Providing for Consideration of Senate Amendment to House Amendment to Senate Amendment to H.R. Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, and Providing for Proceedings During the Period From August Through September 2022
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1289 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1289
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 4346) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology or her designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology or their respective designees. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion.
Sec. 2. On any legislative day during the period from August 1, 2022, through September 12, 2022, the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved.
Sec. 3. The Speaker may appoint Members to perform the duties of the Chair for the duration of the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution as though under clause 8(a) of rule I.
Sec. 4. Each day during the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 7 of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1546).
Sec. 5. Each day during the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule XIII.
Sec. 6. Each day during the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution shall not constitute a calendar or legislative day for purposes of clause 7(c)(1) of rule XXII.
Sec. 7. Each day during the period addressed by section 2 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule XV.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1289, providing for a motion by the chair of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 4346. It provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Finally, the rule provides standard floor recess instructions for the August district work period from August 1 to September 12.
Madam Speaker, this rule provides for consideration of a historic package of long-overdue legislative actions that will strengthen our economy and reignite our competitiveness on the global stage.
Throughout our work in Congress, we have focused on fighting for and uplifting families, on creating opportunity and setting our community on a path toward a brighter future. This historic investment will deliver on the promise of a better tomorrow.
It means jobs, real jobs, that will keep families together and ensure our children can access the American Dream.
It means lower costs for essential, everyday items that will lessen the burden on families.
It means America will strengthen its competitiveness against countries like China and reestablish its place as the global leader in innovation.
It will reaffirm our leadership around the world by strengthening diplomacy, promoting human rights, and bolstering economic engagement.
I am proud that this bill is a result of comprehensive bicameral and bipartisan negotiations, which I had the privilege of participating in as a member of the Conference Committee.
America has always been known as the land of opportunity, creativity, and entrepreneurship. We are the Nation that took to the stars and landed a man on the Moon, the birthplace of transformational inventions like the internet, and home to some of the world's greatest scientists. Technological advancement is in our DNA, and we need to continue fostering its long-term growth. That is why I am particularly pleased this legislation includes steps to enhance regional innovation, which has long been one of my top priorities and opens the doors for limitless potential.
Federal investment in regional innovation hubs will uplift communities across the country that are already leading the way in high-tech advancements, communities like my home of Rochester, which is already doing groundbreaking work in this field.
No longer will Silicon Valley be the only area synonymous with innovation. With this legislation, we are making investments in collaboration across public, private, education, and civic sectors that will be game changers for communities across the country, transforming underutilized cities into crucibles of America's global competitiveness.
Furthermore, this legislation addresses our deep concern that America is losing its competitive edge in semiconductor manufacturing, a clear economic and national security concern. Over the past few years, China has invested more than $150 billion to build their domestic chip manufacturing capacity, while we have invested nothing. We have fallen behind. But not anymore.
The CHIPS and Science Act will bolster our domestic supply of semiconductors, putting us back on pace to match China while reducing our reliance on foreign supply chains and lowering costs for everyday families.
This legislation harnesses the spirit of ingenuity that has always guided America and turns the page on a new chapter in our history, one that creates economic opportunity for communities across the country and ensures our Nation is back on track as the global leader we have always been.
I extend a heartfelt thank-you to all of my colleagues who have helped make this legislation a reality. It has been an honor to collaborate with so many leaders, particularly the Honorable Chairwoman Johnson of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee on regional innovation provisions.
As a member of the USICA-COMPETES conference process, I encountered a strong commitment from fellow conferees and staff to ensure this final package reflects the needs of the entire country and provides a meaningful path forward for innovation and growth.
No legislation is perfect, but this package sends a clear message to the world that when it comes to our global competitiveness, we will set aside our differences and get the job done.
Today, we are taking decisive action to ensure our leadership remains strong, our economy remains robust, and our future remains bright.
Yesterday afternoon, this legislation received broad bipartisan support on the Senate floor, with 17 Republican Senators voting for final passage. I hope we see similar outcomes when it comes to the House floor.
I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in proudly supporting this important legislation. I look forward to seeing it passed in short order.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, let me just reflect on what my good friend and colleague on the Rules Committee said about a single industry. It is hard to imagine any industry in the United States--in the world, in fact--that doesn't utilize semiconductor chips. It is in everything. Chips run everything.
