[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 10117-10131]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




     SOWING THE SEEDS THROUGH SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 318 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. 363.

                              {time}  1710


                     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. 363) to authorize appropriations for basic research and research 
infrastructure in science and engineering, and for support of graduate 
fellowships, and for other purposes, with Mr. Watt in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) and the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Hall) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we spent quite a bit of time on the last bill talking 
about ``Rising above the Gathering Storm,'' the report. It charts a 
course for continuing American prosperity in the decades to come. I 
recommend that my colleagues heed the warning of this report and pursue 
policies to implement its four major policy recommendations.
  One of those recommendations is to ``sustain and strengthen the 
Nation's traditional commitment to long-term basic research that has 
the potential to be transformational, to maintain the flow of new ideas 
that fuel the economy and provide security and enhance the quality of 
life.'' The Gathering Storm report goes on to propose specific high-
priority action items to realize this recommendation.
  In this bill, H.R. 363, we have identified several of these action 
items that have broad bipartisan support. We call the bill the Sowing 
the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Act.
  I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Hall from Texas, ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Science and Technology, who helped craft the 
current version of this bill.
  Six weeks ago, the committee voted unanimously to favorably report 
this bill. We have heard from such groups as The Business Roundtable 
and the Council of Competitiveness expressing their support for the 
bill. These organizations represent a broad spectrum of business 
interests, understand that new technology ideas are necessary for the 
U.S. prosperity in a global 21st century economy. In fact, some 
economists have estimated that half of the economic growth in the 
United States since World War II can be attributed to technological 
innovation. H.R. 363 is needed to prevent the United States from 
falling behind other nations whose national commitments to research are 
increasing, just as ours have been decreasing. The fear is not just 
about falling behind scientifically, it's about falling behind 
economically.
  The first two provisions of H.R. 363 focus on support for early-
career scientists and engineers through grant programs at the National 
Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. These grants will 
identify and support our best and brightest young researchers who are 
engaged in high-risk, high-reward research that is transformational or 
highly innovative. By focusing on young researchers, we promote new 
ideas and research on the frontiers of knowledge.
  The bill also supports graduate student training grants for 
individuals interested in research areas relative to industry's 
technological needs, establishes a Presidential Award for Innovation, 
creates a planning mechanism for maintaining the Nation's major 
research facilities, authorizes the National Science Foundation to 
support research on innovation, directs reports on Federal efforts to 
recruit new scientists and engineers, identifies NASA as a key player 
in the national competitiveness policy.
  This bill doesn't merely seek to fund all of science, it focuses on 
fostering the most innovative elements of a scientific enterprise. It 
is through research such as these that we lay a foundation for future 
of global economic competitiveness. In the future, a healthy scientific 
and technological enterprise spawns innovation, creating jobs that pay 
good wages and produces products that make our lives better.

[[Page 10118]]



                              {time}  1715

  We must pave the way to that future, and I urge my colleagues to 
support this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support what is essentially the second 
piece of the Science Committee's innovation and competitiveness agenda 
package. I am pleased that this Congress continues to advance the 
innovation agenda that the President laid out 2 years ago.
  Primarily, this bill enhances the Faculty Early Career Development 
Program at NSF to help researchers establish a lab and pursue risky 
research in emerging fields. It establishes a similar program at the 
Department of Energy. It also ensures that funding increases 
proportionately to the overall NSF budget for the Integrative Graduate 
Education and Research Traineeship, which supports graduate students in 
cutting-edge interdisciplinary fields.
  Again, most of this bill was part of a Republican-led effort in the 
last Congress to incorporate many of the suggestions and various 
innovation and competitiveness reports without necessarily reinventing 
the wheel to do so. While H.R. 363 is similar to what we did last year, 
it does have some additions that were never vetted at the committee 
level, and I have some concern with that process. I hope as we continue 
the reauthorization process for NSF, the chairman will work with me, as 
he always has and as he does, and we can thoughtfully pass good 
legislation as we move forward.
  With specific regard to H.R. 363, I do thank the chairman for working 
with us to restore a few of the provisions that had been previously 
accepted by the committee, particularly in NIST report language and a 
sense of the Congress that NASA also has a role to play in United 
States innovation and competitiveness.
  It is important, Mr. Chairman, that our Nation continue to lead the 
world in technological innovation. To that end, we should support 
legislation that advances basic science research at the National 
Science Foundation and the Department of Energy. Research conducted by 
these young scholars will yield countless advantages. Americans 
understand that if we are to become energy independent, we will need 
solutions that promote clean, affordable and reliable American energy 
resources. That is why we introduced the competitiveness agenda last 
year and that is why I continue to support this initiative. America's 
solutions for the future begin today.
  This is a good bill. I thank the chairman for helping make it a good 
bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 363.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to 
absolutely concur with Mr. Hall in that we will work as a partnership 
as this bill works its way through. He has been a constructive partner, 
and I want to continue that partnership.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. 
Giffords), a valued member of our committee.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you Ranking Member 
Hall.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my support for H.R. 363, the 
Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Act. In 2005, a 
bipartisan group of congressional legislators came together and asked 
the National Academies for a list of the top 10 action items that 
policymakers must take in order to assure that America stays globally 
competitive.
  Their report, which was reduced, called ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm,'' found that the U.S. would stand to lose our global 
competitiveness if we did not act immediately. One of their 
recommendations was to invest in research in an effort to ``sustain and 
strengthen the Nation's traditional commitment to long-term basic 
research that has the potential to be transformational to maintain the 
flow of new ideas that fuel the economy, provide security, and enhance 
the quality of life.'' This bill does exactly that.
  This legislation provides early-career awards for scientists and 
engineers at the National Science Foundation and at the Department of 
Energy. Young researchers and scientists can shift paradigms, break out 
of traditions, and think of new ideas within their field; and it is 
this outside-of-the-box thinking that we must promote.
  The early-career awards in this bill awards young scientists for 
engaging in both high-risk, but also high-reward, research that is 
transformational and innovative.
  This bill does not fund all science. This bill focuses on fostering 
the most innovative of elements in the scientific enterprise. With 
countries such as India and China becoming more and more competitive, 
we have to take every action possible to ensure that the United States 
of America stays globally competitive.
  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for bringing this bill forward. I am honored 
to be a sponsor.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
do rise today in strong support of H.R. 363, the Sowing the Seeds 
Through Science and Engineering Research Act.
  This legislation, just like H.R. 362 which we just passed, is a 
fantastic opportunity for bipartisanship to support math and science 
education in this country. Taken in combination with that bill, 10,000 
Teachers, 10 Million Minds, we lay a crucial foundation in maintaining 
America's competitiveness worldwide.
  The National Academies released a report entitled ``Rising Above the 
Gathering Storm.'' It looked at ways in which the Federal Government 
could enhance our country's science and technology enterprise so we can 
continue to compete and prosper in this global marketplace. In addition 
to its recommendations with respect to K-12 education, the commission 
came to the conclusion that there is a general lack of research in 
science and engineering in America.
  Our country must face the reality that China and India are making 
significant strides and pouring major resources into science and 
engineering. Therefore, in order to stay competitive, we need to not 
only encourage young students to get excited by the possibilities that 
exist with technology advances, but we also need to support young 
scientist research. Since younger scientists are more likely to do 
innovative and transformative work, it is in our country's best 
interest to ensure that these young scientists indeed have the support 
that they need.
  Mr. Chairman, the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering 
Act offers rewards for younger students in order to encourage them to 
continue their work in the fields of science and engineering.
  This legislation also strengthens Federal support for science and 
engineering researchers at the early stages of their career by 
expanding the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship 
program at NSF, establishing a Presidential Innovation Award, and 
authorizing NSF to authorize research on innovation.
  Again, I want to emphasize that I truly believe in order for our 
great Nation to remain competitive in the ever-advancing global 
marketplace, we need to sustain and strengthen our commitment to long-
term basic research. This is research that has the potential to be 
transformational in maintaining the flow of new ideas that fuel our 
economy, provide security and enhance the quality of life for all 
Americans.
  Mr. Chairman, I firmly believe this legislation is a great first step 
to address this impending crisis, both in America's workforce and our 
country's research institutions, and I am proud to support the bill, 
and I ask all of my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. Chairman, before I conclude, and hopefully I will not run out of 
time, but I did want to at this point say that as much as I am for this 
bill, I have to oppose one of the amendments that is going to be 
offered by the gentlelady from New York, Mrs. Gillibrand, the

[[Page 10119]]

