[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 93 (Thursday, July 11, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H4505-H4508]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2733, ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION ACT OF
2002
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 474 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 474
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule
XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 2733) to authorize the National Institute of
Standards and Technology to work with major manufacturing
industries on an initiative of standards development and
implementation for electronic enterprise integration. The
first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one
hour 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. 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
recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in the
bill. Each section of the committee amendment in the nature
of a substitute shall be considered as read. During
consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole may accord priority in recognition on
the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has
caused it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional
Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII.
Amendments so printed 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 committee
amendment in the nature of a substitute. 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. Quinn). The gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from New York
(Ms. Slaughter), 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, the resolution before us is an open rule that provides
for consideration of H.R. 2733, the Enterprise Integration Act of 2002.
The rule allows
[[Page H4506]]
for 1 hour of general debate and provides that the amendment in the
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science shall be
considered as an original bill for the purposes of amendment. Priority
in recognition will be given to Members whose amendments were
preprinted in the Congressional Record. Finally, the rule provides for
one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.
Mr. Speaker, today the House will consider H.R. 2733, the Enterprise
Integration Act. The bill authorizes the National Institute of
Standards and Technology to work with major manufacturing industries to
set standards for developing and implementing electronic enterprise
integration.
Before the Internet, factories were automated on their own with no
consideration of how to share manufacturing data. Factories installed
software packages that best met their individual needs or customized
software to address particular problems. This resulted in a typical
supply chain where suppliers used a variety of different and
incompatible software packages.
The burden resulting from incompatible software was more pronounced
further down the supply chain as smaller companies had to comply with
all the manufacturers higher up the chain. These companies, who must
bear the greatest burden, tend to be the ones least able to afford
multiple software systems.
However, the Internet and other technological advances have made it
possible for manufacturing companies to work together electronically,
something that was impossible just a few years ago. This seamless
exchange of information, along with the vertical supply chain, is known
as enterprise integration.
For example, if Ford Motor Company decided to change a design
specification for a bumper, every one of the suppliers that contribute
to that part would then have the ability to easily and quickly see the
new specification and how it would impact their component.
{time} 1100
This integration helps large and small businesses all along the
supply chain to reduce costs and productivity times.
A 1999 study commissioned by the National Institute of Standards and
Technology estimated that enterprise integration in the auto supply
chains of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler would result in a
potential savings of at least $1 billion annually.
This estimated savings from just select companies in the automobile
industry is an example. Similar savings are also possible all across
other industries such as shipbuilding, major construction, home-
building, furniture manufacturing, and electronics manufacturing, just
to name a few.
One solution to compatibility problems in design and manufacturing is
to develop standards for the exchange of product data. Through this
legislation, the NIST, which has 20 years of experience in this area,
will be tasked to work with government and industry representatives to
identify and develop ways of enterprise standardization and
integration.
The measure also requires NIST to work with companies and trade
associations to raise awareness of enterprise integration activities,
as well as developing training materials for businesses to participate
in an integrated enterprise.
Manufacturers today must be more flexible, efficient, and responsive
to the changing needs and preferences of consumers. The European Union
understands the importance of enterprise integration and has already
been aggressively developing standardized protocols in such areas as I
have talked about. In order to maintain and remain competitive to
ensure that international standards are compatible with U.S. software
packages, the United States must be active in helping to develop these
standards.
Mr. Speaker, in this day where technology is so intertwined with our
economic prosperity, we must take the necessary steps to streamline our
operations and ensure that there is coordination from top to bottom. I
commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the chairman of the
Committee on Science, and the Committee on Science for taking this
necessary first step to ensure that our manufacturing industries are
not only able to function more efficiently, but also to remain
competitive worldwide.
I urge my colleagues to support this fair and open rule, as well as
the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Sessions) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
(Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the open rule.
Again, Mr. Speaker, this is an entirely noncontroversial measure that
might have been put on the suspension calendar, but nevertheless, it is
an important measure for many regions of the country, including my own
district in upstate New York, and I urge its favorable consideration.
Mr. Speaker, the manufacturing sector remains one of the most
critical economic engines of the U.S. economy. My region of the
country, with a combination of Fortune 500 companies, as well as
midsize and smaller firms, has emerged as the leading per capita
exporting city in America. Many of our smaller and midsized firms have
become the lifeblood of our community and, indeed, have led the Nation
in innovation and expansion. These firms know the critical importance
of a coordinated exchange of information up and down the supply chain.
