[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 71 (Wednesday, May 12, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H3347-H3355]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5116, AMERICA COMPETES 
                      REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 1344 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1344

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 5116) to invest in innovation through research 
     and development, to improve the competitiveness of the United 
     States, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill 
     shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived except those arising 
     under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Science and Technology. After 
     general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
     under the five-minute rule.
       Sec. 2. (a) It shall be in order to consider as an original 
     bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule 
     the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
     the Committee on Science and Technology now printed in the 
     bill modified by the amendment printed in part A of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. The committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     are waived except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. 
     (b) Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to 
     the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall 
     be in order except those printed in part B of the report of 
     the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution and 
     amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution. 
     (c) Each amendment printed in part B of the report of the 
     Committee on Rules may be considered only in the order 
     printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question. (d) All points of 
     order against amendments printed in part B of the report of 
     the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in 
     section 3 of this resolution are waived except those arising 
     under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI.
       Sec. 3.  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of 
     the Committee on Science and Technology or his designee to 
     offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments

[[Page H3348]]

     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules 
     accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. 
     Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be 
     considered as read, shall be debatable for 40 minutes equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Science and Technology or their 
     designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 
     be subject to a demand for division of the question. The 
     original proponent of an amendment included in such 
     amendments en bloc may insert a statement in the 
     Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of 
     the amendments en bloc.
       Sec. 4.  At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
     amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the 
     House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill 
     and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.
       Sec. 5.  The Chair may entertain a motion that the 
     Committee rise only if offered by the chair of the Committee 
     on Science and Technology or his designee. The Chair may not 
     entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the 
     bill (as described in clause 9 of rule XVIII).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to my friend from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. PERLMUTTER. I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 
legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on 
House Resolution 1344.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, House Resolution 1344 provides for consideration of 
H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Act. It is a structured rule, making in 
order 54 amendments. It also provides 1 hour of general debate, equally 
divided between the chairman and ranking member from the Committee on 
Science. It considers the amendment in the nature of a substitute to be 
considered as an original bill. The rule waives all points of order 
against consideration of the motion except clause 9 and 10 of rule XXI. 
Finally, the rule provides authority to the chairman of the Committee 
on Science or his designee to move amendments en bloc.
  Madam Speaker, our Nation's economy fell off a cliff in the fall of 
2008. By the end of the Bush administration, we were losing at least 
700,000 jobs a month. In the last month of the Bush administration, 
that number was up to 780,000 jobs in that month alone. Congress then, 
working in tandem with the Obama administration, passed various pieces 
of legislation to stabilize our economy in the short term and invest in 
various fields for the long-run growth of our country.
  Fifteen months since the passage of the Recovery Act, we are seeing 
its impact. We went from 780,000 jobs lost the last month of the Bush 
administration to 290,000 jobs created in April 2010, a pretty 
significant swing given the fact that the loss was so drastic and so 
quick in the fall of 2008 and the first month of 2009. But we are not 
out of the woods yet. We are turning the tide.
  This Congress recognizes no country on Earth can match the 
creativity, productivity, and hard work of the American entrepreneur. 
The America COMPETES Act builds upon this idea by investing in 
scientific research, industrial innovation, and hard science education. 
It gives our Nation's most creative scientists and engineers the 
resources they need to develop the breakthroughs which will change the 
world as we know it and make America even more competitive.
  The bill reauthorizes programs in the National Science Foundation, 
the National Institute for Standards and Technology, and the Department 
of Energy to capture their full potential. This empowers our 
universities, which are undergoing tremendous strain as they weather 
the recent financial collapse.
  In my own district, the Colorado School of Mines and the University 
of Colorado Health Science Center will have access to more funding to 
develop green energy, medical communications, and other technologies. 
The bill improves science, technology, engineering, and math education 
to ensure that our Nation's workforce has the training and know-how to 
maximize the investments that we make. It gives our innovators the 
chance to compete for more resources so they can research, develop, 
commercialize, and eventually transform our economy.
  As we speak, there are scientists, inventors, and engineers in our 
Nation who are devising the next groundbreaking advances. We cannot 
afford to let those ideas wither on the vine. So I urge the passage of 
the rule and the underlying bill, which will create jobs and solidify 
the foundation for the long-term growth and prosperity of the United 
States.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I would like to 
thank my friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter), for the 
time. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In order for the United States to compete in today's global 
marketplace and to spur long-term growth, we must invest in basic 
science research and development. In 2005, the National Academy of 
Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of 
Medicine, collectively known as the National Academies, published the 
report ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.'' The report concluded that 
the United States faces a serious challenge with regard to our future 
competitiveness and standard of living. That report led to the 
bipartisan enactment of the America COMPETES Act of 2007, which 
implemented the report's recommendations.
  Today we are set to consider H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES 
Reauthorization Act of 2010. The bill reauthorizes the America COMPETES 
Act for 5 years, increases authorization spending levels to $86 
billion, and creates new programs.
  I understand and I support the underlying principles of the America 
COMPETES Act, prioritizing and strengthening investments in basic 
research and development and STEM: science, technology, engineering, 
and mathematics education. But we need to have an economic strategy 
that encourages companies, businesses in the United States, to compete, 
to grow, and to hire new workers, a strategy that includes the 
streamlining of burdensome regulations, a strategy that reduces 
taxation, that brings our Federal spending under control, and controls 
the spiraling national debt.

