[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 90 (Tuesday, June 16, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H6886-H6898]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2010

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 544 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. 2847.

                              {time}  1835


                     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. 2847) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and 
Justice, and Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, with Mr. Altmire in the 
chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) and the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in regard to H.R. 2847, the 
legislation appropriating funds for Commerce, Justice, Science, and 
Related Agencies for 2010.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume in general 
debate.
  Mr. Chairman, if this is June, it must be appropriations season, and 
today I'm pleased to present to the House the first of the 
appropriations bills for fiscal year 2010, H.R. 2847, the Commerce, 
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriation bill.
  While the summer may be hot and humid, as is typical in the Nation's 
Capital, with the assistance of this body, our days and nights need not 
be long for the House to fully consider this and the other 11 
appropriations bills in regular order, or so we hope.
  I want to thank the ranking member of this subcommittee with most 
sincerity for his assistance, help, counsel, and guidance in the 
development of this bill. Mr. Frank Wolf of Virginia was chairman of 
this committee for a number of years, served on it for a great number 
of years. We served on it together. He brings to this bill a lot of 
experience and knowledge and that is really helpful as you work up an 
appropriation bill, and I appreciate, Frank, very much your assistance 
on the bill and the credibility and knowledge you bring to it.
  I also want to thank publicly and personally the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. Obey, for his assistance in developing this bill. Mr. 
Obey's courtesy and the assistance of the front office has been very 
much appreciated, and we also appreciate, Mr. Chairman, the allocation 
that you've given us for this bill that's allowed us to do what we are 
allowed to do, however short the allocation may be.
  I would also like to sincerely recognize the staff: the excellent 
work of the clerk, John Blazey, and the leadership he's provided to the 
rest of the staff, and all of them have done excellent work, which I 
appreciate: Adrienne Simonson, Dixon Butler, Diana Simpson, Darek 
Newby, Tracey LaTurner, Scott Sammis, all with the subcommittee; Mike 
Ringler and John Martens on the minority staff. And then on my personal 
staff, Sally Moorhead and Julie Aaronson.
  It's a lot of work putting together one of these appropriation bills, 
as anybody who's been involved with it or close to it understands, and 
they have worked long hours diligently with great competence to move 
this bill forward, and I most sincerely thank them for the efforts. We 
couldn't do this without them.
  Mr. Chairman, in brief summary, this bill totals $64.4 billion, an 
increase of $6.7 billion over last year, but it is $200 million below 
the President's budget request. The bill provides $30.6 billion for 
investments in science, technology, and innovation, an increase of $1 
billion over comparable levels from last year.
  Within this level, the bill provides $6.9 billion for the National 
Science Foundation and $18.2 billion for NASA. For NIST, the bill 
provides $781.1 million. For NOAA, it's recommended at $4.6 billion. 
The committee's recommendation continues to provide resources 
consistent with the doubling path identified for NSF and NIST in the 
COMPETES Act. It also considers the science and research conducted at 
NOAA and at NASA as critical to the Nation's science enterprise just as 
that performed by NSF and NIST.
  For law enforcement and other agencies of the Department of Justice, 
the bill provides a total of $27.7 billion. Full funding of $7.9 
billion for the FBI, $2 billion for the DEA, and $1.1 billion for ATF.
  For the Bureau of Prisons, the bill provides $6.2 billion to address 
longstanding critical shortages in corrections' staffing and education, 
in addition to drug treatment. For State and local law enforcement 
activities, the bill provides a total of more than $3.4 billion, 
restoring, in large part, reductions proposed by the administration.
  For programs funded through the Office of Violence Against Women, the 
bill provides an increase of $11 million, including a $10 million 
increase for STOP Formula Grants, and a $1 million increase for Sexual 
Assault Victims Services.
  I want to be clear that while the funding table in the report for the 
Office of Violence Against Women may appear in the report to show a 
funding decrease, that is only because the bill moves a number of 
programs to the Office of Justice programs which actually administers 
those programs.
  So, let me repeat, the bill increases funding for the Office of 
Violence Against Women by $11 million.
  The bill provides a full funding of $298 million for the COPS hiring 
program. In other areas within the Justice Department, the bill 
provides $325 million--an increase of $41 million over the fiscal year 
2009 level--for the Adam Walsh Act.
  With respect to border security, the bill provides $1.5 billion, a 30 
percent increase over fiscal year 2009. These funds will be used to 
address firearms and narcotics trafficking between the United States 
and Mexico, an issue on which every Member of this body has concerns, 
and we're pleased to provide these increases.

[[Page H6887]]

                              {time}  1845

  For the Second Chance Act, the bill includes a total of $114 million 
to develop and implement evidence-based strategies and programs at the 
Federal and State levels to reduce recidivism and the future costs of 
incarceration. I want to particularly compliment the authorizing 
committee for the good job that they have done with the Second Chance 
Act and other legislation they are considering. We are looking forward 
and appreciate the opportunity to cooperate with them on the funding 
side.
  A significant initiative across the Department of Justice is 
increased investments in law enforcement and prosecution efforts in 
Indian Country, for which the bill provides approximately $155 million, 
and that is an increase of $65 million over fiscal 2009.
  For SCAAP, which the President proposed to eliminate, Mr. Chairman, 
the bill includes $300 million.
  With respect to the Department of Commerce, $4.6 billion is slated 
for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, an increase of 
$129 million above the request.
  The bill provides $7.4 million for Census, the same level as the 
budget request.
  For NASA, the bill provides a total of $18.2 billion, an increase of 
$420 million over last year's level. Investments have been made in 
Earth science to further the decadal surveys. The recommendation, 
however, acknowledges, and this is important for Members to consider 
and take note of, that the administration has established a blue ribbon 
panel, Mr. Chairman, led by Dr. Norm Augustine, to review the current 
vision for human spaceflight.
  Funds are provided in this bill to continue investments in human 
spaceflight at the level of last year. Reductions from the budget 
request should not be viewed by this body as any diminution of 
certainly my support or the committee's support in NASA's human 
spaceflight activities. Rather, it is a deferral. It is a deferral 
taken without prejudice. It is a pause. It is a timeout.
  Call it what you will, it is an opportunity for the President to 
establish his vision for human space exploration, looking at the 
Augustine report when it becomes available in August, and then for his 
administration to consider what their vision will be, and then, most 
importantly, certainly for our committee, Mr. Chairman, to come forward 
with a realistic future funding scheme for the human space exploration 
program.
  We hope it is a vision worthy of the program, and we look forward to 
realistic funding levels, which we have never had, or haven't had for 
many, many years, for human spaceflight.
  It is also important to note that the total funding contained in this 
bill for NASA is an increase of $421 million over the fiscal year 2009 
level, and, moreover, some $1 billion was provided in the Recovery Act 
for NASA activities.
  Lastly, the bill provides $440 million for the Legal Services 
Administration. Appropriations for Legal Services increased by almost 
$90 million over the last couple of years, with which we are very 
pleased. It is still underfunded compared to base years in the 
nineties. This is indicative of the rising need for legal support for 
the poor, particularly because of mortgage fraud and the home crisis.
  The bill continues the existing limitations, Mr. Chairman, on the use 
of these funds, except that it lifts the current restrictions on 
attorney's fees.
  Mr. Chairman, that is a brief summary of the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join our chairman, the 
gentleman from West Virginia, in beginning consideration of H.R. 2847, 
making appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for the Departments of 
Commerce, Justice, Science and related agencies. The bill provides 
funding for programs whose impact ranges from the safety of people in 
their homes and communities to the study and exploration of space.
  The bill before the House today addresses a number of national needs 
and requirements, and I think it is important for the Record to show 
that I believe, and I think any fair-minded person would, to say that 
the chairman has done a commendable job in balancing the many competing 
interests and has put together a solid bill in a fair and evenhanded 
way.
  At times I have felt the minority has not been treated very, very 
fair, and I will say with the gentleman, we have been treated very, 
very fair, and I think it is important to make sure everyone knows 
that. We have not been foreclosed from anything.
  I also want to thank the members of the subcommittee for their help 
and assistance, including the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. 
Lewis, and the Republican members of the subcommittee, Mr. Culberson, 
Mr. Aderholt and Mr. Bonner.
  I also want to thank the staff on both sides of the aisle who spent 
long hours in putting this bill and report together. The majority 
staff: John Blazey, Tracey LaTurner, Dixon Butler, Adrienne Simonson, 
Diana Simpson, Darek Newby and Scott Sammis. And the minority staff: 
Mike Ringler and John Martens. And on my staff, Tom Culligan, and on 
the chairman's staff, Sally Moorhead and Julie Aaronson.
  Overall, the bill, as I said, includes important increases to 
priority programs, including the need to address violent crime, 
particularly crime related to drug trafficking and gangs; and the need 
to boost our Nation's competitiveness through more investments in 
scientific research and improving science, math in education.
  However, I believe we could have met the most pressing needs by 
prioritizing within the lower allocation. This allocation given to the 
subcommittee is $64.8 billion, which is $6.8 billion or 11.7 percent 
above 2009. This allocation allows virtually every agency, account and 
program to grow, and I believe it is more than a sufficient amount to 
address the highest priority needs.
  The rate of increased spending in the bill corresponds with the 
majority's overall budget blueprint, which increases discretionary 
spending by $77 billion over the current fiscal year. Since the other 
party took control of Congress, nondefense, nonveterans affairs 
discretionary spending has increased by 85 percent.
  This rate of spending does not represent a step toward restoring 
fiscal balance. There was an article today I think in Reuters 
mentioning that our Nation, if we continue the current course, will 
lose our triple A bond rating, it is the earliest date I have ever 
seen, by 2010. It is 2009 now. That means next year. So how we deal 
with that is really a tough, but an important, issue.
  Some highlights: for the Department of Commerce, the bill includes 
$13.85 billion, including an increase of $4 billion to conduct the 2010 
Census.
  The chairman has included strong funding for trade enforcement, which 
I appreciate, particularly with regard to China and the full request 
for Commerce Department programs to enforce dual-use export controls 
and respond to cyber-espionage threats.
  For the Justice Department, the bill includes $27.5 billion, $672 
million above the request. The FBI's operating level is funded at the 
President's request, which is necessary in order to continue current 
staffing operation levels, which also fund the urgent increases in 
counterterrorism programs.
  Too often we fail to recognize the critical and often dangerous work 
that the FBI is doing at home and abroad in order to detect and prevent 
terrorist attacks. This is incredibly important work, and the bill 
strongly supports those efforts while also providing necessary funding 
for the FBI to fulfill its traditional roles and address emerging 
problems such as mortgage and financial fraud, child exploitation, and 
the spread of violent gangs.
  On the gang issue, this bill includes a new $35 million initiative to 
fund the FBI's Safe Streets Task Force and ATF Violent Crime Impact 
Teams. This will fund new task forces and new positions on existing 
task forces in the areas, which is pretty much the entire country, 
plagued by gang violence.
  The bill increases State and local law enforcement accounts by $197 
million. Despite this increased funding for SCAAP, the State Criminal 
Alien Assistance Program, the program is reduced to $300 million from 
the current level of $400 million, and the chairman,