With the emergence of the World Wide Web, international standards for
product data exchange greatly accelerated the movement toward
electronically integrated supply chains during the last half of the
1990s. European and Asian countries are investing heavily in preparing
their smaller manufacturers to do business in the new environment.
European efforts are well advanced in the aerospace, automotive, and
shipbuilding industries and are beginning in other industries,
including home building, furniture manufacturing, textiles, and
apparel. This investment could give overseas companies a major
competitive advantage in the months and years to come.
The legislation before us today will give the small manufacturers in
the United States access to the same electronic integration that the
large firms enjoy. The measure would increase efficiency and
productivity throughout all sectors of our economy by providing
technical and financial assistance to small and medium-sized
businesses.
I was pleased to see in this legislation that the National Institute
of Standards and Technology would spearhead these efforts. With a long
history of working cooperatively with manufacturers, and the nationwide
reach which of its manufacturing extension program, the institute is in
a unique position to help the United States, large and small
manufacturers alike, in their responses on this challenge.
Moreover, the institute will involve the Manufacturing Extension
Program, MEP, which I know firsthand is making a real difference in my
district. The MEP program, through High Tech Rochester, has assisted
more than 1,000 small manufacturing firms within my district.
Established in 1987, High Tech Rochester has been a force in the
region's economy. By 1997, High Tech Rochester could boast that its
client base had collectively realized a 2\1/2\-fold growth in
employment and a $43 million increase in sales to $61 million.
Enterprise integration, as provided for in this bill, would provide
High Tech Rochester and other successful MEP programs throughout the
Nation with a promising new tool to assist the small manufacturing
firms.
Mr. Speaker, I have seen what a difference this kind of support can
make for not only existing small manufacturers, but for manufacturing
start-ups. High Tech Rochester's business incubator supports fledgling
small businesses by helping them to spin off, creating new companies to
diversify the economy, making it stronger in the long run.
I have been a strong supporter of High Tech Rochester's business
incubator program which, over the past 4 years, has successfully
supported dozens of start-up companies to ensure that they survive in
their first years in business. It has been a tremendous success. In the
year 2000, four companies
[[Page H4507]]
``graduated'' from the facility and moved to new larger facilities in
our community. By their graduation, the combined numbers grew from 13
to 61, a nearly 370 percent increase. In 2001, the facility graduated
twice as many firms, and we look forward to them doubling the success
of their predecessors.
It is my firm hope that other regions of the country will benefit
from similar programs, and I urge my colleagues to support this
measure.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Grand Rapids, Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), the rocket
scientist from the Republican Conference.
Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
In 1994, when I first arrived in this Congress, I was absolutely
astounded. I went to my office and, first of all, found that I did not
have a computer in my office, but when I tried to use staff computers
to send e-mails, I discovered that I could send an e-mail more easily
and more rapidly to Moscow than I could to a colleague 20 feet down the
hall. Why was that? Because in the House of Representatives, we had
allowed a system to develop that did not have standards for the whole
House of Representatives, and each Representative had a kingdom where
they had set their own standards for their computer systems. Each
individual system could not talk to each other.
When the Republicans took the majority, then Speaker Gingrich put me
in charge of standardizing the system. Today, we have a system that
seamlessly allows over 10 million e-mails a month to flow between
offices in this Capitol, saving us a lot of money and a lot of staff
time. That is an illustration of what we can accomplish with standards.
Without standards, this place barely functioned in terms of Internet
usage, e-mail and Web sites. Today, with standards, it functions
extremely well, and the American people have access to each and every
one of us almost instantaneously, and the American public, through Web
sites, can receive information on our activities instantaneously.
This bill is about something similar. It will help industry by
setting standards--standards for enterprises working together. Let me
give an example.
A smaller auto parts supplier from my district visited me recently.
As my colleagues know, in Michigan we make a lot of automobiles and we
have many auto parts suppliers around the State. He had a good
business. But he commented that he was working very well with the
Japanese manufacturer. He was making parts for this manufacturer, who
manufactured cars in this country, and they had a good system working
together.