                              {time}  1300

  So, Madam Speaker, as much as I would prefer to support the 
underlying legislation, I believe that at this time of severe budgetary 
constraints, the underlying legislation includes excessive spending 
levels.
  The bill has an overall authorization of nearly $86 billion, which 
represents approximately $20 billion in new funding above the fiscal 
base of this year. That is a significant increase when we're facing 
record budget deficits. And that is after the so-called stimulus bill 
injected 6 billion additional dollars into the agencies funded by this 
bill.
  The current national debt projections and the majority's insatiable 
appetite for spending are unsustainable. And if we continue on that 
trajectory, the America that we know, love, and admire will be severely 
threatened. Our excessive spending threatens the very foundation of our 
economy and our way of life. We could very well find ourselves in a 
position, soon, similar to today's Greece.
  As we saw last week when the House considered the legislation on 
credits for refurbishing homes by my friend from Vermont (Mr. Welch), 
Congress is beginning to realize the magnitude of the Nation's fiscal 
problem--though the congressional majority leadership has not yet 
realized it or simply does not care.
  I may have voted in favor of the underlying legislation if the 
majority, nevertheless, had allowed the House to consider and vote on 
amendments that would have reduced the spending levels on the bill.
  For example, my colleague Representative Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida 
came before the Rules Committee yesterday to request that the

[[Page H3349]]

committee allow the House to consider his amendment to cut the 
authorization of the bill from 5 years to 3 years. His amendment would 
have lowered the cost of the overall bill. It would also have given 
Congress the ability to come back in 3 years and determine if the 
legislation was achieving its intended purpose.
  Perhaps if that amendment had been allowed, a number of Members like 
myself who are concerned about the uncontrolled spending of this 
majority could have voted for the bill. Instead, the majority in the 
Rules Committee decided that they would block consideration of the 
Mario Diaz-Balart amendment and also the Sessions amendment, amendments 
that sought to reduce the spending in the bill. Not only did they block 
the Diaz-Balart and Sessions amendments, they blocked out almost three-
fourths of the Republican amendments submitted to the Rules Committee, 
while allowing nearly 90 percent of the Democrat amendments. So today 
we will consider four Republican amendments and 48 Democrat amendments. 
That's quite a contrast.
  It's especially glaring when you consider that we were told that it 
would not be this way. The distinguished Speaker promised the American 
people that her party would run the most open and bipartisan Congress 
in history; yet week after week the majority continues to block an open 
process. We have yet to consider even one open rule during this entire 
Congress--not even on the historically open appropriations process. It 
is quite sad.
  I reserve my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would like to respond to a couple of 
the things my friend from Florida said.
  First, I'd remind him that at the end of the Clinton administration 
there was a budget that was balanced. There was, in fact, a surplus 
going forward; but under the Bush administration with tax cuts for the 
wealthiest, the prosecution of two wars without paying for them, and a 
financial sector in total disarray at the end of the Bush 
administration, the Obama administration inherited a $1.3 trillion 
deficit.
  But in moving forward with the actions taken by this Congress to 
stabilize the financial system and put people back to work, there's 
been a swing now from the last month of the Bush administration, where 
almost 800,000 jobs were lost, to a gain last month of 260,000, well 
over a million-job swing towards putting this country back on track. 
That will assist with revenues as the economy gets better. That deals 
with budget deficits.
  My friend is right. We have to look at the spending that this country 
is engaging in, but we have got to put people back to work. This 
America COMPETES Act does that by building on our science foundation. 
We have, in this bill, endorsements and support from virtually every 
kind of company and association possible, from business associations 
like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of 
Manufacturers, TechNet, et cetera, to various societies, the American 
Association for the Advancement of Science, university associations as 
well, and a whole host of businesses, because they know how important 
this bill is towards the investment that we're going to make in the 
future for this country. But it's jobs today.
  With that, I would like to yield 2 minutes to my friend from Missouri 
(Mr. Carnahan).
  Mr. CARNAHAN. Madam Speaker, I can't think of a better time than now 
to invest in America's can-do spirit. I would like to thank our 
chairman, Bart Gordon, for his years of devotion working to ensure that 
America is prepared to compete globally.
  America has been at the forefront of every technological innovation 
of the last century, and most of our jobs since World War II have been 
created by new technology and innovation. I believe we can continue to 
lead the world in innovation and technology, and my constituency in St. 
Louis, Missouri, can play a major role in that effort.
  Earlier this morning, I spoke with Missourians closely watching our 
progress on this landmark innovation jobs bill, America COMPETES, 
including Washington University in St. Louis and the University of 
Missouri. Because of America COMPETES, these two great universities 
will be able to work locally with teachers to spark interest in math 
and science for future generations, as well as to continue research 
looking into the next breakthrough technologies.
  Today, I also heard from Chuck Gerding of Gerding Enterprises, a 
small specialty manufacturer from Dittmer, Missouri, who has been 
assisted by the Missouri Enterprise Program that helps small- and 
medium-sized manufacturers. America COMPETES would strengthen the 
Missouri Enterprise Program, helping manufacturers compete in the 
global economy and hire more workers.
  The section of this bill I am particularly proud of will strengthen 
regional economies through Energy Innovation Hubs to help advance the 
U.S. transition to a clean energy economy and to support the growth of 
new sectors of the economy and jobs that come with them. In order for 
the U.S. to remain competitive, we need to invest in the technologies 
now that will create jobs immediately and make our economy stronger for 
the long term.
  The America COMPETES Act will strengthen how America competes and 
empower American innovation.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I want to thank my 
friend, Mr. Perlmutter, for reminding us of the Clinton years.
  I was elected to Congress when President Clinton was elected 
President. Two years later, we, the Republicans, captured the majority 
here in the Congress, and I remember how we had to fight tooth and nail 
to balance the budget. President Clinton never submitted a budget with 
a deficit less than $200 billion a year. I remember ad infinitum his 
budgets at least had $200 billion of deficits. It used to be, Madam 
Speaker, that $200 billion was a lot of money for a deficit. And I 
remember how this Congress had to fight day in and day out, and we 
finally achieved, in very arduous negotiations with the executive, a 
balanced budget. So that's the record.
  I would like, at this point, to yield such time as he may consume to 
the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee from California 
(Mr. Dreier).
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
  I rise in strong opposition to this rule and in strong support of 
Muftiah McCartin. And I'd like to begin by outlining my opposition to 
the rule, and then I'm going to take some time to talk about my support 
of Muftiah McCartin.
  Madam Speaker, my friend from Miami is absolutely right when he 
focuses on the need and the importance for us to be fiscally 
responsible. My friend from Colorado has made the same argument: 
Everyone around here regularly decries wasteful Federal spending.
  Now, this bill is extraordinarily well-intentioned, and as I said in 
the Rules Committee yesterday, I've been a strong supporter of the STEM 
concept. Science, technology, engineering, and math are very high 
priorities. If we, as a nation, are going to remain competitive in this 
global economy, it is absolutely imperative that we do all that we can 
to focus on STEM education.
  The concern with this measure is the fact that it's $22 billion over 
the baseline, going up to $86 billion. I was asked in the Rules 
Committee hearing yesterday by the chairman of the Science Committee 
what level I believe to be appropriate as we focus on STEM education, 
and that area would be at least at that baseline level, which would 
take the $86 billion in funding and bring it down to what would be $64 
billion. That would be a more acceptable level. Why? Because, while we 
know how important this is, we also know that if we don't focus on our 
spending that has been going on for so many years under both political 
parties, we're not going to be able to compete globally at all.
  Now, there are other concerns about this measure. I have just 
obviously been talking about the amendment that the manager on this 
side's brother--he simply described him as his ``colleague.'' He also 
happens to be his brother, Mario Diaz-Balart, who very thoughtfully 
came before the Rules Committee, and that amendment was not made in 
order.
  Mr. Bilbray, sitting behind me, has an amendment focusing on the very 
important issue of ensuring that people who work in this country are 
here legally.

