[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 28, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H4868-H4908]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 COMMERCE, JUSTICE, SCIENCE, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2015


                             General Leave

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on the bill, H.R. 4660, and that I may 
include tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Byrne). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 585 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. 4660.
  The Chair appoints the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1914


                     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. 4660) making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and 
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, with Mrs. Wagner 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 Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.

                              {time}  1915

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I am pleased to begin the consideration of H.R. 4660, making 
appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for Commerce, Justice, Science, and 
Related Agencies. This bill has a far-reaching impact, from the safety 
of people in their homes and communities, to exploring the farthest 
reaches of space.
  The bill before the Committee today reflects a delicate balance of 
needs and requirements. We have drafted what I consider a responsible 
bill for FY 2015 spending levels for the departments and agencies under 
the subcommittee's jurisdiction. We have had to carefully prioritize 
the funding in the bill and make hard choices about how to spend scarce 
resources.
  I want to thank Chairman Rogers for supporting us with a very fair 
allocation and for helping us to move the bill forward.
  I want to thank the subcommittee ranking member, Mr. Fattah, who has 
been a valued partner and colleague. I appreciate his commitment and 
his understanding of the wide variety of programs in this bill, and I 
thank him for his help.
  I want to thank all of the members of the subcommittee for their help 
and assistance and also thank Mrs. Lowey, the ranking member of the 
full committee.
  I want to thank the majority staff for their hard work--subcommittee 
clerk Mike Ringler, Leslie Albright, Jeff Ashford, Diana Simpson, Colin 
Samples, and Taylor Kelly.
  I also appreciate the professionalism and cooperation of the minority 
staff. In particular, I want to thank Bob Bonner and Matt Smith for 
their help during all of the long hours spent putting this bill and 
report together.
  The bill totals $51.2 billion in discretionary spending, a reduction 
of $398 million, or approximately 1 percent below the current fiscal 
year. Since the beginning of the 112th Congress, the committee has cut 
the total amount of the CJS bill by $13.3 billion, or 20 percent, over 
five fiscal years.
  We have focused limited resources on the most critical areas--
fighting crime and terrorism, including a focus on preventing and 
investigating cyber attacks; and boosting U.S. competitiveness and job 
creation by investing in

[[Page H4869]]

exports, manufacturing, science, and space exploration.
  For the Department of Commerce, the bill includes $8.4 billion, $391 
million below the President's request.
  The bill provides funding above the request for the National Weather 
Service operations, weather research, and NOAA's two flagship weather 
satellite systems that will result in more timely and accurate warnings 
and forecasts.
  Severe weather events often result in the loss of life and economic 
ruin. We saw this again, recently, with devastating tornadoes in 
Arkansas, Mississippi, and elsewhere. These investments saved lives in 
Arkansas and Mississippi, and they will save lives wherever the next 
severe weather event strikes.
  The bill makes critical investments in manufacturing, export 
promotion, and job creation, including a Commerce Department task force 
to incentivize U.S. companies to bring their manufacturing and services 
activities back to the United States.
  The bill includes $856 million for NIST research and standards work 
that is critical to innovation and competitiveness, including $130 
million for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program to help 
advance job growth in the manufacturing sector.
  It also funds the Cybersecurity Center of Excellence at NIST to work 
with companies to bolster cybersecurity in the retail sector and 
encourages the development of a cyber breach database, especially in 
light of the attacks on Target and Neiman Marcus, which impacted 
millions of Americans.
  A primary area of focus in the bill this year is scientific research, 
innovation, and competitiveness. Investing in basic research is key to 
growth and job creation, and it is the foundation for the economic 
security of future generations, which enables us to stay ahead of 
China.
  The bill includes $7.4 billion for the National Science Foundation, 
an increase of $232 million, or 3.2 percent, above FY14 for basic 
research and science.
  Despite the constrained allocation, this is an all-time high 
watermark for NSF basic research funding that will keep America's 
economy strong by setting the groundwork for the development of new 
technologies--again, not to be competitive with, but to stay ahead of 
the People's Republic of China, a Communist government.
  With increased funding comes increased responsibility. I respect the 
NSF to follow through on the commitments it has made to the committee 
to increase accountability and transparency in its grant decision 
making. No funny grants is what I am trying to say. The new director 
must take every necessary step to ensure that research grants are 
scientifically meritorious, that funding allocations reflect national 
priorities and that the taxpayer investments in science are being used 
wisely.
  Developing a well-educated STEM workforce is also critical to 
American competitiveness. More than $1 billion is provided throughout 
the bill for these efforts, including $876 million for NSF programs to 
improve the quality of science education.
  For NASA, the bill includes $17.9 billion, including funding above 
the request to keep the development schedule and flight milestones for 
the Orion crew vehicle and the Space Launch System, which will provide 
the capability for the U.S. to return to the Moon and to go to Mars.
  It is important for the U.S. to end our reliance on Russia for crew 
access to the International Space Station as soon as possible, which is 
why Commercial Crew Development is funded at $785 million, with 
instructions to NASA to find the fastest and safest way to close this 
gap.
  The bill includes an increase of $100 million for aeronautics 
research, a long overdue boost to this part of NASA's research 
portfolio. Aerospace is a pillar of the American manufacturing sector 
and is one of our leading exports. This investment will boost our 
aviation competitiveness and improve airspace safety.

  The President's request for NASA science programs would have 
inhibited progress on planetary science goals, including missions to 
Mars and Europa. This bill includes $5.2 billion for NASA Science, 
which restores those cuts. The bill also includes important resources 
to address critical security gaps throughout NASA.
  As the recent espionage case further demonstrated, countries like 
China are engaged in an unprecedented effort to steal cutting-edge 
technology from U.S. labs and companies. This includes the 
groundbreaking space and aeronautics research done at NASA every day. 
We need to make sure we are doing everything possible to prevent the 
theft or unauthorized disclosure of this technology.
  Last year, at the committee's direction, a National Academy of Public 
Administration team, led by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, 
conducted an external review that found troubling vulnerabilities in 
NASA's security controls and practices.
  They found NASA's systems were compromised, and they found a 
troubling culture throughout the agency that failed to prioritize or to 
enforce security. Funding is included in this bill for NASA to protect 
its cutting-edge technology with improved IT security, export control 
training, additional counterintelligence staffing, and the operation of 
a new Foreign National Access Management program.
  The bill also calls for NASA to submit a followup report by the end 
of FY15 on NASA's progress in implementing the recommended 
improvements. The committee will continue to hold NASA accountable for 
the implementation of these security professions.
  For the Department of Justice, the bill includes $27.8 billion, $384 
million above the current level. The top mission priority of the 
Justice Department is defending national security from both internal 
and external threats.
  The bill includes $8.5 billion, an increase of $125 million, for the 
FBI--including funds to prevent and combat cyber intrusions, which 
Director Comey believes may overtake terrorism as the number one threat 
facing the Nation.
  Every major company in the United States has now been hit by the 
Chinese with cyber attacks. Many Members of Congress have had their 
computers stripped by the Chinese. The FBI continues to build a 
nationwide capability for cyber investigations.
  Last week, the Justice Department, for the first time, charged five 
officers of China's People's Liberation Army with economic cyber 
espionage, which is the first time foreign state actors have been so 
charged.
  I commend the administration, but in having served in the Army and in 
having been a private--a private never did anything a sergeant didn't 
tell him to do; the sergeant didn't do anything the lieutenant didn't 
tell him to do; the lieutenant didn't do anything that the major didn't 
tell him to do--right up to the Commander in Chief.
  So this is not just five low-level Chinese officers. This goes to the 
highest level of the Chinese Government. This case is an example of the 
great work the men and women of the FBI are doing with these 
investments in this bill over the last several years to confront cyber 
attacks, and we thank the FBI. These efforts are necessary to stop the 
plundering of American innovation, jobs, and trade securities.
  The FBI is also at the forefront of the effort to combat violent 
gangs. This bill increases the funding for Safe Streets task forces to 
check this growing problem and to better support State and local law 
enforcement efforts to deal with gang networks in their communities.
  The bill includes $8.5 million for the National Gang Intelligence 
Center, and it gives the center a new name and an additional mission to 
provide and coordinate intelligence on human trafficking networks 
nationwide and to disseminate that intelligence to law enforcement 
partnerships.
  The Bureau of Prisons is responsible for the custody and care of more 
than 215,000 Federal offenders in 119 institutions nationwide. The bill 
includes $7 billion to ensure the safe and secure operation of the 
Federal Prison System.
  The bill continues funding for the Chuck Colson Task Force on Federal 
Corrections. When he got out of prison, Chuck Colson dedicated his life 
to reforming the prisons, so we have named this prison reform 
commission after Chuck Colson, which will recommend reforms to increase 
public safety, improve offender accountability, reduce

[[Page H4870]]

recidivism, and control costs in the Federal Prison System.
  This effort will distill lessons learned from innovations at the 
State level--many States are farther ahead, Texas is farther ahead, and 
many others are farther ahead than the Federal Bureau of Prisons--and 
enable these reforms to take hold in the Federal system and in 
corrections systems nationwide.
  The bill directs the Justice Department's Office for Victims of Crime 
to provide the survivors and families of the victims of the November 
2009 terrorist attack at Fort Hood all possible and appropriate 
assistance. We are going to help the victims of Fort Hood and their 
families.
  We are going to require the office to report to Congress what, if 
any, role the classification of the attack as a workplace violence 
incident, rather than as a terrorist attack, played in determining what 
types of assistance would be provided.
  Awlaki was in touch with the major when he shot them. If you look at 
emails, this was a terrorist attack. It was not workplace violence.
  The bill includes a number of important provisions in support of 
Second Amendment rights, including a new provision prohibiting the 
implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, by executive order or 
otherwise.
  The bill includes $2.1 billion for Justice grant programs that 
support States, localities, and nonprofits. This is a reduction of $73 
million from the current level. In fact, since 2009, these programs 
have been reduced by 49 percent. I know we are going to get amendments 
here, complaining, but we had an allocation, and we had to work within 
that allocation.
  Despite the reduction, the bill prioritizes proven, high-priority 
programs, including Byrne Justice Assistance Grants, State Criminal 
Alien Assistance, Violence Against Women programs, human trafficking 
grants, and DNA backlog reduction.
  This is a significant bill for reducing violence against women and 
providing services to victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and 
stalking. The bill includes $425.5 million for these programs, more 
than the current level and more than the President's request.
  This bill triples the current level for human trafficking task forces 
and victim services. We are determined to make a difference and bring 
an end to the heinous crime that is happening not only in other 
countries, but right here in the United States.
  So we triple the current level--not just talk, not just rhetoric, 
words--we triple the amount, and every FBI office is involved, and 
every U.S. attorney has to have a task force to see if we can actually 
end this, perhaps, in the same way that William Wilberforce ended the 
slave trade.
  It also directs the Attorney General to hold a national conference on 
sex trafficking with every Governor, with every U.S. attorney, and 
Federal, State, and local law enforcement to elevate awareness and to 
share the very best practice.
  What is going on in Texas can be done in Virginia. What is going on 
in Pennsylvania can be done somewhere else. At this national 
conference, they will all be together with the idea of ending this.
  The unacceptable backlog of DNA tests at crime labs and law 
enforcement agencies demands action. This bill includes $125 million 
for existing DNA programs and an additional $36 million to address the 
backlog of sexual assault kits at law enforcement agencies nationwide.
  The bill includes funding for prescription drug monitoring grants, 
thanks to Chairman Rogers. It also includes a significant increase for 
the DEA's Tactical Diversion Squads to address our Nation's fastest 
growing drug problem--prescription drug abuse.
  Finally, after the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007, Congress passed a 
bill to improve the National Instant Background Check System, NICS, 
which is a critical tool for keeping firearms out of the hands of 
prohibited persons, but NICS is only as effective as is the State 
database on which it relies.

                              {time}  1930

  The bill, for the second straight year, includes funding above the 
request for grants to States to improve NICS records. This bill 
includes $58.8 million, an increase of 6 percent above the President's 
request, and $40 million above the FY13 level.
  The bill also includes $2 million for the National Center for Campus 
Public Safety, which the committee established with the support of the 
Virginia Tech Family Foundation. This center serves as a clearinghouse 
for the dissemination of information and best practices. There was no 
money requested for this, but we wanted to fund it.
  Additionally, the bill includes $75 million for the Comprehensive 
School Safety Initiative. The National Institute of Justice will study 
the role of mental health, as well as exposure to violent media--such 
as video games and violent movies--in school violence at the K-12 
level. The initiative also provides pilot grants to test effective 
mental health interventions at schools across the Nation.
  NSF is also active in this area. They are currently seeking proposals 
that will enable a better understanding of the factors, causes, and 
consequences of youth violence.
  That is a summary of the bill before you today.
  It provides for the increases and cuts that were necessary. It 
carries on the fight against terrorism, cyberattacks, crime, 
trafficking in persons, and violence against women, and provides 
important increases to boost scientific research, innovation, and 
competitiveness.
  It provides strong support for all the various NASA missions and 
continues the effort to improve weather forecasting accuracy.
  It represents our best take on matching needs with scarce resources. 
We have tried hard to produce the best bill we possibly could within 
the resources we had to work with.
  I urge all Members to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.

[[Page H4871]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] THMY28.001



[[Page H4872]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] THMY28.002



[[Page H4873]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] THMY28.003



[[Page H4874]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] THMY28.004



[[Page H4875]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] THMY28.005



[[Page H4876]]

  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise to offer to the House our support for the base bill. The 
chairman of this committee, whom I have had the honor to work with for 
a number of years, has laid out in some detail some of the 
appropriations in this bill. And as our Constitution requires, no 
dollar out of our Treasury shall be appropriated, except by act of 
Congress. So we are here in our constitutional roles.
  I want to thank Chairman Wolf for all of the courtesies extended to 
the minority. Obviously, if we were drafting a bill, we might have a 
different set of numbers in different areas, whether for legal services 
or COPS. But in the main, this is a bill that the chairman has extended 
himself in every effort that could be done to accommodate the minority. 
I want to thank him for his work with me over these many years, 
inasmuch as this will be the last bill that he will carry on the floor.
  This bill, I think, represents a set of priorities important to our 
Nation that he has laid a predicate for that will be carried on even by 
others who may assume the role that he sits in today.
  As for the Democrats, I want to say a number of things. One is that 
we are very pleased that in this bill the science accounts have been a 
focus of high priority. For NASA, over $17 billion. For the National 
Science Foundation, $7.4 billion. As has been indicated, it is the 
highest amount to date. The Office of Science and Technology is fully 
funded at the President's request.
  I think some of us know now that I consider the science activities in 
this bill to be very, very important. In particular, superior among 
equals in terms of science-related activities is neuroscience. Here, 
again, you will see an extraordinarily significant increase. It is one 
of the highest increases in any of the science accounts.
  The World Health Organization says well over a billion people are 
suffering from brain-related diseases and disorders. The National 
Institutes of Health says that 50 million Americans suffer from 
dementia and epilepsy and all manner of neurological-based diseases and 
disorders.
  In this bill, we continue to fund a neuroscience initiative that was 
crafted--and the chairman supported me in this effort--in our very 
first bill. We continue to lay important foundations for the effort to 
actually come to grips with some of these challenges. So I am very 
pleased about that.
  On the manufacturing initiatives, the manufacturing extension 
partnership is very important. Today, we lead the world in 
manufacturing. Our lead that was absolute is now relative. We see other 
countries who are moving aggressively in this field.
  The chairman led an initiative in terms of re-shoring these jobs. I 
have focused on trying to bring in more technology into our 
manufacturing plants. But the two of us share a concern that America 
has to be a country where we make things and where the manufacturing 
sector is secure in terms of being an important part of our economy's 
future.
  I want to also mention the focus here on youth mentoring. It is above 
the President's request. This includes groups such as the Boys & Girls 
Clubs of America, which is a congressionally chartered organization 
serving some 4 million young people; Big Brothers Big Sisters; and 
Girls, Inc.
  We could go through the list. These are national evidence-based 
organizations that are really making a difference in the lives of young 
people. And the committee is aware of the great work that these 
organizations are doing. So we have seen fit--and appropriately so--
with the chairman's support, to raise the appropriations in this regard 
even above the President's request.
  So there will be a number of amendments that we will debate. 
Democrats may have a different opinion on some of these items from our 
colleagues on the other team. There may even be circumstances where 
there will be intramural differences on some of these issues.
  At its base, I think the CJS bill we present today reflects the 
Nation's priorities. Obviously, if we had a larger allocation, we would 
invest even more in a variety of these priorities.
  I think some of the points that the chairman has pointed to in terms 
of human trafficking and aeronautics investments, on the manufacturing 
side, there are a number of areas where you can see clearly that the 
chairman has taken extraordinary care to make sure that a number of 
items get the appropriate revenues that are needed so that we can truly 
make a difference.
  So we are anxious to have the debate and to get to the amendments and 
have the House work its will.
  I want to thank the majority as we come here today. We have an open 
rule so the House will have an opportunity to work its will.
  Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), chairman of the full committee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding the 
time.
  Madam Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. I want to 
congratulate and thank Chairman Wolf and Mr. Fattah, the ranking 
member, especially, and all the members of the subcommittee and staff 
for bringing us a bill that I think we can be proud of and support 
entirely.
  This is the third of the 12 appropriations bills that make up our 
work--and this is the third that we have brought to the floor this 
year. I think this bill, like the other two that passed, deserves our 
support. We are moving at a very fast clip in the committee. That 
should allow us to complete our appropriations work for the 2015 fiscal 
year on time. I promise that my committee will do everything it can to 
make that a reality.
  As Chairman Wolf has said, the bill provides $51.2 billion for the 
Department of Justice, the Department of Commerce, NASA, the National 
Science Foundation, and related agencies. This very thorough piece of 
legislation, which was approved by the committee on a bipartisan basis, 
makes clear our priorities of keeping our Nation safe and growing our 
economy.
  To achieve these goals, the committee has targeted precious tax 
dollars toward those programs with proven results and economic benefit.
  For example, they increase the funding for the Department of Justice 
by $383 million over last year. Within that total, the bill targets FBI 
funding toward counterterrorism programs and programs that fight cyber 
intrusion, gangs, and human trafficking.
  We also work to fight drug trafficking by providing the DEA with $2.4 
billion. That includes $367 million to combat prescription drug abuse, 
which has quickly become our Nation's number one drug threat. 
Prescription drugs abuse is described by the Centers for Disease 
Control as a national epidemic.
  The funding in this bill will also help to protect communities across 
the country from the risks of devastating natural disasters. We 
rejected the President's proposed cuts to the National Weather Service 
and have made sure that adequate funding is provided for hurricane 
forecasting and tsunami warning grants. We have also made investments 
in the future of weather forecasting technology.
  In addition to the efforts in the bill to keep the Nation safe, we 
have also funded programs that will help our Nation prosper.
  Within the National Science Foundation and the Department of 
Commerce, the bill invests in programs that foster innovation and boost 
our economic competitiveness. This includes funding for programs that 
conduct research on manufacturing, cybersecurity, neuroscience, and 
STEM education, as well as $5 million in grant funding to encourage the 
repatriation of overseas jobs.
  But, as my committee will do with every bill we bring to the floor 
this year, we have ensured that this funding is responsible, is 
reasonable, and will make the most out of every single tax dollar 
spent. By scouring out waste and trimming unnecessary or lower-priority 
spending, we have produced a bill that comes in nearly $400 million 
below the current year.
  I would like to note that the committee did this in spite of the 
President's request, which had $800 million in false savings and 
offsets and underfunded a variety of critical programs. This bill 
rejects those gimmicks and makes sure that these programs have received 
funding levels that allow them to do their important work.

[[Page H4877]]

  To make sure this good work does not fall to the wayside, the 
committee included several oversight provisions that will ensure our 
tax dollars are being spent responsibly.
  In addition, the bill includes several provisions that will assure 
the life, liberty, and property of the American people, such as 
prohibiting the transfer or release of Guantanamo detainees into the 
U.S., protecting our Second Amendment rights, and preserving the 
sanctity of life.
  Madam Chairman, before I close, let me take a moment to again thank 
the chairman, Frank Wolf; Mr. Fattah; and members of the committee and 
staff for all their hard work on this bill. This is a tough bill to put 
together, and the allocation they had to work with was not the greatest 
in the world. But they have, I think, fit the needs of the country into 
this bill.
  I want to particularly draw attention to the chairman of this 
subcommittee and the author of this fine piece of legislation.
  Frank Wolf has served in this House the same number of days that I 
have. We came together in January 1981. Over that 34 years of service 
in this body, Chairman Frank Wolf has been a stalwart, passionate, 
compassionate legislator, and a dedicated, conscientious Member of 
Congress and appropriator. His expert work on this committee can be 
summed up in the legislation that we have before us today.
  I know that when he is gone, Frank Wolf's absence will be deeply felt 
by me, all of his colleagues, and I think by the country, because he 
has truly served America for all these years unselfishly and with hard 
work and with compassion.

                              {time}  1945

  So, Chairman Wolf, for all you have done for this bill, the 
Appropriations Committee, the House of Representatives, your native 
Virginia and the United States of America, we thank you, and we will 
miss you.
  With that, Madam Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield as much time as she may consume to 
the gentlewoman from the great State of New York (Mrs. Lowey), the 
ranking member for the Democratic team on Appropriations.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Chair, the Fiscal Year 2015 Commerce-Justice-
Science bill before us today provides good funding levels for important 
programs to support public safety, such as Byrne Justice Assistance 
Grants and Violence Against Women Act services.
  I thank Chairman Wolf for working with me to include report language 
directing the FBI to publish annual reports on the types of records 
submitted by each State and Federal agency to the National Instant 
Criminal Background Check System. It is only as useful as the 
information it includes, and these reports will help improve the 
system.
  Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah should be commended for fully 
funding the Office of Science and Technology Policy, including its 
working group on Neuroscience, as well as an increase of $21.5 million 
for National Science Foundation's BRAIN Initiative.
  Investments in research and development grow our economy and help to 
ensure that future scientific breakthroughs happen in American labs, 
not those overseas.
  In addition, I am extremely pleased that this bill will provide $125 
million for the DNA Initiative, as well as $36 million for a new 
community backlog reduction program to process sexual assault kits 
which, currently, are often untested for years--sometimes decades--when 
information contained in these kits could help put violent criminals 
behind bars.
  However, I continue to be baffled by efforts aimed at limiting the 
ability of the Federal Government to keep firearms out of the hands of 
dangerous individuals. An ill-advised and dangerous amendment was 
included during the markup to make it more difficult for the ATF in 
four Southwest border States to be aware of multiple purchases of 
powerful semiautomatic rifles.
  ATF already receives this information for handguns. It is 
unfathomable that we would prevent law enforcement from having this 
information for semiautomatic rifles, especially when this amendment 
would make it more difficult to prevent the smuggling of guns to 
Mexican drug cartels. This backwards policy will put lives at risk. We 
must not let it stand in the final bill.
  Other measures must also be addressed before final enactment. The 
COPS program would be cut by $118 million. The ``wet side'' of NOAA is 
also cut, including a 40 percent reduction to fisheries habitat 
conservation and restoration, and the complete elimination of the 
community-based restoration program.
  While the bill funds NOAA weather satellites and the National Weather 
Service, it includes a sizable cut of 24 percent to NOAA climate 
research.
  As the National Climate Assessment showed, storms and weather events 
are becoming more frequent, more severe and, as a result, more costly. 
We should be investing in research to combat the threat of climate 
change, not sticking our heads in the sand, pretending the science is 
wrong because combating such an obstacle would be too costly and 
inconvenient.
  While far from perfect in its current form, this is a reasonable bill 
that I can support. However, it is imperative that no poison pill 
policy riders be included during House consideration.
  As I close, I want to say to the chairman--Chairman Wolf--and Ranking 
Member Fattah, this really is an example of bipartisan cooperation. You 
worked so effectively in putting this bill together, and I want to 
congratulate you.
  Before I close, I also want to thank the retiring chairman for your 
amazing service to our country. It really has been a pleasure for me to 
work with you, and we know there is never a doubt, when Frank Wolf gets 
up to speak, he speaks with conviction and power and determination.
  You are so impressive. I do want to wish you and your family the very 
best. For me, it has really been a delight getting to know you. Thank 
you so much for your service.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Culberson).
  Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chairman, when I was first assigned to the 
Appropriations Committee, I asked specifically to serve on the 
Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Committee because of my 
passion for the sciences, for NASA, for law enforcement, but especially 
to serve alongside Frank Wolf.
  I have come to know Frank Wolf as a model public servant. He is 
someone who always does the right thing for the right reasons, and the 
country is generally going to miss this good man. I can't think of a 
single issue that we have dealt with in this bill that Frank hasn't 
been the first to see the problem approaching over the horizon--he has 
recognized from the beginning.
  When we took the majority several years ago, Chairman Wolf, Chairman 
Rogers, all of us in the majority, as fiscal conservatives, recognized 
the urgent need to prioritize our constituents' hard-earned tax dollars 
and target them on those areas that are the highest priority for our 
Nation.
  This bill, as Chairman Rogers said, is a true reflection of Frank 
Wolf's priorities, the fact that it is one that we are all able to work 
on together, without regard to party labels, because we found common 
ground.
  One of the great joys of serving on this committee is to find so many 
areas where we are able to work together and find areas of agreement 
when it comes to the sciences or law enforcement.
  The work that Chairman Wolf has done, for example, in protecting 
persecuted Christians and religious minorities around the world, this 
committee, all of us, Democrat and Republican alike, have been there to 
support him.
  Chairman Wolf was one of the first to spot the problem of cyber crime 
coming primarily out of Communist China. Frank was one of the very 
first to ring the firebell and warn us of the dangers of the People's 
Liberation Army and the cyber attacks on this Nation and on private 
industry. We have now recognized the scope of that problem, and it is 
because of Frank Wolf's leadership that we are in a position to fight 
it.

