Dapertments of Commerce, Justice, and state, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005
DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 -- (House of Representatives - July 07, 2004)
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. King of Iowa). Pursuant to House Resolution 701 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 4754.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.
Mr. Chairman, earlier today the Committee on House Administration, which I chair, along with our ranking member the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) and our members, held a hearing on electronic voting system security. A diverse group of technology specialists and election administrators testified before the committee regarding issues relating to the reliability of electronic and computer-based voting systems and discussed what is needed to ensure the integrity of the latest generation of voting systems.
Though a wide range of opinions were offered throughout the course of the hearing, everyone agreed that well-written standards and a rigorous testing and certification process are absolutely necessary for maintaining the integrity of electronic voting systems under the Help America Vote Act of 2002, known as HAVA, of which I am proud to have been a principal author with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and also the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt) and others in the House. That bill is an important bill for voting in the United States, and again, I am proud that that bill has passed.
In that bill, NIST plays a crucial role in both the standards setting and testing and certification processes. First of all, HAVA tasks the director of NIST with chairing the Technical Guidelines Development Committee, known as TGDC, which HAVA created to assist the Election Assistance Commission, known as EAC, in crafting standards to ensure the security and reliability of voting technologies used in our Federal elections.
NIST is also tasked with evaluating testing laboratories and providing recommendations to the EAC as to which laboratories should be accredited for voting systems testing and certification.
Now that jurisdictions across the country are beginning to upgrade their voting systems, the American people demand and deserve to know that the latest generation of voting equipment will cast and count their ballots accurately and will be tamper-proof and free of technical malfunctions, for the purpose of HAVA was to make it easier to vote and harder to cheat.
The successful achievement of this objective of the bill will depend in great part upon the ability of NIST to fulfill its responsibilities under the Help America Vote Act, which in turn will hinge on whether NIST receives sufficient funding specifically allocated for its HAVA-related obligations.
Therefore, I believe it is urgent, and I want to stress urgent, that we get the needed resources to NIST as quickly as possible. I am joining today with my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), in support of the report language for this bill that urges NIST to devote funds for these functions.
I want to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), who has always supported the idea of NIST. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman WOLF) for his attention to this issue and for his consideration today. I also have been in contact with the gentleman from Oklahoma (Chairman ISTOOK) to see if the money dedicated to NIST, via the EAC, can be included in the Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill.
The vehicle for the funding is not of greatest importance. What is important is that the funding be absolutely provided. Regardless of the vehicle, we need to see that NIST will receive the money it needs to carry out its important statutory obligations.
I would like to note that the White House recently submitted amendments to its fiscal year 2005 budget that would provide an additional $10 million for the Election Assistance Commission. Perhaps funding for NIST to meet its obligations under HAVA could be taken from this amount. I will be talking again to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Chairman ISTOOK).
I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman WOLF), and express appreciation for the diligence of our colleague the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) on this issue and the bill.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NEY. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his statement. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Ney) for his leadership on the Help America Vote Act. Without his leadership and strong support, it would not have passed. Indeed, the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert), the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) of the Committee on Appropriations and others were critically important in its passage and funding.
I want to rise with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) in strong support of report language that was offered by the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) during the June 23 markup of the bill before us today. I applaud the Committee on Appropriations for including it in the report. I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for their leadership and attention to this very important matter.
That report language reads: "The committee strongly urges NIST to give priority consideration to Help America Vote Act outreach to the election community; expediting work on a new voting standards accreditation program; and its work with the Technical Guidelines Development Committee working with the Election Assistance Commission. NIST is directed to provide in advance of the fiscal 2006 hearings a report detailing what steps must be taken to bring its activities in line with the timetable established by the act."
The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Ney) indicated that the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) had worked with us. In fact, of course, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) was the principal sponsor in assuring that NIST was included as an integral part of the Help America Vote Act.
Obviously, technology is one of the critical issues in the HAVA proposal, which funds new technology for voting around the country. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) correctly said that we ought to have the best possible advice regarding technology, and NIST was the agency to provide that.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, under the Help America Vote Act of 2002, of which I and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) were sponsors, NIST is required to conduct several important research and technical projects connected to election reform. NIST is already busy working with the new Election Assistance Commission to advance HAVA's objectives. However, much more must be done if NIST is to fulfill its important role.
As we learned in the controversial 2000 election, voting systems in many parts of the country are antiquated and obsolete. There continues to be controversy about various technologies. NIST can make a critical difference.
As the 2004 election fast approaches, there are concerns in some quarters about the security and reliability of some voting systems. Properly directed, NIST will make a significant contribution, ensuring that new voting systems are rigorously tested, easy to use and maintain, and secure.
I strongly urge NIST to follow the spirit and substance of the report language and give priority consideration to the Help America Vote Act in fiscal year 2005.
Mr. Chairman, I would follow up with the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Ney) that I look forward to working with him and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Chairman Istook) as we consider the Transportation-Treasury bill and the additional appropriations for the Election Assistance Commission to attempt to get some of the money that NIST needs for 2005 out of the funds that are authorized for the Election Assistance Commission.
Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), the chairman of this subcommittee, and I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the ranking Democrat, for their leadership and assistance in this effort, and I thank the gentleman for his leadership and for yielding me time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time just to close on this issue, let me just say that this funding is a critical component. The entire funding where we get to the $3.9 billion, which we have gotten some money and have a little more to go, the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) has been assisting on that funding. We worked with the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), as the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) mentioned. Originally when this started we went to the Democratic leader, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) at that time. Everybody along the way has been very good on providing the money.
We still have some more components to go, but this particular aspect right now is just so important, to provide this for NIST to be able to really do its job and to interact with the EAC.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, I want to thank him for his continuing comments and again express, this was probably the most substantive bipartisan bill that passed in the last Congress. The Speaker indicated that and others have as well. If we, however, fail to fund it properly, it will be a promise unfulfilled, and our democracy will not be as well served as all of us hoped when we supported the Help America Vote Act.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, and I thank the gentleman from New York as well. He and I have talked about this amendment.
I am a very strong supporter of the COPS program, I have been and continue to be a very strong supporter of the COPS program. And what the gentleman's amendment does is dramatically point out that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) do not have sufficient funds to properly reach the levels that would be appropriate for funding for some very, very worthwhile programs.
On the other hand, when you are in this position, obviously you have to make choices. If you are going to have a zero sum game, that is, add no additional dollars, which would not be allowed, you have to take from some place if you want to increase in another place. The problem with this amendment, as I have told my friend from New York, is not its objective, which is an excellent one, but it is the means that it employs to attain that objective, which will have very serious adverse results, in my opinion.
Now, the gentleman has indicated that he is confident it will have no adverse effect on employment levels. I think that is not the case. It is not the information I have. Now, as I have told the gentleman, obviously, I, as a matter of fact, went to high school a mile down the road from the Census Bureau, so I know something about the Census Bureau. It will, according to the Census Bureau, result in possibly as many as 1,000 RIFs. Now, that is a lot of people.
Now, in addition to adversely affecting the people, the gentleman's amendment will affect the product adversely. Now, what is the product? The product is getting ready for the census of 2010. Now, that sounds very simple, but in fact it is a multiyear process. And if you slow it down, you can never get back that time.
Therefore, although I strongly support the gentleman's objective, I cannot support and will therefore oppose his amendment, the means he employs to obtain that objective. I hope this amendment is defeated not because we should not be expanding the COPS program, but because we should not be doing it in this particular way.