Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 342) to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to require reporting relating to certain cost-share requirements, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 342, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 342, the Cost-Share Accountability Act

of 2023 introduced by my friend, Representative Obernolte.

H.R. 342 is a good-government bill that does exactly what it says it will: it improves accountability.

When making awards, the Department of Energy is subject to cost-share requirements for most research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities.

DOE can modify or eliminate those requirements when necessary, an authority which has been critical to supporting and developing new technologies.

This bill is very simple. It requires DOE to submit a quarterly report to Congress describing the instances where they have modified or waived those cost-share requirements. The bill also makes those reports publicly available.

H.R. 342 doesn't prevent DOE from waiving cost-share requirements. It just ensures that those decisions are made public. This transparency and accountability is important because it allows us to ensure we are making the best possible use of taxpayer resources. It is a smart, bipartisan policy.

I thank Representative Obernolte and Representative Foster for working on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 342 will create more transparency around the DOE awards and help us better oversee our investments in cutting- edge energy technologies. It is bipartisan, commonsense legislation, which is why it passed the House on suspension last year.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill once again, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the PFAS Act.

PFAS refers to a large group of high-strength, high-durability chemicals used in industry and consumer products. They are critical to the reliable and safe function of essential products like cell phones, military aircraft, solar panels, wind turbines, and medical devices. But because of their durability, they don't break down easily and last a long time in the environment. In some cases, but not all, that creates hazards to human health.

There are more than 5,000 strands of PFAS in use, and their tremendous variation means we need to take a thoughtful and nuanced approach to regulating them. We absolutely need to protect the health and safety of firefighters, the military, and individuals exposed to harmful PFAS. That means preventing exposure to unsafe PFAS and addressing PFAS contamination now.

But not all PFAS are harmful, and some are indispensable for things like fighting fires and protecting our servicemen and women from chemical warfare. Others are used for lithium batteries and solar energy equipment. So my concern about some of the legislation on PFAS is that they would ban their use entirely, even when that might not be necessary.

The fact is that we don't fully understand the properties of all PFAS. Maybe a newly created strand has better fire suppression power and dissolves in a solution, or another has absolutely no human health effects and breaks down organically. We simply don't know yet, and we can't shut the door on innovation.

The Science, Space, and Technology Committee is working hard to improve and expand our knowledge about PFAS so that we can make individual determinations about what is safe and what is not.

For example, this summer, the House passed our Federal PFAS Research Evaluation Act which directs the National Academies to study the toxicity, effects, and behavior of different strands of PFAS. It also will study emerging PFAS strands in hopes of finding more harmless strains with effective and useful properties.

This is groundbreaking research, and it can't be done overnight. So while the experts are working on it, my fellow Science, Space, and Technology Committee members and I urge the rest of this body to respect the scientific process.

Do not pass legislation that outright eliminates all 5,000-plus strands of PFAS without the scientific understanding to support that decision.

Here is the good news: The bill we are considering today isn't intended to put us on a path toward banning PFAS. While some of the language could be construed by a creative mind to be broadly anti-PFAS, I know that is not the intention of the sponsors of this bill from Michigan, nor is it the intention of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee.

To further support this, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell) to engage in a colloquy on her intent related to this bill.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentlewoman for her remarks in agreement. We both share the understanding that instead of banning PFAS, this bill focuses on education, understanding, and knowledge of these chemicals. Specifically, it will ensure that we are protecting our firefighters who rely on PFAS to extinguish fires.

There aren't many alternatives to PFAS when it comes to fighting fires, but firefighters put their lives at risk every day, and this bill will ensure they aren't facing long-term health risks simply because of the equipment and the tools they use daily.

We can mitigate harmful effects by carefully studying what chemicals first responders are exposed to and ensuring they are properly educated about safety procedures and risks.

The curriculum authorized by this bill is just that. We are focusing on education, understanding, and knowledge. I support its passage today. When the time comes, I have every intention of working with the gentlewoman from Michigan to make sure we are targeting the truly bad PFAS--those with health and environmental effects. But for now, I appreciate that my friends on the other side of the aisle are leaving the door open for future development and letting science determine the outcome, not politics.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Posey).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, firefighters and emergency response personnel put themselves in harm's way daily with no questions asked. They do this to save lives and protect their communities. Therefore, it is only fitting that Congress does what we can to protect their lives in return.