  Frank Wolf has led the way in strengthening the FBI and their war on 
terrorism and fighting human slavery

[[Page H4878]]

around the world in this bill and in previous bills to help local law 
enforcement agencies clean up the backlog of rape kits, preventing 
abuse in our prisons, preventing the release of Guantanamo terrorists 
into the United States, Frank Wolf has led the way.
  It was Chairman Wolf's bill to create the Select Committee on 
Benghazi. Anywhere he sees a problem and genuinely recognizes in his 
heart of hearts that that is something that is for the good of the 
Nation, he has been fearless about stepping forward and dealing with 
it.
  In the area of the sciences, we see Chairman Wolf's leadership in 
increasing funding for the National Science Foundation and NASA and 
NOAA.
  The country will miss you, Chairman Wolf, and I thank you for your 
service to the people of America and the people of Virginia.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), the ranking member on the Science 
Committee, the authorizing committee here in the House, and an 
extraordinary leader on science and innovation.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Chairman, funding for 
research innovation and STEM education is an investment in our future, 
perhaps the single most important investment we can make.
  Many of our competitors understand this and are striving to surpass 
the United States in innovation capacity and in the creation of a 
highly-skilled 21st century workforce.
  It used to be that the world's best and brightest flocked to our 
shores. Now, many of our own best and brightest are finding better 
opportunities in other countries, or we are chasing them from STEM 
careers altogether.
  In 2007 and, again, in 2010, the U.S. Congress passed the America 
COMPETES Act, recognizing the importance of increased investment in 
research, innovation, and STEM education, signed into law by Presidents 
Bush and Obama, respectively.
  Appropriations have not kept pace with authorizations, but not from 
the lack of effort and commitment by appropriations colleagues, CJS 
Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Wolf, Ranking Member Fattah, 
Chairman Rogers, and Ranking Member Lowey.
  I want to thank them, my colleagues, for their enduring support for 
science, even when it meant making very difficult cuts elsewhere.
  As this is Chairman Wolf's last CJS bill, I want to express my 
personal gratitude to him in particular for being a strong and 
unwavering champion for the National Science Foundation and for STEM 
education. I will miss him greatly. We all will.
  In sad and puzzling contrast, last week, my own committee debated 
COMPETES reauthorization legislation that would turn back the progress 
we have made in securing our Nation's future innovation capacity and 
voted out a bill this afternoon, a substitute today, without a single 
Democratic vote.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues, in the strongest possible terms, 
to add their own vote of confidence in our Nation's premier science 
agency, the National Science Foundation. It is the only agency to fund 
basic research across all fields of science and engineering, including, 
importantly, the social and behavioral sciences.
  The returns on our 65-year investment in the National Science 
Foundation are too many and too significant to list here. But perhaps 
NSF's most important investment is the investment it makes in human 
capital--the great scientists, innovators, and job creators of tomorrow 
and the workforce for tomorrow's high-skilled, high-paying jobs.
  Some of my colleagues' efforts to cut funding, to impose political 
review over peer-review, to establish a message of distrust of 
scientists, and to inhibit the normal advance of science, are sending a 
chilling message to smart young people across the nation to not bother 
entering or sticking with STEM studies or careers.
  A vote to retain the modest 2.9 percent increase to NSF in today's 
legislation is a vote to hold onto our nation's future innovators and 
job creators.
  I will make just a few brief remarks about other agencies within this 
appropriations bill.
  The National Institute of Standards and Technology is playing an 
increasingly critical role in cyber security, forensics, advanced 
manufacturing, and technology, and so many other topics critical to our 
nation's security and wellbeing. I just wish we could do more for NIST 
in this bill, but I understand this was one of the difficult decisions 
that the appropriations committee confronted.
  I also want to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah for 
their support for NASA. While I would like to see NASA funding at even 
higher levels, commensurate with the tasks that we are asking the 
agency to carry out, I am pleased that this bill proposes to fund NASA 
at an increase of about 1.4 percent over the Fiscal Year 2014 enacted 
appropriation.
  In particular, I support the bill's sustained funding levels for 
exploration and the Orion spacecraft and Space Launch System, which are 
being prepared for critical flight tests in 2017 and 2021, and which 
will enable our nation's return to human exploration of deep space.
  I also support the committee's emphasis on the need to enhance 
research on the International Space Station, a unique and perishable 
asset that is important for both basic and applied research and for 
enabling our goals in human exploration of outer space.
  I am also pleased that the committee has sustained robust funding for 
NASA's science programs and, in particular, restored funding to NASA's 
planetary science program, which has experienced cuts in recent years.
  In addition, I applaud the committee for providing a robust increase 
for NASA's aeronautics program, which provides critical R&D to benefit 
our nation's commercial aviation industry and helps sustain our 
nation's competitiveness in global aviation.
  Finally, I must express one significant concern, and that is the 
large cut to climate research activities at NOAA. The level proposed in 
this bill is 44 percent below the President's request and 23 percent 
below current spending.
  A number of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle continue to 
bury their heads in the sand as it relates to climate change, but 
cutting the research that will improve our understanding of and our 
ability to adapt to the impacts associated with climate change is not 
the answer. If anything, given the uncertainties that remain, we should 
be supporting increased funding not less. I hope the needed funding 
will be restored when this bill is conferenced with the Senate.
  In closing, I again want to thank Chairman Wolf, Ranking Member 
Fattah, and the rest of your Committee members for your efforts to 
protect and grow our nation's science and innovation capacity.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Chair, I appreciate all the great things that 
the chairman has done. I echo the remarks, the praise that was sung by 
our friends from Texas to the great job that Chairman Wolf has done in 
his career.
  I appreciate, for example, tonight that he is yielding me this time, 
knowing that he has strong disagreement about which I will be speaking.
  Tomorrow, I will be offering an amendment to the CJS appropriations 
bill, along with my colleagues Sam Farr, Don Young, Earl Blumenauer, 
Tom McClintock, Steve Cohen, Paul Broun, Jared Polis, Steve Stockman, 
Barbara Lee, Justin Amash, and Dina Titus.
  Very simply, our amendment would prohibit the Department of Justice 
from using funds in the bill from preventing States from implementing 
their State medical marijuana laws.
  Importantly, this amendment gives us an opportunity to show our 
support and what we really believe about the 10th Amendment to the 
Constitution, and it gives us an opportunity to support the intentions 
of our Founding Fathers and Mothers. They never meant for the Federal 
Government to play the preeminent role in criminal justice.
  It should be disturbing to any constitutionalist that the Federal 
Government insists on the supremacy of laws that allow for the medical 
use of marijuana.
  So far, 28 States and the District of Columbia--that is a majority of 
the States of the Union--have enacted laws to allow access to medical 
marijuana or its chemical derivatives. They obviously believe enforcing 
such restrictions on the medical use of marijuana is a waste of 
extremely limited resources.
  This amendment has solid bipartisan support, and we have the 
opportunity now, with this amendment, to tell the Department of Justice 
that they are not permitted to waste limited Federal dollars 
interfering with the duly-enacted laws of our States concerning medical 
marijuana.

[[Page H4879]]

  I urge my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, liberals and 
conservatives, to support my amendment. Respect State medical marijuana 
laws.

                              {time}  2000

  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the 
great State of California, Congressman Sam Farr.
  Mr. FARR. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Chair, I rise in general debate to talk about NOAA. But I first 
also want to echo everything that has been said about our great 
colleague from Virginia, Frank Wolf. Frank is one of the few Members of 
Congress who has visited my district. He actually went onto my property 
in Big Sur and ended up coming back and saying: Now I understand why 
you are so passionate about the oceans.
  It is an interesting committee that both Ranking Member Fattah and 
Chairman Wolf head because it is a committee that has all of the 
Department of Commerce; it has all of the Department of Justice; and it 
has the science programs, NASA, NSF, and the Office of Science and 
Technology. Essentially, the science of America is in your hands. And 
this bill has a lot of it in there.
  Particularly, I would like to talk about NOAA. NOAA is the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. And what has been happening is 
that, as we have gotten interested in the weather and as we have gotten 
interested in sort of the sky, we are putting a lot more money into it 
and sucking funds away from the oceans. And yet what is happening in 
the oceans is that they are dying; and if the ocean dies, planet Earth 
dies. So while there is money in this to look at the moons and oceans 
of other planets, we are going to do it at the peril of our own ocean.
  Our coastal economies support 81 percent of all U.S. employment in 
the United States, over 100 million jobs. Coastal economies contribute 
to 84 percent of the U.S. GDP. Ocean tourism is an $89.25 billion 
industry. It relies on healthy marine mammal populations, healthy coral 
reefs, and healthy clean waters and beaches. Just think of all of the 
people who recreate on beaches. If those were polluted, they wouldn't 
be able to do so.
  The United States plays a big role in the world. We are, in fact, 
hosting the international oceans conference next month. And one of the 
topics is going to be the blue economy: What does it mean to all the 
countries of the world and to the United States?
  So as we go through this bill, I just want to emphasize that the wet 
side needs as much attention as the sky side.
  Again, I thank the gentleman from Virginia, Frank Wolf, for the great 
job that he has done.
  Mr. WOLF. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I rise today first in recognition 
of the great professional public service offered by Chairman Wolf. I 
appreciate that so much.
  I also rise in support of H.R. 4660, the Commerce, Justice, Science, 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act that he and his staff have 
worked so hard on.
  This important measure provides funding for a number of vital 
agencies, of course one of which is the Office of the United States 
Trade Representative. This approps bill provides funding for the USTR 
to continue advocating on behalf of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or 
TPP, and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, 
and to continue enforcing existing free trade agreements. More 
specifically, funding USTR will help protect intellectual property 
rights abroad.
  Now, I continue to maintain very serious concerns with Canada's 
misapplication of internationally recognized patent standards, which 
appears to violate their international obligations, and it is having a 
real economic impact on innovative American companies.
  I appreciate that the USTR has expressed serious concern about these 
practices in last year's Special 301 Report, given Canada's continued 
failure to bring its patent standards in line with international 
obligations and best practices. Accordingly, I strongly urge the 
elevation of Canada to the Special 301 Priority Watch List in 2014.
  IP is one of the main engines of the United States' innovative 
economy. Approximately one-third of U.S. jobs and 60 percent of our 
exports rely on IP. With more than 95 percent of the world's population 
living outside of the United States, strong IP protections are 
essential to future U.S. economic growth and competitiveness.
  Funding USTR will ensure a continued enforcement of existing free 
trade agreements while furthering future U.S. economic interests 
through negotiation of TPP and TTIP.
  I would like to, again, thank Chairman Wolf and his staff for their 
important work in putting together this approps bill.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  I want to take a minute to acknowledge someone else who has played a 
very important role in our country's science activities and is now 
retiring.
  I spent some time over at NASA headquarters, and I also went out to 
visit the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to see the Mars Rover land after 
8\1/2\ months of travel. The NASA team is an extraordinary team.
  One of its members, the head of the Education Office, a former 
astronaut, is retiring, and I wanted to take a minute during general 
debate to acknowledge his great service to this country. Leland Melvin 
hails from the chairman's great State of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 
and we want to wish him well and thank him for his service to our 
country.
  I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), 
my colleague who has worked here on small business and research 
connections to science to commercialize technology and to help build 
the American economy.
  Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank the ranking member for yielding.
  Madam Chair, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4660. I would 
like to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah for their hard 
work on this bill.
  While they have had to make some tough budget choices with a reduced 
level of funding, this bill still shows a strong commitment to 
scientific research at the National Science Foundation and also NASA.
  Investment in research is vital to our economic future because it 
helps us achieve discoveries that will keep the U.S. at the cutting 
edge of science and technology and creating new American jobs.
  I also want to take a moment to honor my good friend from Virginia, 
Chairman Wolf. Even in an era of partisan polarization and heated 
rhetoric, he has taken great pains to craft bills like this one that 
get broad support from Members on both sides of the aisle. He has been 
a strong defender of American security and a strong supporter of 
American manufacturing; and, most importantly, throughout his career, 
he has been a courageous fighter for human rights around the world, 
while never losing sight of his duty to his constituents here at home. 
He has been a good example for all of us in this body.
  Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and to support 
the strong funding, especially for the National Science Foundation, in 
this bill.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey, Rush Holt, my friend, the great science leader here in the 
Congress. He is the only one among us who has a terminal degree in 
nuclear science, and he is also retiring this year.
  Mr. HOLT. I thank the gentleman. I certainly appreciate the very 
admirable Chairman Wolf and my good friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Fattah) for the work they have put into crafting this bill.
  Madam Chair, however, I do have some serious concerns, especially as 
regards the cuts that are being made to NOAA's climate research 
programs. This bill cuts NOAA's climate research for the next fiscal 
year by $38 million below the current year, or $69 million below the 
President's request.
  Now, deeper droughts, heavier rains, more flooding, superstorms, 
tornadoes,

[[Page H4880]]

rising seas, huge storm surges are all getting worse. Would we not want 
to understand what is going on?
  I will be offering an amendment later this evening to restore funding 
for critical NOAA climate research programs. NOAA climate research 
programs support ocean and atmospheric research, global data collection 
and sharing so we can understand climate change.
  This year, the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 
Change and the U.S. National Climate Assessment were released. They 
agreed. They come to the same conclusion: the climate is changing. 
Greenhouse gases by human activities are the principal cause. We have 
already begun to experience the effects, which will continue to be 
costly in lives and dollars.
  Those who would deny these changes, some here in this very House, 
can't stop the changes from occurring. Denying funding for the research 
won't stop the changes. It will just leave us ignorant and less 
prepared. We need to support the science behind climate change.
  Now, since we are talking about science, it is true, ostriches don't 
actually bury their heads in the sand, but it is a metaphor for what is 
going on here. We should not bury our heads in the sand. We should be 
supporting this research vigorously because of all the ways that the 
climate change will affect our lives and our well-being both around the 
world and here in the United States.
  Mr. FATTAH. I have no further requests for time during general 
debate, and 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.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment who has 
caused it to be printed in the designated place in the Congressional 
Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       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, 2015, and for other purposes, namely:

                                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 sections 3702 and 3703 of title 44, United States Code; 
     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 section 40118 of title 
     49, United States Code; employment of citizens of the United 
     States 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 section 2672 of title 28, United 
     States Code, when such claims arise in foreign countries; not 
     to exceed $294,300 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, $473,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016, of which $10,000,000 is to be derived from fees to be 
     retained and used by the International Trade Administration, 
     notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United States Code: 
     Provided, That, of amounts provided under this heading, not 
     less than $16,400,000 shall be for China antidumping and 
     countervailing duty enforcement and compliance activities: 
     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; 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.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Lynch

  Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 45, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, before I get started, I just want to join the 
chorus here and congratulate Chairman Wolf on his remarkable career as 
a leader here in this Congress and as someone who has worked diligently 
on behalf of his constituents but also in a way that I think has 
reflected greatly on this body. I think that the work product in this 
bill produced by Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah is a wonderful 
example of the possibilities when people work together.
  Madam Chairman, my amendment would increase by $3 million the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2015 for the Drug Courts program. The $3 
million added to the Drug Courts program will be offset by decreasing 
by $3 million the amount appropriated for funding the International 
Trade Administration.
  Madam Chair, drug addiction in the United States is at an epidemic 
level. To call it otherwise grossly understates the problem. This 
epidemic affects every city and town across America, and it cuts across 
every demographic. It simply does not discriminate.
  Drug and alcohol addiction shatters lives, destroys families, and 
costs taxpayers billions of dollars annually. In fact, according to the 
National Institute on Drug Abuse, estimates of the total overall costs 
of substance abuse in the United States--including lost productivity, 
in-hospital care, incarceration, rehab, and crime-related costs--tally 
to over $600 billion annually in the United States.

                              {time}  2015

  Now, many of us understand that drug addiction is a disease, and 
certain actions taken by people under the influence of drugs are 
typically uncharacteristic of that person. A handful of countries, as 
well as much of our own society here in the United States, have begun 
to realize that we need to deal with addiction and its outcomes in a 
way that can have a long-term, positive effect on the parties and 
families involved. Drug courts offer just such an opportunity by 
providing a support system and a roadmap for moving forward.
  Madam Chair, drug courts are specialized court dockets designed to 
handle cases involving drug and/or alcohol-dependent offenders charged 
with offenses such as possession of a controlled substance or other 
nonviolent offenses determined to have been caused or influenced by 
their addiction.
  Drug court cases are handled through a comprehensive program of 
supervision, drug testing, treatment services, and immediate sanctions 
and incentives designed to reduce the recidivism rates of these 
offenders by helping them overcome their substance abuse problems, 
which are the primary and proximate cause of their criminal activities.
  Drug courts coordinate the efforts of the judiciary, prosecution, 
defense attorneys, probation departments, law enforcement agencies, 
rehab facilities, mental health and social services, and also involve 
the community, the family, and the employer in many cases in an effort 
to break the cycle of substance abuse, addiction, and crime.
  If we can break that cycle, we all benefit. I have had the 
opportunity to visit many of the prisons and houses of correction in 
Massachusetts, where about 91 percent of those inmates have substance 
abuse problems or are dually addicted.
  The bottom line is that drug courts save money, they reduce crime, 
and restore families. Quite simply, drug courts work. According to the 
National Association of Drug Court Professionals, the drug court 
approach reduces crime by as much as 45 percent compared to traditional 
sentencing options. In fact, the available data indicate that 
nationwide, 75 percent of drug court graduates remain arrest-free at 
least 2 years after leaving the

[[Page H4881]]

program, and reductions in crime have been maintained for at a minimum 
3 years, and in many cases over 14 years.
  In addition to reducing crime, drug courts save money. As reported by 
the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, for every dollar 
invested in drug courts, taxpayers save as much as $27 when compared to 
the historic approach to these problems. This substantial savings comes 
from avoided criminal justice costs, reduced prison costs, and reduced 
recidivism and health care utilization--all areas, as we know, that 
devour vast sums of money annually in this country.
  And very important to us all, drug courts help restore families. 
According to statistics, family reunification rates for drug offenders 
are 50 percent higher for drug court participants. People struggling 
through addiction can become isolated from friends and loved ones. 
Reuniting with their family is often the first step in returning to 
normalcy and again becoming a productive member of the community.
  Madam Chairman, the underlying bill provides $41 million for drug 
court funding, $2.5 million over the 2013 post-sequester level. And I 
would like to thank Chairman Wolf--he has long been a champion of drug 
courts--as has Ranking Member Fattah. But these have been underfunded 
for a long time, and the adoption of this amendment would meet the need 
that has been amplified lately.
  I just urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I accept the amendment. The President's request had 
proposed eliminating this as a separate program. We rejected that 
proposal, and instead we funded the program above, as the gentleman 
from Massachusetts said--and I appreciate it--above the level of $41 
million. This takes it to 44. He makes a very powerful case. I think it 
makes a lot of sense, so I accept the amendment, and I think it is a 
good amendment.
  Mr. FATTAH. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I concur with the chairman.
  Mr. WOLF. I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
  The amendment was agreed to.


             Amendment Offered by Mrs. Davis of California

  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 34, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Chair, first, I certainly want to 
thank Chairman Wolf, Ranking Member Fattah, and, of course, the 
committee for putting together a strong bill in what we all know has 
become an increasingly tough environment for appropriations bills.
  This year's Commerce-Justice-Science bill is clearly the product of a 
great deal of bipartisan collaboration, and, as a result, this bill 
provides strong funding for a number of important priorities that both 
Democrats and Republicans can get behind. In that vein, I want to offer 
an amendment which I believe both sides of the aisle should be able to 
support.
  While only a small portion of the overall Department of Commerce 
budget, the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service plays a critical role 
in helping American small business owners export their products to 
foreign countries--and we know that about 95 percent of the world's 
customers live overseas.
  Unfortunately, while this year's CJS bill does a decent job of 
funding the Department of Commerce, it failed to fully match the 
President's requested increase of funds for the U.S. and Foreign 
Commercial Service. Unfortunately, that will mean that we will, once 
again, continue the trend of underfunding this vital national resource.
  Specifically--and I wanted to note these three points--this amendment 
helps small businesses who can benefit from overseas consumer activity 
by helping them learn how to navigate red tape imposed by governments 
overseas. Big companies we know don't necessarily need this help but 
our small business owners do.
  Second, it will help them increase exports, create jobs, and boost 
economic recovery. Third, the funding that was requested in this 
amendment is $3 million. The agency is currently $15 million below the 
President's request. So I want to share where the offset comes from. It 
comes from the Bureau of Prisons, which was overfunded by $61 million--
and that is out of $7 billion. The offset does not touch funding for 
new construction, which we know there are concerns about overcrowding 
from time to time. That is not an issue in this amendment.
  Madam Chair, in order to remain competitive in an increasingly 
globalized economy, we must do everything that we can to help our 
exporters gain access to overseas markets. While this amendment only 
amounts to really a small increase in funding, we know from past 
experience that it will pay enormous dividends. I certainly have seen 
that in my community in California.
  Most importantly, it will allow U.S. exporters to compete on a level 
playing field with the rest of the world and will help strengthen the 
overall economy, putting Americans back to work.
  I urge my colleagues to support small business owners all across this 
country and adopt this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentlelady's 
amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, the recommendation in this bill includes $323 
million for the Global Markets program, which includes the U.S. and 
Foreign Commercial Service. This amount is $3 million more than the 
current operating level. Despite the continued fiscal constraints, the 
committee has supported increases to the International Trade 
Administration over the last few fiscal years in order to support 
deployment of additional commercial service and staff at embassies. But 
this offset totally takes it from the Bureau of Prisons. It reduces the 
Bureau of Prisons' salaries and expenses account by $3 million.
  The prisons are overcrowded. We have had several prison guards 
killed. With our high- and medium-security institutions exceeding 51 
and 41 percent of their rated capacity, the prisons are overpacked. 
They are maxed out. And so with a population of 215,000 inmates and 
2,500 more expected in 2015, the Bureau of Prisons just can't keep up. 
So this bill helps them recover. We don't want to have another prison 
guard killed. So I think where they take the money from--I would urge a 
``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I rise in the first instance in support 
of the focus of the gentlelady's amendment, but I have to oppose the 
amendment because of the offset. One of the prison guards that was 
murdered was from my home State of Pennsylvania, and I think that 
depleting $3 million from this account at a time when we have a 
situation where we have far too many people in prison--and hopefully 
through our criminal justice reform efforts, we will do something about 
that--but while we have people in prison, we have a responsibility to 
administer these prisons safely, and I think it will be unwise.
  Now, I support wholeheartedly export initiatives. We have increased 
this account each year. I have visited and spent time focused on this. 
And the chairman had mentioned a number of initiatives. We also fund 
the SelectUSA and the other parts of the President's export initiative. 
But I am opposed to this amendment solely on the basis of the offset as 
offered.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

[[Page H4882]]

  The amendment was rejected.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Reichert

  Mr. REICHERT. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1)''.
       Page 4, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1)''.
       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $110,000,000)''.
        Page 52, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $110,000,000)''.
       Page 53, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $110,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. REICHERT. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer a critical amendment 
with Representatives Pascrell, King, Grimm, Welch, Johnson, Reed, 
Enyart, DeFazio, and others.
  This amendment funds the highly successful COPS hiring program at the 
fiscal year 2014 level. Ensuring the safety of our communities and 
neighborhoods should be one of our first priorities, and we cannot 
afford to do that without a sufficient number of capable police 
officers trained across our country.
  I became a law enforcement officer because I wanted to serve and help 
others. I brought that same desire to Congress. The COPS program helps 
others do the same. We cannot protect this Nation without adequate 
funding for law enforcement. Their service is our gain.
  Madam Chairman, this program is vital. I was in law enforcement for 
33 years. I started out in a patrol car and was actually hired in 1972 
under a Federal grant. After 30 some years or so, I became the sheriff 
of King County, and I was able to use those grants again to hire 
additional police officers in the sheriff's office, and those 
additional police officers are used to be a part of Federal teams, 
Federal law enforcement task force efforts, across this country. To 
mention a few, the cyber security task force we have in some of the 
major cities across this country is integral to protecting this Nation, 
not only our entire country, but our communities. You cannot do that 
with just Federal resources.
  We always talk about the Federal, State, and local partnerships as 
Federal representatives, and the FBI came to me when I was the sheriff 
and said that we want to work with you; provide a police officer to our 
joint terrorism task force, provide a police officer to our task force 
to fight gangs, and provide a police officer to be a part of our DEA 
effort to impact the use of drugs and reduce the use of drugs in our 
communities.
  Well, Madam Chairman, local police departments and sheriff's offices 
don't have the money to continue to supply police officers to these 
Federal efforts. But they know they are needed.
  I would like to join everyone in congratulating the chairman on his 
distinguished career and his efforts here today in support of 
protecting our country. Mr. Wolf has done an outstanding job over his 
years of service. From my perspective, though, we really need to 
strengthen this partnership, and the way that you do that is you allow 
these grants to be fully funded, you allow police chiefs and sheriffs 
across this country to hire additional police officers to be a part of 
a national effort to reduce human trafficking. And I know this is one 
of Mr. Wolf's passionate issues right now, as well as other Members of 
Congress. It has been highlighted, and we need to highlight it still. 
But the Federal Government cannot stop human trafficking alone. They 
need the help of those local police officers and detectives on the 
street. If we don't have the people, we won't be putting them on the 
street.