Gillibrand amendment. It is duplicative. We already do that under the 
Department of Education in regard to providing scholarships, merit 
scholarships for advanced students in our high schools. We already do 
that through the Department of Education, and it is a very well-funded 
program.
  But more importantly, Mr. Chairman, the reason I am opposed to the 
amendment, in a way it contradicts what we just did in H.R. 362, where 
we said we will give these grants to these students to encourage them 
to study and pursue math and science and engineering types of advanced 
degrees in college with a payback, a two-for-one payback if they go 
into the teaching profession in a community where we have that great 
need for outstanding math and science teachers.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, again, I support the bill. I am opposed to 
the Gillibrand amendment for the reasons outlined.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, let me thank my friend, Dr. 
Gingrey, for his support for this good bipartisan bill, and I yield 2 
minutes to another active member of our committee, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McNerney).
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong bipartisan support 
of H.R. 363, Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research. 
Before my election to Congress, I spent my entire academic and 
professional career as a scientist, as a mathematician and an engineer.
  I was particularly concerned when I read the sobering conclusions of 
the National Academies' ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' about 
America's declining competitiveness in a science and technology-based 
global economy. The report calls for an immediate action to maintain 
America's competitive advantage, and I agree with those 
recommendations.
  We are already moving forward to carry out some of the report's 
recommendations in an effort to renew interest in scientific 
development. H.R. 363 will provide grants to support young researchers 
in the early stages of their careers to engage in the high-risk, high-
reward innovative research that challenges existing assumptions. The 
bill also establishes a Presidential Innovation Award to stimulate 
scientific and engineering advances in the public interest.
  As a Nation, we face many daunting and almost overwhelming 
challenges, the solutions to which will require serious and dedicated 
scientific research. Conclusive research can take years, so we must 
work now to inspire today's students and researchers to take up such 
scientific pursuits. This bill provides just the right kind of specific 
incentives to compel young researchers to do the kind of pioneering and 
groundbreaking research that will yield dividends for the public 
interest.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. McCaul).
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support this bill 
and thank Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall, a fellow Texan, for 
their hard work and leadership on this issue.
  I think we can all agree on the importance of ensuring America is 
competitive in science and engineering. As the National Academy of 
Sciences report ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' warned, this 
country is in danger of losing its leadership role in these fields.
  Last year I sponsored the Research For Competitiveness Act to address 
this issue. Unfortunately, that legislation did not come to the floor 
of the House after being passed by the Science Committee. However, I am 
pleased in this Congress in a bipartisan fashion to note that H.R. 363 
incorporates sections from last year's bill that establish early-career 
grants for young scientists and engineers. These grants will encourage 
scientists and engineers in the early stages of their academic careers 
to establish innovative lines of research. This approach continues the 
successful model of partnership between the Federal Government and 
America's universities.
  As you know, many of the technologies we enjoy today, such as 
breakthroughs that enabled e-commerce to become a reality in the 1990s, 
are based on research initially conducted at universities like the 
University of Texas in my hometown of Austin.
  When we fund programs such as these, we are investing in minds and 
helping create the next generation of America's high-tech workforce. 
Therefore, I strongly support this legislation and urge my colleagues 
to vote ``yes'' on this bill.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. McCaul for his 
support for this good bipartisan bill, and I yield 3 minutes to another 
Texan (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson), who is an active member of the 
Science and Technology Committee.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, thank you for our 
committee leadership.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 363, the Sowing the Seeds 
Through Science and Engineering Research Act. This legislation was 
based on policy recommendations from the ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm'' report to Congress by the National Academy of Sciences.
  One of the greatest challenges new researchers face is getting grant 
funding for their research. In Dallas, the University of Texas 
Southwest Medical School has four Nobel laureates, where they earned 
them right there, and UT-Dallas has at least one. Baylor University and 
others are stellar research institutions, and they compete at the 
national level for grants and perform award-winning scientific 
research.

                              {time}  1730

  These universities depend on Federal research funding.
  When new faculty are hired at research universities in Texas and 
elsewhere, they are expected to be able to write grant proposals and 
successfully win funding from Federal agencies such as the National 
Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Department of 
Energy, and others.
  According to NIH, the average age at which the investigator first 
obtains RO1 major grant funding is age 42. If students are earning 
Ph.D.s in their late twenties, that means there are many years of 
struggle before they can establish themselves and eventually become 
full professors at these universities.
  As a result, many scientists have dropped out of science. It is too 
hard to get funding. The stress level is too high.
  Mr. Chairman, grant support targeted at new investigators is an 
important step toward resolving this problem. If Congress would fund 
Federal research as vigorously as our competitors overseas are doing, 
we wouldn't have such a problem.
  H.R. 363 targets young investigator grant support at the National 
Science Foundation, Department of Energy, and other scientific research 
agencies under the purview of the Committee on Science and technology.
  This is a good bill and I encourage my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
rise with pleasure to support this bill.
  The National Science Foundation for years has been one of the primary 
sources of research funding for outstanding research in this Nation. In 
addition, the Department of Energy Office of Science has been a leader 
in certain areas, particularly high energy or particle physics, but 
also in a number of other physics areas, including the high energy 
light sources such as we have at Berkeley and a few other labs.
  I strongly support these programs, but a difficulty that has 
developed over the past few years is that we have some early career 
researchers, some young people just entering the field, and they really 
have difficulty obtaining funding because the tendency of the reviewers 
at the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy Office 
of Science is to say well, we have this group of very well-known good 
researchers. We know their backgrounds and we know they can produce and 
how well they can do; we should just give

[[Page 10120]]

them the money because we don't know for sure about the early 
researchers. Now, I don't think they actually say that, but, 
unfortunately, I think it is in the back of the minds of the peer 
review folks as they consider proposals.
  I experienced this personally with my son, who as a young scientist 
had trouble breaking into the field and had a number of proposals 
denied before he finally received funding. Even though he had made some 
national strides and was well-known in the field, yet it was difficult 
to get the funding.
  These programs will be very, very helpful to support the early career 
researchers. But there is another aspect about which we need some new 
thinking and some change, and that is the fact that more and more 
science is becoming interdisciplinary, where you may have biology and 
physics, or biophysics; and you have relationships between biology and 
chemistry or chemistry and physics. You can go on and on. There are all 
sorts of different variations. Sometimes you may need five or six 
different disciplines represented in the research program to really 
cover all of the aspects of the research. When you submit a proposal, 
usually you are required to specify one field and if you specify 
interdisciplinary, sometimes the other fields are not adequately 
represented on the peer review panel.
  I admit these are perhaps exceptions; but, nevertheless, we have to 
make sure that all of these bright young scientists or those wishing to 
branch out into another discipline, for example, having a very good 
background in physics and deciding they can really do some good work in 
biophysics. So we need to take account of that, and this bill will 
provide that within both the National Science Foundation and the 
Department of Energy.
  I strongly support this bill. I believe both agencies, I know NSF 
supports it, and I am sure that the Department of Energy Office of 
Science also supports this bill because they have also noted the need 
for these changes.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I thank Dr. Ehlers for his 
support for this bill, and his help in bringing it to the floor today.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Baird), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Research and Science.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend and chairman.
  This is a good day for science and research, and that means it is a 
good day for the United States of America and for our economic 
prosperity and for our children's future.
  As Chair of the Research and Science Subcommittee, I rise today in 
support of H.R. 363, the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and 
Engineering Act, and I want to commend Chairman Gordon for his strong 
leadership on this bill that we are considering now, and on the one 
that passed earlier today.
  I share Chairman Gordon's absolute commitment and belief that we must 
take bold steps now to ensure that American students and workers are 
prepared for the careers of the future and so our Nation is equipped to 
compete in the global economy.
  To accomplish this, however, we must make sure our young scientists 
receive the support they need. That is why, as many of our prior 
speakers have pointed out, it is critically important to invest in the 
minds of young researchers now, because not only are they highly 
productive, but one day they will fill the ranks of our senior 
established and groundbreaking scientists on which our country's 
economy, competitiveness, and indeed our national security depend.
  That is why I am so pleased we are considering H.R. 363 today. The 
bill will ensure continued innovation by supporting outstanding 
researchers in early career stages, and ensuring that graduate students 
in research fields of particular importance to our future 
competitiveness receive adequate funding. I also share Ranking Member 
Ehlers' commitment to the importance of interdisciplinary scientific 
studies which he so well articulated.
  This bill and the one before it that we considered already and passed 
today, are critically important to the future prosperity of our 
country. I share Chairman Gordon's commitment to them, and I urge 
passage.
  I also would like to take this opportunity briefly to express support 
for the amendment soon to be offered by Mrs. Gillibrand of New York. 
Her amendment will require the National Science Foundation to institute 
a program to award scholarships in science, technology, engineering, or 
mathematics to undergraduate scholars. As a former teacher of 
undergraduate scholars and researchers, I know how important this stage 
is to career development and I support her commitment to it, applaud 
her offering the amendment. I urge passage of that, as well as final 
passage of the bill.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
chairman of the Science Committee, as well as the ranking member. We 
have had a long and I like to think of it as a productive relationship, 
and it is an honor to come and acknowledge that we are finally 
listening to the voices of the 21st century.
  I want to hold up this document that claims the 110th Congress is a 
Congress that will move the innovation agenda. As a former member of 
the Science Committee I remember, as the century turned in 2000, 
listening to CEOs who indicated the crisis in both teaching, 
understanding and creative in math, science and technology.
  Let me rise and belatedly say I have certainly supported the last 
legislative initiative dealing with 10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds 
that we just passed, and I am delighted to be able to support the 
Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act of 2007 
and to say this: Science is in fact the work of the 21st century, but 
we are falling behind.
  We don't need to hear the statistics again of how many engineers 
China graduates, for example, compared to the United States. This 
workforce cannot be prepared for the 21st century without actual 
investment by this country, and understanding that without researchers 
and scientists and engineers, we do not create work.
  Clearly, even though these might be considered passe and simple, but 
the light bulb, the typewriter, the car, all innovative aspects of our 
work, the airplane, created eons and years and decades of work.
  This legislation in particular provides an opportunity for research, 
and the amendment provides an opportunity for research for 
undergraduate scholars.
  At Texas Southern University, we have a transportation study program. 
It has a pharmacy school, all small aspects of science. It has a solar 
energy project that I was proud to take Members of Congress to in 2001.
  There are budding opportunities all over America, but what must we do 
to ensure that it works? We have to invest and provide the resources. 
We have to encourage not only students, but teachers, and then 
researchers that their work is valued. NASA and our move to the moon 
all concentrate on having those who will be researchers, technologists, 
readers of software, and yes, we hope, astronauts.
  I applaud this legislation for what it does for engineers and 
scientists and physicians who are pioneers of the work of the 20th 
century and now can be pioneers of the work of the 21st century.
  I believe that we have a step further to go. We need geologists. As 
we look at global warming, we must find ways to be efficient in the 
securing of energy, balancing what we call the resources of the ground 
as well as nuclear as well as solar.
  I think this is an outstanding bill, and I ask my colleagues to 
support it. I thank the distinguished chairman.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 363, the ``Sowing the Seeds Through 
Science and Engineering Research Act,'' of which I am proud to be a 
cosponsor. This bill is the second component of the new Democratic 
majority's Innovation Agenda, which is designed to make our nation more 
able to compete successfully in the global economy.
  Mr. Chairman, it is essential that we invest in a workforce ready for 
global competition by

