[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 16]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 22202-22203]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 22202]]

                          EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

    WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2620, 
DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 8, 2001

  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the House Science 
Committee, I rise in strong support of the FY 2002 VA, HUD and 
Independent Agencies Appropriations Conference Report. My good friends 
Chairman Walsh, and Ranking Minority Member Mollohan have put together 
a conference report that is very good for science, good for the space 
program, and good for the environment. I thank them for their 
outstanding leadership.
  Chairman Walsh shares my belief that basic research provides the 
foundation for economic growth and for the tremendous advances we have 
made in areas like biomedical research. The appropriation for the 
National Science Foundation contained within this conference report 
reflects these beliefs. Chairman Walsh is to be commended for the more 
than 8 percent increase that he has provided for the Foundation.
  The bill also contains funding for the National Mathematics and 
Science Partnerships Program that was proposed by President Bush and 
that is authorized by my bill--H.R. 1858--that was unanimously reported 
out of the Science Committee. This program will bring colleges and 
universities and school districts together to form partnerships to 
improve the quality of elementary and secondary math and science 
education. I look forward to working closely with Chairman Walsh and 
NSF to see that this program is properly implemented.
  I want to particularly thank the conferees for including funding for 
the Noyce Scholarship Program. Named for the co-founder of Intel, this 
program provides scholarships to talented mathematics, science, and 
engineering students in exchange for a commitment to teach two years 
for each year of scholarship. I am passionately committed to attracting 
young people to the profession of teaching and look forward to 
welcoming the first class of Noyce Scholars.
  I also want to commend the Committee for providing funding for the 
Tech Talent Act that I introduced on October 15, of this year. This 
program will encourage colleges and universities to think more 
creatively about how they educate our future scientists, mathematicians 
and engineers.
  The conferees are also to be commended for a bill that protects and 
expands NASA's scientific programs in Science, Aeronautics, and 
Technology while striking the right balance for the Space Station. This 
bill sends a clear signal that Congress is not going to bail out NASA 
for its management failures. It also makes clear that we're willing to 
work with the Administration to identify additional resources to 
improve station capabilities, if we see the right management reforms 
and performance improvements at NASA.
  Yesterday, the House Science Committee heard testimony from Tom 
Young, the Chairman of the International Space Station (ISS) Management 
and Cost Evaluation (IMCE) Task Force and Sean O'Keefe, the Deputy 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget. The Task Force 
concluded that without significant management and budget reforms, NASA 
would not be able to complete the U.S. Core Complete station within the 
budget that was agreed upon earlier this year. Mr. Young and Mr. 
O'Keefe recommended, and I concur, the NASA must be required to 
demonstrate to Congress that it can manage the U.S. Core Complete 
Station--both on time and on budget--before any decisions are made to 
expand the capabilities of the station.
  I also want to stress that the ISS was intended to be a research 
platform that would permit scientists to carry out research that could 
only be conducted in a space environment. It is important that we not 
lose this focus upon science and that we closely examine the research 
program that will be supported by the station. The Science Committee 
has asked the National Academy of Science to review this research 
program and I look forward to their findings. I concur with the 
conferees' recommendation that this study be expanded to evaluate the 
research programs that could be conducted on the ISS with a three- or a 
six-person crew.
  I particularly appreciate the Committee's commitment to new space 
technology and its effort to bridge the gap between NASA and the Air 
Force. By directing a modest amount of funding to the Air Force 
Research Lab, the bill encourages NASA and the Air Force to pool their 
efforts on technologies that will benefit both agencies and the 
American people. Space based radar technology, for example, is vital to 
our national security, but also has immense applications in Earth 
science. A development program that reduces the cost of synthetic 
aperture radar technology will benefit both.
  Similarly, the bistatic radar technology developed at the Rome 
Research Laboratory has immense potential for upgrading our national 
launch range tracking capabilities at a low cost. By demonstrating this 
technology, we may finally break the logjam that has undermined our 
space launch competitiveness.
  The conferees have also, at my request, addressed a matter that is of 
great importance to me--the LANDSAT Data Continuity Mission.The Land 
Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-555) directs the LANDSAT 
Program to consider options, with preference given to a commercial 
solution, to maintain the continuity of LANDSAT data beyond LANDSAT 7.
  While NASA's Earth Science Program has responded to several of my 
concerns, I continue to be deeply concerned that NASA's acquisition 
strategy for the LANDSAT Data Continuity Mission (LDCM) places too much 
emphasis on government satellite engineering and design during the 
formulation phase of the program. I urge that the Director of the 
Office of Science and Technology Policy continue to review this program 
to ensure that preference is given to technically and economically 
sound commercial data buy proposals that will meet our nation's data 
continuity needs. I applaud the conferees for including language in the 
conference report that restates our expectation that NASA will pursue 
commercial data purchase approaches to all Earth Science Program 
Announcements for Opportunity.
  Let me turn for a moment to the budget for the Environmental 
Protection Agency, an agency that Congress should elevate to cabinet 
level status. I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Walsh and his 
colleagues in the House and Senate to provide a responsible budget to 
help meet the nation's environmental needs. On the whole, the 
conference report is good news for EPA. Clearly, many of us would 
prefer to see higher funding levels for some of the agency's programs, 
but the conferees have done an admirable job of balancing competing 
needs and working within difficult fiscal constraints.
  As Chairman of the Science Committee, I am particularly pleased the 
bill increases funding for the Science and Technology account from $640 
million in the budget request to $698 million.
  Admittedly much of this funding is for site-specific or project-
specific activities. Even so, I think it is important to continue a 
trend of increasing agency resources for basic and applied research, 
including drinking water research under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
  Mr. Speaker, the recent experiences with arsenic confirm the 
importance of science in making key regulatory decisions. I commend the 
Administration and the conferees in advancing the effort to replace the 
50 parts per billion standard with a more protective 10 parts per 
billion standard. I hope Congress will provide additional funding to 
research and develop more cost-effective technologies to meet the SDWA 
standards as contemplated by Administrator Whitman.
  As a member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and 
the Congressional Water Infrastructure Caucus, I am pleased the 
conference report rejects the proposed cut to the Clean Water SRF but 
I'm disappointed it

[[Page 22203]]

doesn't provide more than $1.35 billion for the program. I appreciate 
the constraints facing the conferees but would encourage the 
Appropriations Committee to find a way to fund some of the important 
water infrastructure and ecosystem restoration programs, such as the 
new sewer overflow control grants program and the reauthorized Clean 
Lakes program. I hope there are opportunities down the road to target 
assistance for such efforts.
  I would also continue to note my concern with the Superfund program. 
The bill provides $1.27 billion. The Appropriators are doing their best 
under the circumstances. Congress needs to change the circumstances; 
comprehensive reform and, at a minimum, a reauthorization of the 
Corporate Environmental Income Tax (which expired on December 31, 1995) 
should be the next course of action.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill for science, a good bill for the 
space program, and a good bill for the environment. It aptly 
illustrates the tremendous leadership provided by my good friend from 
New York, Chairman Walsh, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

                          ____________________