Whether it is your cell phone, your laptop, or your automobile, it really doesn't matter. Children's toys have chips in them. The fact is, we have lost our competitive edge. That is what this is all about. This affects industry in the United States.
Take, for example, General Motors announcing they have 95,000 automobiles awaiting chips. Do you want to increase the supply of goods to people and help bring down inflation? This is about increasing the supply of goods all over the United States in every single industry.
In my home in Rochester, New York, where we specialize in optics, centuries of optics and photonic integrated circuits, everything is involved with chips. We can no longer wait.
By the way, in addition to our economic security, our national security depends on this. If you want to not only compete with China economically but from a national security and defense perspective, we must do this.
This isn't about a single industry; it is about every industry.
It is like saying water is used to drink; water is in everything. We could not be clearer about this. This is about our competitiveness on every level, and it is about the future.
It is about our children. It is about our grandchildren. It is about what kind of country we want to have and what kind of economy we want to have. Are we going to be in a position to defend the United States' democracy and our interests around the world?
I appreciate my friend's comments, but I have to say it would be narrow-minded to look at this and simply say it affects the semiconductor industry only. It affects everything.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), my very good friend and another distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I am a little surprised by the conversation here, it is as though we don't recognize the importance of semiconductors and the entire semiconductor supply chain to literally every activity we are involved in. Whether transportation, as I have already mentioned, or communications or medical devices or our satellite technology, literally every single thing we do depends on it.
The notion that we should somehow stand pat and allow other nations to invest and to build their supply chains to me is hard to accept, hard to understand, hard to process. If we do nothing over the next decade, China will be producing about 40 percent of semiconductor chips worldwide, the United States about 6 percent. If we want to put our reliance in the hands of foreign suppliers and foreign supply chains, I guess we can do nothing. But we need to invest, and that is why this bill is critical. That is why I suspect it received the support of 17 Republican Senators on the Senate floor yesterday. This is critical.
As I said earlier, China is investing $150 billion in their semiconductor supply chain, and this is not just chips; it is chips, it is substrates, it is packaging, it is assembly. It is the whole thing. Anytime there is a gap in a supply chain, we rely on those who fill that gap for us.
Do we want to be in a position where our economic fortunes are dependent on foreign competitors for a critical part of our supply chain?
Do we want to put our national security in jeopardy because those things which we need to be safe and secure are dependent upon foreign supply chains?
I don't think so. I don't think that is what the American public wants. And, frankly, I am glad to have this debate because I think it shows a divide. I think it shows a contrast between what we want to do to invest in not only this generation but next generations.
There are also a couple of other observations I will make. One is about just market forces and just allowing things to happen according to the market. While working on this bill--I talked a lot earlier, and I will continue to talk about regional innovation, but I also want to talk about Federal investment, two points.
The first I would make is: R&D investment by the United States Government has fallen to 0.61 percent of U.S. GDP. That is the lowest mark since the 1950s. At one point we were investing nearly 2 percent of GDP in research and development.
What came out of things like our investments in the space program are material sciences and advances, advances in telecommunications, advances in weather satellites, advances in so many different things, even fuel cell development. All those things came out of an R&D investment which we haven't kept pace with.
We talk about our competitiveness with China. This is vital to our national interest. I can't think of many things that are more vital to our national interest over the next several decades.
When you look at where we are making those investments, right now, if you are privileged to live in one of the five innovation hubs--such as Boston; the Silicon Valley; in Seattle, Washington; in Austin, Texas-- those areas account for about 90 percent of private investment, and venture capitalists will spend in those areas.
But what about the rest of the country?
I live in a place, Rochester, New York, which is home to the Rochester Institute of Technology and the University of Rochester, both great research facilities. There was a book recently written, ``Jump- Starting America'' by Simon Johnson and Jonathan Gruber, two MIT economists. They rated 130 different communities across the country that are falling behind, despite the fact that they have great innovation ecosystems, but they lack investment.
The public investment which we are talking about making through our regional innovation hubs will drive private investment because private investment will partner with the investments being made by the U.S. Government in our innovation, in our entrepreneurship, in advancing our interests for the long term.
We have to do this. This isn't something that we could decide to wait a year or two years. This is an investment we must make now. We have fallen behind, and we can no longer afford to fall further behind.