                              {time}  2030

  If they are not on the street, if they are not working these cases, 
they will not solved, and if they are not solved, Madam Chair, our 
children will be at risk, so I stand today to offer this amendment 
because I know it is the right thing to do.
  I know it creates a partnership, a true partnership between the 
Federal, the State, and the local agencies. It is critical. It is vital 
to our local law enforcement communities to have access to these 
grants, to be a part of the national effort, and to fight not only 
local crime, but those crimes across State borders; and international 
crimes are something that we also get involved in.
  I thank you for the opportunity to speak, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I am going to accept the amendment. My father was a 
policeman--Philadelphia policeman, badge 3990.
  I think Mr. Reichert makes a very, very powerful case, and I have 
great respect for law enforcement. I just want to put it in context. We 
are going to accept the amendment, but article I, section 2 of the 
Constitution requires a census every 10 years.
  This is one of the few areas where the Constitution actually requires 
this body to do something. Frankly, this body, a lot of times, does 
nothing. This, we are required to do it. This amendment cuts funding 
for the periodic census. Without getting into detail, we will try to 
work this out when we go to conference because I am sympathetic.
  We are going to start getting a lot more amendments: cut census, it 
is not for a few more years. But then the time comes. However, I think 
Mr. Reichert makes a powerful case. We do respect law enforcement, and 
he makes a powerful case.
  We cannot solve the issue of sexual trafficking with just Federal 
officers. We need the sheriffs and the police departments. Having said 
all that, there will be some pain, and we will have to work this thing 
out, but I accept the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the requisite number of words.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I support the chairman in accepting this 
amendment, but his warning about census and the need for us not to 
assume that we can walk out with a bill with zero for census and live 
up to our responsibilities--our constitutional responsibility--is not 
an appropriate notion for this Congress, so I do support this one. I am 
going to be opposing many others.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chair, I just want to say to Frank Wolf: you are 
good man, and I wish you the best of luck. You raised the respect of 
this institution, and that is pretty difficult to do nowadays, Frank. I 
wish you the best of luck.
  As cosponsor of this amendment, along with some others, I want to 
thank all of those folks who came aboard. We have to struggle every 2 
or 3 years. I think it is the responsibility that we, in some way, 
support our local communities, our county sheriff departments.
  The COPS program has been a great success. In fact, the two most 
effective and efficient programs in the Congress of the United States 
are the COPS program and the fire program--FIRE Act. We know where 
every dime is going, we know how it is spent, but we certainly couldn't 
accept a 61 percent cut for a fiscal year.
  So this is going to allow us, Madam Chair, to hire over 1,000 police 
officers. God knows we need them. When we take our oaths, some of us 
who have had good fortune every 2 years, God willing, the first thing 
we talk about is defending the United States, defending the 
Constitution, and defending against attacks from the outside, as well 
as inside. We have an obligation and responsibility.
  So we are taking this very, very seriously. The gentleman from 
Washington and I were the cochairs of public safety in the Congress, 
and we work on this all year around, not just budget time.
  So I am proud to work with the Congressman from Washington, and I 
thank, wholeheartedly, the gentleman from Virginia and wish him the 
best of luck. You have made a big difference in this Congress, and I 
mean that sincerely.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIMM. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

[[Page H4883]]

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GRIMM. Madam Chair, first, let me start by thanking my 
colleagues, Mr. Reichert and Mr. Pascrell, for their continued 
leadership on this issue and specifically in joining me on this COPS 
amendment.
  I would also like to recognize Chairman Wolf for all of his 
outstanding service and specifically his work and with the subcommittee 
for their efforts to fund the critically important programs within this 
bill while facing a very tight fiscal environment. I recognize this is 
absolutely no easy task.
  While I agree Congress must rein in our spending, doing so at the 
expense of men and women in uniform who risk their lives every single 
day to protect our communities is simply unacceptable. That is why I am 
proud to cosponsor this bipartisan amendment to replace the drastic 
cuts to the Community Oriented Policing Services hiring program.
  While some will argue that the COPS program is a bailout to our local 
governments, the truth is that this funding can only be used to 
supplement--not replace--State, local, and other funds used to hire and 
rehire additional police officers.
  Further, unless an agency can demonstrate severe fiscal distress, 
COPS funding has specific limits based on sworn force strength and 
service population.
  Let me give you an example. An agency can only request funding to 
hire or rehire no more than 5 percent of their sworn force strength and 
agencies with a service population of a million or more are capped at 
25 officers. These limits ensure that the COPS program promotes 
community safety in an efficient and fiscally responsible manner.
  The reality is that our local and State budgets are also being 
reduced, and this 60-plus percent reduction to Federal COPS funding 
would exacerbate the many dangers police officers face on a daily basis 
because of low staffing levels.
  I also support the COPS hiring program's incentive to promote veteran 
hiring by giving additional consideration to agencies that commit to 
hiring or rehiring at least one military veteran.
  As of 2013, 336 veterans have been hired with this funding. So 
considering the good that the COPS program has done and that it will 
continue to do in creating good-paying, career-oriented jobs and 
enhancing safety in our communities across the Nation, I want to urge 
my colleagues to support this amendment.
  In closing, I want to emphasize we spoke about human trafficking and 
the horrors entailed there, and we need every effort we can to combat 
that, but I also want to highlight the prescription drug epidemic which 
plagues my district and many districts throughout this country.
  If we are going to be able to fight to keep our children safe and 
keep people from overdosing on prescription drugs, we are going to need 
more and more police officers to combat this.
  I seriously urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Reichert).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Kildee

  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $8,000,000)''.
       Page 63, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KILDEE. Madam Chair, my amendment would ensure that the 
Interagency Trade Enforcement Center under the International Trade 
Administration's budget is funded at this President's requested level 
of $15 million by moving $10 million from NASA's $4.2 billion 
exploration fund, which is funded $191 million above the President's 
request.
  Here is the problem: Mr. Peters and I, who offer this amendment, 
represent the State of Michigan, but I assume this problem, the problem 
of access to markets across the globe for American products, is one 
that other Members in this body experience on a regular basis and hear 
about all the time.
  We may disagree, and I suspect that we would disagree on the elements 
of our trade policy and particularly the elements in form that many of 
the trade agreements that this country enters into with other Nations.
  In fact, there is a debate brewing now over the extent to which we 
continue to expand those international trade agreements, but the one 
thing we ought not to disagree on is whether or not we enforce the 
existing structures that are in place and ensure that American-made 
products have access to markets that should be open to us and, under 
existing agreements, would be open to us if we had the strength and the 
resources to enforce those agreements the way they ought to be 
enforced, and this is having a real effect.
  I represent Michigan, as I said, and the auto sector particularly has 
suffered greatly as a result of trade practices. Just recently, as a 
matter of fact, the WTO sided with the U.S. in a dispute with China on 
duties it imposes on imported American vehicles, duties ranging from 2 
percent to 21.5 percent, affecting two-thirds of the $8.5 billion worth 
of American vehicles that are sold into that market.
  This amendment would ensure that there are adequate resources to 
ensure that we enforce existing trade policy. American workers and 
companies are harmed when other countries are allowed to use unfair 
trade policies unfettered.
  This amendment would ensure that the Interagency Trade Enforcement 
Center has the necessary resources to go after unfair trade barriers. 
It sends a strong message to the world that: If you violate global 
trade laws, the rules will be enforced and that there will be 
consequences for bad behavior.
  American workers deserve this. American companies deserve this. We 
should stand strong. This amendment would make sure that the resources 
are available to do just that.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I rise in opposition to the amendment. The amendment would 
take away from NASA's Commercial Crew Program. This is a program where 
we are paying the Russians--Putin, who invaded the Crimea--Putin, we 
are paying Putin--this takes it away from that, allowing NASA to fund 
fewer development and testing activities.
  It would increase the likeliness that we will have to extend our 
reliance on Russia for access to the space station. The Russians have 
even said that we are going to have to use a trampoline to get to the 
space station. They are going to stop cooperating after 2020.
  I could say more, but I don't think we want to take money from that 
program. Because of that, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. I support the intent of the amendment. I can't support 
the offset. It comes out of the general exploration account of NASA, 
but it would put additional strains on programs like Commercial Crew 
and Commercial Cargo, which are very, very important--not just because 
we have to depend on the Russians at the moment to take astronauts to 
the space station, this was put in place years ago--but given the 
political circumstances, and the chairman is right, there have been 
threats to whether or not we will have access to transport.
  We do have to think about accelerating our Commercial Crew Program. 
It has been very successful to date, in terms of cargo, but we have not 
utilized the commercial cargo system yet to actually put human beings 
into lower Earth orbit on private spaceships like SpaceX or Orbital 
Science, so it is a concern now that this offset would be used.
  So I think what I am saying is that I hope the gentleman will 
consider the fact that we will look at this issue in conference and try 
to find other ways to do it, but I cannot support this offset. It would 
not be a responsible thing for us to do, given where we are.

[[Page H4884]]

  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2045

  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr, Kildee).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                    Bureau of Industry and Security

                     operations and administration

       For necessary expenses for export administration and 
     national security activities of the Department of Commerce, 
     including costs associated with the performance of export 
     administration field activities both domestically and abroad; 
     full medical coverage for dependent members of immediate 
     families of employees stationed overseas; employment of 
     citizens of the United States and aliens by contract for 
     services abroad; payment of tort claims, in the manner 
     authorized in the first paragraph of section 2672 of title 
     28, United States Code, when such claims arise in foreign 
     countries; not to exceed $13,500 for official representation 
     expenses abroad; awards of compensation to informers under 
     the Export Administration Act of 1979, and as authorized by 
     section 1(b) of the Act of June 15, 1917 (40 Stat. 223; 22 
     U.S.C. 401(b)); and purchase of passenger motor vehicles for 
     official use and motor vehicles for law enforcement use with 
     special requirement vehicles eligible for purchase without 
     regard to any price limitation otherwise established by law, 
     $103,500,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     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: Provided 
     further, That payments and contributions collected and 
     accepted for materials or services provided as part of such 
     activities may be retained for use in covering the cost of 
     such activities, and for providing information to the public 
     with respect to the export administration and national 
     security activities of the Department of Commerce and other 
     export control programs of the United States and other 
     governments.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Langevin

  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 4, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Chair, the amendment that I offer today addresses 
a topic that is of the utmost importance to our national defense, that 
is, cybersecurity.
  Before I go into the particulars, I would like to first acknowledge 
the important work of my colleague, Chairman Wolf, on this vital issue. 
Although he is retiring at the end of the year, he has certainly left a 
legacy of support for cybersecurity funding which he and Ranking Member 
Fattah have continued in this bill. I thank them both for their 
important work.
  Madam Chair, bad actors in cyberspace are growing in number and in 
sophistication, and as policymakers we have an imperative to act in the 
public interest. When Congress came up short in its efforts to enact 
comprehensive cybersecurity legislation in the 112th Congress, the 
administration rightly acted as best it could to advance the ball on 
cybersecurity. The President issued an executive order on this topic, 
and among the many things it did, it charged the National Institute for 
Standards and Technology with the creation of a framework for 
cybersecurity, and it ensured an open process, engaging all parties 
from across the spectrum of industry, government, and academia.
  Madam Chair, my simple amendment endorses the use of routine 
Department of Commerce surveys in order to measure the extent to which 
businesses have adopted the NIST voluntary cybersecurity framework. In 
fact, my amendment will ensure that the Bureau of Industry and 
Security's Office of Technology Evaluation uses its Defense Production 
Act authority to conduct a survey about use of the NIST framework.
  While I applaud the President's focus on cybersecurity, and the NIST 
process has been widely regarded as a laudable example of public-
private partnership, much more needs to be done, and the administration 
cannot go it alone. It will take congressional action to address issues 
such as incentives, liability protections, information sharing, and 
breach notification.
  However, while we continue to work toward passage of bipartisan 
cybersecurity legislation, it is important that we measure how well the 
NIST framework is faring. Our routine Commerce Department survey, using 
existing authority under the Defense Production Act, will enable an 
assessment of the NIST framework's adoption rate, a key component of 
its effectiveness.
  Information sharing is also an important part of the framework, so 
the survey will also allow BIS to ask companies what, if any, 
information from the government they have used and how they have used 
it. This brief survey should be designed in a way to minimize the 
burden on companies: determining if their using the framework or 
information shared from the government does not require an exhaustive 
survey of their cybersecurity practices.
  The NIST framework is a model for cybersecurity. It doesn't demand 
adherence to a particular set of standards, nor does it proscribe 
certain activities. Instead, it describes processes that entities can 
adopt to help them decide which standards and risk levels are 
appropriate for their own situations.
  I believe that this framework is a useful tool for companies to help 
them navigate new threats in the information age. I know that some of 
my colleagues believe otherwise, but without hard data, these 
sentiments would be just that: beliefs. Measuring adoption of the 
framework is a concrete step in the right direction that we can take to 
help develop our own best practices for what works in the realm of 
cyber policy.
  So with that, Madam Chair, we have all heard about major cyber 
attacks in the news, including the Target breach and the Heartbleed 
security vulnerability. Just this month alone we have seen the 
Department of Justice indict Chinese soldiers for hacks of American 
companies. We have seen the breach of up to 145 million emails, birth 
dates, and passwords from a major Internet commerce site. We have even 
seen the Department of Homeland Security warned about a successful 
attack on a public utility that compromised the utility's control 
system network.
  My amendment will not solve all of these problems at once, but it 
will help policymakers here and in the administration take effective 
and informed steps to protect our networks from cyber attacks.
  So with that, let me again congratulate Chairman Wolf and thank him 
for his distinguished service to this body.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, the gentleman is absolutely right. I 
completely agree with him. We will make every effort to make sure this 
is in there. He has been ahead of almost everybody else here, but I 
accept the amendment. I think it is a very good amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the amendment also.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I thank the chairman for agreeing to accept 
it.
  I want to spend a second on this. There is no more important an issue 
facing our country in terms of national security than this question of 
cybersecurity, and Chairman Wolf has been at the very forefront of 
this.
  We have seen the unfortunate circumstance, for instance, with a 
corporation like Target. Target has invested over a billion dollars in 
revitalizing libraries in our schools in our country. They have done a 
lot of great work. They were victimized by cyber criminals emanating 
from, apparently, Ukraine. I think that whatever assistance we are 
providing to the new government there should be contingent on making 
sure that the cyber threat emanating from Ukraine visited upon our 
companies here should be part of the considerations.
  The chairman has also pointed out what has now become obvious, given 
the DOJ's action, that China is also quite active in this realm. We 
have seen this problem in places like Nigeria. We can go around the 
globe. If we are going to protect ourselves, we are going to have to 
take action.

[[Page H4885]]

  I thank the chairman for accepting this amendment. I think this is an 
appropriate improvement to the base bill, and I yield back the 
remainder of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                         Parliamentary Inquiry

  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Madam Chair, parliamentary inquiry.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry.
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Would a motion be in order to suspend the rules 
and bring up an amendment that was in the previous section at this 
time?
  The CHAIR. That motion is not available in the Committee of the 
Whole.
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chair.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  Economic Development Administration

                economic development assistance programs

       For grants for economic development assistance as provided 
     by the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, for 
     trade adjustment assistance, for the cost of loan guarantees 
     authorized by section 26 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 
     Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3721), and for grants, 
     $210,500,000, to remain available until expended; of which 
     $5,000,000 shall be for projects to facilitate the 
     relocation, to the United States, of a source of employment 
     located outside the United States; and of which $5,000,000 
     shall be for loan guarantees under such section 26: Provided, 
     That the costs for loan guarantees, including the cost of 
     modifying such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That 
     these funds for loan guarantees under such section 26 are 
     available to subsidize total loan principal, any part of 
     which is to be guaranteed, not to exceed $70,000,000.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Cicilline

  Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 5, line 17, strike ``grants'' and insert ``grants, 
     including grants authorized under section 27 of the 
     Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
     3722)''.

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's 
amendment.
  The CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The gentleman from Rhode Island is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Chair, I thank and acknowledge the work of 
Chairman Wolf and our Ranking Member Fattah for their exhaustive work 
on this appropriations bill.
  Madam Chair, in an effort to drive innovation and regional 
collaboration, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 
established a Regional Innovation Program within the Economic 
Development Administration. This program is intended to encourage and 
support the development of regional innovation strategies, including 
regional innovation clusters and science and research parks.
  For the past few years, the President has consistently requested $25 
million to fund the Regional Innovation Strategies Program. The program 
was provided $10 million in funding in the fiscal year 2014 omnibus 
appropriations bill passed by this Chamber a few months ago.
  Funding for the Regional Innovation Program supports the Economic 
Development Agency's interagency effort to build regional innovation 
clusters, including the Jobs and Innovation Accelerator Challenge and 
the Make It In America challenge. This program helps to ensure we build 
a cohesive, competitive economy by aggregating existing investments and 
technical assistance from multiple Federal agencies to develop a 
network of interconnected firms and institutions. Together, this 
network and other regional stakeholders can use this funding to 
accelerate job growth, spur business formation and expansion, encourage 
innovation, invest in workforce training, and support small business 
development.
  For example, the i6 Challenge grants funded within the Regional 
Innovation Program have already helped universities and research 
centers across the country invest in efforts to scale up groundbreaking 
ideas. This means providing these innovators with the necessary 
resources to accelerate commercialization and to attract venture 
capital for the most promising technologies. To compete in the 21st 
century and win, America must invest in scaling up promising technology 
and innovative ideas.
  In the long-term, these ideas will help ensure our Nation remains at 
the cutting edge. Importantly, investing now will help jump-start our 
competitive advantage in terms of producing emerging technologies and 
supporting advanced manufacturing. Through the Regional Innovation 
Program, local leaders are empowered to maximize existing assets and 
are provided resources to ensure that historically underrepresented 
communities, including those hardest hit by unemployment and economic 
decline, are able to participate in and benefit from a growth in a 
regional cluster.
  The Regional Innovation Program has traditionally garnered support 
from both Republicans and Democrats. It is a truly bipartisan, 
evidence-based method for creating jobs.
  My amendment is simple and straightforward. It would not create a new 
program or new authorization. It does not increase or decrease funding 
for a single account in the appropriations bill. Instead, this 
amendment simply serves to include the Regional Innovation Program 
within the bill and to bring focus to this vitally important job-
creating initiative as this appropriations process moves forward.
  In addition, the Regional Innovation Program has consistently been 
specifically supported and cited with a separate line item in previous 
Senate CJS Appropriations Committee reports.
  To close, I strongly believe we must recognize that innovation is 
critically important to America's ability to compete in the 21st 
century global economy. Supporting the development of regional 
innovation clusters strengthens our capacity to create and retain new 
jobs and sustain our economic recovery. The Regional Innovation Program 
will help Federal, State, and local entities leverage existing 
resources, spur regional collaboration, and support economic recovery 
and job creation in high-growth industries.
  I recognize, after conferring with Chairman Wolf, that there is a 
point of order that has been raised on this.
  Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment and 
look forward to working with the chairman and the committee to see that 
this program is both reauthorized and funded.
  The CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Rhode Island?
  There was no objection.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Pompeo

  Mr. POMPEO. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 5, lines 17 through 21, after each dollar amount, 
     insert ``(reduced to $0)''.
       Page 6, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     to $0)''.
       Page 100, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $247,500,000)''.

                              {time}  2100

  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Kansas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. POMPEO. Madam Chairwoman, today, I rise to ask my fellow Members 
of Congress to take one small step towards fiscal sanity.
  Chairman Wolf has done very nice work on this bill, but we are all 
familiar with agencies that have outlived their usefulness and no 
longer can withstand budget scrutiny. In these times, if we don't set 
priorities, nothing is a priority. Here is one opportunity for all of 
us to make one tiny step towards getting rid of what is now over $17 
trillion in debt.
  We often talk on our side of the aisle about having a spending 
problem. Here is a chance for all of us on both sides of the aisle to 
begin to attack that. We have an opportunity.
  Part of the Department of Commerce, the Economic Development 
Administration, was established in 1965 as an element of President 
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. The current administration and, to be 
frank, many administrations, have used this for their own pork barrel 
projects and their own cookie jar. The EDA has spent over $3.2 billion 
in grants and does nothing more than pick amongst winners and losers by 
region, industry, and community. At its very core, the

[[Page H4886]]

EDA is nothing more than the purest of wealth distribution programs.
  My amendment would eliminate funding for the EDA, totaling $247 
million in fiscal year 2015, and send this money to the deficit 
reduction account. Based on current levels, eliminating EDA will save 
over $2.5 billion over the next decade.
  Even though I ran two small businesses for 16 years, I had never 
heard of the Economic Development Administration before coming to 
Congress. I suspect many of my colleagues are similarly situated.
  First, let me describe what the EDA does. It takes dollars from all 
across the country. That money comes to Washington where the EDA takes 
20 percent of it off the top. That is the cost of the administrative 
burden of running the Economic Development Administration. They then 
ask companies and communities to apply for ``free money'' from the 
Federal Government to renovate a movie theater or to build a new 
industrial park.
  While many much these projects aren't necessarily bad, some are just 
plain ridiculous. These are local projects that either have enough 
support from their local communities so they could certainly advance 
without Federal funding or they require Federal money because the local 
community won't support them. Either way, the Federal Government has no 
role in being involved.
  You might not be familiar with EDA projects, so let me just talk 
about a couple of them.
  In 2008, the Economic Development Administration provided $2 million 
to begin construction of the UNLV Harry Reid Research and Technology 
Park in Las Vegas, Nevada. Currently, this technology park features a 
paved road and a Web site claiming to be the first anticipated tenant 
moving in in 2010. No construction has even begun.
  In 2010, $25 million was spent by the EDA for a Global Climate 
Mitigation Incentive Fund and $2 million for a ``culinary 
amphitheater,'' wine-tasting room, and gift shop in Washington State.
  The EDA then gave New Mexico $1.5 million to renovate a theater in 
2012.
  In 2013 it gave Massachusetts $1.4 million to promote video games.
  Back in the 1980s, the EDA used taxpayer dollars to build replicas of 
the Great Wall of China and the Egyptian pyramids in the middle of 
Indiana. They were never completed. It is now a dumping ground for 
tires.
  After doling out your tax dollars, the Economic Development 
Administration often, along with a local Congressman or Senator, takes 
credit for these projects. They go to ribbon cuttings. The EDA is a 
frequent flyer, traveling all around the country, for just such 
ceremonies.
  I first heard about the EDA in one such project. I was sitting in a 
committee where the director of the EDA proudly took credit for the 
jobs created at a $1.6 billion new steel plant. There was a $1.4 
million grant, less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the project. My 
guess is that the company's CFO knew nothing of the EDA grant.
  Cutting the EDA, however, is not just a conservative idea, it is a 
good idea, and one that gets us closer to fiscal sanity here in 
America.
  Madam Chairwoman, my amendment is fairly modest given the amount of 
debt we are piling onto our children and grandchildren. But this is an 
important vote to show that Members of this body are serious about 
limiting the size and scope of our Federal Government.
  I urge passage of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Foxx). The gentleman from Virginia is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment.
  This bill before the House today also includes for the EDA $5 million 
to support projects to facilitate relocation to the United States of 
jobs currently being done overseas. If you have an iPhone, it is made 
in China. GE has moved plants off of the United States to China. This 
is in order to fund. It will enable EDA to help work with American 
businesses to bring back, to repatriate, their manufacturing activities 
back to the United States.
  It does not support any projects in my district, but it does support 
projects in some very, very poor districts throughout the United 
States. These are areas that are struggling. Because of that, sometimes 
EDA is only a lifeline, a path, to more economic sustainability.
  I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, first of all, in terms of the previous 
amendment that was withdrawn, it is very important that we note that 
innovation is the driving force in our economy. The World Economic 
Forum said: America's economy is built on innovation. So I want to just 
add my voice in terms of that amendment, but in terms of the offering 
relative to the Economic Development Administration.
  The Speaker of the House earlier was saying that as you listen to 
Americans, they are concerned about jobs. Well, one entity in the 
Federal government has a track record of developing jobs in each of our 
50 States. Just recently they announced a 300,000-mile initiative in 
Alaska. Now, Alaska is a little bit away from my hometown in 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but wherever you look in our country, the 
EDA has been working. It stitches together communities of interest, 
builds support in jobs. It is a program that the majority would love 
because it is not decisions from on high. These are decisions that are 
made at the local level about where to build industry, what types of 
industries to attract. It has a proven record decade after decade 
stitched throughout America, not one piece of unbroken cloth, but kind 
of like a quilt, many colors, many different pieces patched together.
  So I support the EDA, I oppose this amendment, and I hope that we 
give a resounding vote in support of the Economic Development 
Administration. If we can spend American taxpayers' money in far off 
places in this world building economies under the notion that that is 
how you strengthen democracies and provide peaceful places in the 
world, then we can take American taxpayers' money and invest it in 
communities right here at home so that Americans can go to work.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last 
word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. My congressional district, Madam Chairman, 
encompasses rural parts of southern and eastern Kentucky. The region 
has historically lagged behind others in the Commonwealth and in the 
country. Particularly in recent years, as we have reeled from a 
crushing downturn in the coal industry that has cost my district some 
8,000 good-paying mining jobs in just the last few months, we have had 
to think and act strategically to revitalize our economic engine. 
Creating jobs in a mountainous region without sufficient roadways or 
suitable water infrastructure might seem an unsurmountable challenge. 
But I have always encouraged my constituents and community leaders to 
``plan their work, and work their plan.'' With the help of EDA, this is 
what we have been doing.
  The Economic Development Administration is one of the few entities in 
our Federal Government uniquely qualified to address the needs of 
communities with chronically high unemployment issues or facing 
enormous setbacks due to natural disasters. EDA's grants, awarded in a 
competitive fashion, leverage over $10 from the private sector for 
every Federal dollar invested and are targeted at facilities that are 
essential for private industry to remain or locate in these 
underachieving areas. As a result of these targeted investments in 
water systems, workforce training centers, intermodal facilities, or 
broadband networks, struggling communities across the country have seen 
the creation of hundreds of thousands of jobs in just the last decade.
  I wholeheartedly concur with the sponsor of the amendment that the 
role of the Federal Government is not to create jobs, but instead to 
create the conditions favorable for private sector