The bill we are considering today, the PFAS Act, arms our first responders with knowledge and procedures to avoid long-term health effects from harmful chemicals.

This bill is also an example of strong bipartisan collaboration, with all the discussion and refinement that entails. My colleague from Michigan understood my concerns about not getting ahead of the science and banning all PFAS. I understood her desire to take immediate action for her constituents. We worked together to both walk away happy with the result.

My sincere thanks to Congresswoman Dingell, the Science, Space, and Technology Committee staff, and everyone involved in these discussions.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the SBIR and STTR Extension Act. This bill is extremely timely, as the authorizations for these programs expire in just a few days.

I am pleased that the bill we are considering today represents a bipartisan, bicameral agreement that provides both small businesses and agencies clarity by reauthorizing the programs for another 3 years.

The SBIR and STTR programs play an important role in our innovation economy. Through these programs, research agencies provide opportunities to small businesses who are then able to leverage private-sector funding to propel research forward.

The programs incentivize economic growth in two ways: They support entrepreneurship and job creation at small businesses across the country. They also support high-risk research to drive breakthrough technologies that make America more competitive.

These programs are a notable example of how public-private partnerships can provide value and stimulate innovation. Importantly, this reauthorization includes several reforms to the programs that are priorities for Republican Members, including: Protecting our research enterprise, bolstering transparency and oversight, and focusing on successful commercialization.

I am pleased that this reauthorization includes strong due diligence measures that each agency with an SBIR or STTR program must enforce. These safeguards build on the bipartisan research security framework that the Science Committee has championed.

Additionally, an increased focus on transparency and oversight of the programs will bolster public transparency, safeguard taxpayer dollars, and provide more opportunities to new small business applicants.

I thank my colleagues on the House Small Business Committee for working with me to reach this bipartisan agreement, and, in particular, I thank Ranking Member Luetkemeyer for his leadership throughout the process.

As always, many thanks to my Chairwoman, Eddie Bernice Johnson, for her tireless work to ensure that the Science, Space, and Technology Committee remains a bipartisan, productive committee focused on legislating.

The SBIR and STTR programs are vital to our research enterprise, especially as we strive to maintain American leadership and technology. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, just 24 hours ago, I expected my remarks on the CHIPS and Science Act to be very different.

I have worked on this bill for more than 3 years. When I first took leadership of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee as ranking member in 2019, developing legislation to strengthen American science and technology was my highest priority.

After extensive work, in January of 2020, I introduced a comprehensive bill that created a long-term strategy for investment in basic research and infrastructure to protect the economic and national security of the United States.

Our committee's chairwoman, Eddie Bernice Johnson, shared my desire to refocus, revitalize, and reinvest in American science, and so we worked together for 2 years, gathering extensive stakeholder feedback and technical advice, while holding multiple hearings with expert witnesses to chart a path forward.

This has been an exemplary bipartisan process. Chairwoman Johnson and her staff have put in countless hours of work with my staff to find strong, consensus policies to support Federal R&D. I thank the chairwoman for her partnership and leadership and her staff for their diligence.

I also thank my committee staff members, who have put in long hours and hard work to craft what I believe could be a transformational science policy. I particularly thank Jennifer Wickre, who led this process for us from the very beginning.

The Science, Space, and Technology Committee's efforts over the past few years and the bipartisan legislation we produced is truly an incredible example of what we can achieve when we work together as responsible legislators in regular order. Unfortunately, not everyone shares our commitment to that process.

Mr. Speaker, I was frustrated last year when Democratic leadership put off conferencing our competitiveness legislation with our colleagues across the Hill in favor of focusing on the doomed Build Back Better Act.

I was frustrated when the proposed funding for semiconductor manufacturing jumped from $24 billion to $52 billion with no explanation.

I was frustrated when, after finally starting on conference negotiations, the other body tied our research policy to reconciliation.

I was frustrated when negotiations were shut down, and I was even more frustrated when the House was shut out of discussions once they picked back up.

