|
|
Marcia Fudge on Technology |
The House Committee on Science, Space and Technology has jurisdiction over non-defense federal scientific research and development. Specifically, the committee has partial or complete jurisdiction over the following federal agencies: NASA, the Department of Energy, EPA, NSF, FAA, NOAA, National Institute of Standards and Technology, FEMA, and United States Geological Survey.
| Subcommittee | Chair | Ranking Member |
|---|---|---|
| Technology and Innovation | David Wu (D-OR) | Adrian Smith (R-NE) |
| Energy and Environment | Brian Baird (D-WA) | Bob Inglis (R-SC) |
| Investigations and Oversight | Brad Miller (D-NC) | Paul Broun (R-GA) |
| Research and Science Education | Dan Lipinski (D-IL) | Vern Ehlers (R-MI) |
| Space and Aeronautics | Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) | Pete Olson (R-TX) |
A BILL To ensure that amounts credited to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund are used for harbor maintenance. This Act may be cited as the `Realize America`s Maritime Promise Act` or the `RAMP Act`.
IN GENERAL- The total budget resources made available from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund each fiscal year shall be equal to the level of receipts plus interest credited to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for that fiscal year. Such amounts may be used only for harbor maintenance programs. GUARANTEE- No funds may be appropriated for harbor maintenance programs described in such section unless the amount described in paragraph (1) has been provided.
Congressional Summary: TIGER Grants for Job Creation Act: Congress finds the following:
Opponent`s argument against bill:(The Reason Foundation, July 6, 2012):
The US Constitution authorizes Congress `to regulate Commerce...among the several States.` However, the five non-motorized transportation projects, the six transit projects and the six multimodal projects TIGER Grants have funded serve no national need. Some of the port, passenger rai
Congressional Summary: Scientific Research in the National Interest Act: This bill directs the National Science Foundation (NSF) to award federal funding for basic research and education in the sciences only if the grant promotes the progress of science in the United States, is worthy of federal funding, and is in the national interest.
Support on GovTrack.us: Lead sponsor Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX-21)--chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee--noted the millions of dollars the NSF has doled out for purposes he considers less than worthwhile. In particular, he cited a few examples he considered particularly egregious, including:
Opposition on GovTrack.us: The Science Committee`s ranking member, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX-30) called the bill anti-science. She wrote, `Most Members of Congress lack the relevant expertise to fairly evaluate the merits of any particular grant. If we do not trust the Nation`s scientific experts to make that judgement, then who are we to trust?` Johnson also noted that the NSF already has a rigorous review process, only funding about 1/5 of grant proposals.
White House Opposition: Contrary to its stated purpose, [HR.3293] would add nothing to accountability in Federal funding for scientific research, while needlessly adding to bureaucratic burdens and overhead at the NSF. It would replace the clarity of the [current rules implemented in] 1950, with confusing language that could cast a shadow over the value of basic research.
Legislative outcome: Passed House 236-178-26 (roll call 70, CR H684) on 2/11/16; bill died in Senate committee. The White House had threatened to veto the bill if it passed the Senate.
Summary by Vox.com: The US House of Representatives just passed a bill to bring Obama-era net neutrality rules back to the internet. This time, they want to make these regulations law so the Federal Communications Commission can’t overturn them easily. President Trump has said he will veto the bill should it make it to his desk. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called the bill `dead on arrival in the Senate`.
Statement in support by Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA-16): `The internet has a profound impact on America`s economy and the social fabric of our nation. It is an important tool to connect individuals to each other and businesses with consumers, said Costa. `Ensuring a free and open internet, with equal access to all, is essential if we are to preserve the American dream.`
Statement in opposition by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC-8): `If this legislation became law, the Internet would be slower, more expensive, less free and controlled by Washington,` said Rep. Hudson. `This would hurt our rural communities the most. I`ll continue to work to keep the Internet free from government intervention and open.`
Statement in opposition by Rep. Don Bacon (R-NC-8): `Previous regulations led to additional expenses for 80% of providers in rural areas leading to delayed or reduced network expansion and services,` said Rep. Bacon. `This bill would also lay the groundwork for the government for eventually taxing the internet.` The internet is now operating under the same regulations that governed, and facilitated its expansive growth, from the mid 1990`s until 2015. Some Democrats predicted that the return of those regulations would lead to limited access of the internet. None of those scenarios came true.
Legislative outcome: Bill passed House 232-190-10 on April 10, 2019, rollcall #167. [The 116th Congress terminated with no Senate action on this bill].