Our economic interests, our national security interests are intimately tied together, and that is why this legislation is so vital, and that is why I hope we will have strong bipartisan support when the bill comes to the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I will admit that I am a little mystified about what I am hearing here, so let me try to unpack a lot of what I just heard.
In the first instance, a number of my colleagues have repeatedly suggested that regular order in the House is for the authorization of legislation and then appropriators identify how much money can be spent on those things authorized under law.
That is exactly what we are doing here today. We are authorizing much under the CHIPS legislation. That is the way we do regular order. It is identifying those things that we authorize and then identifying the dollars necessary to meet that authorization.
But let me just read from the actual report on the bill: Division A, CHIPS Act of 2022, Section 101, Short Title: This Act may be cited as the CHIPS Act of 2022. Section 102, Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors for America Fund, the CHIPS fund. In order to support the rapid implementation of the semiconductor provisions included in the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA, this division would provide $52.7 billion in emergency supplemental appropriations.
This bill has nearly $53 billion included in it, $50 billion allocated over 5 years for the CHIPS for America Fund.
I could go on and list it, but this is exactly what we are talking about: Authorization to move forward over the next several years to strengthen American competitiveness in the world.
By the way, it is not just all of the industries I talked about. Try to order a refrigerator without a chip in it or a microwave oven or a dishwasher or a TV or a laptop or a cell phone or--I could go on and on all day. There isn't a consumer device, there is not an electronic device--even farm equipment. Everything we use has chips in it. We are falling behind the Chinese and others, and we are relying on foreign investment and foreign supply chain.
I can't imagine something more American than passing this bill. This is vital to our national interest. This is one of the most vital things we will do.
So we are following in the way that we are supposed to: authorization, appropriation. But there are emergency appropriations of over $50 billion to move not just one industry forward, but to move all industries forward, to move our economic and our national security interests forward together.
By the way, just so if people tune in and wonder, What is this all about? Let me just say all the things I just mentioned, $50 billion in emergency appropriations, the desire and the need and the will of the American people, as represented by the Senate and the House, to move forward on economic and national security interests.
We should put that all aside, my friends are suggesting, and don't do any of that today. So we are not going to authorize; we are not going to spend money; we are not going to move ourselves forward from an economic security and a national security perspective.
This is what they would like us to do instead, and I am reading from their bill, the thing they just said we should do instead of doing all the things I just mentioned: resolve that it is the sense of the House of Representatives that two consecutive quarters of negative growth in gross domestic product constitutes a recession. That is what they would like to do.
We would like to move America forward. We would like to build a supply chain that works for all Americans. We want to make sure our economy is strong now and in the future. We want to make sure our national defense is strong, that the American public is protected, that democracy is protected across the world. And that is what we are doing. That is what our partners in the Senate are doing. They want to define what a recession is. That is their plan.
I would ask America: Should we stop what we are doing? Should we put an end to our desire to make sure we are competitive on the world stage? Should we not protect America's economic interests? Should we not protect America's national security interests? And we should define in the House of Representatives what a recession is? That is what we want to do? That is their plan?
I think most Americans watching would be scratching their heads. I think they would wonder why is it people don't want to make us competitive here in the House of Representatives. Well, we do. The majority--and I suspect a fair number of their colleagues are going to vote for this, too, because they know it is good for America, and they know it is good for the future, for not only my generation, but my children's generation, my grandchildren's generation, and generations to come.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I do worry sometimes that the public sometimes doesn't understand what is being said here. It is curious that my distinguished friend, the gentleman from Illinois, would scream about the consensus calendar.
Let me just be clear, folks back home. We created the consensus calendar. It didn't exist in the past. The Democrats created it to try to create more bipartisanship. What we are doing here is simply pausing, as we have done on both sides when both sides were in the majority--pausing during the August district work period.
This is something that I just find fascinating. We didn't even have a consensus calendar when Republicans were in charge. We are pausing it for the next 6 weeks. I appreciate the distinguished gentleman, but I want to assure the American public that what they should be focused on is the work we should be doing today, the work that is actually getting done to strengthen our resolve around the world, to strengthen our economic position, to build jobs for families across America, to aid consumer electronics and business electronics, and all the things that we want to do around quantum computing and quantum communications, and taking American ingenuity, American innovation, which has been the hallmark of our growth as a Nation for two centuries, and doubling down and saying we are not going to stand aside and let others take a leadership position in this world.
