[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 23, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H2599-H2628]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SBIR/STTR REAUTHORIZATION ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125 and rule
XVIII, 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. 5819.
{time} 1625
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. 5819) to amend the Small Business Act to improve the Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business
Technology Transfer (STTR) program, and for other purposes, with Ms.
DeGette in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall not exceed 1 hour, with 40 minutes equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of
the Committee on Small Business and 20 minutes equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee
on Science and Technology.
The gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each will control 20 minutes, and the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Wu) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) each will
control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, this year, we celebrate Small Business Week in the
face of harsh realities that come with an economic downturn. But it is
important to remember that the Nation's 26 million entrepreneurs have
always led America's way to economic recovery and sustained growth.
That was the case during the last slowdown, when the technology
sector--led by small startups--provided the foundation for the booming
economy of the 1990s. It can be true again today.
Over the past decades, research conducted by entrepreneurs in the
Small Business Innovation Research and the Small Business Technology
Transfer programs has bolstered every area of American life. The
important contributions of these small research firms span such varied
disciplines as national security, energy efficiency, and public health
infrastructure.
The measure that is before the House today reauthorizes SBIR and
STTR. Together, the programs make up the largest government-wide R&D
initiative, and they can help us emerge from weak economic times yet
again. Just as importantly, the reauthorization will ensure these
successful programs continue to spur innovation and job growth, while
keeping America at the forefront of the global marketplace.
The last time these programs were reauthorized, the Internet was in
its infancy, and the term ``Google'' was an obscure mathematical
concept. Today, the Internet is a part of everyday life, and Google is
one of the best known and largest companies on the planet.
Our legislation modernizes SBIR/STTR. It ensures small firms can
contribute to our country's most pressing research and development
challenges. The bill recognizes that, while many good ideas come from
large companies and universities, it is American small businesses who
are our primary source of innovation. These entrepreneurs, not just
Boeing or MIT, develop the type of products and services that meet the
needs of the new economy.
H.R. 5819 allows small businesses to continue bringing their
critically important ideas from the laboratory to the marketplace. The
bill also offers targeted resources for technical assistance and
ensures small firms are not discriminated against because of their
business model or type of financing.
Last, but not least, H.R. 5819 increases the number of SBIR and STTR
applications from rural areas. It also promotes participation by small
businesses that are owned by women, service disabled veterans and
minorities.
Moreover, this reauthorization enables a greater number of small
research companies to advance the sort of innovation that saves lives.
As a result, dozens of patient groups support the bill. They include
the ALS and Alpha-1 Associations, the Caring Voice Coalition, the
Coalition of Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue, the Cystic
Fibrosis Foundation, the National Organization for Rare Disorders,
Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy and the Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance.
The same holds true for a broad array of business groups,
representing everything from the agricultural sector to energy and
technology organizations. This diverse group of supporters includes the
American Electronic Association, the Biotechnology Industry
Organization, the Association for Manufacturing Technology, the U.S.
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce.
{time} 1630
Madam Chairman, in passing this legislation, we will ensure the SBIR
and STTR awards remain competitive from top-notch research and continue
to produce cutting-edge breakthroughs.
There is no better way to celebrate Small Business Week than to
support the work of entrepreneurs. That is especially true when it
means saving lives, creating high-paying jobs for Americans, reducing
our trade deficit, and getting our economy back on track.
I urge my colleagues to join with me and Mr. Chabot in celebrating
Small Business Week by voting for this important measure.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5819, the Small
Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer
Programs Reauthorization Act.
These two programs are highly successful Federal initiatives designed
to encourage economic growth and innovation within the small business
community by assisting with the funding that is critical at the startup
and developmental stages of a small company. Not only do they spur
growth in individual companies, the programs stress the importance of
the Small Business Committee's and the entire Federal Government's
commitment to expand and diversify research opportunities for small
businesses.
Created in 1982, the SBIR program offers competition-based awards to
stimulate technological innovation among small private sector
businesses while providing government agencies with new, cost-
effective, technical and scientific solutions to meet their diverse
needs. This program is not only critical to the unique needs of each of
the participating Federal agencies but also to our national economy.
Small businesses renew the U.S. economy by introducing new products and
lower cost methods of doing business, sometimes with substantial
economic benefits. They play a key role in introducing technologies to
the market, often responding quickly to new market opportunities. Some
of our Nation's greatest technological innovations were originated by
small business owners tinkering in their workshops, including two very
famous Ohioans, the Wright brothers.
Our committee worked very hard to produce the legislation we have
before us today. We held several hearings on
[[Page H2600]]
this topic over the last few months inviting the Small Business
Administration, SBIR and STTR program managers from Federal agencies,
various small businesses, and academics to discuss this program's
successes and consider amendments that would improve it. I am happy to
say that a great many of the ideas presented to the committee have
found their way into this legislation.
For example, the bill requires agencies with an annual SBIR program
of $50 million or more a year to create an SBIR advisory board to
review the program quarterly and recommend improvements. We found
throughout the course of our work that there is simply not enough hard
evidence available to effectively measure the success or failure of the
programs. Several of our witnesses touched on this subject, and the
National Academy of Sciences mentioned it in its congressionally
mandated study of the SBIR program.
The bill also states that agencies required to have an SBIR advisory
board must complete an evaluation of the competitive SBIR proposals
within specific time frames. This is important to ensure that potential
awardees are reviewed promptly and effectively. Given the complexity
and time-consuming nature of awarding an SBIR grant award application,
it can be very difficult to plan your business' future without knowing
its fate for months at a time.
The legislation also increases the size of maximum awards to allow
grant winners greater ability to develop their new technologies and
provides agencies even greater flexibility to administer the programs.
The award levels have not been raised or adjusted for inflation in 16
years. Several of our witnesses commented that the levels, particularly
for phase I, offer very little wiggle room.
Additionally, I believe this legislation finds an appropriate balance
on the issues of venture capital companies' funding of SBIR
participants. I would like to thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Graves) for all of his hard work on this issue. Mr. Graves has been a
champion on this matter for years and has consistently worked to find a
solution that balances funding the best science with maintaining the
integrity of the program's goals of helping small businesses. I
understand Mr. Graves will be offering a perfecting amendment during
this proceeding that effectively strikes this balance, and I would urge
Members on both sides of this aisle to support the amendment.
I would also like to thank the gentlelady from New York and
chairwoman of our committee, Ms. Velazquez, and her staff for working
in such a strong bipartisan manner with me and other members of our
committee and with our staff on this legislation. But this is nothing
new. The gentlelady has consistently sought my input and Republican
members on the committee's input on various bills that we reported out
of the committee and how they should be crafted. Although we may not
always agree on every issue or there may be philosophical undertones,
the spirit of working together in an effort to produce legislation that
truly helps American small businesses always prevails, and I
congratulate and commend the gentlelady for doing that.
Again, I urge my colleagues to vote for this legislation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of H.R. 5819, this SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act. I
want to commend Chairwoman Velazquez and the gentleman from Ohio for
their fine work in the Small Business Committee to bring a strong bill
to the floor. I also want to recognize Drs. Ehlers and Gingrey and
Chairman Gordon of our Science and Technology Committee for their
leadership on this issue.
SBIR and STTR are integral to our innovation agenda. Small companies
are where a lot of innovation happens, and we need to support these
companies to remain successful in the competitive global economy. At
more than $2.3 billion a year, SBIR and STTR comprise the largest
single source of Federal funding for private sector technological
innovation. These funds help fund companies to turn federally funded
research into new jobs, products, and services. However, SBIR and STTR
were created more than 20 years ago, and we need to restructure both
programs to respond to the new global innovation environment.
Last week, the Technology and Innovation Subcommittee marked up H.R.
5789, the Science and Technology Innovation Act of 2008, which also
reauthorized SBIR and STTR. I am glad to see that many of the
provisions from H.R. 5789 were included in the subject bill, H.R. 5819.
I thank Chairwoman Velazquez for working to include provisions that
the Science Committee thought were critical to the continued success of
SBIR and STTR.
Prior to coming to Congress, I practiced technology law for a number
of years, and I helped a number of applicants through the SBIR
application process. I can tell you that it is a long and arduous
process and that frequently, grant sizes were not adequate. The bill we
are considering today includes many updates which can fix some of the
problems that I saw in the private sector, such as increasing the set-
aside by one-half percent, increasing the award sizes, allowing for
agency flexibility and granting awards, and addressing venture capital
participation in the SBIR program.
Again, I want to thank the chairwoman for introducing this good
legislation which improves upon existing programs that are vital to the
development of innovative technologies. I urge my colleagues to support
this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small
Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program both were created to
stimulate technological innovation, encourage the use of small
businesses to meet Federal research and development needs, and increase
private sector commercialization of innovations developed from Federal
research and development. I believe both programs have been very
successful and should be continued, and, on that basis, I support the
legislation before us, although I disagree with some aspects of it.
The Science and Technology Committee has a long standing interest in
promoting innovation and development by small businesses. Through these
two competitive programs, the Small Business Administration is charged
with ensuring that the Nation's small innovative businesses are a
significant part of the Federal Government's research and development
efforts. Currently, 11 Federal departments participate in the SBIR
program, including the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Commerce,
Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and
Transportation, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency, the
National Aeronautics Space Administration, and the National Science
Foundation. Of these 11, five departments also participate in the STTR
program, awarding $200 billion to small high-tech businesses.
The original legislation for SBIR was developed based on the Small
Business Innovation Research program of the National Science
Foundation. The NSF program was designed to encourage proposals from
small science and technology firms in NSF program areas. The current
Federal-wide program mirrors the original NSF program, which was also
organized in three phases to ensure the most efficient use of
resources.
Phase I was an opportunity to develop research on important
scientific and engineering problems. Projects that were found to be
promising after the phase I research stage were given phase II awards
to further develop the research project. Phase III is a transition
phase that involves commercialization of the products or processes
developed in the first phases.
Similar to SBIR, STTR is also a highly competitive three-phase
program that reserves a specific percentage of Federal research and
development funding for small businesses to work in partnership with
nonprofit research institutions to help move ideas from the laboratory
to the marketplace, to foster high-tech economic development in the
United States, and to help to meet the technological needs of the
Federal Government. Since the implementation of this program in 1983
through fiscal year 2006, over $20.7 billion has been given in awards
for more
[[Page H2601]]
than 94,660 projects. The Government Accountability Office, which has
been charged with assessing this program, has generally found that
these programs have achieved the goal of enhanced participation of a
small business in research and development fields.
Given the interest of the Committee on Science and Technology on the
research and development of new technology, our committee has a unique
interest in this bill. We have long been concerned about how America
competes with the rest of the world in these areas. Many initiatives
that have been passed by our committee in this Congress have focused on
the need to improve our competitiveness in the world through funding of
science education programs and public outreach efforts. I view this
legislation as one more way we can reach out to the public to assist
American innovation.
My only regret with regard to this legislation is that I do not
believe it was able to receive the proper attention it warranted by the
Committee on Science and Technology. Our committee shares jurisdiction
on this legislation, primarily concentrated on the areas of science
itself and the amount of science funding.
However, the full committee was not given the opportunity to consider
this legislation and have its voice heard with regard to its
continuation, primarily because there was a great hurry to bring this
bill to the floor. Had regular order been provided, I believe we would
be bringing a different bill to the floor today. And in view of that, I
have offered an amendment that I believe will strengthen the bill, make
it sounder in funding, preserve the funding of other resources and
other research in the Federal Government, and also provide an
opportunity to increase the funding for SBIR and STTR in the future by
bringing up the funding for the other agencies of which these two
organizations receive a percentage.
But I believe the approach in the bill of simply arbitrarily
increasing the funding for SBIR and STTR hurts our research efforts in
the Nation, and I will speak later on that topic when my amendment
reaches the floor.
The second reservation is voiced by Mr. Gingrey of Georgia and, if we
have time, we will enter into that discussion later and I will give him
an opportunity to speak.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar), a
member of the Small Business Committee, for 3 minutes.
{time} 1645
Mr. CUELLAR. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5819, the SBIR/STTR
Reauthorization Act.
The creation of the Small Business Innovation Research program has
benefited small businesses across the United States. Through the SBIR
program, small businesses have been given the opportunity to provide
innovative solutions that benefit the Federal Government through the
research and development of new products.
I applaud the chairwoman's efforts. Nydia Velazquez has worked
extremely hard with all members of the committee to make sure that we
properly make the changes to the SBIR program. I commend the
chairwoman, and the ranking member, also, for their diligence in
protecting and encouraging the participation of small business concerns
owned by women, veterans and minorities, all businesses.
I would like to thank the chairwoman and the committee staff for
working with me to add a provision that I brought forward to make sure
that Congress has a clear picture of how exactly involved these
underrepresented small business concerns have been in the SBIR and the
STTR program.
I believe Congress can best make improvements to valuable programs
and initiatives if we have an effective reporting requirement. This
legislation will require that annual reports on the SBIR program
include information regarding the SBIR program involvement of small
business concerns that are owned by women, minorities and veterans, and
again, I emphasize, all the small businesses that we have. By
evaluating what SBIR awards have been distributed to these
underrepresented businesses, my opinion is that Congress can best
determine how to further involve businesses owned by women, minorities
and veterans.
Again, I thank the chairwoman for the effort, and the ranking member.
I support this legislation and I ask Members to support it.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I want to thank my friend for yielding. And I want
to thank the chairwoman, Ms. Velazquez, for the job that she has done
and for what Ranking Member Chabot has done, and the true bipartisan
work and the good things that we have been able to do in the committee
this year for small business.
But while we're talking about that, you know, we need to talk about
the one threat that all small business people have come up to me in the
last couple of weeks to talk about, and that is the price of fuel.
Madam Chairman, I want to tell you that some of them feel like they
have been lied to or maybe misled, because in 2006, the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee sent out a memo that said, ``To Assist
the Candidates.'' ``Demonstrate your dedication to fighting for middle
class families by clearly explaining how you will work to keep down the
price of gas if elected to Congress. Hold an event at a gas station or
other logical locations where you call for a real commitment to
bringing down gas prices, and pledge that as a Member of Congress you
will fight for families in your district, not for oil and gas
executives that the Republican Congress has fought for.'' And so they
went out.
And maybe some people were misled because if you look at April 11,
2006, one of the candidates, Jason Altmire, who is on our committee,
had a campaign that said, ``rising fuel costs'' that got Jason Altmire,
the Democratic nominee for the Fourth Congressional District, calling
for alternative fuel sources. ``Altmire made four stops Thursday in the
district at gas stations all at prices for regular unleaded teetering
at around $3 per gallon. The Democrat blames his opponent and President
Bush for the rising fuel costs.'' The price for a barrel of fuel at
this time, a barrel of oil is $57. You know, it's $119 today.
Small business people have been misled to think that the new majority
was going to do something about fuel costs. It's time we have a public
outcry that we do do something. If this secret plan is released, if the
Pelosi premium is brought down, gas prices are at a record at this time
of $3.50 a gallon.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Georgia has expired.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield the gentleman an additional
minute.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I think that small businesses deserve an answer. I
think they deserve to see what this program is. I think they deserve to
see what this plan is, what they were promised.
The fact that gas at the time that they were told this was $2.06 a
gallon, oil was at $76 a barrel, today oil is at $119 a barrel, average
price of gas is $3.50, they've been misled. And so what we want to do
is see that commonsense plan brought to the floor, laid out, that we
can all look at and maybe we can work towards.
And it's not just raising taxes, it's not buying or riding bicycles,
it's not windmills, it's not solar panels, it's got to be less
dependence on foreign oil. And we can only do that by using our natural
resources to provide energy for this country.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington, the chairman of the Research and Education Subcommittee of
the Science Committee, Mr. Baird.
Mr. BAIRD. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank my dear friend from
Oregon, my colleague and neighbor across the river, and also the
gentlelady from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for her leadership, and my
friend, Mr. Ehlers from Michigan, and Mr. Chabot from Ohio.
I am particularly pleased about the aspect of this legislation that
will eliminate what I feel are counterproductive barriers to
participation by firms that receive venture capital in the SBIR
program. This issue was brought to my attention by a local
[[Page H2602]]
firm, nLight Photonics, which is leading the world in high-capacity
semiconductor lasers.
Many of our top high-tech companies demand startup venture capital in
order to build the infrastructure they need to produce the products
which save us money, save us lives, and help stimulate our economy.
These successful companies, however, often would like to branch out
into a parallel area, perhaps not their primary pursuit, but a parallel
area for which SBIR funds would be fully appropriate and advantageous.
Unfortunately, under current rules, that is prohibited. In other words,
the very companies that have proven successful and have been able to
demonstrate to venture capital that they have a process, personnel, and
products that are worth supporting are then precluded from Federal
support. This bill corrects that. I commend the gentlelady and Mr. Wu
for recognizing that.
I want to thank Mr. Graves, who worked on this with me several years
ago, and again thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle. It is
a good bill. It will help, by the way, address some of those energy
challenges that the gentleman who just spoke alluded to.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to
the distinguished gentleman from Georgia, Dr. Gingrey.
Mr. GINGREY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, both the Small Business Innovation Research and the
Small Business Technology Transfer programs have proven to be extremely
successful since the their implementation in 1982. These are both grant
programs that have been effective in providing government assistance to
small businesses to help more people in our country achieve the
American Dream.
Although I do have some concerns about the underlying bill, H.R.
5819, small business is still the cornerstone of the economy and job
growth in this country, and I am happy that we're addressing these
important programs on the House floor.
Madam Chairman, small business drives United States economic growth
and innovation. These companies make up 99.7 percent of all United
States employers and employ nearly half of all Americans who are not
working for the government. In addition, small businesses employ 39
percent of high-tech workers, such as scientists and engineers, and
they produce 13 to 14 times more patents per employee than do the
larger firms. The SBIR and STTR programs were created to provide
critical funding to these companies so they could conduct R&D that they
otherwise would not be able to afford. These programs also provide
further funding to commercialized promising technology resulting from
that R&D.
Since their inception in 1982, these programs provide over $2 billion
in grants and contracts each year, and they have provided the start-up
funding for hundreds of small businesses in the United States. In my
own State of Georgia, Georgia Tech, my alma mater, provides assistance
to small business initiatives across the State, and as a result,
companies have received $15 million in SBIR and STTR grants.
Specifically in my district in northwest Georgia, the 11th, eight
companies have received $8.3 million in SBIR awards since 2005. So,
Madam Chairman, it is vital that these programs are reauthorized so we
can continue to foster small business development in the emerging
technology-based global economy.
While I am generally supportive of H.R. 5819, I do, as I said, have
some concerns with sections relating to venture capital and phase one
and two grant eligibility.
Venture capital helps small business entrepreneurs gain credibility
on solid ideas that have the potential for commercialization. However,
while venture capital serves as an important component in facilitating
small business success, it must also be closely monitored and
scrutinized. We must ensure small business interests are at the heart
of SBIR and STTR programs. After all, that's why they were created back
in 1982.
Through H.R. 5819, small business companies who utilize SBIR and STTR
programs have the latitude to incorporate venture capital funding into
their operation, but section 201 in the bill provides safeguards so
that small businesses are not merely conduits for venture capital
interests, and I want to thank Chairwoman Velazquez for this. While I
believe this section of the bill is a very good step in the direction
of protecting small business interests, I believe that this language
could be even stronger to specifically reinforce the integrity of these
two programs.
Madam Chairman, I do support the mission and the intent of SBIR and
STTR programs. I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 5819.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I am very pleased to yield 3 minutes
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak), vice president of the
Small Business Committee.