[[Page 10121]]

creating a new generation of innovators and make a sustained commitment 
to federal research and development. We need to spur and expand 
affordable access to broadband, achieve energy independence, and 
provide small business with tools to encourage entrepreneurial 
innovation. H.R. 363 a critical first step.
  Charles Drew, Benjamin Banneker, Clarence Elder, and David 
Crosthwait, Jr. are only a few of the names associated with great 
American scientific history. These engineers, scientist, and physicians 
were pioneers in their respective fields, and have touched all our 
lives in ways that we probably never consider. Whether it is enjoying 
the comfortable atmosphere of Radio City Music hall, navigating the 
streets of Washington, DC, or having a loved one receive a blood 
transfusion these men have all made significant contributions to 
America and the world. Yet, the beautiful thing about science is its' 
evolutionary nature. Innovation never sleeps, and great minds are 
always at work.
  Therefore to continue the legacy of these great men, and to ensure 
that America is at the forefront of new technological and scientific 
discoveries, I rise in support of H.R. 363. Representing Houston, I 
realize the importance of institutions like NASA and the sense of 
national pride that NASA can produce when they are leading the global 
effort in advancing science and technology.
  Mr. Chairman, according to the National Academies, the most important 
thing we can do for our future economic health is to increase the 
nation's expertise in science, technology, math, and engineering. H.R. 
363 represents a critical down-payment toward achieving this goal. 
Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I just quickly yield myself 
the balance of my time to say this truly has been a collaborative, 
bipartisan effort. I thank Mr. Hall and his very able staff. We have 
worked together. We have a good bill, and we need to pass this bill.
  Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Chairman, tonight the House took a critical 
step in the effort to ensure that America remains at the leading edge 
of the global economy by passing H.R. 363, the Sowing the Seeds Through 
Science and Engineering Act. The provisions in the bill, including 
expanded grants through the National Science Foundation and Department 
of Energy for early career researchers, support for research in fields 
of national importance, and government recruitment of young scientists 
build on the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences and 
will help to rebuild our knowledge infrastructure. By doing so, the 
legislation will help America maintain its leadership in scientific 
research and allow American innovators to strengthen our economy by 
finding solutions to achieve energy independence, greater environmental 
protection, the development of new medical treatments, and a host of 
other goals. It is for these reasons that I voted to support H.R. 363.
  However, I am deeply opposed to language, added to the bill through a 
motion to recommit, that prioritizes support for research into advanced 
nuclear reprocessing. Although supporters of nuclear power have renewed 
their efforts to increase America's reliance on nuclear power, the 
reality is that there are significant safety and environmental concerns 
associated with nuclear energy. The storage of spent nuclear fuel is a 
growing problem facing individual power plants and communities 
throughout the nation. At the Indian Point Energy Center, there is an 
ongoing leak of radioactive material from spent fuel pools into the 
Hudson River, and throughout the country communities that host nuclear 
facilities are being forced to contemplate the cleanup and security 
costs associated with the storage of nuclear waste.
  We must also clearly understand that, at a time when nuclear 
terrorism is one of the greatest threats facing our nation, the process 
used to recycle spent fuel would create a significant proliferation 
risk by resulting in the production of plutonium that can be used in 
nuclear weapons. The language prioritizing support for a technology 
that threatens to damage our environment and undermine our national 
security is misguided, and tarnishes an otherwise laudable piece of 
legislation. I am hopeful that this language will not be included in 
the conference report.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Sowing the 
Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act. Taking its name 
from the sixth chapter of the National Academies Report ``Rising Above 
the Gathering Storm,'' H.R. 363 is part of an ambitious legislative 
portfolio that is part of the Innovation Agenda. I was proud to help 
craft the Innovation Agenda, on which our nation is dependent for its 
future prosperity.
  Fifty thousand people hold postdoctoral appointments in the United 
States. In 1999, postdocs were 43% of the first authors in articles in 
the prestigious journal Science. Postdoctoral appointments are 
temporary by design and are compensated poorly. Postdocs are generally 
motivated by the idea of becoming professors, a goal to which three 
quarters of postdocs aspire. However, only 20 percent will attain 
faculty positions. This had led to an increasingly dramatic and 
problematic holding pattern which could select more for flexibility and 
perseverance than for talent and performance.
  As science funding has become tighter, it's become more difficult for 
postdocs to find permanent academic positions and to remain in science. 
The availability of positions is entirely dependent on the likelihood 
of a new professor finding funding. As of 2002, the median age at which 
one receives a first NIH grant as a primary investigator is 42. In 
1981, the median age was 35. In the biological sciences, in 1980, 
researchers under 40 years old received more than half of all 
competitive research grants. By 2003, this had fallen to less than 17 
percent. At NSF, the funding rates for first-time grant recipients fell 
from 25 percent in 2000 to 17 percent in 2004.
  H.R. 363 addresses this problem by setting aside funds specifically 
for early career researchers, which are defined as assistant professors 
or the equivalent thereof. Assistant professor is the role to which 
most postdocs aspire as their next step. It is one step short of having 
a tenured, permanent position in a research institution. H.R 363 also 
requires DOE and NIST to report on how they are doing with recruitment 
and retention of early career engineers and scientists.
  H.R. 363 supports the early career part of the science and technology 
professional pipeline in other ways, as well. The act requires NSF to 
set aside at least 1.5 percent of funds appropriated for research and 
related activities to the Integrative Graduate Education and Research 
Traineeship (IGERT) program and permits the NSF to research the process 
of innovation and the teaching of inventiveness.
  At present, the United States research infrastructure is deficient. 
In 2001, more than 60 percent of the Department of Energy Office of 
Science lab space was over 30 years old. This requires $2 billion to 
correct. In 1998, the NSF estimated that $11.4 billion were needed to 
renovate U.S. academic research facilities. In 2001, the NIH estimated 
$5.6 billion in health research infrastructure needs.
  This problem is in part caused by a 26 percent cap on reimbursement 
to universities from research grants for infrastructure costs. Since 
this cap was created in 1991, universities have been unable to find 
sufficient sources of funding to keep their scientific facilities 
competitive or, in some cases, adequate. At the same time, they are 
using these facilities to attempt to compete internationally for 
scientists.
  H.R. 363 addresses this problem by instructing the Office of Science 
and Technology Policy to create a National Coordination Office for 
Research Infrastructure. This office would prioritize deficiencies in 
research facilities at universities and national labs and then work to 
coordinate a response to these deficiencies.
  I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution. Without its 
reforms to our research infrastructure and science talent pipeline we 
will continue to deteriorate.
  Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
363, the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act.
  I first want to thank Chairman Gordon for his leadership on the 
important issue of innovation, and commend our Committee's work towards 
investing in our research communities.
  This past August, I invited Chairman Gordon to join me in a panel to 
discuss the subject of Innovation back in St. Louis. The Event was a 
tremendous success and sparked a conversation about competitiveness, 
STEM education and innovation that still continues with enthusiasm in 
St. Louis.
  While this is an issue that warrants much discussion, the time has 
come for bold action.
  Unfortunately, our nation's standing as the global leader in science 
and technology has slipped in recent years.
  H.R. 363 will counteract this worrying trend by investing in long-
term scientific research and encouraging young scientists and 
researchers to pursue high-risk and high-reward research.
  Specifically, the bill administers awards to outstanding early-career 
researchers in academia and in nonprofit research organizations, 
provides graduate research assistantships in areas of national need and 
establishes a national coordination office to prioritize university