America is going to stand up. We are going to do what we have always done. We are going to invest in smart people; we are going to build our economic future; and we are going to build our national security future. It starts here today. That is what we should keep our eyes on.
Everyone should pay attention. This is what we are doing. I am expecting and hoping that we are going to have a substantially bipartisan vote on this bill when it comes to the floor as it did in the Senate just yesterday.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, while I have just a moment, I want to share with those who tuned in some comments about the underlying bill for this rule. ``This funding will help kick-start domestic production of these semiconductors in a way that will prevent a vulnerability of our supply chain . . .'' ``One other benefit to this bill is that this bill could create roughly 185,000 jobs every year as these new facilities are constructed.'' That was said by John Cornyn from Texas yesterday on the floor of the U.S. Senate.
From Roy Blunt, a Republican Senator from Missouri said: ``This bill includes targeted investments in technological development and manufacturing that will strengthen our position in a global economy. The bill expands the successful Manufacturing U.S.A. program by creating new innovation hubs and helps ensure we have the right Federal policy in place to support the research and development of emerging technologies. I was proud to be a part of this effort, and I urge our House colleagues to get this bill to the President's desk.''
Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican from West Virginia said this: ``America can never be replaced as the global economic and innovation leader. Winning the future means making the necessary investments to address issues like the microchip shortage, prepare the next generation of workers in science and technology fields, and keep up with our competitors, including China. This legislation not only bets on American ingenuity, but it also authorizes funding that can be utilized by our institutions of higher education . . .''
How about Todd Young, a Republican from Indiana: ``It's time to go on the offensive, and that is exactly what this legislation, which has gone by many names--from the Endless Frontier Act to the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act to CHIPS-Plus--will do . . .'' ``This bill will unleash private sector innovation while significantly boosting Federal national security investments. It's been a long journey to get to this point, but history will show that by passing this bill, we are confronting the challenges of today and building a prosperous and secure tomorrow for all Americans.''
Rob Portman, a Republican from Ohio: ``Today's passage of the CHIPS Act is critical in the effort to bring semiconductor manufacturing back to the United States, protect our national security, and create thousands of high-paying jobs in Ohio. I was proud to help lead efforts in the Senate to pass this legislation and ensure that Intel's planned semiconductor plant in central Ohio remains on track and reaches its full potential. I urge the House to act quick on this bipartisan legislation so the President can sign it into law, and I look forward to attending the groundbreaking for this transformational project in the coming months.''
The reviews keep coming, and they are all positive. We have got to move this today in the House. We have got to get it to the President's desk. We have not a moment to lose in the race for America's future and to make sure that we are secure for generations to come.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank my great friend and colleague for the opportunity to engage in a thoughtful conversation about issues where we may agree and we may disagree, but I always appreciate him.
I would just note, though, that all the conversations I have had over the last many, many months about American competitiveness has largely been with my chamber of commerce, with business leaders, CEOs of companies who are desperate that we continue to move forward in repairing the challenges of our microelectronic supply chain. I haven't heard from any Socialists about it. They may have different communication with people, but I have heard from the business community; I have heard from economic drivers; I have heard from innovators; I have heard from entrepreneurs about the need to make this go.
Madam Speaker, I want to, first of all, thank my colleagues who have spoken in support of the rule. I want to thank those who have put this bill before us. Support for this rule showcases a commitment to American leadership in research, manufacturing, and innovation for decades to come. It showcases a commitment to lowering costs for families, creating job opportunities, and building long-term economic stability that will uplift families across this country. It showcases a commitment to investing in regional innovation and leveraging the significant untapped potential that so many communities hold, including my own in Rochester, New York.
We can't afford to wait any longer to make these critical investments. We must join our colleagues in the Senate and show the American people we are committed to taking on China and reestablishing our place on the global stage as a force to be reckoned with.
This is a pivotal moment in our Nation's history. We must meet it head-on and deliver investments that will ensure every family in every community has the opportunity to achieve the American Dream. This legislation will do just that.
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.
The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 1289
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 8. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the resolution (H. Res. 1290) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that two consecutive quarters of negative growth in gross domestic product, as reported by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, constitutes a recession. The resolution shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of House Resolution 1290.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source