[[Page H4887]]

job creation. By partnering with local area development districts, 
leveraging public and private dollars, and engaging the local 
workforce, EDA does just that.
  This bill provides $247.5 million for the agency, which is already 
below the President's request; rejects the administration's request to 
shift funds away from vital public works programs; and supports a loan 
guarantee program to develop innovative manufacturing technologies that 
will keep rural areas competitive nationally and globally. With 
unemployment in rural areas around the country still hovering well 
above the national average, particularly in coal country, the victims 
of the war on coal, this is an investment we cannot afford to lose.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas will 
be postponed.
  Mr. CANTOR. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CANTOR. Madam Chairman, let me begin by expressing my admiration 
for my colleague from Virginia, the chairman of the Commerce, Justice, 
Science Subcommittee, Frank Wolf. The Commonwealth of Virginia, the 
Nation, and, indeed, individuals from around the world owe Chairman 
Wolf a deep debt of gratitude for his years of service.
  The positive impacts of Frank Wolf's efforts literally span the globe 
as he has been a leader in the fight for, and defense of, human rights 
and religious freedom around the world. Chairman Wolf is a principled 
leader, and I and the rest of my colleagues will miss his leadership in 
this House in the years to come.
  Madam Chairman, I also rise to address the issue of funding for 
research through the National Science Foundation. I believe the Federal 
Government has an important role to play in basic research, including 
the research conducted by the National Science Foundation.
  The dollars we invest in research in the physical and biological 
sciences, in particular, have the potential to cure diseases and create 
new innovations that will become the building blocks for future 
economic growth and prosperity.
  But I have been troubled that the administration has been spending 
scarce Federal resources allocated to the National Science Foundation, 
not on these hard sciences, but instead on political and social science 
research, including, for example, the attitude of Americans on the 
filibuster, studying ``what makes politics interesting,'' and how 
politicians change their Web sites.
  The National Science Foundation even spent $700,000 to fund a 
musical--a musical, not research--on climate change.
  My colleague, Lamar Smith, the chairman of the Science, Space, and 
Technology Committee, has been leading an effort to reform the NSF to 
eliminate wasteful spending and prioritize research that has the 
potential of truly benefiting our Nation.
  Chairman Smith's committee currently has a National Science 
Foundation reform bill under consideration. That bill takes important 
steps to set appropriate national priorities. I thank him for his 
efforts on this important front.
  In addition, Chairman Smith is offering an amendment that will be 
offered tomorrow to this bill that would seek to leave funding for the 
social, behavioral, and economic sciences directorate at the current 
year levels and then allocate the $15 million increase requested by the 
President to other research priorities.
  I fully support Chairman Smith's amendment and urge my colleagues to 
support it as well. This is the first step of many that I hope we will 
take to protect taxpayers while at the same time ensuring that high 
priority research is appropriately funded. I look forward to continuing 
to work with Chairman Smith on this initiative.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, first of all, I appreciate the majority 
leader. I know for certain that he has an interest, particularly in 
these areas that he has spoken about, because on one day, at the end of 
a long week, the two of us ventured over to the National Institutes of 
Health to sit and learn a little bit more about the merit-based 
selection process for investment and investigations to end diseases, 
and Lamar Smith, who is a great Member, led the effort on patent 
reform.
  However, I think that both are misguided in this attempt to move away 
from the world-renowned merit-based selection process at the National 
Science Foundation.
  All of our competitors are actually trying to mimic the merit-based 
selection process that the National Science Foundation utilizes, and it 
is critically important that the National Science Board, in the ways 
that these decisions are made, is not going to be influenced by 
politics.
  That was in the wisdom of the creation of this, and it has worked so 
well that we now lead the world. If we want to continue to lead the 
world, the last thing we want to do is to interject politics into the 
decisionmaking process of what basic scientific research should be 
supported.
  There are more proposals that come in than can be funded that are 
done on a peer-review, science-only basis, and I think it would be a 
very unwise signal for this Congress to send if we were to move in this 
direction.
  I hope that our colleagues, even though we have great respect for the 
majority leader, would act with more respect for basic science and for 
a merit-based selection process.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of administering the economic 
     development assistance programs as provided for by law, 
     $37,000,000: Provided, That these funds may be used to 
     monitor projects approved pursuant to title I of the Public 
     Works Employment Act of 1976, title II of the Trade Act of 
     1974, and the Community Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1977.

                  Minority Business Development Agency

                     minority business development

       For necessary expenses of the Department of Commerce in 
     fostering, promoting, and developing minority business 
     enterprise, including expenses of grants, contracts, and 
     other agreements with public or private organizations, 
     $30,000,000.

                   Economic and Statistical Analysis

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, as authorized by law, of economic 
     and statistical analysis programs of the Department of 
     Commerce, $99,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016.

                          Bureau of the Census

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for collecting, compiling, 
     analyzing, preparing and publishing statistics, provided for 
     by law, $248,000,000: Provided, That, from amounts provided 
     herein, funds may be used for promotion, outreach, and 
     marketing activities: Provided further, That the Bureau of 
     the Census shall collect data for the Annual Social and 
     Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey using 
     the same health insurance questions included in previous 
     years, prior to the revised questions implemented in the 
     Current Population Survey beginning in February 2014.

                     periodic censuses and programs

       For necessary expenses for collecting, compiling, 
     analyzing, preparing and publishing statistics for periodic 
     censuses and programs provided for by law, $858,500,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2016: Provided, That, 
     from amounts provided herein, funds may be used for 
     promotion, outreach, and marketing activities: Provided 
     further, That within the amounts appropriated, $1,551,000 
     shall be transferred to the ``Office of Inspector General'' 
     account for activities associated with carrying out 
     investigations and audits related to the Bureau of the 
     Census.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Gibson

  Mr. GIBSON. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

[[Page H4888]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.
       Page 30, line 24, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $4,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GIBSON. First of all, let me begin by recognizing my friend, 
Chairman Wolf, for his long and distinguished career in public 
service--a role model for all of us. Let me say also how impressed all 
of us are with the teamwork of Chairman Wolf's and of Ranking Member 
Fattah's in putting together this piece of legislation. I am giving it 
my highest endorsement here.
  Madam Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment about an issue that 
is of grave concern to us in upstate New York, which is of the heroin 
and opiate epidemic that is going on.
  From the stories I have read, this is actually an issue across our 
country. I will note that the Governor of Vermont spent the time in his 
State of the State to address this issue. We certainly have to do more 
on this score.
  I have convened meetings in which I have had an opportunity to listen 
very carefully to district attorneys, to law enforcement professionals, 
to medical professionals, and to the families of those affected. 
Without any doubt, we are going to have to do more to address this 
issue. I see it in three basic categories. One is doing more on 
prevention. The second is enforcement. The third is treatment. 
Treatment is handled in the Labor-HHS bill, and I look forward to our 
addressing that in the weeks to come. Tonight, we can address 
prevention and enforcement.
  I do want to commend the committee, and I do want to read of some 
specific areas of the bill in which the committee, I think, has done 
great on this issue.
  In DEA Language:

       Prescription drug and heroin abuse--the committee is 
     extremely concerned about the continued threat posed by 
     prescription drug abuse, as well as about the resurgence of 
     heroin abuse and overdoses that appear connected to the 
     enforcement of laws against prescription drug diversion. The 
     committee has included in its recommendation funding to 
     support the enhancement of DEA's investigative efforts to 
     deal with these growing threats and directs DEA to report to 
     the committee no later than 60 days after the enactment of 
     this Act on the numbers of actual and estimated heroin 
     investigations in fiscal years 2013 through 2015, the amounts 
     and street value of heroin associated with such 
     investigations and prosecutions resulting from 
     investigations.

  In the DOJ General Administration:

       Heroin--the committee notes with concern the increase in 
     heroin abuse. The Department shall report no later than 90 
     days after the enactment of this act on potential ways to 
     address this problem, such as prevention, law enforcement 
     strategies, prescription drug disposal site expansion, and 
     other evidence-based approaches.

  Then, finally, in Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force:

       Heroin--the recent surge in heroin use, overdose deaths, 
     and trafficking volumes shows it to be one of the gravest 
     problems now facing law enforcement and the drug treatment 
     community. DEA noted in its 2013 threat assessment a trend of 
     users switching to heroin from prescription drug abuse as one 
     explanation for a rise in overdose deaths and warned that 
     persons addicted to opioid prescription pills now find highly 
     pure heroin easier and cheaper to obtain. The committee urges 
     the Department to intensify its use of task forces to address 
     this disturbing trend.

  I commend the committee for their work on this.
  I rise to offer an amendment to increase, by $4 million, the funding 
for the account that addresses the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement 
Task Force. This will help our country--and my district in particular--
in dealing with high-level traffickers and gangs that are selling 
heroin and opioids. I think this will help.
  It will be part of an overarching strategy, and I think it 
synchronizes with the committee, so I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I have no objection to the amendment. I think 
it is a very good amendment, and I share the gentleman's concern.
  Out in the western part of my district, in the Shenandoah Valley, I 
think they had one heroin death in 2011 or in 2012. In 2013 and this 
year, they are surpassing that, and it is only May. This is going to be 
an epidemic. It is hitting the country.
  They are actually finding that growers of marijuana in Mexico are 
getting out of that business and are growing poppies. So I think it is 
a very good amendment, and I urge the support of it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I also rise in support of the amendment.
  This is a crisis any way you look at it in my home State of 
Pennsylvania whether it is in the Pocono Mountains area or in the city 
of Philadelphia. All throughout the country, we see this epidemic. 
People are losing their lives, and extraordinary action needs to be 
taken.
  I do want to say that our side, even though we support this 
particular amendment, is concerned about the offset. Just so that we 
can start to make sure that everyone understands that we are concerned 
about it, we will want a recorded vote on this, and I will vote in 
favor of it as we do have a responsibility at some point to think about 
funding the census. So I will stop there.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gibson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. For what purpose does the gentleman from California 
seek recognition?
  Mr. McNERNEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I ask for a recorded vote on the last one.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Committee had already progressed to the next 
amendment.
  Mr. FATTAH. I indicated in my remarks that we were asking for a 
recorded vote.
  Would you like to read back my remarks?
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair did not see any Member seeking 
recognition for that purpose at the time the result of the voice vote 
was called.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I respect your decision then, and we will 
proceed. Thank you.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. McNerney

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 52, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. McNERNEY. First, I want to recognize Chairman Wolf for his 
service to this body and to this country, and I want to recognize the 
chairman and Ranking Member Fattah for their work on this bill.
  Madam Chair, my amendment takes $3 million from the Census Bureau and 
transfers it to the COPS grant program, with the intent that this $3 
million will go toward the COPS Technology grants program at the 
Department of Justice.
  I am proud to represent California's Ninth Congressional District and 
the work our law enforcement agencies are doing in our region. However, 
they need additional support. Several cities in my district have 
violent crime rates that are well above State averages.
  Law enforcement agencies are understaffed and are struggling to 
retain and recruit officers. These first responders are doing their 
best to stretch budgets in tough economic times while trying to manage 
crime activity.
  This is an extremely difficult task that stresses police departments, 
officers, their families, and our neighborhoods. Consequently, it is 
even more important that our communities and law enforcement work 
together to ensure crime fighting is as effective as possible while 
also yielding the best results.
  One way to accomplish this goal is through improvements in 
technology. This increases effectiveness. It streamlines capabilities 
and increases information sharing. Most importantly, it

[[Page H4889]]

improves the public's and officers' safety.
  Through 2010, the COPS Technology program helped more than 3,000 law 
enforcement agencies acquire essential technology to help meet the 
needs of their regions. That demand for technology funding by law 
enforcement agencies across the country has increased in the past 4 
years.
  I recently met with the chief of police from a city in my district 
who asked how his department could obtain funding for an innovative 
project that will help officers identify the exact location of gun 
shops within the city. This pilot project in a very small area has been 
extremely successful.
  These technology grants would be awarded on a competitive basis, 
ensuring that each applicant has a fair opportunity to receive money 
and to acquire and deploy crime fighting technologies.
  I do understand the concerns about taking money from the Census 
Bureau as it begins its preparations for the 2020 census, but I believe 
that individuals, families, and businesses in high crime areas would 
greatly benefit from the COPS Technology grant funding in the short and 
in the long term. This technology will save lives.
  Lastly, I want to mention that the International Association of 
Chiefs of Police supports my amendment, and I urge the adoption of the 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I announce that we are going to postpone the 
2020 census and move it to 2021 or maybe to 2022.
  I am going to accept the amendment, but if we keep taking it from the 
census, there will be no census unless it is going to be done on a 
voluntary basis, and we can ask people if they will. I think it is a 
good amendment.
  I understand what you are trying to do, but if we keep fining census, 
census, census, then there will be no census. I accept the gentleman's 
amendment. He makes a very powerful case, and I think it is a very good 
issue.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.


                  Amendment Offered by Mr. Bridenstine

  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $12,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $12,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 
minutes.

                              {time}  2130

  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Madam Chair, my amendment transfers $12 million from 
the Census Bureau to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research for the 
specific purpose of weather research.
  We now know that technology exists that can predict tornadoes nearly 
1 hour in advance. This technology will move us toward a day when we 
have zero deaths from tornadoes.
  My amendment today will direct funds to research and technology vital 
to saving lives and property. I want to thank Chairman Wolf for working 
with us towards this goal.
  The $12 million added by this amendment is for weather research in 
NOAA's office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, as authorized in my 
House-passed, bipartisan Weather Forecasting Improvement Act. 
Specifically, this increase provides for a total of $76 million for 
weather laboratories and cooperative institutes to advance 
observational, computing, and modeling capabilities and quantitative 
assessment tools for measuring the value of data and specific observing 
systems. The funding will accelerate research, development, and the 
development of critical technologies like new aerial weather observing 
systems; transformative global, national, and regional weather models; 
advancing high-performance computing using graphic processing 
information technology networks; and observing system simulation 
experiments to deliver substantial data improvements in weather 
forecasting and prediction of high-impact weather events such as those 
associated with hurricanes and tornadoes. This will save countless 
American lives in the future and allow our citizens to better protect 
their personal property. This should be NOAA's highest priority.
  Another critical part of the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act is a 
joint technology transfer initiative between NOAA Research and the 
National Weather Service. I urge the Weather Service to follow through 
on this House's bipartisan voice vote back in April and transfer the 
full $20 million authorized in that legislation to NOAA Research to 
carry out the transition of the latest scientific and technological 
advances into the Weather Service operations. This will sunset outdated 
and expensive operational methods and tools to enable the cost-
effective transfer of new methods and tools into operations.
  Madam Chair, NOAA is the only Federal agency tasked with providing 
accurate and timely forecasts. I believe this amendment is a big step 
forward in reflecting this priority.
  Again, I am grateful for the chairman's guidance in working on this 
amendment, and I am thankful for his leadership on this issue. I hope 
that we can work together to keep weather research funding at this 
level when it comes time to conference with the Senate. This amendment 
will save lives and property.
  With that, I urge the support of my amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I have no objection to the amendment. And the gentleman's 
area has been hit. We have all seen the pictures of the towns in 
Oklahoma. So I appreciate his efforts and diligence.
  I just want Members to know the Commerce-Justice-Science bill already 
includes strong funding for the National Weather Service. The bill is 
$16 million above the request for the National Weather Service. We 
restore the $10 million proposed reduction for information technology 
officers at each weather forecast office. We restored a proposed $8 
million cut to the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Program. We restored 
$6 million in proposed cuts to the tsunami community education 
awareness program.
  But I think the gentleman makes a very, very powerful case, and we 
will work to make sure that this stays in until we go to conference. As 
he said, we can save lives. And that is what we want to do.
  With that, I accept the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I 
have spent a lot of time and effort on this issue. I join with the 
chairman in acknowledging the fact that in the chairman's mark is a 
very significant investment in the National Weather Service and in our 
severe weather forecasting activities.
  And, again, the offset here is the U.S. Census. And so even though I 
support the amendment, I am going to be seeking--and will remain 
standing--a recorded vote. Because the House needs to acknowledge that 
if we are taking money from the Census now, there will come a time in 
which we will have to ante up on our constitutional responsibilities.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine).

[[Page H4890]]

  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma 
will be postponed.
  Mr. JOLLY. Madam Chairwoman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. JOLLY. Madam Chairwoman, I rise for the purpose of entering into 
a colloquy with Chairman Wolf, someone I have great respect for, and I 
compliment him on a bill that he has prepared, along with the ranking 
member.
  I prepared an amendment at the desk this evening that would reduce $8 
million from the Census Bureau and instead move that money to the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's operations, research 
and facilities account for the Office of Marine and Aviation 
Operations--essentially, NOAA marine research.
  I appreciate the chairman's comments about continuing to slice at the 
Census Bureau account, and for that reason, I rise for purposes of a 
colloquy.
  I understand the bill includes $175 million to operate and maintain 
NOAA's ships. While I would have liked to see that number increase, I 
understand it does match the President's budget, and in fact represents 
an increase of over $5 million above the enacted level from last year 
for purposes of funding additional days at sea.
  NOAA marine research is critical for a number of reasons. I represent 
a gulf coast district. Many Members of this House do. One of the 
purposes of NOAA marine research and one of the benefits that we see 
from it is more and better stock assessments when it comes to 
fisheries.
  We need to do better as a Nation in our stock assessments and how we 
study fisheries. We need to have additional study and research into the 
survivability of juvenile stocks. We need to have better research into 
invasive species and how that leads to closures. Perhaps the best way 
we could ever address closures is with additional research into 
studying the survivability of juvenile stocks.
  NOAA marine research also advances our interest in water quality. It 
educates us and provides additional research for Federal agencies when 
it comes to emergency situations like oil spills; red tide plumes, 
which are critical in the gulf; as well as responding to the stranding 
of endangered marine mammals.
  NOAA marine research also, ultimately, improves the economy for areas 
along the gulf and other areas in the Nation. It affects the quantity 
of fish that we are able to produce for our food supply, but it also 
addresses quality of life for communities like mine in Pinellas County. 
It also assists the economic development of regional economies that 
depend on a robust fish stock.
  The increase that I would have proposed tonight was in an effort to 
help NOAA better fulfill this research mission as something I believe 
we need to continue to put an emphasis on. I thank the chairman for his 
commitment thus far already in the chairman's mark in the bill we are 
considering today when it comes to NOAA marine fisheries and marine 
research, but I would simply ask the chairman to consider continuing 
this commitment as this process winds its way. As you get to 
conference, if there is an opportunity to identify additional 
resources, I certainly would appreciate the chairman and the ranking 
member's consideration.
  Mr. WOLF. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. JOLLY. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman for withdrawing the amendment.
  As the gentleman is aware, the bill before the House today includes 
$175 million to support the operation of NOAA's research vessels. This 
amount is the same as the request--a $5 million increase above the 
enacted level.
  We will take a look at it, and I appreciate the gentleman raising it. 
We will stay with him as we go to conference.
  Mr. JOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the balance of my time.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Nugent

  Mr. NUGENT. Madam Chairwoman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $4,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $4,000,000)''.
       Page 45, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 48, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. NUGENT. Chairman Wolf, I want to thank you for your leadership 
and all the years of service to this body, and to the Nation in 
general.
  Each day, more and more Americans are realizing that we need to take 
action to deal with mental health issues in this country. You merely 
need to watch the news. We need to make it a priority.
  My amendment, in keeping with that sentiment, would provide 
additional funding for programs under the Mentally Ill Offender 
Treatment and Crime Reduction Act, or MIOTCRA, and for Veterans 
Treatment Courts. These programs have a proven track record of 
effectively addressing some of the important issues associated with 
mental health illnesses.
  My amendment would offset this increase by taking $4 million from the 
periodic censuses and programs account, which I have heard had been hit 
over and over again. This is less than one-half of 1 percent.
  Madam Chairman, both of the programs that would receive an increase 
in funding under my amendment highlight the need for our justice and 
mental health systems to work together.
  As a former sheriff, I can tell you cooperation is vital. If our 
justice and mental health systems are collaborating, we can provide 
more positive outcomes--not only for those with mental health issues, 
but for our taxpayers as well.
  Grants provided under MIOTCRA are used, among other purposes, to set 
up mental health courts, for community reentry services, and training 
for State and local law enforcement to help identify and respond to 
people with mental illnesses, which should be obvious to folks back 
home, just as with what happened in California.
  During my 37 years as a cop, I saw firsthand how our jails are 
becoming warehouses for people with mental health issues. No one is 
well served by this process--not those with mental health issues, not 
our taxpayers, and certainly not our veterans.
  Let me provide some numbers to illustrate what is actually going on 
in our jails.
  According to the Florida Mental Health Institute, over a 5-year 
period, 97 individuals in the metro Miami-Dade area accounted for 2,200 
bookings into the county jail, 27,000 days in jail, and 13,000 days in 
crisis units, State hospitals, and emergency rooms. The cost to the 
State and taxpayers was nearly $13 million for just 97 people over a 5-
year period. However, the type of programs my amendment supports have 
shown to dramatically reduce these rates.
  In Pinellas County--another county in Florida--for instance, a mental 
health jail diversion program showed an 87 percent reduction in 
rearrests for nearly 3,000 offenders that were enrolled in that 
program. Not only does my amendment support these programs but 
recognizes the unique responsibilities that we have to our veterans.
  Veterans are disproportionately affected by mental health issues. 
Even more, they likely wouldn't have these issues had it not been for 
their service to our country. We owe them a better outcome. And 
Veterans Treatment Courts can help.
  The point, Madam Chairman, is we don't have to waste taxpayer dollars 
warehousing people in jail. We don't have to be content with a system 
that isn't effectively serving the people it is supposed to. We have 
programs to help and that save money. And we can make this a priority.
  I know that this account has been hit numerous times, but I would 
tell you that you need only to see what is going on in this country. 
Mental illness is a

[[Page H4891]]

problem that needs to be addressed. The Veterans Treatment Courts that 
can be put in place by this, I think, is owed to our veterans, and 
certainly is owed to the people we represent.
  So I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.

