This blog from ASPB's public affairs unit will provide updates on policy developments in Washington and other plant biology news impacting the ASPB community. Please send any news, comments, or suggestions to ASPB's public affairs director, Adam Fagen, at afagen@aspb.org
Policy Archives available under Group Pages.
Posted By Lewis-Burke Associates LLC,
Monday, April 23, 2012
On April 19, the House Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations Subcommittee and the full Senate Appropriations Committee approved their respective versions of the fiscal year (FY) 2013 CJS appropriations bill, which funds the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Economic Development Administration (EDA) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). NSF, NIST, NOAA, and NASA are particular winners in the House bill. At this point, it is still too early to compare the House mark with the bill the Senate Appropriations Committee approved earlier today as details on the Senate bill remain scarce.
As previously reported, there is low likelihood of Congress passing any appropriations bills for FY 2013 before the November elections. Furthermore, the House appropriations bills will be a total of $19 billion below the level set in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (debt-limit agreement) while the Senate Appropriations Committee intends to write its bills to the higher level of $1.047 trillion approved last year in the Act. Below are additional details on NSF funding in the House CJS Subcommittee bill.
Similar to the Senate, the National Science Foundation (NSF) would continue to receive strong bipartisan support in the House, with the House Subcommittee proposing $7.333 billion overall for NSF, an increase of $299 million or four percent over FY 2012, $41 million or less than one percent below the FY 2013 request, and $60 million above the Senate mark. With the exception of the Research and Related Activities (R&RA) account, the Subcommittee would support all NSF accounts at the President’s FY 2013 requested level. The Subcommittee would provide an increase of $254 million or five percent over FY 2012 to the R&RA account; however, this amount would be a decrease of $41 million or less than one percent below the President’s request for FY 2013.
The House Subcommittee bill would fully fund OSTP at the President’s request of $6 million, which is an increase of $1 million (30 percent) over the FY 2012 level.
House CJS Appropriations Bill, FY 2013
As reported by the House CJS Appropriations Subcommittee, 4/19/12
(In thousands)
National Science Foundation
FY 2012 Enacted
FY 2013 Request
House Mark*
Senate Mark†
House vs. Senate
NSF, total
7,033,100
7,373,100
7,332,513 (4.3%)
7,273,000 (3.4%)
59,513
(0.8%)
Research & Related Activities (R&RA)
5,689,000
5,983,280
5,942,693 (4.5%)
N/A
N/A
Education & Human Resources (EHR)
829,000
875,610
875,610 (5.6%)
N/A
N/A
Major Research Equipment & Facilities Construction (MREFC)
197,060
196,170
196,170 (-0.5%)
N/A
N/A
Agency Operations & Award Management
299,400
299,400
299,400 (0%)
N/A
N/A
National Science Board (NSB)
4,440
4,440
4,440 (0%)
N/A
N/A
Office of Inspector General
14,200
14,200
14,200 (0%)
N/A
N/A
* Percentage comparison is to the FY 2012 enacted level.
† Percentage comparison is to the FY 2012 enacted level.
ASPB’s Executive Director, Crispin Taylor, will be testifying to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science Space and Technology, Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight on the topic ofFederally Funded Research: Examining Public Access and Scholarly Publication Interests. The hearing is currently scheduled for Thursday, March 29, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. EDT and will be webcast live.
Consistent with ASPB’s response earlier this year to an Office of Science and Technology Policy request for information on similar topics, Taylor will argue that the government should adopt sensible, flexible, and cautious approaches to drafting and revising public access policies or regulations. These approaches should engage all concerned parties, including federal agencies, scientists, university administrators, librarians, publishers, and the public and should foster innovation and collaboration. Policies should focus on providing access to the definitive version of an article, which is typically hosted on the publisher’s website; developing robust metadata standards; and ensuring increased interoperability among journal articles and other valuable sources of information online. Policies should also recognize and embrace the global nature of scientific research and scholarly publishing. Taylor will further testify that government mandates that specify business models or embargo periods are detrimental to collaborative progress toward improved access to and utility of scholarly information online. Please see full written testimony.