[[Page 10122]]

and national research infrastructure needs. By investing in our young 
researchers, we invest in the ideas that will shape our country's 
future.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill to advance our nation's 
status as a leader in the global economy.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 363, the 
Sowing the Seeds through Science and Engineering Research Act.
  The bill authorizes appropriations for basic research in science and 
engineering, and provides support of graduate fellowships, as well as 
research grants, to scientists and engineers in the early phases of 
their careers.
  As a member of the Science and Technology Committee, I commend 
Chairman Gordon for crafting this important legislation and bringing it 
to the House floor today.
  We must take bold steps now to insure that American students and 
workers are prepared for the careers of the future and that our nation 
is equipped to compete in the global economy.
  The bill is based on the recommendations of the National Academies' 
widely-acknowledged ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm'' report, which 
found that the U.S. stands to lose its competitive edge in the 
international economy unless immediate action is taken.
  Statistics show that U.S. 12th-grade students performed below the 
international average of 21 countries on a test of general knowledge of 
math and science.
  In 2004, America graduated 70,000 engineers, while China turned out 
10 times as many.
  We know that American high-tech companies often look abroad for 
workers who are willing to work for less pay.
  I am very concerned about the issue of off-shoring and outsourcing, 
and it troubles me when companies say they need to go overseas just to 
find employees who are skilled in math and science.
  I believe there is a clear link between off-shoring and outsourcing 
and how these trends relate to future employment opportunities and 
career choices of students in the science and engineering fields.
  I believe we have to raise awareness of this issue and work together 
in a bipartisan manner in order to keep high-wage science and 
engineering jobs here in the U.S. and maintain our competitive edge.
  H.R. 363 puts us on the right path and demonstrates our commitment to 
strengthening our science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
educational programs in order produce a skilled and knowledgeable 
workforce here at home.
  Maintaining U.S. innovation and leadership demands hard work and 
investment. While there are no quick fixes, we can take steps, like 
H.R. 363, now to accomplish these important goals.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Chairman, today we are considering several bills to 
implement the Innovation Agenda including H.R. 363, the Sowing the 
Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act.
  In February I was pleased to support this legislation in Committee. 
H.R. 363 provides merit-based grants for researchers early in their 
careers, establishes a Presidential innovation award, and creates a 
national office to identify, prioritize, and coordinate research 
infrastructure needs at universities and national laboratories.
  America needs innovators and leaders if we want to remain competitive 
in the global economy. This is especially true when it comes to science 
and engineering.
  Retaining scientists and engineers, however, is often difficult, 
because they receive such low pay early-on in their careers.
  If we don't invest early in our future innovators, we will fall 
behind.
  H.R. 363 supports an important goal and I look forward to its passage 
today.
  Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 363, a piece of 
legislation that is desperately needed to enhance tomorrow's scientific 
research.
  We all know what it's like to start out on our own--the uncertainty 
of your financial footing, but with great faith in yourself and your 
ideas. Imagine that feeling on an exponential scale and that might be 
how a young, talented researcher feels as they work on a cure for 
autism, or traumatic brain injury for our troops, or a new source of 
cleaner, renewable energy.
  The field of research is high-risk and high-yield, and the federal 
government is right to invest in research that benefits us all. H.R. 
363 will help ``sustain and strengthen the nation's traditional 
commitment to long-term basic research . . . to maintain the flow of 
new ideas that fuel the economy, provide security, and enhance the 
quality of life,'' as prescribed by the National Academies report, 
Rising Above the Gathering Storm, that has been the focus of our work 
in the Science and Technology Committee, and mentioned many times 
today.
  Young researchers are the key to innovation, as they are more likely 
than established researchers to shift paradigms, break with tradition, 
or bring new ideas to a discipline or to a combination of disciplines. 
The early-career awards outlined in this bill reward young researchers 
for engaging in high-risk/high-reward research that is likely to be 
transformative or highly innovative. The establishment of a 
presidential innovation award is designed to identify and recognize 
people who develop the unique scientific and engineering innovations in 
the national interest at the time they occur. This bill doesn't simply 
seek to fund all science; it focuses on fostering the most innovative 
elements of the scientific enterprise.
  I would also like to thank Chairman Gordon, as well as Ranking Member 
Hall, on their hard work on this legislation, and the bipartisan manner 
in which the Science and Technology Committee is run to produce such 
substantial legislation.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I submit the accompanying 
exchange of letters regarding H.R. 363.

                                         House of Representatives,


                             Committee on Energy and Commerce,

                                   Washington, DC, April 27, 2007.
     Hon. Bart Gordon,
     Chairman, Committee on Science and Technology, Rayburn House 
         Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I write regarding H.R. 363, which 
     authorizes appropriations for basic research and research 
     infrastructure in science and engineering, and for support of 
     graduate fellowships, and for other purposes. I am concerned 
     that certain provisions of the bill as reported may be broad 
     enough to include applicability with respect to biomedical 
     and behavioral research conducted or supported by the 
     National Institutes of Health or other agencies of the Public 
     Health Service. As you know, those matters are within the 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
       I support passage of the bill based on my understanding 
     that you have agreed that the inaction of the Committee with 
     respect to the bill does not in any way serve as a 
     jurisdictional precedent as to our two committees.
       Further, as to any conference on the bill, the Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce reserves the right to seek the 
     appointment of conferees for consideration of any portions of 
     the bill that are within the Committee's jurisdiction. It is 
     my understanding that you have agreed to support a request by 
     the Committee with respect to serving as conferees on the 
     bill (or similar legislation).
       I request that you send me a letter confirming our 
     agreements as to jurisdiction, including with respect to 
     conferees, and that our exchange of letters be included in 
     the Congressional Record as part of the consideration of the 
     bill.
       I look forward to working with you on this important 
     legislation. If you wish to discuss this matter further, 
     please do not hesitate to contact me.
           Sincerely,
                                                  John D. Dingell,
                                                         Chairman.
                                  ____
                                  
         House of Representatives, Committee on Science and 
           Technology,
                                   Washington, DC, April 26, 2007.
     Hon. John D. Dingell,
     Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rayburn House 
         Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding the 
     consideration of H.R. 363, the ``Sowing the Seeds Through 
     Science and Engineering Research Act.'' I appreciate your 
     support of this important legislation.
       I recognize your Committee's jurisdictional interest in 
     this area as it pertains to the National Institute of Health 
     and other agencies of the Public Health Service. I agree that 
     the inaction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce with 
     respect to the bill does not in any way serve as a 
     jurisdictional precedent as to our two committees, and I will 
     support any request you may make to have conferees on those 
     portions of H.R. 363, or similar legislation, that implicate 
     the Public Health Service. The exchange of letters between 
     our two committees will be placed in the Congressional 
     Record.
       Thank you for your attention to this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Bart Gordon,
                                                         Chairman.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill for the 
purpose of amendment

[[Page 10123]]

under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered read.
  The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as 
follows:

                                H.R. 363

       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 ``Sowing the Seeds Through 
     Science and Engineering Research Act''.

     SEC. 2. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION EARLY CAREER AWARDS FOR 
                   SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCHERS.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the National Science 
     Foundation shall carry out a program to award grants to 
     scientists and engineers at the early stage of their careers 
     at institutions of higher education and organizations 
     described in subsection (c)(2) to conduct research in fields 
     relevant to the mission of the Foundation. The existing 
     Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Program may be 
     designated as the mechanism for awarding such grants.
       (b) Size and Duration of Award.--The duration of awards 
     under this section shall be 5 years, and the amount per year 
     shall be at least $80,000.
       (c) Eligibility.--Award recipients shall be individuals who 
     are employed in a tenure-track position as an assistant 
     professor or equivalent title, or who hold an equivalent 
     position, at--
       (1) an institution of higher education in the United 
     States; or
       (2) an organization in the United States that is a 
     nonprofit, nondegree-granting research organization such as a 
     museum, observatory, or research laboratory.
       (d) Selection.--Award recipients shall be selected on a 
     competitive, merit-reviewed basis.
       (e) Selection Process and Criteria for Awards.--An 
     applicant seeking funding under this section shall submit a 
     proposal to the Director at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information as the Director may require. In 
     evaluating the proposals submitted under this section, the 
     Director shall consider, at a minimum--
       (1) the intellectual merit of the proposed work;
       (2) the innovative or transformative nature of the proposed 
     research;
       (3) the extent to which the proposal integrates research 
     and education, including undergraduate education in science 
     and engineering disciplines; and
       (4) the potential of the applicant for leadership at the 
     frontiers of knowledge.
       (f) Awards.--In awarding grants under this section, the 
     Director shall endeavor to ensure that the recipients are 
     from a variety of types of institutions of higher education 
     and nonprofit, nondegree-granting research organizations. In 
     support of this goal, the Director shall broadly disseminate 
     information about when and how to apply for grants under this 
     section, including by conducting outreach to Historically 
     Black Colleges and Universities that are part B institutions 
     as defined in section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061(2)) and minority institutions (as 
     defined in section 365(3) of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1067k(3))).
       (g) Authorization of Appropriation.--For each of the fiscal 
     years 2008 through 2012, the Director shall allocate at least 
     3.5 percent of funds appropriated to the National Science 
     Foundation for Research and Related Activities to the grants 
     program under this section.
       (h) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to the 
     Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
     Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation of the Senate a report describing the 
     distribution of the institutions from which individuals have 
     participated in the Faculty Early Career Development Program 
     since fiscal year 2001 among each of the categories of 
     institutions of higher education defined by the Carnegie 
     Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the 
     organizations in subsection (c)(2).
       (i) Evaluation.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to the 
     Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
     Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation of the Senate a report evaluating the 
     impact of the program carried out under this section on the 
     ability of young faculty to compete for National Science 
     Foundation research grants.