Mr. SESTAK. Madam Chairman, I rise today also in support of H.R.
5819, a bill to improve and modernize the Small Business Innovation
Research program and the Small Business Technology Transfer program.
Small businesses, the backbone of our economy, bring innovation,
creativity, competition and lower costs to our economy. As elsewhere in
America, 70 percent of all the new jobs in my district in Pennsylvania
come from small businesses, and I strongly believe our economic
security is dependent upon our ability to provide these businesses with
the tools and the resources they need to grow.
In 1982, as has been mentioned, Congress recognized the importance of
retaining and increasing the innovation and research of small business
by creating the Small Business Innovation Research program to stimulate
technological innovations, meet Federal research and development needs,
and increase the commercial success of innovation.
The bill we will be voting on improves the Small Business Innovation
Research program and the Small Business Technology Transfer program to
ensure that small businesses receive the resources they need to
continue to innovate, grow and succeed.
Madam Chairman, this bill will make the necessary changes to
modernize these two programs. This bill will increase funding available
for grants, simplify the application process, broaden technical
assistance, and create a more flexible process for the 11 participating
Federal agencies. It also focuses agencies on granting funding to
projects with commercial viability and promising research, and it
requires agencies to establish databases to collect best practices
information.
I strongly believe that innovation is essential to the economic well-
being of our Nation, and the Small Business Innovation Research program
and the Small Business Technology Transfer program make a significant
contribution to our economy. I therefore urge my colleagues to vote in
support of this timely reauthorization.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, we will reserve the balance of our time.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, at this time, I am pleased to yield 1 minute
to the gentleman from Ohio, a member of the committee, a leader in the
field of nanotechnology, Mr. Wilson.
Mr. WILSON of Ohio. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
5819, the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business
Technical Transfer reauthorization bill. Established in 1982, these
highly competitive programs have a well-deserved reputation for
success.
In today's economy, small businesses are critical to U.S. innovation.
In my home State of Ohio, the SBIR and the STTR programs have played an
important role in improving the regional economy through science,
technology and innovation.
The SBIR and the STTR programs work to create jobs and increase our
Nation's capacity for technological innovation. And funding these
programs has been critical to the success of many businesses throughout
my district. It is clear that the SBIR and the STTR programs are
critical in promoting the science and technology research that drives
our innovation-based economy.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important bill.
Mr. EHLERS. May I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is advised he has 30
seconds remaining.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H2603]]
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I would like to inquire how much time
is remaining on each side, each committee.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from New York has 11 minutes remaining.
The gentleman from Ohio has 12 minutes remaining. The gentleman from
Oregon has 5 minutes remaining.
{time} 1700
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire), who is the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of the Small Business
Innovation Research Program Reauthorization Act.
Since its inception in 1983, SBIR has been key to American
competitiveness, providing quality research for the U.S. Government and
spurring technology innovation. SBIR has been a catalyst for some of
today's most successful enterprises. For over 25 years, SBIR has
allowed innovative small businesses to partner with the government for
the development of today's most cutting-edge goods and services. SBIR
is a program designed to stimulate American competitiveness.
This legislation we consider today will ensure that SBIR will keep
pace with the technological changes and advancements in today's ever-
changing, high-tech world to keep our Nation's small businesses
competitive in the global economy.
The region I represent in western Pennsylvania has produced a number
of SBIR success stories, ranging from new medical therapies to advanced
computer technology. The area is an emerging medical- and technology-
based community that is home to some of the top research and
development in the entire country.
Reauthorization of SBIR will allow us to continue to foster research
and innovation that will translate into a wealth of new employment
opportunities and economic growth for western Pennsylvania and the
entire country.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I would like to yield to the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones) for 2 minutes.
(Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. I would like to thank the Chair of this wonderful
committee for yielding time to me today.
Madam Chairman, I used to serve on the Small Business Committee and
am pleased every chance I have to take the opportunity to come back and
salute all the members of the committee, my colleague from Ohio as
well, for the work that they do.
I come to the floor today in support of H.R. 5819 to amend the Small
Business Innovation Research program and the Small Business Technology
Transfer program because this will bring an opportunity for small
businesses in my congressional district to have an opportunity to work
on some of the innovative technology that they have been planning over
the years.
Within my congressional district, I have more than five medical
institutions, and the work that these medical institutions have been
able to do with small businesses that have been spawned from much of
the research is very, very exciting. And we think that the area of
Cleveland and northeast Ohio will be a place where we will have an
opportunity to put to work some of the opportunities that are presented
in this particular legislation.
I'm particularly pleased that the legislation includes an annual $10
million competitive grant program that will support and assist women-,
veteran-, and minority-owned businesses. In today's fast-paced economy,
minority businesses are steadily expanding their presence and are
increasingly a driving force in the economy. But, more importantly, we
all know the importance of small business. Unlike my father and my
mother and many of our fathers and mothers who worked for companies for
40 years, it does not happen anymore that you're working for that same
company. And we need opportunity to expand business so that young
people coming out of high school and college have a place to work.
I'm so pleased to join my colleagues in supporting the expansion of
these programs.
I rise today in support of H.R. 5819, a bill that will reauthorize
the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business
Technology Transfer (STTR) programs through 2010.
I support these programs because they provide a much needed boost in
business innovation and job creation throughout the country. These
programs address the needs of our current struggling economy by
providing funds to small businesses that work with universities or
perform cutting-edge research related to the missions of our different
federal agencies.
According to the House Science and Technology Committee, these two
programs provide the most federal support--about $2.3 billion
annually--for private-sector technology innovation by small businesses.
In these tough economic times, small business innovation becomes an
increasingly vital asset to our economy. In my home state of Ohio, the
SBIR program has made a significant contribution to the economy by
providing $83 million in awards to small businesses in 2005 and 2006.
As a representative of a congressional district that is home to more
than five major medical institutions, I am keenly aware of the role the
SBIR program has played in fostering medical breakthroughs. I am very
interested in promoting the ability of our researchers to explore and
pursue cutting-edge medical advancements and believe that the SBIR
program is critical to ensuring that promising medical innovations can
move forward.
I am particularly pleased that this legislation includes an annual
$10 million competitive grant program that will provide support and
assistance for women, veterans, and minority-owned businesses. In
today's fast paced economy, minority businesses are steadily expanding
their presence and are increasingly a driving force in the economy.
Today, minorities own over four million firms, generating nearly $700
billion in yearly revenue and employing over 7 million workers. People
of color across the country have embraced business ownership and this
legislation will allow more of these firms to participate in Federal
research and development activities.
I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5819.
The CHAIRMAN. Are the Members now prepared to close?
Mr. EHLERS. I am prepared to close, Madam Chairman.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, we have been told we have Don Young, who
is on his way here; so we're not prepared to close. But if time runs
out, then it runs out.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I have no further requests for time.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, we have one further speaker, who, we are
told, is on her way.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized to close.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, the substance of the bill is good. I
support the general intent of it.
I am very concerned about several aspects. One of those is the size
of the increase of the allocation, which is going to hurt our Nation's
research effort in its totality. Secondly, the issues raised by Dr.
Gingrey which involve giving perhaps too much control and power to the
venture capitalists. And, third, the issues relating to the other
issues that Dr. Gingrey brought forth regarding category I and category
II funding, and the interplay between the two.
If we can solve these problems I would hope to support the bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I am ready to close.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized.
Mr. WU. This is a finely crafted bill, which a lot of Members have
worked on for quite some time. I want to especially thank those
staffers who normally do not get recognition: Dennis Worden of my
personal staff, Barb Jones, a detailee from the National Institute of
Standards and Technology; Mike Quear from the Science Committee staff;
and also Piper Largent of the Republican side on the committee staff.
I think that I would just close by saying that this is a good bill.
It is a compromise bill. No one is getting everything that they want.
But I think that on balance this is a bill which is good for innovation
in America.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
[[Page H2604]]
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Obviously we are still waiting for Mr. Young to speak. If he gets
here, he gets here; if he doesn't, he doesn't.
I would like to, first of all, again commend the gentlewoman from New
York for her cooperation and once again putting together a bipartisan
effort here. And we both agree that both of these programs should be
continued and have great value; so I would encourage my colleagues to
support it.
Without Mr. Young's being here and not having spoken to him ahead of
time and knowing exactly what he wanted to talk about, I would guess
what he wanted to talk about had to do with the fact that energy is a
huge problem in this country and some of it is because we have
handcuffed ourselves and we are far too reliant upon foreign sources of
energy from the Middle East, from some of the most unstable parts of
the world, from Nigeria, from Venezuela. And for that reason, we're
seeing gas prices at all-time highs, approximately $3.50 per gallon,
and it's hurting an awful lot of our constituents, my constituents in
Cincinnati and other members of the driving public all over this
country. And one of the principal reasons is we are too reliant upon
foreign sources of energy. We also haven't built an oil refinery.
Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CHABOT. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. WU. It has been delightful to be working with the majority on the
SBIR/STTR bill.
The minority has chosen to make this into a debate about energy
prices. A professor at Stanford University estimates that oil prices
should be at about $60 a barrel. The chairman of Exxon, I understand,
says that oil should be at about $55 a barrel. And I think the only
reason why oil is at twice that price is because of an unnecessary war
and a Republican Congress which permitted Exxon to speculate in the
energy market.
Mr. CHABOT. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for interposing
his points of view.
But as I was saying, Madam Chairman, I think one of the principal
reasons we are seeing these high energy prices is because we are far
too reliant upon foreign sources of energy. We have put off-limits an
area which is in Mr. Young's State, in Alaska, ANWR. It's an area that
not many people go to, although the photographs that you see of it make
it look like it's nothing but flowers and animals and that it's a very
lovely area, and I'm sure it is lovely in certain parts of the year.
But the bottom line is by putting that 16 to 18 billion barrels of oil
off-limits, we have to buy more oil from other countries, and that's
one of the things that drives up the cost.
Another part of considerable oil reserves that we have put off-limits
is in the Outer Continental Shelf. Now compared to 16 to 18 billion
barrels of oil in ANWR, we have, we think, 83 to 86 billion barrels of
oil and huge amounts of natural gas. And as long as we put those areas
off-limits, it means we have to buy oil from somewhere else. It puts
OPEC in a position where they can turn the spigot down somewhat or not
increase it to take care of not only our needs but the needs of a
growing environment in India and in China and those areas; so the price
goes up as a result of that.
The other problem is we haven't built an oil refinery in this country
since 1976. We make it virtually impossible for that to happen. We had
over 300 oil refineries 30 years ago. We're down to 148, so fewer than
half the number of oil refineries. That's another big problem. And I
think those are the types of problems that Mr. Young would have in all
likelihood spoken about.
Madam Chairman, I see that Mr. Young has entered, so I will at this
point yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Alaska
(Mr. Young).
(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the gentleman for yielding because we're
talking about innovating small business and helping small business in
this country. And that's well and good, and I congratulate the chairman
and, of course, the ranking members on this legislation.
But, Madam Chairman, it's all for naught, it's all for naught, unless
we address this issue of energy. Small business can't run on hot air.
Small business can't even survive in this Nation or progress unless we
solve this energy problem of fossil fuels.
And you may have heard me last week saying it's not your fault other
than the fact you're in the wheelhouse now. You're in the wheelhouse.
We were there for 12 years, and we didn't solve it either. But you said
you would do that. You would lower the cost of energy for small
business and the consumers of this Nation. That has not happened.
Realistically, this Congress cannot do it unless we address the issue
of production. Not pie in the sky but production.
There's no shortage of fossil fuels in the United States of America.
There's a shortage of the will to develop it. We just had a sale in
Alaska in the Chukchi Sea, $2.6 billion. And they tell me, the
geologists, there's more oil there than there is in the Gulf of Mexico.
But we can't, in fact, develop it because of a lawsuit by certain
interest groups in this Nation who do not want that developed. We have
the Beaufort Sea. We have the Aleutian chain. That's just Alaska.
And for those of you in California, you have more oil off your shores
than we do in Alaska if you'll develop it. But you have not done so. We
have not done so.
We have the Gulf of Florida. We can't do it. We have the Rocky
Mountains, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and we have not
done so. We have not passed one piece of energy legislation in this
body that produces any energy that runs these small businesses.
So I ask you, my colleagues, how can you stand here on the floor and
sit on this floor and talk about innovation for small business without
addressing the energy problem?
Each man, woman, and child this year will pay a $2,000 tax to foreign
countries, each man, woman and child in the United States of America,
for buying fossil fuels overseas and not developing those fossil fuels
within our borders. That's $2,000 a year, the largest tax of any one
family, a family of five, a $10,000 tax, to the Saudi Arabians or
Venezuela or Kuwait or Iran or Iraq.
{time} 1715
Seventy percent of our fossil fuels today are being imported because
this body has not solved this problem, and should do so. Some of you on
that side, some on this side voted to open the Arctic Wildlife Range in
Alaska 12 times in this House. We did get it out of the Senate once,
and Bill Clinton vetoed it. He vetoed it. We passed it 12 times here,
11 times; couldn't get the votes in the Senate. If we had it developed
today, we would be producing enough energy so they couldn't raise the
prices they are doing now.
By the way, everybody says, Get the oil companies. They say, Get
those dirty oil companies. We are not the only buyer on the market any
more. China is now burning more barrels of fuel today than we are, and
it's going to go up. Look at their automobile consumption. India is
right behind them.
Now some people say, Well, we don't need fossil fuels. We will use
wind power and solar power, et cetera. I agree with all those things.
But our economy is run on power that moves objects. Your product that
comes and goes, comes on a vessel that is driven by fossil fuels. The
plane, the train, the ship, and the automobile that delivers to the
consumer is driven by fossil fuels. There is no quick solution with
hydrogen, et cetera.
If you want the economy to go forth and you want these small
businesses to succeed, this Congress, and I ask the Congress on both
sides to address this issue. Madam Chairman, let's solve the problem.
Let's not have any more pie in the sky. Let's open these areas that
have been put on restriction, because the oil is there, Mr. and Mrs.
America. It's just that you have not asked us to open it. You preferred
us not doing so as long as we can buy it cheap from a foreign country.
And those days are over.
Now this is my prediction. Oil now is at $120 a barrel. That means
gasoline for this summer is going to be around $5 a gallon. But more
than that, that means the power to run small businesses will not be
available because we
[[Page H2605]]
have not kept up the power in other areas. We don't develop the
nuclear, which we should. We haven't had any hydro, which we should.
Yes, we have a little bit of wind and solar. But more than that, we
have not addressed the fossil fuel issue.
So as we talk about small businesses, how we are going to encourage
them, we are going to give them incentives, and have new imagination,
that is well and good, but you can't do it without reasonable price
power.
So I charge this body, the leadership on that side, and I charge this
side in the minority, to truly come to grips and address each area that
has fossil fuels that we know where they are, lift the restrictions,
and develop it for the future of this Nation, the youth of this Nation,
and the businesses of this Nation. If we don't do that, we are
neglectful of our duty.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Chairman, the gentleman from Alaska comes here and laments
about high energy prices. But when he had a chance to vote against
price gouging, he voted ``no.'' When he had a chance to vote about
long-term alternative energy and conservation, he voted ``no.'' So
don't come to the floor and tell us the need to deal with the energy
crisis in this Nation, because I can tell you that talk is fine. But
when it comes to real solutions, you vote ``no.''
So, Madam Chairman, let's go to the issue at hand. It's just really
sad that the minority decided to make SBIR and STTR an innocent
bystander on this debate. Let me say that there is no other nation on
Earth where a person's dreams of service and innovation can be
translated so effectively into a brand of success that yields both
wealth and concrete benefits to society. That distinctly American
tradition of entrepreneurship, of cutting edge and ideas and service to
society, is what Small Business Week is all about. It is also the core
of H.R. 5819.
I want to thank Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall, Mr. Wu and
Mr. Ehlers from the Science and Technology Committee, as well as my own
ranking member, Mr. Chabot, for their work on this important
legislation. I am particularly grateful for Mr. Chabot's input on this
legislation, and I think that our collaboration has produced a better
product for our Nation's small businesses.
I also want to recognize the staff members on both committees for
their tireless work. A special thank you goes to Bill Maguire on Small
Business Committee Democratic staff; Michael Day, and to Joe Hartz on
Mr. Chabot's side of the aisle, and Kevin Fitzpatrick. I also would
like to acknowledge Melissa Shannon from the Speaker's office. On the
Science and Technology Committee I would like to recognize the
Democratic staff, Mike Quear; from Mr. Wu's staff, Dennis Worden; and
from Mr. Graves' personal office, Paul Sass.
Most of all, I would like to thank the men and women of America's
small business. It is their efforts that continue to make our Nation
great. They keep us moving forward, no matter what challenges arise,
and they deserve our support and respect.
Once again, I urge my colleagues to join me in celebrating Small
Business Week by voting ``yes'' on this important legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of
H.R. 5819, to reauthorize the ``SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act.'' This
legislation extends the federal government's largest small business
research and development programs for two years, increases funding for
small research firms by half a billion dollars, and modernizes the
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program so that it is better
aligned with the needs of small research firms. I would like to thank
my colleague Congresswoman Velazquez for introducing this legislation,
as well as for her ongoing leadership as Chairwoman of the Committee on
Small Business.
Madam Chairman, this legislation is very important to the
constituents of my community and the nation as a whole because it will
continue to provide funding for small business innovation research and
small business technology transfer programs by extending these programs
until FY2010. Small businesses represent more than the American dream--
they represent the American economy. Small businesses account for 95
percent of all employers, create half of our gross domestic product,
and provide three out of four new jobs in this country.
Minority businesses are also crucial to our communities and our
country. According to statistics published by the United States Census
Bureau, in 2002 nearly 2 in 5 black-owned firms operated in health care
and social assistance. Black entrepreneurs owned 9.7 percent of all
such businesses in the United States. Statistics gathered between 1997
and 2002 show substantial increases in the number of black owned firms
with receipts of $1 million or more, as well as the number of black
owned firms with 100 employees or more. Black-owned firms accounted for
5 percent of all non-farm business in the United States in 2002.
In my home city of Houston, small businesses are vital to our
economy. In 2002, Harris County ranked 6th in the nation for counties
with the largest number of black-owned firms, with 27,770 firms with
receipts totaling 1,817 million dollars. I have worked to introduce
minority, women, and small business owners to contracting officials at
NASA to help promote and develop Houston small businesses. I was proud
to support H.R. 1873, the Small Business Fairness in Contracting Act,
which passed the House in May of last year, and to introduce two
amendments, both of which were accepted to the bill. The first
amendment brings transparency, accountability and responsiveness to the
process of procuring federal contracts. I also successfully introduced
an amendment mandating that whenever there is a disagreement between
the SBA and the contracting procurement agency, the appropriate House
and Senate committees with jurisdiction over the matter are informed.
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program and the Small
Business Technology Transfer (STIR) Program are two crucial research
and development programs. Through these two competitive initiatives,
the Small Business Administration, SBA, ensures that the nation's
small, high-tech, innovative businesses are a significant part of the
federal government's research and development efforts. Created by
Congress in 1982, SBIR is the largest government-wide research and
development initiative in existence. According to SBA, eleven federal
departments participate in the SBIR program, and five departments
participate in the STIR program, awarding $2billion to small high-tech
businesses.
The legislation that we are considering today updates the SBIR
program, bringing into step with today's technologically-driven world.
It will both increase access to SBIR funding, and work to leverage the
advances made by small businesses to benefit the competitiveness of the
U.S. economy.