Taylor has served as the Executive Director of ASPB since 2004. He previously held the positions of news and reviews editor and managing editor at The Plant Cell (http://www.plantcell.org), which is published by ASPB, and he has also worked at Science’s Next Wave (now part of Science Careers website, http://www.sciencecareers.org) where he collaborated with AAAS’s Education and Human Resources unit to develop the Minority Scientists’ Network (http://www.miscinet.org).
Rep. Hartzler stressed that, "Only about half of 1
percent of the [federal] budget supports food production -- a very small
investment to keep our food supply safe, affordable and reliable.” Furthermore, funding of research for food and
agriculture makes up an even smaller fraction of the one half of one percent. Rep. Hartzler called out the importance of
agricultural research in feeding a growing global population. "Crop yields have
increased tremendously over the past few years due to improved genetics and
enhanced crop protection products…continued improvements are necessary to feed
the world.”
Rep. Cuellar worries about other pieces of long-term
legislation taking precedence over the farm bill and the effects of not passing
the bill this year. "Without a new farm
bill, USDA is unable to assist with new difficulties that have arisen since
2008 - such as the expanding citrus diseases – and cut areas that have out
lived their usefulness.”
As
you may be aware, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee recently
approved the Grant Reform and New Transparency (GRANT) Act, H.R. 3433.
The bill, which the full House has not considered, is intended to provide more
transparency in the federal grant-making process by requiring all federal
agencies to publicize the selection procedures for each grant program. It also mandates the White House Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) create a single, comprehensive website for all
federal grant opportunities, among other provisions.
Many in the research community have concerns with the bill’s
transparency requirements in the peer-review process, which include the posting
of full copies of funded proposals online (albeit with an exception for
information that is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)). Although many efforts have been made to
effect positive changes in the bill, the amount of disclosure required is still
potentially damaging to the peer-review process. As such, Representatives Rush Holt (D-NJ) and
David Price (D-NC) have drafted a "Dear Colleague" letter, which can be viewed here, to the House
leadership urging them to fix these remaining issues; Reps. Holt and Price also
are seeking additional signatories to the letter from among their
colleagues.
ASPB is closely
monitoring this bill and working to remove damaging provisions in the
legislation. If you have concerns with
the GRANT Act, you can share them with your Representative and/or encourage
them to sign on to the Holt-Price Dear Colleague letter. Contact information for your
Representative is available at http://house.gov/representatives/. You
can either call their Washington, D.C., office or send an e-mail via your
Representative’s website. If you do not
know who your Representative is, you can enter your zip code into the above
website to find out. The deadline for additional signatories to
the Dear Colleague letter has been extended to Friday, January 27.
If you’d like help reaching out to your Representative,
please contact ASPB’s Public Affairs Manager, Kathy Munkvold, at kmunkvold@aspb.org.
As
you may be aware, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee recently
approved the Grant Reform and New Transparency (GRANT) Act, H.R. 3433.
The bill, which the full House has not considered, is intended to provide more
transparency in the federal grant-making process by requiring all federal
agencies to publicize the selection procedures for each grant program. It also mandates the White House Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) create a single, comprehensive website for all
federal grant opportunities, among other provisions.
Many in the research community have concerns with the bill’s
transparency requirements in the peer-review process, which include the posting
of full copies of funded proposals online (albeit with an exception for
information that is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)). Although many efforts have been made to
effect positive changes in the bill, the amount of disclosure required is still
potentially damaging to the peer-review process. As such, Representatives Rush Holt (D-NJ) and
David Price (D-NC) have drafted a "Dear Colleague” letter to the House
leadership urging them to fix these remaining issues; Reps. Holt and Price also
are seeking additional signatories to the letter from among their
colleagues.
