Eric Swalwell on Technology Withdrawn Democratic Presidential Challenger; CA Rep

Sponsored investing $1 billion in transportation projects.

Congressional Summary: TIGER Grants for Job Creation Act: Congress finds the following:

1. The economy is struggling to recover from the recession. The unemployment rate is nearly 8%.
2. The American Society of Civil Engineers` 2009 Report Card for America`s Infrastructure estimated that there is a $549 billion shortfall in investments in roads and bridges and an additional $190 billion shortfall in investments in transit.
3. TIGER, formally known as the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery grant program, is a nationwide competitive grant program that creates jobs by funding investments in transportation infrastructure.

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

Apply copyright inheritance to same-sex couples.

Congressional Summary: Revises the definition of `widow` concerning the transfer of a copyright to an author`s spouse following the author`s death. Declares that an individual is the widow of an author if they were legally married at the time of the author`s death, even if they could not marry in their home state. (Currently, only the author`s surviving spouse under the law of the author`s domicile at the time of death is considered a widow.)

Supporters reasons for voting YEA: (by Human Rights Campaign, hrc.org): This bill would fix wording in the Copyright Act that currently prevents some same-sex couples from receiving inheritance rights. Because of restrictions in current law, some agencies--including the Copyright Office and the Social Security Administration--do not recognize same-sex couples living in states without same-sex marriage equality.

Background: (Wikipedia.com on `U.S. v. Windsor`): Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer, a same-sex couple residing in New York, were lawfully married in Canada, in 2007. Spyer died in 2009, leaving her entire estate to Windsor. Windsor sought to claim the federal estate tax exemption for surviving spouses. She was barred from doing so because the IRS said the exemption only applies to heterosexual couples under the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and compelled her to pay $363,053 in estate taxes. The Supreme Court rules 5-4 to overturn DOMA as unconstitutional. [This bill applies that Supreme Court ruling to copyright law].

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (PopVox blog postings on H.R.238 & S.23):

• OK-3: My concern is that our government believes that just a few more laws and a few more bills and freedom will be perfected. Stop shoving immoral activity down our throats and telling us it`s normal and lawful.
• WV-1: I oppose H.R. 238 because it`s not necessary.
• KY-3: I oppose S.23 because if the spouse remarried, they aren`t a widow/widower anymore.

Let NSF decide research grants, not Congress.

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:

• $700,000 to support a climate change-themed musical
• $487,000 to study the Icelandic textile industry during the Viking era
• $516,000 to help amateurs create a video game to `Relive Prom Night`

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.

Sponsored bill for net neutrality for open internet.

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].