[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 77 (Tuesday, May 19, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H3363-H3365]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SCIENCE PRIZE COMPETITIONS ACT
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 1162) to make technical changes to provisions
authorizing prize competitions under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology
Innovation Act of 1980, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1162
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Science Prize Competitions
Act''.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO PRIZE COMPETITIONS.
Section 24 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation
Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3719) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) by inserting ``competition'' after ``section, a
prize'';
(B) by inserting ``types'' after ``following''; and
(C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``prizes'' and inserting
``prize competitions'';
(2) in subsection (f)--
(A) by striking ``in the Federal Register'' and inserting
``on a publicly accessible Government website, such as
www.challenge.gov,''; and
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``prize'' and inserting
``cash prize purse'';
(3) in subsection (g), by striking ``prize'' and inserting
``cash prize purse'';
(4) in subsection (h), by inserting ``prize'' before
``competition'' both places it appears;
(5) in subsection (i)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(B), by inserting ``prize'' before
``competition'';
(B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``prize'' before
``competition'' both places it appears;
(C) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4); and
(D) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new
paragraph:
``(3) Waiver.--An agency may waive the requirement under
paragraph (2). The annual report under subsection (p) shall
include a list of such waivers granted during the preceding
fiscal year, along with a detailed explanation of the reasons
for granting the waivers.'';
(6) in subsection (k)--
(A) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``prize'' before
``competition''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``prize'' before
``competitions'' both places it appears;
(7) in subsection (l), by striking all after ``may enter
into'' and inserting ``a grant, contract, cooperative
agreement, or other agreement with a private sector for-
profit or nonprofit entity to administer the prize
competition, subject to the provisions of this section.'';
(8) in subsection (m)--
(A) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) In general.--Support for a prize competition under
this section, including financial support for the design and
administration of a prize competition or funds for a cash
prize purse, may consist of Federal appropriated funds and
funds provided by private sector for-profit and nonprofit
entities. The head of an agency may accept funds from other
Federal agencies, private sector for-profit entities, and
nonprofit entities, to be available to the extent provided by
appropriations Acts, to support such prize competitions. The
head of an agency may not give any special consideration to
any private sector for-profit or nonprofit entity in return
for a donation.'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``prize awards'' and
inserting ``cash prize purses'';
(C) in paragraph (3)(A)--
(i) by striking ``No prize'' and inserting ``No prize
competition''; and
(ii) by striking ``the prize'' and inserting ``the cash
prize purse'';
(D) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``a prize'' and
inserting ``a cash prize purse'';
(E) in paragraph (3)(B)(i), by inserting ``competition''
after ``prize'';
(F) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``a prize'' and
inserting ``a cash prize purse''; and
(G) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking ``cash prizes'' and
inserting ``cash prize purses'';
(9) in subsection (n), by inserting ``for both for-profit
and nonprofit entities,'' after ``contract vehicle'';
(10) in subsection (o)(1), by striking ``or providing a
prize'' and insert ``a prize competition or providing a cash
prize purse''; and
(11) in subsection (p)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``cash prizes'' both
places it occurs and inserting ``cash prize purses''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(G) Plan.--A description of crosscutting topical areas
and agency-specific mission needs that may be the strongest
opportunities for prize competitions during the upcoming 2
fiscal years.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer) each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
General Leave
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
to include extraneous material on H.R. 1162, the bill now under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
H.R. 1162, the Science Prize Competitions Act, promotes increased
utilization of prize competitions within the Federal Government.
[[Page H3364]]
I want to thank the ranking member of the Oversight Subcommittee, Mr.
Beyer, for introducing this legislation. I also thank the bipartisan
cosponsors, which include the vice chair of the Oversight Subcommittee,
Mr. Bill Johnson, as well as the full committee ranking member, Ms.
Eddie Bernice Johnson.
Prize competitions help spur innovation. They give innovators
incentives to produce groundbreaking, outside-the-box ideas. Used
effectively, prize competitions can be a tool to generate revolutionary
results that wouldn't happen otherwise.
For example, after the Deepwater Horizon explosion, the X Prize
Foundation sponsored a competition to elicit new oil removal
technologies that needed to be better than state of the art. With the
incentive of a million-dollar prize for first place, the winning team
designed technology capable of extracting 89 percent of the oil from
the water.
Thanks to the incentives provided by the competition, the winner, in
a few months, blew the competition and the then best available oil
skimmers out of the water.
Another example of a novel idea for a prize involves the Head Health
Challenge. This is a joint effort by the National Football League,
Under Armour, General Electric, and the National Institute of Standards
and Technology to produce ``viable materials that will result in
increased safety and protection for athletes, the warfighter, and
civilians.''
This is a competition that could yield a solution that would benefit
a diverse section of the population, from athletes to soldiers.
H.R. 1162 makes important changes to the prize competitions section
of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980. It better
defines the role of the private sector in various aspects of prize
competitions. H.R. 1162 will have a positive impact on science prize
competitions, which have bipartisan support.
