[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 82 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H5103-H5105]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED 
                   AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 529 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, 
H.R. 4690.

                              {time}  1601


                     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 further consideration of 
the bill (H.R. 4690) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and related agencies for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes, with 
Mr. Pease (Chairman pro tempore) in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. When the Committee of the Whole rose on 
Friday June 23, 2000, the amendment by the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Coble) had been disposed of and the bill was open for 
amendment from page 44, line 18 to page 44, line 22.
  Pursuant to the orders of the House of Thursday, June 22, and Friday, 
June 23, no further amendments to the bill shall be in order except pro 
forma amendments offered by the chairman and ranking member of the 
Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of 
debate and amendments printed in the Congressional Record on or before 
June 22, 2000.
  Amendments printed in the Congressional Record may be offered only by 
the Member who caused it to be printed or his designee, shall be 
considered read, shall be debatable for 10 minutes, except that 
amendment No. 23 shall be

[[Page H5104]]

debatable for 30 minutes and amendment No. 60 shall be debatable for 60 
minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
to a demand for a division of the question.


           Amendment No. 74 offered by Mr. Smith of Michigan

  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 74 offered by Mr. Smith of Michigan:
       Page 44, line 21, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $4,350,000)''.
       Page 73, line 19, after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(reduced by $8,700,000)''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
Friday, June 23, 2000, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) and a 
Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment helps assure that we have more accurate 
statistics that guide over $2 trillion in State and Federal spending 
and hundreds of billions of dollars in wage decisions and revenue-
sharing decisions.
  If this amendment had been taken up last week, there were several 
individuals that had indicated that they would like to speak on the 
importance of accurately funding BEA, the Bureau of Economic Analysis. 
That is because we depend so much on what happens with BEA. Seventy 
percent of our determinations coming from the Congressional Budget 
Office, coming from the President's Office of management and budget, is 
from BEA. The ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) as well as two potential 
chairmen of that committee indicated that it is important that we 
adequately fund BEA. This amendment contains $4.3 million that we put 
into BEA to help make sure that they can do their job.
  Here is the problem. They have been cut 12 percent in real terms over 
the last several years, and the economy is changing so dramatically 
that they cannot be underfunded with the freeze in personnel they have 
had for the last several years. It will be difficult if not impossible 
to do the job we need them to do.
  I would just like to quote a couple of people, and I will start out 
with Alan Greenspan. Alan Greenspan said, and I quote, ``I am 
extraordinarily reluctant to advocate any increase in spending, so it's 
got to be either a very small amount or a very formidable argument, and 
I find in this case that both conditions are met.''
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to quote a comment from Robert Shapiro, 
Under Secretary for Economic Affairs: ``Without your amendment, the 
bill would seriously threaten our capacity to understand and measure 
the rapidly changing American economy.'' Then he goes on to say, the 
new expanded responsibility that BEA has in this new economy and their 
predictions are so crucial. BEA tracks economic activity and calculates 
the U.S. domestic products. BEA statistics underlie virtually all 
economic projections in both business and government.
  Mr. Chairman, I say to the gentleman from New York and the gentleman 
from Kentucky that I have not gone out and solicited political 
supporters for this amendment. This is not a very glitzy amendment. It 
is not very exciting. But please consider its importance. Consider the 
fact that, without these kinds of estimates being accurate, we are 
going to end up having very poor economic projections.
  According to OMB and CBO, discrepancies in the current GDP data, that 
is what BEA does, can change estimates of government revenues by as 
much as $200 billion over the projection period. A recent example: in 
1998, CBO projected a unified budget, listen to this, in 1998, CBO 
projected a unified budget deficit of $70 billion for this year based 
on BEA estimates. As it turns out, there is a $200 billion surplus. 
This $270 billion discrepancy can be largely traced to the BEA data.
  Mr. Chairman, they have been doing an excellent job, but we have 
shortchanged them. They are 12 percent below what they were in real 
terms. The President suggested in his budget that we increase them by 
$5 million; this amendment will only mean that we increase them by $4.3 
million.
  I think it is important to make a quick comment on the offset. The 
amendment draws from the State Department's Educational and Culture 
Exchange Account. We did not pass the amendment when we finished last 
Friday to take something like $90 million out of that account. CBO 
informs me that they are only going to spend half of the money that 
they get in this account. This amendment takes only $4 million.
  This account is one of the few that received a significant increase 
in this legislation.
  While I support cultural exchange, I feel that our need for accurate 
data on the economy for government and business is more pressing and 
justifies this small transfer.
  The Educational and Cultural Exchange fund would still receive 
slightly more funding than it got for FY 2000 under this amendment.


                               Conclusion

  Chairman Greenspan of the Federal Reserve said the following of BEA 
in February:

       We are moving into an economy, the structure of which none 
     of us has ever seen before.  . . . This means that a lot of 
     the things we examine in the economy are very poorly 
     represented in our current statistics.  . . . [A]dditional 
     funds could probably very effectively be spent to improve the 
     quality of our statistics both for the private sector, which 
     is crucial, and for those of us who have to be involved in 
     governmental economic policy.

  Alan Greenspan:

       I am extraordinarily reluctant to advocate any increase in 
     spending. So it's got to be either a very small amount or a 
     very formidable argument. And I find, in this case, that both 
     conditions are met.

