[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.

                          ____________________