[[Page H3350]]

  And, of course, the very, very, very important issue that the ranking 
member of this committee, Ralph Hall, brought before the Rules 
Committee. By unanimous vote in the Committee on Science and 
Technology, they incorporated language to ensure that there would be a 
prioritization of those 59,700 disabled veterans who want to have an 
opportunity to participate in the STEM program at the undergraduate 
level and 8,700 who want to have the opportunity to participate at the 
postgraduate level. That was agreed on by the committee, but, 
unfortunately, when the measure got before the Rules Committee, it was 
stricken. As Mr. Hall has described to me, some very, very watered-down 
version which does undermine the ability of our Nation's disabled 
veterans to be able to take advantage of this program the way they 
should is, in fact, denied.
  And so the fact that these measures are not made in order, Madam 
Speaker, I am a strong opponent of this rule because I believe that we 
can do better. And as Mr. Diaz-Balart said, having an open amendment 
process--which we have not had in this entire Congress--should have 
been the model for this bill in light of the fact that it has, in the 
past, been reported out under suspension of the rules.
  Now, having spoken about my opposition to the rule itself, Madam 
Speaker, I'd like to speak briefly about my support for Muftiah 
McCartin.

                              {time}  1315

  Madam Speaker, in 1976, she was obviously a child, and this 
institution was probably violating child labor laws when Muftiah 
McCartin came to work as a clerk in the Parliamentarian's Office. That 
is 34 years ago. In that 34-year period of time, she has had an amazing 
career which has been, from my perspective, capped by her service as 
the majority staff director of the House Rules Committee.
  She was the first woman named as a parliamentarian back in 1991, and 
she has worked for both Republicans and Democrats on the House 
Appropriations Committee, and her work there was very important. As I 
said, the fact that she has come to the House Rules Committee is a very 
appropriate spot for her.
  When she began her work, she pursued both her undergraduate and law 
degrees when she began in the 1970s, and has been able to utilize those 
skills extraordinarily well.
  Madam Speaker, we are very sorry that she will be leaving us. In 
fact, unless there is a massive disruption in the operations of this 
institution through the week, this will be the last rule that will be 
considered on the House floor during her period of time. I do know that 
her husband, Terry, her four children, and her new grandchild will 
anxiously look forward to spending more time with her.
  The Rules Committee, as we all know, Madam Speaker, tends to be a 
rough and tumble place, and Muftiah has had an extraordinarily good and 
close working relationship with those of us in the minority. When I had 
the privilege of being chairman of the Rules Committee, we worked 
extraordinarily closely with her in her role in the Parliamentarian's 
Office. And I know that things may still be rough and tumble within her 
family; it will certainly be a great joy for all of her family members 
to have her back. And so, Madam Speaker, I would like to extend 
congratulations to Muftiah McCartin for her extraordinary 34 years of 
service to this institution. And I know that her family is the only 
thing that she loves more than this place, which we all respect and 
love so much.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from California for 
his remarks regarding Muftiah.
  I now yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern).
  Mr. McGOVERN. I want to thank my colleague from Colorado for yielding 
me the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule for the America 
COMPETES Act, and more importantly, I also rise in strong support and 
to pay tribute to the staff director of the Rules Committee, Muftiah 
McCartin, as she finishes up her last week here in the House of 
Representatives and prepares to move on to a new phase in her life.
  Madam Speaker, Muftiah is an amazing woman. She has worked in this 
body for 34 years, first in the Office of the Parliamentarian, then for 
the Appropriations Committee, and finally on the Rules Committee. She 
leaves as the top staffer on the Rules Committee, someone who not only 
made the trains run on time, but also someone who definitely worked 
through the dicey political and policy issues that the Rules Committee 
is required to work through.
  Muftiah will be missed here in the House, but I can honestly say this 
body is better because of her hard work over the past 34 years. Over 
that time she has shown dedication and passion for this institution. 
Whether it was advising the presiding officer as parliamentarian, or 
working for Congressman Obey and Chairwoman Slaughter, Muftiah excelled 
at her job and helped us do our jobs better. But what we will miss most 
is the way Muftiah brings everyone together. She unified the Rules 
professional and associate staff. She made sure we, as Members of 
Congress, were prepared and ready to do the business at hand. But she 
also worked as both a mentor to her staff and to the associate staff. I 
can honestly say that I and my staff do our jobs better today because 
of Muftiah and the leadership that she has provided over the past few 
years in the Rules Committee.
  And while she has spent the last three decades here in the House, she 
also has a life outside of this Chamber. She has a wonderful husband, 
Terry, four children, Marissa, Elaine, Sandra, and Luke. And she just 
became a grandmother for the first time, a young grandson named 
Thaddeus.
  Madam Speaker, I was a staffer before I was elected to Congress, 
although I have to say that I started working here a few years after 
Muftiah started her career on the Hill. But I understand the role the 
staff play here, and I know this institution would not be the great 
body it is without the dedicated staff that puts so much of their lives 
into what we all do here. Muftiah embodies that dedication, and we are 
going to miss her.
  Let me say, Madam Speaker, in conclusion, to Muftiah, I want to thank 
you for all the incredible work that you have done here. You will be 
missed, and we love you.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, we have great 
differences, great disagreements often here on the floor of this House. 
Rare is the occasion when there is no debate, when there are no 
differences.
  Muftiah McCartin enjoys the admiration of all Members on both sides 
of the aisle who have worked with her. She personifies the best of this 
institution. She personifies competence, professionalism, and courtesy. 
And as someone who has had the privilege of working with her, I thank 
her for her service and commend her for her professionalism, 
competence, and that courtesy.
  So the best to you, Muftiah, and your family as you move on to other 
endeavors. You are an example of the wonderful men and women who have 
through the years made possible what this Congress gets accomplished. 
And so I join all of my colleagues in wishing Muftiah the best.
  I yield 3 minutes to my distinguished friend and colleague from 