Madam Chairman, this legislation includes provisions designed to
encourage more small firms to apply for SBIR and STIR awards. It
doubles the size of SBIR and STIR awards for Phase I and Phase II
grants, and provides access to technical assistance. This legislation
also places an emphasis on areas where further research is particularly
needed, providing incentives for small business innovation research on
alternative fuels and orphan diseases. Through these provisions, this
legislation speaks both to the needs of small businesses and of the
broader American population.
Madam Chairman, I am particularly pleased that this legislation
establishes an initiative to diversify participation in these important
programs. This legislation aims to increase participation by small
businesses located in underrepresented geographic areas, as well as
those owned and controlled by women, veterans, and minorities. I
believe this provision will both diversify the program and increase
competition for the important awards.
Further, the act increases partnerships between SBIR awardees and
prime contractors, venture capital operating companies, and larger
businesses. This act has laudable goals and will ensure that small
businesses have at their disposal more advanced technology that can be
used for the development of our local communities. This act ensures
that the technology and innovation would be used to further small
businesses and local economic development.
Madam Chairman, over the past 25 years the SBIR program has supported
many of our nation's most successful entrepreneurial enterprises. Many
of these small, innovative businesses have grown into powerful
technical companies that have kept the United States on the cutting
edge of technological enterprise. Today, by voting for this
legislation, we are making sure that this important program is of the
maximum benefit both to American entrepreneurs and to all the citizens
of this nation.
I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important
legislation.
Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to the
SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act (H.R. 5819). I am a long-time supporter
of the Small Business Innovative
[[Page H2606]]
Research, SBIR, and the Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR,
program because it requires federal agencies with at least a $100
million research and development, R&D, budget to set aside a certain
percentage of awards for small firms. The SBIR program was created in
1982 because small businesses--the most innovative sector of our
economy--received very few R&D awards. Almost the entire federal R&D
budget back then went to large firms and academic institutions.
There are many good provisions in H.R. 5819. Section 102 increases
the small business set-aside in the SBIR program from 2.5 percent to 3
percent. The SBIR awards come in three phases--Phase 1 is for start-
ups; Phase II is for follow-on work; and Phase III is for
commercialization of the product either in the form of government
procurement or for sale in the marketplace. Section 103 increases the
maximum award in Phase I from $100,000 to $750,000. For Phase II
awards, the maximum award goes up from $300,000 to $2.2 million. There
are no grant dollars for the Phase III or commercialization phase. In
the past, few federal agencies had any interest in Phase III. However,
H.R. 5819 contains several provisions, most particularly in Title IV,
to encourage commercialization of products developed with SBIR awards.
However, Section 201 of H.R. 5819 opens up more of the SBIR program
to small firms that have significant investments from venture capital
(VC) companies. For the purposes of the SBIR program, a small firm
would be considered to be independently owned and operated even with a
majority share owned by VC firms. VC investments, unlike a bank loan,
make the ``owner'' of the company no longer the true leader of the firm
if venture capitalists own more than 50 percent of the firm. In other
words, he or she doesn't control the ultimate destiny or direction of
the company--the ``owner'' has to take ultimate direction from the VC
firms. The small business is no longer independently owned and
operated. Thus, if a small company receives venture capital even from
multiple sources to pursue Vaccine A but then sees the research going
in a different direction to develop Vaccine B, the ``owner'' of the
company will be compelled to complete the research on Vaccine A for
which he or she received funding unless the ``owner'' receives
permission from the venture capitalists to pursue Vaccine B.
The only limitations on VC investments in Section 201 for SBIR firms
are that (1) no one single VC firm can own a majority of the tech
company applying for a SBIR grant; (2) the VC firm does not control a
majority of the seats on the tech company's board of directors; (3)
only ``small'' VCs, as defined in the bill as those VC firms employing
500 employees or less, can participate; and (4) a ``corporate-owned''
VC firm can only own up to 10 percent of a SBIR tech company and that a
SBIR tech company can only have one investment from a corporate VC. My
concerns are that the first two limitations can be easily evadable by
creative VCs that set up multiple firms. The third limitation dealing
with a small business definition of a VC encompasses almost every VC in
the nation. The Small Business Administration (SBA) currently defines
small venture capital firms as those with less than $6.5 million in
annual receipts. There is no need to change the small business
definition of a VC.
In Section 110, H.R. 5819 also allows firms to apply directly for
Phase II awards, bypassing the Phase I process. In my opinion,
combining three key elements of H.R. 5819--dramatically higher awards
(Section 103), allowing almost every VC in the nation to own more than
a majority of a SBIR firm (Section 201), and bypassing Phase I (Section
110)--sets up a stage where VC-owned ``small'' firms will gobble up
most of the money in the SBIR program. Then, there would be a dramatic
drop-off in the number of truly very small and independently-owned
companies in the SBIR program, particularly those looking for Phase 1
start-up funding.
During my tenure as Chairman of the House Small Business Committee, I
spent a lot of time and effort trying to solve the specific problem of
the eligibility of some small businesses with venture capital
investments to participate in the SBIR program at the National
Institutes of Health (NIH). After the Defense Department, the NIH is
the second- largest spender of R&D funding in the federal government.
This issue of the role of VC investment in SBIR companies seems
primarily confined to NIH.
Section 201 in H.R. 5819 tries to solve a problem that is grossly
exaggerated. It is a myth that small businesses with VC investments are
unable to participate in the SBIR program at NIH because of a
misinterpretation of the law by the SBA. In an impartial Government
Accountability Office (GAO) study that was released in 2006, the GAO
discovered that 17 percent of NIH SBIR awards, accounting for 18
percent of the dollar value, went to small businesses with VC
investments in Fiscal Year 2004. These small firms had no problem in
complying with SBA guidelines. Nevertheless, I tried to proffer a
compromise to establish a two-year pilot SBIR-like program to set-aside
0.5 percent of NIH R&D funding for smaller firms that receive a
preponderance of their funding from VCs and do not own or control their
company. Unfortunately, my compromise was rejected by NIH and by the
biotech and VC industries. However, the solution contained in Section
201 is a dramatic overreach in the effort to solve this specific
problem with NIH.
Finally, the Bush Administration shares my concern on this issue.
According to the Statement of Administration Policy issued on April 22,
2008, ``the Administration believes that H.R. 5819 goes too far in
relaxing constraints on venture capital ownership of firms receiving
SBIR and STTR funds, which could lead to inappropriate subsidization of
well-capitalized businesses that do not warrant funding through a set-
aside program. The Administration is reviewing whether venture capital
funding of businesses receiving SBIR and STTR funds could be expanded
through reforms of SBA regulations without inappropriately providing
Federal commercialization subsidies to well-capitalized businesses.''
Thus, for these reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 5819.
Ms. ESHOO. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5819, the
SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act.
The Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, and Small Business
Technology Transfer, STTR, programs are important sources of Federal
support to facilitate the commercialization of research. Updating these
programs will ensure the continuation of the central role they play in
maintaining the preeminence of the U.S. research enterprise.
The importance of fostering public-private partnerships cannot be
underestimated. I see firsthand all the aspects of the innovation
process, because my Congressional district contains basic research
institutions, hundreds of current and former SBIR- and STTR-awarded
companies, and venture capital firms. The SBIR and STTR programs
facilitate the transition of technologies to the market. The important
changes made by this reauthorization include increasing the award
guideline levels, establishing advisory boards to improve program
effectiveness and outcomes, and emphasizing the importance of energy-
related research proposals.
A key aspect of the debate surrounding this reauthorization has been
whether or not venture capital-backed companies should be eligible to
participate in the SBIR program. Small businesses with a proven ability
to attract venture funding should not be excluded.
The original legislation which created the program stated that no
federal funds could be used for the Phase 3 commercialization state of
an SBIR award, requiring award recipients to seek venture capital and
other private sector funding. Preventing those companies from returning
to the program for a different project undermines its very objective of
bringing more technologies to the market. A small business that wins an
SBIR and then attracts VC funds has a proven ability to succeed, yet
may have insufficient resources to pursue new research projects. These
companies should be eligible to continue to participate in the program
and I'm pleased to see that the reauthorization before us today
maintains this position.
Let me remind my colleagues that Congress did not authorize a policy
change to prohibit venture-backed companies from participating in the
program. A ruling by an SBA administrative law judge made this
interpretation and seriously damaged the program by disqualifying many
good companies. Today we clarify the language and get the SBIR program
back on the right track, without excluding small businesses which have
successfully obtained venture capital funding for other technologies.
I know there are concerns that this bill's increase in the percentage
of research funds that are directed to the SBIR and STTR programs will
detract from the core research missions of the agencies. This is a
particular concern for the NIH which has been working under a
constrained budget over the last several years. We need to continue to
increase funding at the NIH and other research agencies, and we should
consider the impact of increasing the SBIR and STTR set-aside as the
bill moves forward in the legislative process.
I hope the House will demonstrate strong bipartisan support for this
bill to ensure that the innovators and entrepreneurs of our country
continue to have Federal assistance to transition their research and
ideas out of the labs and into the marketplace. I urge the entire House
to support this important legislation.
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R.
5819, a bill that will reauthorize the Small Business Innovation
Research--SBIR, and Small Business Technology Transfer, STTR, programs
through 2010.
I support these programs because they provide a much needed boost in
business innovation and job creation throughout the country.
[[Page H2607]]
These programs address the needs of our current struggling economy by
providing funds to small businesses that work with universities or
perform cutting-edge research related to the missions of our different
federal agencies.
According to the House Science and Technology Committee, these two
programs provide the most federal support--about $2.3 billion
annually--for private-sector technology innovation by small businesses.
In these tough economic times, small business innovation becomes an
increasingly vital asset to our economy. In my home State of Ohio, the
SBIR program has made a significant contribution to the economy by
providing $83 million in awards to small businesses in 2005 and 2006.
As a representative of a congressional district that is home to more
than five major medical institutions, I am keenly aware of the role the
SBIR program has played in fostering medical breakthroughs. I am very
interested in promoting the ability of our researchers to explore and
pursue cutting-edge medical advancements and believe that the SBIR
program is critical to ensuring that promising medical innovations can
move forward.
I am particularly pleased that this legislation includes an annual
$10 million competitive grant program that will provide support and
assistance for women, veterans, and minority-owned businesses. In
today's fast paced economy, minority businesses are steadily expanding
their presence and are increasingly a driving force in the economy.
Today, minorities own over four million firms, generating nearly $700
billion in yearly revenue and employing over 7 million workers. People
of color across the country have embraced business ownership and this
legislation will allow more of these firms to participate in Federal
research and development activities.
I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 5819.
Mrs. TAUSCHER, Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5819,
the Small Business Innovation Research, SBIR, and Small Business
Technology Transfer, SBTT, Reauthorization Act.
I thank my colleague from New York, Ms. Velazquez, for bringing this
bill to the floor today. This legislation would ensure that innovative
small businesses in my district and across the country have access to
the Federal support they need to conduct research and development and
to transform their work into commercially viable products.
Helping small businesses stimulates our economy. Small businesses
account for 99 percent of all employers in the United States and are
responsible for generating more than half of all new jobs. In
particular, the East Bay area of California has hosted countless small
business success stories. Throughout my time in Congress, I have been
committed to helping these entrepreneurs thrive. This is why I formed a
Small Business Advisory Group, which keeps me personally connected with
issues affecting small businesses in my district.
Frequently, small business owners need assistance obtaining Federal
contracts and grants. To this end, I regularly host seminars to teach
small business owners how to apply for grants and contracts, and I work
with the Small Business Administration to ensure that underrepresented
entrepreneurs like women and minorities are helped to be competitive.
Likewise, I am proud to support this bill, which would encourage
greater participation in STTR and SBIR--programs that help small
business innovators connect with research institutions and explore
their own technological potential, contribute to the marketplace, and
profit from commercialization.
This bill would also expand SBIR eligibility to include venture-
backed businesses like biomedical firms, whose advances have been
critical to the ongoing competitiveness of America's economy. Finally,
the bill proposes a $10,000,000 Federal grants program to reach out to
small firms owned and controlled by women and minorities and small
businesses located in areas that are underrepresented in the SBIR
program.
Madam Chairman, this bill would give small businesses access to
resources that will facilitate discoveries, create jobs, and energize
our economy. I commend Ms. Velazquez for her leadership on this issue,
and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the bill.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Madam Chairman, I rise today in support of
H.R. 5819. The Small Business Innovation and Research and Small
Business Technology Transfer programs are a critical means of
supporting small businesses' research and innovative competitiveness
and their technology training and technology exchange.
This bill will increase the number of small firms that can take
advantage of these valuable programs by requiring federal agencies to
spend at least 3 percent of their annual research and development
budgets on these programs. In addition, it will increase the maximum
research and technology transfer awards so that these funds are
adjusted for inflation and other changes in the economy. These changes
will make SBIR and STTR programs available to more businesses and
increase the impact they will have on those firms. I am extremely
supportive of these provisions and strongly endorse the inclusion of
them in this bill.
I think it is important, however, to raise concerns about another
section of the bill. Section 201 changes the definition of a small
business. It clarifies that businesses that receive the backing of
venture capital firms can still be considered small for the purposes of
the SBIR and STTR programs. Specifically, the bill permits a small firm
that is 100 percent backed by venture capital to be defined as long as
not one venture capital firm owns more than 49 percent of the business
and those venture capital companies have fewer than 100 employees. In
addition, the bill permits large venture capital firms to have up to a
10 percent stake in the small business without jeopardizing the small
company's SBIR and STTR eligibility.
These changes to the definition of a small business are
disconcerting. Although in this bill they are limited to the SBIR and
STTR programs, these provisions establish a dangerous precedent that
could pave the way for further alteration of the small business
definition. Expanding the eligibility of small business programs to
large or venture-capital-funded small businesses puts at risk the
success and support of those companies that are truly independently
owned and operated. I support H.R. 5819, but because of Section 201, I
do so with reservations.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Chairman, I rise today in strong support of
H.R. 5919, the SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act. It is essential to
reauthorize this program before it expires on October 1, 2008 and to
implement the updates to this program included in the bill. As the
Chairman of the Small Business Subcommittee on Contracting and
Technology, I understand the importance of this program to small
businesses who want to turn their raw ideas into innovative solutions.
I want to thank Small Business Chairwoman Nydia Velazquez and Ranking
Member Chabot for their work on this legislation. I am continually
impressed by the ability of the Small Business Committee to work in a
bipartisan manner on legislation that benefits U.S. small businesses.
Based on their track record, it is no surprise this bill passed the
Small Business Full Committee by a vote of 22-0.
The SBIR Program provides grants to help small businesses through the
critical initial stages of product development. The SBIR/STTR
Reauthorization Act will address national security priorities and
economic development. It will also help in the development of life-
saving medical technologies, therapies, and products.
Small Businesses are a primary source of innovation and they can keep
us on the forefront of technological advances. I am pleased this bill
includes language that will increase participation of small businesses
from rural areas, and from minority- and women-owned businesses.
Increased participation will also increase competition. It is
important to ensure that taxpayer money is being used to fund the best
opportunities for advances in technology. Funding the research we're
trying to create is a key objective of this program.
I am also pleased this bill increases the size of maximum awards for
the SBIR Program. The current limits have not been raised in 16 years.
The SBIR Program is a critical source of funding for early stage
research and development and the awards need to be realistic for
developments in science and technology.
The SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act will provide small businesses with
the funding and guidance they need to succeed. These small businesses
are a big part of the solution for helping us emerge from the difficult
economic conditions we face today.
It will also ensure these businesses remain competitive in the global
environment they must now compete in. We must give these businesses the
support they need to grow. I encourage my colleagues to support this
important legislation.
Ms. VELAZAQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute
printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the
purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered
read.
The text of the committee amendment is as follows:
H.R. 5819
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``SBIR/STTR
Reauthorization Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
[[Page H2608]]
TITLE I--MODERNIZING THE SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMS
Sec. 101. Extension of termination dates.
Sec. 102. Increased SBIR and STTR set-asides.
Sec. 103. Increased SBIR and STTR award levels.
Sec. 104. Establishment of SBIR advisory boards.
Sec. 105. Increase in amount of technical assistance funds and option
to purchase technical assistance directly.
Sec. 106. Increased number of research topic solicitations annually and
shortened period for final decisions on applications.
Sec. 107. Inclusion of energy-related research topics and rare-disease-
related research topics as deserving ``special
consideration'' as SBIR research topics.
Sec. 108. Agencies should fund vital R&D projects with the potential
for commercialization.
Sec. 109. Federal agency engagement with SBIR awardees that have been
awarded multiple Phase One awards but have not been
awarded Phase Two awards.
Sec. 110. Limitation on certain awards.
Sec. 111. Comptroller General audit of how Federal agencies calculate
extramural research budgets.
TITLE II--VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT STANDARDS
Sec. 201. Ensuring that innovative small businesses with substantial
investment from venture capital operating companies are
able to participate in the SBIR program.
TITLE III--SBIR AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Sec. 301. Reauthorization and modernization of Federal and State
Technology Partnership Program (FAST).
Sec. 302. Obtaining SBIR applicant's consent to release contact
information to economic development organizations.
TITLE IV--ADVANCING COMMERCIALIZATION OF SBIR-FUNDED RESEARCH
Sec. 401. Clarifying the definition of ``Phase Three''.
Sec. 402. Agency research goals.
Sec. 403. Express authority for an agency to award sequential Phase Two
awards for SBIR-funded projects.
Sec. 404. Increased partnerships between SBIR awardees and prime
contractors, venture capital investment companies, and
larger businesses.
Sec. 405. Express authority to ``fast-track'' Phase Two awards for
promising Phase One research.
Sec. 406. Commercialization programs.
Sec. 407. Report on efforts to enhance manufacturing activities.
TITLE V--SUPPORTING PROGRAM UTILIZATION
Sec. 501. Agency databases to support program evaluation.
Sec. 502. Agency databases to support technology utilization.
Sec. 503. Interagency Policy Committee.
Sec. 504. Nanotechnology-related research topics.
Sec. 505. Rural preference.
TITLE VI--IMPLEMENTATION
Sec. 601. Conforming amendments to the SBIR and STTR policy directives.
Sec. 602. National Research Council SBIR Study.
TITLE I--MODERNIZING THE SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMS
SEC. 101. EXTENSION OF TERMINATION DATES.
(a) SBIR.--Section 9(m) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(m)) is amended by striking ``2008'' and inserting
``2010''.
(b) STTR.--Section 9(n)(1)(A) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(n)(1)(A)) is amended by striking ``2009'' and
inserting ``2010''.
SEC. 102. INCREASED SBIR AND STTR SET-ASIDES.
(a) SBIR.--Section 9(f)(1) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(f)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``in each fiscal year
thereafter,'' and inserting ``in each of fiscal years 1997
through 2008; and'' and
(3) by adding after subparagraph (C) the following:
``(D) not less than 3.0 percent of such budget in each
fiscal year thereafter,''.
(b) STTR.--Section 9(n)(1)(B) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(n)(1)(B)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking ``fiscal year 2004 and each
fiscal year thereafter.'' and inserting ``each of fiscal
years 2004 through 2008; and''; and
(3) by adding after clause (ii) the following new clause:
``(iii) 0.6 percent for fiscal year 2009 and each fiscal
year thereafter.''.
SEC. 103. INCREASED SBIR AND STTR AWARD LEVELS.
(a) SBIR Award Level.--Section 9(j)(2)(D) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j)(2)(D)) is amended by striking
``$100,000'' and ``$750,000'' and inserting ``$300,000'' and
``$2,200,000'', respectively.
(b) STTR Award Level.--Section 9(p)(2)(B)(ix) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(p)(2)(B)(ix)) is amended by
striking ``$100,000'' and ``$750,000'' and inserting
``$300,000'' and ``$2,200,000'', respectively.