So maybe I shouldn't be surprised, but I am frankly, in all fairness, disgusted by the developments over the last 24 hours.

House Republicans have been working in good faith this entire time to come to consensus legislation that could be passed by both Chambers. But time and time again, we have been thwarted by Democratic leadership that has moved the goalposts, shut down the process, chosen their divisive partisan policies over a smart bipartisan bill that would benefit our country for generations.

I understand why people on my side of the room are furious. I share those concerns, and I have been around here long enough to know that this is not the way to do things. For better or for worse--and it is very clearly for the worse, I would note--the CHIPS and Science Act has been irrevocably tied to a massive tax hike and spending spree in reconciliation.

The decisions on how to pursue scientific policy are out of the hands of this committee, and at this point practically out of the hands of this Chamber.

Mr. Speaker, I remain incredibly proud of the good work we have done to strategically strengthen American research and development. And yet I cannot ignore the fact that the immense tax hikes and irresponsible spending in the expanded reconciliation package change the calculus when it comes to supporting spending bills, particularly a bill that has come to be tied to reconciliation.

This is one of those occasions that, as a statesman and responsible Member of Congress, I have to put aside my own pride in the Science, Space, and Technology Committee's work and cast a vote that represents the best interests of Americans, and particularly the good people of the Third District of Oklahoma.

So, regrettably--and it is more regrettably than you can possibly imagine--I will not be casting my vote for the CHIPS and Science Act today.

I emphasize that this is in no way a reflection of my feeling about the transformational research policies in this bill. I am grateful to Chairwoman Johnson for working with me every step of the way to create a strategic, bipartisan, forward-thinking policy.

I just wish other legislators in both Chambers would follow our example instead of forcing indefensible votes like we have today.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. Rodgers), the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Hern).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelly).

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close whenever it is appropriate, so I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers and I, too, am prepared to close. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as I said in my opening remarks, I am deeply disappointed by the process that led us here, especially over the last 24 hours. Had Democratic leadership acted in good faith, we would be having a very different discussion today.

I would prefer that our bipartisan strategic competitiveness policy had not been tied to the partisan and divisive reconciliation legislation. But it would be dishonest to pretend that that hasn't been the case.

And after long and careful thought for what reconciliation will mean to the economy, the expanded government, and the American people, I cannot, in good conscience, vote for the $52

billion in mandatory spending; while knowing that hundreds of billions in taxes and partisan spending are about to bulldoze us.

We know the numbers, but it is worth repeating them because they are more than numbers. As someone who studied economics, I am very cognizant that these are, in fact, a representation of the daily life for families across America.

Inflation has skyrocketed to 9.1 percent. Every dollar in your wallets, in your paycheck, in your retirement account, every dollar is now worth less.

The next set of numbers is 1.6 and 0.9. Those are the most recent declines in our Gross Domestic Product, GDP.

While my friends on the other side of the aisle want to debate the definition of recession, let's put that nitpicking aside and step back for a moment and consider the big picture, what this means for Americans.

Our economic growth is slowing. Our inflation is rising. Our job growth is tapering off. Americans are unquestionably worse off now than they were a year ago; and that is what I have to consider when casting today's vote.

What we need right now is policy to make our economy stronger and more competitive; not backroom deals that increase taxes on businesses and raise government spending.

As I said at the start of this debate, I am incredibly proud of the work the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee has done to create thoughtful, strategic, sustainable science and technology policy. I am grateful to Chairwoman Johnson, to the Republican and Democrat members of the Science Committee, and to all the staffers who worked to advance this legislation.

While others may try to take credit, the truth is division B was primarily developed and written by our committee, which has been working on this issue for longer than anyone on the Hill.

I would like very much to cast my vote in support of our research and development policies, but I cannot ignore the consequences of doing so, alongside a deeply flawed reconciliation package. I owe it to my constituents to vote in their best interests. And today, that means voting against the legislation I have long supported.

I will conclude with this: I believe the bipartisan leadership of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee represents the best that Congress can be when we work together in a transparent fashion to come to agreements that serve the American people.

I believe that actions taken by Democratic leadership yesterday are a sad example of the dysfunction that plagues Congress when we ignore these details. I am deeply disappointed in this process.