ASPB is closely
monitoring this bill and working to remove damaging provisions in the
legislation. If you have concerns with
the GRANT Act, you can share them with your Representative and/or encourage
them to sign on to the Holt-Price Dear Colleague letter. Contact information for your
Representative is available at http://house.gov/representatives/. You
can either call their Washington, D.C., office or send an e-mail via your
Representative’s website. If you do not
know who your Representative is, you can enter your zip code into the above
website to find out. The deadline for additional signatories to
the Dear Colleague letter is Friday, January 13.
If you’d like help reaching out to your Representative,
please contact ASPB’s Public Affairs Manager, Kathy Munkvold, at kmunkvold@aspb.org.
Posted By Lewis-Burke Associates LLC,
Saturday, November 05, 2011
The House and Senate appear to have come together on a
strategy to complete consideration of the fiscal year (FY) 2012 appropriations
bills. Rather than combine all 12 appropriations bills into one large
omnibus appropriations package, as Congressional appropriators have done in the
past, Congressional leaders plan to enact the appropriations bills through a
more piecemeal approach; passing three or four appropriations bills at one time
in "minibus" appropriations packages. Congressional leaders from both
parties have also indicated that they will adhere to the top line discretionary
spending levels that were agreed to in the Budget Control Act of 2011 (the debt
limit bill), which are approximately $24 billion higher than the total
discretionary spending level approved by the House earlier in the year.
The first such minibus bill was passed by the Senate on
November 1 and included the Senate's Agriculture–FDA appropriations bill,
Commerce–Justice-–Science bill, and Transportation–Housing and Urban Development
bill. These bills provide funding for federal research agencies such as
the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, among others. On the
evening of November 3, House and Senate appropriators met to begin conference
negotiations on the first minibusbill.
Conference members agreed to top line spending targets for each bill that
comply with the Budget Control Act. Specifically, they agreed to $19.6
billion for the Agriculture–FDA bill ($2.4 billion above the House-passed
level, and $200 million below the Senate-passed level), $52.7 billion for the
Commerce–Justice–Science bill ($2.5 billion more than the House proposed level,
and level with the Senate-passed bill), and $55.6 billion for the
Transportation–Housing and Urban Development bill ($400 million above the
House-proposed level and $300 million above the Senate-passed level).
Negotiators were very courteous to one another during the
conference committee meeting, stating their intentions to work together to
complete the FY 2012 appropriations bills before the end of the calendar
year. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) stated
that the conferees have been instructed to keep their schedules open over the
upcoming Congressional recess period to complete negotiations on the minibus
package before November 14. The House and Senate are expected to pass the
first minibus bill during the week of November 14, before the current
continuing resolution (CR) expires on November 18. The minibus package
will likely include an additional CR to extend funding for programs under the
remaining appropriations bills through mid-December to provide additional time
for Congress to complete its work.
While negotiators have agreed to top line funding levels for
each appropriations bill, there are still discrepancies between the House and
Senate on programs within the bills that will need to be worked out. This
includes emergency aid to states for recent natural disasters and funding for
transportation projects through the Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery (TIGER) grants program, among others. Funding for science and
education programs within these appropriations measures has not been
highlighted as an area of contention, and in fact, research agencies are faring
quite well in receiving funding that is flat or slightly below current levels.
Appropriators have stated that they may attach additional,
less controversial spending bills to this minibus appropriations package such
as the Legislative Branch bill and the Homeland Security bill. The Senate
is expected to consider a second minibus package in the coming week which may
include the Energy and Water Development bill, the Financial Services bill, and
the State and Foreign Operations bill.
This post includes content provided by ASPB's external government relations consultant, Lewis-Burke Associates LLC.
The U.S. House Committee on Agriculture Subcommittee on Rural Development, Research, Biotechnology, and Foreign Agriculture will hold a public hearing on Thursday, June 23, to review the opportunities and benefits of agricultural biotechnology.