     SEC. 3. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY EARLY CAREER AWARDS FOR SCIENCE 
                   AND ENGINEERING RESEARCHERS.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the Office of Science of 
     the Department of Energy shall carry out a program to award 
     grants to scientists and engineers at the early stage of 
     their careers at institutions of higher education and 
     organizations described in subsection (c)(2) to conduct 
     research in fields relevant to the mission of the Department.
       (b) Size and Duration of Award.--The duration of awards 
     under this section shall be up to 5 years, and the amount per 
     year shall be at least $80,000.
       (c) Eligibility.--Award recipients shall be individuals who 
     are employed in a tenure-track position as an assistant 
     professor or equivalent title, or who hold an equivalent 
     position, at--
       (1) an institution of higher education in the United 
     States; or
       (2) an organization in the United States that is a 
     nonprofit, nondegree-granting research organization such as a 
     museum, observatory, or research laboratory.
       (d) Selection.-- Award recipients shall be selected on a 
     competitive, merit-reviewed basis.
       (e) Selection Process and Criteria for Awards.--An 
     applicant seeking funding under this section shall submit a 
     proposal to the Director of the Office of Science at such 
     time, in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Director may require. In evaluating the proposals submitted 
     under this section, the Director shall consider, at a 
     minimum--
       (1) the intellectual merit of the proposed work;
       (2) the innovative or transformative nature of the proposed 
     research;
       (3) the extent to which the proposal integrates research 
     and education, including undergraduate education in science 
     and engineering disciplines; and
       (4) the potential of the applicant for leadership at the 
     frontiers of knowledge.
       (f) Collaboration With National Laboratories.--In awarding 
     grants under this section, the Director shall give priority 
     to proposals in which the proposed work includes 
     collaboration with the Department of Energy National 
     Laboratories.
       (g) Awards.--In awarding grants under this section, the 
     Director shall endeavor to ensure that the recipients are 
     from a variety of types of institutions of higher education 
     and nonprofit, nondegree-granting research organizations. In 
     support of this goal, the Director shall broadly disseminate 
     information about when and how to apply for grants under this 
     section, including by conducting outreach to Historically 
     Black Colleges and Universities that are part B institutions 
     as defined in section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061(2)) and minority institutions (as 
     defined in section 365(3) of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1067k(3))).
       (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy to carry out 
     the Director's responsibilities under this section 
     $25,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012.
       (i) Report on Recruiting and Retaining Early Career Science 
     and Engineering Researchers at the National Laboratories.--
     Not later than 3 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Director of the Office of Science shall transmit to 
     the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
     Representatives and to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
     Resources of the Senate a report on efforts to recruit and 
     retain young scientists and engineers at the early stages of 
     their careers at the Department of Energy National 
     Laboratories. The report shall include--
       (1) a description of Department of Energy and National 
     Laboratory policies and procedures, including financial 
     incentives, awards, promotions, time set aside for 
     independent research, access to equipment or facilities, and 
     other forms of recognition, designed to attract and retain 
     young scientists and engineers;
       (2) an evaluation of the impact of these incentives on the 
     careers of young scientists and engineers at Department of 
     Energy National Laboratories, and also on the quality of the 
     research at the National Laboratories and in Department of 
     Energy programs;
       (3) a description of what barriers, if any, exist to 
     efforts to recruit and retain young scientists and engineers, 
     including limited availability of full time equivalent 
     positions, legal and procedural requirements, and pay grading 
     systems; and
       (4) the amount of funding devoted to efforts to recruit and 
     retain young researchers and the source of such funds.

     SEC. 4. INTEGRATIVE GRADUATE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH 
                   TRAINEESHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) Funding.--For each of the fiscal years 2008 through 
     2012, the Director of the National Science Foundation shall 
     allocate at least 1.5 percent of funds appropriated for 
     Research and Related Activities to the Integrative Graduate 
     Education and Research Traineeship program.
       (b) Coordination.--The Director shall coordinate with 
     Federal departments and agencies, as appropriate, to expand 
     the interdisciplinary nature of the Integrative Graduate 
     Education and Research Traineeship program.
       (c) Authority To Accept Funds From Other Agencies.--The 
     Director is authorized to accept funds from other Federal 
     departments and agencies to carry out the Integrative 
     Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program.

     SEC. 5. PRESIDENTIAL INNOVATION AWARD.

       (a) Establishment.--The President shall periodically 
     present the Presidential Innovation Award, on the basis of 
     recommendations received from the Director of the Office of 
     Science and Technology Policy or on the basis of such other 
     information as the President considers appropriate, to 
     individuals who develop one or more unique scientific or 
     engineering ideas in the national interest at the time the 
     innovation occurs.
       (b) Purpose.--The awards under this section shall be made 
     to--
       (1) stimulate scientific and engineering advances in the 
     national interest;
       (2) illustrate the linkage between science and engineering 
     and national needs; and
       (3) provide an example to students of the contribution they 
     could make to society by entering the science and engineering 
     profession.
       (c) Citizenship.--An individual is not eligible to receive 
     the award under this section unless at the time such award is 
     made the individual--
       (1) is a citizen or other national of the United States; or
       (2) is an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for 
     permanent residence who--

[[Page 10124]]

       (A) has filed an application for naturalization in the 
     manner prescribed by section 334 of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1445); and
       (B) is not permanently ineligible to become a citizen of 
     the United States.
       (d) Presentation.--The presentation of the award shall be 
     made by the President with such ceremonies as he may deem 
     proper, including attendance by appropriate Members of 
     Congress.

     SEC. 6. NATIONAL COORDINATION OFFICE FOR RESEARCH 
                   INFRASTRUCTURE.

       (a) In General.--The Office of Science and Technology 
     Policy shall establish a National Coordination Office for 
     Research Infrastructure. Such Office shall--
       (1) identify and prioritize the deficiencies in research 
     facilities and major instrumentation located at academic 
     institutions and at national laboratories that are available 
     for use by academic researchers; and
       (2) institute and coordinate the planning by Federal 
     agencies for the acquisition, refurbishment, and maintenance 
     of research facilities and major instrumentation required to 
     address the deficiencies identified under paragraph (1).

     In prioritizing the deficiencies identified under paragraph 
     (1), the Office shall consider research needs in areas 
     relevant to the Nation's economic competitiveness.
       (b) Staffing.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy shall appoint individuals to serve in the 
     Office established under subsection (a) from among the 
     principal Federal agencies that support research in the 
     sciences, mathematics, and engineering, and shall at a 
     minimum include individuals from the National Science 
     Foundation and the Department of Energy.
       (c) Report.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
     Technology Policy shall provide annually a report to Congress 
     at the time of the President's budget proposal--
       (1) describing the research infrastructure needs identified 
     in accordance with subsection (a);
       (2) listing research facilities projects and budget 
     proposals, by agency, for major instrumentation acquisitions 
     that are included in the President's budget proposal; and
       (3) explaining how these facilities projects and 
     instrumentation acquisitions relate to the deficiencies and 
     priorities arrived at in accordance with subsection (a).

     SEC. 7. RESEARCH ON INNOVATION AND INVENTIVENESS.

       In carrying out its research programs on science policy and 
     on the science of learning, the National Science Foundation 
     may support research on the process of innovation and the 
     teaching of inventiveness.

     SEC. 8. REPORT ON NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND 
                   TECHNOLOGY EFFORTS TO RECRUIT AND RETAIN EARLY 
                   CAREER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCHERS.

       Not later than 3 months after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Director of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology shall transmit to the Committee on Science and 
     Technology of the House of Representatives and to the 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
     Senate a report on efforts to recruit and retain young 
     scientists and engineers at the early stages of their careers 
     at the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
     laboratories and joint institutes. The report shall include--
       (1) a description of National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology policies and procedures, including financial 
     incentives, awards, promotions, time set aside for 
     independent research, access to equipment or facilities, and 
     other forms of recognition, designed to attract and retain 
     young scientists and engineers;
       (2) an evaluation of the impact of these incentives on the 
     careers of young scientists and engineers at the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology, and also on the 
     quality of the research at the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology's laboratories and in the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology's programs;
       (3) a description of what barriers, if any, exist to 
     efforts to recruit and retain young scientists and engineers, 
     including limited availability of full time equivalent 
     positions, legal and procedural requirements, and pay grading 
     systems; and
       (4) the amount of funding devoted to efforts to recruit and 
     retain young researchers and the source of such funds.

     SEC. 9. NASA'S CONTRIBUTION TO INNOVATION.

       (a) Sense of the Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress 
     that--
       (1) a balanced science program as authorized by section 
     101(d) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
     Authorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-155) contributes 
     significantly to innovation in and the economic 
     competitiveness of the United States; and
       (2) a robust National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 
     funded at the levels authorized under sections 202 and 203 of 
     that Act, would offer a balance among science, aeronautics, 
     exploration, and human space flight programs, all of which 
     can attract and employ scientists, engineers, and technicians 
     across a broad range of fields in science, technology, 
     mathematics, and engineering.
       (b) Participation in Innovation and Competitiveness 
     Programs.--The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 
     Space Administration shall fully participate in any 
     interagency efforts to promote innovation and economic 
     competitiveness through scientific research and development 
     within the spending levels cited in subsection (a).
       Amend the title so as to read: ``A bill to authorize 
     programs for support of the early career development of 
     science and engineering researchers, and for support of 
     graduate fellowships, and for other purposes.''.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to the committee amendment is in order 
except those printed in House Report 110-99. Each amendment may be 
offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member designated 
in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the 
time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent of the amendment, shall not be subject to 
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question.


              Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Hall of Texas

  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed 
in House Report 110-99.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Hall of Texas:
       Page 4, line 15, insert ``, except to the extent that a 
     sufficient number of meritorious grant applications have not 
     been received for a fiscal year'' after ``under this 
     section''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 318, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) each 
will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise to encourage my colleagues to support my amendment. One of the 
key elements of this bill is a grant program at NSF designed to help 
scientists and engineers at early stages of their careers at 
institutions of higher learning.
  Eligible applicants are tenure-track faculty, and allow the existing 
faculty early career development program to be designed and designated 
as the mechanism for awarding such grants that we are talking about 
here.
  We also require the director of the NSF to allocate at least 3.5 
percent of funds appropriated to the NSF research and related 
activities account for the purposes in the bill.
  This amendment would modify the 3.5 percent allocation provision to 
include the following clause: ``except to the extent that a sufficient 
number of meritorious grant applications have not been received for a 
fiscal year.''
  I did this out of concern that the bill required the allocation of 
3.5 percent of the funds appropriated to the earlier career awards for 
science and engineering, without taking into account there may be years 
in which there are not sufficient meritorious grant applications in 
that area and NSF could use the funds more effectively maybe in another 
area.
  I hope my good friend, Chairman Gordon, and my colleagues will join 
me in support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment and a 
thoughtful amendment and I recommend its passage.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
chairman, and I thank the distinguished ranking member.
  If I might inquire of Mr. Hall, your amendment does not cut funds, it 
just refines the use? That is what I was trying to understand. Does 
your amendment cut funds?
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. No, absolutely not.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. It just sends it back if they are not 
utilized?
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Yes. It really provides a way for them to use the 
funds in other areas if they are not used up.

[[Page 10125]]


  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Reprogrammed?
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Yes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Let me thank you. I know this is not in the 
bill, but I just wanted to mention a school district I have been 
working with where I tried to draw in private interests in helping with 
math and science labs.
  I know that as you look at the Innovation Agenda, I want to make sure 
we do not frighten away the private financiers as well. This happens to 
be a large energy company, and I am going to openly say to them, I hope 
you have not abandoned the commitment to the North Forest Independent 
School District where we were committed to science labs and math labs 
and math scholar teachers. So it is tracking the same innovativeness of 
this particular bill, and I think we can work together as a partner.
  I want to support the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I thank Ms. Jackson-Lee for 
her addition to this informational session here; and once again, let me 
say that I think Mr. Hall has a good amendment, and I support that 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Tauscher

  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in House Report 110-99.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mrs. Tauscher:
       Page 4, line 10, insert ``In awarding grants under this 
     section, the Director shall give special consideration to 
     eligible early-career researchers who have followed 
     alternative career paths such as working part-time or in 
     nonacademic settings, or who have taken a significant career 
     break or other leave of absence.'' after ``(20 U.S.C. 
     1067k(3)).''.
       Page 10, line 9, strike ``needs; and'' and insert 
     ``needs;''.
       Page 10, line 10, redesignate paragraph (3) as paragraph 
     (4).
       Page 10, after line 9, insert the following new paragraph:
       (3) show the potential of such innovation to substantively 
     enhance the economic competitiveness of the United States 
     through development of commercializable intellectual 
     property; and

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 318, the gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Tauscher) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend Chairman Gordon for reporting 
these two critical bills out of the Science Committee, one focused on 
math and science education and the second on science and engineering.
  Taken together, these two bills are a critical step toward restoring 
our American technological base as well as giving students, engineers, 
and researchers the tools they need to compete in a global economy.
  And they are a great way to kick off the Innovation Agenda, an effort 
that is vital to America's competitiveness, economy and security, and 
an effort the New Democrat Coalition, which I chair, is proud to be 
leading.
  I am very proud to offer a bipartisan amendment with my good friend, 
Congresswoman Judy Biggert of the Science Committee. Our amendment 
would expand eligibility for National Science Foundation Early Career 
Awards to thousands of scientists and engineers previously deemed 
ineligible. These men and women have followed alternative career paths 
such as working part-time or in non-academic settings, or have taken a 
significant career break or other leave of absence.
  In particular, our amendment would level the playing field for women 
scientists who have taken maternity leaves, and for all scientists and 
engineers who have taken internships, worked in industry, or who have 
pursued entrepreneurial efforts.
  The amendment would also expand the scope of the Presidential 
Innovation Award to recognize and reward innovations that result in 
intellectual property that significantly enhances the economic 
competitiveness of the United States.
  I strongly support Speaker Pelosi and Chairman Gordon's efforts to 
promote a strong Innovation Agenda that grows our economy and creates 
more jobs.
  I appreciate working with Judy Biggert on this issue and ask my 
colleagues to support our amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition to the amendment, although I do not oppose the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Illinois is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I rise today in support of the Tauscher-Biggert amendment to H.R. 
363, the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineer Research Act.
  While I am pleased to have worked with my colleague from California 
(Mrs. Tauscher) in developing this amendment, she deserves the credit 
for the substance of it. I just happen to think she had a great idea, 
and I am honored to lend my support.
  Mr. Chairman, we face a world in which our economic competitors in 
Asia and Europe are making significant new investments in their own 
research capabilities, in terms of both infrastructure and human 
capital. These investments are beginning to pay off, as Asia and 
European countries challenge U.S. leadership in the sciences no matter 
how it is measured, by number of patterns won, articles submitted to 
scientific journals, Nobel Prizes won, the percentage of gross domestic 
product dedicated to research and development, and even the number of 
degrees awarded.
  Report after report from the National Academies to the Task Force on 
the Future of American Innovation has concluded that we need more 
people with scientific expertise and engineering talent if we are to 
counter this threat. Only our national security and our economic 
competitiveness are at stake.
  Unfortunately, the number of undergraduate degrees and Ph.D.s awarded 
in the U.S. in science and engineering has been flat or stagnant for 
over a decade; and of those undergraduates who have obtained a degree 
in science or engineering, only 28 percent actually go on to get their 
graduate degree or pursue a career in science and engineering.
  That is why this amendment is so important. It expands eligibility 
for the NSF Early Career Awards to the thousands of scientists and 
engineers who have followed alternative career paths, such as working 
part-time or in non-academic settings, or who have taken a significant 
career break but want to get back into the lab.
  For instance, over 12,000 men and women with doctorates in science or 
engineering currently are not working because of family 
responsibilities, according to the most recent statistics compiled by 
NSF. Of those, over 11,000 are women who may be raising children or 
caring for a sick parent. Imagine the countless benefits of just 
getting these 11,000 women back into the lab.
  But this amendment has the potential to do so much more than that. It 
provides an opportunity for thousands of other people with scientific 
expertise and training, men and women, to get the support they need to 
reenter the scientific and engineering workforce and get back to doing 
the scientific work that is so important to the competitiveness of our 
Nation.
  This amendment also recognizes and rewards those scientist and 
engineers whose innovative ideas enhance the economic competitiveness 
of the

[[Page 10126]]

United States. It does so by making them eligible for the Presidential 
Innovation Award created by this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, by creating additional opportunities to expand the 
ranks of scientists and engineers and rewarding them for innovative 
ideas that make the Nation more economically competitive, this 
amendment strengthens our ability to innovate.
  It is our ability to innovate that has made and will make America the 
envy of the world in terms of our freedoms, our security and our 
culture, health and prosperity.
  I thank the ranking member, Mr. Hall, for his support for this 
amendment. I urge my colleagues to support it as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon), the chairman of the Committee on 
Science and a great leader on innovation.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for 
yielding, but more importantly, I thank her for bringing this amendment 
before us.
  It really is an example of why diversity of collaboration helps you 
make better decisions. This was a niche that we simply overlooked; and 
with her help, as well as our fellow member of the Science Committee, 
Mrs. Biggert, we have a better bill.
  We thank you for the amendment. We thank you for another example of, 
again, why diversity helps us make better decisions. This is a good 
amendment. I support it.
  Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his support of 
the bill. I appreciate the ranking member's support of the bill. I 
really want to thank my colleague from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for her 
friendship and her support.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher).
  The amendment was agreed to.


               Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. Gillibrand

  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed 
in House Report 110-99.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mrs. Gillibrand:
       At the end of the bill, add the following new section:

     SEC. 10. UNDERGRADUATE SCHOLARSHIPS FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, 
                   ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS.

