Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. America Competes Act of 2022
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of March 30, 2022, I offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 4521.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to instruct the conferees on our competitiveness legislation.
This motion instructs conference members to agree to section 2502 of the Senate legislation. This section is simple and common sense. It says that no person or entity of concern can receive grants, awards, or other support from the National Science Foundation, federally funded manufacturing programs, or technology hubs authorized by this legislation.
A person or entity of concern is generally defined by the Department of Defense as directed by Congress in previous Defense Reauthorization Acts.
DOD has identified entities of concern as Communist Chinese military companies and companies owned or controlled by the People's Liberation Army, and they have defined persons of concern as individuals affiliated with these CCP military entities.
Simply put, this motion ensures that we aren't giving taxpayer dollars to the adversaries who are trying to steal U.S. technology and use it against us.
The Senate was right to add this important guardrail, and it is only responsible that we urge our House conferees to ensure it is included in the final conferenced legislation.
I would like to point out that we wouldn't have this particular difference in our bills had the process of passing the House legislation been done in regular order.
The COMPETES Act was developed in a back room by the Speaker's office with very little input or review from relevant committees.
Although thoroughly vetted and bipartisan Science Committee bills were included in that package, they were sandwiched in among unrelated, partisan spending that added up to a backdoor attempt to pass parts of the Build Back Better Act. Because of this rushed, opaque bill-writing process, unsurprisingly, the COMPETES Act had a lot of flaws.
Despite less than 3 days to review the bill text, Members submitted more than 600 amendments to the bill. But the Rules Committee, with very little input, made in order only 261; and of that number, only three Republican amendments were given individual debate time on the floor, with all other Republican amendments being considered en bloc. Not only did Members have little opportunity to write this bill, but they also had almost no opportunity to fix its flaws.
I could go on about the danger of passing massive bills like this out of regular order, but for now I will focus on this particular issue. This provision preventing funds from going to Chinese military entities and persons of concern was submitted as a part of multiple Republican amendments to the Rules Committee, but none of these amendments were made in order. I fail to see how amendments limiting taxpayer funds from going to China isn't relevant to a bill about competitiveness with China.
Democrats' failure to include similar language in the COMPETES Act is an unfortunate example of an unwillingness to be strong on China and protect our national security. But we have a chance to rectify that now.
Madam Speaker, surely we can all agree that we shouldn't be sending taxpayer dollars to Communist leadership in China. They are already stealing our discoveries and using them to surpass us economically and militarily. We are spending the time, money, and effort to plant the seeds of new technologies, but China is the one harvesting the crop.
We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass legislation to improve U.S. technology and to set us up to be globally competitive for the coming decade.
The Science Committee has spent 2 years preparing for this opportunity. Working together, Republicans and Democrats held meetings with stakeholders, conducted in-depth hearings, and individually marked up more than a dozen bills to strategically scale-up America's research and development capacities.
Those bills all passed out of committee unanimously, and many passed across the floor with strong bipartisan support. They double down on investment in basic research at the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy Office of Science and National Labs, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
They also direct the creation and regular review of a national science and technology strategy, as well as improving STEM education and regional research opportunities.
The Science Committee bills are targeted to the areas where government investment is most needed and will give us the biggest reward. We ensure our approach is strategic, focusing on the technologies of the future like quantum sciences, artificial intelligence, and advanced manufacturing. We will keep America competitive and secure and help create good jobs here at home.
This legislation should be the foundation for the conference legislation, not the COMPETES Act, which is more of a climate change bill than a technology bill, and not the bill formerly known as USICA, which is a grab-bag of special interest provisions cobbled together into a franken-bill.
There is a lot of chaff to separate from the wheat of this bill, but I believe we can come to smart, consensus policy through the conference. The Science Committee worked together to pass strong bipartisan legislation, and I think our process, as well as our end result, should serve as a model moving forward.
I am looking forward to getting to work and paring down these bills to the smart policies we need. It is urgent that we act now. Democratic leadership delayed the legislation for 9 months. I assure you the Chinese Communist Party isn't doing the same. Let's stop playing politics with something so important.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this motion, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to close, and I believe I have the right to close, so I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank my colleagues for their words of support for this motion.
As I said when we began this debate, we have a once-in-a-generation chance to strengthen U.S. science and technology and secure a place in the global economy. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has passed strategic, bipartisan legislation to do just that. Our bills double our investment in critical research and technology. They are a strong commitment to America's technological development.
There is no question that our bills should be the core of the final conferenced legislation. We can't afford to pollute these critical policies with partisan poison pills and throw away our deliberate, strategic approach for long-term growth in favor of the one-time spending spree in the COMPETES Act.
There is a difference between empty spending and making an investment. The COMPETES Act is empty, unfocused spending. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has passed targeted, bipartisan investments in research and technology. They will pay off in more jobs, a stronger economy, and a more secure homeland.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support that approach and to support guardrails to ensure that our taxpayer investments aren't going to Communist leadership in China. That is why this motion is so important.
This isn't a partisan issue. It has been part of Senator Schumer's legislative text on competitiveness from day one. That is because this is basic, commonsense policy, and I can't imagine that any of our constituents would disagree with that.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to pass this motion, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source