Testifying at the hearing will be three witnesses:
Several amendments have been proposed that would have a catastrophic impact on funding for USDA research.
In particular, an amendment (H.AMDT.428) from Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) would cut $1.8 billion from USDA including a cut of $650 million from the Agricultural Research Service (a 65% cut!), $85 million from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, $43 from the Economic Research Service, and $1.04 billion from the Food for Peace Grants.
We urge you to contact your Congressional representatives IMMEDIATELY and urge them to oppose Rep. Chaffetz's amendment and any amendments that would be harmful to research.
There are several other amendments proposed that would impact funding for USDA research. We will update this blog post with more details.
Thank you for your calls! Rep. Chaffetz's amendment failed on a vote of 83-338. No other amendments passed that have any significant effect on the USDA research portfolio.
ASPB Public Affairs Committee member Elizabeth Hood testified on behalf of ASPB before the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies at a March 11 Outside Witness hearing.
Hood spoke in support of funding for the National Science
Foundation (NSF) and the $7.767 billion requested for fiscal year 2012. While recognizing the difficult fiscal
environment faced by the nation, Hood’s testimony emphasized that investments
in scientific research will be a critical step toward economic recovery.
Hood mentioned that "the NSF Directorate for Biological Sciences is a
critical source of funding for scientific research, providing 68 percent of the
federal support for non-medical basic life sciences research at U.S. academic
institutions.” "Despite the fact that
basic plant biology research—the kind of research funded by the NSF—underpins
so many vital practical considerations, the amount invested in understanding
the basic function and mechanisms of plants is relatively small when compared
with the impact plants have on our economy and in addressing some of the
nation’s most urgent challenges such as food and energy security.”
Among the high impact programs supported by NSF is the Plant Genome
Research Program (PGRP), which has laid a strong scientific research foundation
for understanding plant genomics as it relates to energy (biofuels), health
(nutrition and functional foods), agriculture (impact of changing climates on
agronomic ecosystems), and the environment (plants’ roles as primary producers
in ecosystems). Hood asked that PGRP be
restored as a separate line within the NSF budget, as in years past, and be
funded at the highest possible level.
Hood also spoke in support of NSF’s career and workforce development
programs—including graduate traineeships, fellowships, and career transition
awards—as well NSF’s diversity programs and the research the agency supports on
teaching and learning.
Hood is distinguished professor of agriculture at Arkansas State
University. ASPB’s complete written
testimony may be found at http://bit.ly/e9RftK.
Posted By Adam Fagen,
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
One of the 500+ House amendments offered on the Continuing Resolution (CR) that would cut $100B from the federal budget would eliminate funding for biological and environmental research (BER) within the Department of Energy's Office of Science.
Amendment No. 304: At the end of the bill (before the short
title) insert the following new section:
Sec. 4002. None of the funds provided by this Act under
the heading ``Department of Energy, Science'' shall be
available for biological and environmental research
authorized under subtitle G of title IX of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16311 et seq.).
Rep. McClintock has offered a second amendment (no. 305) that removes the funding that would otherwise be appropriated to BER under the CR. Rep. McClintock represents the 4th district of California, which includes the northeast corner of the state, including most of the state north and east of Sacramento.
We believe that Rep. McClintock has offered his amendment in order to eliminate climate change research. But BER also supports a significant amount of research unrelated to climate change, including fundamental and applied research in support of DOE's energy, environment, and basic research missions, such as the development of biofuels.
Among the programs that could be shuttered if these cuts are enacted would be the three Bioenergy Research Centers: BioEnergy Science Center at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center at the University of Wisconsin, and Joint BioEnergy Institute at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. It could also mothball a number of BER user facilities including the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement, and the Joint Genome Institute.
ASPB urges you to add threats to DOE's biological and environmental research portfolio to your talking points when you contact your Congressional representative.
