Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson's Floor Statement on the Consideration of H.R. 5326, the CJS Appropriations Bill
FLOOR STATEMENT ON THE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5326, THE CJS APPROPRIATIONS BILL
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON [D-TX]
Mr. Chairman, funding for research, innovation, and STEM education is an investment in our future, perhaps one of the most important investments we make as a nation. China, the European Union, and many other countries understand this and are poised to surpass the United States in innovation capacity and in the creation of a highly skilled 21st century workforce, if they have not already. According to an analysis carried out by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the United States ranks second to last of the 44 countries and regions analyzed in terms of progress in innovation-based competitiveness over the last decade. It used to be that the world’s best and brightest flocked to our shores. Now many of our own best and brightest are finding better opportunities in other countries, and we are losing our edge in the competition for top talent from around the world.
In 2007, and again in 2010, the U.S. Congress enacted legislation—the America COMPETES Act—that recognized the importance of increased investment in research, innovation, and STEM education. The funding trajectories we put forth in those bills were developed while our budget situation was healthier than it is today. While falling short of the authorized levels, we nevertheless have still managed to come together on a bipartisan basis with the Administration to ensure that funding for scientific research remains relatively unscathed as many other important programs and initiatives suffer deep cuts. This is particularly the case with the CJS bill before us today. I want to thank Chairman Wolf, Ranking Member Fattah, Chairman Rogers, and Ranking Member Dicks and for their commitment to funding science and STEM education even as they made very difficult cuts in other worthy programs.
In particular, I want to commend the Appropriators for their enduring support for the National Science Foundation. The NSF is the only agency to fund basic research across all of science and engineering, and its support for education research has transformed the way we think about teaching and learning. The returns on our 65-year investment in the National Science Foundation include such critical discoveries as the hole in the ozone layer and the warming of the Arctic and such inspiring discoveries as new planets in the cosmos above and breathtaking creatures in the deep seas below. Our relatively modest investments have also led to such economically important technologies as fiber optics, the bar code, computer-aided design, cloud computing, and to a large extent the internet. But perhaps NSF’s most important investment is the investment it makes in human capital – both in the great scientists and innovators of tomorrow and in the workforce at all levels that will fill the jobs that would not be possible without those scientists and innovators.
While I am very pleased with the overall funding levels proposed for NSF, I do want to make a couple of specific comments. First, in their report on NSF, the Appropriators raise a few important oversight issues, especially with respect to management of research facilities. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee is undertaking a series of oversight hearings in preparation for a reauthorization of NSF next year. We’ve already held two hearings this year focused solely on facilities. I look forward to working with the Appropriators as we refine our own guidance to the agency through a careful and deliberative process. Second, I remain concerned that the agency continues to flat-fund its broadening participation programs and is now proposing a significant cut to its informal STEM education program even though the National Academies found that out-of-school learning provides a special opportunity to provide science learning experiences for millions of students who don’t have access to such experiences in their under-resourced schools. We can’t afford to continue leaving behind such a large and growing percentage of our brainpower. Given the overall growth in the Education Directorate proposed in this bill, I hope we can work together to ensure that NSF does not let up in its commitment to broadening participation in STEM.
Turning to NASA, it is clear that NASA is a critical part of the nation’s research and development enterprise, as well as being a source of inspiration for our young people and a worldwide symbol of American technological prowess and good will. We need NASA to succeed. While fiscal challenges require difficult decisions, those decisions should not come at the expense of losing critical capabilities.
I’m pleased to see that the House bill restores a portion of the 21% cut to our planetary exploration program—a program that has been a highly successful scientific undertaking that has captured the imaginations of people around the world. Planetary science has also been an increasingly international effort, especially in plans for future Mars exploration. The rationale to back out of our plans for Mars collaborations with Europe was never clear, and this restoration of planetary funding provides the opportunity to resume our engagement in that effort and sustain critical U.S capabilities.
Regarding the Commercial Crew development program, I have witnessed the enthusiasm from aspiring commercial crew companies testifying before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee and I wish them well. But as a steward of the taxpayers’ dollars, I cannot let enthusiasm override the need for hardheaded oversight. NASA has yet to provide Congress with a convincing explanation of why it reversed course and scrapped its plan to use FAR-based contracts—contracts that allow NASA to ensure that its safety and performance requirements are met for whatever systems it funds—in favor of a agreements that cannot mandate that safety requirements be met. We don’t have the luxury of paying for a “hope for the best” strategy that risks having us pay more down the road the problems that inevitably arise when that hope-based approach collides with reality. That is why I support a commercial crew development approach that returns to FAR-based contracts as soon as actionable.
I am pleased that the House bill provides increases for the Space Launch System and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle— also known as Orion—over the amounts in the budget request, although even these levels are significantly below authorized amounts. It is essential that both the SLS and Orion remain on track for planned flight tests in 2014 and 2017. With respect to Orion, I hope that by the time the House and Senate have completed their negotiations on this appropriations bill, funding for that important capability will be at least at the level in the Senate’s Committee-passed. We need to ensure that the development of Orion includes sufficient funding to enable preparations for its use as a back-up or alternative to commercially provided crew and cargo transportation in a timely manner in the event those commercial vehicle programs are delayed.
With respect to NOAA, I am pleased to see the CJS appropriations includes the full requested level of funding for the Joint Polar Satellite System, JPSS. It is vitally important that during a time where every region of this country is experiencing various extreme weather phenomena, we ensure that we make the needed investments in our premier weather and climate observational and forecasting tools. This year alone, this country has witnessed in every region and on every coastline some of the most extreme, record-breaking weather events. We must ensure that Americans are provided accurate short – and long – term weather forecasts--forecasts that are critical to saving lives and properties and to making informed plans.
Finally, I am very pleased that the bill before us today recognizes the important role that the National Institute of Standards and Technology plays in fostering innovation and industrial competitiveness. In this bill, NIST’s research budget receives a level of funding that will allow it to continue its important work with industry to advance the nation’s technology infrastructure. I am also pleased that the research budget, along with a decision to continue robust funding for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership program and to initiate funding for the promising Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia program, will help U.S. manufacturers compete and flourish in the global marketplace.
One of the keys to our ability to grow the economy for the future lies in our ability to spur innovation-based economic development in regions throughout this country. The America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 recognized how critical regional innovation is to our competitiveness and authorized a regional innovation program at the Economic Development Administration. This program built on initiatives already underway at EDA, but provided the agency with the tools and flexibility that it needed to ensure the biggest bang for its buck by funding the projects with the greatest innovative potential. I am disappointed that this bill does not follow the Senate’s lead by providing a separate line item of funding for this regional innovation program. If our shared goal is to promote innovation and economic growth, we should fund these activities under the program that was developed specifically with this goal in mind and not continue to require these activities to be funded through programs that were developed for other economic development purposes.
Next Article Previous Article