Even with all my admiration for my chairwoman, and all the respect for our mutual members and our staffs, even with all that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6845, the Commercial Remote Sensing Amendment Act. I introduced this bipartisan legislation along with my colleague, Representative Perlmutter, to update reporting requirements for NOAA's Office of Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs so that Congress can monitor how regulations are impacting the growth and improvement of the commercial remote sensing industry.

Remote sensing uses data collected from satellites to produce images of the Earth. It has become a critical resource in fields like agriculture, finance, trade, and energy.

For instance, imagery and data from commercial remote sensing allows us to improve crop production by helping farmers more efficiently apply water and fertilizer. It informs future commodity prices by actively monitoring weather and crop health.

Commercial remote sensing also improves our ability to prepare for and to respond to natural disasters by informing flood plain mapping, tornado tracking, and drought monitoring, topics that are very important to the people of Oklahoma.

It can also be helpful in humanitarian relief efforts and monitoring treaty compliance, among other applications.

As you can see, commercial remote sensing provides us with critical information for many important applications. This technology is constantly evolving, and the industry is seeing tremendous growth.

To effectively support and manage remote sensing activities, it is critical that Congress receives timely and comprehensive reports so we can evaluate the state of the industry and how regulations are affecting its growth.

The Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015 established a reporting requirement from the Department of Commerce on the status of commercial remote sensing licensing and regulation. That requirement expired in 2020.

H.R. 6845 will reinstate the reporting requirement and keep Congress informed of agency actions, their impact on licensees, and the state of the commercial remote sensing industry. These reports to Congress will give us the information we need to ensure that the U.S. remains a global leader in this important field.

Madam Speaker, H.R. 6845 is a no-nonsense, bipartisan bill that will help ensure that the U.S. remains the global leader in the commercial remote sensing industry.

I thank my friend, Representative Perlmutter, for working with me on this legislation. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as may consume.

As I said before, commercial remote sensing provides us with critical information to a number of fields like agriculture, finance, trade, energy, and more. This, in turn, allows us to be better stewards of our resources.

H.R. 6845, the Commercial Remote Sensing Amendment Act, will help us

ensure that Congress receives the updates necessary to monitor industry regulations. By updating these reporting requirements, we can ensure that the U.S. remains the global leader in this important field.

Again, I thank Representative Perlmutter for cosponsoring this bill with me, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7569, the Energy Cybersecurity University Leadership Act.

Broadly, this bill is meant to expand the cybersecurity workforce for our energy sector. But before I explain how it will do that, I will impress upon my colleagues why this is necessary.

Our energy sector is facing more threats now than ever before. Russia's attack on Ukraine has heightened threats to our infrastructure, and our liquefied natural gas industry has been the target of numerous cyberattacks recently.

The FBI has also been issuing warnings about credible threats to our energy infrastructure. In addition to staying vigilant now, we need to prepare ourselves for a future in which threats like these continue to grow. The way we do this is by building our energy sector cybersecurity workforce. This bill does just that with a three-pronged approach.

First, it encourages further study in this field by creating a program at the Department of Energy that provides financial assistance to graduate students and post-docs who are working on cybersecurity and energy infrastructure.

Second, it provides energy cybersecurity training through traineeships at our national labs and utilities, giving students practical skills and experience to bring to the workforce.

Third, it ensures that we have access to the broadest possible range of potential cybersecurity experts by conducting outreach to historically Black colleges and universities, Tribal colleges and universities, and minority-serving institutions.

Taken together, these three provisions in this bill will expand and improve our energy cybersecurity workforce and help us protect our critical infrastructure from growing threats.

I thank my colleague, Representative Ross, for introducing this important legislation, and Representative Carey for joining her as the Republican lead on this bipartisan effort. It deserves our full support.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, our energy industry infrastructure quite literally keeps our country running. Cyberattacks that damage our grids, shut down our pipelines, interrupt our energy transmissions can have real and dangerous consequences for families and businesses across the country.

We know our energy sector is an attractive target for our foreign adversaries, so we need to do everything within our power to keep it secure and reliable.

H.R. 7569 will help develop the most important weapon we have in our arsenal against cyberattacks: a highly skilled and engaged workforce.