(c) Annual Adjustments.--Section 9 of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is amended--
(1) in subsection (j)(2)(D), by striking ``and an
adjustment of such amounts once every 5 years to reflect
economic adjustments and programmatic considerations'' and
inserting ``and a mandatory annual adjustment of such amounts
to reflect economic adjustments and programmatic
considerations''; and
(2) in subsection (p)(2)(B)(ix), by striking ``greater or
lesser amounts'' and inserting ``with a mandatory annual
adjustment of such amounts to reflect economic adjustments
and programmatic considerations, and with lesser amounts''.
(d) Limitation on Certain Awards.--Section 9 of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(z) Limitation on Phase I and II Awards.--
``(1) In general.--No Federal agency shall issue an award
under the SBIR program or the STTR program if the size of the
award exceeds the amounts established under subsections
(j)(2)(D) and (p)(2)(B)(ix), except as provided in paragraph
(2).
``(2) Exception.--The prohibition in paragraph (1) does not
apply to an agency for a fiscal year if the head of the
agency--
``(A) notifies the Administrator that the agency intends to
issue awards in that fiscal year without regard to the
prohibition in paragaph (1); and
``(B) reports to the Committee on Small Business and the
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate at least annually the number
of instances in which the agency issued an award that exceeds
the amounts referred to in paragraph (1) and the
justification for each such instance.''.
SEC. 104. ESTABLISHMENT OF SBIR ADVISORY BOARDS.
(a) In General.--Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638) is amended by inserting after subsection (z) the
following:
``(aa) SBIR Advisory Boards.--
``(1) Advisory boards required.--Each Federal agency that
is required by this section to conduct an SBIR program and
that administers annually $50,000,000 or more in SBIR grants
shall have an SBIR advisory board.
``(2) Members.--For each advisory board required by
paragraph (1), the members of the advisory board shall
include--
``(A) at least two individuals who are employees of the
agency;
``(B) at least two representatives of private sector
technology firms; and
``(C) such other individuals as the agency considers
appropriate.
``(3) Security clearances.--Where it is appropriate to the
work of an advisory board required by paragraph (1) that the
members and staff of the advisory board have a security
clearance, the appropriate departments and agencies of the
executive branch shall cooperate with the advisory board to
expeditiously provide members and staff with appropriate
security clearances to the extent possible under applicable
procedures and requirements.
``(4) Meetings.--Each advisory board required by paragraph
(1) shall meet at least two times per year.
``(5) Duties.--Each advisory board required by paragraph
(1) shall--
``(A) review the quarterly reports submitted under
subsection (g)(8);
``(B) make recommendations to the agency about potential
modifications to the agency's SBIR program that are intended
to--
``(i) encourage applications, particularly applications
from small business concerns owned and controlled by women,
small business concerns owned and controlled by minorities,
and small business concerns in States and regions that
historically receive few SBIR awards; and
``(ii) support commercialization of Federal research funded
by SBIR awards; and
``(C) submit to the Committee on Small Business and the
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate an annual report on the SBIR
program conducted by the agency.
``(6) Contents of annual report.--The annual report
required by paragraph (5)(C) shall include a description of
how that agency's SBIR program is functioning and any
recommendations of the advisory board for strengthening that
agency's SBIR program. The annual report shall also state the
number and dollar amount of awards under the agency's SBIR
program, and under the agency's STTR program, that were made
to small business concerns owned and controlled by women,
small business concerns owned and controlled by minorities,
small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans, and
small business concerns in States and regions that
historically receive few SBIR awards.
``(7) Non-applicability of faca.--The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to an advisory
board required by paragraph (1).''.
(b) Agency Reports to SBIR Advisory Boards.--Section
9(g)(8) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(g)(8)) is
amended by inserting before the semicolon at the end the
following: ``and, if the agency is required by subsection
(aa) to have an SBIR advisory board, submit a quarterly
report on the SBIR program to that SBIR advisory board''.
SEC. 105. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUNDS
AND OPTION TO PURCHASE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
DIRECTLY.
Section 9(q) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(q))
is amended--
[[Page H2609]]
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph
(2)(A), or another Federal agency under paragraph (2)(B),'';
(B) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (C);
(C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D)
and inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) implementing manufacturing processes and production
strategies for utilization.'';
(2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) Assistance providers.--
``(A) Vendor selection.--Each agency may select a vendor to
assist small business concerns to meet the goals listed in
paragraph (1) for a term not to exceed 3 years. Such
selection shall be competitive and shall utilize merit-based
criteria.
``(B) Interagency collaboration.--In addition, each agency
may enter into a collaborative agreement with the technical
extension or assistance programs of other Federal agencies in
order to provide the assistance described in paragraph
(1).''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``$4,000'' and
inserting ``$5,000'';
(B) by amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows:
``(B) Second phase.--Each agency referred to in paragraph
(1) may provide directly, or authorize any second phase SBIR
award recipient to purchase with funds available from their
SBIR awards, services described in paragraph (1), in an
amount equal to not more than $8,000 per year, per award.'';
and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) Authority to opt out.--The Administrator shall
establish guidelines under which an award recipient eligible
to receive services under subparagraph (A) may decline those
services and receive instead an amount equal to not more than
$2,500, which shall be in addition to the amount of the
recipient's award and which shall be used to purchase
services described in paragraph (1).''.
SEC. 106. INCREASED NUMBER OF RESEARCH TOPIC SOLICITATIONS
ANNUALLY AND SHORTENED PERIOD FOR FINAL
DECISIONS ON APPLICATIONS.
(a) Increased Number of Research Topic Solicitations.--
Section 9(g)(2) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
638(g)(2)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon at
the end the following: ``, but not less often than twice per
year''.
(b) Shortened Period for Final Decisions on Applications.--
Section 9(g)(4) of that Act (15 U.S.C. 638(g)(4)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the
following: ``: Provided, That if the agency is required by
subsection (aa) to have an SBIR advisory board--''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(A) a final decision on each proposal shall be rendered
not later than 90 days after the date on which the
solicitation closes;
``(B) the SBIR advisory board may, on a case by case basis,
extend the 90 days to 180 days; and
``(C) the SBIR advisory board shall include in each annual
report to Congress under subsection (aa) a statement
identifying how many times a decision was not rendered in 90
days, how many times an extension was granted, and how many
times a decision was not rendered in 180 days;''.
SEC. 107. INCLUSION OF ENERGY-RELATED RESEARCH TOPICS AND
RARE-DISEASE-RELATED RESEARCH TOPICS AS
DESERVING ``SPECIAL CONSIDERATION'' AS SBIR
RESEARCH TOPICS.
Section 9(g)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
638(g)(3)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by inserting
after ``critical technologies'' the following: ``or pressing
research priorities'';
(2) at the end of subparagraph (A) by striking ``or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) the National Academy of Sciences, in the final report
issued by the `America's Energy Future: Technology
Opportunities, Risks, and Tradeoffs' project, and in
subsequent reports issued by the National Academy of Sciences
on sustainability, energy, and alternative fuels;
``(D) the National Institutes of Health, in the annual
report on the rare diseases research activities of the
National Institutes of Health for fiscal year 2005, and in
subsequent reports issued by the National Institutes of
Health on rare diseases research activities; or''.
SEC. 108. AGENCIES SHOULD FUND VITAL R&D PROJECTS WITH THE
POTENTIAL FOR COMMERCIALIZATION.
Section 9(j)(2) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
638(j)(2)), as amended by section 103, is further amended--
(1) in subparagraph (H) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (I) by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(J) procedures to ensure that the Administrator, on an
annual basis, submits to the Committee on Small Business and
the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate a list identifying each small
business concern that, for the period covered by the
preceding 5 fiscal years, received 15 or more first phase
SBIR awards and no second phase SBIR awards.''.
SEC. 109. FEDERAL AGENCY ENGAGEMENT WITH SBIR AWARDEES THAT
HAVE BEEN AWARDED MULTIPLE PHASE ONE AWARDS BUT
HAVE NOT BEEN AWARDED PHASE TWO AWARDS.
Section 9(j) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j))
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Requirements relating to federal agency engagement
with certain first phase sbir awardees.--The Administrator
shall modify the policy directives issued pursuant to this
subsection to provide for each Federal agency required by
this section to conduct an SBIR program to engage with SBIR
awardees that have been awarded multiple first phase SBIR
awards but have not been awarded any second phase SBIR awards
and to develop performance metrics to measure awardee
progression in the SBIR program.''.
SEC. 110. LIMITATION ON CERTAIN AWARDS.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(bb) Subsequent Phases.--
``(1) In general.--A small business concern which received
an award from a Federal agency under this section shall be
eligible to receive an award for a subsequent phase from
another Federal agency, if the head of each relevant Federal
agency makes a written determination that the topics of the
relevant awards are the same.
``(2) Crossover between programs.--A small business concern
which received an award under this section under the SBIR
program or the STTR program may, at the discretion of the
granting agency, receive an award under this section for a
subsequent phase in either the SBIR program or the STTR
program.
``(3) Phase ii sbir applications.--An agency may permit an
applicant to apply directly for a Phase II award, as
described in subsection (e)(4)(B), without first completing a
Phase I award, as described in subsection (e)(4)(A), if the
applicant can demonstrate that project feasibility was
achieved without SBIR or other Federal funding.
``(4) Phase ii sttr applications.--An agency may permit an
applicant to submit proposals for Phase II awards, as
described in subsection (e)(6)(B), without first completing a
Phase I award, as described in subsection (e)(6)(A), if the
applicant can demonstrate it has accomplished Phase I through
cooperative research and development achieved without STTR or
other Federal funding.
``(cc) Waiver of Minimum Work Requirement.--A Federal
agency making an SBIR or STTR award under this section may
waive the minimum small business concern or research
institution work requirements under subsection (e)(7) if the
agency determines that to provide such waiver would be
consistent with the purposes of this section and consistent
with achieving the objectives of the award proposal.''.
SEC. 111. COMPTROLLER GENERAL AUDIT OF HOW FEDERAL AGENCIES
CALCULATE EXTRAMURAL RESEARCH BUDGETS.
The Comptroller General of the United States shall carry
out a detailed audit of how Federal agencies calculate
extramural research budgets for purposes of calculating the
size of the agencies' Small Business Innovation Research and
Small Business Technology Transfer budgets. Not later than 1
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee on Small
Business and the Committee on Science and Technology of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Small Business
and Entrepreneurship of the Senate a report on the results of
the audit.
TITLE II--VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT STANDARDS
SEC. 201. ENSURING THAT INNOVATIVE SMALL BUSINESSES WITH
SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT FROM VENTURE CAPITAL
OPERATING COMPANIES ARE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE SBIR PROGRAM.
Section 9(e) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(e))
is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (8),
striking the period at the end of paragraph (9) and inserting
``; and'', and adding at the end the following:
``(10) effective only for the SBIR and STTR programs, and
notwithstanding any provision in section 3 to the contrary,
the following shall apply:
``(A) A business concern that has more than 500 employees
shall not qualify as a small business concern.
``(B) In determining whether a small business concern is
independently owned and operated under section 3(a)(1) or
meets the small business size standards instituted under
section 3(a)(2), the Administrator shall not consider a
business concern to be affiliated with a venture capital
operating company (or with any other business that the
venture capital operating company has financed) if--
``(i) the venture capital operating company does not own 50
percent or more of the business concern; and
``(ii) employees of the venture capital operating company
do not constitute a majority of the board of directors of the
business concern.
``(C) A business concern shall be deemed to be
`independently owned and operated' if--
``(i) it is owned in majority part by one or more natural
persons or venture capital operating companies;
``(ii) there is no single venture capital operating company
that owns 50 percent or more of the business concern; and
``(iii) there is no single venture capital operating
company the employees of which constitute a majority of the
board of directors of the business concern.
``(D) To be eligible to receive an award under the SBIR or
STTR program, a small business concern may not have an
ownership interest by more than one venture capital operating
company controlled by a business with more than 500
employees, and that venture capital operating company may not
own more than 10 percent of that small business concern.
``(E) The term `venture capital operating company' means a
business concern--
[[Page H2610]]
``(i) that--
``(I) is a Venture Capital Operating Company, as that term
is defined in regulations promulgated by the Secretary of
Labor; or
``(II) is an entity that--
``(aa) is registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-51 et seq.); or
``(bb) is an investment company, as defined in section
3(c)(14) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-3(c)(14)), which is not
registered under such Act because it is beneficially owned by
less than 100 persons; and
``(ii) that is itself organized or incorporated and
domiciled in the United States, or is controlled by a
business concern that is incorporated and domiciled in the
United States.''.
TITLE III--SBIR AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SEC. 301. REAUTHORIZATION AND MODERNIZATION OF FEDERAL AND
STATE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM (FAST).
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by inserting after subsection (r) the following:
``(s) Outreach and Support Activities.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the other provisions of this
subsection, the Administrator shall make grants on a
competitive basis to organizations, to be used by the
organizations to do one or both of the following:
``(A) To conduct outreach efforts to increase participation
in the programs under this section.
``(B) To provide application support and entrepreneurial
and business skills support to prospective participants in
the programs under this section.
``(2) Program authority.--Of the amounts made available to
carry out this section for each of fiscal years 2009 through
2010, the Administrator may expend not more than $10,000,000
in each such fiscal year to carry out paragraph (1).
``(3) Amount of assistance.--For each of subparagraphs (A)
and (B) of paragraph (1), the amount of assistance provided
to an organization under that subparagraph in any fiscal
year--
``(A) shall be equal to the total amount of matching funds
from non-Federal sources provided by the organization; and
``(B) shall not exceed $250,000.
``(4) Direction.--An organization receiving funds under
paragraph (1) shall, in using those funds, direct its
activities at one or both of the following:
``(A) Small business concerns located in geographic areas
that are underrepresented in the programs under this section.
``(B) Small business concerns owned and controlled by
women, small business concerns owned and controlled by
service-disabled veterans, and small business concerns owned
and controlled by minorities.
``(5) Advisory board.--
``(A) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall
establish an advisory board for the activities carried out
under this subsection.
``(B) Non-applicability of faca.--The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the advisory
board.
``(C) Members.--The members of the advisory board shall
include the following:
``(i) The Administrator (or the Administrator's designee).
``(ii) For each Federal agency required by this section to
conduct an SBIR program, the head of the agency (or the
designee of the head of the agency).
``(iii) Representatives of small business concerns that are
current or former recipients of SBIR awards, or
representatives of organizations of such concerns.
``(iv) Representatives of service providers of SBIR
outreach and assistance, or representatives of organizations
of such service providers.
``(D) Duties.--The advisory board shall have the following
duties:
``(i) To develop guidelines for awards under paragraph
(1)(A), including guidelines relating to award sizes,
proposal requirements, metrics for monitoring awardee
performance, and metrics for measuring overall value of the
activities carried out by the awardees.
``(ii) To identify opportunities for coordinated outreach,
technical assistance, and commercialization activities among
Federal agencies, the recipients of the awards under
paragraph (1)(A), and applicants and recipients of SBIR
awards, including opportunities such as--
``(I) podcasting or webcasting for conferences, training
workshops, and other events;
``(II) shared online resources to match prospective
applicants with the network of paragraph (1)(A) recipients;
and
``(III) venture capital conferences tied to technologies
and sectors that cross agencies.
``(iii) To review and recommend revisions to activities
under paragraph (1)(A).
``(iv) To submit to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business and the Committee on Science and Technology of the
House of Representatives an annual report on the activities
carried out under paragraph (1)(A) and the effectiveness and
impact of those activities.
``(6) Selection criteria.--In awarding grants under this
subsection, the Administrator shall use selection criteria
developed by the advisory board established under paragraph
(5). The criteria shall include--
``(A) criteria designed to give preference to applicants
who propose to carry out activities that will reach either an
underperforming geographic area or an underrepresented
population group (as measured by the number of SBIR
applicants);
``(B) criteria designed to give preference to applicants
who propose to carry out activities that complement, and are
integrated into, the existing public-private innovation
support system for the targeted region or population; and
``(C) criteria designed to give preference to applicants
who propose to measure the effectiveness of the proposed
activities.
``(7) Peer review.--In awarding grants under this
subsection, the Administrator shall use a peer review
process. Reviewers shall include--
``(A) SBIR program managers for agencies required by this
section to conduct SBIR programs; and
``(B) private individuals and organizations that are
knowledgeable about SBIR, the innovation process, technology
commercialization, and State and regional technology-based
economic development programs.
``(8) Per-state limitations.--
``(A) In general.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this subsection, the applicant must have the written
endorsement of the Governor of the State where the targeted
regions or populations are located (if the regions or
populations are located in more than one State, the applicant
must have the written endorsement of the Governor of each
such State). Such an endorsement must indicate that the
Governor will ensure that the activities to be carried out
under the grant will be integrated with the balance of the
State's portfolio of investments to help small business
concerns commercialize technology.
``(B) Limitation.--Each fiscal year, a Governor may have in
effect not more than one written endorsement for a grant
under paragraph (1)(A), and not more than one written
endorsement for a grant under paragraph (1)(B).
``(9) Specific requirements for fast awards.--In making
awards under paragraph (1)(A) (to be known as `FAST' awards)
the Administrator shall ensure the following:
``(A) Goals.--Priority shall be given applications that
address one or more of the following goals:
``(i) Increasing the number of SBIR applications from
underperforming geographic areas (as measured by the number
of SBIR applicants).
``(ii) Increasing the number of SBIR applications from
underrepresented population groups (as measured by the number
of SBIR applicants).
``(B) Duration.--Each award shall be for a period of 2
fiscal years. The Administrator shall establish rules and
performance goals for the disbursement of funds for the
second fiscal year, and funds shall not be disbursed to a
recipient for such a fiscal year until after the advisory
board established under this subsection has determined that
the recipient is in compliance with the rules and performance
goals.''.
SEC. 302. OBTAINING SBIR APPLICANT'S CONSENT TO RELEASE
CONTACT INFORMATION TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ORGANIZATIONS.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended in subsection (s) (as added by this title) by adding
at the end the following:
``(5) Consent to release contact information to
organizations.--
``(A) Enabling concern to give consent.--Each Federal
agency required by this section to conduct an SBIR program
shall enable a small business concern that is an SBIR
applicant to indicate to the agency whether the agency has
its consent to--
``(i) identify the concern to appropriate local and State-
level economic development organizations as an SBIR
applicant; and
``(ii) release the concern's contact information to such
organizations.
``(B) Rules.--The Administrator shall establish rules to
implement this paragraph. The rules shall include a
requirement that the agency include in its SBIR application
forms a provision through which the applicant can indicate
consent for purposes of subparagraph (A).''.
TITLE IV--ADVANCING COMMERCIALIZATION OF SBIR-FUNDED RESEARCH
SEC. 401. CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF ``PHASE THREE''.
Section 9(e) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(e))
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4)(C)--
(A) in the matter preceding clause (i) by inserting after
``a third phase'' the following: ``, which shall consist of
work that derives from, extends, or logically concludes
efforts performed under prior SBIR funding agreements (which
may be referred to as `Phase III')''; and
(B) in clause (i) by inserting after ``non-SBIR Federal
funding awards'' the following: ``: Provided, That for
purposes of this clause, such sources of capital and such
funding awards include private investment, private research,
development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) awards, private
sales or licenses, government RDT&E contracts and awards, and
government sales'';
(2) in paragraph (8) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(3) in paragraph (9) by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(10) the term `commercialization' means the process of
developing marketable products or services and producing and
delivering products or services for sale (whether by the
originating party or by others) to government or commercial
markets.''.