On Friday evening, the House Appropriations Committee released its bill to fund the government through the remainder of fiscal year (FY) 2011. The bill would cut $100 billion from President Obama's proposed budget for FY2011, including catastrophic cuts for the science agencies that support research in plant biology.
See ASPB's Urgent Action Alert for more information about the proposed cuts.
ASPB members and
others are encouraged to reach out to their Representatives and Senators to ask
them to support research funding and oppose cuts to the budgets for the National Institute
of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and Agricultural Research Service (ARS) at the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, the DOE Office of Science, the National Science
Foundation (NSF), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). House members will be voting on these
proposed cuts this week, and the final budget bill will have to be passed by
the Senate as well. You can find your
Representative’s contact information on the House of Representatives website and your Senators’ contact
information on the Senate website.
When
calling the offices, ask to speak with the science or appropriations staffer or
to leave a message. Simply ask them to support funding for science
agencies, explaining that basic research and science education are vital to maintaining
America’s competitiveness and give examples of how cuts would impact your
research activities. Remind them of the
critical role that science has in fostering innovation, which leads to jobs and
a healthy economy—these cuts will not only have dire short-term consequences
but will hurt our long-term success for years to come. You could also point out that federal support
for research leads to jobs in local communities, including the talented
graduate students, postdocs, and other personnel in your own labs and
institutions working to address vital priorities in areas like food and energy
security.
The House is expected to
debate the continuing resolution this week, so please call as soon as possible.
Posted By Adam Fagen,
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
Details are starting to be revealed on how the House Appropriations Committee will realize $74 billion in cuts from President Obama's proposed fiscal year (FY) 2011 budget. Although the broad number was released last week, these are first details about where the cuts will be proposed.
A statement from committee chair Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY), released today, provides a partial list of 70 spending cuts that will be included in the upcoming House Continuing Resolution (CR) bill. A CR would carry federal spending through the end of the fiscal year on September 30. The government is currently operating on a CR that is in effect through March 4, 2011.
Although more specific details will emerge over the next few days and weeks, here are the proposed cuts in programs of interest to the ASPB community:
Department of Energy Office of Science: $1.1 billion
National Institutes of Health: $1 billion
Agriculture research: $246 million
National Science Foundation: $139 million
In his statement, Chairman Rodgers acknowledged the pain these cuts would cause:
Make no mistake, these cuts are not low-hanging fruit. These cuts are real and will impact every District across the country - including my own. As I have often said, every dollar we cut has a constituency, an industry, an association, and individual citizens who will disagree with us.
It should be noted that these are cuts proposed by the House Appropriations Committee which must not only pass the full House but also pass the Senate and be signed by President Obama. Therefore, it's unlikely that the final FY2011 budget will experience such deep cuts, but it is clear that this is a tough budget environment.
House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) has outlined the spending cuts for each of the twelve appropriations subcommittees.
The House Budget Committee had previously outlined an overall budget $74 billion below the President's request and $35 billion below fiscal year (FY) 2010 appropriations. Rep. Rogers allocated the cuts to each of the subcommittees that together set the House's budget levels for the federal government.
These cuts are for FY2011 budget, which will fund the government through September 30, 2011 (the government's fiscal year begins on October 1 of the previous year).
Rep. Rogers' statement says that cuts will not be across-the-board but target specific programs:
"To accomplish this goal [of cutting $74 billion], I am instructing each of the twelve Appropriations subcommittees to produce specific, substantive and comprehensive spending cuts. We are going go line by line to weed out and eliminate unnecessary, wasteful, or excess spending – and produce legislation that will represent the largest series of spending reductions in the history of Congress. These cuts will not be easy, they will be broad and deep, they will affect every Congressional district, but they are necessary and long overdue.
"With this CR, we will respond to the millions of Americans who have called on this Congress to rein in spending and help our economy grow and our businesses create jobs. It is my intention –and that of my Committee – to craft a responsible, judicious CR that will significantly reduce government spending, begin to get our nation’s finances in order so that the economy can thrive, and provide essential resources for our national security.”