Everything was computerized, everything was set up from the beginning
so each side knew exactly what the other was doing, and they could
relate to each other well. But with the American manufacturers, they
did not have that relationship. They were trying to establish it, but
it was going to be different than the one with the Japanese
manufacturer, so he was going to have to have two different systems to
deal with these two different manufacturers.
That does not make sense, and that is what this bill is about: so
that small businesses such as this gentleman's can be assured that
whichever manufacturer he makes parts for, he will be able to use the
same communication system via the Internet, and that his business will
flourish, because it will reduce his expenses tremendously.
This bill will help both large and small manufacturers alike, because
it will cut costs and improve efficiency. By taking advantage of
information technology such as the Internet and other parameters
relating to that, our manufacturing industry will be able to fully
integrate their supply chain so information will be able to flow freely
up and down the supply chain.
This integration, however, will require the development of standards
on how the information is going to be exchanged between businesses
within a supply chain. Going back to my example of the small parts
supplier working with the Japanese manufacturer and American
manufacturer, each of them thinks their own standards are the best.
There has to be some outside force that works out the differences and
gets agreement.
This bill will provide that outside force by supporting this
integration through authorizing the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, better known as NIST, to work with industry to identify
what research, testing, and development needs to be undertaken to
develop these information exchange standards. NIST has been in the
standards business for over 150 years. They are experienced at this.
They are experts at bringing together different parties and
establishing standards, and this is the logical place to put this
particular effort.
This legislation provides NIST an authorization of $47 million over 4
years, starting with $2 million in fiscal year 2002 and ramping up to
$20 million in fiscal year 2005; and with this money, they will be able
to carry out this effort.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and this
legislation. Small and large businesses in America will benefit from
it. I urge my colleagues to vote for this rule and this bill.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Rochester, Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time. I rise in support of this rule and this bill.
There is an old expression that ideas in children are brilliant when
they are your own, and we have a problem sometimes with technology
because we have one group who has an idea and another group that has an
idea, and they begin to speak different languages. What this bill, the
Enterprise Integration Act of 2002, is about is ultimately getting
everybody talking the same language.
Imagine, for example, if we had a situation where pilots from one
airline here in the United States spoke Greek and the next one spoke
Latin and the next one spoke German; what we want them all speaking is
the same language.
It is said that 50 percent of our economic growth over the next 10
years is going to come from small business. It is also said that more
than 50 percent of our economic growth is going to come from
technology. This is the way we tie together small business and
technology. This is a very, very important bill in the long-term
economic future of this country, and particularly for our small
businesses here in the United States.
Let me take a minute, though, to say what a wonderful agency the
National Institute of Standards and Technology is. I have had the
chance to visit two of their campuses, and I cannot tell my colleagues
enough how impressed I am with the scientists who work there. The
National Institute of Standards and Technology is involved in all kinds
of basic research. They study everything from fire to atomic clocks,
and they do it very well and they do it on a very limited budget.
{time} 1115
In fact, I was so impressed when the chairman and I went out to
Boulder, Colorado, to see the way they do business out there at their
labs to see how much duct tape they are using in their various labs,
and this is very high technology that they are working on. They do not
waste any of the taxpayers' money, but what they do best is come up
with standards so that various industries are all working on the same
language, and the language of science is something that is probably way
above my ability to completely understand, and we are delighted to have
the good doctor being a very important part of this discussion, but I
understand this: if we can get big business and small business,
manufacturers and suppliers, all using the same language, both the big
business, the small business, the consumer, everyone; the American
economy will benefit.
This is a very important piece of legislation. I hope Members will
join me in supporting the rule and the bill.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Committee on Rules brought this rule forward. It is great
legislation. It makes sense. It will aid not
[[Page H4508]]
only small business but encourage the opportunity for big business and
small business to be more competitive around the globe. In my prior
life, I worked for a company that was called Bell Communications
Research, formerly known as Bell Labs. It was our mission at that time
to make sure that we ensured the standards for the telecommunications
industry were the same across the United States, albeit the world.
The ability to speak together in the same language, as the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) talked about, is so critical to the
success of people who are trying to provide products worldwide. This
not only makes sense, what we are doing, but it will help America be
more competitive. I wholeheartedly support not only this rule but the
underlying legislation. And I would say, Mr. Speaker, that this is a
great bill; and I urge my colleagues to support this.
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.
____________________