       (a) Establishment.--The National Science Foundation shall 
     establish a program, to be known as the Undergraduate 
     Scholarships for Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
     Mathematics, or US-STEM, program, for awarding scholarships 
     to undergraduate scholars in science, technology, 
     engineering, and mathematics.
       (b) Eligibility.--A student is eligible for a scholarship 
     under this section only if the student--
       (1) is enrolled at a public, 4-year college or university;
       (2) will have completed at least one-half of the credit 
     requirements for an undergraduate degree before beginning 
     studies to be funded by the scholarship;
       (3) has maintained a grade point average in undergraduate 
     studies of at least 3.0 on a scale of 4.0, or an equivalent 
     level as calculated by the National Science Foundation, 
     except that if the student's institution appeals this 
     criterion on the basis of undue hardship on the student, the 
     National Science Foundation may waive this paragraph;
       (4) has a total family income of less than $75,000 per 
     year, with such amount to be adjusted annually by the 
     National Science Foundation for inflation;
       (5) has not been convicted of a felony; and
       (6) is a citizen or permanent resident alien of the United 
     States.
       (c) Selection Criteria.--Scholarship recipients shall be 
     selected on the basis of merit and such other criteria as the 
     National Science Foundation shall establish.
       (d) Awards.--The National Science Foundation shall announce 
     awards before April 1 for each upcoming academic year, and 
     may make up to 2,500 awards per year. Awards may be made for 
     a maximum of 2 academic years for each student, and 
     scholarship amounts shall be paid to the institution.
       (e) Advisory Board.--The Director of the National Science 
     Foundation shall establish an advisory board, which shall 
     make recommendations to the Director for selection criteria 
     for scholarship recipients, and provide guidance and 
     oversight for the program.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the National Science Foundation for 
     carrying out this section--
       (1) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       (2) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       (3) $61,800,000 for fiscal year 2011;
       (4) $63,600,000 for fiscal year 2012; and
       (5) $65,500,000 for fiscal year 2013.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 318, the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, first I want to thank the chairman of the Committee on 
Science and Technology, Mr. Gordon, for putting forward H.R. 363, which 
will increase America's competitiveness in the world by strengthening 
our science and research base.
  I offer this bipartisan amendment to build the pipeline for our 
country's future teachers, scientists, engineers and researchers by 
proposing 2,500 scholarships each year of full tuition to any State 
university or college.
  My amendment is based on the National Academies' strong 
recommendation for the Federal Government to develop an undergraduate 
scholarship program for students studying science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics. This amendment will create the 
recommended scholarship program through the National Science 
Foundation.
  Under the amendment, an undergraduate student who comes from a family 
with an income of less than $75,000, maintains at least a 3.0 grade 
point average and is studying science, technology, engineering, or 
mathematics may receive up to 2 years of paid tuition at that State 
university.
  Since the year 2001, tuition at State universities has risen by 41 
percent, making the task of paying for college much more difficult. 
Scholarships for bright students will increase the number of students 
who will have the resources to go into the STEM field and achieve their 
God-given potential.
  Having a home-grown, educated workforce will be crucially important 
to the future strength of America's economy, not only by allowing 
families and students who are financially stretched to continue their 
education at high-quality programs such as the nanotechnology program 
in SUNY Albany, SUNY-Delhi's College of Technology, or the 
Cytotechnology program at SUNY Plattsburgh, all colleges that are very 
important to my district in upstate New York, but because by educating 
America's students in these fields, we will ensure that America retains 
our competitive advantage in the science field around the world.
  My upstate New York district is beginning an exciting new economic 
revival based on the high-tech sector, and we need to maintain a local 
workforce that is skilled in engineering and mathematics.
  Investments in higher education and science are some of the most 
important investments our government can make, and I urge everyone to 
vote ``yes.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in 
opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  The amendment would create a new merit scholarship program at NSF for 
undergraduate scholars pursuing science, technology, engineering, or 
mathematics degrees, the STEM degrees. To receive a scholarship, a 
student has to be a junior or a senior at a 4-year public institution, 
have at least a 3.0 grade point average, come from a family with an 
income of $75,000 or less, and be a citizen or a permanent resident 
alien with no felony conviction.
  Generally, I am supportive of merit scholarships, and while this 
particular

[[Page 10127]]

concept sounds good, it is duplicative. An almost identical program 
already exists at the Department of Education. It is called the Science 
and Mathematics Access to Retain Talent Grant and is part of the 
President's American Competitiveness Initiative.

                              {time}  1800

  Therefore, our 2008 budget request for this scholarship program is 
$1.2 billion. We don't need to add another $281 million scholarship 
program at another agency that achieves essentially the exact same 
thing.
  The other main reason I oppose this amendment is its effect on the 
bill we just debated, H.R. 362. The driving force between H.R. 362 is 
to expand the Noyce Scholarship Program for undergraduates to entice 
them to enter the STEM K-12 teaching profession. A requirement for this 
scholarship is that they give back to society by obligating to teach 2 
years for every year of scholarship money they receive. This amendment 
includes no commitment of any kind from these proposed awardees.
  What kind of a message are we sending if we require Noyce scholarship 
recipients to give back to society with a teacher service obligation, 
when the recipients of scholarships under this amendment have nothing 
to repay?
  In addition to the two bills before us today, the Science Committee 
is also working on NSF's reauthorization, which also includes quite a 
bit of undergraduate STEM education improvements. I just think the 
amendment currently before us is not only recreating a scholarship 
program that is already in existence, but it's entirely inappropriate 
for this legislation we are considering today. I encourage my 
colleagues to vote against it.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my distinguished 
colleague from California (Mr. McNerney).
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of Mrs. 
Gillibrand's amendment to H.R. 363.
  Our universities and research institutes lead the world in 
innovation. Today we stand at the cusp of new breakthroughs in fields 
ranging from medicine, to computer technology and renewable energy.
  Unfortunately, too few of our undergraduates are choosing to enter 
science-related fields. In order to continue our remarkable record of 
achievement, we must do a better job of encouraging students to pursue 
careers in science, mathematics and engineering. This amendment will 
provide scholarships for science students from low- and moderate-income 
families, and will help young Americans realize their potential.
  We have a chance today to open new doors for our children, and we 
should seize this opportunity. This amendment will benefit students and 
our Nation. I hope that all of my colleagues will join me in support of 
this amendment.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to 
Dr. Ehlers, the gentleman from Michigan.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. EHLERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I also rise in opposition to this amendment, although I 
would say I would be delighted to support it if we could also be 
guaranteed that the budget of the National Science Foundation would be 
increased by another $1 billion.
  I say that because the National Science Foundation has not been 
treated well in its budgets over the last 12 or 13 years. It has 
increased very slowly. We even had a decrease 2 years ago for the first 
time in many, many years. It's a shame that we have not treated the 
National Science Foundation adequately. It has hurt our Nation, it has 
hurt our economy, and we certainly have to improve that situation.
  We are in a catchup mode. I am reminded of former Speaker Newt 
Gingrich, who was instrumental in getting the doubling of the National 
Institutes of Health, who today has told me, and I have heard him tell 
audiences in speeches a number of times, that he regards one of his 
great mistakes, perhaps the greatest, the failure to double the 
National Science Foundation at the same time that we doubled the NIH.
  Nevertheless, that didn't happen, so we are in a period of poverty 
for the National Science Foundation. Therefore, I oppose adding a new 
program. Even though at this point it's only $281 million, I am sure it 
will be a popular program and end up costing well over $1 billion. We 
simply cannot afford it at this time. I would be happy to consider this 
proposal at some time in the future if we, in fact, do double the NSF 
as we hope. But even that will leave us with a skimpy budget there.
  The other factor is that this program does already exist in the 
Department of Education. It's a very good program. It has been in 
operation for several years.
  I hope that we will keep that in mind, that we will turn down this 
amendment at this point, and perhaps consider it sometime in the future 
when we are bound to have an abundance of money at the National Science 
Foundation.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
chairman, Mr. Gordon.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, let me say I can understand 
the concerns of the opponent of this amendment. There are programs that 
are similar in the Department of Education.
  Let me point out only 15 percent of the graduates in the United 
States receive a degree in engineering, where in China it's 50 percent; 
in Singapore it's 67 percent. It would seem there is still room to 
improve this statistic in the United States.
  I support the gentlelady's amendment.
  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. Chairman, I would like to briefly respond to my 
colleague's arguments.
  I appreciate the remarks of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers). 
I thought they were very thoughtful, and I appreciate your long-term 
vision for the growth of science and technology deficit in the Nation.
  I disagree with the analysis of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall). 
Primarily his argument seemed to say that this program is too 
expensive. But this is about our national security, it's about our 
economic security, and what is so necessary right now in our vision for 
America's future is the investment in the next generation. What we need 
to be is producing graduates who have science, math and technology 
expertise so that we can be competitive with both China and India in 
the generations and decades to come. We need to begin to fund the 
pipeline. I think the argument of being too expensive is misplaced.
  Second, I would like to say this is a priority for our Nation, and I 
think we can all agree to strengthen our economy, and our national 
security has to be number one.
  Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chairman, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Research 
and Science Education, I rise in support of Ms. Gillibrand's amendment.
  This amendment will require the National Science Foundation to 
institute a program to award scholarships in science, technology, 
engineering, or mathematics to undergraduate scholars.
  Congresswoman Gillibrand and I share a commitment to recruiting and 
educating our young people to meet the growing need for a larger 
science and engineering workforce. I commend Congresswoman Gillibrand 
for her leadership on this issue and, as Chairman, look forward to 
continuing to work with her to strengthen math and science education in 
this country and ensure our future competitiveness.
  I urge adoption of this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time has expired.
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Gillibrand).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 254, 
noes 165, not voting 18, as follows:

[[Page 10128]]



                             [Roll No. 255]

                               AYES--254

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Bono
     Bordallo
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Castor
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doyle
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Faleomavaega
     Farr
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Norton
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walden (OR)
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--165

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Coble
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Deal (GA)
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Fortuno
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Hall (TX)
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hulshof
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Johnson, Sam
     Jordan
     Keller
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kline (MN)
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Poe
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Terry
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walsh (NY)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Wicker
     Wilson (SC)
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Bilbray
     Boehner
     Brady (PA)
     Buyer
     Christensen
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     DeFazio
     Fattah
     Fossella
     Hunter
     Jones (NC)
     King (NY)
     Lampson
     Latham
     Sutton
     Westmoreland

                              {time}  1832

  Mr. FORBES, Mr. COBLE and Mrs. MILLER of Michigan changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. ROTHMAN and Ms. PRYCE of 
Ohio changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Snyder) having assumed the chair, Mr. Watt, Chairman 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. 363) to 
authorize appropriations for basic research and research infrastructure 
in science and engineering, and for support of graduate fellowships, 
and for other purposes, pursuant to House Resolution 318, he reported 
the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted by the Committee 
of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?