Georgia, Dr. Broun.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong 
opposition to this rule.
  I applaud the fact that 54 amendments were made in order, which is 
the most amendments that the Democratic leadership have allowed in a 
long time, maybe ever since they have been in control of this House of 
Representatives in the 110th Congress.
  I am pleased that one of my amendments to remove some new programs 
that are in this bill will be debated later on this afternoon. However, 
at a time when our deficits are projected to remain above $1 trillion 
for the foreseeable future, I can't understand why two of my other very 
important amendments dealing with fiscal responsibility were ruled out 
of order.
  My first amendment would have simply changed the authorization level 
to 3 years from 5 years, and would have frozen spending to this year's 
levels, and it would save over $45 billion of taxpayers' money. The 
2007 COMPETES bill was originally a 3-year authorization. In these 
tough economic

[[Page H3351]]

times, why are we expanding yet another Federal program?
  My second amendment would have streamlined the overall COMPETES 
program by removing all of the newly created programs. Again, in these 
tough economic times, we can't do everything that we want to do. So we 
need to prioritize our resources while ensuring basic research in 
science.
  Many of the new programs are duplicative of other existing programs. 
For example, the loan guarantees are similar to the Small Business 
Administration's loan guarantee program for which manufacturers are 
eligible. Also, the HUD program appears to be redundant with existing 
Department of Energy activities. These are only two examples of 
duplicative programs that are in this bill.
  Expanding the size and cost of this reauthorization while creating 
duplicative programs is not what the American people want and certainly 
not what they need. American families and American small businesses 
have been forced to make difficult spending decisions. Shouldn't the 
Federal Government do the same? We need to stop spending money that we 
do not have on new programs that further increase our ever-expanding 
debt.
  Madam Speaker, our children and grandchildren are dependent upon us 
being fiscally responsible. This rule and this bill is not fiscally 
responsible. I urge my colleagues to reject this rule so that sensible 
amendments, like the two that I have discussed and others that Mr. 
Diaz-Balart discussed, can be included in this important debate.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I say to my good friend, Congressman 
Broun, that he has forgotten that this bill satisfies the PAYGO rules 
which CBO has scored at zero, so that there is not an increase, a rule 
that my friends on the Republican side of the aisle eliminated, which 
helped drive up the debt of this country.
  And I would just say to my friend, the investments that are being 
made in science and technology and in the education of scientists and 
engineers and mathematicians is the kind of investment for the long-
term health of this country that has to be made right now.
  I yield to my friend from California (Ms. Matsui) 2 minutes.
  Ms. MATSUI. I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying 
legislation.
  Investing in research and STEM education will help our country take 
the lead in scientific, technological, and economic advancements. This 
bill will also assist my hometown of Sacramento, where we are 
positioned to become a leader in the clean technology sector. That is 
why I am pleased that Chairman Gordon has pledged to support two smart 
grid-related amendments that I plan to offer to the bill.
  My first amendment will ensure that new smart grid technologies are 
an important part of the Department of Energy's research and 
development. My second amendment will ensure that smart grid 
technologies are included in the list of research and development 
activities undertaken by the Department of Energy innovation hubs. Both 
of these amendments will be extremely valuable to Sacramento's 
continued leadership in the field of smart grid technologies.
  Now, Madam Speaker, I just want to take a moment to recognize the 
departing staff director of the Rules Committee. Muftiah McCartin, Muf, 
affectionately known, has steered the Rules Committee through a 
challenging period, and she has done so with skill and grace. We all 
know that the Rules Committee can sometimes be a very contentious 
place. I know I speak for my staff and for my colleagues when I say 
that Muftiah will be sorely missed on the Rules Committee. We all wish 
her the very best in her new position. And thank you for your very hard 
work, Muftiah, and your dedication. And enjoy the next chapter of your 
life.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my 
friend from California (Mr. Bilbray).
  Mr. BILBRAY. Madam Speaker, as a member of the committee of 
jurisdiction, I have been trying to work in a bipartisan effort with 
this bill. I want to support this bill even though it has an $85.6 
billion price tag. But sadly, the fact is that, just trying to do some 
of those little things that the American people want us to move 
forward, commonsense things, like making sure that the $85.6 billion, 
that no portion of that is going in to financing illegal behavior such 
as illegal employment, sadly, the Rules Committee has said we don't 
have time to bother with assuring the American people that their money 
is not going to be spent in the commission of a crime of illegal 
employment.
  It is bad enough, Madam Speaker, that we have a bill that does not 
specifically require anyone who gets Federal funds or Federal grant 
guarantees to do the thing that you and I do as Members of Congress, 
the Federal Government does, that every contractor does since President 
Obama has mandated; this bill doesn't require that the recipients of 
Federal funds under this program have to make sure they check the 
employment status of somebody before they start paying them with 
Federal funds. Common decency.
  But what is worse than that, Madam Speaker, is the Rules Committee 
has denied both sides of the aisle the ability to vote on this issue. 
The Rules Committee has denied us the ability, as Republicans and 
Democrats and Independents, to go on record with the American people 
and say, look, we want to make sure that your money is not spent for 
illegal activities such as illegal employment.
  I tried to work across the aisle on this issue. I have worked with 
Chairman Gordon on this issue. All we asked was the common decency to 
give Democrats and Republicans the ability to go on record and do a 
little thing that the American people have been demanding for much too 
long, and that is, when you spend money, even if it is more than we 
want, make sure that you are not financing the violation of Federal 
law. That is all I asked. But the Rules Committee couldn't find the 
decency to allow a bipartisan vote on something that is so commonsense, 
so common decency, as to make sure that we keep our promise to the 
American people, that we uphold the Constitution, and make sure that 
our Federal funds are not engaged in illegal activity.

