Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2021, Jobs and Energy Permitting Act of 2011, and Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1249, America Invents Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I do not commonly talk on rules. Usually I come for the substance of the underlying bill, and I will be speaking later on the underlying bill, on the Judiciary's patent reform bill, but I would like to speak not only to the fairness of the rule and the appropriateness and the reason for passage but also perhaps clarify something related to the underlying bill in the case of Judiciary.

First of all, I'm delighted, delighted to see that we are reducing the amount of time for passage of a rule when they are like.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle certainly know that at the beginning of every Congress, once every 2 years, we pass a massive rules package that every suspension and every other bill is essentially brought under. A rules package is nothing but a slight addition to the overall set of rules of the House, and if we do not produce one, then we operate under the rules of the House. So I'm delighted to see that we are using floor time more efficiently.

As to the question of the costs related to the upcoming bill on patent reform, I find something really amazing that I think all the Members should be aware of, Mr. Speaker, and that is this is a piece of legislation that has already passed by 95-5 out of the Senate. This is a piece of legislation that the ranking member and I have worked on for my entire 11 years here. This is a piece of legislation that every one of us has had input into and found ways to come together so that we had a 10:1 ratio when we passed it out of committee.

And when it comes to the costs, the American people, Mr. Speaker, have to understand this is simply talking about the exclusive fees that both Republicans and Democrats on the committee have demanded be used only for the patent office work and not be diverted. So, even if at some point we have to admonish the appropriators to stay within a number, we're only talking about how much of the money that the men and women who apply for patents, the men and women who invent, contribute for the purpose of having that passed.

So although people will pass dollars around, let's understand these are not tax dollars. These are dollars contributed with an application for a patent or for the extension, continuation of a patent. These are fees that inventors pay in order to have their inventions considered and retained, and nothing should be more sacred to Republicans and Democrats than making sure that those funds collected by these people are used there.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISSA. Reclaiming that 30 seconds, I fully understand my colleague's statement about the CBO scoring question, but understand, Mr. Speaker, that subject to appropriations, no money will be spent except money contributed in fees by those folks.

So whatever we must do in enactment of this law over time, we will do, but let's understand, we're not talking about the normal budget situation, where clearly any dollars that CBO is referring to are the dollars contributed by the men and women who invent things.

So I think we really have to look at that and say, We know they're entitled to 100 cents on the dollar. That's all we're doing regardless of scoring.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source