[[Page H6888]]

appropriately so I think, has drafted an amendment to increase SCAAP 
that I hope will pass with bipartisan support.
  In the area of science, the bill includes important initiatives in 
science competitiveness. Our country is falling behind. We have about 
95,000 engineers working for the space program, and China has about 
200,000.
  The previous administration launched the American Competitiveness 
Initiative, which included a commitment to double the funding are for 
basic scientific research over 10 years and also to strengthen 
education and encourage entrepreneurship. I am pleased that the 
chairman has done this and also that the new administration embraced 
this goal.
  For the National Science Foundation, the bill provides $6.9 billion, 
a 6.9 percent increase above the current year for research that will 
set the groundwork for the development of new technologies and science 
education that will ensure we have a well-educated and skilled 
workforce to improve competitiveness.
  For NASA, the bill includes $18.2 billion. This includes the full 
request for aeronautics, the shuttle program and the International 
Space Station, as well as funding above the request for NASA science 
and education. However, the bill freezes funding at the current level 
for exploration activities pending the outcome of a blue ribbon panel 
review of future options.

  The result of this cut is a funding level that will not be sufficient 
to sustain the current development scheduled for the next generation of 
space exploration vehicles and would result in severe disruption to the 
Nation's human spaceflight program.
  I look forward to the recommendations, as the chairman does, of the 
review panel being led by Norm Augustine, and to working with the 
chairman and other Members to ensure that the final bill will include 
sufficient funds to continue the U.S. leadership role in human 
spaceflight.
  Finally, I want to acknowledge the important language that is 
included in the bill regarding the release and transfer of Guantanamo 
detainees. This bill does not prevent the closure of Guantanamo. It 
seeks only to ensure in the process of carrying out the executive order 
that national security, the security of our communities and the 
security of our men and women in uniform overseas are the highest 
priority.
  The bill prohibits the release of any detainees into the United 
States. It also prohibits transfer to the U.S. for prosecution as well 
as transfers or release to other countries unless and until the 
administration presents a comprehensive report to the Congress on the 
proposed disposition of each individual. This report will detail 
security risks and measures to mitigate those risks and will include a 
certification that affected State governments have been notified in 
advance.
  Regarding transfers to other countries, the report must address the 
risk of recidivism. Some are going to Saudi Arabia and Yemen. Saudi 
Arabia has funded many of these radical madrasas up on the Pakistan-
Afghan border, and Yemen has been the center of a lot of terrorist 
activities. The report must address the risks of recidivism and detail 
the terms of any financial agreements related to the acceptance of the 
individuals transferred.
  The language will ensure that detainees are not released into our 
communities, and it places important restrictions and conditions on 
future transfers and releases.
  It has become clear in the last few days that the administration is 
rushing to release and transfer as many of these detainees as possible 
before the will of Congress to place restrictions can be enacted.
  In closing, despite concerns about the overall levels of spending, 
the bill represents the chairman's best efforts to distribute the 
allocation he was given to the various competing requirements under the 
subcommittee's jurisdiction. I commend the chairman and I thank the 
chairman for his openness and his thoroughness to the minority.
  I would say that the chairman held a week of hearings on prison 
reform. We, unfortunately, have the largest per capita prison 
population in the world. They were the best hearings that I have seen 
held in this Congress.
  Based on that, and I want to commend Mr. Mollohan, based on that, the 
Council of Governments and the Pew Foundation will be putting on a 
major conference this fall that I am sure the chairman will be very 
much involved in to establish the best practices, because you cannot 
just put a man or woman in prison and lock them up and throw away the 
key without any job training and things like that.
  There was not a lot of coverage. I don't think The New York Times 
ever covered the story. I don't think many of the major papers did. But 
it was the best hearings in the time that I have been here, and I want 
to thank the chairman for his efforts and concerns. I think a lot of 
positive things will come out of that.
  Lastly, I am pleased to operate under an open rule today, and look 
forward to the consideration of the many amendments that have been 
filed and will be urging my Members on this side at final passage to 
support the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Wolf) for those kind comments about our Bureau of Prisons hearings. I 
would like to comment he was the leader with regard to prison reform 
and has been for a great number of years. Based upon those hearings, he 
is the one that contacted the State Council of Governments to encourage 
them to follow up with their proceedings in the fall. Thank you, Mr. 
Wolf.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the 
full committee, Mr. Obey.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio for the 
purpose of colloquy.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, thank you for discussing with me a matter 
of great importance to the citizens of the United States.
  At the heart of our financial crisis is the housing crisis and at the 
heart of the housing crisis is mortgage fraud. The FBI redeployed 
financial special agents in the last decade and have yet to allow the 
White Collar Crime Division to replace those agents even when it warned 
the public and the administration in 2004 of the potential for mortgage 
fraud to become an epidemic. The vast majority of mortgage fraud in 
fact goes unreported, and thus the depth of mortgage fraud is vastly 
underestimated.
  In the savings and loan investigations of the late eighties and early 
nineties, approximately 500 FBI agents worked on cases. In February 
2009, however, Deputy Director of the FBI John Pistole testified before 
the Senate stating: ``However, today's financial crisis dwarfs the S&L 
crisis as financial institutions have reduced their assets by more than 
$1 trillion related to the current global financial crisis, compared to 
the estimated $160 million lost during the S&L crisis.''

                              {time}  1900

  According to the Department of Justice budget documents, there are 
currently 175 FBI agents working mortgage fraud and corporate mortgage 
fraud. That is laughable, given the vast amount of taxpayer dollars 
still at risk. We know that the FBI Mortgage Fraud Division needs to 
have an increase in special agents and an increase in the necessary 
support personnel such as forensic accountants.
  I look forward to working with the chairman as the bill moves forward 
to address this national need.
  Mr. OBEY. Let me thank the gentlelady for her comments on this issue 
and her steadfast advocacy on behalf of those who are suffering during 
this economic downturn.
  The bill we're considering today continues the process of rebuilding 
the FBI's mortgage fraud capability by adding 50 new agents and $25 
million to the white-collar crime program. We look forward to working 
with the gentlelady to monitor the FBI's progress on mortgage fraud 
investigations and to ensure as we move through the conference that the 
Bureau is appropriately resourced and staffed to address a problem of 
this magnitude.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on this 
issue and for your leadership on our full committee. I look forward to 
working with you to bolster the FBI's critical investigative 
capabilities and deliver justice to the American people through 
prosecution of those who have perpetrated systemic financial fraud and 
control fraud, which have brought our Republic to this dangerous 
juncture.

[[Page H6889]]