                              {time}  1330

  Madam Speaker, sadly, that is where I am today. I like a lot of this 
bill. But if you ask me to go back to San Diego and face off my 
constituents--right, left, Republican, Democrat--how can I look at them 
with a straight face and say, I've done everything I can to make sure 
your money is spent appropriately and legally. Sadly, this rule does 
not require that little bit of common decency of making sure the 
constituency gets legal expenditure of their $85.6 billion. That's the 
price tag of not being bipartisan leadership.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from 
California, it is common sense. The Rules Committee understands that 
Federal funds can only be used for legal purposes. That must be in the 
statutes 550 times. So he just wants to have a little more redundancy 
in the law.
  With that, I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Colorado 
(Mr. Polis).
  Mr. POLIS. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5116, the America 
COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. I commend Chairman Gordon on his 
hard work and his leadership on this important legislation. This bill 
is the product of our Nation's understanding that economic prosperity 
and international competitiveness is the result of American innovation 
and forward thinking. I'd also like to address the comments made by my 
colleague from California, as well. As the gentleman from California is 
aware, there is in fact widespread violation of Federal laws that are 
out of touch with reality with regard to immigration. We don't know who 
is here, what they're doing, where they are going. The America COMPETES 
Act, of course, is not the proper legislative vehicle for addressing 
that, but I do encourage my colleague from California to join me and 
many others in sponsoring comprehensive immigration reform, which will 
ensure, going forward, no one works in this country illegally and that 
we have a way of tracking who is here and enforcing the rule of law 
across this Nation.

[[Page H3352]]