I appreciate the work that Representatives Ross and Carey have done to get this bill to the House floor.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support it today so we can move quickly to begin developing cybersecurity resources.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6933, the Cost-Share Accountability Act of 2022.

As the ranking member of the House Science Committee, I am proud of the work my colleagues and I have done to support innovative research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities for the Department of Energy.

To give just a few examples, last summer, the full House passed H.R. 3593, our comprehensive reauthorization of the Office of Science. Additionally, the committee passed bipartisan legislation authorizing cutting-edge R&D activities across a variety of

fields such as biomanufacturing, abandoned well remediation, microelectronics, and low-emissions manufacturing.

However, directing the Department to conduct these activities is only a part of our job. Congress must be an active partner for the Department of Energy in ensuring we get the best return on our Federal research and development investments. This legislation institutes a basic, commonsense reporting requirement that facilitates congressional oversight of the Department of Energy's financial awards.

As a bit of background, for each research, development, demonstration, or commercial application award the Department of Energy issues, it must require that a non-Federal source pay a certain percentage of the cost of the project. However, the Department has the authority to reduce or eliminate this requirement under certain circumstances and fund a larger percentage of the project's cost.

This authority to modify these cost-share requirements is useful for supporting the development of novel technologies and encouraging new potential partner organizations to compete for awards. However, the Department must wield this authority carefully and be a responsible steward of the taxpayers' dollars.

The Cost-Share Accountability Act of 2022 requires the Department to submit quarterly reports to Congress on the use of its authority to modify or eliminate the statutory cost-share requirement for research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities that it funds. This legislation requires the Department to make these reports public, increasing public awareness and transparency regarding the Department's funding decisions.

The reports will be an important tool for Congress in monitoring the Department's energy technology programs and holding it accountable for its fiscal decisions. Additionally, these reports can inform future legislation on research and development programs and any potential adjustments to the cost-share requirements.

This basic reporting requirement in no way impedes the Department's ability to continue to use its authority to waive the cost-share requirement. Again, it simply provides Congress and the public with more data on how and when the Department exercises its authority.

Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this simple reporting requirement, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The Cost-Share Accountability Act of 2022 institutes a simple reporting requirement to assist Congress in monitoring the Department of Energy's financial awards under its research, development, demonstration, and commercial applications programs.

The reports required by this bill will provide valuable information to Congress on how the Department administers the statutory cost-share requirement. They will also assist Congress in fulfilling its responsibilities to oversee our Federal agencies' use of taxpayers' resources.

This legislation is a simple improvement to support accounting at the Department of Energy for its spending decisions and helps maximize the value of our R&D dollars.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7289, the Federal PFAS Research Evaluation Act.

PFAS is an acronym for a large range of manufactured chemicals that are exceptionally strong and durable and have the ability to withstand high temperatures. These characteristics make them incredibly valuable in countless products, from cell phones to wind turbine components to military aircraft to everything in between.

The high strength and durability of PFAS also mean they don't break down easily in the environment. But their essential use in industry and consumer

products is exactly why it is important we remember not to villainize the entire category of chemicals.

The hazard and risk profiles of various PFAS are immensely different. Using certain PFAS in a controlled, responsible manner is safe and effective. Understanding the distinct properties of each of these chemicals will allow us to continue the important uses and benefits of PFAS technologies.

That is why I rise in support of H.R. 7289. This bill seeks to increase our understanding of PFAS by directing the Environmental Protection Agency to work with the National Academies to conduct two studies.

The first study is to better understand human exposure, behavior, and toxicity of PFAS. It will allow us to better address research and knowledge gaps that were identified by the National Academies in 2020.

The second study is focused on understanding the extent and implications of PFAS contamination, as well as research needed to manage and treat contamination and develop safe alternatives.

Together, these studies will help us better address PFAS using the best available science.

At the end of the day, removing harmful PFAS from production and cleaning up legacy contaminations to protect human health is a bipartisan issue. But we need to understand the full extent of what we are seeking to remove, how to best do it, and the potential implications, if executed.

I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Meijer), my colleague on the Science, Space and Technology Committee, for leading this bill, and being an informed, smart advocate on this issue.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Meijer).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close.