  Mr. WOLF. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Culberson).
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to sincerely thank Chairman 
Mollohan, Ranking Member Wolf for the bipartisan manner in which this 
bill was put together. Mr. Mollohan truly has, and Mr. Wolf, opened up 
this process to all members of the committee to participate. Majority 
and minority views are included, and it is, truly, the bill was put 
together in an open, bipartisan way, which I'm very grateful for.
  And I especially also want to thank Chairman Obey, Mr. Lewis, 
Chairman Mollohan and Mr. Wolf for the strong commitment that they have 
made to invest in the sciences, the National Science Foundation, the 
scientific work that's being done at NASA and NOAA. The scientific 
advancement that this Nation makes, and throughout our history, has 
been one of the most important factors in the advance of America 
throughout our history. And I'm very, very pleased at the investment 
the committee is making in scientific research.
  However, I do have some serious concerns about the bill's reduction 
in funding from the budget request for NASA's human spaceflight frame.
  Mr. Chairman, if I could engage in a colloquy with you, sir, to ask 
about the manned spaceflight funding and what the committee, what the 
country and NASA can expect as this bill moves through the legislative 
process.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to ask if you'd agree that the United States 
must maintain its world leadership in space exploration, and that, in 
order to lead the world, America must have a robust human spaceflight 
program; and also, that NASA's human spaceflight program must have a 
clearly defined mission, and that Congress and the Obama administration 
should fully fund that mission. And also, Mr. Chairman, that Congress 
and NASA should do everything possible to mitigate the 5-year gap 
between the retirement of the shuttle and the initial operating 
capability of the next generation of human spaceflight.
  And then finally, Mr. Chairman, that the Appropriations Committee, we 
will all work together in an absolutely bipartisan and open way to 
fully fund the mission of NASA's manned space program as defined by the 
Augustine Commission, the Obama administration and this Congress.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, let me thank my colleague, Congressman 
Culberson, who is a fine member of our subcommittee, and who brings 
particular expertise. As I often say, I aspire to know as much about 
the sciences as he does and he makes significant contributions to our 
committee. I thank him for his passion to our committee, and also to 
our Nation's space programs.
  I share the sentiments the gentleman just expressed. I should note 
that the bill before the House today does not cut human spaceflight 
programs in fiscal year 2010; rather, the bill level funds ongoing 
activities until such time as the Augustine Commission completes its 
review, and the Obama administration commits to the next generation of 
human spaceflight.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Chairman, I'm very confident that under the 
leadership of Chairman Mollohan and Ranking Member Wolf that these 
proposed reductions from the President's budget request will be 
reviewed once again after the Augustine report is completed in an 
announcement from the Obama administration on how to proceed in human 
spaceflight. We genuinely appreciate the chairman's commitment to fund 
that recommendation with, of course, the input of the authorizing 
committee and the Appropriations Committee, because for America to 
surrender the high ground of space exploration, Mr. Chairman, would be 
as dangerous today as it would have been for General Meade to surrender 
the high ground of Little Round Top and Cemetery Hill at the Battle of 
Gettysburg. If General Meade had surrendered the high ground, I don't 
think there's any doubt that the United States would have lost the 
Battle of Gettysburg. And just as certainly as America would be at the 
mercy of our enemies, in position to lose any future war, if America 
surrenders the high ground of outer space to other nations.
  Mr. OLSON. Will the gentleman yield to me for the purposes of 
continuing this colloquy?
  Mr. CULBERSON. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. OLSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to 
participate in this colloquy with you here today.
  This Nation has been the leader in human spaceflight for 50 years, 
and the decisions we make today will determine whether we will continue 
to lead in the next 50. And I'm worried that as other nations look at 
the stars, we're staring at our feet.
  The proposed cut in the exploration budget threatens our economic, 
military and technological standing, and would lead to a loss of up to 
4,000 jobs, extend up to 2 years the time needed to fully design and 
develop the Constellation system, and result in additional cost of up 
to $8 billion. Therefore, I have prepared an amendment to restore that 
funding.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your pledge to revisit the funding issues 
based on the outcome of the Augustine panel, and that if the panel 
agrees, we will work as a Congress to reassess appropriate funding 
levels. In light of that commitment, I will not offer my amendment, and 
look forward to working with you to meet the pressing needs of human 
spaceflight.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I appreciate the work of both my colleagues from Texas. 
I appreciate and agree with the sentiments that they've expressed here 
today. I just wish I could have expressed them as eloquently as my 
colleague and committee member, Mr. Culberson, particularly as he 
alludes to the Civil War. I can think of no comparison to match it. But 
the sentiment I agree with.
  Mr. WOLF. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Culberson is definitely the science 
man. I mean, he is the science guy. It's not debatable, and if we have 
an amendment, and he also is a Civil War guy too, but he is the science 
guy.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).
  Mr. CALVERT. I would point out, Mr. Chairman, those were Texans that 
were coming up on Little Round Top against Colonel Chamberlain that 
day, but I did want to point that out.
  But I want to appreciate the subcommittee chairman, my good friend, 
Alan Mollohan, for the hard work him and has staff have done while 
drafting this bill. It's not an easy job being the committee chairman, 
but I know you've done a great job to balance these many priorities.
  That being said, I just want to echo my comments, my colleague from 
Texas, John Culberson, in regards to the current level of funding for 
NASA. And hopefully we can, as you said, we'll work with you to make 
sure that the $700 million, which obviously would be devastating to 
NASA if that cut stayed in, to make sure that we get that money back in 
the 2010 Commerce, Justice spending as enacted.
  As you know, as has been pointed out, the challenges that we have 
with other countries that are making major investments in space--China, 
India, Japan, Pakistan, Russia. And certainly we don't live in a world 
today where we're the only ones involved in outer space.
  So I support the chairman and what he's trying to do with the 
Augustine panel to wait to find out what the report is. But I'm 
optimistic we'll work this out with our fellow NASA supporters in 
Congress to provide necessary funding and the rules and tools it needs 
to realize the agency's human space exploration under President Obama.
  And so I would again thank the chairman for your hard work on that.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I thank the gentleman for his comments, and look 
forward to working with him on this issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Carney).
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to enter into a colloquy with 
the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee of Justice-Science, Mr. 
Mollohan. And I want to thank the chairman for the increased funding in 
the bill to hire more corrections officers in our Federal prison 
system, which will allow the Bureau of Prisons to hire an additional 
1,000 corrections officers nationwide.
  And while I fully support such an increase, I believe we must do 
more,

[[Page H6890]]

given that the director of the Federal prison system has asked for an 
additional 3,000 correctional officers to effectively run our Nation's 
prison system.
  And by bringing this issue to the floor, I hope to raise the 
awareness of our colleagues in the House regarding staffing levels at 
the Federal correction facilities located not just in our districts but 
in our communities all across the country.
  The district that I represent, Pennsylvania's 10th, contains three of 
the 15 high-security penitentiaries operated by the BOP, in addition to 
one minimum- and one medium-security facility. Also I represent 
correction officers from communities working at two minimum- and two 
medium-security Federal penitentiaries in neighboring districts.
  Additionally, we have one of the federal penitentiaries in my 
district, USP Lewisburg, that is in the process of being converted to a 
``special management unit,'' the only one of its kind in the entire 
system. Lewisburg will house inmates from other penitentiaries who 
prove too troublesome to manage, but who do not qualify for the ADMAX 
facility at USP Florence in Colorado.
  For various reasons, funding for our Nation's corrections officers 
has failed to keep pace with increased prison populations and 
increasingly dangerous prisoners over the last several years.
  Mr. Chairman, I understand that you are making every effort to 
reverse the trend of underfunding the BOP and to assure that 
communities hosting Federal corrections sites, that they are safe, and 
the corrections staff working within the walls will be able to work 
together as this bill moves forward to ensure that the Bureau has the 
funding it needs to catch up with the staffing needs.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I thank the gentleman. I appreciate his rising on this 
important issue, and I appreciate his leadership in supporting 
increased funding for the Bureau of Prisons.
  BOP funding has simply not kept pace, Mr. Chairman, with the rising 
prison population and the aging BOP infrastructure. The Bureau of 
Prisons prisoner population is currently 37 percent above the rated 
capacity for BOP facilities, and the prisoner-to-staff ratio is an 
appalling 4.9-1. We must begin to turn that around, and this bill takes 
a big step in that direction. This committee has had this concern for a 
number of years and has been working diligently to increase this 
funding.
  The bill provides an increase of $481.5 million above the fiscal year 
2009 level for the Bureau of Prisons salaries and expenses, which is 
$97.4 million above the administration's request. We added that $97.4 
million to help restore the BOP's base budget, which has been 
progressively hollowed out in recent years by inadequate budget 
requests. These additional funds will enable the Bureau of Prisons to 
hire additional correctional officers and activate two newly 
constructed prisons.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield another 30 seconds to the gentleman.
  Mr. CARNEY. Mr. Chairman, I understand that you are making every 
effort to reverse the trend of BOP funding to ensure that communities 
hosting correction sites are safe, as are the corrections staff working 
within the facility walls. I hope that we will be able to work together 
as the bill moves forward, to ensure that the Bureau has the funding it 
needs to catch up with staffing needs.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Burton).
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I guess the biggest problem I have with this bill is 
that we've been talking about cutting spending and about controlling 
the budget. So far this year, in the Emergency Economic Stabilization 
Act, the TARP bill, we've spent $700 billion. In the Children's Health 
Reauthorization Act, the State Children's Health Insurance, we've spent 
$73.3 billion. In the America Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the 
stimulus, we've spent $1.16 trillion. In the February '09 consolidated 
appropriation, the omnibus bill, we've spent $625 billion. Now, I 
understand the necessity of this bill, but it's 11.6 percent higher 
than, I think, the same bill last year.
  The thing that really bothers me is that, I think, you have 80-some 
pages of earmarks, of pork bill projects, whatever you want to call 
them, at a time when we're suffering severely economically and at a 
time when we're spending way, way more money than the American people 
can afford. We're spending so much money that they're actually, I 
think, running the printing presses over at Treasury day and night. I 
can't understand why we're allowing all of these earmarks, many of 
which have nothing to do with Commerce, Justice and Science.
  So I would just like to say that I think this is something that we 
ought to take a hard look at when we get into the amendments. I wish 
that we didn't have this kind of a tremendous amount of additional 
expenses, and I sure wish we didn't have all of these earmarks.
  If there is one thing the American people are very concerned about 
right now it is all of these additional projects, especially at a time 
when they're suffering at home. People can't afford their houses. They 
can't afford to take care of their kids' educational needs. There are 
so many problems the American people have. The unemployment rate is 
at--what?--9 percent nationally. Here we are with all of these 
earmarks, and we're spending all of this money that they don't have and 
that, certainly, the government doesn't have.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the Record a June 16, 2009, 
document on general funding levels.