  I want to take this opportunity to thank Muftiah McCartin of our 
Rules Committee. She is our Rules Committee staff director--the only 
Rules Committee staff director that I have known in my time in Congress 
who, as you know, is leaving us. On many occasions, Muftiah has trekked 
to the fifth floor of Cannon, where my office is, and advised my staff 
and me on important issues and parliamentary procedures and asked us 
our questions and concerns and addressed them promptly. Of course, when 
I found out today in these remarks that she had been here 34 years, I 
began to think it was a different Muftiah than the one I know that is 
retiring. I find it hard to believe that our Muftiah McCartin has 
worked in this wonderful building for 34 years. Perhaps that time is 
calculated because she frequently works until midnight, or even until 3 
in the morning. I have borne witness to that. Perhaps for every year 
she works, it's counted as 2 years time in, because that's the only 
logical explanation that I was able to figure out for how she could 
have possibly worked in this body for 34 years and is moving on to 
other opportunities.
  Her dedication to this body, this institution, this committee, both 
in her current job and previous jobs, is something that I hope we all 
strive to emulate with our accomplishments on committee and the House 
floor, which are really a great testimony to her commitment of many 
years. As a freshman member of the Rules Committee, she's repeatedly 
assisted me and our colleagues on the sometimes Byzantine legislative 
processes and has worked tirelessly to ensure that our Members and 
districts have been able on walk away with success.
  Thank you, Muftiah, for your service. You will be sorely missed.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would ask how much time each side 
has remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has 13\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Florida has 8\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would yield 2 minutes to my friend 
from Florida (Mr. Hastings).
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend and 
colleague on the Rules Committee for yielding the time.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the 
underlying legislation. But I would also like to take a brief moment to 
bid a fond farewell to Muftiah McCartin, the staff director of the 
Committee on Rules. We've heard that she's done this for 34 years. I 
came in contact with her first when she was with the Office of the 
Parliamentarian. She was as diligent then and hardworking as she has 
been with us. Muftiah has been an asset to this body and it is better 
for her having served here as a staff member of the Rules Committee.
  I've personally, as you've heard my other colleagues say, relied on 
her more times than I can count. And I do need to say that I'm speaking 
for Fred, David, Alex, Lale, and the entire staff in my office. She 
combines a vast knowledge of congressional procedures with an 
unflappable patience, putting both Members and staff alike at ease when 
approached about complicated legislative matters, even during the most 
politically heated moments.
  More admirable than her remarkable career in the House, however, is 
her incredible devotion to her family. While spending seemingly 
countless hours at work, she's also managed to raise, with her husband 
Terry, four beautiful children--Marissa, Elaine, Sandra, and Luke--and 
is now a grandmother as well. I remember when she was at the 
Parliamentarian's Office when she was carrying one of those children. I 
didn't know how she was able to do it.
  After her years of service to the Rules Committee and to the House of 
Representatives, Muftiah is leaving us to embark on the next chapter of 
her professional career. You're going to be missed, Muf, but I--and I'm 
sure all of my colleagues--wish you much happiness and success in your 
future endeavors, and my great hope is that you will continue to 
flourish.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I continue to 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would like to now yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein).
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Colorado for his leadership on the America COMPETES Act. I rise in 
strong support of the rule and the America COMPETES Act itself. I 
believe it will play an integral role in creating jobs and turning our 
economy around. I also rise in support of an amendment which I 
introduced, which has been made in order under the rule, to instruct 
the director of the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership to 
evaluate challenges that are unique to small manufacturers and 
facilitate improved communication between the MEP centers so they can 
readily share with one another which solutions best address particular 
problems faced by small firms, which really are the bulk of the types 
of manufacturing businesses in my district in Florida.
  In my meetings with many of the manufacturers in Palm Beach and 
Broward Counties in Florida, as well as the South Florida Manufacturing 
Association, I've been told that while MEP services are helpful for 
some businesses, they often have greater expertise in developing 
business solutions for medium- to large-sized businesses. Small 
manufacturers, such as Uniweld, which is in Fort Lauderdale, a family-
owned business which has been run by a World War II veteran and his two 
sons for many years, make up a large sector of the manufacturing firms 
in Florida, and as a result, they are critical to our industrial and 
technological competitiveness. In these challenging times, small 
manufacturers in my home State have faced many obstacles, financing 
being one of them, but many of the support services by the MEPs can 
truly make a difference to our small manufacturers as well.
  While basic research investment is important to advancing our 
Nation's innovation infrastructure, we must build and sustain a strong 
manufacturing base in the United States which will bridge the gap 
between research and commercial development of new technologies. That's 
where these small manufacturing businesses and the MEPs together can 
accomplish that goal. Under my amendment, we will be able to provide 
increased assistance to reduce manufacturing costs and increase 
productivity, thereby allowing our small manufacturing base businesses 
to significantly improve their bottom line.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding the time, and urge a ``yes'' vote 
on this amendment and the underlying bill.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, I continue to 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would just reiterate what Mr. Klein 
from Florida was saying about the purpose and the need for this bill at 
this time in this legislation. The America COMPETES Act is about moving 
this country forward, making sure that for the next 20 years we 
continue to have a strong science and engineering and technological 
future for the country. The bill, as we said, provides all sorts of 
funding to the National Science Foundation, to NIST, to NOAA, and to 
the Department of Energy, so that we can do research in a whole variety 
of ways across this country through our universities and other kinds of 
facilities and institutions of higher learning.
  Now I guess I'd like to speak on behalf of Muftiah--or speak to 
Muftiah. Many people have presented a lot of accolades that I can't 
top. But what I can say is, as a new member to the Rules Committee, 
that we have had some very contentious, rough and tumble bills, to use 
a couple of the terms Mr. Dreier used, Ms. Matsui, but we can look to 
Muftiah--I can look to Muftiah--to give good advice and to bring a 
calming influence to the committee and certainly to me as we were going 
through the whole list of parliamentary procedures--what's in order, 
what's not in order, why is it in order. She has stood out as somebody 
who really knows the rules, understands the policy, and is willing to 
work with both sides of the aisle and with all the members certainly on 
the Democratic side of the Rules Committee to make sure we do the best 
job that we can do. I thought I brought a lot of experience from the 
practice of law, having served also in the legislature in Colorado. But 
the rules and the

[[Page H3353]]

approach that's taken in the Congress, there are many more layers and 
many more things that have to be understood.
  I would say to you, Muftiah, you are a heck of an adviser. You are a 
great teacher. I just wish you the best, as I know all the other 
members of the Rules Committee and the Members of the House just wish 
you the best in whatever you do, whether it's practicing law or raising 
your family or just enjoying life, because we put in a lot of hours. 
Thank you very much.
  With that, I would like to yield 1 minute to the Speaker of the 
House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Before 
I begin my remarks on the legislation before us today, I want to join 
my colleagues in saluting the wonderful work of Muftiah McCartin. She 
began her work on the Hill--it couldn't be 1976. I can't believe that. 
She has worked on the Appropriations Committee and is now leaving her 
tenure as staff director on the Rules Committee.
  We all know that she loves this institution. She has poured her heart 
and soul into her work. We were all so proud when she became the staff 
director of the Rules Committee. Her policy and technical expertise 
have served both sides of the aisle over many years. She is a mother of 
four children. It's hard to imagine she is now a grandmother. We have 
been blessed with her service over many, many years. She will be sorely 
missed.
  Muftiah, thank you very much for all that you have done. This is 
coming as news to me, by the way, so I'm quite taken aback by the fact 
that you're leaving us. But thank you for your service. I wish you well 
in the future. We have been very blessed by your service. 
Congratulations on where you're going next.
  Madam Speaker, 10 years ago, President Kennedy summed up America's 
commitment to innovation when he launched the ``man on the Moon 
initiative'' to send a man to the Moon and back--in those days, they 
said a man--but a man to the Moon and back safely in 10 years. At that 
time, he said, ``The vows of this Nation can be fulfilled only if we 
are first, and therefore, we intend to be first. Our leadership in 
science and industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations 
to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort.''