A letter from the Director of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy proclaims the values of such competitions by stating:
This report details the remarkable benefits the Federal
Government has reaped from more than 400 prize competitions
and challenges implemented by over 72 agencies to date, the
steps the administration has taken to establish a lasting
foundation for use of the COMPETES prize authority, and
detailed examples from fiscal year 2014 of how the COMPETES
prize authority is increasing the number of agencies that use
prizes to achieve their missions more efficiently and
effectively.
Again, I want to thank Mr. Beyer of Virginia and Mr. Johnson of Ohio
for introducing this bill.
I urge my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to thank two Texans, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member
Johnson, for their leadership on this important issue and remind them
that Samuel Houston and Stephen Austin were both born in Virginia. I
also would like to thank my esteemed colleague, the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Johnson) for cosponsoring.
The 2010 COMPETES reauthorization granted all Federal agencies the
authority to hold prize competitions as an incentive for scientific and
technological innovations.
This authority supports agencies' increased use of prizes to
incentivize more high-risk, high-reward research and reach out to a new
audience of researchers and innovators across all areas of science and
technology.
Prize competitions go back at least 300 years, to the 1714 Longitude
Prize offered by the British Government to develop a practical method
to precisely measure a ship's longitude. The 1919 Orteig Prize spurred
Charles Lindbergh to make the first transatlantic flight. Of course, it
took 8 years from the prize to the flight itself.
In more recent years, prize competitions have accelerated
technological development for space exploration, public health,
automobiles, lighting, and much more. Many of these competitions have
been privately sponsored, but several have been sponsored by our
Federal agencies, including NASA, DARPA, and the Department of Energy.
Prize competitions have also proven to be an effective tool to
invigorate our Nation's brightest innovators from all corners. They
allow our science agencies to case a wide net to draw in new talent.
I think one of the most interesting facts is that NASA found that
over 80 percent of NASA prize competitors have never before responded
to NASA or other government requests for proposals. We are bringing in
our best and brightest to solve these problems.
If we are to continue leading the world in science and technology, we
must draw up on all of our Nation's talent, whether they are
researchers in a university lab, owners of a technology start-up, or
independent innovators working in their own garages.
Imagine if more of our Federal science agencies took full advantage
of the potential of prizes to address some of our Nation's most
pressing technological challenges. How might the world be changed in
2025 from a prize offered today?
Private organizations have spent years perfecting the design of prize
competitions to address big challenges. We hope that our science
agencies will see this same success, and we must continue to support
Federal agencies as they implement this authority.
The legislation we are considering today addresses some real and some
perceived hurdles in the 2010 authority that were identified once
agencies began to implement prize competitions.
It also aligns the terminology with the industry standard to
eliminate any confusion in the interpretation of the law. These are
technical amendments, which should make it easier for all agencies to
make full use of the 2010 authority. In trying to rebalance our Federal
budget, we have had to make very hard choices about where to cut
funding, including in R&D programs.
While prize competitions should never be used as an excuse to cut our
investments in R&D, prizes do allow the Federal Government to continue
to fund high-reward research with minimal risk to the taxpayer. They
are another valuable tool for agencies to deploy to meet their critical
mission responsibilities.
I am proud to cosponsor this bill and ask my colleagues for their
support. I am very grateful for the chairman for his bipartisan
leadership on this issue.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia for reminding me that
Stephen Austin and Samuel Houston were born in Virginia, and I have to
confess, I have a number of ancestors who came from Virginia as well,
and I am told one of them may have even been the Governor of Virginia,
but that is as much as I am going to say about the great Commonwealth
tonight.
I will say that I have no other requests for time; and I, again,
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I believe I misspoke. I would love to acknowledge my
colleague from Illinois.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Virginia ask
unanimous consent to reclaim his time?
Mr. BEYER. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to reclaim my
time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I just was going to say I concur and
agree to yield to the gentleman from Illinois as well.
Mr. BEYER. As I slowly develop my mastery of this parliamentary
procedure, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Lipinski).
Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Beyer for yielding and for his
introduction, his authorship of this bill on prize competitions.
I want to add my voice in strong support of this bill. I have long
been a strong supporter of prize competitions to spur innovation not as
a substitute for Federal grants in other aid, but as an additional
tool.
Back in 2007, I wrote language in the Energy Independence and
Security Act that directed DOE to create a hydrogen energy prize, a
competition now called the H-Prize that is currently ongoing and,
hopefully, will yield some results
[[Page H3365]]
in innovation in using hydrogen as a transportation fuel.
In the 2010 COMPETES bill, I added language to that bill that
authorized prize competitions at the National Science Foundation. I
believe that these prize competitions are an excellent way to unlock
the innovative potential of researchers, the private sector, and even
hobbyists working in a garage, all while protecting taxpayer dollars.
This bill will clarify prize competition authority so that more
agencies of the Federal Government will be able to run competitions. It
is a good bill. I thank Mr. Beyer, again, for introducing it; I thank
Chairman Smith for moving it and Ranking Member Johnson for moving it.
I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. BEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 1162, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________