     To: Congressman Dan Burton
     From: Legislative Staff
     Date: June 16, 2009
     Subject: Talking points


                        General Funding levels:

       The bill provides $6.7 billion (11.6 percent more than FY 
     2009 for programs funded under the CJS Appropriations bill.
       Agencies funded through the bill received approximately $16 
     billion in supplemental appropriations outside the normal FY 
     2009 appropriations process, the vast majority of which came 
     from the ``stimulus'' bill.
       H.R. 2847 would provide $13.85 billion for the Department 
     of Commerce, which is an increase of $4.57 billion, or 49 
     percent, over FY 2009. The majority of the increase for 
     Commerce is due to a $4.2 billion increase in spending for 
     the Census Bureau.
       The bill provides $27.74 billion for the Department of 
     Justice, DOJ, which is an increase of $1.65 billion, or 6.3 
     percent, above FY 2009.
       Funding for science agencies is $25.1 billion, an increase 
     of $868 million, or 3.5 percent, above FY 2009.
       Spending for other related agencies is $956 million, which 
     is $83 million, or 9.5 percent, above FY 2009.


                 Conservative Concerns About the bill:

       Earmarks: The Report accompanying H.R. 2847 contains $386 
     million in funding for approximately 1,100 earmarks, listed 
     on 80, non-searchable pages.
       Earmarks in the bill range from: $180,000 for ``Training 
     the Next Generation Weather Forecasters'' at San Jose State 
     University; $1 million for a forensics laboratory in South 
     Carolina; $100,000 for Tennis, Sports, Literacy and Education 
     Program in New York City
       Competitive Bidding Ban: The bill prohibits the Bureau of 
     Prisons from using any funds to enter into a public/private 
     contract under the OMB Circular A-76, which requires private 
     contractors to compete for Federal money to ensure that the 
     U.S. receives maximum value for tax dollars.
       Matching Funds Waived: The appropriation grants the 
     Attorney General, AG, authority to waive a legislatively 
     mandated requirement that Federal grants for prisoner reentry 
     programs under the Second Chance Act be matched by State or 
     local funds.

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Kosmas).
  Ms. KOSMAS. Mr. Chairman, I would now like to enter into a colloquy 
with Mr. Mollohan.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to enter into a colloquy 
with the gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. KOSMAS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify a point in the 
committee report related to the space shuttle program.
  It is my understanding that the committee's position relative to the 
retirement of the space shuttle is consistent with NASA's testimony and 
the administration's position that there is no hard date on shuttle 
retirement. This position that the space shuttle will fly until it 
completes its current manifest, even if it runs beyond 2010, has also 
been supported by this Congress, as demonstrated by the inclusion in 
this year's congressional budget resolution of shuttle funding in 
fiscal year 2011.

[[Page H6891]]

We also expect the administration to fund the fly-out of the shuttle 
when it submits its fiscal year 2011 budget request.
  I hope you can clarify whether this is the committee's position as 
well.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. The gentlewoman is correct. That is the committee's 
position.
  Ms. KOSMAS. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this consideration.
  Mr. Chairman, I also rise to express my concern with the level of 
funding for NASA contained in the bill.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield another 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Florida.
  Ms. KOSMAS. According to preliminary estimates, the funding included 
in the bill for exploration could cause additional delays of up to 2 
years and could increase the cost up to $8 billion. These levels will 
also mean a greater reliance on Russia, a loss of our highly skilled 
workforce, and it could create a situation that could be detrimental to 
over 1,500 businesses that supply NASA and commercialized spinoff 
technologies. This level would result in thousands of layoffs in 2010. 
This will only exacerbate the challenges related to retaining our 
uniquely skilled workforce, many of whom are already working on both 
shuttle and exploration.
  So we must recognize that the investments in NASA have large 
multiplier effects, contributing $100 billion to our economy last year 
and employing nearly 300,000 people in 41 States.
  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your consideration.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I thank the gentlewoman.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Hall), the ranking member on the Science and Technology Committee.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, at this time of economic turmoil and 
of growing international technological competitiveness, it seems to me 
that America should be funding those things that advance our 
capabilities and that increase our standing in the world.
  As ranking member of the House Science and Technology Committee, I've 
always felt that NASA has done more to advance America's technological 
leadership than any other Federal agency, and this bill presently 
reduces NASA's funding in human spaceflight at a very critical time.
  The House Appropriations' reduction of $670 million in exploration 
systems represents a reduction of 17 percent from the President's FY 
2010 budget request. With NASA on a path to retire the space shuttle 
after only eight more flights, America needs to rapidly develop the 
next generation of spacecraft. The $670 million reduction would have 
prevented NASA from completing the Constellation system before March 
2015. In fact, because this reduction would occur in the peak design 
year when staffing is at its highest, NASA estimates that the work 
stoppages, inefficiencies and loss of key skills and capabilities would 
delay the Constellation program by as much as 2 years from that time.
  Moreover, the cut in exploration funding would increase costs by as 
much as $8 billion to the program, and it would reduce the 
Constellation workforce by more than 20 percent in 2010, or by 
approximately 4,000 contractors, mostly from the existing workforce.
  During this gap in human spaceflight capability, America must buy 
seats from the Russians to get to the International Space Station and 
fulfill our obligations to our international partners.
  I am really encouraged that Chairman Mollohan, though, and Ranking 
Member Frank Wolf are working to mitigate this loss. I am grateful to 
them, and I thank them both for the colloquy.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Alabama (Mr. Griffith).
  Mr. GRIFFITH. Mr. Chairman, I rise to enter into a 2-minute colloquy 
with the chairman.
  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me.
  I rise from Alabama's 5th District, the birthplace of NASA and of the 
space program. I, too, am concerned, but I appreciate very much the 
hard work the chairman and Ranking Member Wolf have entered into in 
trying to preserve the NASA budget. However, the decrease in funding is 
of some concern to us.
  The Aries 1 and the Aries 5 will represent what the Saturn was to us 
50 years ago with spaceflight and in putting a man on the Moon. This is 
not just a matter of jobs; it's a matter of international security and 
of national pride. I believe, after the Augustine Commission is done, 
we'll find that the NASA program is underfunded and that the funding 
will return to a level that will put us on the Moon in 2020 and that 
will return us to manned spaceflight in 2015.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Let me just say that I appreciate my colleague's 
comments this afternoon.
  Mr. Chairman, let me first note that the bill before the House today 
does not actually cut human spaceflight programs in fiscal year 2010. 
Rather, the bill level funds ongoing activities until such time as the 
Augustine Commission completes its review and the Obama administration 
commits to the next generation of human spaceflight. In fact, the total 
in the bill before the House today provides an increase of over $420 
million over the fiscal year 2009-enacted level across all NASA 
activities and programs.
  We're talking only about the human spaceflight program here. I 
believe that the Augustine panel is well-positioned to make an informed 
review of planned U.S. human spaceflight activities and alternatives to 
ensure that the Nation is undertaking efforts that are safe, 
innovative, affordable, and sustainable in the years following the 
completion of space shuttle manifests and its retirement.
  When that panel provides its information, its informed judgment, to 
us and to our new President and when we have had an opportunity to 
embrace the Nation's next human spaceflight program and to budget 
accordingly, we look forward to moving forward.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. GRIFFITH. I appreciate those comments.
  Mr. Chairman, we will certainly work hand in hand with the committee.
  I will say one final thing, which is that the human spaceflight 
community--the scientists who are involved in that--is a culture, and 
that culture cannot be interrupted and put back together again as 
though it were a puzzle.
  So I appreciate so much your efforts, and I appreciate the wording in 
this bill. Thank you for allowing me to enter into a colloquy with you.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I thank the gentleman with those assurances, too.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Posey), who represents Cape Canaveral, who worked on the 
Apollo, who helped put the first man on the Moon, and who is a strong 
advocate for NASA and for the space program. He has advocated and has 
talked to me over and over about this.
  Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Congressman Wolf, for that kind introduction.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to take a brief moment and thank Chairman 
Mollohan and Ranking Member Wolf for their bipartisan commitment to 
fully fund America's manned space program.
  Of course, I want to thank Chairman Obey and Ranking Member Lewis for 
bringing this bill to the floor and for allowing this process to work 
like it is supposed to.
  The security of our great Nation and of the world will be enhanced 
because of their efforts to provide our country and the world with 
vehicles for our future Christopher Columbuses, Magellans and Marco 
Polos.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Arizona, Chairwoman Giffords.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. I rise for the purpose of a colloquy with the 
subcommittee chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned about the reductions from the 
request recommended for the NASA Constellation program in this 
appropriations bill. As you know, this bill provides the same level of 
funding as in the year 2009, and it's almost $600 million less than 
what the President requested for 2010.
  As the Chair of the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, I strongly 
believe that NASA should be given the funding needed to carry out one 
of the

[[Page H6892]]

most important missions, which is exploration. I am very concerned that 
the levels obtained in this bill will be viewed by the Augustine Human 
Spaceflight Review Panel as a lack of support for Constellation and for 
NASA's other human spaceflight programs, programs that have been 
strongly endorsed, as we've heard by the colloquies here on the floor, 
on a bipartisan basis in last year's NASA Authorization Act of 2008.
  So Chairman Mollohan, is it your view that the Augustine panel should 
not interpret the House's action today as any weakening of 
congressional support for the Nation's human spaceflight and 
exploration programs?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. That is absolutely correct.
  The funding deferral does not signify any weakening of the 
committee's support for human spaceflight and exploration. I would also 
direct the attention of my colleague to the bill's accompanying report 
that states this very fact.