Details of the proposed cuts have not been released yet, but here are the bottom line number for each subcommittee's area of responsibility:
The Commerce, Justice, Science subcommittee would see a cut of $10.2 billion (16%) below FY2010. This subcommittee includes jurisdiction for NSF.
The Agriculture, Rural Development and FDA subcommittee would see a cut of $3.2 billion (14%) below FY2010. This subcommittee includes jurisdiction for USDA.
The Energy and Water Development subcommittee would see a cut of $3.5 billion (10%) blow FY2010. This subcommittee includes jurisdiction for DOE.
The Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education subcommittee would see a cut of $6.6 billion (4.4%) below FY2010. This subcommittee includes jurisdiction for NIH.
It should be noted that these target cuts only apply to the House. It is not expected that the Senate or White House will be willing to go along with such substantial budget reductions.
Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY), chair of the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations, has named the chairs and Republican members of the Appropriations Subcommittees. Each subcommittee has jurisdiction for developing appropriations bills for agencies within their jurisdiction.
Here are the Republican members of the subcommittees with most relevance to the ASPB community:
Agriculture Subcommittee (jurisdiction for USDA, FDA, other agencies)
This afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the America COMPETES reauthorization, approving the version which passed the Senate by Unanimous Consent last Friday. Among other provisions, the bill provides reauthorization for the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). COMPETES provides three years of authorization and sets a doubling path for those agencies over the next 12 years. It also authorizes ongoing support for the DOE's Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). As an authorization bill, however, the legislation does not actually provide funding.
The final tally in the House was 228-130, with 16 Republicans joining all 212 voting Democrats in support of the bill. Those Republicans voting for the bill were Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (MD), Judy Biggert (IL), Brian Bilbray (CA), Shelley Moore Capito (WV), Bill Cassidy (LA), Michael Castle (DE), Charles Dent (PA), Vernon Ehlers (MI), Jim Gerlach (PA), Timothy Johnson (IL), Christopher Lee (NY), Michael McCaul (TX), Tom Reed (NY), David Reichert (WA), Chris Smith (NJ), and Frank Wolf (VA).
In what are likely to be among his final remarks on the floor of the House, retiring Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN), Chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee, made the case for passage:
Science funding is the engine of a knowledge-based economy. If we remove it, our economy will crash and burn.
If we are to reverse the trend of the last twenty years, during which our country’s technological edge in the world has diminished, we must make the investments necessary today.
...While there have been concessions made in light of the economic environment, this bill preserves the intent of the Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the original COMPETES. It keeps our basic research agencies on a doubling path, it continues to invest in high-risk, high-reward energy technology development, it will help improve STEM education, and it will help unleash the American spirit of innovation.
COMPETES is and will continue to be a Bipartisan, Bicameral effort about which every member can feel proud.
...I cannot think of anything I would rather be doing, for what is likely my final act on this House Floor after 26 years of service, than sending this bill to the president’s desk.
...The business community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, foster innovation, and improve education.
The academic community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, foster innovation, and improve education.
The scientific community has urged us to pass this bill to support research, foster innovation, and improve education.
And every one of our colleagues in the Senate has agreed that this bill needs to be sent to the President’s desk so the U.S. can support research, foster innovation, and improve education and create 21st century jobs.
I urge my colleagues to stand with the business community, the academic community, and the scientific community to send a strong message that the U.S. must maintain its scientific and economic leadership.
The White House applauded passage of the COMPETES legislation. In a blog posting this afternoon, John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, said: "It is heartening that Congress today recognized that the maintenance of America’s global leadership in science, technology, and innovation transcends politics and partisanship. Full funding of the COMPETES Act is among the most important things that Congress can do to ensure America’s continued leadership in the decades ahead."