                              {time}  2145

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman's 
amendment. I think Mr. Nugent makes a very powerful case. As more 
veterans return from combat, we are seeing the increased involvement in 
the justice system.
  The committee did establish the Veterans Court program in fiscal year 
2013 and has increased its funding for this year. The President did not 
request funding specifically for this program.
  The Mental Health Court Program is important as well and, given that 
a significant percentage of the justice-involved population have mental 
health disorders, these courts help with recidivism.
  I think Mr. Nugent again, as I said, makes a very powerful case, so I 
support the amendment and urge its adoption.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I will not request a recorded vote on this 
amendment, but I did want to speak on behalf of it.
  Colleagues in my home State of Pennsylvania, Congressman Meehan and 
Congressman Brady, have been very interested in the Veterans Courts.
  I was originally involved in the creation of the drug courts in 
Pennsylvania years ago. I think this is a very important effort, 
particularly as it relates to our veterans, but in terms of a host of 
populations to help divert people, when possible, from the criminal 
justice system and make our communities safer at the same time, so this 
is a very important amendment.
  I disagree with the offset, and I want that to be registered, but I 
will not burden the House with another recorded vote.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Nugent).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. McDermott

  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 17, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 13, line 21, after the dollar amount insert 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Chairman, fisheries management is something that 
has had a long history on the Pacific coast. As we built the dams on 
the Columbia River back in the 1930s, we made treaties with the 
Canadians. The Mitchell Act was passed, and we have been subsidizing 
the propagation of fish since that period.
  We also have Canadian and United States treaties for the fish caught 
in the rivers along our borders. The fish don't know where they came 
from. They don't know whose fish they are, and the human beings have 
got to sort it out.
  We have had these treaties in place, but we have been gradually 
reducing the amount of money we spent in this enforcement and 
propagation of fish.
  Now, this $3 million seems like a very small amount, but what it is 
really all about is it means a hatchery closure, which will reduce, by 
3 million, the Chinook that are released next year, along with another 
500-some odd thousand other kinds of salmon.
  You can't do this fisheries management by turning on the switch and 
turning off the switch. The fish go out for 3 years, they come back, 
and it is a longstanding process, and we are gradually whittling down 
what we are doing to one of the major sources of protein for this 
country.
  It is a huge economic effect on Alaska, Washington, Idaho, and 
northern California, and it is money well-spent.
  If you don't understand fish and you don't live in a community, as I 
do, where the entire Alaska fishing fleet is right now getting ready to 
go up and catch the salmon that you are used to eating in this country, 
you don't understand what it means when you don't have hatcheries 
producing salmon.
  The enforcement issue is really a matter of getting people to count 
and make sure that we get what is ours and also make sure that the fish 
are counted, so we know about the sustainability.
  One of the issues that is going on in the world today that people are 
not paying attention to is the acidification of the ocean. 
Acidification of the ocean means that salmon eggs are not as fertile as 
they were before, and you are coming to a time when we are going to 
have serious problems with our fisheries all along the northwest coast 
of the United States.
  So this $3 million, although it seems like a very minimal amount, is 
necessary to continue the treaties with the Canadians and to continue 
the propagation.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I am going to oppose the amendment. We are 
just taking out of census, and so the Members know, this is the same as 
last year's level, so there are not any big major cuts here.
  Also, we are above the request. We are $3 million above the request, 
so I don't question what the gentleman says. He knows a lot more about 
salmon than I do. He has probably forgotten more about salmon than I 
will ever know, but we can't keep going into the census and going into 
the census.
  Since it is $3 million above the request, it is at the same level 
last year, we added money into the salmon in the full committee, and so 
I am going to ask for a ``no'' vote on the amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. The chairman and I sat through some hearings last year, 
listening to and learning about the hatcheries in Washington State and 
learning about both the treaty responsibilities and the natural 
hatchery programs. I think we funded it at the level that was requested 
and then above that.
  On top of the fact that we are at a level beyond what was requested, 
this, again, would diminish the accounts for the census.
  We have a constitutional responsibility. We swear our oath to the 
Constitution. It requires the United States Congress to fund a census, 
and even though the hatcheries in Washington State deserve appropriate 
support, I think that the committee has moved in that direction.
  I have to oppose this on the basis that it, again, attacks an account 
that we have a responsibility to protect, even though it may not have 
the same level of political or popular support as some of these items.
  I love eating the fish, but we have got to make sure we count the 
census, so that we can live up to our responsibility as a Congress.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       National Telecommunications and Information Administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, as provided for by law, of the 
     National Telecommunications and Information Administration 
     (NTIA), $36,700,000, to remain available until September 30, 
     2016: Provided, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1535(d), the 
     Secretary of

[[Page H4892]]

     Commerce shall charge Federal agencies for costs incurred in 
     spectrum management, analysis, operations, and related 
     services, and such fees shall be retained and used as 
     offsetting collections for costs of such spectrum services, 
     to remain available until expended: Provided further, That 
     the Secretary of Commerce is authorized to retain and use as 
     offsetting collections all funds transferred, or previously 
     transferred, from other Government agencies for all costs 
     incurred in telecommunications research, engineering, and 
     related activities by the Institute for Telecommunication 
     Sciences of NTIA, in furtherance of its assigned functions 
     under this paragraph, and such funds received from other 
     Government agencies shall remain available until expended.

    public telecommunications facilities, planning and construction

       For the administration of prior-year grants, recoveries and 
     unobligated balances of funds previously appropriated are 
     available for the administration of all open grants until 
     their expiration.

               United States Patent and Trademark Office

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the United States Patent and 
     Trademark Office (USPTO) provided for by law, including 
     defense of suits instituted against the Under Secretary of 
     Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, 
     $3,458,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall 
     be reduced as offsetting collections of fees and surcharges 
     assessed and collected by the USPTO under any law are 
     received during fiscal year 2015, so as to result in a fiscal 
     year 2015 appropriation from the general fund estimated at 
     $0: Provided further, That during fiscal year 2015, should 
     the total amount of such offsetting collections be less than 
     $3,458,000,000 this amount shall be reduced accordingly: 
     Provided further, That any amount received in excess of 
     $3,458,000,000 in fiscal year 2015 and deposited in the 
     Patent and Trademark Fee Reserve Fund shall remain available 
     until expended: Provided further, That the Director of USPTO 
     shall submit a spending plan to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     for any amounts made available by the preceding proviso and 
     such spending plan shall be treated as a reprogramming under 
     section 505 of this Act and shall not be available for 
     obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the 
     procedures set forth in that section: Provided further, That 
     any amounts reprogrammed in accordance with the preceding 
     proviso shall be transferred to the United States Patent and 
     Trademark Office Salaries and Expenses account: Provided 
     further, That from amounts provided herein, not to exceed 
     $900 shall be made available in fiscal year 2015 for official 
     reception and representation expenses: Provided further, That 
     in fiscal year 2015 from the amounts made available for 
     ``Salaries and Expenses'' for the USPTO, the amounts 
     necessary to pay (1) the difference between the percentage of 
     basic pay contributed by the USPTO and employees under 
     section 8334(a) of title 5, United States Code, and the 
     normal cost percentage (as defined by section 8331(17) of 
     that title) as provided by the Office of Personnel Management 
     (OPM) for USPTO's specific use, of basic pay, of employees 
     subject to subchapter III of chapter 83 of that title, and 
     (2) the present value of the otherwise unfunded accruing 
     costs, as determined by OPM for USPTO's specific use of post-
     retirement life insurance and post-retirement health benefits 
     coverage for all USPTO employees who are enrolled in Federal 
     Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) and Federal Employees Group 
     Life Insurance (FEGLI), shall be transferred to the Civil 
     Service Retirement and Disability Fund, the FEGLI Fund, and 
     the FEHB Fund, as appropriate, and shall be available for the 
     authorized purposes of those accounts: Provided further, That 
     any differences between the present value factors published 
     in OPM's yearly 300 series benefit letters and the factors 
     that OPM provides for USPTO's specific use shall be 
     recognized as an imputed cost on USPTO's financial 
     statements, where applicable: Provided further, That, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, all fees and 
     surcharges assessed and collected by USPTO are available for 
     USPTO only pursuant to section 42(c) of title 35, United 
     States Code: Provided further, That within the amounts 
     appropriated, $2,000,000 shall be transferred to the ``Office 
     of Inspector General'' account for activities associated with 
     carrying out investigations and audits related to the USPTO.

             National Institute of Standards and Technology

             scientific and technical research and services

       For necessary expenses of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology (NIST), $670,500,000, to remain 
     available until expended, of which not to exceed $9,000,000 
     may be transferred to the ``Working Capital Fund'': Provided, 
     That not to exceed $5,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses: Provided further, That NIST may 
     provide local transportation for summer undergraduate 
     research fellowship program participants.

                     industrial technology services

       For necessary expenses of the Hollings Manufacturing 
     Extension Partnership of the National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology, $130,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                  construction of research facilities

       For construction of new research facilities, including 
     architectural and engineering design, and for renovation and 
     maintenance of existing facilities, not otherwise provided 
     for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, as 
     authorized by sections 13 through 15 of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278c-
     278e), $55,300,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That the Secretary of Commerce shall include in the 
     budget justification materials that the Secretary submits to 
     Congress in support of the Department of Commerce budget (as 
     submitted with the budget of the President under section 
     1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) an estimate for each 
     National Institute of Standards and Technology construction 
     project having a total multi-year program cost of more than 
     $5,000,000 and simultaneously the budget justification 
     materials shall include an estimate of the budgetary 
     requirements for each such project for each of the 5 
     subsequent fiscal years.

            National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

                  operations, research, and facilities

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of activities authorized by law for 
     the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     including maintenance, operation, and hire of aircraft and 
     vessels; grants, contracts, or other payments to nonprofit 
     organizations for the purposes of conducting activities 
     pursuant to cooperative agreements; and relocation of 
     facilities, $3,089,480,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2016, except that funds provided for 
     cooperative enforcement shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2017: Provided, That fees and donations 
     received by the National Ocean Service for the management of 
     national marine sanctuaries may be retained and used for the 
     salaries and expenses associated with those activities, 
     notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, United States Code: 
     Provided further, That in addition, $116,000,000 shall be 
     derived by transfer from the fund entitled ``Promote and 
     Develop Fishery Products and Research Pertaining to American 
     Fisheries'': Provided further, That of the $3,220,480,000 
     provided for in direct obligations under this heading 
     $3,089,480,000 is appropriated from the general fund, 
     $116,000,000 is provided by transfer, and $15,000,000 is 
     derived from recoveries of prior year obligations: Provided 
     further, That the total amount available for National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration corporate services 
     administrative support costs shall not exceed $215,654,000: 
     Provided further, That any deviation from the amounts 
     designated for specific activities in the report accompanying 
     this Act, or any use of deobligated balances of funds 
     provided under this heading in previous years, shall be 
     subject to the procedures set forth in section 505 of this 
     Act: Provided further, That in addition, for necessary 
     retired pay expenses under the Retired Serviceman's Family 
     Protection and Survivor Benefits Plan, and for payments for 
     the medical care of retired personnel and their dependents 
     under the Dependents Medical Care Act (10 U.S.C. 55), such 
     sums as may be necessary.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Holt

  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 13, line 21, and page 14, lines 8 and 9, after the 
     dollar amounts insert ``(increased by $37,450,000)(reduced by 
     $37,450,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chair, I rise today as a member of the Sustainable 
Energy and Environment Caucus. This coalition of Members has formed in 
order to advance policies to promote clean energy; protect our land, 
air, and water; and to address one of the dominant issues of our time: 
human-induced global climate change.
  I am joined in this amendment tonight by Representatives Moran, 
Peters of California, Polis, Lowenthal, Connolly, Hastings of Florida, 
Huffman, Tonko, and Cartwright, and we rise because, unfortunately, 
this bill fails to make the critical investments that are needed to 
further our understanding of the atmospheric changes that we know are 
affecting our planet.
  This bill we are debating here tonight would cut NOAA climate 
research for the next fiscal year by $37.5 million dollars below the 
current year or $69 million below what the President is asking for.
  NOAA climate research funds atmospheric and oceanic research, climate 
research laboratories, cooperative institutes, regional climate data 
and information, competitive climate research global data collection 
and sharing.

[[Page H4893]]

  As the climate changes, we will continue to experience deeper 
droughts, more intense wildfires, more frequent storms and floods, 
superstorms like Hurricane Sandy, higher sea levels, bigger storm 
surges. Would we not want to understand what is going on?
  It is ironic that, as Members here tonight are trying to outdo each 
other in supporting weather research, they propose to cut climate 
research. I suppose, when we come to NIH, they will be tripping over 
themselves to talk about research in symptoms, but ban any study of the 
causes of the disease.
  Now, earlier this year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 
released their fifth assessment report, and earlier this month, the 
Federal Government released the U.S. National Climate Assessment.
  Both reports, which were the product of years and years of research, 
the combined efforts of literally thousands of scientists spanning the 
globe, came to the same conclusions: the climate is changing.
  Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are the principal 
cause, and the result is costly, in lives and dollars--yes, deadly.
  Just about a year ago, we passed a landmark in human history, 400 
parts per million of carbon dioxide in the air worldwide. Now, I say in 
human history because, indeed, it is human activity, the way we produce 
and use energy, that is primarily responsible for this large increase 
in the concentration of carbon dioxide.
  It is of historic importance because, as scientists have made clear, 
this great concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases 
is changing our very climate.
  Now, we know some Members, even in this Chamber, have their doubts 
about manmade climate change--the human-induced climate change. They 
say: maybe the climate is changing and humans aren't to blame; or maybe 
humans are changing the climate, but it is really not as bad as the 
alarmists say.
  Still, others outright deny the science, reject the calls for action 
by scientists. Why this denial?
  It wouldn't happen in other instances. If a firefighter bangs on your 
door to tell you that your house is on fire, would you look at this 
stranger dressed in fireproof clothing and wearing a helmet and an 
oxygen tank and say, I don't believe you? Or would you get out?

                              {time}  2200

  Why, then, when thousands of the world's best scientists are telling 
us that humans are dangerously changing the planet's climate, that your 
house, planet Earth, is in deep trouble, wouldn't we get moving? This 
is not a joke. It is not a hoax. It is not a false alarm.
  This bill would cut critical investments that are needed for ongoing 
climate research, and failing to provide the resources necessary to 
study our changing climate won't make the problem go away; it will just 
make it harder to predict and more difficult to understand. Denial is 
the result of ignorance and only deepens our ignorance.
  We need to support the science behind climate change. We need to 
develop policies that would help us mitigate and adapt to the threats 
of climate change.
  I yield back the balance of my time
  Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the gentleman from New 
Jersey, Dr. Rush Holt, who is probably the smartest scientist we have 
ever had in the United States Congress. He gave us a warning that we 
need to pay attention to climate research. It is not weather research. 
Weather, we have just put a lot more money into. We are worried about 
prediction. We are worried about what is going to happen. They want to 
know in the next few days whether there is going to be a tornado or a 
hurricane.
  But climate is what tells us what is going to happen in the long-term 
future, whether we are going to have a sustained drought, whether we 
are going to have fire danger because of winds and droughts, whether we 
will have rainfall patterns--that it falls in one part of the country 
and not in the other--that will affect agriculture and water resources.
  I live on the coast. And although a lot of people deny that there is 
global warming and, therefore, ice melting and, therefore, the oceans 
rising, I can tell you that it is actually asked in all the zoning 
matters and building permits. Now in California, if you are going to 
build along the coastline, what is that coastline going to look like 10 
years out? What does the climate forecast--climate, not weather 
forecast--tell us about these rising oceans that will not allow your 
house to be built exactly where you want it to be built? So this is 
really important information to have.
  We have understood how important ports are to the United States' 
trade. We can't live without goods going out of this country and goods 
coming in, and they come through our ports. And if the oceans are going 
to rise and destroy our docks and our facilities, that is going to have 
a huge impact on our national economy.
  Ocean chemistry, the next amendment is going to talk about ocean 
acidification. I am going to rise on that as well, which is very 
important to our fisheries.
  So I think that an amendment like this is really important to invest 
in. We cannot really understand weather unless we understand the 
patterns of climate.
  Climate change will impact trade. Climate change will impact food 
security. Climate change will impact national security. Climate change 
will impact human health.
  It is imperative that we robustly fund NOAA climate research in order 
to be prepared for and adapt to the changing weather and changing 
climate.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. TONKO. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. TONKO. Madam Chair, this bill is providing reasonable levels of 
funding for research and development to the National Science Foundation 
and NASA, but in the NOAA accounts, climate research is singled out for 
major cuts below last year's spending.
  It seems there are a number of us who believe that we can improve 
weather forecasting without doing climate research. This simply is not 
the case.
  The distinction between weather and climate is created by the time 
period we define to examine the temperature, precipitation, humidity, 
and other atmospheric phenomena we are experiencing.
  As our society and our economy have become more advanced, more 
interconnected, and more global, we increasingly operate 24 hours a 
day, 7 days a week, and 365 days a year. For better or worse, we assume 
that everything can and is operating all the time. Well, often because 
of weather conditions, that assumption is challenged. Travel delays in 
the airline industry alone due to weather events can result in 
multibillion-dollar losses.
  Phenomena such as droughts and floods and fires are not merely single 
weather events. Their probability of occurrence, duration, and 
intensity is a function of climactic factors that
can only be understood and predicted
if we can better understand short-,
medium-, and long-term climate trends.
  I would note that the bill before us retains funding for the National 
Drought Information System. That is good news. But by cutting the 
climate research that drives improvements in the information delivered 
through this system, we are stifling the potential for this tool to 
provide better information to farmers, to ranchers, water managers, 
energy utilities, and the many other businesses, communities, and 
citizens who require dependable, adequate water supplies.
  It was climate research that led to our much-improved understanding 
of the El Nino and La Nina cycles that drive predictable changes in 
weather. As a result, farmers are able to adjust crop varieties or 
practices to prevent losses.
  We are spending an increasing amount of money every year on relieving 
drought, fighting forest fires, and on relieving disasters from 
tornadoes, hurricanes, and flood events. Instead of cutting climate 
research funds, we

[[Page H4894]]

should be expanding them. Instead, this Congress continues to deny what 
is all too obvious to many of our citizens and to those of other 
nations: that climate change is underway.
  Some of our agricultural systems, transportation systems, and 
essential infrastructure are at risk. We can adapt. We can redesign and 
rebuild infrastructure, but we need to know where to concentrate our 
efforts and what type of adaptations will be necessary. We need to have 
a better understanding of the rate of change that we will experience. 
Climate research is providing that understanding.
  In February last year, the Government Accountability Office added the 
financial risk of climate change to its High Risk List. This past 
February, GAO testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs about the fiscal liability associated 
with weather and climactic disasters.
  GAO's recent work on this topic found that the number of disaster 
declarations increased from 65 in 2004 to 98 in 2011. The financial 
risk from the two primary Federal insurance programs--National Flood 
Insurance Program and the Federal Crop Insurance Program--are over $1 
trillion. We paid over $60 billion on Hurricane Sandy recovery alone. 
And these are only the financial costs.

  Hurricanes Irene and Lee swept through my district in 2012. I saw 
firsthand the suffering caused by these storms. The loss of human lives 
and the destruction of homes and communities exact a terrible cost on 
those who experience these devastating events.
  We should be doing much more to spare our citizens from these 
experiences. With financial exposure of over $1 trillion and the known 
risks to individuals, communities, businesses, and infrastructure from 
climate and weather, it is absurd to claim that we are saving money by 
cutting $37 million from these programs.
  We must do our part to ensure that future generations have the 
opportunities that our parents and grandparents secured for us. Past 
generations built this Nation through their willingness to tackling the 
challenges of their time, by believing in the future of this Nation, 
and by investing in it.
  Climate change is real, and it will not have less impact if we 
pretend it isn't happening. We must stop ignoring this problem. We can 
choose to deny. We can bury our heads in the sand. When that sand is 
washed away, however, by climate change, it is over.
  Climate research is vital to our national security, our food 
security, our economic security, and to our future as a Nation. We 
should continue this important research effort and use the knowledge 
gained from it to inform and implement an adaptive strategy.
  With that, I urge support for this amendment and yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Chair, I rise also in support of the amendment 
offered by my dear friend from New Jersey, Dr. Holt. And I also want to 
echo the words of the gentleman from California, Representative Farr, 
in saying that it has been an honor and a privilege to serve in his 
company in the United States House of Representatives.
  Madam Chair, average temperatures have risen across the contiguous 48 
States since 1901, with an increased rate of warming over the past 30 
years. Seven of the top 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 
just 1998. Tropical storm activity in the Atlantic Ocean, the 
Caribbean, and the Gulf of Mexico has increased during the past 20 
years. In the past 2 years alone, extreme weather events resulted in 
109 Presidential major disaster declarations, 20 events that each 
inflicted at least $1 billion in damage, 409 deaths, and $130 billion 
in economic losses in 44 States. All that was caused by these 20 events 
alone.
  Every part of the Southwest experienced higher average temperatures 
between 2000 and 2013 than the long-term average dating back to 1895. 
Some areas were nearly two degrees warmer than average. We simply 
cannot afford to ignore this increasing threat in the future. In times 
like these, it would be irresponsible to cut funding for research 
dedicated to predicting future extreme weather events, but that is just 
what this legislation does.
  Madam Chair, research is how we educate ourselves. And the familiar 
maxim to everyone is, if you think education is expensive, try 
ignorance.
  The bill, as it stands, currently would cut $37.5 million from 
research on the effects of climate change, like tropical storms, 
floods, and droughts. That is why I support Dr. Holt's amendment, which 
would restore funding to the FY14 budget levels so that we can continue 
our research into these disasters and save the lives and businesses 
affected by climate change.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. POLIS. Madam Chair, I am very concerned with regard to the House 
CJS appropriations bill and the drastic cuts to climate research. The 
House bill provides for $69 million below the President's request and 
$37.5 million below the 2014 level. These cuts endanger our economy, 
our recovery, would harm our understanding of climate change, and will 
set scientists back years with regard to understanding our climate.
  Climate research is critical for our economy. It provides us with 
forecasts beyond 2 weeks, including heat waves, hurricanes, droughts, 
and tornado predictions. Cutting these functions would negatively 
impact transportation, agriculture, commerce, and all industries that 
make important planning decisions based on these long-term forecasts. 
Cutting this important investment will hurt economic growth and destroy 
jobs in these critical sectors.
  Based on climate research information, some examples of how it is 
used are: a cargo ship can reroute its course to circumvent a storm; a 
trucker can choose a different road to mitigate delays; or a water 
manager may restrict types of water use to plan for extended droughts, 
like we have had in Colorado these last few years.
  The Second Congressional District of Colorado is home to two world-
class universities--the University of Colorado at Boulder and Colorado 
State University at Fort Collins--in addition to the numerous Federal 
labs, collaborative institutes, and research institutions. I am proud 
to represent a community that has deep roots in science, with many 
scientists among my constituents, providing technology, research, and 
innovation in the public, nonprofit, and private sectors. Science is an 
incredibly important driver of economic growth in my district.
  Federally funded research is a linchpin in helping our country 
understand and respond to the concerns of climate change, severe 
storms, drought, and fire risks. We need to invest more in climate 
research in order to plan for and respond to severe weather events and 
climate events, reducing damage and increasing economic growth. That is 
why, for the second year in a row, I was proud to lead an 
appropriations letter, along with 73 of my colleagues, requesting full 
funding for the NOAA Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Science. Climate 
research is an important part of this program.
  I urge my colleagues to support climate research and restore critical 
funding to at least the 2014 levels, and hopefully more, so that we can 
have the very best science guiding our decisions, provided to companies 
in commerce, transportation, and agriculture, and employing the very 
best information that we have with regards to climate science.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.

                              {time}  2215

  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Madam Chairman, I join my colleagues tonight in 
opposition to the irresponsible cuts in this bill to vital climate 
research. The CJS mark slashes NOAA's climate research program by 24 
percent below the fiscal year 2014 levels and 37 percent below the 
President's fiscal year 2015 request.

[[Page H4895]]

  Does the majority think that with less climate research we can make 
better informed decisions? Does the majority think that with less 
climate research we can better prepare our communities for higher storm 
surges? Does the majority think with less climate research we can 
better understand why the Western United States has increased wildfires 
and water shortages? Does the majority think that with less climate 
research we can improve our predictions and responses in our planning 
for hurricanes? And, finally, does the majority think that with less 
climate research we can improve our ability to model regional weather 
pattern changes, which will affect the productivity of our agricultural 
sector?
  Unfortunately, the majority's bill shortchanges our ability to 
realize all these vital benefits of climate research. If we hide our 
heads in the sand, the laws of physics will not change. We cannot wish 
away this problem. Denying a changing climate is not just another 
political position. It is a denial of reality.
  I want to make this point to those in Congress who think the verdict 
is still out on whether human actions contribute to climate change. 
This is false, it is wrong, and it is misleading. The case is closed: 
climate change is happening, and humans are contributing.
  Today, there is not a single scientific body of national or 
international standing that rejects the findings of human contribution 
to climate change--not one. To further make this point, let me share 
the latest work from researcher Dr. James Powell, a geochemist and 12-
year member of the National Science Board who was appointed by both 
President Reagan and President George H.W. Bush.
  Dr. Powell recently completed an update to his comprehensive study of 
the peer-reviewed literature on climate change. Dr. Powell found that 
of the 10,885 peer-reviewed scientific papers that were published on 
climate change in all of 2013, only two papers reject human 
contributions to climate change--two out of nearly 11,000. That is less 
than two-hundredths of 1 percent of all scientific journal papers 
published in 2013 that are peer reviewed rejected some form of human 
contribution to climate change.
  This is not disagreement. This is not a divided scientific community. 
The reason for this is simple: there is no convincing scientific 
evidence against a human role in climate change. Period. End of 
discussion. Those that deny human contributions to climate change offer 
no compelling evidence to better explain the undeniable rise in 
atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and accompanying rising 
global temperature.
  The case is closed. We need to put this illusion of major scientific 
disagreement behind us and take action. We should be fully funding 
NOAA's climate research hopefully at the level requested by President 
Obama in his 2015 budget request.
  Mr. FATTAH. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment.
  Mr. LOWENTHAL. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt).
  The amendment was rejected.