                              {time}  1930

  And if I could find it here quickly, I would read it for her.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, let me continue, and when you find that--
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. And I did find it. At page 146 of that report, I would 
refer the gentlelady to read a pertinent part. ``Accordingly, after the 
work of the panel is complete''--that's the Augustine Panel--``the 
committee expects the administration will amend its fiscal year 2010 
budget request to fund fully the plan advocated by the panel, and that 
the administration's subsequent budget request shall similarly include 
resources that fund fully the Nation's Human Space Flight Program.'' 
That's in our report. And I am pleased to reaffirm that here tonight 
with the gentlelady with this colloquy and with the others that we've 
had colloquy.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  In addition, do you agree that it's imperative that the President--
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield the gentlelady 1 additional minute.
  Ms. GIFFORDS.--and Congress provide the appropriate resources that we 
can avoid cost increases and further delays in the initial operating 
capabilities of our Nation's next generation of human space flight 
architecture?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Yes, I do. And I stated as much at the subcommittee 
markup of this legislation. Again, I would turn my colleague's 
attention to the accompanying report where these sentiments are also 
expressed.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. And finally, do you agree with me that the Augustine 
Panel should not be bound by arbitrary OMB budgetary projections as it 
develops its best advice to the President and Congress on the future 
conduct of the Nation's Human Space Flight Program?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I believe that the Augustine Panel is well positioned 
to make an informed review of planned U.S. human space flight 
activities and alternatives to ensure that the Nation is undertaking 
efforts that are safe, innovative, affordable and sustainable in the 
years following the completion of the space station manifest and 
retirement. And when that panel provides its informed judgment to us 
and the President and we are able to evaluate it, our new President and 
our authorizers will have a chance to look at it and act on it, our new 
President--and we--will have an opportunity to move forward together on 
our Nation's future human space flight program and budget accordingly.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we've heard tonight, not 
only is manned spaceflight strongly bipartisan, but it truly represents 
the best that our civilization has ever achieved.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. The gentlelady, among these other colleagues, is a 
champion of the program. Thank you.
  The CHAIR. Both sides have 8\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Maryland (Ms. 
Edwards).
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. I rise to engage in a colloquy with you, Mr. 
Chairman, regarding the Commerce, Justice, Science and related agencies 
programs.
  Mr. Chairman, as a long-time advocate for prevention of violence 
against women, I know that Federal funding is really essential to 
ensuring that victims of violence, especially in rural or underserved 
areas, have access to life-saving programs and resources. There are 
several programs that assist victims of domestic violence in need of 
funding, including programs aimed at curtailing abuse in public and 
assisted housing, establishing privacy for victims, and providing 
outreach to underserved populations.
  According to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, poverty 
and lack of education contribute to the economic dependency that keeps 
many women dependent on their abusers for financial support. Especially 
in these challenging economic times, though, as you recognize, domestic 
violence doesn't discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, economic 
status, or party identification.
  In 2005, Mr. Chairman, there were 34 domestic violence-related 
homicides in your home State of West Virginia. And in my State of 
Maryland, in my congressional district, in fact, in just 1 year, from 
July 1, 2007 until June 30, 2008, there were 11 domestic violence-
related homicides just outside of the District of Columbia in Prince 
George's and Montgomery County, totaling 16 domestic violence homicides 
in my congressional district in that short time.
  Our communities need this increased funding in order to save lives, 
and financial support for the programs really is a matter of life and 
death. And so, Chairman Mollohan, I appreciate the funding increase 
already provided in the bill, and I urge you to maintain this funding 
and to possibly increase it because of the need.
  Ending domestic violence really requires, as you know, a collective 
commitment for law enforcement, prosecution, training, outreach, 
education, and of course shelters and programs as you have provided for 
in this legislation. And so I would appreciate increased funding for 
these programs as we work together in the future.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Let me first commend the gentlelady for her good work 
in this area in the short time she has been in the United States 
Congress and for her input into our subcommittee, which has certainly 
influenced our markup of the bill in this important area.
  I thank the gentlelady for her comments. And I appreciate her support 
and commitment to programs funded through the Office of Violence 
Against Women.
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I want to thank my friend from Virginia for his 
leadership on this issue and his attempts to promote fiscal 
responsibility and raise some significant concerns just in general 
about this piece of legislation.
  The fact of the matter is that the rule that was adopted by this 
House to consider this bill in fact waives rules that are supposed to 
keep us fiscally responsible. So it waives rules that say that you have 
to have appropriate information about earmarks, and it waives rules to 
say that the PAYGO rule, that things have to be paid for, that we're 
not going to drive the Nation further into debt and deficit with the 
adoption of this.
  Now, waiving a rule means that you don't follow it. And we don't 
follow it to such a huge degree in the area of earmarks that I have 
here the list of earmarks. And they go on, Mr. Chairman, for page after 
page after page after page in what I think is probably about six font. 
So it's pretty small. And there are thousands of them, literally 
thousands.
  The question becomes whether or not anybody in Washington is 
listening to the concerns of the American people. And their concern 
that I hear every weekend when I go home and every day when I talk to 
my constituents and folks from around this land is that they don't 
believe that Washington is being fiscally responsible. They see bailout 
after bailout, they see expenditure after expenditure, they see bill 
after bill of more money going out the door and not money coming in, 
more things being done to depress the economy than to improve the 
economy.

[[Page H6893]]

  And so, Mr. Chairman, it is with great concern that I believe we are 
launching into this appropriation season, having started the process by 
setting the precedent that thousands and thousands of earmarks are 
appropriate and that we are not going to worry about whether or not we 
pay for the bill itself.
  So I think that we all ought to listen to our constituents and take 
pause and think about the issues with which we're dealing here and 
attempt to be more responsible with the hard-earned taxpayer money.
  I thank my good friend from Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from 
Arizona (Mrs. Kirkpatrick).
  Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona. Mr. Chairman, before coming to Congress, 
I was a prosecutor in Coconino County, home to five Native American 
tribes. Many people do not realize that for many classes of serious 
crimes committed on tribal land, prosecution can only be initiated by 
the Federal Government.
  Today, I represent 11 federally recognized tribes in my congressional 
district. I hear frequently from these communities who have seen major 
crimes going unprosecuted because the Federal Government is not 
providing enough help. This is why I have advocated for more Federal 
support for tribal law enforcement. These areas have always been vastly 
underserved by the government, and it is time we begin closing the gap.
  Therefore, I am very happy to see that this bill directs $6 million 
to hire new assistant U.S. Attorneys who will be devoted to handling 
cases coming from tribal areas. This should provide dozens more 
prosecutors and will result in a huge increase in prosecuting major 
crimes in Native American communities all across the country.
  Increasing the number of prosecutions will also reduce the level of 
narcotics flowing through many Southwestern tribal lands, providing an 
important step in closing a jurisdictional loophole that cartels have 
been using to their advantage.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Connecticut (Mr. Murphy).
  Mr. MURPHY of Connecticut. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
  I rise in support of the bill, but to encourage the committee and 
this Congress moving forward to better address the issue of gaps in our 
missing persons database system. On August 24, a 31-year-old resident 
of my district, Billy Smolinsky, went missing. Sadly, foul play is 
suspected. And to this day, his parents, Janice and Bill, still don't 
know what happened to their son. What they found out, when they tried 
to go online to find databases that helped identify remains that had 
been found and missing adults, was that there is no central repository 
of information, and the databases that do exist don't communicate with 
each other. In fact, up until 2 years ago, there wasn't even a database 
that was open to the public, there were only databases that were 
available to private law enforcement.
  Today, we have the Name Us database, which is available to 
individuals and families who are looking to try and find this kind of 
information, and yet it doesn't have enough information. The private 
databases that are run by the FBI don't communicate with these public 
databases.
  And so I come to the floor this evening simply to encourage my 
colleagues in appropriations bills going forward to make sure that we 
look to appropriating funds to allow for this kind of transfer of 
information to make sure that families like the Smolinskys all across 
this country have access to the best and most accurate information 
possible to try to press their cases going forward.
  I understand that there are legitimate privacy concerns regarding 
what kind of information the FBI might share with this public database, 
but I think that we can solve those problems and create a much more 
comprehensive public database for families going forward. I look 
forward to that conversation in coming appropriations bills.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, would the Chair be kind enough to let 
both sides know how much time they have remaining, respectively?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from West Virginia has 3 minutes remaining. 
The gentleman from Virginia has 6 minutes remaining.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to congratulate Chairman 
Mollohan and his staff for their hard work on H.R. 2847.
  I feel it is necessary, however, to highlight what I feel is an 
egregious error on the part of the U.S. Census Bureau, the 
misrepresentation of data collected in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and 
transgender community.
  Last month, I, along with 51 of my colleagues, sent a letter to the 
Director of Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, expressing 
concern over the U.S. Census Bureau's intention to continue altering 
data of same-sex married couples in the reporting of the 2010 census.
  With same-sex marriage now legal in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Iowa, 
Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, it is crucial to accurately 
represent the collection of data for same-sex married couples. 
Currently, if same-sex married couples in these States list themselves 
as married, the U.S. Census Bureau will go back and manually alter the 
data.
  The U.S. Census Bureau was created to collect data and provide the 
American public with accurate reporting on the population, not to 
collect data and then alter it based on political decisions. I hope the 
Obama administration will reconsider this policy and direct the 
Department of Commerce to provide the American public with an accurate 
representation of LGBT families in the U.S. census.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from 
Texas (Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the distinguished chairman and I 
thank the ranking member for their collaboration on this appropriation. 
This is a very difficult challenge dealing with issues of commerce, 
science and justice.
  Mr. Chairman, I have listened to the debate going forward dealing 
with the President's mark in the NASA space exploration, which was $400 
million more than the House mark, and would only offer my support for 
the continuing statements that have been made on the floor of the 
House, hoping that we will have an opportunity to reimburse those 
dollars to be able to provide for space exploration, particularly as 
relates to the Constellation, the CEV vehicle, and to be able to 
achieve the goals that we need to achieve with respect to the 
international space station.