SEC. 402. AGENCY RESEARCH GOALS.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by striking subsection (h) and inserting the
following:
``(h) Agency Research Goals.--
``(1) In general.--In addition to the requirements of
subsection (f), each Federal agency that is required by this
section to have an SBIR program and that awards annually
$5,000,000,000 or more in procurement contracts shall,
effective for fiscal year 2009 and each fiscal year
thereafter, establish annual goals for commercialization of
projects funded by SBIR awards.
``(2) Specific goals.--The goals required by paragraph (1)
shall include specific goals for each of the following:
[[Page H2611]]
``(A) The percentage of SBIR projects that receive funding
for the third phase (as defined in subsection (e)(4)(C)).
``(B) The percentage of SBIR projects that are successfully
integrated into a program of record.
``(C) The amount of Federal dollars received by SBIR
projects through Federal contracts, not including dollars
received through the SBIR program.
``(3) Submission to advisory board.--For each fiscal year
for which goals are required by paragraph (1), the agency
shall submit to the agency's SBIR advisory board--
``(A) not later than 60 days after the beginning of the
fiscal year, the goals; and
``(B) not later than 90 days after the end of the fiscal
year, data on the extent to which the goals were met and a
description of the methodology used to collect that data.''.
SEC. 403. EXPRESS AUTHORITY FOR AN AGENCY TO AWARD SEQUENTIAL
PHASE TWO AWARDS FOR SBIR-FUNDED PROJECTS.
Section 9(j) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j))
is amended by adding after paragraph (4) (as added by section
109) the following:
``(5) Requirements relating to additional second phase sbir
awards.--The Administrator shall modify the policy directives
issued pursuant to this subsection to provide the following:
``(A) A small business concern that receives a second phase
SBIR award for a project remains eligible to receive
additional second phase SBIR awards.
``(B) Agencies are expressly authorized to provide
additional second phase SBIR awards for testing and
evaluation assistance for the insertion of SBIR technologies
into technical or weapons systems.
``(C) Each agency that is required by subsection (aa) to
have an SBIR advisory board shall include in the quarterly
reports submitted under subsection (g)(8) the number of
projects that have received additional second phase SBIR
awards and the total dollar amount of those additional second
phase SBIR awards.''.
SEC. 404. INCREASED PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN SBIR AWARDEES AND
PRIME CONTRACTORS, VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT
COMPANIES, AND LARGER BUSINESSES.
Section 9(j) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j))
is amended by adding after paragraph (5) (as added by section
403) the following:
``(6) Increased partnerships.--Each agency required by this
section to conduct an SBIR program shall establish
initiatives by which the agency encourages partnerships
between SBIR awardees and prime contractors, venture capital
investment companies, and larger businesses, for the purpose
of facilitating the progress of the SBIR awardees to the
third phase. If the agency is required by subsection (aa) to
have an SBIR advisory board, the advisory board shall include
in each report submitted under subsection (aa) a description
of the initiatives established and an assessment of the
effectiveness of such initiatives.''.
SEC. 405. EXPRESS AUTHORITY TO ``FAST-TRACK'' PHASE TWO
AWARDS FOR PROMISING PHASE ONE RESEARCH.
Section 9(j)(2)(G) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
638(j)(2)(G)) is amended by inserting before the semicolon at
the end the following: ``, and to encourage agencies to
develop `fast-track' programs to eliminate that delay by
issuing second phase SBIR awards as soon as practicable,
including in appropriate cases simultaneously with the
issuance of the first phase SBIR award''.
SEC. 406. COMMERCIALIZATION PROGRAMS.
Section 9(j) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j))
is amended by adding after paragraph (6) (as added by section
404) the following:
``(7) Commercialization programs.--Each agency required by
this section to conduct an SBIR program shall establish a
commercialization program that supports the progress of SBIR
awardees to the third phase. The commercialization program
may include activities such as partnership databases,
partnership conferences, multiple second phases, mentoring
between prime contractors and SBIR awardees, multiple second
phases with matching private investment requirements, jumbo
awards, SBIR helpdesks, and transition assistance programs.
The agency shall include in its annual report an analysis of
the various activities considered for inclusion in the
commercialization program and a statement of the reasons why
each activity considered was included or not included, as the
case may be. If the agency is required by subsection (aa) to
have an SBIR advisory board, the advisory board shall include
in each report under subsection (aa) a statement identifying
the number of SBIR awardees that successfully progressed to
the third phase.
``(8) Funding for commercialization programs.--
``(A) In general.--From amounts made available to carry out
this paragraph, the Administrator may, on petition by
agencies required by this section to conduct an SBIR program,
transfer funds to such agencies to support the
commercialization programs of such agencies.
``(B) Petitions.--The Administrator shall establish rules
for making transfers under subparagraph (A). The initial set
of rules shall be promulgated not later than 90 days after
the date of the enactment of this paragraph.
``(C) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Administrator to carry out this
paragraph $27,500,000 for fiscal year 2009 and each fiscal
year thereafter.
``(9) Funding limitation.--For payment of expenses incurred
to administer the commercialization programs described in
paragraphs (7) and (8), the head of the agency may use not
more than an amount equal to 1 percent of the funds available
to the agency pursuant to the Small Business Innovation
Research program. Such funds--
``(A) shall not be subject to the limitations on the use of
funds in subsection (f)(2); and
``(B) shall not be used for the purpose of funding costs
associated with salaries and expenses of employees of the
United States Government.''.
SEC. 407. REPORT ON EFFORTS TO ENHANCE MANUFACTURING
ACTIVITIES.
Section 9(j) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(j))
is amended by adding after paragraph (9) (as added by section
406) the following:
``(10) Efforts to enhance manufacturing activities.--If an
agency is required by subsection (aa) to have an SBIR
advisory board, the advisory board shall include in each
report under subsection (aa) a part relating to efforts to
enhance manufacturing activities, which shall include--
``(A) a comprehensive description of the actions undertaken
each year by the SBIR and STTR programs of that agency in
support of Executive Order 13329;
``(B) an assessment of the effectiveness of such actions
toward enhancing the research and development of
manufacturing technologies and processes; and
``(C) any recommendations that the program managers of the
SBIR and STTR programs consider appropriate for additional
actions to be undertaken in order to increase the
effectiveness toward enhancing manufacturing activities
within the defense industrial base.''.
TITLE V--SUPPORTING PROGRAM UTILIZATION
SEC. 501. AGENCY DATABASES TO SUPPORT PROGRAM EVALUATION.
Section 9(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(k))
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A)--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii);
(B) by inserting ``and'' at the end of clause (iii); and
(C) by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(iv) information on the ownership structure of award
recipients, both at the time of receipt of the award and upon
completion of the award period;'';
(2) by amending paragraph (3) to read as follows:
``(3) Updating information for database.--
``(A) In general.--A Federal agency shall not make a Phase
I or Phase II payment to a small business concern under this
section unless the small business concern has provided all
information required under this subsection with respect to
the award under which the payment is made, and with respect
to any other award under this section previously received by
the small business concern or a predecessor in interest to
the small business concern.
``(B) Apportionment.--In complying with this paragraph, a
small business concern may apportion sales or additional
investment information relating to more than one second phase
award among those awards, if it notes the apportionment for
each award.
``(C) Annual updates upon termination.--A small business
concern receiving an award under this section shall--
``(i) in the case of a second phase award, update
information in the databases required under paragraphs (2)
and (6) concerning that award at the termination of the award
period;
``(ii) in the case of award recipients not described in
clause (iii), be requested to voluntarily update such
information annually thereafter for a period of 5 years; and
``(iii) in the case of a small business concern applying
for a subsequent first phase or second phase award, be
required to update such information annually thereafter for a
period of 5 years.''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Agency program evaluation databases.--Each Federal
agency required to establish an SBIR or STTR program under
this section shall develop and maintain, for the purpose of
evaluating such programs, a database containing information
required to be contained in the database under paragraph (2).
Each such database shall be designed to be accessible to
other agencies that are required to maintain a database under
this paragraph.''.
SEC. 502. AGENCY DATABASES TO SUPPORT TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION.
Section 9(k) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(k)),
as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(7) Agency databases to support technology utilization.--
Each Federal agency with an SBIR or STTR program shall create
and maintain a technology utilization database, which shall
be available to the public and shall contain data supplied by
the award recipients specifically to help them attract
customers for the products and services generated under the
SBIR or STTR project, and to attract additional investors and
business partners. Each database created under this paragraph
shall include information on the other databases created
under this paragraph by other Federal agencies. Participation
in a database under this paragraph shall be voluntary, except
that such participation is required of all award recipients
who received supplemental payments from SBIR and STTR program
funds above their initial Phase II award.''.
SEC. 503. INTERAGENCY POLICY COMMITTEE.
(a) Establishment.--The Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy shall establish an Interagency SBIR/
STTR Policy Committee comprised of one representative from
each Federal agency with an SBIR program.
[[Page H2612]]
(b) Cochairs.--The Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy and the Director of the National Institute
of Standards and Technology shall jointly chair the
Interagency Policy Committee.
(c) Duties.--The Interagency Policy Committee shall review
the following issues and make policy recommendations on ways
to improve program effectiveness and efficiency:
(1) The public and government databases described in
section 9(k)(1) and (2) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
638(k)(1) and (2)).
(2) Federal agency flexibility in establishing Phase I and
II award sizes, and appropriate criteria to exercise such
flexibility.
(3) Commercialization assistance best practices in Federal
agencies with significant potential to be employed by other
agencies, and the appropriate steps to achieve that leverage,
as well as proposals for new initiatives to address funding
gaps business concerns face after Phase II but before
commercialization.
(d) Reports.--The Interagency Policy Committee shall
transmit to the Committee on Science and Technology and the
Committee on Small Business of the House of Representatives,
and to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
of the Senate--
(1) a report on its review and recommendations under
subsection (c)(1) not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act;
(2) a report on its review and recommendations under
subsection (c)(2) not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act; and
(3) a report on its review and recommendations under
subsection (c)(3) not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 504. NANOTECHNOLOGY-RELATED RESEARCH TOPICS.
(a) SBIR.--Section 9(g)(3) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(g)(3)), as amended by section 107, is further
amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(E) the national nanotechnology strategic plan required
under section 2(c)(4) of the 21st Century Nanotechnology
Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7501(c)(4)) and in
subsequent reports issued by the National Science and
Technology Council Committee on Technology, focusing on areas
of nanotechnology identified in such plan;''.
(b) STTR.--Section 9(o)(1) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 638(o)(1)) is amended by inserting ``, giving special
consideration to topics that further 1 or more critical
technologies, as identified by the national nanotechnology
strategic plan required under section 2(c)(4) of the 21st
Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15
U.S.C. 7501(c)(4)) and in subsequent reports issued by the
National Science and Technology Council Committee on
Technology, focusing on areas of nanotechnology identified in
such plan'' after ``its STTR program''.
SEC. 505. RURAL PREFERENCE.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(dd) Rural Preference.--In making awards under this
section, Federal agencies shall give priority to applications
so as to increase the number of SBIR and STTR award
recipients from rural areas.''.
TITLE VI--IMPLEMENTATION
SEC. 601. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO THE SBIR AND STTR POLICY
DIRECTIVES.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration
shall promulgate amendments to the SBIR and the STTR Policy
Directives to conform such directives to this Act and the
amendments made by this Act.
SEC. 602. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL SBIR STUDY.
Section 108(d) of the Small Business Reauthorization Act of
2000 is amended--
(1) by striking ``of the Senate'' and all that follows
through ``not later than 3'' and inserting ``of the Senate,
not later than 3''; and
(2) by striking ``; and'' and all that follows through
``update of such report''.
The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment is in order
except those printed in House Report 110-603. Each amendment may be
offered only in the order printed in the report; by a Member designated
in the report; shall be considered read; shall be debatable for the
time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the
proponent and an opponent of the amendment; shall not be subject to
amendment; and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Boswell
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Mr. BOSWELL. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Boswell:
In title V of the bill, add at the end the following (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 506. PRIORITY FOR AREAS THAT HAVE LOST A MAJOR SOURCE OF
EMPLOYMENT.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(ee) Priority for Areas That Have Lost a Major Source of
Employment.--In making awards under this section, Federal
agencies shall give priority to applications from companies
located in geographic areas that, as determined by the
Administrator, have lost a major source of employment. Not
later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Administrator shall promulgate rules for
making the determination required by this subsection.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman from
Iowa (Mr. Boswell) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. BOSWELL. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I will yield myself such time
as I may consume.
This amendment offered by myself and the gentlelady from Ohio (Ms.
Sutton) will give applicants from regions that have lost a major source
of employment priority for SBIR and STTR funding. The Boswell-Sutton
amendment would help to revitalize distressed economies that have lost
major employers, such as factories and manufacturing plants.
SBIR and STTR funds would help small businesses in these areas create
new, high-quality jobs in areas hard hit with the pressures of
globalization and current trade policies. This is particularly
important to me because I have witnessed the devastating impact of
losing a major employer and what it can have on the community.
For 113 years, the Maytag Corporation was the largest employer in
Newton, Iowa. At its peak, Maytag employed over 3,000 Newton residents
at the headquarters and manufacturing plants. In 2006, Maytag was
purchased by Whirlpool. On October 25, 2007, the last Maytag washing
machine rolled off the line and the Newton plant and the corporate
headquarters closed. The loss of so many good-paying, quality jobs had
a distressing effect on Newton, and the local economy has yet to
recover from this tragedy.
Investing in these communities so they are able to create new jobs by
attracting companies is essential to many towns in America. I am
pleased to report that in Newton, part of the former Maytag facility is
in the process of being occupied by a new company that makes components
for wind turbines, and the company expects to employ 140 hardworking
Iowans. This is a step toward more energy, in response to the gentleman
from Alaska. This amendment will help revitalize communities like
Newton, and thousands of others across the United States.
I would like to thank Congresswoman Sutton for working with me on
this important initiative, and I thank Chairwoman Velazquez and Ranking
Member Chabot for their leadership on this bill. Thank you for
consideration. I hope you will accept this amendment that I believe is
so important for so many communities across our Nation.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I thank Congressman Boswell and Congresswoman Sutton
for their amendment and their efforts to improve the bill. This
amendment encourages applications from economically distressed areas
and helps ensure the competitive research proposal submitted from
companies in this area will receive valuable early stage funding. The
amendment will strengthen the SBIR program, and has the potential to
spur entrepreneurship and create jobs in distressed areas.
Now, Madam Chairman, I will yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms.
Sutton), a cosponsor of the amendment, such time as she may consume.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of this
amendment. I am fortunate and thankful to have had the opportunity to
work with Representative Boswell to offer this important amendment,
which would require that areas that have lost a major source of
employment be given priority when applying for Small Business
Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer awards.
Representative Boswell, as he described, and I both know firsthand
the devastating effects that massive job losses can have on a community
when a major employer closes shop. The loss
[[Page H2613]]
of good-paying jobs can really hurt when a major employer leaves a
community. It's estimated that for every manufacturing job in the
United States, it creates as many as four related jobs. So when those
jobs pack up and leave, it's a problem.
Focusing funds and awards in areas that have suffered the most, to
the areas that have endured major job losses, such as those in my
district or Representative Boswell's district, will ensure that the
money is helping the people in the communities that need it most. These
programs will help keep our communities self-sustaining as we work to
revitalize our economies.
Ohio has lost over 200,000 manufacturing jobs since 2001, and
unfortunately, Representative Boswell's district in the home State of
Iowa have also lost thousands of jobs. With this amendment, applicants
from our areas around our country that have suffered from similar
circumstances will be considered a priority when applying for funding
through these important programs. New, green industries will be able to
grow in areas like Lorain and Akron, Ohio, and in Newton, Iowa, as
resources are directed where they are needed most.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I will yield to the gentleman from
Ohio for any comments that he may have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
We have no objection to the gentleman's amendment and would commend
him for offering it.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman from Iowa is prepared
to yield back, we are prepared to accept the amendment.
Mr. BOSWELL. I am prepared to yield back my time. I thank the
gentlewoman for the support, and the ranking member, thank you very
much. Ms. Sutton, thank you for your support. We encourage passage of
the amendment.
And we yield back.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Iowa and
the gentlewoman from Ohio for their work on this legislation. I urge
adoption of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Ehlers
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Ehlers:
Page 3, line 10, through page 4, line 17, strike section
102, and redesignate the subsequent sections accordingly.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
{time} 1730
Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the recognition.
This amendment is very important in terms of the total research
effort of our Nation. H.R. 5819 would increase the Small Business
Innovation Research program set-aside from 2.5 percent to 3 percent, a
20 percent increase. It would also increase the Small Business
Technology Transfer program set-aside from 0.3 percent to 0.6 percent,
a 100 percent increase. My amendment would remove these increases and
keep the current set-asides in place at 2.5 percent for SBIR and 0.3
percent for STTR.
This is an extremely important issue. The Science and Technology
Committee has worked very hard during the last few years to get the
America COMPETES authorization bill signed into law. It has now been
signed into law. It establishes a funding doubling path for several
agencies under Science Committee jurisdiction, several of which are
SBIR and STTR funding agencies. However, finding the money to fund
these authorizations has not been so easy, and in fact these increased
authorizations have not been appropriated.
Several of my colleagues have expressed the opinion that an increase
in the set-aside for these two programs was justified by the authorized
funding increases in the COMPETES Act. However, as I said, these have
not been appropriated.
My concern and my purpose behind my amendment is to make sure that we
are not robbing Peter to pay Paul. If we increase the SBIR and STTR
program percentages while other agency's funding remains flat, we begin
to severely erode our fundamental research base. I would much rather
see us fight over extra funding for our basic research programs, our
fundamental research programs, of which a percentage would then
transfer into SBIR and STTR.
I should point out that my amendment is supported, first of all, by
Mr. Obey, who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. He has
spoken to me about it, and asked me to specifically mention that he
supports my amendment.
I believe it is also supported by a large number of Members, as well
as the Association of American Universities, the American Association
of Medical Colleges, the Biophysical Society, the Campaign for Medical
Research, the Federation of American Societies for Experimental
Biology, the National Association of State and Land Grant Colleges and
the Small Business Administration.
To quote the President of the Association of American Universities,
the change ``would translate directly into cuts in both nominal and
real terms in the budgets of most Federal research agencies.''
In real terms, the proposed changes would remove approximately $650
million that is currently provided to researchers, especially those at
universities around the country. At the National Institutes of Health,
which I believe everyone in this body supports very strongly, if we do
not adopt this amendment, the NIH budget would be reduced by $185
million. That is a severe cut.
So I urge the adoption of my amendment. I think it actually will
improve things. I hope that in the next few years we will get
substantial increases in the amount of funding for the various research
agencies and SBIR and STTR would receive substantial increases to the
percentage that they will continue to receive.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman
from New York?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I appreciate the gentleman's tireless leadership with
respect to Federal funding for research and development. It was the
gentleman's bill that reauthorized the SBIR program 8 years ago, and he
is, therefore, well aware that the amount of Federal research budgets
that go to America's small research companies is extremely limited. The
fact that innovative small firms have such limited access to Federal
research dollars is a problem for our country, and I want to work with
the gentleman from Michigan to find a solution that will address this
problem.
That said, I understand the gentleman's point of view, and I am going
to accept the amendment. As the reauthorization process goes forward, I
trust that just as we work in a collaborative, bipartisan manner on the
Small Business Committee, that you and I can work together to increase
the amount of Federal research dollars available to small firms without
raising concerns about the country's critical research priorities.