                   Amendment Offered by Ms. Bonamici

  Ms. BONAMICI. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 13, line 21, after the dollar amount insert ``(reduced 
     by $9,000,000) (increased by $9,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Madam Chair, I rise in support of increasing funding to 
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, to support 
its Integrated Ocean Acidification research line and fulfill the 
administration's requested funding level of $15 million in fiscal year 
2015.
  The administration's requested increase of funds for ocean 
acidification research reflects a growing consensus in both the 
scientific community and the coastal and fishing communities that I and 
so many of our colleagues represent that ocean acidification is already 
affecting marine organisms and could irreversibly alter the marine 
environment and harm our coastal ecosystems and economies.
  On the west coast alone, a $270 million shellfish industry has 
experienced disastrous oyster production failures and near collapse in 
recent years because of changes in water conditions that have been 
attributed to ocean acidification. This change in chemistry is caused 
by carbon dioxide in the atmosphere dissolving into the ocean, and the 
increased acidity of the ocean is harming the basic building blocks for 
life in the ocean, making it more difficult for marine organisms to 
build their skeletons and shells, and slowing the formation of 
important ecosystem features such as coral reefs.
  In the Pacific Northwest, for example, the combination of seasonal 
upwelling of acidic waters, low alkalinity, and increased anthropogenic 
CO2 create some of the most corrosive ocean conditions in 
the world.
  In just the last few years, the scientific community has been 
increasingly raising concerns about ocean acidification with 
policymakers. Researchers at Oregon State University have been working 
with the fishing community in Oregon to determine the impacts of 
acidification. They have been helping the shellfish industry, 
especially the hatcheries, assess the causes of oyster die-off and how 
to mitigate the harmful upwelling events through monitoring the water 
entering their facility. This exemplifies the kind of academic and 
industry partnerships that become possible when the Federal Government 
supports the academic research enterprise.
  Funds provided by NOAA's Integrated Ocean Acidification research 
program will support extramural research awards that will fund studies 
on the impact of acidification in coastal, estuarine, coral reef, and 
shell environments. Not only will NOAA support studies on the impact of 
acidification, the agency runs the observing system that helps monitor 
areas experiencing increased acidity, and it also helps coastal 
communities and impacted industries develop adaptation strategies.
  Now, my examples thus far have focused on the impact in Oregon and on 
the west coast, but, colleagues, this is important to everyone because 
it affects the whole shellfish industry. I know from working with my 
colleagues in the Pacific coast States that this is a problem that 
their constituents raise with them more frequently, and they point to 
it as an immediate threat to coastal economies. In conversations I've 
had with many constituents, the threat is made more immediate by how 
little is known about how these changes could impact the marine 
organisms and the people who depend on ocean resources for their 
livelihoods. This is why we need more information, and this is why we 
need NOAA's Integrated Ocean Acidification research program and why it 
needs more robust funding. The science community at large is still 
grappling with the extent and impact of changing ocean conditions.
  The bill before us today is full of important priorities and accounts 
that could use more funding if we in Congress were able to provide it. 
Researchers at NOAA have indicated that even increasing the funding to 
$15 million does not provide them with enough resources to fully 
address a problem of this magnitude. But even a modest increase will go 
a long way to supporting our hard-hit coastal communities and 
industries and would better prepare communities to address the creeping 
threat of changing ocean chemistry.
  Now, Madam Chair, at the appropriate time, I plan to withdraw my 
amendment, but I do hope that the chairman, the ranking member, and the 
committee will work with me on this important issue going forward, and 
I know there is at least one additional Member who wishes to speak on 
this issue.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FARR. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment and this 
concept. I want to thank the gentlewoman from the Northwest, 
Congresswoman Bonamici, for introducing this amendment.

[[Page H4896]]

  Look, this is a science bill, and there is a lot of discussion 
tonight on science, and a lot of it is on weather and climate. What 
generates the climate of this planet is the ocean, and we sometimes 
often overlook the importance that the ocean plays. Now, if we are 
killing the ocean, which some people think we are doing, because if you 
think about it, we have dumped everything we don't want on the mainland 
into the ocean, including nuclear waste and all kinds of other waste, 
we have caught everything that is in the ocean that is edible, and we 
have never found the balance. There is one industry that has, and that 
is the shellfish industry, which doesn't have to go out and just 
collect wild shellfish anymore. It is the fish farming industry, and it 
is a $270 million industry on the west coast.
  Guess what is happening to that industry? The seawater that they use 
that is necessary has become acidic, and therefore the shells can't 
form. It is sort of like, remember what we were doing with DDT and you 
had eggshells from birds, pelicans, that couldn't get hard? And we 
eliminated the DDT. We got sensible about that.
  Well, we have to get sensible about what we are going to do about 
ocean acidification. Don Young, our colleague from Alaska, and I are 
working on a bill, on a substantive bill, for the policy of ocean 
acidification. But that policy can't be implemented unless the 
Department carries it out, which the amendment that the gentlewoman has 
introduced will allow it to do.

  I don't know how to put this in any clearer terms, but if our water 
that we were trying to drink was getting so bad that it was killing 
people, we did something about it in Congress. We passed a national 
Clean Water Act that says that you can't do bad things to water that we 
use for beneficial purposes. When air was getting so bad that people 
were getting harmed by air, Congress enacted a national air pollution 
act--the Clean Air Act--and said we have to clean up the air. It 
certainly was a big impact in California with all the smog in southern 
California, and we tackled it. We invested money into it, we invested 
politics into it, and we cleaned up the air in the southern California 
basin--not perfectly, but it is certainly a lot better than it used to 
be.
  So the point of it here is, look, if we don't pay attention to the 
ocean and what is happening to the chemistry of the ocean, in the long 
run our concerns about deficits, war, and pestilence around the world 
mean nothing because if that ocean gets so toxic, it kills us all, it 
kills all living things on Earth. Seventy-three percent of the planet 
is ocean.
  So let's begin doing what we have done well in paying attention to 
clean air and clean water and start thinking about, what is it going to 
take to pay attention to clean oceans or do no harm or stop dumping 
into the oceans? Let's not kill one of Earth's life forms that is so 
important. And particularly, since we get so much sustenance from the 
oceans in the shellfish industry, let's not kill a private sector 
business that is managing itself well because we are not paying 
attention to acidification of our oceans.
  So please adopt this amendment. If you are going to withdraw it, I 
hope we can work something out in conference to pay attention to this 
very important issue.
  Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment from our 
colleague from Oregon.
  There has been a lot of talk tonight on both sides of the aisle about 
science. The point of science research is to teach us things that we 
don't already know. In fact, it was just a few years ago that science 
research showed something that we should have known but didn't, which 
was that our oceans were becoming acidic, that our oceans were becoming 
acidic to the point of damaging fisheries, damaging coral reefs, and 
damaging many of the things that we value and should value in this 
world of ours.
  This is an important amendment, and although I understand that the 
gentlelady intends to withdraw it, I do hope that the chair will find 
some way to address her point as this bill goes through the legislative 
process, as I also hope the chair will find some way to address the 
point of my earlier amendment about NOAA climate research.
  With that, expressing strong support for this amendment, I yield back 
the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2230

  Ms. BONAMICI. Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment 
be withdrawn.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Oregon?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CARNEY. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Delaware is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CARNEY. Madam Chair, in lieu of offering my amendment at the 
desk, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the chairman.
  Madam Chairman, I rise to discuss with you the importance of our 
Nation's fisheries and, in particular, the survey of horseshoe crab 
populations along the Atlantic coast. The Delaware Bay supports the 
largest population of horseshoe crabs in the world.
  This unique and ancient species is critical to not only the ecology 
of the Atlantic coast region, but to my State's economy as well.
  Horseshoe crab eggs are a critical food source for migrating shore 
birds. An estimated 450,000 to 1 million of these shore birds visit 
Delaware Bay each year, along with them come birdwatchers who 
contribute to Delaware's tourism economy. Horseshoe crabs also provide 
bait for commercial American eel and conch fisheries along the coast.
  Less well known is that horseshoe crabs are used for biomedical 
applications. Extract of horseshoe crab blood is used to ensure that 
injectable medications like intravenous drugs, vaccines, and medical 
devices are free of bacterial contamination.
  While there are some indications that horseshoe crabs are thriving in 
the Delaware Bay, we need additional research about their migratory 
patterns and prevalence in other parts of the mid-Atlantic region.
  Congress has, in the past, provided funding for comprehensive surveys 
of horseshoe crab populations. The data collected through these surveys 
allows the Atlantic coastal States to set annual quotas for the 
Delaware Bay region to protect both horseshoe crabs and migratory shore 
birds.
  For a very small investment, we can generate the research necessary 
to ensure this critical species remains on a sustainable path.
  Although I am withdrawing my amendment, I look forward to continuing 
to work with the Appropriations Committee on ways to improve funding 
for the science and data collection needed for surveys of horseshoe 
crab populations along the Atlantic coast.
  Mr. WOLF. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CARNEY. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. WOLF. I thank the gentleman for withdrawing the amendment. I 
understand how important the horseshoe crab is. I have been to Lewes, 
Delaware, many times; and I understand.
  You make a very powerful point, but as the gentleman is aware, the 
bill before the House today includes $72 million for stock assessments, 
which is the same as the request, and a $3 million increase above the 
enacted level. We will continue to work with the gentleman, and I 
appreciate his comments.
  Mr. CARNEY. I thank the gentleman and look forward to working more 
with the committee on this issue.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I concur with the chairman and look forward 
to working with the gentleman from Delaware on this issue of horseshoe 
crabs because they are critically important to both biomedical research 
and to the economy. We look forward to working with him as we go 
forward.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H4897]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

               procurement, acquisition and construction

       For procurement, acquisition and construction of capital 
     assets, including alteration and modification costs, of the 
     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 
     $2,176,290,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017, 
     except that funds provided for construction of facilities 
     shall remain available until expended: Provided, That of the 
     $2,189,290,000 provided for in direct obligations under this 
     heading, $2,176,290,000 is appropriated from the general fund 
     and $13,000,000 is provided from recoveries of prior year 
     obligations: Provided further, That any deviation from the 
     amounts designated for specific activities in the report 
     accompanying this Act, or any use of deobligated balances of 
     funds provided under this heading in previous years, shall be 
     subject to the procedures set forth in section 505 of this 
     Act: Provided further, That the Secretary of Commerce shall 
     include in budget justification materials that the Secretary 
     submits to Congress in support of the Department of Commerce 
     budget (as submitted with the budget of the President under 
     section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code) an estimate 
     for each National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     procurement, acquisition or construction project having a 
     total of more than $5,000,000 and simultaneously the budget 
     justification shall include an estimate of the budgetary 
     requirements for each such project for each of the 5 
     subsequent fiscal years: Provided further, That within the 
     amounts appropriated, $1,302,000 shall be transferred to the 
     ``Office of Inspector General'' account for activities 
     associated with carrying out investigations and audits 
     related to satellite procurement, acquisition and 
     construction.

                    pacific coastal salmon recovery

       For necessary expenses associated with the restoration of 
     Pacific salmon populations, $65,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2016: Provided, That, of the funds 
     provided herein, the Secretary of Commerce may issue grants 
     to the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, 
     California, and Alaska, and to the Federally recognized 
     tribes of the Columbia River and Pacific Coast (including 
     Alaska), for projects necessary for conservation of salmon 
     and steelhead populations that are listed as threatened or 
     endangered, or that are identified by a State as at-risk to 
     be so listed, for maintaining populations necessary for 
     exercise of tribal treaty fishing rights or native 
     subsistence fishing, or for conservation of Pacific coastal 
     salmon and steelhead habitat, based on guidelines to be 
     developed by the Secretary of Commerce: Provided further, 
     That all funds shall be allocated based on scientific and 
     other merit principles and shall not be available for 
     marketing activities: Provided further, That funds disbursed 
     to States shall be subject to a matching requirement of funds 
     or documented in-kind contributions of at least 33 percent of 
     the Federal funds.

                      fishermen's contingency fund

       For carrying out the provisions of title IV of Public Law 
     95-372, not to exceed $350,000, to be derived from receipts 
     collected pursuant to that Act, to remain available until 
     expended.

                   fisheries finance program account

       Subject to section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974, during fiscal year 2015, obligations of direct loans 
     may not exceed $24,000,000 for Individual Fishing Quota loans 
     and not to exceed $100,000,000 for traditional direct loans 
     as authorized by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936.

                        Departmental Management

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the management of the Department 
     of Commerce provided for by law, including not to exceed 
     $4,500 for official reception and representation, 
     $54,000,000: Provided, That the Secretary of Commerce shall 
     maintain a task force on job repatriation and manufacturing 
     growth and shall produce an annual report on related 
     incentive strategies, implementation plans and program 
     results.


            Amendment Offered by Mr. Thompson of California

  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 17, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 22, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
       Page 35, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,500,000)''.
       Page 35, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $5,500,000)''.
       Page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $19,500,000)''.
       Page 46, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $19,500,000)''.
       Page 70, line 17, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $10,000,000)''.

  Mr. THOMPSON of California (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask 
unanimous consent to dispense with the reading.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Madam Chair, I want to thank my friend, 
Mr. Wolf, for all of your years of outstanding service to this fine 
institution.
  I rise in support of the bipartisan Thompson-King-Esty-Heck-
Fitzpatrick amendment to strengthen the National Instant Criminal 
Background Check System.
  Everyone agrees that we don't want criminals, domestic abusers, or 
dangerously mentally ill folks getting guns; and the first step in 
stopping this is through our background checks system, but the 
background checks system is only as good as the data you put in it.
  Right now, all of the information isn't getting in. When the 
information doesn't get into the system, we can't enforce the law, and 
dangerous people who otherwise wouldn't pass a background check can 
slip through the cracks and buy guns.
  A recent USA Today report found that, in just five States, records 
for 2.5 million fugitives weren't entered into the NICS system. Six 
States have fewer than 30 total records in the NICS system, and 12 
States have submitted fewer than 100 mental health records to the NICS 
system.
  When States fail to submit these records, there is nothing to stop a 
dangerously mentally ill person from passing a background check and 
buying a gun. This is exactly what happened in the tragedy at Virginia 
Tech.
  My bipartisan amendment will address this dangerous shortfall. It 
provides an additional $19.5 million to help States improve their 
submissions into the criminal background checks system. It will bring 
NICS grant funding to $78 million.
  Many people on both sides of the aisle have already voted to support 
funding at levels that are much higher. After the Virginia Tech 
shooting, Congress unanimously enacted legislation that authorized DOJ 
to provide up to $190 million per year to help States improve 
submissions into the NICS system.
  The NRA supported it, too. In fact, Wayne LaPierre said:

       Our members don't want mental defectives and criminals 
     buying handguns. We supported the background checks and 
     support the money to make it work effectively.

  Since the unanimous passage of this NICS improvement legislation, 
Congress hasn't come close to appropriating these funds. In FY 2013, 
Congress appropriated just $18 million.
  Last year, we started to move in the right direction, increasing 
funding to almost $59 million. While this was a good bump, it wasn't 
enough because, also last year, almost $20 million in requests from 
States went unfunded.
  Our States need more resources to get all their information into the 
NICS system. If we give them the resources, we can stop dangerous 
people from getting guns, and we can save lives.
  Every day, our background checks system stops more than 170 felons, 
some 50 domestic abusers, and nearly 20 fugitives from buying a gun; 
but millions of dangerous purchasers could be passing background checks 
when they shouldn't be, all because States don't have the money they 
need to get records into the criminal background check system.
  Madam Chair, this is dangerous. We can only stop criminals, domestic 
abusers, and the dangerously mentally ill from getting guns if their 
information is in the system, so let's pass this amendment and give our 
States the resources they need to keep people safe.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I rise in strong support of the gentleman's amendment, and 
I thank him for taking the initiative and doing what he has done. 
Enforcing existing laws that keeps guns out of the hands of prohibited 
individuals is a goal we all share.
  The bill already includes funding over 6 percent above the 
President's request for NICS grants. The level is $40 million above the 
fiscal year 2013 level. We can maybe even get it up higher than the 
gentleman has when we go to conference.

[[Page H4898]]

  I think what he is doing is very important. I am going to ask for a 
roll call vote on this. I think it is very, very important. It is not 
enough to just talk about something; I think it is important we do it. 
I thank the gentleman and strongly support his amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. I rise in support of this amendment and thank the 
chairman for accepting it. I join with the chairman in asking for a 
recorded vote.
  My home State, like many of our States, rushed forward with hundreds 
of thousands of names into the system after the Newtown shooting of 20 
schoolchildren, but names that should have been in the system from the 
beginning.
  So I think it is very important that, if we are going to have this 
system, that we have the information in it, and this amendment provides 
the resources, and none of the offsets are from the census account.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ESTY. Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle to support the Thompson-King-Esty-Heck amendment to increase 
funding for the National Instant Criminal Background Checks Systems 
(NICS).
  The NICS database provides critical information on prospective 
firearms buyers, protecting the 2nd Amendment rights of law-abiding gun 
owners. Information in the database is used to determine whether an 
individual is ineligible to purchase a firearm because they are a 
felon, a domestic abuser, or seriously mentally ill. The NICS database 
allows sellers to conduct criminal background checks to make sure 
firearms are not getting into the hands of people who may be a danger 
to the public or even themselves.
  Unfortunately, many states do not have adequate funding and resources 
to submit the most recent and comprehensive data to the NICS database. 
Our amendment would increase funding for NICS by $19.5 million to meet 
the growing demand from states to responsibly update the database.
  According to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, criminal 
background checks have blocked more than 2.1 million illegal gun 
purchases, including more than 291,000 by domestic abusers. Background 
checks prevent more than 171 convicted felons from purchasing firearms 
every single day. These simple checks have saved countless lives in the 
past two decades, and it is essential that states have the necessary 
tools to prevent more tragedies in the future.
  I thank my good friends Rep. Mike Thompson, Rep. Peter King, and Rep. 
Joe Heck for their outstanding partnership on this commonsense 
amendment. Their leadership proves that legislation to prevent gun 
violence and protect our families should not be a partisan issue. I 
urge all Members to support this commonsense amendment to save lives.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                      renovation and modernization

       For necessary expenses for the renovation and modernization 
     of Department of Commerce facilities, $4,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), $30,596,000.


               Amendment Offered by Mr. Broun of Georgia

  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 18, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $596,000)''.
       Page 100, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $596,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Madam Chair, this amendment would eliminate the 
increase of $596,000 for the Office of Inspector General under the 
Department of Commerce and apply that amount to the spending reduction 
account. This amendment has the support of the ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Oversight, Representative Maffei, as well.
  As chairman of the House Science Oversight Subcommittee within the 
Science, Space, and Technology Committee, I have had the unfortunate 
responsibility of discovering an incidence of whistleblower 
intimidation perpetrated by top-level agency employees at the 
Department of Commerce, Office of Inspector General.
  Consequently, the Office of Special Counsel was brought in to 
investigate these allegations of whistleblower retaliation.
  The investigation in this particular case found that the counsel to 
the inspector general and the principal assistant inspector general for 
investigations and whistleblower protection had threatened 
whistleblowers with an ultimatum: to either sign an agreement to not 
``disparage the agency to Congress and their staff, the Office of 
Special Counsel, and the media'' or have failing performance reviews 
added to their permanent files.
  Unfortunately, the Office of Inspector General ignored these findings 
and took minimal action against these individuals. That is not enough.
  As a result, I, along with all of the members of the subcommittee, 
sent a letter on April 1, 2014, to the Commerce IG demanding he 
immediately fire the two officials in question.
  The inspector general responded by saying, in part, that the office 
had ``moved on.''
  It is beyond hypocritical that the inspector general's office has 
conducted itself in this manner.
  According to its website, the Office of Inspector General ``endeavors 
to detect and determine waste, fraud, and abuse'' throughout the 
Commerce Department and ``keep Congress fully and currently informed 
about problems and deficiencies and the need for corrective action.''

                              {time}  2245

  As lawmakers, we depend on just and ethical inspectors general to 
protect taxpayers' interest and to hold Federal Government officials 
accountable to the law. Yet we can't depend on the Office of Inspector 
General at the Department of Commerce to even police its own, much less 
others who may seek to violate whistleblower protection laws. At the 
very least, we must refuse to increase the OIG's appropriation until 
corrective action is taken.
  I urge my colleagues to adopt this nonpartisan amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I reluctantly rise in opposition to the 
gentleman's amendment.
  The Commerce IG performs an important oversight for the Department 
and for our subcommittee and committee.
  I understand that the inspector general has asked the Integrity 
Committee of the Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and 
Efficiency for an objective review and recommendations concerning this 
matter taking into account all the facts; the OIG has implemented each 
of the corrective actions proposed by the Office of Special Counsel, 
and that those actions were accepted by the Office of Special Counsel 
to address concerns contained in its report as a result of its 
investigation. Further, I understand there was no testimonial or 
documentary evidence that the inspector general had committed any 
prohibition with regard to personnel. It appears also that the IG has 
asked the counsel--they call it the CIGIE--to further review this 
matter. Until that process is concluded, it could be premature to 
reduce the common inspector general funding.
  Because of that, I rise in opposition to the amendment and yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.

[[Page H4899]]

  The Clerk read as follows:

               General Provisions--Department of Commerce

       Sec. 101.  During the current fiscal year, applicable 
     appropriations and funds made available to the Department of 
     Commerce by this Act shall be available for the activities 
     specified in the Act of October 26, 1949 (15 U.S.C. 1514), to 
     the extent and in the manner prescribed by the Act, and, 
     notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3324, may be used for advanced 
     payments not otherwise authorized only upon the certification 
     of officials designated by the Secretary of Commerce that 
     such payments are in the public interest.
       Sec. 102.  During the current fiscal year, appropriations 
     made available to the Department of Commerce by this Act for 
     salaries and expenses shall be available for hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 
     1344; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and uniforms 
     or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-
     5902).
       Sec. 103.  Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation 
     made available for the current fiscal year for the Department 
     of Commerce in this Act may be transferred between such 
     appropriations, but no such appropriation shall be increased 
     by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: Provided, That 
     any transfer pursuant to this section shall be treated as a 
     reprogramming of funds under section 505 of this Act and 
     shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except 
     in compliance with the procedures set forth in that section: 
     Provided further, That the Secretary of Commerce shall notify 
     the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days in advance 
     of the acquisition or disposal of any capital asset 
     (including land, structures, and equipment) not specifically 
     provided for in this Act or any other law appropriating funds 
     for the Department of Commerce.
       Sec. 104.  The requirements set forth by section 105 of the 
     Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-55), as amended by 
     section 105 of title I of division B of Public Law 113-6, are 
     hereby adopted by reference and made applicable with respect 
     to fiscal year 2015.
       Sec. 105.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Secretary may furnish services (including but not limited to 
     utilities, telecommunications, and security services) 
     necessary to support the operation, maintenance, and 
     improvement of space that persons, firms, or organizations 
     are authorized, pursuant to the Public Buildings Cooperative 
     Use Act of 1976 or other authority, to use or occupy in the 
     Herbert C. Hoover Building, Washington, DC, or other 
     buildings, the maintenance, operation, and protection of 
     which has been delegated to the Secretary from the 
     Administrator of General Services pursuant to the Federal 
     Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 on a 
     reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis. Amounts received as 
     reimbursement for services provided under this section or the 
     authority under which the use or occupancy of the space is 
     authorized, up to $200,000, shall be credited to the 
     appropriation or fund which initially bears the costs of such 
     services.
       Sec. 106.  Nothing in this title shall be construed to 
     prevent a grant recipient from deterring child pornography, 
     copyright infringement, or any other unlawful activity over 
     its networks.
       Sec. 107.  The Administrator of the National Oceanic and 
     Atmospheric Administration is authorized to use, with their 
     consent, with reimbursement and subject to the limits of 
     available appropriations, the land, services, equipment, 
     personnel, and facilities of any department, agency, or 
     instrumentality of the United States, or of any State, local 
     government, Indian tribal government, Territory, or 
     possession, or of any political subdivision thereof, or of 
     any foreign government or international organization, for 
     purposes related to carrying out the responsibilities of any 
     statute administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
     Administration.
       Sec. 108.  The Department of Commerce shall provide a 
     monthly report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate on any official 
     travel to China by any employee of the U.S. Department of 
     Commerce, including the purpose of such travel.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of Commerce 
     Appropriations Act, 2015''.