                                  1945

  I would hope that the Augustine report would not be impacted by this 
particular mark. And I know that there has been a lot of hard work. I 
obviously intended to offer an amendment. I will look forward to 
discussing this further with the chairman as we move forward into this 
section so that we'll have an opportunity to discuss possibly my 
amendment and the idea of working to lay a mark, if you will, for the 
idea that space exploration, the international space station, all are 
linked together, and it is valuable for this Nation that we continue to 
be on the cutting edge of science and provide the support we need for 
human space flight.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, in closing, as we look at this bill, I know 
there is going to be a series of amendments at different times, and I 
think a lot of the amendments that will be offered will be from Members 
who are very sincerely concerned about the economic crisis that our 
country faces. There was an article today in Reuters. Let me read it to 
the Members here. It says:
  ``New York Reuters: Technical analyst Robert Prechter on Monday said 
he sees the United States losing its top AAA credit rating by the end 
of 2010, as he stuck by a deeply bearish outlook on the U.S. economy 
and stock market.
  ``Prechter, known for predicting the 1987 stock market crash, joins a 
growing group of market heavyweights in forecasting the United States 
will lose its top credit rating as the government

[[Page H6894]]

issues trillions of dollars in debt to fund efforts to bail out the 
economy.
  ``Fears about the long-term vulnerability of the prized U.S. credit 
rating came to the fore after Standard & Poor's in May lowered its 
outlook on Britain, threatening the U.K.'s top AAA rating. That move 
raised fears that the United States could face a similar risk, with the 
hefty amounts of government debt issued in both countries to pay for 
financial rescues causing budget deficits to swell.''
  So as Members offer these, I would just say there are some things 
there that are important in the country. We have got to get control of 
spending. But in other areas, our country is facing a crisis--in the 
area of science. Last year China and India graduated 700,000 engineers, 
and we only graduated 70,000, and 40 percent of our engineers are 
foreign students who are returning to their country.
  And, lastly, in the space program, we have 95,000 engineers working 
on the space program. But China has 200,000. And unless we do some 
fairly dramatic things, our factories will close and we will lose the 
edge in science and engineering. So we need to gain control of the 
entitlement spending, and I hope to be able to offer an amendment to 
the Financial Services bill. I'm going to offer an amendment that sets 
up a bipartisan commission to put every spending program on the table, 
every spending program in the government on the table, and give that 
bipartisan commission an opportunity to then go around the country 
holding public hearings, but to send a proposal up to Congress and 
require the Congress to vote on it.
  So I understand the frustration of many of the Members when they see 
this Congress failing to address the fundamental issues of spending in 
the Congress. And we also have the trustee's report showing that the 
Social Security system is beginning to go bankrupt faster, the Medicare 
system is going to go bankrupt faster, and young people have no 
confidence and believe that the Social Security system is not sound.
  We have a moral obligation to deal with that, and I hope that 
Congress will.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time in 
general debate. Let me again reiterate my appreciation to the 
committee, subcommittee, and ranking member in marking up this bill. 
And we look to proceeding through amendments at this time.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chair, thank you, Chairman Mollohan and Ranking 
Member Wolf, for the opportunity to offer remarks on the fiscal year 
2010 Commerce, Justice and Science Appropriations bill. I appreciate 
your hard work and dedication bringing this important funding 
legislation to the floor.
  As Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education and as a member of the House Committee on Science and 
Technology, I work with my colleagues to support and strengthen several 
agencies of great importance to our nation's technological innovation 
capacity. The core of that capacity depends on basic scientific 
research, and a vigorous research base is crucial to our national 
economic security. Coupled with that research base is research in 
education supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF).
  I am pleased that this legislation has essentially supported the 
President's overall requested budget for the National Science 
Foundation, an agency which has great significance to our federal 
research endeavors. However, I do have some concerns about the science, 
technology, engineering and math (collectively, STEM) education funding 
provided for the NSF within this year's spending bill.
  In late April, the President announced ``. . . a renewed commitment 
to education in mathematics and science, since we know that the 
progress and prosperity of future generations will depend on what we do 
now to educate the next generation.'' I support this commitment, but am 
troubled that somehow the education directorate budget at the NSF is 
not keeping pace with the budgets of the research directorates. While 
the overall research budget of the NSF will receive a 9 percent 
increase in this year's funding bill, the education budget will only 
increase by 2 percent.
  Congress, economists, and scientists have consistently maintained 
that the NSF's research and educational missions must be treated as co-
equal and core missions of the Foundation. Enhancing our research 
competitiveness in scientific fields while neglecting the educational 
component of such research will cripple our ability to succeed as an 
innovative nation.
  I want to recognize that both the budgets for research and education 
at the National Science Foundation are increasing in this budget, and I 
greatly appreciate the work of the Committee in supporting both 
activities. I simply want to emphasize that both of these endeavors are 
equally critical to the competitiveness of our nation, and research and 
education should be treated as parallel--and equally worthy entities--
at the National Science Foundation.
  I look forward to working with you on the NSF research and education 
funding, and, again, thank you for your dedication to improving our 
nation's research enterprise.
  Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Chair, I would like to associate myself with the 
comments by Mr. Culberson and many others about NASA's Exploration 
budget and the Constellation programs. I believe it is very important 
to National Security and to many science related efforts for us to 
aggressively move forward with our own launch capability and 
exploration efforts.
  While I value international cooperation, it is very important that we 
not have to depend on other nations for access to space. The Ares and 
Orion programs have made progress, and we should accelerate them.
  I look forward to hearing the results of the Augustine Panel. It is 
important that Congress take decisive action with regard to funding 
Exploration in this Fiscal Year 2010 budget. I look forward to working 
with my friends and colleagues, Chairman Mollohan and Ranking Member 
Wolf, in the coming weeks.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chair, I thank the chair, and I'd like to thank the 
gentleman/gentlelady for yielding.
  The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has been conducting 
extensive oversight of the Cenusu Bureau and its preparations for the 
2010 census. We have identified many things that are working, along 
with many areas that need remedial action. However, it is critical that 
if these problems are to be fixed in time for the start of the census 
less than one year away, the census needs sufficient funding.
  This bill includes a cut of $206 million dollars to the Census Bureau 
at the worst possible time. I strongly oppose these cuts, and any 
amendments that would divert money from the census. The Census Bureau 
needs these funds in order to improve response rates in areas that have 
been undercounted for many years. To cut money now on preparation and 
outreach would do nothing but increase the costs to count 
nonrespondents next year.
  And let me just say, I've heard a lot from my colleagues and my 
constituents on this issue. My district in Brooklyn and other urban 
areas in general have suffered from undercounts over the last few 
decades, and we do not want to see this happen again next year. The 
Bureau has promised to address the problems with undercounting in urban 
communities and other areas, but we cannot expect them to fix their 
problems in 2010 if we cut their funding here today.
  This cut would be devastating to outreach and education efforts and 
very costly in the long run. The Bureau estimates that a one-percent 
decrease in the mail response rate will add between $80 and $90 million 
to the cost of the follow up operations.
  I urge my colleagues to support full funding for the Census Bureau 
and oppose all amendments that would take funds from this effort to 
accurately count all Americans.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  No amendment to the bill may be offered except those received for 
printing in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
purpose in a daily issue dated June 15, 2009, or earlier, and pro forma 
amendments for the purpose of debate. Each amendment may be offered 
only by the Member who submitted it to be printed, or his or her 
designee, and shall be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 2847

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,
       That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money 
     in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, 
     namely:

[[Page H6895]]

                                TITLE I

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                   International Trade Administration


                     OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION

       For necessary expenses for international trade activities 
     of the Department of Commerce provided for by law, and for 
     engaging in trade promotional activities abroad, including 
     expenses of grants and cooperative agreements for the purpose 
     of promoting exports of United States firms, without regard 
     to 44 U.S.C. 3702 and 3703; full medical coverage for 
     dependent members of immediate families of employees 
     stationed overseas and employees temporarily posted overseas; 
     travel and transportation of employees of the International 
     Trade Administration between two points abroad, without 
     regard to 49 U.S.C. 40118; employment of Americans and aliens 
     by contract for services; rental of space abroad for periods 
     not exceeding 10 years, and expenses of alteration, repair, 
     or improvement; purchase or construction of temporary 
     demountable exhibition structures for use abroad; payment of 
     tort claims, in the manner authorized in the first paragraph 
     of 28 U.S.C. 2672 when such claims arise in foreign 
     countries; not to exceed $327,000 for official representation 
     expenses abroad; purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
     official use abroad, not to exceed $45,000 per vehicle; 
     obtaining insurance on official motor vehicles; and rental of 
     tie lines, $444,504,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2011, of which $9,439,000 is to be derived from fees to 
     be retained and used by the International Trade 
     Administration, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302: Provided, 
     That not less than $7,000,000 shall be for the Office of 
     China Compliance, and not less than $4,400,000 shall be for 
     the China Countervailing Duty Group: Provided further, That 
     the provisions of the first sentence of section 105(f) and 
     all of section 108(c) of the Mutual Educational and Cultural 
     Exchange Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2455(f) and 2458(c)) shall 
     apply in carrying out these activities without regard to 
     section 5412 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 
     1988 (15 U.S.C. 4912); and that for the purpose of this Act, 
     contributions under the provisions of the Mutual Educational 
     and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 shall include payment for 
     assessments for services provided as part of these 
     activities: Provided further, That negotiations shall be 
     conducted within the World Trade Organization to recognize 
     the right of members to distribute monies collected from 
     antidumping and countervailing duties: Provided further, That 
     negotiations shall be conducted within the World Trade 
     Organization consistent with the negotiating objectives 
     contained in the Trade Act of 2002, Public Law 107-210: 
     Provided further, That within the amounts appropriated, 
     $3,715,000 shall be used for the projects, and in the 
     amounts, specified in the table titled ``Congressionally-
     designate items'' in the report of the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives to accompany 
     this Act.


                Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Mollohan

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Mollohan:
       Page 3, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $100,000)''.
       Page 23, lines 18 and 19, after each dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $21,132,000)''.
       Page 45, lines 1, 4, and 13, after each dollar amount, 
     insert ``(reduced by $78,768,000)''.
       Page 47, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $100,000,000)''.
       Page 48, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $100,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment. I'm 
offering this amendment on behalf of Mr. Honda, Mr. Calvert, Mr. 
Schiff, Mr. Lewis of California, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Culberson, Ms. Linda 
T. Sanchez of California, Mr. Dreier, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Gary G. Miller 
of California, Ms. Giffords, Mr. McCaul, Mrs. Kirkpatrick of Arizona, 
Mr. Connolly of Virginia, and Mr. Marshall.
  This amendment would provide an additional $100 million, Mr. 
Chairman, for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, restoring it 
to the fiscal year 2009 funding level of $400 million.
  Mr. Chairman, the current administration and the predecessor 
administrations have in turn each year proposed elimination of the 
SCAAP program. And since our allocation is $200 million below the 
administration's request, it is difficult to restore moneys such as to 
the SCAAP program to $300 million in the subcommittee mark. When the 
administration requests zero and then you have to fill that hole, that 
makes a tremendous strain on the other accounts in the bill.
  I opposed the SCAAP amendment during committee consideration of this 
bill largely because it would have unadvisedly used the Bureau of 
Census as an offset. We are in the final year, final months of 
preparing for a census that's just a year away, and this is not any 
time to take money away from the Census. We have overcome hurdles in 
the Census and challenges as a result of some mismanagement with regard 
to census preparation. We are on track now. And this is not the time, 
given this short period before we have to conduct the census, to take 
money away from the Census, so we opposed it.
  However, I am aware that there is considerable support, as reflected 
by the number of our colleagues who want to be cosponsors on this 
amendment here today. There is tremendous broad-based support in the 
body for the SCAAP program. It is supported by many Members; so I offer 
this amendment in recognition of that support.
  Mr. Honda is a member of the subcommittee and a cosponsor of this 
amendment, and he has been particularly persuasive about the need to 
restore SCAAP funding to the level that this amendment would bring it 
to.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support strongly the issue of 
SCAAP.
  I come from the State of California, where the financial situation is 
very grave, and help in this manner would be tremendous for the State 
of California and I suspect for the other States that have these kinds 
of problems too.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of Mr. Mollohan's 
amendment, of which I am a co-sponsor, to increase funds for the State 
Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). I'm pleased that we were 
able to work in a bipartisan manner to increase SCAAP by $100 million, 
from $300 million to $400 million. Representatives Lewis, Honda, 
Calvert, Schiff, Edwards, Culberson, Linda Sanchez, Mitchell, Gary 
Miller, Giffords, McCaul and Kirkpatrick all provided valuable input 
and support to make this happen.
  Securing our nation's borders is the responsibility of the federal 
government. Congress has consistently legislated that the federal 
government must either take criminal aliens into federal custody or 
reach an agreement to compensate state and local jurisdictions for 
their incarceration.
  The cost of jailing criminal illegal immigrants has placed an 
enormous cost on all of our states and local governments. My state of 
California, in particular, shoulders the greatest burden of illegal 
immigration, and has received over $2.5 billion in SCAAP funds since 
the inception of the program, representing 42 percent of nationwide 
SCAAP awards.
  Los Angeles County and San Bernardino County, which I represent, 
receive only a fraction of what they spend to jail criminal illegal 
immigrants. According to Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, 
incarcerating illegal aliens costs the County $100 million per year. 
And according to San Bernardino County Sheriff Rod Hoops, jailing 
illegal immigrants costs the County $24 million per year. Yet last 
year, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties only received $14 million 
and $2.3 million, respectively. In fact, since 2000, Los Angeles County 
has received $159 million in SCAAP funds and San Bernardino County has 
been awarded $6.7 million. In nine years, Los Angeles County was 
reimbursed an amount equal to what it spends on jailing criminal 
illegal immigrants in just a year and a half, while San Bernardino 
County received SCAAP funds equal to what it spends in less than half a 
year.
  While the underlying bill provides $300 million for SCAAP, this is 
still $100 million less than we provided last year. At a time when our 
state and local governments are feeling the financial crunch, they 
should not be forced to continue to shoulder what is a federal 
responsibility. This amendment will add $100 million to SCAAP, 
restoring the program to its 2009 level of $400 million.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of our amendment to 
block the proposed 25 percent cut to the State Criminal Alien 
Assistance Program, otherwise known as ``SCAAP''.
  SCAAP was created in 1994 to reimburse states and localities for the 
arrest, incarceration and transportation of undocumented immigrants who 
commit crimes in our communities.
  Immigration enforcement is supposed to be a federal responsibility, 
but as any Arizonan can tell you, the federal government has yet to 
meet them.

[[Page H6896]]

  When State and local governments are forced to step-in and do the 
federal government's job, it is only fair that they be reimbursed.
  Last year, the Arizona Department of Corrections received $12.8 
million from the federal government to house 5,600 criminal illegal 
immigrants in our state prisons. That was only 10 percent of the $124 
million Arizona spent to house illegal inmates that year.
  Currently, Arizona's state prisons hold 6,100 illegal immigrants, 
nearly 15 percent of the total inmate population.
  The Arizona Department of Corrections estimates that it will spend 
$128 million in 2009 to clothe, feed and provide medical care to 
illegal immigrant inmates.
  Instead of boosting funding to help pay the actual expense imposed on 
states like Arizona, however, the Fiscal Year 2010 Commerce Justice 
Science Appropriations bill cut SCAAP funding by 25 percent.
  This is just plain wrong.
  That is why I am proud today to join with my colleagues, from both 
sides of the aisle, to offer this amendment to restore full funding for 
SCAAP.
  If we are serious about immigration enforcement, we need to reimburse 
Arizona--and other states that bear brunt of our nation's broken 
immigration policy--for keeping criminal illegal immigrants behind 
bars.
  I want to thank Chairman Mollohan for his leadership on this issue, 
and his willingness to listen to so many of us from the southwest who 
know how critical this program is to our nation's immigration 
enforcement efforts. Mr. Chair.
  I urge all my colleagues to vote for this amendment.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Schock

  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Schock:
       Page 3, line 4, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.
       Page 7, line 5, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $500,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of amendment No. 8, 
which seeks to transfer $500,000 from the Census salary and expenses to 
the International Trade Administration.
  The intent of this amendment is to dedicate funding for the 
International Trade Administration to conduct a study on the economic 
impact, including the loss of U.S. jobs, due to the failure of this 
body to pass the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. My intent is to have 
the ITA submit this study to Congress no later than 60 days after the 
date of this enactment.
  For more than a year now, Congress has left an agreement sitting in 
our collective ``in box'' which will result in more good-paying 
manufacturing jobs for all Americans. And I, for one, want to know the 
price of this neglect.
  Now, I understand that not everybody in this body or this Chamber 
shares my view. I know there are those who believe that the Colombian 
Free Trade Agreement will, in essence, result in the loss of American 
jobs. And to these Members, I would say vote for my amendment. If you 
are right, my amendment will prove that and the study subsequently will 
prove that. Please have the confidence in your convictions that I have 
in mine and vote for this amendment, and we'll see which of the two 
sides is correct.
  I recently had the opportunity to travel to Colombia and Panama with 
a number of both Republican and Democrat colleagues. During this trip, 
we met with President Uribe of Colombia. And the President detailed 
with great specificity the human rights and labor strides that his 
country has made over the last decade. Every question that my 
colleagues raised to President Uribe, he had an excellent answer. Every 
charge these Members made, Mr. Uribe described how his reforms had 
addressed the issues. Colombia has done her part, and now we in our 
country need to do our part to ensure our top democratic ally in the 
region remains a good one.
  And while I found the President's answers remarkable, I was most 
impressed with the view of the Colombian people. The vast majority of 
the people in Colombia we met with support the free trade agreement, 
even though they already enjoy virtually duty-free access to the U.S. 
markets as a result of the Andean Trade Preferences Act. They support 
the trade agreement because it will mean not only a new relationship 
status with the United States, but they will also be able to buy even 
more American products, putting more dollars back in American pockets.
  After our experience in Colombia, it was the overwhelming belief of 
the Members on that trip, both Republicans and Democrats, that they 
could see firsthand the benefits of a free trade agreement, truly 
highlighting the bipartisan support in this body for the pending free 
trade agreement.

