Providing for Consideration of Senate Amendment to H.R. 5116, America Competes Reauthorization Act of 2010, Providing for Consideration of Senate Amendments to H.R. 2751, FDA Food Safety Modernization Act; and Providing for Consideration of Senate Amendme

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1781 provides for the consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Science and Technology or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 5116. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science and Technology. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. The rule provides that the Senate amendment shall be considered as read.

The rule also provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 2751, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 2751. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. The rule provides the Senate amendments shall be considered as read.

The rule also provides for the consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 2142, the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 2142. The rule provides 1 hour of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the motion, except those arising under clause 10 of rule XXI. Finally, the rule provides that the Senate amendment be considered as read.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I don't want to prolong this debate, but if I could just make a couple of observations in the aftermath of the gentleman's speech. I should remind my colleagues that each year, 76 million Americans are sickened by contaminated food that they consumed. More than 300,000 of them are hospitalized and more than 5,000 each year die. We've heard about tainted eggs, tainted spinach, tainted peanut butter, tainted cookie dough. We haven't updated our food safety laws in decades.

So here's the deal. If you want to do a better job of protecting the American consumer, you will have an opportunity, if you vote for this rule, to vote for the food safety bill. If you don't, then vote down the rule and vote against the bill when it comes up.

I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, oh, my goodness. There are a lot of things that come before the Members of this body that, I think, are worth getting all worked up about and that, I think, sometimes understandably lead to partisan bickering; but as to what we are talking about here today, to me and to, I think, most people who are watching, this should be fairly noncontroversial.

What we are talking about is a rule that will allow us to consider three bills. One is called the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010.

What does this radical bill do?

It authorizes funding increases for the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes for Science and Technology, and the Department of Energy's Office of Science for fiscal years 2010-2013, on a path toward increasing substantially our investment in research and development over the next 10 years. It is not even an appropriation. It is an authorization.

So the Appropriations Committee next year can work their will and decide whether to invest more in science so that we can compete in this global economy, or will we not invest in science and actually do what some of my friends on the other side of the aisle will tell you about taking a meat ax to these programs, you know, and putting ourselves at a competitive disadvantage?

This is a bill about supporting and expanding American energy technology so we are not so reliant on foreign oil and so we don't go to war over oil. It is a national security issue, but this somehow is a controversial bill. This should pass easily.

The other bill that is so radical, according to my colleague on the Republican side of the aisle, is called the Government Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Performance Improvement Act.

What does this bill do?

It basically says to agencies and departments, look, you need to work to come up with a plan to prevent unnecessary and wasteful spending and to help eliminate Federal Government waste by working with us to help us find where those wasteful areas are.

Now, this is what is causing such consternation on the other side of the aisle? I mean, rather than just taking a meat ax and saying an arbitrary percentage cut across the board, what this bill says is let's think about what we're doing. Maybe we can cut 5 percent; maybe we can cut 10 percent; maybe we can cut even more.

Well, let's do this in a sensible way where we don't adversely impact services that directly impact the American people for the good. Let's have a plan. Let's just not do this senselessly. Let's do this sensibly. Somehow, this radical, awful bill has caused all this noise by my colleague on the other side of the aisle.

The final bill is the Food Safety Modernization Act. Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier--and it's worth repeating--in this country, literally 76 million Americans on a yearly basis are sickened by contaminated food that they digest--76 million Americans a year. More than 300,000 of them end up going to hospitals on a yearly basis, and 5,000 die.

So what is this Congress trying to do?

We are trying to find a way to protect consumers, and my colleague on the other side of the aisle is all upset about it. Oh, boy. What a terrible, awful idea to protect the health and well-being of the citizens of this country by updating our food safety rules and regulations, which haven't been updated in almost 30 years.

Come on. I mean let's move forward with this rule. Let's consider these bills. I am sure they all will pass.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

The resolution was agreed to.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Source