Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 3322 - Omnibus Civilian Science Authorization Act

(House)
(Walker (R) PA and 4 cosponsors)

If H.R. 3322 were presented to the President in its current form, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Director of the National Science Foundation, the President's Science Advisor, and die Director of the Office of Management and Budget would recommend that the bill be vetoed because of its devastating impact on Federal investments in science and technology.

H.R. 3322 would undermine economic growth, job creation, protection of the environment, and improvements in the quality of fife for all Americans. The bill would reverse the tradition of unwavering, bipartisan commitment to U.S. leadership in science and technology. The most objectionable dements of H.R. 3322 are described below.

Commerce Civilian Technology Programs

H.R 3322 does not provide any FY 1997 appropriations authorizations for the Commerce Department's Advanced Technology Program (ATP), the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), or the Technology Administration. The President's FY 1997 Budget requests $345 million for ATP - an effective mechanism for augmenting U.S. economic growth through highly- leveraged, industry-led research and development. ATP is a rigorously competitive, cost-shared program that fosters technology development, promotes industrial alliances, and creates jobs. The President's Budget requested $105 million for MEP to complete a national network of centers providing technology and business assistance to the Nation's 381, 000 smaller manufacturers. The Technology Administration, which is funded in the President's Budget at $9.5 million, provides technology advocacy and analysis for U.S. industry at a time of increasingly fierce global competition.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Programs

The bill would undermine NOAA's ability to protect the environment and provide services to the American public. While the amendment deleting provisions of the committee reported bill that would have had devastating impacts on NOAA's ability to manage marine, ocean, and coastal resources is an improvement, H.R. 3322 would still render NOAA unable to successfully implement its mission requirements. H.R. 3322 would unnecessarily delay National Weather Service Modernization and jeopardize satellite continuity. This initiative, through deployment of cutting edge technology, has greatly improved forecasts which lead to lives and property saved. The bill would also fail to authorize NOAA funds for the Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) program and would impose cuts across NOAA that could lead to significant downsizing and reductions in force.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Programs

H.R. 3322 would reduce the FY 1997 appropriations authorization for the NASA's Mission to Planet Earth Enterprise by almost $374 million, a reduction of nearly 27 percent This would severely undermine NASA's ability to carry out this program to observe, document, understand, assess, and predict environmental change. The bill's major reductions in NASA's Aeronautical Research and Technology, salaries and expenses, and construction of facilities would disrupt NASA operations. While the Administration strongly supports commercial buying practices, the Administration is concerned that sections 255 and 257 could be interpreted to require NASA to establish new procurement rules inconsistent with generally applicable procurement law.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Programs

The bill would reduce the President's Budget request for EPA's science and technology activities by almost $92 million, a reduction of 16 percent below the FY 1997 request. The reduction includes termination of planned funding for innovative environmental technologies, the climate change action plan, indoor air pollution research, and several other activities. The authorization for global change research would be dramatically reduced. The environmental technology initiative would spur development of new technologies to protect public health and environmental quality, reduce costs, and create new American jobs in this country and in export markets.

National Science Foundation (NSF) Programs

H.R. 3322 would significantly reduce the appropriations authorizations for NSF'S research programs, educational activities, and construction of major research equipment. These reductions are inconsistent with the President's investments in science and technology to maintain the Nation's competitive edge. The bill would also interfere with the Foundation's ability to effectively manage its programs through reductions in its workforce and unwarranted organizational restructuring. In addition, changing the name of the NSF to the National Science and Engineering Foundation would cause a decline in the Foundation's name recognition and would also cause confusion over the Foundation's mission.

Other Objectionable Provisions

The prohibition in section 901 on the use of funds authorized by H.R 3322 to "influence legislation pending before the Congress" except for certain "requests for legislation or appropriations" should be deleted. This overly broad prohibition, if applied literally, would inappropriately and unnecessarily limit the ability of departments and agencies to advise Congress and the public of their views on pending legislation. This provision is especially troublesome insofar as it would purport to constrain the constitutional authority of the President to communicate his views through subordinates to Congress and the American people.

The requirement in section 222(b) that the President propose legislation by September 30, 1996, to implement a NASA report on restructuring activities should be deleted. This provision would interfere with die President's constitutional authority to recommend to Congress "such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient".

Section 453, creating a new coordinating advisory council for oceanographic programs, is unnecessary and should be deleted. Further, the method of appointing members to the National Ocean Research Council and the Ocean Research Partnership Coordinating Group is not consistent with the Appointments Clause of the Constitution.

The Administration supports efforts to amend H.R. 3322 consistent with the President's FY 1997 budget.

Pay-As-You-Go Scoring

H.R. 3322 would affect direct spending and receipts; therefore:, it is subject to the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) requirements of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. OMB's preliminary estimate is that H.R. 3322 would increase direct spending by $2 million in FY 1997. Final scoring of this legislation may differ from this estimate.