I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Ohio for any comments
that he might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
I would just comment that we appreciate the chairwoman's willingness
to work with the gentleman in accepting his amendment. We would be
happy to be part of that conversation. We appreciate your cooperation.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman is prepared to yield
[[Page H2614]]
back, we are prepared to accept the amendment.
Mr. EHLERS. I would just like to offer a few closing comments.
First of all, I thank you for your offer to work on this problem
together. As you know from working with me on this so often, I totally
support research in all areas. My concern in this case is that we would
be giving some money to one agency and taking it from others. I think
we should work together to increase the funding for both, and all boats
will rise. If we manage to give the appropriate amount of money to the
research institutions, then SBIR and STTR will automatically increase
because of that. So if we work together from that standpoint, I think
we will be in total agreement.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I just would like to thank Mr. Ehlers
for his commitment. I look forward to our working together to address
the issue of the limited resources.
With that, I am prepared to accept the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Sestak
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Mr. SESTAK. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk made in
order under the rule.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Sestak:
At the end of title I of the bill, insert the following:
SEC. 1___. PROVIDING EXPLANATIONS TO UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICANTS.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(dd) Providing Explanations to Unsuccessful Applicants.--
Whenever an entity applies for, but does not receive, an
award under an SBIR or STTR program under this section, the
Federal agency conducting the program shall--
``(1) in a plain and conspicuous manner, notify that entity
that it can request an explanation (which must be of a
constructive nature) of the reasons why the entity did not
receive the award; and
``(2) provide such an explanation to that entity, if the
entity so requests.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SESTAK. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
This amendment mandates that an agency must specify in their
notification that unsuccessful applicants are entitled to constructive
feedback, potentially opening up the breadth of SBIR grant recipients.
This is a very simple and valuable measure to increase the transparency
of our Federal agencies. It would allow firms insight into a rejected
application and would increase their competitiveness in the future.
On more than one occasion, firms in my district have voiced their
concern that the SBIR program awards grants to a relatively small group
of businesses. A GAO study actually reported that the 25 most frequent
winners of SBIR grants, which represents fewer than 1 percent of the
companies in the program, received about 11 percent of the program's
awards. Further, there are many qualified applicants that apply for
these programs who are unsuccessful each year, but may not know that
they are entitled to feedback and an explanation on the decision.
Therefore, by mandating that an agency must specify in the
notification that unsuccessful applicants are entitled to constructive
feedback, I believe that this will allow firms insight so that they
might increase their competitiveness in the future. Furthermore, this
amendment will ensure accountability in our Federal agencies.
I therefore urge my colleagues to vote to support this simple
amendment to promote transparency and future competitiveness within the
SBIR and STTR programs.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I thank the gentleman for his amendment and his effort
to improve this bill. The amendment requires Federal agencies to notify
unsuccessful applicants to the SBIR program that they can request an
explanation of the reasons their application was not funded. This
amendment is likely to be a useful clarification to those small firms
who are applying to revise their proposals in order to reapply.
I would now yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for any
comments that he might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
We have no opposition to the gentleman's amendment. We appreciate his
effort to add to the positive things which we need to do to move
towards solving this energy crisis we find ourselves in.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, if the gentleman from Pennsylvania is
prepared to yield back, we are prepared to accept the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would advise the gentlewoman from New York
that since she claimed the time in opposition to the amendment, the
gentleman from Pennsylvania has the right to close.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SESTAK. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sestak).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Matheson
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Mr. MATHESON. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Matheson:
At the end of title V of the bill, add the following (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. __. PREFERENCE FOR ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE MAKING
SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARDS ENERGY
EFFICIENCY.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(ff) Preference for Organizations That Are Making
Significant Contributions Towards Energy Efficiency.--In
making awards under this section, Federal agencies shall give
priority to applications so as to increase the number of
SBIR, STTR, and FAST award recipients from organizations that
are making significant contributions towards energy
efficiency, including organizations that are making efforts
to reduce their carbon footprint or are carbon neutral.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Matheson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
Mr. MATHESON. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
First I would like to commend Chairwoman Velazquez, Ranking Member
Chabot and the Small Business Committee, as well as Chairman Gordon and
Ranking Member Hall and the Science and Technology Committee, for all
their hard work in bringing this important bill to the floor today.
I think we all agree that the U.S. economy is built on the growth and
success of small businesses and we in Congress should continue to look
for ways that we can support small business so it can succeed. That is
why I am offering an amendment to H.R. 5819 today.
My amendment helps incentivize energy efficient practices for small
businesses by rewarding business that seek to reduce their costs
through a reduced carbon footprint. This amendment gives priorities to
applicants of SBIR, STTR and FAST grants that have demonstrated an
ability to reduce their carbon footprint.
Many small businesses have already developed practices to reduce
their carbon footprint. By adopting energy efficient practices, they
are reducing costs
[[Page H2615]]
for themselves in the long run and making themselves more competitive
with other businesses.
A number of companies in my home State of Utah have benefited from
SBIR grants. One such company is TechniScan, which has developed a
technology intended to aid physicians in diagnosing breast cancer. It
has already adopted certain practices to reduce its energy usage and
hence reduce its carbon footprint.
Many other small businesses across the country have likewise reduced
their carbon footprint and would therefore be given priority for
receiving these grants under my amendment.
I have worked to help government and private entities alike conserve
energy. As cochair of the Green Schools Caucus, I have worked with
schools to become more energy efficient, which reduces their costs.
Small businesses that also seek to reduce their carbon footprint should
be rewarded for their efforts as well.
This amendment will help position small businesses better as they
continue to grow and expand while reducing their energy costs.
Again, thank you to Chairwoman Velazquez, Ranking Member Chabot,
Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, although I am not opposed to the
gentleman's amendment, I would like to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Ohio?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I would like to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).
{time} 1745
Mr. HAYES. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
First let me thank Congresswoman Velazquez, Sam Graves, and others
for bringing an excellent bill to the floor.
I rise today in support of the bill and support of Mr. Matheson's
amendment. But I think a picture in this case is worth a thousand
words, because as we look at the small businesses, the men and women
that make up the small business core of our communities, the one item
that is on their minds is the price of gas.
In the Washington paper last week was a political cartoon.
Unfortunately, there was nothing funny about it. If you would follow me
for just a moment: Very obvious in the picture, the Capitol is there.
And in the first frame it says: We demand that you energy companies do
something about high gas prices.
Well, if you move with me to the second frame the question is asking,
you have heard it here today: Can we drill in ANWR? Can we explore off
our coastal regions while the Chinese are drilling off the coast of
Cuba? The answer: Forget it. Forget it. We can't do that. So we take
that off the table. Now the second frame it talks offshore.
The third frame, clean coal. We have more coal resources than Saudi
Arabia has oil. We have technology that can be improved even more to
allow us to burn coal cleanly, but we also must be able to turn coal
into gas for fuel in airplanes for the Air Force. This is something
that we must do.
Conservation is critical, and I applaud the new majority for their
emphasis on conservation. We are all sensitive to that and we are
working in our own ways to conserve as much as we can.
Alternate sources of energy, vitally important. But as a livestock
and agriculture member, our food supplies, our food prices are being
driven up by a lack of balance on alternative fuels like ethanol.
So back to the picture. Nuclear power. It is clean, it is safe. We
are making progress every day in the effort to use spent fuel in
positive ways. But, no, that is not on the table.
Last but not least: You're joking. Why don't you do something?
Well, folks, we can do something. The Small Business bill is
critical. The last Congress that met on this floor passed the
legislation that is referred to. The only thing not mentioned in this
political cartoon that is not funny is the expansion of our refinery
capacity.
So, again, I thank the gentlelady, Mr. Matheson, and others for their
important efforts to strengthen small businesses. But I would remind
everyone here, because you have the same experience that I have,
whether you are talking about BRAC, agriculture, economic development,
the research campus in Kannapolis, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, gas
prices strike you in the face like somebody shaking you by the shirt
walking around the room when you see that price going up every day on
the sign at the gas station.
So, ladies and gentlemen, I would simply ask that we Members of
Congress join together in a bipartisan way as we are handling these
amendments and put forth a resolution that says to the foreign oil
exporters who are gouging us for prices; we say to the rest of the
world we will explore, not exploit, we will use nuclear energy, we will
use our coal resources, we will expand our refineries so that we become
competitive while developing vitally important alternative sources of
energy that will ensure the future, the independence opportunity for
everyone in this country.
I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
Mr. CHABOT. Reclaiming my time, do I have any time remaining, Madam
Chairman?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman has 1 minute remaining.
Mr. CHABOT. I yield my remaining time to the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Ehlers).
Mr. EHLERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and would like to
comment on this amendment.
I have no great objection to it, but I am not terribly excited about
it, either. Let me comment.
I personally would prefer, if we are going to show preferences here
and use the money for that purpose, I would really prefer that we use
those funds to give preference to those organizations that submit
proposals for doing research and developing areas that will reduce
carbon emissions. I think in the long run that might be better for the
Nation than simply rewarding those who have taken steps within the
organization rather than developing new ideas and inventions that can
apply to everyone in the Nation.
So, as I said, I will not oppose it, but I did want to make that
suggestion.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MATHESON. Madam Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the
distinguished Chair of the Small Busi-
ness Committee, Congresswoman Velazquez.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I want to thank the gentleman from Utah for yielding
and for his amendment and his efforts to improve the bill. Since the
Republicans today are so concerned about energy crisis and gasoline
prices, this is an opportunity to start addressing this issue.
With gasoline at $4 a gallon and the evidence concerning global
climate change mounting, the importance of research in the area of
clean energy sources is increasingly clear. The amendment recognizes
that technologies which can improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon
emissions are a critical national research priority. As such, the
amendment will give priority to SBIR and STTR applications that address
clean energy research topics. I support this amendment and I urge
adoption of this amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson).
The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. MATHESON. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah will be postponed.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Ms. Giffords
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 5 offered by Ms. Giffords:
[[Page H2616]]
At the end of the bill, insert the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. ___. SBIR AWARDEE BUSINESS OPERATIONS.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(ee) SBIR Awardee Business Operations.--
``(1) In general.--To be eligible to receive an SBIR award,
an awardee must have its primary business operations in the
United States.
``(2) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `United
States' includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the
United States.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentlewoman from
Arizona (Ms. Giffords) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Arizona.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Madam Chairman, in this period of economic downturn, we
must ensure that we are doing everything we can to support American
small businesses. We also have to protect our hard-working taxpayers.
American small businesses still to this day remain the backbone of
our economy, and that is why I am offering this amendment today to H.R.
5819, the SBIR Reauthorization Act.
Madam Chairman, this amendment will guarantee that businesses that
are awarded funding from the small business research and development
programs in this bill have their primary business operations located in
the United States. The amendment ensures that we continue to provide
support to American-owned businesses and reiterate our commitment to
protecting American jobs.
Since its inception in 1982, the Small Business Innovation Research
program, SBIR, has helped small businesses compete for Federal research
and development awards. Eighty-five percent of businesses competing in
SBIR are small firms employing 20 or fewer persons. And the program has
generated an impressive 50,000 patents over these 25 years.
I have seen the success of SBIR awards in my district at the high-
tech, highly creative Breault Research Organization in Tucson, Arizona.
As we expand this program, we must keep responsible taxpaying, job-
creating organizations like Breault Research in mind. We have to ensure
that truly American-owned companies are winning these valuable awards.
We should not be funding R&D for businesses that will develop their
U.S. taxpayer financed ideas here, then those ideas turn into jobs
overseas. The goal of this reauthorization bill is to boost U.S. small
business innovation and competitiveness and thereby boost U.S.
competitiveness.
As a former president and CEO of a small business, I know how
difficult it is to compete in today's environment, I know how hard it
is to grow a business. And that is why I am offering this amendment, to
protect hard-working, ambitious American businesses to fulfill the
underlying bill's goal to foster American competitiveness.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Arizona
for her amendment and for her efforts to improve this bill.
Small businesses awarded SBIR grants from the Federal Government
should create jobs and pay appropriate and applicable taxes in the
United States. This amendment will ensure this is the case. It is an
important clarification for Federal agencies providing SBIR funds.
I would yield to the gentleman from Ohio for any comments that he
might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
We have no objection to the gentlewoman's amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. We are going to accept the amendment and support the
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Madam Chairman, I now yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Chairman, I rise to support this amendment. I
commend Congresswoman Giffords for her tireless work on this issue, and
commend both the Chair and ranking member for accepting the amendment.
The Small Business Innovative Research program increases small
businesses' participation in federally funded research and development.
It is a proven program. It is an effective program.
Since 1983, more than 94,000 projects have received more than $20
billion in awards, keeping our Nation competitive in the global
marketplace and helping our small businesses thrive. But in order for
this program to have its full impact, there must be that level playing
field, and those who try and cheat the system must not be allowed to
reap the benefits.
This amendment simply says that to receive a Small Business
Innovation Research award, a small business must be domiciled in the
United States. You must play by the rules. Today, even contractors
supporting our own military in Iraq continue to filter Federal dollars
through offshore shell companies to avoid paying taxes here. Every
year, offshore tax shelters cost taxpayers nearly $100 billion. No one,
contractors, small businesses or otherwise, no one who looks for
special privileges under our tax system should be able to take
advantage of the opportunities offered by the Federal Government.
I thank my colleague and the committee for offering this well
thought-out and necessary amendment to the bill, and urge its adoption
and appreciate its being accepted by the Chair and ranking member.
Ms. GIFFORDS. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank Chairwoman
Velazquez and Ranking Member Chabot for all of their hard work on the
SBIR bill. I also appreciate their support for my amendment.
This amendment will protect American small businesses and help ensure
that they remain competitive in this global environment. It prevents
foreign companies from reaping the benefits of hard-earned U.S. tax
dollars and undermining this bill's goal to foster American innovation,
create U.S. job opportunities, and uphold our commitment to American
taxpayers. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Graves
The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed
in House Report 110-603.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Graves:
Strike title II of the bill and insert the following:
TITLE II--VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT STANDARDS
SEC. 201. ENSURING THAT INNOVATIVE SMALL BUSINESSES WITH
SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT FROM VENTURE CAPITAL
OPERATING COMPANIES ARE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN
THE SBIR PROGRAM.
Section 9(e) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(e))
is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (8),
striking the period at the end of paragraph (9) and inserting
``; and'', and adding at the end the following:
``(10) effective only for the SBIR and STTR programs,
notwithstanding any other amendment made by the SBIR/STTR
Reauthorization Act, the following shall apply:
``(A) A business concern that has more than 500 employees
shall not qualify as a small business concern.
``(B) In determining whether a small business concern is
independently owned and operated under section 3(a)(1) or
meets the small business size standards instituted under
section 3(a)(2), the Administrator shall not consider a
business concern to be affiliated with a venture capital
operating company (or with any other business that the
venture capital operating company has financed) if--
``(i) the venture capital operating company does not own 50
percent or more of the business concern; and
``(ii) employees of the venture capital operating company
do not constitute a majority of the board of directors of the
business concern.
``(C) A business concern shall be deemed to be
`independently owned and operated' if--
``(i) it is owned in majority part by one or more natural
persons or venture capital operating companies;
[[Page H2617]]
``(ii) there is no single venture capital operating company
that owns 50 percent or more of the business concern; and
``(iii) there is no single venture capital operating
company the employees of which constitute a majority of the
board of directors of the business concern.
``(D) If a venture capital operating company controlled by
a business with more than 500 employees (in this subparagraph
referred to as a `VCOC under large business control') has an
ownership interest in a small business concern that is owned
in majority part by venture capital operating companies, the
small business concern is eligible to receive an award under
the SBIR or STTR program only if--
``(i) not more than two VCOCs under large business control
have an ownership interest in the small business concern;
``(ii) the VCOCs under large business control do not
collectively own more than 20 percent of the small business
concern; and
``(iii) the VCOCs under large business control do not
collaborate with each other to exercise more control over the
small business concern than they could otherwise exercise
individually.
``(E) The term `venture capital operating company' means a
business concern--
``(i) that--
``(I) is a Venture Capital Operating Company, as that term
is defined in regulations promulgated by the Secretary of
Labor; or
``(II) is an entity that--
``(aa) is registered under the Investment Company Act of
1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-51 et seq.); or
``(bb) is an investment company, as defined in section
3(c)(14) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-3(c)(14)), which is not
registered under such Act because it is beneficially owned by
less than 100 persons; and
``(ii) that is itself organized or incorporated and
domiciled in the United States, or is controlled by a
business concern that is incorporated and domiciled in the
United States.''.
The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Graves) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, I would first like to thank Chairwoman Velazquez and
Ranking Member Chabot from the Small Business Committee for moving
forward with this bill. This bill is critically important to small
businesses and innovation in this country.
The SBA provides startup funding to small businesses in a variety of
ways. One such program is the Small Business Innovative Research
program, or SBIR, which allocates a specific percentage of Federal
research and development grant monies to small business applicants.
This program allows for cutting-edge innovative research that may not,
in its earliest stages, attract funding from other sources. I strongly
believe in the SBIR program and what it does for small businesses.
American innovation is what drives this country and economy. As
Members of Congress, we need to create an environment that will keep
American innovation at the forefront of the global market.
As a member of the Small Business Committee, I work to advocate on
behalf of small businesses, and the passage of my amendment will have a
tremendous impact on the success of those small firms.
My amendment addresses a problem that began in 2003. The Small
Business Administration reversed a 20-year-old policy by ruling that
small business companies that are majority venture capital backed could
no longer compete for small business grants, regardless of how few
employees a company may have. As a result, small businesses are finding
it increasingly difficult to acquire the investment capital necessary
to start or grow their businesses. This jeopardizes the development of
innovative treatments, therapies, and technologies.
{time} 1800
Venture capital funding is critical to capital intensive industries.
They provide the needed seed money to help get some of those innovative
ideas off the ground. Without this investment, some of our most
innovative ideas would never develop.
My amendment will restore majority venture capital backed small
companies' eligibility so they can compete for SBIR grants and receive
other small business assistance.
Small businesses are providing this country with the ideas and
innovation that has become the identity of the United States. Without
these thoughts and ideas, the United States will fall behind the rest
of the world in innovations and breakthroughs.
Creating an environment that will keep American innovation in the
forefront of the global market is a priority of this body, and I am
very confident this amendment and bill will help us meet those goals.
My amendment simply makes a couple of technical corrections in title
II of the bill which has the support of both the chairwoman and the
ranking member of the Small Business Committee. Simply put, this
amendment helps remove barriers to participation in the SBIR program.
I would like to thank the staffs of Chairwoman Velazquez and Ranking
Member Chabot for all of their hard work on this issue. This bill and
amendment have been a work in progress for over 3 years, and I
appreciate all of the work they have done on my behalf. This is a very
important issue to me, my constituents, and small businesses
everywhere, and I am glad to see it before the House today.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while I am not opposed to the
amendment, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN (Ms. Berkley). Without objection, the gentlewoman
from New York is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Missouri
for his amendment and his efforts to improve the bill. Mr. Graves has
been a leader in our committee on many issues, and I appreciate his
efforts to improve this legislation.
This amendment clarifies the availability of venture capital to small
companies. It makes sure that we do not end up disqualifying any
current participant in the SBIR program.
Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).
Mr. WU. I thank the chairwoman.
I would like to inquire of the proponent of the amendment to clarify
that his amendment, the net effect is to permit two corporate owned
venture capital firms each to own 10 percent of an applicant as opposed
to what is currently in the bill of one corporate owned venture capital
firm owning 10 percent of an applicant.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri for an answer.
Mr. GRAVES. I thank the chairman; and that is correct.