As reported here last week, the Senate passed its version of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act on Friday. That means that the House will have to pass the Senate version for the bill to go on to the White House for President Obama's signature.
ASPB encourages its members--as well as their colleagues, friends, and neighbors--to call their Representative and urge support for the COMPETES Reauthorization.
See the December 20 issue of the ASPB Washington Report for additional information.
Visit the House website to find contact information for your Representative.
The House Republican Steering Committee has selected Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) to serve as the next chair of the House Appropriations Committee. Although Rep. Rogers has secured earmarks for his district and even been called the "Prince of Pork," he has promised to end the earmark process going forward. He represents Kentucky's 5th district, which includes the southeastern corner of the state.
In a statement issued after being elected by the GOP Conference, Rep. Rogers said:
Hello. This is Congressman Hal Rogers. I am honored by the Republican Conference’s decision to elect me as their Chairman of the Appropriations Committee. It is truly humbling to receive the confidence of my colleagues and I am ready to get to work so that together we can move our country forward. We are facing unprecedented times and the American people are giving us a unique opportunity to start reining in government and getting our economy back on track. My Republican colleagues and I are listening and we will fight to rein in spending, implement rigorous oversight and work together to change the culture on Capitol Hill. There is no room for failure, our nation’s security depends on us getting this right and finding a new way forward.We are facing unprecedented times and the American people are giving us a unique opportunity to start reining in government and getting our economy back on track. My Republican colleagues and I are listening and we will fight to rein in spending, implement rigorous oversight and work together to change the culture on Capitol Hill. There is no room for failure, our nation’s security depends on us getting this right and finding a new way forward.
Rep. Rogers was selected over two others believed to be in the running: current Ranking Member Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), who would have needed a waiver from House GOP term limits, and Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), who was backed by Tea Party followers.
Meanwhile, Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA) was tapped to become the Democratic Ranking Member in the new Congress. Rep. Dicks is the second most senior member on the committee behind current chair Rep. David Obey (D-WI), who is retiring. Rep. Chakah Fattah (D-PA) had also sought the Ranking Member position, but was defeated on a vote by House Democrats.
Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) has been selected by the House Republican Steering Committee to be the next chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The committee has jurisdiction over a number of important areas including energy policy, climate change, biomedical research, consumer protection, telecommunications, and travel and tourism.
In a statement from Rep. Upton on his appointment, he listed several priorities:
We face many challenges, but priority number one is to repeal the job-killing Obamacare law. While the various subcommittee posts will be filled in the days ahead, the fight to repeal Obamacare starts now and I am pleased to appoint Rep. Joe Pitts as chairman of the Health Subcommittee. Together, we will protect the sanctity of life, ensuring early next Congress that no federal funds are used for abortion.
Energy and Commerce will also immediately adopt new rules to cut spending and restore fiscal responsibility.
If we have learned anything these last two years of soaring unemployment and out-of-control spending, it is that government is not the answer to all our ills - it is, in fact, the root cause of many of them.
The Obama administration is on notice - they will not be allowed to regulate what they have been unable to legislate.
Rep. Upton also sent a memo to fellow House members that emphasized his leadership on efforts to curb indecency in public broadcasting, promote abstinence-only education, oppose funding for abortion, and cutting spending. His district is made up of the southwest corner of Michigan including the cities of Kalamazoo and the Twin Cities of Benton Harbor-St. Joseph.
Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) is the current Republican Ranking Member of the committee, but was passed over by the Steering Committee to serve as the next chairman. Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) is the current Democratic Chairman.
Posted By Adam Fagen,
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
The House of Representatives Committee on Science & Technology will have new leaders when the 112th Congress convenes in January 2011 with the new Republican majority in the House and the retirement of current chair Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN).