In December of last year, the Science, Space and Technology Committee held a hearing on research and development relating to PFAS. I was impressed to hear just how far along the companies are when it comes to technologies that can safely and effectively destroy PFAS in the environment.

I mention that because it is part of why I am optimistic about our ability to improve our environmental stewardship. When it comes to protecting human health and the environment, we are making tremendous progress through technology. There are very few problems, if any, that innovation cannot address. We can spur that innovation by arming ourselves with the best possible information, data, and scientific knowledge.

H.R. 7289 does exactly that for PFAS. It doesn't label all PFAS as deadly, and it doesn't ban using it. It simply identifies areas of research that will help us address PFAS using the best available science.

I thank Representative Lizzie Fletcher for introducing this legislation and working in a bipartisan manner to advance it, and I also thank Science, Space and Technology Committee members, Representatives Meijer and Posey, for cosponsoring this bill.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3952, the NOAA Chief Scientist Act, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA to most of us, has a broad mission that includes monitoring and conserving our coasts, strengthening fisheries, forecasting severe weather, and improving emergency management. That is just a small sample of what they do.

Their work either involves directly conducting research or using research to inform how they can provide the best services to American industries and communities. That is why the position of chief scientist at NOAA is so important. The chief scientist is tasked with advising the NOAA administrator, providing direction for NOAA's science and technology policies, and leading scientific integrity efforts.

This bill doesn't create a new role for the chief scientist at NOAA. That position has been utilized by the agency for a long time now. Instead, in recognition of how important it is for the agency to have a chief scientist, this bill simply makes that role's existing responsibilities into law.

It also ensures that the position will never be vacant for long by creating a process for naming an acting chief scientist when the role is empty. And having an office support staff for the chief scientist will make sure critical activities don't slip through the cracks.

We rely on NOAA to perform critical R&D and to implement sound scientific policies. Doing so requires capable scientific research, and this bill ensures that NOAA will always have that. It is especially timely, given that earlier this month Sarah Kapnick was named to the role of chief scientist at NOAA. I wish her luck there. I hope she will continue NOAA's long history of scientific excellence.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close.

Madam Speaker, the NOAA Chief Scientist Act is smart legislation that codifies an important existing role at NOAA.

A scientific agency needs scientific leadership, and H.R. 3952 ensures that NOAA will always have that in place.

I thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Ms. Sherrill), the chair of our Environment Subcommittee, for introducing this bill. I also thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Feenstra), the ranking member of the Research and Technology Subcommittee, for leading the Republican side.

Madam Speaker, this is a smart, simple bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7361, the National Weather Service Communications Improvement Act. Right now, the National Weather Service is years behind when it comes to the internal communications system known as NWSChat.

This instant messaging system is how forecasters and local emergency managers communicate with each other before, during, and after a severe weather event unfolds. This instantaneous communication is critical to their ability to warn and prepare communities for dangerous storms quickly and accurately.

It was developed decades ago out of necessity by employees within the National Weather Service, not by a company that specializes in application development. Therefore, NWSChat has had its fair share of hiccups, especially when a large number of users try to access it at once.

Surprisingly, the heaviest user traffic is usually during a large, destructive weather event when officials are trying to anticipate what is coming toward their communities.

H.R. 7361 will help solve this problem by authorizing the National Weather Service to upgrade their instant messaging service to a commercial, off-the-shelf solution. These services can handle a large number of users and easily adapt to technology upgrades, giving our forecasters a flexible and modern messaging service.

Living in Tornado Alley, I am very familiar with how quickly storms can form and change direction, so I can tell you that if a small upgrade like this makes storm warnings even a few seconds faster, that time can absolutely be the difference between life and death.

Madam Speaker, I thank my Committee on Science, Space, and Technology colleague, Mr. Feenstra, for introducing this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Feenstra).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing.

Madam Speaker, as my colleagues have made clear in their support of this bill today, every second matters when it comes to reacting to extreme weather events.

NWS Chat is yet another tool in our toolbox to make sure that communities have the earliest possible warning of what is heading their way. We need a fast and reliable messaging service that doesn't glitch when we need it most.