Mr. WU. If the chairwoman would yield for a moment, I would support
the gentleman from Missouri's amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the ranking member of
the Small Business Committee, Mr. Chabot.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I rise in support
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Graves).
This is a good amendment that I feel strikes the appropriate balance on
the issue of venture capital companies' funding of SBIR participants.
One of the guiding principles that we focused on as we worked on the
legislation was the premise that we ought to be funding the best
science. By allowing the amounts of venture capital investment in SBIR
applicants that are prescribed by this amendment, we are not only
ensuring that we are funding the best science, but also maintaining the
program's goal of helping small businesses.
The gentleman from Missouri has been a leader on this issue for
years, and I applaud his efforts on our committee and throughout the
House to find a solution for this issue. And it is a balance here. You
can make arguments on both sides, but I think what he has tried to do
is to do something that is fair to small businesses and also have the
best science.
I thank the gentleman for yielding, and thank him for his leadership
on this issue.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment.
Mr. EHLERS. Madam Chairman, would the gentlelady yield?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. EHLERS. I am not necessarily in opposition to this amendment, but
I
[[Page H2618]]
just have to express a concern, and that is that we have been going
round and round on this issue for a couple of years on venture capital
getting involved. I always like the emphasis in this to be on the
``S,'' the Small Business Innovation Research Program, and I worry
about getting two venture capital companies involved together on a
project. With 500 employees each, you are talking about the equivalent
of a company with a thousand employees. How many will fit in this
category? For example, even though I have an industrial community,
there is no company in my district that would be considered funded by
venture capital and that would have that number of employees.
Does this then disadvantage smaller communities like mine? Mine is
not that small, a few hundred thousand. But nevertheless, we wouldn't
qualify at all in this category.
My concern, if I may express it, and perhaps you can reassure me on
this, my concern would be that the money would tend to flow to those
areas of the country that have the large venture capital companies, and
areas such as Michigan, which as you know is in a one-State repression,
would not be able to put together programs that would fit this
particular part of it. I am really concerned about keeping all small
businesses in every part of the country fully involved in this. I
wonder if the gentleman can give me some reassurances or an explanation
on this.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Ehlers, I understand your
concern. But I will say that at a time when we are facing an economic
crisis in our country where so many small businesses have been impacted
because of the lack of access to capital and the credit crunch, this is
the time when this amendment makes sense.
We are allowing for small businesses and SBIR companies across the
country to have the ability to secure venture capital so they can
continue to provide innovation and the new technologies that are so
needed in our economy.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES. Does the gentlewoman have any more speakers?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. We are prepared to accept the amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, I would just like to say to Ranking
Member Ehlers that this is about small businesses, and we want to make
sure that small businesses have the ability to compete, especially when
it comes to highly technical fields. In many cases it is
extraordinarily hard to get the capital that they need, and allowing
small businesses to take advantage of venture capital companies is the
way. But it is my every intention to direct this completely to small
businesses.
Again, I appreciate the concerns and I very much thank the chairwoman
and Ranking Member Chabot for working with me, and encourage my
colleagues to support the amendment.
Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Graves).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Ms. Matsui
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in House Report 110-603.
Ms. MATSUI. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 7 offered by Ms. Matsui:
Page 33, line 13, insert ``(A)'' before ``Each''.
Page 33, line 17, after ``venture capital investment
companies,'' insert ``business incubators,''.
Page 33, after line 24, insert the following:
``(B) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term `business
incubator' means an entity that provides coordinated and
specialized services to entrepreneurial businesses which meet
selected criteria during the businesses' startup phases,
including providing services such as shared office space and
office services, access to equipment, access to
telecommunications and technology services, flexible leases,
specialized management assistance, access to financing,
mentoring and training services, or other coordinated
business or technical support services designed to provide
business development assistance to entrepreneurial businesses
during these businesses' startup phases.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. MATSUI. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, the bill before us today is a good one. I would like
to commend Chairwoman Velazquez, Chairman Gordon and Chairman Wu for
their hard work on this timely legislation.
Madam Chairman, in many cities and towns across the country, business
incubators provide a valuable service. They help young businesses
survive and grow.
They provide guidance, business tools, space, contacts, and the know-
how to run a company. Incubators can dramatically increase the success
of new companies. Across the United States, incubators have already
nurtured tens of thousands of new companies to great success. Their
efforts have helped grow our economy and create both jobs and profit.
In these challenging economic times, a good idea is often not enough
to guarantee success. Many young companies need further business
expertise in order to avoid failing.
In my hometown of Sacramento, the CleanStart incubator is helping
grow a whole suite of clean energy companies. These businesses are
developing the cutting-edge technologies that will power our economy
and protect our environment in the future.
However, many businesses receiving SBIR grants devote most of their
capital to research. This leaves little left over for business
development. These are the type of businesses that can benefit most
from the services provided by incubators.
My amendment ensures that SBIR dollars will continue to work with
incubators across the country to drive economic development. It will
allow incubators to do what they do best, translate good research
conducted by small businesses into commercial technologies that create
jobs and economic growth. I urge all Members to support this
commonsense amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I thank the gentlewoman from California for her
amendment and her efforts to improve this bill. H.R. 5819 directs
Federal agencies to establish initiatives by which agencies encourage
partnerships between SBIR awardees and prime contractors, venture
capital firms and larger businesses. The purpose of these partnerships
is to help awardees progress toward phase III of the SBIR program.
The amendment highlights the significant role that business
incubators can play for small firms as they work to commercialize their
research. It is completely appropriate for Federal agencies to
acknowledge business incubators as valuable partners with SBIR
awardees.
I yield to the gentleman from Missouri for any comments he may have.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, we don't have any problems with the
amendment. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, we are prepared to accept the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. MATSUI. Madam Chairman, my amendment complements the goals of
today's legislation by helping to ensure that taxpayer-funded research
is maximized. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Sutton
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 110-603.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
[[Page H2619]]
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 8 offered by Ms. Sutton:
At the end of title V of the bill, insert the following
(and conform the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. ___. VETERANS PREFERENCE.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(ff) Veterans Preference.--In making awards under this
section, Federal agencies shall give priority to applications
from veterans, as defined in section 101(2) of title 38,
United States Code, so as to increase the number of SBIR and
STTR award recipients who are veterans.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ohio.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I want to begin by thanking Chairman
Velazquez, Chairman Gordon, and Chairman Wu for their leadership on
this bill, as well as the ranking members for their leadership.
This amendment would require agencies that administer Small Business
Innovation Research Programs to give special consideration to pressing
transportation and infrastructure research activities when reviewing
grant applications.
The devastating state of this Nation's crumbling infrastructure was
demonstrated in dramatic fashion last August when the I-35 bridge in
Minneapolis collapsed into the Mississippi River. And it is also
demonstrated every day as people drive over potholes in their
neighborhoods and sit in traffic jams on our crowded highways as they
travel to and from work.
Tackling the repair of our Nation's infrastructure is not a glamorous
task, but it is absolutely essential to our Nation's long-term success.
{time} 1815
Investments in infrastructure are critical for public safety and
boost local economies by providing more Americans with good-paying
jobs. Building our Nation's infrastructure for a new economy and a new
century is vital to revamping our work force and revitalizing our
communities.
It is also crucial that as we rebuild our roads and mass transit
systems, we act as stewards of the environment and seek greener and
cleaner technologies for fueling our economy.
America's working families deserve creative and innovative thinking
and policies from us as their representatives. This amendment will
ensure that as agencies review small business innovation applications
they place a premium on projects that focus on transportation and
infrastructure, the building blocks of our economy.
I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I really thank the gentlewoman for her
amendment and her efforts to improve this bill.
The amendment requires Federal agencies to give priority to SBIR and
STTR applications submitted by veterans. During a time when our country
is at war, it is particularly appropriate to prioritize SBIR
applications submitted by our veterans. And I support this amendment.
I would like to yield to the gentleman from Missouri for any comments
that he might have.
Mr. GRAVES. Madam Chairman, I don't have any opposition.
Mr. EHLERS. Will the gentlewoman please yield?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes, I will.
Mr. EHLERS. Thank you for yielding.
I just have to express some concern. We already had a preference
earlier for organizations that have exhibited concern about their
carbon footprint. And I don't object to the one about veterans, but I
worry about getting too many preferences involved here. And Uncle Joe,
who's trying to build a widget in his barn, may just fall in the cracks
because he doesn't meet any of these preference categories.
I don't particularly oppose this one about transportation. Everyone
knows we need improvements in that. But there are so many different
areas, I don't want to bog down the SBA in dealing with these requests
by having to worry about preference after preference.
So basically I'm issuing a warning here. Let's watch it in the
future, and let's make sure we don't add too many preference
requirements or it becomes very, very cumbersome.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time,
and I accept the amendment.
Ms. SUTTON. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Sutton
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 110-603.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 9 offered by Ms. Sutton:
In section 107(3) of the bill, in the quoted matter, strike
``or'' at the end of subparagraph (D), and insert after
subparagraph (D) the following:
(E) the National Academy of Sciences, in the final report
issued by the `Transit Research and Development: Federal Role
in the National Program' project and the `Transportation
Research, Development and Technology Strategic Plan (2006-
2010)' issued by the United States Department of
Transportation Research and Innovative Technology
Administration, and in subsequent reports issued by the
National Academy of Sciences and United States Department of
Transportation on transportation and infrastructure; or
In section 504(a) of the bill, in the quoted matter,
redesignate (E) as (F).
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton) and a Member opposed each will
control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ohio.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I want to thank Chairwoman Velazquez for
her support of this amendment; that would require that we recognize our
veterans in this bill.
We ask our veterans to sacrifice years of their lives to protect our
country and our loved ones. In return, we have made a commitment to
honor their service.
And last year this Congress provided the largest increase in funding
for the VA in history. And this year I am proud that in this bill we
will continue to reaffirm our support for the men and women who have
chosen to serve their country in uniform.
It's our responsibility to ensure our veterans receive the care they
deserve. Our veterans also deserve to receive, as I have proposed in
this amendment, priority status when applying for awards through the
Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology
Transfer programs.
This amendment will grant a preference for the brave men and women
who have sacrificed for all of us. As they return home and restart
their lives, it's essential that the number of veterans who receive
SBIR and STTR awards increases. The underlying bill includes a
preference as was discussed, for applicants from rural areas and
veterans deserve the same consideration.
Madam Chairman, 3 million veteran business owners responded to the
2002 survey of business owners administered through the U.S. Census
Bureau. This survey revealed that veterans tend to be better educated
and slightly older before starting or acquiring their businesses. This
trend can undoubtedly be attributed to their time in the service and
their use of one of the most important and successful pieces of
legislation this body has ever passed, the GI bill.
Madam Chairman, our veterans will continue to make us proud as they
make good use of the funding available through these important small
business programs. As I have often said, it is not enough to simply pay
tribute to our veterans with words; we must show them our appreciation
with our actions.
[[Page H2620]]
I appreciate the support that has been expressed for this amendment,
and I urge a ``yes'' vote.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to this amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I just simply want to say thank you to
the gentlelady from Ohio for her sensitivity and commitment to our
veterans at a time of war, and for working to perfect this legislation.
I have no opposition to this amendment. I am prepared to accept the
amendment.
I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, we have no opposition.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. SUTTON. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Mr. Barrow
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 110-603.
Mr. BARROW. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 10 offered by Mr. Barrow:
Page 36, after line 2, insert the following:
(D) Minority institution pilot program.--
(i) Establishment.--From amounts made available to carry
out this subparagraph, the Administrator shall establish and
carry out a pilot program to make grants to minority
institutions that partner with nonprofit organizations that
have experience developing relationships between industry,
minority institutions, and other entities, for the purpose of
increasing the number of SBIR and STTR program applications
by minority-owned small businesses.
(ii) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
the pilot program established in clause (i), a minority
institution shall submit an application to the Administrator
at such time, in such manner, and containing such information
and assurances as the Administrator may require.
(iii) Matching requirement.--As a condition of a grant
under the pilot program, the Administrator shall require that
a matching amount be provided from a source other than the
Federal Government that is equal to the amount of the grant.
(iv) Minority institution.--In this subparagraph, the term
``minority institution'' has the meaning given that term in
section 365(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1067k(3)).
(v) Funding.--For each of fiscal years 2009 through 2012,
of the amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of
appropriations in subparagraph (C), up to $4,000,000 shall be
available to carry out this subparagraph.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. BARROW. I thank the Chair and I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Chairman, the whole purpose of the SBIR and STTR programs is a
generally recognized acknowledgement of the fact that in the bidding
wars with the big guys for Federal contracting, small businesses are
just generally outgunned. And while that is true for small businesses
generally, it's even more true for a subset of small businesses.
Minority-owned small businesses are at even a greater disparity and
disadvantage when it comes to competing for government contracts,
research and development.
Less than 10 percent of the SBIR grants are made to minority-owned
small businesses. Now if SBIR and STTR are at the forefront of ensuring
that American small businesses remain competitive, we've got to make
sure that minority-owned businesses have an opportunity to participate.
But too often, minority and disadvantaged small businesses don't even
know about these grants. If they don't know about them, they can't
compete for them.
My amendment seeks to address this in a carefully drawn and
constructive manner. It does this by authorizing grants to partnerships
between minority institutions, as that term is defined in the
amendment, and nonprofit organizations that have experience in linking
up minority-owned businesses with government contracting.
There are limits, carefully drawn limits drawn into the amendment.
One of those is that the administrator of the SBA gets to set the terms
and conditions for submitting and applying for these grants.
Second, it requires these grants can only be made to partnerships
with experienced partners. Minority institutions, as defined by the
amendment, consist of colleges that serve a minority, 51 percent or
more of minority students. This is basically HBCUs, but not exclusively
HBCUs, and also requires they be in partnership with nonprofits that
have experience in linking small businesses with government contracts.
Finally, what the bill does is it doesn't create any authorization
for spending new money. It doesn't appropriate any new money. What it
does is it directs the administrator to set up a pilot program that
authorizes him to spend up to $4 million in money that is already
authorized and appropriated for such purposes.
HBCUs and local nonprofits, they have the experience in connecting
small businesses with government contracts. My amendment allows them to
work together to increase minority-owned business participation in
government contracting. That's good for the government when it's the
customer, it's good for the taxpayers, and it's good for the economy.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for
his amendment and his efforts to improve this bill.
The amendment establishes a grant program for minority institution
with the purpose of increasing the number of SBIR and STTR applications
submitted by companies owned by minorities. The participation of women-
owned and minority-owned companies in the SBIR program continues to be
at unacceptably low levels. The Barrow amendment--along with the
provisions of H.R. 5819, that reauthorize the FAST program--seeks to
address this challenge. It does this by funding outreach efforts to
encourage and support more applicants by companies owned by minorities.
I now will yield to the gentleman from Ohio for any comments that he
might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. We have no
opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. With that, I will accept the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BARROW. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mrs. Capito
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 110-603.
Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 11 offered by Mrs. Capito:
Page 8, line 10, after ``minorities,'' insert the
following: ``small business concerns owned and controlled by
service-disabled veterans,''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from West Virginia.
Mrs. CAPITO. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I also want to thank the
chairman of the Small Business Committee and the ranking member of the
Small Business Committee for their good hard work on this piece of
legislation. I would also like to thank the
[[Page H2621]]
Rules Committee, of which I was formerly a member, for making my
amendment in order.
I rise today to offer a very simple amendment that adds service
disabled veterans to the list of targeted groups to receive
consideration from the SBIR bill and SBIR board. Currently in the bill,
the board, which is authorized to make recommendations to the grant
awarding authorities, is directed to develop a means of how to
encourage more applications from small business owners who are
minorities or women. My amendment will direct the board to include
service disabled veterans owners of small businesses to those who will
be encouraged to make more applications from a grant pool of over $50
million.
We have a lot of our servicemen and women returning with injuries.
But we want to encourage them that they can move forward with their
lives and invest and prosper in a small business, and this opens up
more opportunity for them.
Madam Chairman, recent studies have shown that returning veterans
face unemployment rates that are nearly four times as high as that of
nonmilitary laborers.
{time} 1830
Our returning veterans should have post-military opportunities that
inspire confidence and don't disappoint them.
This amendment will extend to service-disabled veterans more
opportunities to succeed after serving our Nation so bravely.
Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I want to take the opportunity to
thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for her efforts to improve
this bill. The amendment directs the SBIR advisory boards established
under H.R. 5819 to include in their annual report to Congress the
number and the dollar amount of SBIR awards made to small businesses
and controlled by service-disabled veterans. This is valuable data that
Congress should have. Moreover, the collection of this data is likely
to encourage Federal agencies to redouble their efforts to publicize
the SBIR programs to service-disabled veterans.
I now would like to yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for
any comments he might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
I support the gentlelady's amendment, and I would commend her for
looking out for the interest of service-disabled veterans in this
country, a group of people who have clearly earned the respect and the
gratitude that they are entitled to. Thank you for offering the
amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, we're prepared to accept the
amendment, and I urge adoption of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chairman, I yield back my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from West
Virginia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Ms. Velazquez
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 110-603.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, as the designee of Mr. Carney of
Pennsylvania, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 12 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
Page 26, line 2, strike ``and'' at the end.
Page 26, line 5, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 26, after line 5, insert the following:
``(D) criteria designed to give preference to applicants
who include an SBDC program that is accredited for its
technology services.''.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, small business development centers,
which are accredited for their technology services, are particularly
well-positioned to provide support for companies preparing SBIR
applications. It is appropriate that FAST grant applications that
incorporate the services of those SBDCs that are accredited for
technology services should be viewed favorably by the SBA.
The amendment will ensure that the Small Business Administration
includes this preference in the grant selection criteria it develops
for the FAST program.
I support this amendment.
I yield time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Carney).
Mr. CARNEY. Tonight I urge my colleagues to support the amendment
that I am offering to H.R. 5819, the SBIR/STTR reauthorization bill.
The amendment is good for America's small businesses and will
increase our technological competitiveness in the global marketplace.
Specifically, the amendment would allow the administrator of the SBA to
view favorably FAST grant applicants that utilize small business
development centers that are accredited for their technology
commercialization in determining the award of a FAST grant.
My amendment acts as a catalyst that will encourage and enable 41
State SBDC programs to develop the capacity to deliver technology
commercialization services. The result will be an increase of new
technology and technological products introduced into the marketplace
improving America's competitiveness, as it strengthens America's small
business community.
Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, my amendment furthers the
SBA's goal of increasing the number of SBDC programs that offer
technological commercialization service as it becomes credited.
I urge you all to support America's small businesses by supporting
this amendment.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, although I am not in opposition, I will
claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I won't take that time. I just want to
commend the gentleman for offering the amendment. We have no
opposition.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I am prepared to accept the amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mrs. Gillibrand
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 110-603.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 13 offered by Mrs. Gillibrand:
Page 7, line 9, strike ``and''.
Page 7, after line 9, insert the following:
(C) at least one individual who is a veteran who owns a
small business concern owned and controlled by veterans; and
Page 7, line 10, redesignate (C) as (D).
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam Chairman, my amendment is very simple. It
[[Page H2622]]
provides a voice to veteran-owned small businessmen on the newly
created Small Business Innovation Research Board.
The advisory board will oversee the design and award process for SBIR
grants. By including a veteran-owned small businessman or -woman on the
board, we will ensure that the criteria used towards small business
grants will include areas for which our veterans specialize, areas such
as weapons development and destruction, communications networking, and
many more skills that have been uniquely acquired through their
military service.