  I ask for my colleagues' support on my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I just think it is so very important that the chairman 
and ranking member of this committee consider the importance of this 
amendment, and I hope that they will concur.
  Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record the letter I quoted from 
earlier from Mr. Robert Shapiro.
         United States Department of Commerce, The Under Secretary 
           for Economic Affairs,
                                    Washington, DC, June 26, 2000.
     Representative Nick Smith,
     306 Cannon House Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Smith: Thank you for your letter asking 
     our views on your proposal to add $4.35 million to the $43.8 
     million in the Appropriations Committee's FY 2001 budget for 
     the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Without your 
     amendment, the bill could seriously threaten our capacity to 
     understand and measure the rapidly changing American economy.
       The basic measures produced by BEA range from the Gross 
     Domestic Product (GDP) and the balance of payments, to 
     domestic investment and state and local income. BEA is also 
     the world's leading statistical agency in the area of 
     measuring the New Economy--including the development of 
     innovative techniques to measure software as business 
     investments; rapid quality changes in semiconductors, 
     computers and telecommunications equipment; and productivity 
     in banking. The quality of spending and investment decisions 
     across government and the private sector will depend on the 
     BEA's ability to continue these efforts.
       With an additional $4.35 million in support, BEA will be 
     able to measure additional aspects of the New Economy 
     critical for American business and government--including the 
     size of e-commerce markets; the output of industries such as 
     business services, financial services and education that rely 
     heavily on information technologies; the role of stock 
     options in compensation; and the dimensions of investment, 
     consumption, and wealth. Improving the accuracy of BEA's 
     national statistics will also help end the periodic revenue 
     surprises associated with Administration and Congressional 
     budget forecasts, and improve the allocation of more than 
     $100 billion a year in federal funds based on BEA state and 
     local income estimates.
       In recent Senate testimony, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan 
     Greenspan said that BEA is one of the few areas of government 
     that meet his conditions for increased spending. As Congress 
     continues consideration of the Commerce, Justice, State 
     appropriations, I hope your colleagues will seriously 
     consider the enormous benefits to the United States from 
     fully funding the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Robert Shapiro,
                             Under Secretary for Economic Affairs.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Rogers) claim the time in opposition?
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I do.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H5105]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment, 
well-intentioned as it is. He wants to increase the funding for 
economic and statistical analysis at the Commerce Department by $4.35 
million.
  I will be happy to work with the gentleman as we go through the 
process in conference with the Senate and further, but in the process 
this amendment would slash double that amount from the State 
Department's international exchange program. The funding level in the 
bill for exchanges provides only for wage and price increases, so any 
reduction to the level in the bill would be a cut into the meat of 
these programs, which include the Fulbright Scholarship Program and the 
International Visitor Program.
  Exchanges like these, Mr. Chairman, foster the international dialogue 
that is critical to American leadership in the world and to long-term 
peaceful and productive relations with other countries. Exchange 
programs are a vital tool to advance our foreign economic and security 
policies, and this amendment would cut them to below a freeze level.
  I do appreciate the gentleman's concerns about the economic and 
statistical programs of the Commerce Department, but this bill already 
provides funding for those programs at the current year level, which 
includes an increase over last year's for an initiative to update and 
improve statistical measurement of the U.S. economy and the measurement 
of international transactions. In addition, the Department of Commerce 
will be able to submit a reprogramming for additional funding for these 
programs if they feel it necessary.
  I would be happy to work with the gentleman to address his concerns, 
and the concerns of all of us, as we continue through the process; but 
the proposed offset would do real damage to the exchange program at 
State; and, therefore, I am constrained to urge that we reject this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Serrano).
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I want to join the chairman in his comments that he has made.
  Let me first say that many Members have come to me and told me that 
this is an area they wish would not be used for offsets. This 
especially cuts the Fulbright program, which has been cut by Congress 
by more than 25 percent in fiscal year 1995 and 1996. In addition, I am 
informed that this would also cut educational advising, which assists 
folks who are interested in attending school over here.
  So, in general, while we certainly understand what the gentleman is 
trying to do, and under normal circumstances I probably would join him, 
there are many people on this side who believe that hurting this 
program would just not be the proper thing to do at this time.
  Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to note that I am joined in opposition by the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Gilman) of the Committee on International Relations, and by the 
chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human 
Rights, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), in urging that we 
reject the amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROGERS. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for 
yielding to me, and I appreciate the Chairman's frugal manner and the 
fact that there are not a lot of excess appropriations in his budget. 
However, in this particular account, the Educational and Cultural 
Exchange Account, there was an increase. This amendment still leaves 
that account with more money than they had last year.
  And, again, I would just call to the chairman's attention the fact 
that BEA has been cut 12 percent in real terms since 1993. It is being 
held flat this year, even though there are tremendous changes in our 
economy to calculate.
  Do I understand the chairman to say that he will work, as this goes 
to conference and through the process, to try to more adequately fund 
the BEA?
  Mr. ROGERS. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is 
correct. I will work with the gentleman and others to see if there is 
some way we can find extra money for BEA. I realize the importance of 
it and that they are being squeezed by this funding level. So I will 
work with the gentleman to see if there is something we can do along 
the way.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Committee will rise informally.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Smith of Michigan) assumed the Chair.

                          ____________________