That is why H.R. 7361 is a simple but necessary bill. By upgrading the National Weather Service's communications, we can give our most vulnerable communities the information they need to protect lives and property.

I again thank my colleague, Mr. Feenstra, for bringing together the entire Iowa House delegation to support this bill after witnessing the destructive power of a tornado outbreak in their State.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 3588, the Mathematical and Statistical Modeling Education Act.

This bill would direct the National Science Foundation to provide competitive grants to support the research and development of curricula and teaching methods to improve mathematical and statistical modeling education. Ensuring that our teachers are well equipped to encourage student interest and involvement in STEM fields is a key component of stimulating America's STEM workforce and bolstering our competitiveness.

Mathematics underpins the critical thinking skills we use every day, from managing a budget to following a recipe, even to estimating how long votes will take today.

As more and more jobs become tech-reliant, our students will need mathematical and computational skills to keep up with the changing workplace and fill the growing demand for a domestic STEM-literate workforce.

H.R. 3588 is supported by the American Statistical Association, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and the Business Software Alliance, among other stakeholders.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague, Dr. Baird, for working in a bipartisan way to advance this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing.

Madam Speaker, as teachers prepare for the next generation of the American workforce, it is vital that we invest in the best STEM education curricula and teaching methods. That is why I strongly support this bipartisan legislation, which will bolster investments in mathematics and statistical modeling curricula.

Madam Speaker, I again thank Dr. Baird for his hard work to advance this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 7180, and I thank my colleague, Mr. Gonzalez, for introducing and championing this important legislation.

The Brycen Gray and Ben Price COVID-19 Cognitive Research Act directs the National Science Foundation to support research on the long-term neurological effects of COVID, particularly in adolescents. It also instructs NSF to commission a National Academies study on the disruption of cognitive processes associated with COVID.

This bill is named for two men who died by suicide after suffering neurological problems caused by COVID-19.

Tragically, there have been numerous instances of psychosis developed after COVID illnesses. The neurological effects of this disease is not well understood, and H.R. 7180 will help to change that.

Research on this issue has been progressing as we continue to learn more about the long-term effects of the disease. This bill will help accelerate these efforts to better inform the public and medical community; and hopefully, it will prevent more tragic deaths from occurring.

I again thank Representative Gonzalez for his hard work on behalf of his constituents.

Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gonzalez).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

This legislation reflects how Congress can work in a bipartisan way to address difficult issues that our constituents are facing. The deaths of Brycen Gray and Ben Price due to COVID psychosis were unexpected and tragic.

While their memories will live on through their families and friends, we can give them a further memorial through the passage of this legislation and, hopefully, prevent more tragedies like this in the future.

H.R. 7180 represents a grassroots effort to address the issue in a thoughtful and meaningful way.

Again, I thank my friend Mr. Gonzalez for championing this legislation. Many times, people who observe this body may think it is all about political tit-for-tat or it is about making noise or directing time and energy in a fashion that is less than productive. What Congressman Gonzalez has demonstrated here today in the case of both Brycen and Ben is that we are

people, too, as Members. This tragedy touched Mr. Gonzalez and compelled him to respond legislatively to make sure that other families can be spared what the Grays and Prices have gone through. It is a testament to my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Gonzalez) and a statement that we are basically good and decent people in this place. We just need to focus on the priorities that are important to our fellow Americans as Congressman Gonzalez is doing today.

Madam Speaker, I urge the passage of this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7606 because American farmers and ranchers deserve real assistance, real relief, real policy solutions.

To understand my opposition, you must understand the part of the country that I represent and was raised in. The Third District of Oklahoma was the epicenter of the drought, the Dust Bowl, and the economic depression of the 1930s. This was a time when horrible weather conditions collided with misguided Federal ag and misguided Federal monetary policy to create an environment that profoundly changed the region that my family has called home for over 120 years.

I was raised on these stories, and it was their experiences that shaped my view on what the role of the Federal Government should be. The Federal Government should be passing and enacting policies that help people and businesses, not hinder them. Unfortunately, the Biden administration and House Democrats seem to not hold that same view.

During the past 5 years, American farmers and ranchers have weathered volatile world markets, devastating natural disasters, prolonged droughts, supply chain disruptions, ever-increasing input costs, and soaring inflation.