                              {time}  2000

  The facts for a trade agreement speak for themselves. This free trade 
agreement will help make American companies more competitive globally, 
increase their profitability, allow them to hire new American workers 
and help stimulate the economy. Currently we enjoy a $2.7 billion trade 
surplus, including a manufacturing surplus with nations with which we 
have a signed free trade agreement. But for more than a year, the 
majority has disallowed this body to add Colombia to this list. 
America's two-way trade with Colombia reached $18 billion in 2007, 
making Colombia our fourth largest trading partner in Latin America. 
Since America's market is already open duty free for imports from 
Colombia, the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement will give American 
businesses, farmers, ranchers and workers similar access to this 
important market. The independent nonpartisan International Trade 
Commission has estimated that the Colombia Free Trade Agreement would 
increase U.S. exports by at least $1 billion. Since Colombia signed the 
trade agreement in 2006, U.S. products have been charged more than $2 
billion in needless duties, money that could have been spent by 
companies near our country making the products and expanding 
infrastructure here in our country to hire more domestic workers.
  In 2008 the United States had a trade surplus of $35 billion with 
countries with FTAs that were signed under the Trade Promotion 
Authority, the same authority that the Colombia Free Trade Agreement 
was signed under. This surplus was up over 61 percent just in 2007. 
Finally, Colombia is a model country for what we need to do by 
providing an open hand from America to emerging democracies around the 
world. This country's bipartisan approach with Colombia, taken 10 years 
ago when they were on the verge of becoming a terrorist state, was a 
comprehensive diplomatic approach, one of open trade market policy and 
has brought them back toward a democracy. And the strongest way to 
promote democracy is with that same kind hand and the benefits it 
brings, not through an isolationist policy.
  Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention that on January 1, 
2010, Colombia will formally enter into free trade agreements with 
Europe and Canada. For these reasons and more, I urge passage of this 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, we have no objection to the amendment and 
would be willing to accept the amendment.
  Mr. WOLF. I move to strike the requisite number of words.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I rise in support of the amendment.
  As the gentleman says, Colombia is a strong ally and a partner in 
this hemisphere; and I support the Congress acting to implement U.S.-
Colombia Free Trade Agreement. The trade agreement that has been 
negotiated would bring important economic benefits to the U.S. and 
level the playing field between our countries. It would create jobs. 
The unemployment rate that just came out is 9.2 percent. Not to do this 
would border on being crazy. The gentleman's amendment would serve the 
ongoing debate by generating information about the economic impacts 
here in the U.S. of our failure to adopt the agreement. So I urge 
support of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I move to strike the last word.

[[Page H6897]]

  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise to commend my friend from 
Illinois for offering this amendment and just to point out a couple 
items as it relates to these issues. The Census is slated in this bill 
to receive $7.1 billion. So I think that the gentleman from Illinois 
has picked an appropriate, responsible amount out of that $7.1 billion 
to be used for a study that ought to be performed to demonstrate the 
importance of what ought not really be called the Colombia Free Trade 
Agreement. It ought to be called the Colombia Fair Trade Agreement.
  As the gentleman stated with great eloquence, the lack of enacting 
the Colombia FTA by this majority is actually harming American 
companies. That's right, Mr. Chairman. We're harming American jobs and 
American companies by not acting on something that both executive 
branches have already agreed to.
  So this is a wise amendment, an appropriate amendment, an appropriate 
area of study that ought to be done. I wonder if the chairman of the 
subcommittee would be willing to respond to a question.
  To my friend from West Virginia, I wonder, if this amendment passes, 
is my friend from West Virginia able to commit to doing all that he can 
to make certain that this amendment remains in the final work product 
as it comes through the conference process?
  I will yield to my friend from West Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. We're willing to accept the amendment. What happens in 
conference is in the future, and I wouldn't be able to make any 
commitments with regard to that in any way.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, that really 
is where the rub is, is that there appears to be no significant resolve 
on the part of the majority party to actually determine what the level 
of harm is to the American economy and American businesses without 
adoption of the Colombia Fair Trade Agreement.
  I appreciate my friend from West Virginia for agreeing to accept the 
amendment. But it is with little comfort because, as you heard, Mr. 
Chairman, there is little or no commitment to making certain that this 
stays in this bill as it moves through the process. As you know, Mr. 
Chairman, this is the first step in this appropriations process, and 
we're early in the amendment process. But it seems to me that this 
amendment is of significant import, and also significant knowledge 
would be gained from this study to give Members of this body 
appropriate information with which to be able to make decisions as they 
move forward and decide for themselves whether or not to push their 
leadership, the Speaker and the leadership on the Democrat side, to, in 
fact, adopt the Colombia Fair Trade Agreement.
  So I want to commend my friend from Illinois for the work that he's 
done and for the important amendment that he brings to the floor. I 
urge support of the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I have great respect for my colleague, Mr. 
Mollohan, and undoubtedly he is going to be one of the conferees. I 
would like to ask him a question.
  What I would like to know is, when you go to conference, you and I 
both know that there's a lot of give-and-take. And if you really feel 
strongly about an amendment, you fight for it. So I'd just like to ask 
you this question: Because the Colombia Free Trade Agreement is so 
important, will you use every bit of your fiber and being to fight for 
this in conference?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. As the gentleman understands--the gentleman has been to 
conference before on bills.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Sure.
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. And the gentleman understands that conferees come to 
the conference from many different directions and have many different 
attitudes. There are many different issues in the bill during 
conference. I will tell the gentleman that we take seriously our bill 
as it is fashioned, as we bring it to the floor, and as it is amended 
on the floor as we proceed to conference.
  Beyond that, the gentleman clearly understands that conferences are 
about process and that there's give-and-take in the Congress. All of 
the attitudes expressed in conference must be taken into consideration, 
and there is nothing about this amendment that precludes our not 
seriously supporting it in conference. But the gentleman is asking for 
something that the gentleman knows in the process cannot be guaranteed, 
and that is, I guarantee that we're going to do something in 
conference. I hope that's satisfactory. If it's not, it's the best I 
can do for the gentleman.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Let me just say that we've been fighting this 
issue for a long, long time. One of the biggest problems that we've had 
is drugs coming into the United States from Central and South America. 
And President Uribe of Colombia has been one of our best friends and 
allies down there. He has stabilized that country, and one of the 
things that he really needs is a Free Trade Agreement to help further 
stabilize his country. I think it's extremely important that Mr. 
Mollohan, or whoever else is on the conference committee, realize the 
gravity of this situation. And Mr. Mollohan well knows that when you go 
to conference, and you're sitting across the table from your Democrat 
counterparts, if you are willing to really hang tough on an amendment, 
many times you can get that accepted, especially when you start 
compromising on other issues that may be in the bill. So I asked the 
question of Mr. Mollohan, will you fight for this in conference, and he 
reluctantly skirted the issue just a little bit.
  So since this amendment has been accepted by Mr. Mollohan, it seems 
to me that it should be pretty well guaranteed that he is going to do 
everything he can to keep it in the bill when it goes to conference 
committee. And if that is not the case, then, you know, this might 
appear to be--I would never accuse my colleague of being insincere--but 
it might appear to be a facade. So if you accept this, Mr. Mollohan, I 
would just like to ask you one more time: Will you do everything you 
can to keep this in the bill?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. I thank the gentleman for his comments.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Will you answer the question? Will you do 
everything you can to keep it in the bill?
  Mr. MOLLOHAN. We will approach the conference, my colleague from 
Indiana, exactly the way I described to you. We will consider every 
issue that is in the bill as it comes out of the House of 
Representatives seriously as we approach conference. If it's accepted, 
it will be in the conference report. You have the ranking minority 
member. He is going to be a part of the conference. The other members 
of the committee are going to be a part of the conference, and we will 
treat this issue just as seriously as we treat all issues. We will 
support it in conference, and it will be a part of the process of the 
conference as it moves forward. I hope that is satisfactory to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for his answer. I will 
just end by saying, I really hope this stays in the bill. I can't think 
of anything that's more important as far as stabilizing Central and 
South America than free trade agreements. We've been fighting for a 
free trade agreement with Panama and Colombia for a long, long time; 
and if we're going to make sure that we slow down the illegal 
immigration that's coming from Central and South America, we've got to 
do things to stabilize that entire region, not only from a drug 
standpoint, but also from the illegal immigration standpoint. So I 
really hope that my colleague--and I'm sure Mr. Wolf will--I really 
hope my colleagues will do everything they can to make sure that this 
stays in the piece of legislation.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Schock).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                             Motion to Rise

  Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the motion to rise.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Point of order.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe the gentleman from Illinois was on his feet

[[Page H6898]]

prior to the gentleman asking that the Committee do rise.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from West Virginia was the Member who sought 
recognition, and he had a motion preferential to an amendment.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the Chair.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the motion to rise.
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 179, 
noes 124, not voting 136, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 350]

                               AYES--179

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cuellar
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Driehaus
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Griffith
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kildee
     Kilroy
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Marshall
     Massa
     McCarthy (NY)
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Nye
     Obey
     Ortiz
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sablan
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Shuler
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Spratt
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Welch
     Wilson (OH)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--124

     Akin
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Boehner
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dreier
     Ehlers
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Graves
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Lummis
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Murphy, Tim
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Platts
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Rehberg
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Wu

                            NOT VOTING--136

     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Baird
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilirakis
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Cao
     Carney
     Christensen
     Clay
     Conyers
     Costello
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (IL)
     DeGette
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Emerson
     Eshoo
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gordon (TN)
     Granger
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Hare
     Harman
     Hensarling
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinojosa
     Holden
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Maffei
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Markey (MA)
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McHugh
     Meeks (NY)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Olson
     Olver
     Pallone
     Paul
     Peterson
     Petri
     Pierluisi
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Radanovich
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Roskam
     Rothman (NJ)
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Sherman
     Simpson
     Sires
     Smith (NJ)
     Souder
     Space
     Speier
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tierney
     Velazquez
     Wamp
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Westmoreland
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                              {time}  2101

  Messrs. AKIN and PLATTS, Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, and 
Messrs. McKEON and TERRY changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Ms. BALDWIN, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Ms. 
CASTOR of Florida, and Messrs. LIPINSKI, DOGGETT and MINNICK changed 
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the motion to rise was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs. 
Tauscher) having assumed the chair, Mr. Altmire, Chair 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. 2847) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, and 
Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2010, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________