House passes COMPETES bill

JUN 07, 2010

Paul Guinnessy

Amended and modified by Paul Guinnessy.Unmodified version appeared as House Passes Reauthorization of America COMPETES Bill by Richard M. Jones at AIP’s FYI.

House Science and Technology Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN) has finally managed to get the COMPETES act (H.R. 5116 )—which sets a mandate for doubling the National Science Foundation, DOE Office of Science, and NIST’s budget over the next 10 years, and provides additional resources for science education—through the House of Representatives after a failure to get it reauthorized in early May.

Gordon split a number of amendments that had scuttled earlier attempts to pass the bill, submitted by S&T committee ranking Republican member Ralph Hall (TX) , out of the main act, so that representatives could vote on each individual amendment. The bill then passed by a vote of 262 to 150.

A political calculation

The COMPETES act was originally signed into law in 2007 with the backing of former President Bush, and the support of representative Vern Ehlers (R-MI) , but required reauthorization every three years.

Just before the House was to vote on the original bill on 13 May, Hall used a procedure to send the legislation back to the science committee with instructions on how it should be rewritten.

Hall’s package of changes included a three-year freeze in funding for NSF, the DOE Office of Science, and NIST, which, if applied in the associated appropriations bills, would result in cuts in projected science funding over the next few years, while other countries, such as China, India, and members of the European Union, increased their science funding.

It also reduced the authorization period, which had been upped to five years in the reauthorization bill, back down to three years, and eliminated the authorization for several new programs in the bill, while adding a new veterans’ benefit.

Hall’s package also included a provision to prohibit the payment of salaries to federal employees for viewing, downloading, or exchanging pornography on a government computer or while performing official duties. Hall’s motion passed by a vote of 292 to 126.

The science committee sent a new version of the bill back before the House on 19 May. The bill’s price tag was reduced by 50% by changing the authorization period from five years to three years. It also included a pornography provision but although the vote was 261 to 148 in favor of the bill, it was not the two-thirds majority required for passage, and hence COMPETES failed again .

Back to the drawing board

Just after the House finished voting on the FY 2011 National Defense Authorization Act , it was announced that the House would resume its proceedings on H.R. 5116—the original bill with the five-year authorization period.

Following brief floor procedures, Gordon moved what is called “a division of the question.” This procedure allowed representatives to vote on each part of the amendment contained in Hall’s May 13 Motion to Recommit. A division of the question has been part of the House Rules since 1789 and has been used during consideration of authorization and appropriations measures and in impeachment proceedings.

There was no debate when the House resumed its proceedings on COMPETES. Gordon’s move divided Hall’s amendment in the motion to recommit into nine portions. On three of these, the House voted to retain the original bill language regarding federal loan guarantees, regional innovation clusters, and Energy Innovation Hubs .

The votes went as follows:

Roll call vote 326 was to strike a new NSF prize award. The House voted 175 yes to 243 no, resulting in the retention of the prize award in the bill.

Roll call vote 327 was to remove a provision in the bill authorizing an Innovative Services Initiative at NIST. This failed by a vote of 163 to 244.

Roll call vote 328 was to provide special consideration for disabled veterans. This portion failed by a vote of 197 to 215.

Roll call vote 329 was approved unanimously to prohibit the payment of salaries to federal employees who view pornography while performing official government duties.

Roll call vote 330 would prohibit federal funding to institutions of higher learning if they deny or restrict campus access to ROTC or military recruiting. The House agreed to add this portion to the bill by a vote of 348 to 68.

The next roll call vote, 331 , encapsulated much of the discussion there had been about future science spending in the Science Committee and on the House floor. This portion would have reduced the authorization period from five years to three years. Of note, it would have frozen the authorization levels for NSF, NIST, and the DOE Office of Science at current levels for FY 2011, 2012, and 2013. The House rejected this by a vote of 181 to 234. There were 181 members voting for this portion, 12 of whom were Democrats and the rest of whom were Republicans. A total of 234 members voted against this portion: 233 Democrats and one Republican—Rep. Ehlers.

The final roll call vote, 332 , was to pass the bill. There were 150 members voting against passage of the bill, all of whom were Republicans. Seventeen Republicans joined 245 Democrats in voting to pass the bill.

The Republican and Democratic sides of the House Science and Technology Committee issued press releases after the passage of the COMPETES act. Hall commented:

“I am disappointed that my Democratic colleagues resorted to using a procedural tactic to defeat Republican changes that would have saved over $40 billion and restored the original COMPETES priority of basic research. While I am glad we were finally able to reauthorize many of the important research and education programs in this bill, the bill that passed today spends too much money, authorizes duplicative programs, and shifts focus away from the bill’s original intent.”

Chairman Gordon stated:

“As I’ve said before, this bill is too important to let fall by the wayside. Today, we took the action necessary to see consideration of this bill completed. And we allowed the Members of the House to be on record voting on provisions gutting funding for our science agencies, voting on whether we should eliminate programs that will help create jobs, voting on whether to eliminate programs that will make us more energy independent, voting in opposition to federal employees watching pornography, and voting on whether universities that ban military recruiters should receive federal research dollars. We have provided all Members, in a reasonable manner, with the ability to vote on each of these items separately instead of all together.”

More about the authors

Paul Guinnessy, pguinnes@aip.org