                        Parliamentary Inquiries

  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman may state his parliamentary 
inquiry.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, isn't it true that under the rules 
of the House adopted in this 110th Congress, the five Delegate Members 
are allowed to vote in the Committee of the Whole, but not in the whole 
House?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.
  Isn't it true that the number of eligible Members to vote in the 
whole House is 435 when all seats are filled?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Isn't it further true, Mr. Speaker, that the 
number of eligible votes in the Committee of the Whole is 440?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Currently it is 438 because of absences due 
to two deaths. But normally it is 440, that is correct.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Four hundred forty if all seats were filled.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Isn't it further true, Mr. Speaker, that the 
vote in the Committee of the Whole on the Gillibrand amendment was 
adopted by a vote of 254-165?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. That is correct.
  The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


               Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Sullivan

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. SULLIVAN. In its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Sullivan of Oklahoma moves to recommit the bill H.R. 
     363 to the Committee on

[[Page 10129]]

     Science and Technology, with instructions to report back the 
     same forthwith with an amendment. The amendment is as 
     follows:
       Page 5, line 19, insert ``, giving priority to grants to 
     expand domestic energy production and use through coal-to-
     liquids technology and advanced nuclear reprocessing'' after 
     ``mission of the Department''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, today I stand before Congress to offer 
this motion to recommit because we must encourage new innovations in 
domestic energy supply. This motion to recommit gives priority to 
grants to expand domestic energy production through the use of coal-to-
liquids technology and advanced nuclear reprocessing.
  H.R. 363 already emphasizes the need for increased science and 
engineer research grants, especially with regard to our Nation's young 
people. What it does not emphasize is the need for further 
diversification of our energy sources that will help achieve American 
energy independence and energy security. World energy demand is 
expected to increase by over 50 percent by the year 2030, a startling 
statistic, for sure. In America alone, energy demand is expected to 
increase by one-third.
  There is no one simple solution to arrive at energy independence and 
energy security. There are, in fact, several pieces to the energy 
puzzle. It is vital that we wean America off unstable foreign sources 
of energy.
  Congress must urge researchers to invest time and money into the rich 
technology of coal-to-liquid and nuclear reprocessing. We must commit 
to support coal-to-liquid technologies for the total life cycle, from 
coal extraction, through benefaction, processing, refining, packaging, 
distribution and end product consumption.
  It has been said that the United States is the Saudi Arabia of coal. 
If we can economically produce liquid transportation fuel from coal, we 
could displace barrels of unstable foreign oil with barrels of 
domestically produced fuel. As America's most abundant domestic energy 
source, coal is an obvious choice to diversify our transportation fuels 
mix and to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources. If we 
invest in coal-to-liquid fuels technology in the early stages, we can 
take one more step towards energy independence.
  Several countries, including France and Japan, are already 
reprocessing their spent nuclear fuel. It is important for our young 
scientists and engineers to learn how to develop this progression of 
reprocessing nuclear fuel.
  In 20 years, the number of university nuclear engineering programs 
has declined from 65 to 29. These young engineers should be encouraged 
to reuse nuclear fuel in an efficient and cost-effective way. This 
motion to recommit will promote our colleges to train our future 
scientists and engineers. In an aging nuclear workforce it is important 
that these young people are properly trained.
  It is time to encourage American energy supply through the 
development of coal-to-liquid and advanced nuclear technologies. With 
these technologies we can achieve this energy independence we so 
desperately need.
  This motion to recommit will allow us to meet this energy demand on 
our own terms by giving priority to grants to expand domestic energy 
production through the use of coal-to-liquids technology and advanced 
nuclear reprocessing.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield some time to the gentleman from 
Illinois, Congressman Shimkus.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Oklahoma 
for bringing forth this motion to recommit.
  I have been down here a couple of times on other motions to recommit, 
and they are very similar to what we are addressing now. This is a call 
to my fossil fuel Democrats, my coal Democrats, to address the need of 
our energy security issues and help us with this motion to recommit to 
say that what we need to do is address, in this bill, and prioritize 
coal-to-liquid research and development. And just as important, the 
global security needs and the global warming with carbon sequestration. 
This motion to recommit will help prioritize these educational funds to 
do that.
  Likewise, for those who support nuclear power, especially those who 
feel that there is a concern of high-level nuclear waste, that we learn 
how to properly reprocess that fuel so we can use that to help our 
energy independence.
  I appreciate my colleague from Oklahoma, and I hope I have my friends 
on the other side support this motion to recommit.
  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, we were not 
given the courtesy of seeing this motion to recommit until a matter of 
seconds before it was introduced.
  But, with that said, we will accept this motion, and we will consider 
it in conference where it can be considered under the light of more 
scrutiny.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage of the bill.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 264, 
noes 154, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 256]

                               AYES--264

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baker
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Campbell (CA)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Gene
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Issa
     Jindal
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jordan
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Melancon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Ortiz
     Pastor
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Sali
     Saxton
     Schmidt
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Space
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher

[[Page 10130]]


     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--154

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boyda (KS)
     Braley (IA)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson
     Castor
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Crowley
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank (MA)
     Giffords
     Gilchrest
     Gillibrand
     Green, Al
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kagen
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Klein (FL)
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lynch
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCollum (MN)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Michaud
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Price (NC)
     Rangel
     Reichert
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Spratt
     Stark
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walsh (NY)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Bilbray
     Brady (PA)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Fattah
     Fossella
     Hastert
     King (NY)
     Lampson
     Miller (NC)
     Sutton
     Westmoreland
     Wynn


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised there 
are 2 minutes remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1903

  Mrs. BOYDA of Kansas, Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Ms. HARMAN and 
Messrs. BACA, PRICE of North Carolina, WALSH of New York, REICHERT, 
MITCHELL, GILCHREST, MEEHAN, HOYER and EMANUEL changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. SENSENBRENNER, GONZALEZ, CUMMINGS and BUYER changed their 
vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to instructions of the 
House on the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 363, back to 
the House with an amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment:
       Page 5, line 19, insert ``, giving priority to grants to 
     expand domestic energy production and use through coal-to-
     liquids technology and advanced nuclear reprocessing'' after 
     ``mission of the Department''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and 
nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 397, 
nays 20, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 257]

                               YEAS--397

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Alexander
     Allen
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boustany
     Boyd (FL)
     Boyda (KS)
     Brady (TX)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Butterfield
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp (MI)
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson
     Carter
     Castle
     Castor
     Chabot
     Chandler
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cohen
     Cole (OK)
     Conaway
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (KY)
     Davis, David
     Davis, Lincoln
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Drake
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English (PA)
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fallin
     Farr
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Hall (TX)
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Heller
     Herger
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hobson
     Hodes
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Inglis (SC)
     Inslee
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jindal
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Jordan
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Klein (FL)
     Kline (MN)
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     Kuhl (NY)
     LaHood
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Lynch
     Mack
     Mahoney (FL)
     Maloney (NY)
     Marchant
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCaul (TX)
     McCollum (MN)
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murphy, Tim
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Perlmutter
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Price (GA)
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schmidt
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sestak
     Shays
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Space
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walberg
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh (NY)
     Walz (MN)
     Wamp
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch (VT)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (OH)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--20

     Akin
     Barrett (SC)
     Blackburn
     Campbell (CA)
     Duncan
     Feeney

[[Page 10131]]


     Flake
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett (NJ)
     Hensarling
     Johnson, Sam
     Lamborn
     Manzullo
     Paul
     Pence
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Sali
     Shadegg
     Tancredo

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Bilbray
     Brady (PA)
     Clarke
     Cubin
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Fattah
     Fossella
     Gilchrest
     Hastert
     King (NY)
     Lampson
     Sullivan
     Sutton
     Westmoreland
     Wynn


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised there 
are 2 minutes remaining on this vote.

                              {time}  1912

  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The title was amended so as to read: ``A bill to authorize programs 
for support of the early career development of science and engineering 
researchers, and for support of graduate fellowships, and for other 
purposes.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________