The new chair is likely to be Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX), who is the current Republican Ranking Member. Rep. Hall is a former conservative Democrat who actually served as the Democratic Ranking Member from 1999 until switching parties in 2004. He is the oldest member of the House and will be serving his 16th term representing the 4th district of Texas, which encompasses the northeastern part of Texas along the Arkansas and Oklahoma borders. Rep. Hall issued a statement on November 3 describing his plans for the S&T Committee:
Nationally, I am heartened that Americans returned Republicans to the majority in hopes of providing a check on runaway spending in Washington and getting the economy back on track toward growth and job creation. I look forward to working with current members on the Science and Technology Committee, as well as hearing from our new members, to formulate and advance an agenda that keeps our nation moving forward. The Science and Technology Committee will be a place where every member’s ideas will be respected and considered, and all Republicans can play a role in crafting good science policy.
We must also conduct strong oversight over this Administration in key areas including climate change, scientific integrity, energy research and development (R&D), cybersecurity, and science education. Over the past few years the unprecedented growth of the Federal government and the creation of multiple new and duplicative programs occurred without having first assessed the effectiveness and success of existing programs.
My goal is to ensure science policy drives innovation and thereby the American economy. Federal investment in R&D must empower the free market, not interfere in it.
On the Democratic side, Rep. Jerry Costello (D-IL), who was the committee's second-ranking Democratic, announced that he would not pursue the Ranking Member position.
Third-ranking Democrat Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) has thrown her hat into the ring for the Ranking Member position. She represents Texas' 30th district which includes downtown Dallas and its southeastern suburbs. Rep. Johnson issued the following statement on November 10:
If elected as Ranking Member, I would work tirelessly in order to further seek the implementation of policies which we have not yet been able to advance in the 111th Congress. As Ranking Member, I would continue to advocate for STEM education, clean energy, and for scientific research to improve the lives of all Americans. I would fight to ensure that our aviation industry and, NASA specifically, remains strong, and able to undertake each and every new mission that draws them further away from our planet and into depths of scientific discovery. I would continue to emphasize the need to invest in basic scientific research and development to support our nation’s energy independence and security, to create new technologies, industries, and jobs that will catalyze our nation’s embattled middle class and fulfill a mission for the U.S. to lead the world in clean technology.
Today, I stand eager to work with the Republican Chairman of the House Science committee to help rebuild our Nation’s economy through science; with basic and applied scientific research to enhance our standard of living, foster new industries, and retain our global competitiveness.
Serving as the Ranking member would allow me to continue to fight for the issues that are important to Scientific, as well as the Federal government's work effectively and efficiently. My commitment to both this institution and our party is strong. I will continue to work with the Administration to identify solutions to new, or persistent issues that threaten to set our nation back even as we continue to look forward to our future.
Finally, my new role would allow me to address the needs of the scientific sector while engendering the growth of our Nation’s scientific research capabilities that contribute to the economic strength of our nation.
Print to Page
Group Home
Blog Home
Group Blogs
RSS
On April 19, the House Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations Subcommittee and the full Senate Appropriations Committee approved their respective versions of the fiscal year (FY) 2013 CJS appropriations bill, which funds the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Economic Development Administration (EDA) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). NSF, NIST, NOAA, and NASA are particular winners in the House bill. At this point, it is still too early to compare the House mark with the bill the Senate Appropriations Committee approved earlier today as details on the Senate bill remain scarce.
Chairman Wolf’s opening remarks during the Subcommittee markup are available at 
The 
ASPB members and
others are encouraged to reach out to their Representatives and Senators to ask
them to support research funding and oppose cuts to the budgets for the National Institute
of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and Agricultural Research Service (ARS) at the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, the DOE Office of Science, the National Science
Foundation (NSF), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). House members will be voting on these
proposed cuts this week, and the final budget bill will have to be passed by
the Senate as well. You can find your
Representative’s contact information on the 
In what are likely to be among his final remarks on the floor of the House, retiring 
The House Republican Steering Committee has selected 
Meanwhile, 
Rep. Fred Upton
The new chair is likely to be 
Third-ranking Democrat