                              {time}  1345

  Over the past half century since then, Americans have lived up to 
these words. Science and technological innovation have formed the 
backbone of our progress as a people and our prosperity as a Nation. 
And today in passing this innovation bill, this COMPETES Act, we are 
reaffirming our leadership in science and in industry, and we are 
keeping America first.
  Few have done more for the cause of innovation in the Congress than 
Chairman Bart Gordon, and I'm sorry he is not on the floor yet--he will 
be momentarily to manage this bill--who was first in sounding the alarm 
and heeding the call of the report, ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm.'' That was a report presented by a great innovation leader, Norm 
Augustine, and the National Academy of Sciences. It provoked us to send 
a team of Members, legislators around the country.
  Congresswoman Anna Eshoo and Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren from the 
Silicon Valley invited Chairman George Miller, chairman of the 
Democratic Policy Committee and the Education and Labor Committee, to a 
meeting at Stanford University to launch a series of meetings in a 
bipartisan way to develop an innovation agenda.
  We met, of course, with academics. We met with workers. We met with 
venture capitalists to see where the private dollar would go because we 
believed that this had to be a market-oriented initiative to build the 
competitiveness of America. We met with every aspect of putting 
together an innovation agenda, and we met all across the country to do 
that. We had particularly strong presentations from members of the 
Asian American community who were quite impatient with the lack of 
progress that was happening in terms of public policy, and that 
accelerated the pace of our time table for this.
  So what came from that was the COMPETES Act that Chairman Bart Gordon 
was instrumental in bringing to the floor in 2007. We had strong 
bipartisan support in passing that legislation, I am pleased to say. 
And again, we are here today to reauthorize the COMPETES Act, to spur 
innovation, invest in cutting-edge research, modernize manufacturing, 
and increase opportunity. And I thank you for your remarks, Mr. 
Perlmutter, and your leadership on this subject as well.
  As a result, new industries will provide good jobs for our workers, 
markets for American products will expand, we will reassert our 
leadership throughout the world and give future generations a better 
chance to realize the American Dream. It's about jobs, jobs, jobs, 
jobs.
  Simply put, this legislation supports our efforts to keep America 
number one, following President Kennedy's lead to keep America first 
and following the call of President Obama at his inauguration for 
swift, bold action now to do just that. The COMPETES Act will keep our 
Nation on the path that we promised, to double the funding for the 
scientific research over 10 years, create jobs with innovation 
technology loan guarantees for small- and medium-sized manufacturers 
and enhanced manufacturing extension partnerships--these MEPs are a 
very valuable tool for job creation, promote regional innovation 
clusters--this is new--that strengthen regional economies and expand 
scientific collaboration, and invest in high-risk/high-reward research 
through ARPA-E--again, this is a major initiative of Mr. Gordon--
helping ensure American energy independence.
  Since we know that innovation begins in the classroom, I want to 
commend Mr. Miller for yielding to Chairman Gordon because we didn't 
want this bill held up by one jurisdiction or another of committee, and 
Mr. Gordon has carried that principle that innovation begins in the 
classroom, and we have those considerations in the bill. This bill will 
help raise up the next generation of entrepreneurs by improving 
science, math, technology and engineering education at all levels. It 
will also train young people to think in an entrepreneurial way and 
will secure a central role for women and minorities in these fields.
  As we go forward with this innovation--we had the industrial 
revolution, we had the technological revolution, and now we have this 
revolution--we want to do so in a way that brings everyone into the 
fullest participation in the new prosperity of America and will 
strengthen and diversify our workforce as, again, we create jobs, jobs, 
jobs, and jobs.
  In this Congress, in addition to jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, which is a 
four-letter word we use all the time, there are four words that 
describe our agenda. They are: science, science, science and science. 
Science to provide health care for all Americans. And in our health 
care bill that we passed and in the Recovery Act of last year, we have 
major investments in science and technology to make America healthier; 
science to keep America number one in innovation. In the new 
technologies to protect the environment and the rest, we have to be 
competitive. Science and technology will take us there; science to keep 
our air clean and our water clean for our children and the safety of 
the environment in which they live; and science to promote our national 
security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and to advance the 
technologies to keep us preeminent in terms of our country's defense.
  This bill comes down to good-paying jobs for Americans, strong 
American leadership in the global economy and long-term growth for 
America's workers and families. It does so in a way that doesn't just 
put people back to work as we are trying to address the need for more 
jobs. It puts them back to work in better jobs. It puts more people to 
work, some who have been unemployed no matter how well educated they 
are or how economically deprived their areas have been. Some of this is 
really ground floor, ground floor. We're bringing women, minorities, 
people from urban areas and rural areas, again, people with a wide 
range of educational backgrounds but with a prospect for great success.
  So with this, we are not just solidifying the disparities in our 
economy. We are opening up avenues for, again,