When I was first elected last year, I formed a constituent-based
Veterans Advisory Board in my district. Over the past year, I have
worked very closely with these men and women to find new ways to better
serve them and the veterans of our district throughout our Nation who
have sacrificed so much for this great country. It is for this reason
that I strongly believe that veterans need advice on the SBIR advisory
board and why I have been working with the board to draft legislation
to address the problems of homeless vets and to ease the transition
from active duty to civilian life.
When our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines leave service after
multiple deployments abroad and a tremendous sacrifice by them and
their families, the least we can do is to ease their transition and
help them get their businesses off the ground.
I, therefore, urge my colleagues to support my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her
amendment and for her efforts to improve the legislation. The amendment
requires that at least one veteran small business owner must serve on
the SBIR Advisory Board that H.R. 5819 establishes in section 104.
These boards are meant to provide small firms with an avenue to
communicate with Federal agencies about the SBIR program.
The intention of the amendment is to help ensure that agencies are as
responsive as possible to the unique needs of small research companies
and to veteran-owned small firms in particular.
I support this intention.
I would yield to the gentleman from Ohio for any comments that he
might have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the chairwoman for yielding, and I want to
commend the gentlelady for offering her amendment, and we support it.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I urge the adoption of the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam Chairman, I yield back my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 14 Offered by Ms. Velazquez
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in House Report 110-603.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, as the designee of Mr. Walz of
Minnesota, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 14 offered by Ms. Velazquez:
At the end of title V of the bill, add the following (and
conform the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 506. INITIATIVE TO PUBLICIZE THE SBIR PROGRAM TO
VETERANS.
The Administrator of the Small Business Administration, in
consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall
develop an initiative to publicize the SBIR program to
veterans returning from service and encourage those veterans
with applicable technical skills to apply for SBIR grants.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) and a Member opposed each
will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, the amendment directs the
administrator of the Small Business Administration to consult with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop an initiative that publicizes
the SBIR programs to veterans returning from service. The amendment
will direct the SBA and the VA to work together to encourage veterans
to apply for SBIR grants.
Many of the veterans returning from service are highly skilled and
highly trained in technical fields. The amendment will draw on this
pool of talent and increase the number of veterans applying for SBIR
awards. Our efforts such as this will strengthen the SBIR program,
especially the Department of Defense's SBIR program.
I urge adoption of this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition,
even though we're not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIRWOMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. CHABOT. We would commend the gentleman for offering the
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Vermont
(Mr. Welch).
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Madam Chairman, I would like to engage the
distinguished Chair of the Small Business Committee in a colloquy.
First of all, I would like to thank you. Your committee has done
extraordinary work throughout the year, probably produced more good
legislation than any other.
I want to thank you for working with me on this issue that is raised
on this bill regarding the ability of small businesses to continue to
use the SBIR program. Specifically, I want to thank you for agreeing to
work with me to monitor agency actions to ensure that smaller firms are
not represented in the agency's distribution of SBIR awards.
Also, I want to say that I am pleased that you agree to work with me
and in Congress and that this matter needs vigorous study, and we will
work to ensure that a National Institute for Standards and Technology
study, which I would like to place in the Record, is included in the
conference.
{time} 1845
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Reclaiming my time, you have my commitment to monitor
Federal agencies' efforts to award grants to small firms. And as this
legislation moves forward, we will work with you to identify ways that
agencies are properly studying and making available opportunities for
small businesses.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Thank you.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I urge adoption of the Walz amendment
I am offering on his behalf.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Foster
The Acting CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15
printed in House Report 110-603.
Mr. FOSTER. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 15 offered by Mr. Foster:
At the end of the bill, add the following (and amend the
table of contents accordingly):
SEC. __. PROHIBITION OF AWARDS TO ALIENS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT
IN THE UNITED STATES.
Section 9 of the Small Business Act is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(ee) Prohibition of Awards to Aliens Unlawfully Present
in the United States.--A concern is not eligible to receive
an award under this section if an individual who is an alien
unlawfully present in the United States--
``(1) has an ownership interest in that concern; or
``(2) has an ownership interest in another concern that
itself has an ownership interest in that concern.''.
SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON AWARDS TO FIRMS IN VIOLATION OF
IMMIGRATION LAWS.
Any applicant found, based on a determination by the
Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General to
have engaged in a pattern or practice of hiring, recruiting
or referring for a fee, for employment in the United States
an alien knowing
[[Page H2623]]
the person is an unauthorized alien shall not be eligible for
the receipt of future awards under section 9 of the Small
Business Act.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 1125, the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Foster) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. FOSTER. Madam Chairman, I am offering this amendment along with
my colleagues, Representatives Ellsworth and Altmire, to H.R. 5819, the
Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology
Transfer Reauthorization Act.
As a physicist with a long career at a Federal laboratory that
supported and benefited from the SBIR program, I am committed to
reauthorizing these innovative and worthwhile programs. The SBIR
program is designed to increase the participation of small high
technology firms in the Federal R&D endeavor.
The program was established upon the belief that while high
technology-based companies under 500 employees tended to be highly
innovative, and innovation is essential to our economic well-being and
the high standard of living that we enjoy, that small businesses are,
unfortunately, underrepresented in government R&D activities.
Our amendment is simple. Similar to other amendments that have been
offered on various pieces of legislation, it is codifying current
regulations and makes absolutely clear that illegal immigrants are not
eligible for these programs. Legal permanent residents would be
eligible; however, illegal immigrants would not. Moreover, a firm found
to be in violation of this provision would be barred from receiving
future awards.
If this language looks familiar, it should. As I just alluded to,
similar language was adopted last year during consideration of H.R.
3867, the Small Business Contracting Program Improvements Act.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. The American taxpayer
must have confidence that their hard-earned dollars are being spent
properly, and this amendment, by making crystal clear that illegal
immigrants are not eligible for these programs, helps accomplish this.
Upon passage of comprehensive immigration reform, the path to
eligibility for these programs will be the path to citizenship under
the rule of law.
Again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, while not opposed to the amendment, I
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from New York
is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentlemen for their
amendment and their efforts to improve the bill. It is only appropriate
that the recipients of Federal grants like the SBIR and STTR programs
should be majority owned and controlled by individuals who are citizens
of or permanent resident aliens in the United States. The amendment
would clarify this requirement.
I support this amendment, but it is important to recognize that we
cannot solve our country's immigration challenges on a piecemeal basis.
This is an important amendment and reminds us that comprehensive
immigration reform is good for America's national and economic
security.
I now yield to the gentleman from Ohio for any comments that he may
have.
Mr. CHABOT. I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
We have no objections.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FOSTER. Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, Representative Altmire.
Mr. ALTMIRE. Madam Chairman, I would like to thank Congressman
Ellsworth and Congressman Foster for their leadership in joining me
today in offering this amendment.
Our amendment clearly states that any small business that is either
owned by or employs illegal immigrants will not qualify for SBIR
funding. By adding this language, we clarify that Congress will not
reward those small businesses who fail to play by the rules.
As we know, SBIR awards are critical to assisting our Nation's small
businesses compete, and Congress must ensure that those monetary awards
paid for by the American taxpayer are not provided to those small
businesses that purposefully contribute to our Nation's ongoing illegal
immigration problem.
This amendment is absolutely necessary because of those bad actors
who choose to ignore the law and hire individuals who are not in this
country legally.
I urge adoption of our amendment to guarantee protections for
American small businesses.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Chairman, I am prepared to accept the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. FOSTER. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the
ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. FOSTER. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
will be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that amendments 16 and 17
will not be offered.
Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now resume on
those amendments printed in House Report 110-603 on which further
proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Matheson of Utah.
Amendment No. 11 by Mrs. Capito of West Virginia.
Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Foster of Illinois.
The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote.
Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Matheson
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Matheson) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 355,
noes 48, not voting 33, as follows:
[Roll No. 213]
AYES--355
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Donnelly
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
[[Page H2624]]
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Myrick
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Norton
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--48
Aderholt
Akin
Bachmann
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Carter
Conaway
Cubin
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Doolittle
Duncan
Flake
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Lamborn
Linder
Lungren, Daniel E.
Marchant
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pence
Petri
Poe
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Thornberry
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
NOT VOTING--33
Alexander
Andrews
Blumenauer
Blunt
Braley (IA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buyer
Campbell (CA)
Clyburn
Cooper
Cramer
Davis, Tom
DeFazio
Dicks
Doggett
Everett
Feeney
Fortuno
Goodlatte
Higgins
Hulshof
Hunter
LaHood
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Peterson (PA)
Ruppersberger
Rush
Saxton
Walsh (NY)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
{time} 1917
Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico, Mrs. BACHMANN, Messrs. PETRI, DAVID DAVIS
of Tennessee, BARTON of Texas, ROHRABACHER, and KINGSTON changed their
vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chairman, on rollcall No. 213, I was unavoidably
detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Madam Chairman, on rollcall No. 213, I was at
Bethesda Naval Hospital getting a CT scan. Had I been present, I would
have voted ``aye.''
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mrs. Capito
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from West
Virginia (Mrs. Capito) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 405,
noes 0, not voting 31, as follows:
[Roll No. 214]
AYES--405
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
[[Page H2625]]
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--31
Alexander
Andrews
Blumenauer
Blunt
Braley (IA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buyer
Campbell (CA)
Clyburn
Cooper
Cramer
Davis, Tom
Dicks
Doggett
Everett
Feeney
Fortuno
Grijalva
Higgins
Hulshof
LaHood
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Regula
Ruppersberger
Rush
Saxton
Weller
Wu
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Two minutes remain in the
vote.
{time} 1926
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Madam Chairman, on rollcall No. 214, I was at
Bethesda Naval Hospital getting a CT scan. Had I been present, I would
have voted ``aye.''
personal explanation
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Madam Chairman, on rollcall Nos. 213 and 214, had
I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Foster
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Foster) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 406,
noes 0, answered ``present'' 3, not voting 27, as follows:
[Roll No. 215]
AYES--406
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Bordallo
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Christensen
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Faleomavaega
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Norton
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--3
Becerra
Kucinich
Stark
NOT VOTING--27
Alexander
Andrews
Blunt
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buyer
Campbell (CA)
Clyburn
Cooper
Cramer
Davis, Tom
Dicks
Doggett
Everett
Feeney
Fortuno
Higgins
Hulshof
LaHood
Lamborn
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Peterson (PA)
Rush
Saxton
Slaughter
Weller
Wu
Announcement by the Acting Chairman
The Acting CHAIRMAN (during the vote). Two minutes remain in the
vote.
{time} 1933
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in
the nature of a substitute, as amended.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended,
was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Tierney) having assumed the chair, Ms. Berkley, Acting 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. 5819) to
amend the Small Business Act to improve the Small Business Innovation
Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business Technology Transfer
(STTR) program, and for other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution
1125, she 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
reported from 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 of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Heller of Nevada
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the
desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. In its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
[[Page H2626]]
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Heller of Nevada moves to recommit the bill to the
Committee on Small Business with instructions to report the
bill back to the House promptly in the form to which it may
be perfected at the time of this motion with the following
amendment:
Page 14, line 3, strike ``and alternative fuels'' and
insert ``alternative fuels, and projects that have the
potential to lower gasoline and diesel prices''.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order against the
motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman reserves a point of order
against the motion.
The gentleman from Nevada is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the
concerns American workers and small businesses have with fuel prices.
The majority party in Congress has offered the American people no real
solutions to lower fuel costs. Speaker Pelosi said, ``Democrats have a
comprehensive plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices,'' and
the American people want to know, where is that plan?
Gas prices have risen 50 percent since Democrats took control. Was it
the comprehensive energy bill passed last December?
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may proceed.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Nevada yield for
that purpose?
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. I would yield.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his parliamentary
inquiry.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Is it the role of the Speaker to make certain
that the House is in order prior to Members speaking so that the
gentleman can be heard? Isn't that appropriate?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is the role of the Chair to determine
whether or not there is order in the House and to allow the gentleman
to proceed with his comments.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may proceed.
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Gas prices have risen 50 percent----
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman's colleagues will help bring
the House to order. Please take your comments off the floor of the
House so the gentleman from Nevada may be heard.
The gentleman may proceed.
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Gas prices have risen 50 percent----
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the House is not in order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will suspend.
The gentleman may proceed.
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Gas prices have risen 50 percent since Democrats took control. Was it
the comprehensive energy bill passed last December? Gas prices have
risen 7.6 percent and diesel has risen 16 percent since December's
highly touted energy bill passed.
Earlier today, I heard on this floor one member of the majority blame
others for the increases of the last 16 months. We would hate to take
responsibility around here, wouldn't we? To make matters worse,
Democrats are actually rallying behind a plan to increase the gas tax
by 50 cents per gallon.
Mr. Speaker, in my home State of Nevada, gasoline is already on
average $3.60 a gallon. This is well over $1 per gallon over what it
was when the current majority party took control of Congress.
In the course of holding a number of town hall meetings over the last
16 months, I have spoken to small business owners and more than 100,000
households across my district. During these town hall meetings, I have
asked the question, do you support the proposed 50 cent per gallon
gasoline tax? Roughly 82 percent of Nevadans asked about this proposal
oppose this tax increase. If passed, this gas tax would be devastating
for each of the 204,000 small businesses in my home State.
High gasoline and diesel prices are affecting everything and have
contributed in part to the rising costs of food and commodities.
Increased food prices this year have resulted in a financial burden for
many, including small businesses, seniors on Social Security or fixed
incomes, and other low-income families. Prices for beef, bakery
products and eggs are up sharply.
Several factors have affected food prices, Mr. Speaker, but the most
damaging are the gasoline and diesel prices for the operation of
equipment and transportation of food to the market.
Our solution to this problem is economics, supply and demand. We need
to increase supply, and to that end exploration and production must be
increased, including domestically. Refineries need to be built and
energy sources expanded, including alternative fuel technology.
Mr. Speaker, in this light I offer my motion to recommit, which will
help research ways to lower the price of fuel for Americans and small
businesses. This motion simply states that the energy-related research
topics in this bill should also include projects that have potential to
lower gas and diesel costs.
It is critical that Congress act on this issue of high fuel prices
now, not only to help American workers have a better way of life, but
to help our struggling small businesses.
Mr. Speaker, on that note, I yield back.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentlewoman from New York continue
to reserve her point of order?
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the motion be
amended to report back to the House forthwith.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Nevada yield for
that request?
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Yes, I do.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Maryland?
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I
appreciate the offer of the gentleman, although I would suggest that if
the unanimous consent request would also include the bill that has been
included by Mr. Fossella in the Senate-passed FISA bill that we have,
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that we have under a
discharge petition, then I believe our side would be pleased to accept
the unanimous consent.
Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I would be happy to.
Mr. HOYER. I am only going to play the game just so far.
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. We would be happy to accept the unanimous
consent request if the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act will be
allowed to come to the floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman object?
Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation on the point of
order, and I rise in opposition to the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, the motion we are considering today will
do nothing to lower gas prices. But what this bill does is it will
provide for small businesses to afford the resources that would allow
for them to bring prices down by promoting new technologies.
My question to the author of the motion to recommit is, where is your
outrage when the President refuses to implement H.R. 6, which would
allow for small businesses to lower gas prices?
When the Republicans had a chance to vote on price gouging, you voted
``no.'' When you had a chance to have America invest in alternative
energy, you voted ``no.'' When you had a chance to invest in
conservation, you voted ``no.'' This is the height of hypocrisy. This
motion does nothing to lower gas prices in the country.
{time} 1945
In the country, it will kill the bill that we allow for small
businesses in this country to have the tools and resources to deal with
the issue of energy conservation and gas prices in this Nation.
Vote ``no'' on this motion to recommit.
[[Page H2627]]
I yield to the majority leader.
Mr. HOYER. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, the American public
know this game. The gentlelady, the chairman of the Small Business
Committee, has just made it clear. Gas prices were $1.46 when President
Bush took over the White House, when the Republicans took over the
House, when the Senate was taken over by the Republicans. Gas prices
are now $3.51. Two oil men reside in the White House and in the vice
presidency.
Nothing, of course, is your fault, because we have been here, after
all, for 14 months. We, of course, have had most of that which we have
wanted to pass on economics vetoed by the President. But what we wanted
to pass on energy, we agreed with the President and worked on an energy
package to get us to independence.
Now I want to talk to my side. We know this is a game. We know this
is pure politics. We know there wants to be a 30-second ad to say
somehow we voted against bringing gas prices down. That is patently
absurd, and the American people are too smart for that. The American
people are too smart.
I urge my colleagues on my side; I don't know that I will get any
votes on this side, but this is a game, and it is a game that has gone
on for too long. I asked for unanimous consent, but Mr. Price knows
this is a game so he wouldn't give me unanimous consent to include this
in the bill and pass it this very night. That is not what you want to
do. You want a political ad.
So I am asking everybody on my side--the House wanted to be in order,
I heard from over there. I am asking everybody on my side not to play
this game, because it will never end. Don't play this game. Don't fool
the American public. This is about sending this bill back to committee.
It will take weeks to bring it back. The small business community
deserves this bill. Support this bill. Reject this cynical political
maneuver on this floor tonight.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu).
Mr. WU. Instead of grandstanding on gas issues, instead of taking
``yes'' for an answer, the minority would want to kill a bill that has
funded NEI Corporation of Somerset, New Jersey that enables the
development of batteries for hybrid vehicles; a program that funded
Eltron Research for coal gasification that establishes energy
independence; that funded Mohawk Innovative Technology of Albany, New
York to enable the hydrogen economy.
You want energy independence? Vote for this bill. Stop the political
grandstanding.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the motion to
recommit.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to please direct their
remarks to the Chair.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia will state his
parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, is it not true that if indeed this
motion to recommit passed, that this bill could be referred back to the
two committees from which it came and that it could be back on this
floor as soon as tomorrow?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As the Chair reaffirmed on November 15,
2007, at some subsequent time, the committee could meet and report the
bill back to the House.
Mr. WESTMORELAND. I thank the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. HELLER of Nevada. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by
5-minute votes on passage of the bill, if ordered; ordering the
previous question on House Resolution 1126; and adoption of House
Resolution 1126, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195,
noes 215, not voting 21, as follows:
[Roll No. 216]
AYES--195
Aderholt
Akin
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Castle
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Deal (GA)
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Fallin
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gilchrest
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Hill
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Keller
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marshall
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Saxton
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--215
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dingell
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Foster
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth Sandlin
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Klein (FL)
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
[[Page H2628]]
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--21
Alexander
Andrews
Blunt
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Campbell (CA)
Clyburn
Cramer
Davis, Tom
Dicks
Doggett
Everett
Feeney
Higgins
Hulshof
King (IA)
LaHood
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Peterson (PA)
Rush
Weller
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes
left to record their vote.
{time} 2008
Messrs. BONNER, McINTYRE and MITCHELL changed their vote from ``no''
to ``aye.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
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.
Recorded Vote
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 368,
noes 43, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 217]
AYES--368
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Chabot
Chandler
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Edwards
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Filner
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--43
Barton (TX)
Boehner
Broun (GA)
Burgess
Carter
Cubin
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Deal (GA)
Duncan
Flake
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Hodes
Jordan
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Linder
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Poe
Radanovich
Rohrabacher
Royce
Sali
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Stearns
Tancredo
Thornberry
Tsongas
Westmoreland
NOT VOTING--20
Alexander
Andrews
Blunt
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Campbell (CA)
Clyburn
Cramer
Davis, Tom
Dicks
Doggett
Everett
Feeney
Higgins
Hulshof
LaHood
Moran (VA)
Nadler
Peterson (PA)
Rush
Weller
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes
remaining to vote.
{time} 2015
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________