                                TITLE II

                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

                         General Administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the administration of the 
     Department of Justice, $103,851,000, of which not to exceed 
     $4,000,000 for security and construction of Department of 
     Justice facilities shall remain available until expended.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore

  Ms. MOORE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 22, line 25, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

  Ms. MOORE (during the reading). Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
to dispense with the reading.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. MOORE. Madam Chair, my amendment adds $1 million to the Executive 
Office for Immigration Review, EOIR, and is offset through the 
Department of Justice salaries and expenses account.
  Now, I really do want to acknowledge the committee for their great 
work in increasing funding for the EOIR for this fiscal year, but even 
with this increase, Madam Chair, funding is still woefully short of the 
President's request. This bill doesn't nearly go far enough to address 
the crisis our immigration courts face today.
  This House has spared no expense--no expense--when it comes to 
throwing money at our failed enforcement-only immigration system. Since 
we are spending about $18 billion a year on enforcement, we are 
detaining and deporting immigrants at record levels. An estimated 1,000 
deportations take place each day. Yet, Madam Chair, we have done little 
to nothing to ensure that our Nation's immigration courts keep up with 
that pace, let alone fix many of these problems. This is one more 
example to demonstrate why we should have passed comprehensive 
immigration reform this year.
  But that having been said, this amendment seeks to address that 
disparity. This mismatch, Madam Chair, between immigration review 
resources and aggressive enforcement efforts has created a backlog of 
over 366,000 cases in our immigration courts. The average wait for a 
hearing is over 570 days.
  Many justified--justified--immigration relief and asylum seekers can 
find themselves waiting years in limbo. And these unacceptable delays 
waste taxpayer dollars by keeping people in detention.
  Moreover, our tradition of due process is in serious jeopardy. EOIR 
has been forced to do everything in its power to accommodate their 
dockets, but only so much can be done without sacrificing essential 
aspects of the court.
  Now, Madam Chair, in February, a Washington Post article described 
the day-to-day world of one of our immigration courts, where a judge 
had, on average, 7 minutes to decide each case: 7 minutes to decide 
whether to deport a person who might be eligible for asylum because 
they could be killed if they are sent back to their home country; 7 
minutes for a judge to decide if a child will grow up without that 
father or mother--7 minutes. One judge described it in testimony before 
Congress: It is like doing death penalty cases in a traffic court 
setting.
  My amendment also highlights the need to fund and expand the Legal 
Orientation Program. This important program gives detainees basic legal 
information, makes our system more efficient, and strengthens due 
process.
  About 41 percent of those awaiting hearings before an immigration 
judge don't have legal representation. Children, Madam Chair, would 
benefit from this. In March of 2014, a U.N. refugee agency report cited 
a strong link between instability and violence in the Americas region 
and the new displacement patterns of children fleeing northward. Yet 
these children, ranging from toddlers to teenagers, are so vulnerable, 
but they are less likely to have legal advice and counsel, our notion 
of guardian ad litem, to help them navigate the complex immigration 
laws. This is so important, Madam Chair. I hope we can work together to 
expand it.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I understand it takes a million from Attorney 
General Holder's office and puts it into the immigration area. I think 
she makes a powerful case. I have no objection.
  Mr. FATTAH. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. FATTAH. I concur with the gentleman's remarks.

[[Page H4900]]

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Chair, I rise today to express my support for 
the fiscal year 2015 Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations bill and to thank Chairman Wolf for his steadfast 
service as chairman of the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related 
Agencies Subcommittee.
  On behalf of the members of House Judiciary, I would like to express 
my gratitude for the cooperative spirit in which Chairman Wolf and the 
CJS Subcommittee has worked with us to ensure that many of the 
Judiciary Committee's concerns were addressed.
  Funding for immigration courts, intellectual property rights, 
enforcement, and crime victims are just a few of the critical 
priorities addressed by the bill. I am pleased to say that the bill 
includes an increase in funding for the administrative review and 
appeals account. This increase will support much-needed additional 
immigration judge teams. I commend the committee for their efforts to 
allocate this funding, which is crucial to reducing the backlog of 
unadjudicated removal and asylum cases.
  I also want to express my appreciation for language included to 
ensure that the Executive Office for Immigration Review will not use 
taxpayer funds to pay for attorneys for aliens in removal proceedings, 
except to the extent required by Federal court order.
  This bill also increases funding available for crime victims by 
raising the cap on the crime victims fund, a mandatory account 
supported by criminal fines, forfeited bail bonds, and special 
assessments, as opposed to appropriated funding.
  Furthermore, I applaud Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah for 
the extraordinary efforts shown throughout title II of this bill to 
prioritize the elimination of human trafficking, using all of the law 
enforcement components and tools of the Department of Justice.
  This bill also maintains many important restrictions on the use of 
funds, such as a prohibition on the transfer or release of Guantanamo 
detainees into the U.S., the continuation of various provisions related 
to firearms, and limitations on the use of funds by the Legal Services 
Corporation.
  The bill also provides $3.46 billion for the Patent and Trademark 
Office, an amount equal to the fees that are expected to be collected 
by the PTO in the coming fiscal year.
  While I am disappointed that the bill includes no funds for the 
Juvenile Accountability Block Grant program, a program that was zeroed 
out as of fiscal year 2014, the House Judiciary Committee intends to 
examine this program further, including to potentially reauthorize this 
program.
  In conclusion, I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Wolf and Ranking 
Member Fattah to work with the Judiciary Committee on this very 
important bill. I urge its support.
  I also want to take a moment to personally thank Chairman Wolf for 
his service to this body and to the Commonwealth of Virginia. He has 
been a leading advocate for justice, human rights, and religious 
freedom, and his efforts have left an indelible mark on the Nation as 
well the world.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2300


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Sinema

  Ms. SINEMA. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 38, line 2, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 40, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Arizona is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. SINEMA. Madam Chair, the amendment today is a commonsense, 
budget-neutral amendment that provides colleges and universities with 
additional resources to prevent and respond to sexual violence on 
campus.
  This amendment increases funding for the Department of Justice's 
grants to reduce domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, 
and stalking on campus program by $1 million and offsets this increase 
by reducing DOJ general administration funding by the same amount.
  Madam Chair, I offer this amendment because nearly one in five female 
undergraduate students report being sexually assaulted in college. 
According to the Department of Education, 60 higher education 
institutions across the country--including Arizona State University, 
which I represent--are under investigation for their handling of sexual 
violence and harassment complaints. We must do more to protect students 
and equip universities to respond appropriately to sexual assault on 
campus.
  This amendment will allow more institutions of higher education to 
implement comprehensive, coordinated responses to sexual violence 
through the campus grant program.
  The campus grant program was created by the Violence Against Women 
Act of 2005 and reauthorized by the Violence Against Women 
Reauthorization Act of 2013, a bill which I worked hard to pass.
  Increasing funding to this vital program represents an important step 
in empowering victims of sexual assault and protecting both men and 
women on college campuses in Arizona and across the country.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Before I close, I want to thank the chairman of the Appropriations 
Committee, Mr. Rogers, and the chairman of the Commerce, Justice, 
Science Appropriations Subcommittee, Mr. Wolf, and the ranking member, 
Mr. Fattah, for working with me on this issue. Finally, I would like to 
thank Mr. Wolf for the years he has devoted to public service over the 
course of his very distinguished career.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, I accept the amendment. I think it is a 
very good amendment. I congratulate the gentlelady from Arizona, and I 
urge a ``yes'' vote.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I rise again in support of this 
amendment. I join with the chairman.
  I do note that this review has taken place at a number of 
universities, but none of these investigations have concluded and we 
don't know the exact facts. But we do know that young people on college 
campuses and in other circumstances are victimized. It is important 
that this program receive additional support.
  I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this amendment to our attention, 
and I thank the chairman for accepting it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Sinema).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment Offered by Mr. King of Iowa

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $5,000,000) (increased by $5,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Madam Chair, first, I would like to reiterate the 
statement made by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. 
Goodlatte, and my appreciation for the service of Mr. Wolf from 
Virginia and the job that he has done for my years that I have been 
here for my years and beyond. As a member of the Judiciary Committee 
and this Congress, I very much appreciate Frank Wolf's contribution to 
the well-being of this

[[Page H4901]]

country and the well-being of justice and compassion around the world 
that he has demonstrated.
  The amendment that I offer this evening, Madam Chair, is an amendment 
that calls upon the Department of Justice to use $5 million from the 
general administration fund to investigate the discretionary 
enforcement decisions of the Department of Homeland Security concerning 
their release of--and I will go through a series of these numbers that 
catch my attention and should alarm Americans:
  For 2013, potentially deportable aliens, ICE encountered 722,000, 
according to a report. They only charged 195,000. That means they 
released 527,000 potentially deportable aliens.
  Of the criminal aliens they encountered, they released 68,000 
criminal aliens. That was 35 percent of the criminal aliens that they 
encountered. Roughly another 195,000 encountered; 68,000 released. That 
is with no charges, Madam Chair. Some will say that is under the DACA 
provisions. I will say that the President has no constitutional 
authority to create groups of people that are exempt from the law--DACA 
standing for Deferred Action for Criminal Aliens, in this case, Madam 
Chair. It is not prosecutorial discretion.
  Deportable aliens released on the streets now--they are on the ICE 
docket for removal, but they are on the streets--870,000; 36,007 
criminal aliens released pending deportation--36,007. Of those are 
88,000 convictions all together in a variety of crimes from murder to 
kidnapping, arson, sexual assault, extortion, robbery, burglary, 
assault, and many others. We know this: that for a long period of time, 
about 15 years on average, 76 percent of these criminals released do 
not show up for their final removal hearing. That means 27,000 of the 
36,000 will abscond. The administration will say: Well, we had to 
release these criminals, these murderers and sexual assaulters and 
kidnappers, we had to release them because of a Supreme Court decision 
in about 2001 called the Zadvydas v. Davis decision.
  In that the Supreme Court held that we couldn't retain an individual 
who was being deported when the home country wouldn't accept that 
individual. But that is only 3,000 of the 36,000 that would be under 
the Zadvydas decision. That is 8 percent. The other 92 percent could 
have, and should have, been removed from this country--193 homicide 
convictions of the 36,000. So when the gentlelady from Wisconsin 
laments 1,000 deported today, there is about every other day--more 
often than every other day--there is a murderer released on the streets 
under this policy that we are getting out of the Department of Homeland 
Security and ICE.
  So my request is that $5 million out of this administrative budget be 
directed to investigating the actions of the Department of Homeland 
Security and coming back with an analysis of what is going on and why 
that we have so many criminals released onto the streets of America: 
193,000 murderers in 1 year alone; 426,000 who have committed sexual 
assault; 303 kidnapping convictions; 1,075 aggravated assaults, on down 
the line; 16,070 drunk or drug drivers released. And here is the 
kicker, Madam Chair: 303 were released to have been convicted of flight 
escape. They had broken out of jail, convicted for breaking out of 
jail, put them back in jail, and released them again to save them the 
trouble of having to break out of jail again.
  These are the kind of things that I would ask the Department of 
Justice to take a look into because their mission statement says that 
they are to enforce the law, ensure public safety, control crime, and 
seek punishment for those who violate the laws. It is de facto amnesty 
that is going on in the Department of Homeland Security. It is very 
consistent with the Department of Justice's mission statement that they 
look into these actions.
  Let's protect the American people from criminals being poured loose 
on the street by the tens of thousands. I don't lament so much 1,000 
deportations a day as I do 193 murderers turned loose in a year. I 
would point out to the gentlelady that if the deportations in this 
country exceeded the illegal entries, we wouldn't have this issue of 
illegal immigration in America.
  I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chairman, I thank my colleague from Iowa for 
offering his amendment. I oppose it.
  I would hope that we would usher in the day in which the House would 
take up comprehensive immigration reform. The President has acted, the 
Senate has acted. The people's House should vote on this matter so that 
we can come to some conclusion on these issues. We are not going to 
handle it in a piecemeal fashion, but I think that it is clear that 
there is enough concern in our country. The Chamber of Commerce says we 
need to do immigration reform. Every responsible organization has 
spoken out on this, all of our religious leaders have spoken out.
  The United States Congress has the responsibility not to run from 
this issue but to stand up and vote and be counted. I hope one day the 
gentleman from Iowa will have an opportunity to vote on comprehensive 
immigration reform, and I hope that the people in my district will have 
a chance to see me vote on this. The House should not delay any longer.
  This is an appropriations bill. We are not in the business of 
immigration reform on this bill. We are just trying to run the bare 
bones of the United States Government. I hope one day we will come back 
to this issue appropriately.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Iowa will be 
postponed.


            Amendment Offered by Ms. Brownley of California

  Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 48, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Madam Chair, I rise tonight to offer an 
amendment to H.R. 4660, which would increase funding for Veterans 
Treatment Courts.
  Our Nation's heroes are returning home from over a decade of war with 
the invisible wounds that come with multiple deployments and military 
service to our Nation. I am concerned that the effects of posttraumatic 
stress and TBI have led to a rise in substance abuse among our 
veterans, which in turn too often leads to criminal activity.
  This has led to an increase in veterans being incarcerated by our 
justice system without addressing the mental health counseling they 
need after their service to our country.
  My simple amendment would increase funds for Veterans Treatment 
Courts by $1 million. Treatment courts are designed to address 
fundamental problems with our troubled veterans who have succumbed to 
substance abuse and have gotten in trouble with the law. These courts 
are designed to provide mental health counseling that focuses on 
rehabilitation and sobriety, and works with veterans to address the 
reasons for their criminal behavior. Veterans Treatment Courts provide 
our veterans with long-term solutions versus short-term punishment.
  In January, I visited a Veterans Treatment Court in Ventura County. 
They are doing an amazing job with a team of professionals really truly 
saving one life at a time and providing a last chance for our veterans. 
Rather than arresting and jailing veterans for a few days or weeks, 
only to return them to the same type of life, the Ventura County 
collaborative court connects veterans to needed treatment and

[[Page H4902]]

services, which may include mental health care, drug and alcohol 
treatment, vocational rehabilitation, or other life skills services and 
programs.
  The process begins with a guilty plea and in-court meeting involving 
the veteran, his or her attorney, and a VA representative. I was very 
impressed with the care that the court officers and volunteers extended 
to veterans who found themselves before the court.
  In Ventura County, Judge Toy White has been a real champion of the 
veterans court and has put together a very successful and effective 
program.
  However, the Ventura County court is just one example of many of a 
Veterans Treatment Court. I believe we need to increase Federal 
resources to these critical programs nationwide, which is what my 
amendment seeks to accomplish.
  It is our obligation to ensure our veterans receive the appropriate 
attention to their needs and that we do whatever we can to help them 
transition to an independent civilian life.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support my amendment to rehabilitate 
veterans who have gotten in trouble with the law and help them secure a 
strong future.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chairman, this is a good amendment. We accepted Mr. 
Nugent's amendment earlier this evening, I think for $2 million. For 
this we accept the amendment.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Brownley).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  2315


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. McKinley

  Mr. McKINLEY. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,500,000)''.
       Page 74, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,500,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from West Virginia is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. McKINLEY. Before I get to my remarks, let me join in the thanks 
for Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah and for their staffs for 
all of the hours that they put in here tonight. I have sat here and 
listened to all of these amendments. I have appreciated the patience 
you all have exhibited through this.
  Madam Chairman, many small businesses around the country are 
struggling to compete against unfair, low-priced foreign imports. They 
are intimidated by the cost of the legal challenge to push back. The 
intent and purpose of this amendment is simple. It transfers $1.5 
million to the International Trade Commission to provide legal and 
technical assistance to small businesses seeking a remedy.
  Time and time again, small businesses are losing business against 
unfair, low-cost imports that flood this country. Something needs to be 
done. Small businesses need help.
  They don't have access to the same legal resources as larger 
companies, and they can't afford the cost to file a claim against large 
state-supported industries like we find in China.
  In West Virginia, we have one particular company that manufactures 
glass lead-free marbles. The company has fewer than 50 employees, and 
it has asked our office a very simple question: When the average cost 
to file an antidumping claim is between $1 million and $2 million, how 
can a small manufacturer afford access to justice?
  The Federal Government provides pro bono attorneys in criminal cases 
for those who can't afford representation. Why not offer something 
similar to our small businesses facing unfair dumping competition?
  On two occasions last year, this particular company had the 
opportunity to bid on significant contracts that would have allowed it 
to hire back laid-off workers, plus add an additional 20 people. Both 
times, the company was knocked out by questionable Chinese competition.
  A recent contract was offered for 300 million marbles per year. That 
contract would have guaranteed 300 days of production for hardworking 
Americans. Again, a Chinese company undercut them unfairly.
  Unfortunately, we have seen this story before with Chinese currency 
manipulation and State subsidies that have crushed our tin, rebar, and 
hot rolled steel industries, among others. The ITC must have the tools 
to protect our small businesses, and this amendment is a step in the 
right direction.
  Let's be clear, Madam Chairman. Do we want to keep talking about 
jobs? Or do we want to do something about it? Supporting this amendment 
will be an immense help for small employers in fighting back against 
unfair trade.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of this amendment. 
The gentleman from West Virginia is exactly right.
  One of the frustrating things to keep in mind is that, in China, 
there are 24 Catholic bishops under house arrest, and nobody seems to 
care. There are big law firms in Washington that represent the Chinese 
Government, and nobody seems to care.
  They have plundered Tibet, and yet American companies have to go up 
against American law firms that are paid for by Chinese filthy money, 
so I think it is a very good amendment. I would have made it double the 
amount, but we will try to add that when we get to conference. I accept 
the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment and its 
goals, and I agree with the spirit of the chairman on this matter.
  I do want to note that we went through a series of amendments in 
which we cut the general administrative accounts at the Department of 
Justice, and there will be a day of reckoning as there was with the 
Census Bureau. It has nothing to do with your amendment, but we do have 
to fund those accounts.
  This is what happens when you have an allocation that is squeezed: 
the offsets all start to sound pretty familiar. The last three or four 
amendments have all been related to cutting money from these general 
accounts. They are good amendments, and this is a good amendment, so I 
stand in support of it.
  I just want the House to take note that, at some point, we will have 
to reconcile these figures and conference with the Senate in that we 
will have to be funding for these general accounts at DOJ.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).
  The amendment was agreed to.


     Amendment Offered by Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico

  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Madam Chairman, I have an 
amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 45, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Thank you, Chairman Wolf 
and Ranking Member Fattah, for your leadership and tireless work on 
this bill.
  Madam Chairman, my amendment would add $2 million to the Mentally Ill 
Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act programs. This will 
partially restore these programs to presequestration levels and provide 
desperately needed funding for increasing the collaboration between our 
Nation's criminal justice and mental health systems.

[[Page H4903]]

  My amendment is offset by the Department of Justice's general 
administration account. While I recognize the importance of funding the 
DOJ, this amendment amounts to less than two-tenths of 1 percent of 
DOJ's total administrative budget.
  Even though this $2 million investment is modest, it will have a 
tremendous impact on existing State and local law enforcement agencies 
all across the country to provide a broad range of mental health 
services, including mental health courts, mental health and substance 
abuse treatment, rehabilitation and community reentry services, and 
training for State and local law enforcement to help them identify and 
improve responses to people with mental illnesses.
  I want to particularly express my support for crisis intervention 
training for State and local police officers, which receives funding 
through the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act.
  Officer encounters with mentally ill individuals during crises too 
often end in tragedy. Crisis intervention training can help prevent 
injuries to officers, alleviate harm to the person in crisis, promote 
the decriminalization of individuals with mental illness, and reduce 
the stigma associated with mental disorders.
  We can all agree that the mental health and criminal justice systems 
in this country are failing the American people. Focused more on 
prosecution than on prevention and rehabilitation, jail is often used 
as a de facto holding area for the mentally ill.
  The Department of Justice estimates that 64 percent of local jail 
inmates and 56 percent of State inmates have symptoms of severe mental 
illness.
  Without treatment, rehabilitation, and community reentry services, 
these individuals are much more likely to spend their lives in and out 
of the prison system. In fact, 81 percent of mentally ill inmates in 
State prison and 79 percent of mentally ill inmates in local jails have 
had prior convictions.
  Considering that it takes more money to keep a person in jail for a 
year than to send him or her to college, we cannot afford to do 
nothing.
  I believe my amendment is in the spirit of this bill's goal of 
investing in prevention and rehabilitation in order to reduce 
recidivism and long-term incarceration costs.
  I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and ensure that our 
criminal justice and mental health systems have the funds that they 
need to serve this country's most vulnerable people.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, we have already increased this, but I think it 
is meritorious, so I have no objection to the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Coffman

  Mr. COFFMAN. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,044,445)''.
       Page 26, line 1, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. COFFMAN. Madam Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to the 
Justice appropriation that would plus-up the account for salaries and 
expenses by $1 million for the United States Attorneys' Office and make 
an offsetting decrease in the amount appropriated for general 
administration.
  The first reason I offer this amendment is to acknowledge that, over 
the past couple of years, the United States Attorneys' Office has 
devoted substantial resources in the successful prosecution of numerous 
individuals for the fraudulent use of the service-disabled, veteran-
owned small business preference program.
  My subcommittee worked diligently to bring attention to this type of 
fraud to the VA Office of the Inspector General and to get its 
commitment to pursue these cases.
  A recent case involved a joint VA OIG-FBI investigation of a sham 
company set up as a passthrough to secure almost $13.5 million in set-
aside contracts that rightfully should have gone to a business owned by 
a qualified service-disabled veteran.
  Victimizing veterans must not be tolerated. As chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs, I want to see these investigations and prosecutions 
continue.
  Second, I anticipate a serious need for investigative and 
prosecutorial resources, going forward, nationwide, as a result of the 
burgeoning scandal involving the manipulation of appointment scheduling 
records at VA medical facilities.
  My subcommittee has been investigating problems with appointment 
scheduling, consult delays, and timely health care for over 3 years. 
Lists with true wait times are being kept off the official books. 
According to these sources, as many as 40 veterans may have died while 
waiting for an appointment at the Phoenix medical center.
  Upon this discovery, the full committee chairman, Jeff Miller, 
immediately called for an in-depth criminal investigation by the VA OIG 
at all medical centers where such schedule manipulation, appointment 
delays, and preventable deaths may be occurring.
  The VA has had knowledge of the intentional manipulation of 
appointment schedules and the falsification of official records since 
at least 2010, when an internal memorandum warned of the use of as many 
as 17 different scheduling schemes. Such manipulation occurs because 
scheduling delays negatively affect a performance metric used for 
bonuses at the VA.
  In an interim report issued today, the VA OIG confirmed that the 
manipulation of appointment schedules persist, and they substantiated 
that significant delays in access to care have negatively impacted the 
quality of care at the Phoenix medical center.
  Further, they indicated that they opened investigations at 42 other 
VA medical facilities across the Nation. We do not yet know the full 
extent of the scandal, including how many veterans have died while 
waiting for an appointment with the VA.
  As with every scandal, I am very concerned that additional crimes may 
be committed during the coverup. I have instructed my investigators to 
continue to pursue leads in furtherance of the committee's 
congressional oversight duties.

                              {time}  2330

  In this role, we have received credible allegations from numerous 
employees that multiple VA supervisors are instructing them to destroy 
evidence and are dictating what to say to OIG investigators. These 
allegations are being referred to the OIG for criminal investigations.
  Given the scope of the problems and the seriousness of the 
allegations, I strongly urge passage of this amendment to provide 
additional money to the U.S. Attorneys' Offices who will be tasked with 
the difficult job of pursuing investigations and prosecuting the crimes 
related to this national scandal unfolding at the VA.
  When our servicemembers are deprived of the quality health care that 
they have earned, we must demand justice from those who are found 
responsible.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognize for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. The gentleman moved back and forth from the original 
allegations to today's report from the inspector general, but left out 
some very important points, and I want to make sure the House is 
operating from full information.

[[Page H4904]]

  The allegation that veterans died for a lack of care was not proven 
by today's report. In fact, the inspector general said today they have 
no ability to determine this issue.
  The actual whistleblower who made this allegation in the first place 
was on FOX News on Sunday and said that he had no ability to tie the 
death to the delay.
  I think we don't want to create a situation where we don't have 
veterans seeking care based on misinformation.
  So what I want to do is just take a minute and make sure the House is 
aware that under every analysis, the care at the VA is good or 
excellent. This is from the actual veterans' care organizations and 
their testimony before the Congress, House, and Senate.
  In fact, today, I had a young woman who was a paralyzed Vietnam war 
veteran. She walked into my office. She is involved in a spinal cord 
program at the Bronx VA that has got her up and walking. It is part of 
the ReWalk system.
  She was first denied some benefits because her autoimmune deficiency 
was caused by agent orange, and that had been denied for many years. 
But under General Shinseki, they have allowed this. And now, because 
she had more than a 50 percent disability, a quality wheel chair and 
other access.
  I want to make this point clear. One is that no one anywhere has 
found that some veteran died because of a lack of service. It has not 
been proven. It is an allegation. There is an investigation. And we 
should see the investigation to its conclusion. But the one thing we 
don't want to do is create a situation where veterans who need care 
don't pursue it. And especially in spinal cord and in terms of 
artificial limbs and traumatic brain injury, there is no better care 
that our veterans can get than at the VA.
  So I just want to make this point that we are not dealing with the 
substance of the amendment, but that on the facts of this investigation 
the House would be well served to let us have an investigation and then 
let us react to what the facts are.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of the 
gentleman's amendment, because as the Congress has learned today in the 
VA inspector general's report, quoting directly from that report:

       The inspector general's review at a growing number of VA 
     medical facilities has confirmed that inappropriate 
     scheduling practices are systemic throughout veterans health 
     administration.
       To date, our work has substantiated serious conditions at 
     the Phoenix health care system.

