not allow
spending to get out of hand, and that we not allow one side to
blackmail the other into spending more money with the threat of a
Government shutdown hanging over our heads. It seems to me clearly
germane to this issue and very important that we act on this, and that
we act on it now. What we were seeking to do last year was serious.
Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I call for regular order and a
point of order. This is an authorization bill, not an appropriations
bill.
Mr. GEKAS. Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. FARR of California. It has to do with sea grants.
The CHAIRMAN. The Members will suspend.
The gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Shadegg] should confine his remarks
simply to the question of the point of order. With that admonition, the
gentleman may proceed.
Mr. GEKAS. Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Gekas] wish
to be heard on the germaneness point of order?
Mr. GEKAS. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will hear the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Gekas].
Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Chairman, we have had a recurring battle over the
years as to whether or not this type of amendment would be germane to a
subject like the one that is presently on the floor. We are trying to
convince the Parliamentarian and the Speaker's office that when we talk
about a matter that has to do with a continuation of Government, to
prevent shutdown of Government by a transition type of mechanism that
we are constantly proposing, that we are, in effect, allowing this
measure today to actually go into effect, because if we do have to shut
down Government, then this measure and all its sister measures will be
of no avail. They will be of no force, because during the shutdown of
Government they will go out of existence.
That is why we say that a motion, an amendment that would continue
Government, prevent Government shutdown, facilitates this legislation,
the subject matter that is on the floor here. Although it has to do
with perhaps a budget concept, the very existence of the agency that
would be promulgating and continuing the work of the subject matter of
this would be in jeopardy if the Government shuts down. That is why we
feel this is germane.
The CHAIRMAN. If no other Member desires to argue on the point of
order, the Chair is prepared to rule.
Does the gentleman from California [Mr. Farr] simply wish to submit
the issue to the Chair with respect to germaneness?
Mr. FARR of California. I do, Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The amendment involves legislative jurisdictions and
subject matters, to wit, appropriations, beyond those in the pending
bill, and pursues purposes different from those pursued in the bill.
The amendment is not germane. The point of order is sustained.

{time} 1215

Are there further amendments to the bill?
If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, as amended.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, was agreed
to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Pease) having resumed the chair, Mr. Rogan, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 437) to
reauthorize the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other
purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 164, he reported the bill back
to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment in the
nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the Whole? If not,
the question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422,
nays 3, not voting 9, as follows:

[Roll No. 208]

YEAS--422

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Dellums
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Green
Greenwood
Gutierrez
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hoyer
Hulshof
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Latham

[[Page H3889]]

LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Molinari
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watkins
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NAYS--3

Hefley
Paul
Taylor (MS)

NOT VOTING--9

Andrews
Barton
Largent
Lipinski
Miller (CA)
Pombo
Schiff
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)

{time} 1236

Mr. BERMAN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________