[[Page H3354]]

everyone to participate in the prosperity for our country.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I urge all of our colleagues to make a very 
strong bipartisan vote for jobs, for science, and to keep America 
number one by voting for the COMPETES Act.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I continue to reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise in strong 
support of the rule on the COMPETES Act, and I will speak later on the 
bill itself.
  But I rise to pay tribute to Muftiah McCartin. Muftiah is a good 
friend of mine, so I want you to take this as a totally subjective 
analysis. I don't pretend to be objective. I think Muftiah McCartin is 
one of the most able people with whom I have worked during the 30 years 
I have been here. Muftiah came here when she was just a child 35 years 
ago and has served this institution extraordinarily well during that 
period of time. She served the Parliamentarians that I have served with 
myself, Bill Brown and Charlie Johnson and John Sullivan, and she did 
so with extraordinary skill.
  Our Parliamentarian's Office, for those who have the opportunity to 
watch us, are the truest nonpartisan, bipartisan people that we have in 
this institution, who give both sides advice and counsel as to how to 
conform to the rules and how to conduct business in the most 
appropriate fashion. Muftiah McCartin was a giant in that service. She 
cares deeply about this institution and all its Members, not from a 
partisan sense but from an institutional sense. She has served the 
American people extraordinarily well, and what an example of success 
she is.
  She came here shortly after high school, working here, and went to 
night school to get her undergraduate degree and completed her law 
degree in night school. She showed the same tenacity that warranted the 
private sector wanting her to come and be with them. Her service to 
this institution cannot be calculated in any kind of numbers of years 
served. Her service to this institution is measured by the commitment 
she made to each and every one of us and to this institution.
  Perhaps Terry, her husband, and her four children--her three girls 
and Luke--will have more time now with Muftiah because she was with us 
around the clock sometimes. When I first came here, we didn't have a 
rule that said you have to end at 12 o'clock. When I first came here in 
the early eighties, as Mr. Rangel will recall and Muftiah I know will 
recall, we sometimes went until 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock or 5 o'clock in 
the morning. They went home quickly and then came right back here to 
open the session at 9 o'clock or 10 o'clock, and of course they had to 
be here an hour or so earlier than that.
  Muftiah, we cannot possibly--if I took an hour, which I could take 
with my 1 minute as majority leader--but if I took that hour or if I 
took multiple hours, I could not express the depths of our gratitude to 
you or the respect we have for the professionalism that you have 
demonstrated in the performance of your duties and the extraordinary 
affection we have for you as our friend, as our colleague. And we wish 
you the very, very best of success in the years ahead. God bless you, 
and thank you.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, 
Mr. Perlmutter, for his courtesy and for his management on the majority 
side of this rule.
  While reiterating that I am so pleased that Members on both sides of 
the aisle have joined to commend and wish the best to Muftiah McCartin, 
with regard to the legislation that we are bringing to the floor with 
this rule, I would say, Mr. Speaker, while not minimizing its 
importance because I think it's obviously dealing with a very important 
set of subjects that enjoy bipartisan support in this Congress, I would 
bring to the attention once again of all Members what we saw last week 
with legislation on--I believe it was a $6 billion tax credit to 
allow--I remember it was a credit for home refurbishings, brought to 
the floor by my good friend Mr. Welch. And I noticed at that time a--I 
think it was a change in attitude.
  I was impressed. I was certainly impacted by what I perceived as a 
change in the Congress on what normally I think would have faced little 
opposition. Certainly it would have been expected that that legislation 
would have faced little opposition. We saw--what I saw, what I 
perceived was a ground swell of concern on the spending. You know, 
refurbishing one's home and encouraging citizens to refurbish their 
homes to keep them energy efficient, you know, that's not something 
that in itself would have opposition. It was the spending that touched 
a nerve because of the moment we're living. And so with the legislation 
that we bring to the floor today that is being increased from the basic 
spending by about $20 billion, I certainly would not be surprised if we 
see a similar nerve being touched. That doesn't mean that the subject 
is not of great importance.

                              {time}  1400

  Science, education, keeping the U.S. leading edge, cutting edge in so 
many ways, that is obviously something that has enjoyed bipartisan 
support, and it should. But I think the majority is failing to sense 
that moment that the Nation at large and the Congress now is finally 
manifesting or reacting to. There is concern about the path we are on 
with regard to spending.
  Having said that, I again thank Mr. Perlmutter for his courtesy and 
management of this rule, as well as thanking all who have participated 
in this debate today.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for his courtesy in 
how he debates these bills, debates the rules; I just appreciate that. 
But he and I differ very much on the passage of this rule. This rule 
and this bill should be passed.
  In listening to some of my friends on the Republican side of the 
aisle who are wanting to draw back, wanting to draw down at a time when 
America must really move forward, must look to its long-term future and 
towards its prosperity and its ability to compete in the world, this is 
the rule and this is the bill that moves us forward, with its 
investments in science and technology and math and engineering. Those 
are very key things.
  It reminds me of those who would have asked Abraham Lincoln to stop 
building the dome and rebuilding this Capitol during the Civil War 
because of its costs and the country should look towards the Civil War 
and worry about that. Legitimate concerns, but President Lincoln said: 
No, this country is going to succeed. Its long-term prosperity is going 
to occur, and I am going to keep moving forward with the construction 
of the dome of the Capitol. I'm not going to back off.
  We in this country, Americans, look forward. We are a forward-looking 
people. We believe in our future, and there is no place like continuing 
to build our abilities in science, technology, math, and engineering. 
That is the place where we have to start putting our investments. It is 
jobs today, and it is long-term investment in the prosperity and 
success of this country.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on 
the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Capuano). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the 
yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on agreeing to House Resolution 1344 will be followed by 5-
minute votes on suspending the rules with regard to H.R. 5014 and House 
Concurrent Resolution 268.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 243, 
nays 177, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 259]

                               YEAS--243

     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher

[[Page H3355]]


     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Chu
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Giffords
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy (NY)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--177

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mitchell
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Barrett (SC)
     Carney
     Cole
     Davis (AL)
     Hoekstra
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Meeks (NY)
     Rangel
     Souder
     Wamp

                              {time}  1431

  Messrs. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California and PETRI changed their vote 
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________