  And as my colleague said, they have initiated reviews at 42 others. 
They have already identified an additional 1,700 veterans waiting for 
primary care appointments but who were not on the electronic waiting 
list. Until that happens, the inspector general states, the wait time 
is not even started.
  This report is deeply, deeply disturbing, and as it comes to those 
individuals, my good friend from Pennsylvania is correct, there are no 
conclusions yet drawn about whether or not anyone died as a result of 
being denied access to the VA because the inspector general doesn't 
have enough evidence yet.
  As he says in the report:

       We are not reporting the results of our clinical reviews as 
     to whether or not someone may have as a result of a delay 
     died or been adversely affected while on a waiting list.

  To quote the inspector general:

       These assessments need to draw conclusions based on 
     analysis of medical records, death certificates, and autopsy 
     results. We have made requests to appropriate State agencies 
     and issued subpoenas to obtain those records. They are 
     gathering the information.

  The gentleman's amendment is an attempt to add additional funding to 
the Department of Justice to pursue criminal investigations and pursue 
criminal charges. I sincerely hope that that does not come to pass, but 
we have a report right in front of us today that tells us it is headed 
in that direction.
  The inspector general has said in this, again, preliminary report, 
they find that inappropriate scheduling practices are a systemic 
problem nationwide in the Veterans Affairs Department.
  It is just appalling and unacceptable.
  The VA staff at two VA medical facilities deleted consults without 
full consideration of the impact to patients. Multiple schedulers 
described to us a process they use that essentially overrides 
appointments to reduce the reported waiting times.
  The inspector general found out that at the Phoenix health care 
center certain audit controls were not even enabled. This limited the 
ability of the Veterans Affairs Department and the inspector general to 
determine whether any malicious manipulation of the electronic medical 
records occurred.
  Somebody turned off--or didn't even turn on--the audit controls that 
would allow a criminal investigation to determine whether or not there 
was a malicious intent.
  This is outrageous. It is unacceptable. As chairman of the Veterans 
Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee I assure you that our 
subcommittee--I know Chairman Miller and your subcommittee and the 
United States Congress--is going to devote every resource, every tool, 
every asset at our disposal to assure veterans are given immediate 
access to health care. They have earned it. They deserve it. They are 
going to get right in immediately, whether it is a VA hospital or 
another hospital.
  We are going to fix this problem and make sure that those that are on 
the waiting list are taken care of immediately. And those who have been 
denied care--God forbid somebody died as a result of being denied 
care--that is going to result in criminal charges, which is what the 
gentleman's amendment is intended to do--to make sure the Attorney 
General has the resources to follow the facts where they may lead.
  We need to be careful to follow the facts. But I am quoting directly 
from the report. This is absolutely unacceptable. It is outrageous. 
This is the opportunity during this debate on this bill to add 
additional resources to the Attorney General's office so they can hire 
the investigators and attorneys that are necessary--when this inspector 
general's report is final--to pursue criminal charges, if they are 
merited.
  So I strongly support the gentleman's amendment. This is another 
arrow in our quiver to do everything in our power to protect the health 
and well-being of the men and women of this country who have served us 
so well in defending our freedom and our prosperity.
  I urge all of us to support the chairman's amendment, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Coffman).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                 justice information sharing technology

       For necessary expenses for information sharing technology, 
     including planning, development, deployment and departmental 
     direction, $25,842,000, to remain available until expended: 
     Provided, That the Attorney General may transfer up to 
     $35,400,000 to this account, from funds available to the 
     Department of Justice for information technology, for 
     enterprise-wide information technology initiatives: Provided 
     further, That the transfer authority in the preceding proviso 
     is in addition to any other transfer authority contained in 
     this Act.


               Amendment Offered by Ms. Lee of California

  Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       On page 22, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert: 
     ``(reduced by $2,500,000)''.
       On page 34, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert: 
     ``(reduced by $500,000)''.
       On page 44, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert: 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
       On page 48, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert: 
     ``(increased by $3,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. LEE of California. Madam Chair, let me thank our ranking member, 
Mr. Fattah, for his tremendous leadership on the subcommittee. Also, I 
want to thank Chairman Wolf, first of all, for your years of service 
and for so much of your hard work on this bill and so many other 
issues. We have worked together for so many years. Your legacy

[[Page H4905]]

in this body will continue for many, many years. You have made such a 
positive impact on the lives of so many people, not only in our own 
country, but throughout the world. So thank you again for your service.
  Let me thank also our staff on both sides of the aisle for their 
assistance, for their support, their very astute understanding of this 
bill, and for helping us put together this amendment, which is really 
very simple, and hopefully Members on both sides of the aisle can 
support.
  It would increase funding for Second Chance Act programs by $3 
million, offset from the justice information sharing technology and the 
Bureau of Prison salaries account.
  I have to once again thank the chair and Ranking Member Fattah for 
funding the Second Chance Act to the President's request in this bill.
  Now, more than ever, we need strong investments in bipartisan and 
proven effective programs like the Second Chance Act. Congressman Danny 
Davis from Illinois has been such a leader on this issue and has fought 
for many, many years to make sure that Second Chance Act not only is 
authorized, but it is funded.
  At a time when our Nation incarcerates its citizens at the highest 
rate in the world, the fact of the matter is this program needs very 
strong support.
  In 2009, there were over 1.6 million inmates incarcerated in the 
United States. That is one in every 199 United States residents. If you 
include those housed in local jails, that number increases to 2.2 
million.
  We also need to acknowledge the disparate impact that mass 
incarceration has on communities of color. In 2011, 1 in 13 Black males 
ages 30 to 34 were in prison, along with 1 in 36 Hispanic males. That 
number is 1 in 90 for White males.
  This is an issue that tears at our communities and our families each 
and every day.
  Unfortunately, we know that more than half of the inmates who are 
released from prison who have served their time are re-incarcerated 
within 3 years.
  So we need to lower these unacceptable recidivism rates by addressing 
the overwhelming obstacles faced by the reentry population. That is 
exactly what the Second Chance Act does, by providing grants to State 
and local governments as well as nonprofit organizations who are 
working to improve outcomes for people returning to communities from 
incarceration.
  This also increases public safety and actually reduces the burden on 
taxpayers.
  The Second Chance Act grants funds for comprehensive and coordinated 
services in employment, housing, education, substance abuse, mental 
health, and family counseling.
  Since becoming the law, the Second Chance Act has authorized nearly 
600 grants that have been awarded to local governments and nonprofit 
organizations in 49 States. For example, in my own district in the city 
of Oakland, a program known as Comprehensive Community Cross System 
Reentry Support brings together government and nonprofit partners to 
reengage youth in school after leaving a juvenile detention center.
  Also, in my home district, the Alameda County Sheriff's Office has 
implemented Operation My Home Town, which provides pre- and post-
release services to inmates at the Santa Rita Jail, the fifth-largest 
county jail in the Nation.
  These are just a couple of examples of the hundreds of successful 
programs that have helped previously incarcerated individuals get back 
on their feet during a very difficult time. These programs work in our 
district.
  This is a bipartisan bill, a bipartisan program. I know that there is 
support for this program and reforming our prison system on both sides 
of the aisle.
  This is also a fiscal issue. It is one that has economic 
implications. It is also a humanitarian issue.
  So I urge ``yes'' on this amendment.
  Once again, I want to thank the chair, ranking member, and our staffs 
for your assistance and leadership.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2345

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. I think it is a good amendment, and I accept the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. That being granted, I also think it is a great amendment 
and from a great Member. I thank the chairman for agreeing to it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   administrative review and appeals

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses necessary for the administration of pardon and 
     clemency petitions and immigration-related activities, 
     $335,000,000, of which $4,000,000 shall be derived by 
     transfer from the Executive Office for Immigration Review 
     fees deposited in the ``Immigration Examinations Fee'' 
     account: Provided, That, of the amount provided, not to 
     exceed $10,000,000 is for the Executive Office for 
     Immigration Review for courthouse operations, language 
     services and automated system requirements and shall remain 
     available until expended.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Cohen

  Mr. COHEN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 22, line 25, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 34, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Chair, this is a very logical amendment that I hope 
will be accepted. What this does is it takes a program that the 
Department of Justice announced last week, that I have been encouraging 
the President and the Attorney General to engage in, and that is to 
expand the clemency department in the Department of Justice, so that 
individuals who are unjustly incarcerated can appropriately be 
recommended to the President for commutations and/or pardons.
  This Congress passed the fairness in sentencing law a few years ago. 
The President signed it in 2010, and it corrected what we found were 
errors in the judgment of this Congress in the way it incarcerated 
people and the distinctions of cocaine and crack and found that it had 
a disparate impact and an illogical impact on African Americans, that 
cocaine and crack are basically the same drug.
  For years, it was a 100 to 1 ratio in the quantity, working against 
what was considered a drug more likely to be used by African Americans 
than Caucasians. The fact is that each drug is equal in its pernicious 
effects on society, and that 100 to 1 ratio was wrong. We changed it to 
18 to 1. It should be equal, but we changed it to 18 to 1.
  Accordingly, for the first time probably in the history of this body 
and maybe any legislative body, sentences were reduced, which means 
that the public policy of the United States of America is now that 
those people are being unjustly incarcerated.
  It was only passed in a prospective and not a retroactive fashion, 
which it should have been, because public policy shows they are being 
unjustly incarcerated.
  The President has seen the need to have more commutations and 
pardons. It costs us $30,000 a year to incarcerate an individual, and 
if people are in there on sentences that are void against public 
policy, they should be released. They should have a commutation when 
they have served their time according to the law that has existed in 
this country from 2010 to the present.
  It would reunite them with their families, get them back into 
society, and save the public the cost of incarcerating them.
  So what this particular amendment would do is take just $2 million 
from the Bureau of Prisons, which has a budget in the hundreds of 
millions of dollars. Their budget is $7 billion, with a $121 million 
increase.
  It would take $2 million from the Bureau of Prisons which is one 
three-hundred-fiftieth of what the Bureau of

[[Page H4906]]

Prisons gets, to put that money, not into the Bureau that would have 
these people where they are incarcerated unjustly, but to give the 
money to the Department of Justice, where they can ascertain which 
individuals should appropriately be recommended for commutations and 
save money for society and reunite people with their loved ones and 
give them freedom--freedom, which is so important--and liberty.
  Now, I know some of the amendments have been talked about and they 
said: well, we don't want to put any of the people in the Bureau of 
Prisons at risk.
  I would submit to you that by taking $2 million from the Bureau of 
Prisons and allowing more people to be recommended for commutations, 
there would be less people in prison, less need for those personnel, 
and less likely of having any problems.
  Beyond that, the Bureau of Prisons would see to it that $2 million 
didn't come from areas where prison guards would be endangered. They 
could take that from personnel. They could take it from management. 
They could take it from administration. They could take it even from 
the areas where the prisoners get their clothing or their food or 
whatever they get.
  I assure you that $2 million will not jeopardize a single member of 
the Bureau of Prisons, but it will give people freedom and liberty, at 
$30,000 a year for the taxpayers.
  So I would hope that we could approve this, give this newly 
invigorated Department of Justice office for commutations $23 million 
to hire more attorneys to make sure they make the right decisions and 
they make plentiful decisions to give people liberty and save the 
taxpayers money.
  I would ask for a positive vote, and thank you for the opportunity to 
present this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I oppose the amendment.
  Chairman Goodlatte, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, who was here 
and just left, strongly opposes the amendment.
  There is no authorization. There is no appropriation. Congress never 
approved it. It is almost like an executive order out of nowhere.
  Again, so the chairman of the full committee, we try to work closer 
together. We have had a better relationship than we have had for a long 
time.
  The authorizers oppose it, and so I strongly oppose it and ask for a 
``no'' vote on the amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I oppose the offset. I do not oppose the 
notion that we should have a more robust clemency approach in our 
country. I commend the administration for this, and I hope that we can 
find a way to provide more support.
  I don't agree with the gentleman's math, that $2 million cut from any 
number of other places in the Bureau of Prisons would be just fine. I 
know these accounts pretty well, and I have some concerns about that.
  I do think that in a $28 billion investment or spending in the 
Department of Justice in total, clearly, there are dollars that could 
be used so that innocent people in our country, or those who have 
deserved to have some relief, can appropriately apply for clemency.
  I will be glad to work with the gentleman on this as we go forward.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee 
will be postponed.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General, 
     $88,000,000, including not to exceed $10,000 to meet 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential character.

                    United States Parole Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Parole 
     Commission as authorized, $13,308,000.

                            Legal Activities

            salaries and expenses, general legal activities

       For expenses necessary for the legal activities of the 
     Department of Justice, not otherwise provided for, including 
     not to exceed $20,000 for expenses of collecting evidence, to 
     be expended under the direction of, and to be accounted for 
     solely under the certificate of, the Attorney General; and 
     rent of private or Government-owned space in the District of 
     Columbia, $893,000,000, of which not to exceed $20,000,000 
     for litigation support contracts shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That of the total amount appropriated, 
     not to exceed $9,000 shall be available to INTERPOL 
     Washington for official reception and representation 
     expenses: Provided further, That notwithstanding section 205 
     of this Act, upon a determination by the Attorney General 
     that emergent circumstances require additional funding for 
     litigation activities of the Civil Division, the Attorney 
     General may transfer such amounts to ``Salaries and Expenses, 
     General Legal Activities'' from available appropriations for 
     the current fiscal year for the Department of Justice as may 
     be necessary to respond to such circumstances: Provided 
     further, That any transfer pursuant to the preceding proviso 
     shall be treated as a reprogramming under section 505 of this 
     Act and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure 
     except in compliance with the procedures set forth in that 
     section: Provided further, That of the amount appropriated, 
     such sums as may be necessary shall be available to the Civil 
     Rights Division for salaries and expenses associated with the 
     election monitoring program under section 8 of the Voting 
     Rights Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 1973f) and to reimburse the 
     Office of Personnel Management for such salaries and 
     expenses: Provided further, That of the amounts provided 
     under this heading for the election monitoring program, 
     $3,390,000 shall remain available until expended.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Fleming

  Mr. FLEMING. Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       On page 23, line 24 after ``893,000,000'' add ``(reduce by 
     $866,000)''.
       On page 100, line 17, after ``$0'', add ``(increase by 
     $866,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Louisiana is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FLEMING. Madam Chairman, I want to thank my good friend, Chairman 
Wolf, for all the many years of service he has provided and the great 
work he is doing on this appropriation.
  My amendment simply reduces the Department of Justice's general legal 
account by $866,000, specifically targeting the Deputy Attorney 
General's office until the Attorney General enforces the Controlled 
Substances Act, as well as the Bank Secrecy Act.
  My amendment does not reduce the enforcement funding available to 
DOJ, but rather decreases available funding for the salaries of 
individuals who are delineating ways to evade Federal law.
  Madam Chairman, it is with growing alarm that we see this 
administration selectively executing and enforcing Federal law.
  The CSA sets forth five classifications or schedules for controlled 
substances. Marijuana, along with heroin and LSD, are schedule I drugs 
without accepted medical purpose and which have a high potential for 
abuse. Smoking marijuana remains a Federal offense, and growers and 
distributors could and should be prosecuted.
  Despite DOJ's responsibility to uphold the CSA as the law of the 
land, over the last few months, the Department of Justice has issued 
several memos suggesting ways for States like Colorado and Washington 
to evade Federal law and Federal law enforcement and encouraging other 
States to follow suit with decriminalization and potentially 
legalization.
  Any Google search will tell you that the first of eight Federal 
priorities outlined in Deputy Attorney General James Cole's August 2013 
is being run roughshod in Colorado.
  Kids are quickly gaining access to marijuana. News accounts from 
Colorado describe elementary children selling pot at school.

[[Page H4907]]

  In February of this year, both the Department of Justice and the 
Department of the Treasury outlined ways for banks and other financial 
institutions to circumvent Federal law, in effect, giving tacit 
approval for financially facilitating the marijuana industry.
  Madam Chairman, I don't have time to delve into all of the negative 
issues regarding health care and marijuana, but it is vitally important 
for my colleagues to remember that the scientific facts and recent 
studies all point to the fact that marijuana is highly addictive, is 
closely linked to altered brain development; schizophrenia; mental 
illness; heart complications; lower IQ; and impairs attention, 
judgment, and memory functions.
  I would like to close by reading the following statement from the 
Drug Enforcement Agency's DEA May 2014 booklet on the ugly truth about 
marijuana:

       Legalization of marijuana, no matter how it begins, will 
     come at the expense of our children and public safety. It 
     will create dependency and treatment issues and opens the 
     door to use of other drugs, impaired health, delinquent 
     behavior, and drugged drivers.

  I think the DEA got it right. It is time for the rest of the Justice 
Department to do their job and enforce current U.S. law that recognizes 
marijuana's devastating impact on our children and society.
  I am hopeful that my amendment will encourage DOJ to take steps 
necessary to correct any misunderstanding regarding the Federal 
enforcement of the CSA and the BSA. I now urge my colleagues to join me 
in supporting this amendment.
  Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  0000

  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I support the gentleman's amendment.
  I was just reading the dangers and consequences of marijuana abuse. 
What is happening to our country? I saw a report today in The Hill 
newspaper, ``Buyers' remorse on marijuana?'' The growers in Mexico are 
not growing marijuana now. They are going into the poppy business 
because they are now doing it in Colorado.
  I cast the deciding vote against smoking on airplanes, and now we are 
encouraging or allowing people to use marijuana?
  I think the gentleman is right. And I have been disappointed in the 
Justice Department because, you know, we should follow the law. The law 
is the law, and I think the gentleman is right. You are seeing the 
skirting of the law. There is much more. We are going to have a big 
debate tomorrow, I guess, on this whole issue a little bit differently 
than this.
  But I think the gentleman is right. The law is the law, and the 
Justice Department should be seeking justice and enforce the law. If 
they don't like the law, they should come up here to Congress and 
change the law. Reasonable people can debate it and have differences. 
But I think the gentleman makes a very powerful point, and I strongly 
support the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Chair, as we near the midnight hour, as Wilson 
Pickett would say: In the midnight hour, we drift off to ``Reefer 
Madness'' type of logic.
  We saw ``Reefer Madness'' in the thirties, and it has come back to 
Congress here 80-some-odd years later.
  The fact is we are not talking about marijuana for children. Children 
shouldn't be doing marijuana, nor should they be smoking tobacco, nor 
should they be drinking beer or alcohol. We are talking about adults, 
and we are talking about: Should adults who are behaving according to 
the laws in the States in which they live--and the States passed 
certain laws in Colorado and Washington concerning legalization, and in 
20-some-odd States and the District of Columbia passed medical 
marijuana laws. Should those people who abide by the laws of the State, 
the laws that are closest to them, that some on the other side of the 
aisle would regularly say we should defer to the States and we should 
let the States set the policies for everybody--we do that on a lot of 
things, but we sometimes don't do it on these particular issues.
  The fact that people are being incarcerated in great numbers and 
losing their liberty and having a scarlet ``M'' put on their chest that 
denies them public housing on occasions, denies them scholarships, and 
denies them opportunities to work is wrong. Even if you take the 
arguments that the gentleman on the other side of the aisle makes, if 
you accept them, it still doesn't fit the punishment, the lifetime 
scarlet letter that you put on an individual.
  Mr. FLEMING. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. COHEN. The Department of Justice is correct to respect the laws 
of the States and to put an understanding that heroin and crack and 
cocaine and meth and prescription drugs are drugs that really cause the 
evils we have and the problems we have in society, that make people 
commit crimes to feed their habits. Marijuana does not make people 
commit crime. It makes them overeat. It doesn't make them commit 
crimes. And that is why we need to prioritize the resources we have in 
this country toward those drugs that really cause problems to others.
  I commend the Department of Justice for their discretion. They 
haven't gone as far as they should. And the laboratories of democracy, 
the States, as Louis Brandeis called them, are doing a great service to 
this country, in Colorado and Washington, to see how it works. They are 
bringing in millions and millions of dollars. Violent crime has gone 
down in Colorado. There have not been the problems alleged to have 
occurred in other areas. And we can wait and see how those States' 
experiments go. And the Department of Justice is allowing the 
experiment to go on for other States' benefits.
  And I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I would say to 
you that science tells us that the more drugs--whether it is marijuana 
or heroin or whatever--are out there in society, on the shelves in 
homes, the more likely children will get involved in them. And as they 
do, in their young, developing brains, they are five times more likely 
at risk of having an addiction, and that is what gets them in prison. 
And trust me, my friend, I will tell the gentleman that whether it is 
marijuana or heroin or methamphetamines, as a drug addict once told me: 
All addicting substances are gateways to other addicting substances.
  Mr. COHEN. So should we make alcohol illegal again, that exercise in 
prohibition that was brought by this Congress, that was proved to be 
such a failure, that it was repealed later on? Should we make alcohol 
illegal because kids might get it? I submit to you, if you want to do 
that, you be the leader.
  Mr. FLEMING. If the gentleman will again yield, alcohol has been a 
part of our society and culture for thousands of years as part of our 
religious practices. It was impractical to have a prohibition.
  Mr. COHEN. Bourbon is part of our religious practices?
  Mr. FLEMING. Alcohol is part of our religious practices.
  Mr. COHEN. Wine. So make wine legal. How about bourbon and scotch and 
vodka and gin?
  Mr. FLEMING. So it has been culturally accepted for many generations; 
whereas, marijuana hasn't.
  So if alcohol is a problem, why do we want to add another problem in 
the form of marijuana?
  Mr. COHEN. It has been culturally accepted not in your area, but in 
some cultures it has.
  And in the African American community, you are eight times more 
likely to be arrested and sent to jail because of the color of your 
skin. It has a disparate impact on minorities. It always has.
  If you go back to the genesis of the laws in the thirties, it was 
made illegal because of discrimination against Hispanics. And in the 
seventies, Nixon spoke out, as did Haldeman and Ehrlichman, and they 
said this is something we can't talk about, African Americans in the 
inner city, but we can take their drug of choice and make it illegal.

[[Page H4908]]

  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the 
Chair.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word and hopefully 
to offer the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Madam Chair, I resemble some of the remarks that have 
been made as of late on the floor. I want to say a couple of things.
  One is that a lot of us like to hold onto things, but, you know, life 
moves on and the country moves on. There is a point in time in which 
the country made a decision around alcohol and put it in a different 
category than other things, and, seemingly, the public is making a 
decision about marijuana.
  Now, it may have something to do with the last few Presidents we have 
had, who all agreed that they smoked marijuana, or it may have 
something to do with medical marijuana and the notion that it can help 
in terms of dealing with the pain that people feel when they have 
chronic pain and diseases. Whatever is going on, the truth of the 
matter is that the Congress, we are probably the last to hear of it. 
But the Nation has kind of moved on, and you see this in the State 
actions.
  You see it in my hometown, where the district attorney got elected 4 
years ago and decided he was not prosecuting any more marijuana cases, 
where the people had just possession for use. And now, 4 years later, 
the city council has finally decided, well, maybe the police shouldn't 
lock people up since the DA is not going to prosecute them.
  So sometimes those of us who are in political office, we get dragged 
along a little slower. But it doesn't matter what we decide on this 
issue. There are decisions being made, and the country is moving in a 
different direction, very similar to the decision that was made on the 
prohibition in terms of alcohol.
  So the point here is that we will vote however we may vote. It will 
not be the deciding issue in this regard, because local communities are 
deciding. Just like in Kentucky now, you have Mitch McConnell and 
others talking about what we are going to do about hemp. There is going 
to be some movement here on some of these issues, and those of us who 
have got a few gray hairs, we might just have to hold on and know that 
the country has made changes on some of these social issues.
  But there is still the reality that when we made the change on 
alcohol, we went from shooting up and down the street during 
prohibition over it, with Eliot Ness and crew, to a point where we have 
accepted it as part of, as you said, our culture. Now, it is still not 
healthy; it is still addictive; it is still a drug; but it is not 
criminalized in our Nation. And that might be where America is headed 
on the question of marijuana. And some of us, at times, have to accept 
change for what it is. It is a change because people have grown to a 
different point of view or, as the President has said, you evolve on 
some of these issues.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. WOLF. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Culberson) having assumed the chair, Ms. Foxx, Acting 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. 4660) 
making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, 
Science, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
2015, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________