Yet, the only thing the Biden administration and House Democrats seem interested in doing is increasing regulatory burdens, limiting access to fuel, and passing spending packages that fuel inflation.

Mr. Speaker, if House Democrats were truly interested in providing relief for American farmers and ranchers, they would join my Republican colleagues and me in calling for the Biden administration to reinstate the Trump-era Waters of the United States rule and rescind the Biden administration's WOTUS rule.

If Democrats were interested in reducing the cost of farm inputs like fertilizer and fuel, they would work with us to restore and expand domestic energy production. They would join us in calling for the Biden administration to rescind the SEC's proposed rule on climate-related disclosure.

This rule is not only a ploy to divert capital away from traditional energy investments, it also requires farmers, regardless of size, to track and report environmental data to public companies with which they work.

Finally, House Democrats are touting this bill as a solution to the issue of consolidation in the meatpacking industry. As we all know, DOJ--yes, the Department of Justice--is in the middle of an ongoing investigation into the meatpacking industry, an investigation that was launched under the Trump administration.

I feel strongly that if there is collusion, manipulation, or other wrongdoing by packers, then the existing law should be enforced under the existing authorities at USDA and DOJ. There are civil and criminal penalties if violations are found. Changing those authorities or laws in the middle of an ongoing investigation only helps to confuse and complicate the eventual DOJ findings.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this messaging bill and join with me in calling for real solutions for American farmers and ranchers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2543. The U.S. economy faces tremendous challenges. We have 40-year high inflation, persistent supply chain disruptions, and tight labor markets.

The American people are grappling with increased costs across every aspect of their life. Food is more expensive, energy and gasoline prices have skyrocketed, and the cost of housing is surging.

In 1977, when I first started out as a young farmer, we slid into the inflationary period of the Carter years, and went through Chairman Volker's dramatic tightening of the money supply. This period was devastating to my neighbors and the entire U.S. economy, and left a profound impact on how I view fiscal and monetary policy.

Now is not the time to take the Federal Reserve's eyes off the ball. Congress should be focused on the issues that currently weigh on the economy and aim to strengthen the financial well-being of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I oppose H.R. 2543.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Oklahoma for yielding and for introducing this legislation.

H.R. 5324, the NOAA Weather Radio Modernization Act of 2021, is a straightforward, lifesaving bill introduced by my esteemed colleague from Oklahoma, Representative Stephanie Bice, who is the ranking member of the Environment Subcommittee.

Last week, nearly the entire State of Oklahoma experienced an outbreak in severe weather and a number of confirmed tornadoes. That is not uncommon for this time of year, and our citizens were well prepared.

While there was significant damage and widespread power outages, there have been no confirmed deaths at this point. That is because of the lifesaving efforts of NOAA, the National Weather Service, and warning capabilities like the NOAA Weather Radio, also known as NWR.

Day or night, power or no power, in a rural area or in the heart of the city, an NWR device loudly alerts you and your family to severe weather nearby. Most Oklahomans have grown up listening to these announcements, and we know to act when we hear them. That saves lives. But since NWR was designated as the sole government provider of direct warnings to private homes in 1975, the system has gone through few upgrades other than broadly expanding access across the country.

The NWR's aging infrastructure has led to increased maintenance costs and more frequent outages. The copper wiring that connects broadcast transmitters to Weather Service stations has become obsolete and expensive. More powerful storms require backup options and stronger signals in case of extensive damage to mission critical facilities.

The NWR Modernization Act addresses these challenges and gives NOAA the authority and resources to ensure the NWR is as useful in the 21st century as it has been for the last four decades. This legislation continues to expand access to NWR, but does so while ensuring the system does not become obsolete with out-of-date technology.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the leadership of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's Environment Subcommittee, Ranking Member Bice and Chairwoman Sherrill, for leading on this critical issue, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I would simply note that we pass lots of pieces of legislation in this body every session. But every so often, we address a piece of legislation that makes a real difference in the lives of people, a piece of legislation that deserves to move as swiftly as possible through the process to enable its implementation.

Mr. Speaker, again, I thank all of my colleagues, and I urge a yes vote.