[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 57 (Thursday, March 31, 2022)] [House] [Pages H4046-H4053] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] {time} 1545 MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 4521, AMERICA COMPETES ACT OF 2022 Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of March 30, 2022, I offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 4521. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion. The Clerk read as follows: Mr. Lucas moves that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 4521 be instructed to agree to section 2502 of the Senate amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas) and the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Stevens) each will control 30 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to instruct the conferees on our competitiveness legislation. This motion instructs conference members to agree to section 2502 of the Senate legislation. This section is simple and common sense. It says that no person or entity of concern can receive grants, awards, or other support from the National Science Foundation, federally funded manufacturing programs, or technology hubs authorized by this legislation. A person or entity of concern is generally defined by the Department of Defense as directed by Congress in previous Defense Reauthorization Acts. DOD has identified entities of concern as Communist Chinese military companies and companies owned or controlled by the People's Liberation Army, and they have defined persons of concern as individuals affiliated with these CCP military entities. Simply put, this motion ensures that we aren't giving taxpayer dollars to the adversaries who are trying to steal U.S. technology and use it against us. The Senate was right to add this important guardrail, and it is only responsible that we urge our House conferees to ensure it is included in the final conferenced legislation. I would like to point out that we wouldn't have this particular difference in our bills had the process of passing the House legislation been done in regular order. The COMPETES Act was developed in a back room by the Speaker's office [[Page H4047]] with very little input or review from relevant committees. Although thoroughly vetted and bipartisan Science Committee bills were included in that package, they were sandwiched in among unrelated, partisan spending that added up to a backdoor attempt to pass parts of the Build Back Better Act. Because of this rushed, opaque bill-writing process, unsurprisingly, the COMPETES Act had a lot of flaws. Despite less than 3 days to review the bill text, Members submitted more than 600 amendments to the bill. But the Rules Committee, with very little input, made in order only 261; and of that number, only three Republican amendments were given individual debate time on the floor, with all other Republican amendments being considered en bloc. Not only did Members have little opportunity to write this bill, but they also had almost no opportunity to fix its flaws. I could go on about the danger of passing massive bills like this out of regular order, but for now I will focus on this particular issue. This provision preventing funds from going to Chinese military entities and persons of concern was submitted as a part of multiple Republican amendments to the Rules Committee, but none of these amendments were made in order. I fail to see how amendments limiting taxpayer funds from going to China isn't relevant to a bill about competitiveness with China. Democrats' failure to include similar language in the COMPETES Act is an unfortunate example of an unwillingness to be strong on China and protect our national security. But we have a chance to rectify that now. Madam Speaker, surely we can all agree that we shouldn't be sending taxpayer dollars to Communist leadership in China. They are already stealing our discoveries and using them to surpass us economically and militarily. We are spending the time, money, and effort to plant the seeds of new technologies, but China is the one harvesting the crop. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass legislation to improve U.S. technology and to set us up to be globally competitive for the coming decade. The Science Committee has spent 2 years preparing for this opportunity. Working together, Republicans and Democrats held meetings with stakeholders, conducted in-depth hearings, and individually marked up more than a dozen bills to strategically scale-up America's research and development capacities. Those bills all passed out of committee unanimously, and many passed across the floor with strong bipartisan support. They double down on investment in basic research at the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy Office of Science and National Labs, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. They also direct the creation and regular review of a national science and technology strategy, as well as improving STEM education and regional research opportunities. The Science Committee bills are targeted to the areas where government investment is most needed and will give us the biggest reward. We ensure our approach is strategic, focusing on the technologies of the future like quantum sciences, artificial intelligence, and advanced manufacturing. We will keep America competitive and secure and help create good jobs here at home. This legislation should be the foundation for the conference legislation, not the COMPETES Act, which is more of a climate change bill than a technology bill, and not the bill formerly known as USICA, which is a grab-bag of special interest provisions cobbled together into a franken-bill. There is a lot of chaff to separate from the wheat of this bill, but I believe we can come to smart, consensus policy through the conference. The Science Committee worked together to pass strong bipartisan legislation, and I think our process, as well as our end result, should serve as a model moving forward. I am looking forward to getting to work and paring down these bills to the smart policies we need. It is urgent that we act now. Democratic leadership delayed the legislation for 9 months. I assure you the Chinese Communist Party isn't doing the same. Let's stop playing politics with something so important. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this motion, and I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong and enthusiastic support of moving forward to conference the America COMPETES Act of 2022 with the Senate. For those watching back at home, a conference committee is a joint committee between the House and Senate, a temporary ad hoc configuration to negotiate elements of a bill; and it is, frankly, the best of legislative action; Congress working for the American people, debating through democracy and deliberation to produce an end result. As a Member of Congress, I often ask myself, I often pose the question, what will drive our economy for the next 10 years, 20 years, 30 years? What is our moonshot of the next 50 years? What can I do today to ensure that my neighbors in southeast Michigan are on a strong path to a successful future? What are the technologies and research investments that we can make today to ensure the success of the Nation for all of us? The legislation that we are moving to conference today, the America COMPETES Act, tackles those big questions and secures our competitive edge for generations to come. This bill is an investment in our people. It reflects our ability to reach higher, to think deeper, and to invent solutions to not only today's problems but solutions for tomorrow's opportunities. Americans are known for their hustle, for their ingenuity. My job, our job in Congress is to connect people to the tools to unlock a good life, to connected opportunity for everyone. And, frankly, the tools of the future are in this bill. The COMPETES Act turbocharges America's scientific research and technological leadership while strengthening America's economic and national security at home and abroad. Even more, this bold investment in innovation ensures our top scientific minds have the tools to rise to the challenge of our climate crisis, from clean energy technologies to emissions measurement. Not only does this bill look to the future, but it also mends the acute stressors that we are all feeling today due to our years of Federal underinvestment in science and innovation. A conference committee to discuss this, my friends, the America COMPETES Act tackles our supply chain vulnerabilities to make more goods in America and surges production of American-made semiconductors, chips, that which we invented here in this Nation, and in the 1990s were producing 40 percent of a crucial component in everything from cars to computers to medical devices. And the American people are ready; ready for investments that will spur innovative solutions to create jobs across the Nation, support American manufacturing, and build a strong and diverse STEM workforce ready to address the challenges we face as a Nation. {time} 1600 During President Biden's State of the Union Address, he called on Congress to get our innovation package to him for his signature. So we should be proud--I certainly am--to be here as we move to take the next step in this process. There is, frankly, no time to waste in getting the COMPETES Act to the President's desk. As the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Research and Technology, I am so proud of the range of bipartisan Science, Space, and Technology Committee provisions that have long been championed that are included in this package. I am especially proud of the NIST for the Future Act, my legislation. This critical investment in NIST will ensure the agency and its employees have the resources they require to be a key part of bolstering our American technology enterprise: a resilient supply chain, small and midsize manufacturers being brought to the table to deliver for America, and the American workforce that compels them. Since Michigan's 11th District sent me to Congress, I have been laser-focused on bringing innovation economy [[Page H4048]] solutions not only to folks in southeastern Michigan but also, obviously, all across the United States. We built a transformative piece of legislation from the ground up. The ranking member is right--bipartisan years of work on the Science, Space, and Technology Committee to do such legislation. We heard from the science community. We heard from industry. We heard from academia. We heard from other stakeholders. They all told us the same thing: Don't leave Americans behind. Don't leave anyone behind based on geography or demographics. Bring the scientific research enterprise to all. We are here, and we are here with a lot of hardworking people from the Science, Space, and Technology Committee staff. We have not had a conference committee since 2018, albeit for NDAA. Many people have not been able to be privy to such an action, and they deserve our gratitude. These are the folks writing the text late into the night based on our corrections, the Science, Space, and Technology Committee staff who work so hard and the Science, Space, and Technology Committee members. The United States has long been a beacon of excellence in science and innovation, and it is long overdue that we restore Federal support for these vital initiatives, that we invest now and lead the world. The House's and Senate's approaches may certainly have some differences, but we seek the same goal: to deliver for this Nation. I am very confident that we will have a very productive conference process and hope to get the America COMPETES Act to President Biden's desk for signature very soon. The U.S. has endless potential to compete globally in science and innovation. The America COMPETES Act provides the critical resources and tools we need to achieve that. I look forward to working with my colleagues throughout conference to invest in America's most valuable resource, the talent of our people. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Babin). Mr. BABIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for yielding. Madam Speaker, last month, the House passed the COMPETES Act, better known as the concedes act, which was forced through this Chamber in a partisan fashion and lacked the policies needed to truly bolster our scientific infrastructure and combat threats from our foreign adversaries. The hard work and the bipartisan collaboration of the Science, Space, and Technology Committee were left in the wake of partisan politics. The House-passed concedes act let China off the hook very simply for failing to contain COVID-19. It failed to ban funding to CCP-tied organizations. It failed to punish the CCP for its blatant human rights abuses. It failed to strengthen America's competitive edge over China. Today, we have the opportunity to instruct conferees to bolster the language and actually stand up against Communist China. That is why I support this motion to instruct. It will ensure that no entities identified as Chinese military companies operating in the United States are eligible to receive funds through the new technology directorate, the supply chain resiliency program that we set up through Manufacturing Extension Partnership. We must put a stop to Communist China spreading misinformation, stealing our technology, and bolstering its economic advantages while weakening ours. The FBI and intelligence agencies have continually warned Congress about these same threats from Communist China. China's investment in development, and not in basic research, implies that they are building their technological success on the backs of U.S.-funded basic research. We have even seen the infiltration of Chinese influence in our university systems and academia on several different occasions at the top institutions of America. We must work to ensure that China cannot undermine our open system of research and development. This time, let's support scientific discovery, advance American technology, and hold our foreign adversaries accountable, and let's not waste the American people's time again. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, the ranking member, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), has given us a motion to instruct, a negotiation that we will pursue in the conference to come. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone). Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, we are at a crucial moment in our Nation's history, and Congress has the chance to reinvigorate our economy and ensure that we can outcompete every other nation. The America COMPETES Act will put us on a course to lead the pack in creating the strongest and most advanced economy of the 21st century. Today's actions move us one step closer to making this legislation a reality. Over the past 40 years, America's manufacturing sector has lost market share to economic competitors like China. This decline in manufacturing, coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic, has led to severe supply chain disruptions across our economy that have raised prices for consumers. As the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I would like to highlight several important provisions in the America COMPETES Act that will help reverse this trend, strengthen our economy, bolster our Nation's supply chains, and ensure that more critical goods are made right here in the United States. The legislation invests $45 billion in grants, loans, and loan guarantees to support supply chain resilience and manufacturing of critical goods, industrial equipment, and manufacturing technology right here in the U.S. It also invests $52 billion for the CHIPS for America Act, incentivizing private-sector investments in semiconductor fabrication. This funding will help eliminate disruptions in the semiconductor supply chain from abroad that have hurt American automakers, medical supply chain companies, and manufacturers of heavy machinery. The bill invests $3 billion to help build a domestic solar manufacturing supply chain so we can aggressively counter China's control of the solar chain that jeopardizes our energy security interests. The bill also keeps our electric grid secure and resilient in the face of evolving cybersecurity and physical security threats. Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act also improves our medical product supply chain and strengthens our Strategic National Stockpile. During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were widespread shortages of essential medicines, medical supplies, and some personal protective equipment. This legislation increases our domestic drug manufacturing base by expanding the use of advanced and continuous manufacturing practices. It also establishes a $1.5 billion supply chain manufacturing pilot program that will help maintain domestic reserves of critical medical supplies. It creates a $10.5 billion program that awards grants to States to expand or maintain a State strategic stockpile of products essential in the event of a public health emergency. Finally, Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act will help innovate our wireless supply chain and network security by funding the deployment of cutting-edge technology and ensuring that next-generation mobile wireless networks and technologies are safe and secure from foreign adversaries. Madam Speaker, for far too long, America has relied heavily on other nations to manufacture critical goods essential to our economy. That must come to an end as we work together to reinvigorate our manufacturing base and create new, good-paying jobs here at home. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim). Mrs. KIM of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Ranking Member Lucas' motion to instruct. This motion will agree with section 2502 included in USICA, which prohibits entities identified as Chinese military companies from receiving [[Page H4049]] funds through the new technology directorate, the supply chain resiliency program, the regional innovation program, or the Manufacturing USA program. In other words, this motion ensures taxpayer dollars spent in this bill do not go toward the Chinese Communist Party. On the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, we spent several months working on a series of bipartisan competitiveness bills that we could have gone to conference with. Unfortunately, with little notice, we voted on a 3,000-page bill that was not bipartisan, did not include strong protections to safeguard U.S. investments from CCP, and provided $8 billion for a climate slush fund that we have zero oversight over and China has already taken $100 million from. Republicans offered several amendments with similar language to that of Ranking Member Lucas' motion to instruct in the Rules Committee, but unfortunately, the majority did not allow them to be considered on the House floor. The CCP is watching us. Today, we have an opportunity to send a strong bipartisan and bicameral message: We are bolstering American competitiveness and national security to ensure we lead in the development and deployment of the technologies of the future. It is imperative we have guardrails, such as Mr. Lucas' motion to instruct, in order to ensure these investments do not fall into the hands of the CCP and to attain a true bipartisan, bicameral agreement. I thank Ranking Member Lucas for his leadership and his motion. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer). Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and allowing me to speak on this. I think it is worth the wait to bring these important provisions together to the floor to work on a path forward and maybe a little hint of restoring regular order. It is important that we invest in innovation for our future. And I would note not just the cutting edge, high-tech future developments that are so important in my State and in many others that are going to help keep us on the front lines, but it is also important to invest in legacy technology, legacy chips. We had the manufacturing supply chain all over America halt for lack of chips that cost only a few pennies because it wasn't profitable for some to create the legacy chips moving forward. And I hope some of these billions will be invested in opportunities to ramp up that production. It happened very fast, and it will make a difference from automobiles to microwaves and washing machines. I am proud of the work we have done in the Ways and Means Committee under the leadership of Richie Neal to develop pro-worker responsive efforts and deal with the Chinese challenge. Now, because the benefits of trade are broadly understood and spread but the problems are localized, the impacts often hit individual communities. That is why our provision has a strong Trade Adjustment Assistance program. Sadly, it expired a year ago, setting us back, leaving people desperately in need of this help out of luck. We have a very strong, carefully crafted provision that will help workers and communities alike with an updated, modernized Trade Adjustment Assistance program. We hear a lot of concerns about China, and I share those concerns. Our provisions are tough on China. For instance, we closed the de minimis loophole that allows 2 million packages a day to be imported into the United States directly to our consumers, uninspected in the main and evading tariffs. It is time for us to close that de minimis loophole. I note that the Chinese give Americans $7 of an exemption, and ours is $800. The least we ought to do is close that de minimis loophole. The trade title is strongly supported by American business and organized labor. We are dealing with a TSP and MTB that will improve global standards and strengthen American manufacturing. The title is supported by AFL-CIO, American Alliance of Manufacturers, the autoworkers, machinists, electricians. People who want to build products in America are advantaged under this. It meets workers' needs, bolsters America's ability to compete, and is attuned to what Americans want. Madam Speaker, I look forward to the work with the committee moving this forward, and ultimately, its passage. {time} 1615 Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oregon for reminding us about the importance of legacy chips and the MTB. I also thank the previous gentlewoman from California for reminding us about Manufacturing USA, which was probably started under the Obama administration. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice). Mrs. BICE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct from my colleague and Oklahoma delegation member, Mr. Lucas. Safeguarding our national security, improving our supply chain resiliency, and bolstering American innovation are things that we can all agree on. However, in the COMPETES Act, Democrats took these problems and drafted ineffective, partisan policies in response. As a member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, we had previously advanced strong legislation to combat these very issues. On top of this, when this legislation came to the House floor for a vote in February, Republicans in the House were denied the opportunity to provide input on these important issues through the restrictive processes of the majority. While over 600 amendments were submitted, less than half of those were made in order by the Committee on Rules. Of the 600, there were a number that would have taken steps to address the ever-growing threat we face from the Chinese Communist Party and their affiliated companies operating in the United States. This motion to instruct will ensure that the critical investments we are making in America's innovation don't fall into the hands of our foreign adversaries. Democrats' failure to include similar provisions in the COMPETES Act exemplify their continued, weak policies on China that compromise our strategic advantage and our national security. It is common sense that U.S. taxpayer dollars should not be lining the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party, and instead, should be used to strengthen our industries here at home. Investing in American companies will strengthen the economy while keeping the Nation safe. Madam Speaker, this should not be a partisan issue. I encourage the adoption of the motion. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks). Mr. MEEKS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan for yielding the time. Madam Speaker, we find ourselves in a competition to lead in the 21st century. And that is a competition that the United States cannot afford to lose, and if we do what we should do here, will not lose. A month ago, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping thought that America was in decline, that America could no longer lead the world, and that they could therefore simply overwhelm smaller states. They believed that they could undermine the rules-based order whenever they chose. Well, this incredible global coalition, binding and getting us together, working with our allies, that President Joe Biden has put together to condemn Russia and support the Ukrainian people, has proven that their assertion is absolutely wrong. But the events of the past month have underscored the need to position America for this challenge on a long-term basis. Therefore, it is absolutely critical that Congress get H.R. 4521 to the President's desk. It is an investment in science, innovation, and technology, which would allow us to excel in the global economy for decades, bolster our domestic industry, and create jobs for American workers. [[Page H4050]] Madam Speaker, I am proud that my bill, the EAGLE Act, serves as the foreign affairs division of America COMPETES. It bolsters our diplomacy to marshal a coalition of states to check the PRC's aggression, its theft of technology, its shirking of global rules, and its gross violation of human rights, of which we need to focus on. And I know that if we put our minds to it, we can work together in a bipartisan and bicameral way to finalize this critical legislation and get it to the President's desk, and we must do it. That is because our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific are watching. They need our help to bolster international rules, combat the PRC's coercion, and address shared global challenges like climate change. And after what we have seen in Ukraine, the people of Taiwan are watching, to ensure that we deepen our economic ties, strengthen its defense, and create greater space for Taiwan globally. Hong Kongers and Uyghurs are also watching to make sure we get this done because they urgently need the refugee protections that are in the COMPETES Act. They need Congress to send a message to Beijing that its genocide in Xinjiang, its destruction of Hong Kong's autonomy, and its lack of regard for human rights will not stand. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, we are lucky to have such a chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs here in the Congress. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman). Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, in a peewee sports competition, you can make the case that if you are competing, you are winning. But when it comes to global standing, energy independence, and economic security, there are no participation trophies. Our goal can't be to just compete. We have to dominate because if we are not winning in this area, we are losing. And if America loses, the world loses. Unfortunately, this so-called COMPETES Act would place America on the loser's bench. I am baffled why, at a time when gas prices are skyrocketing from Putin's war in Ukraine, and more Americans than ever are facing economic instability, this majority is still laser-focused on a blind, green-energy political agenda when America needs a rational, domestic energy plan that results in reliable, affordable, and clean energy. Our constituents are paying almost $5 a gallon to fill their cars. Yet, I am hearing my Democrat colleagues suggest the solution is just to buy an electric vehicle. What a slap in the face to thousands of hardworking men and women that President Biden put out of their jobs by canceling pipelines and shuttering American mines, while turning to international adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela to solve the energy and mineral crisis he created. Madam Speaker, no, if we really want to win, we must unleash the full power of American energy and mineral development by processing permits, issuing leases, streamlining the regulatory process, and giving our own homegrown industries the ability to use our American resources. We can and we will do that safer, cleaner and faster than anyone else in the world. Where China uses child and slave labor to mine minerals vital to batteries and computers, we can use state-of-the-art technology to access those minerals that are right here in the U.S. Where Russia controls oil rights and uses it as political leverage, we can produce energy for our own people and be an exporter to our allies. Madam Speaker, we have no other option than to win. I urge my colleagues to give Americans the power to develop, innovate, and unleash our full potential. If you look around, Democrat strategies are proving to be losing strategies. Americans can't afford higher prices and more incompetence. Let's begin to put an end to the madness by passing this motion to instruct. Madam Speaker, I encourage that. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining? The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Luria). The gentlewoman from Michigan has 13\3/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Oklahoma has 15 minutes remaining. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, as the gentleman from Arkansas reminds us, I am proud that Michigan is the destination where the combustion engine was invented and innovated, and very proud to be the destination where our workers are manifesting and innovating electric vehicles. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer). Mr. BEYER. Madam Speaker, I confess, I cannot connect my friend from Arkansas' comments with this motion to instruct, but I won't take any time to refute these things. Madam Speaker, manufacturing has long been a core strength of the American economy. But the decades-long decline of manufacturing jobs in the United States has cut off pathways to economic security for so many families across this country. Passage of the America COMPETES Act will be a landmark investment in infrastructure, in clean technology, in innovation that will create and preserve high-quality jobs in communities across America, and advance U.S. competitiveness and drive long-term economic growth. Disinvestment in American homemade products has also contributed to the severe supply chain disruptions during the coronavirus pandemic that have pushed up prices for so many American consumers. The America COMPETES Act will bolster supply chains, ramp up domestic manufacturing of critical components, like semiconductors, and insulate U.S. workers and families from price volatility and help build their own economic resilience. Part of the House-passed version is the National Secure Data Service Act, which will allow agencies to link together data collected through surveys, Federal program administration, nongovernmental data sources to advance evidence-based policymaking. This will be a great boon for artificial intelligence and machine learning. Also included in the COMPETES Act, is an amendment I cosponsored with Representative Trahan to increase investment in fusion energy, the holy grail for our climate and for world poverty. The COMPETES Act bottom line gives the U.S. the competitive edge needed to maintain our global leadership in innovation and research. Madam Speaker, I am not sure why my Republican friends felt the need to offer this motion in the first place. Of course, we all understand that the essential subtext of the COMPETES Act has been to strengthen our competitive position versus communist China or, to restate my friend from Arkansas, to put us in the dominant position to compete against communist China. Of course, nothing in this landmark initiative in American research, in American innovation, in American manufacturing, American artificial intelligence or American chips is intended to be transferred to the PRC. So if this is meant to show that Republicans are tougher on China than Democrats, that is silly and untrue. Together, we will fight China's human rights abuses. We will fight its cheating on trade. We will fight its autocratic, dictatorial government. And the COMPETES Act gives us the strength we need to do that today. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul). Mr. McCAUL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for yielding. Madam Speaker, the Chinese Communist Party poses a generational threat to the United States and our freedom-loving allies around the world. They are brutally oppressing their own people. They are committing genocide against ethnic and religious minorities. They are expanding their military reach and carrying out territorial aggression against their neighbors. We cannot wait any longer to address these issues. Madam Speaker, I stand before you, quite frankly, disappointed. We had a great opportunity here, and this bill that passed the House is not the bill. I am very hopeful we can get to a good place in our conference committee. Unfortunately, the Democrat leaders chose not to work with Republicans to pass a substantive, meaningful bill to counter this malign influence. Instead, [[Page H4051]] they jammed the partisan COMPETES Act through the House. The COMPETES Act, in my judgment, is a Trojan horse filled with unserious, dangerous, and wasteful provisions. {time} 1630 Those provisions include fringe, progressive priorities, like $8 billion worth of taxpayer money into an unaccountable U.N. slush fund. This U.N. slush fund has already provided at least $100 million directly to China, a country that this Congress, former Republican administration, and current Democrat administration have all agreed is committing genocide. In fact, it is worse. The Xinjiang Province--you get this money to make solar panels and batteries in the Xinjiang Province where they commit genocide itself. That is not good for America and it is certainly not good for the U.S. taxpayer. Secretary Kerry admitted before our committee that the CCP is using slave labor to make these green energy products--like solar panels and batteries--that could be used by this U.N. fund. In effect, the bill would fund their slave labor and prop up their forced abortions. We tried to stop this from happening--to stop U.S. taxpayers from funding slave labor in my motion to recommit, and shockingly, we were outright rejected by the Democrats. The motion to recommit prohibited taxpayer money going to slave labor, genocide, and the Wuhan Lab, and every Democrat voted against that measure. This is a test of our time. Madam Speaker, so I remain the eternal optimist and hopeful that this conference process will be able to rectify these glaring issues that I have outlined. We can start today by supporting this motion that will block billions of dollars going to the CCP military PLA companies and human rights abusers. Congress owes it to the American people to pass a bill that takes this threat seriously. That includes tough export controls, outbound investment screening and funding for the CHIPS for America Act, which I introduced, to give us a competitive edge, bring manufacturing to the United States to make advanced semiconductor chips and protect our national security at the same time. This is vitally important to our national security, and it keeps critical U.S. technology out of the hands of the Chinese military, like hypersonics. It ensures U.S. taxpayers are not subsidizing their genocide. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct. I hope we can all work together in a bipartisan manner on what could be the most important legislation of this Congress. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I join the ranking member in being optimistic because we are in a conference committee negotiating the America COMPETES Act, we will get this CHIPS legislation done. Proudly, I have led 29 Democrats and 29 Republicans in endorsing the CHIPS Act legislation, so it will be bipartisan. It will get done for the American people, and we will solve some of our supply chain woes. Madam Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko). Mr. TONKO. Madam Speaker, I am very proud of the efforts that have been made by the House to advance COMPETES, an act that is about investment; a bipartisan effort promoted with higher prioritization by the leadership of this House to address investment: investment in research, investment in workforce, investment in manufacturing. It is so important that we are now investing in research as the COMPETES Act requires so that we create the next generation of product line and chips. It is important to invest in that pipeline of workers that will have those precision-oriented skills in an innovation economy that requires such precision. It is important that we retrofit our manufacturing centers so as to compete and compete effectively. I am impressed by the fact that we have taken the strengths of so many committees and brought them into the forefront of COMPETES to make certain that we invest in the CHIPS for America Act. I have industries for microelectronics, and certainly the semiconductor industry that are hosted in the 20th Congressional District that I am honored to represent. They deserve and they require, more importantly, a partnership with the Federal Government. Those resources will be there with the passage of this bill as we bring together a consensus. We will invest in that $52 billion worth of investment for the chips industry, the CHIPS for America Act. We will make certain that a bill that I authored, the Micro Act, is incorporated in the context of COMPETES, and that will complement the provisions in CHIPS by making certain that we accelerate early stage microelectronics research to feed into the national semiconductor technology center. It is so important to have that cutting-edge investment so that we can lead the world in innovation, and making certain also that we promote strong global leadership by positioning the interests and the values of our United States, not China, to win on the world stage, including with strong action to hold the PRC accountable for its trade abuses which hurt U.S. workers, and for its human rights violations. The America COMPETES Act will elevate American leadership in the global arena, putting diplomacy first, strengthening our alliances, combating unfair trade practices, and standing up for our national values. The COMPETES Act ensures that American goods are made in America by American workers and boosts competition addressing supply bottlenecks, strengthening U.S. manufacturing, and lowering those kitchen table costs. This is a measure that is all-inclusive. It is the boldest, strongest statement on competitiveness for America. It is the great strength of COMPETES that I hope will carry us now into an innovation economy with the workforce prepared to go, a research investment that gives us the vision and tethers that vision into future product lines and chips development, and that will allow for us to strengthen our manufacturing partnership. They require that assistance and they require our partnership. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot). Mr. CHABOT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to strongly support Mr. Lucas' motion to instruct conferees on the American COMPETES Act. The House-passed version of the bill should really have been called-- as a number of my colleagues have mentioned--the American concedes act. Democratic leadership cobbled this legislation together from mostly partisan bills without Republican support, in stark contrast to what our colleagues in the Senate did. As ranking member of the Asia-Pacific Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over China, I am deeply disappointed by the partisan nature and the substance, in many ways, of this House-passed bill. Competing with China should not be a partisan issue. On every front, the Chinese Communist Party is aggressively challenging the free world and our belief that open societies and free markets, and, yes, rule of law are the way to a prosperous and equitable civilization. After decades of inaction, it is time to reevaluate our basic approach toward engagement with China. The Democrats' bill doesn't do that. When Republicans attempted to amend the bill to make it better, the Democrats rejected virtually every one of those attempts. I would like to highlight two particularly concerning omissions from the House bill. First, we should have adopted provisions to modernize and strengthen our relationship with Taiwan which, by the way, got bipartisan support in the Senate. Second, we should also have used the opportunity to advance strong export control policies to ensure that our critical technologies do not advance the PRC's own drive for technological supremacy. Moving forward, as we seek to bridge the gap between the House and Senate bills, let's have these three priorities in mind. First, the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, is an adversary. No amount of cajoling or diplomacy is going to get them to drop their hegemonic ambitions. They want to be the top dog. [[Page H4052]] Second, the legislation must not include irrelevant pet projects like money for the U.N. climate slush fund. Third, at a bare minimum, we must ensure that any new technology or grant funding doesn't end up going to China. A bill aimed at competing with the Chinese Communist Party that simultaneously funds their military modernization simply makes no sense. Mr. Lucas' motion to instruct would go a long way towards making sure that American tax dollars don't go to fund the Chinese Communist Party. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support it. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee). Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan for her leadership, along with my colleague from Texas, Congresswoman Johnson, who chairs the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and the many, many committees that have worked on the COMPETES Act. As an alum of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee and a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I could not be more ecstatic for America, for Houstonians, for Texans. To really take the words of President Biden that were said to us in his comment on the COMPETES Act: It is transformational investment in our industrial base as well as research and development. It will help drive not only the American economy, but the global economy. It will, in fact, bring more manufacturing jobs back, and, yes, we will use the terminology, it will reimagine not only the Midwest, but it will reimagine the Southwest, the East, the West, the North, and the South. It will reimagine opportunities for young people. And the chips we have been waiting for, as indicated by the gentlewoman from Michigan, I know we will have the opportunity to really join in in a bipartisan way in conference for something that nobody disagrees with. In addition, this ugly thing called the supply chain that for a moment clogged the system, raised the prices, which still have not been stabilized, but we will have the opportunity to address that question as well by unclogging the seaways, by investing with the infrastructure bill in ports, and getting products where they need to go. Let me also suggest that we will be able to build other companies, smaller companies. Small businesses will improve or be able to result in more investment. At the same time, this bipartisan legislation will create opportunities for the next generation and the next generation. I hope as well that minority businesses, minority scientists, historically Black colleges will have the opportunity to be part of the COMPETES Act, which I know that they will. This idea that we have a distance between us as Republicans and Democrats has to be closed. This is an American bill. This is a bill to say to China: We are not going to take, sitting down, the unfair competition that you exert on many of the inventions that actually are made right here in the United States. Take the age-old internet and what China has done in many instances. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the COMPETES Act and it going to conference, and at the same time recognize that any issue dealing with China and the chips dealing with semiconductors will be addressed in conference, and, as well, we will get the job done. It is transformational and we can do no less than to invest in the great mountain of research and development in this Nation. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the COMPETES Act ultimately, and to work with conference as we go forward on this legislation. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith). Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees. I welcome this opportunity to reconcile the differences between the House and the Senate bills. This is an opportunity to finally hold China accountable, and I hope we get to a strong work product that we can be proud of. The House version of this bill, the COMPETES Act, truly is a nonstarter for House Republicans--no surprise--for both sides of the Senate as well, and actually for the American people--and that is my concern. While it was messaged as legislation to combat the Chinese Communist Party's predatory practices, the trade provisions in the House bill did little to level the playing field with China, adding hurdles that would hurt American consumers and small businesses. Instead, that bill actually discourages work during a workforce shortage by expanding and delinking the trade adjustment assistance from new trade opportunities. It adds red tape and narrows eligibility of trade programs like GSP and MTB. These are relief measures that we know help small businesses and manufacturers in the marketplace. The bill also exacerbates our supply chain crisis by making unvetted changes to de minimus; and it also fails to address the administration's lackluster effort to compete with China in the Indo- Pacific and around the world. The Senate's bipartisan approach, while imperfect, addresses China, promotes small businesses of all sizes across our country, and more than anything, it empowers American consumers right here at home. {time} 1645 It offers a clean renewal of MTB, retroactively extends GSP, mandates a section 301 exclusion process with retroactivity, and does not include the Green New Deal wish list. Let's work together on a final product that actually holds China accountable. Madam Speaker, I reiterate my support and certainly urge my colleagues to do the same. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am prepared to close, and I believe I have the right to close, so I continue to reserve the balance of my time. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close. We have heard today, Madam Speaker, a commitment to act, a commitment to move into a conference, a commitment to get the America COMPETES Act done for the United States, CHIPS Act funding, investment in scientific research, and more. This is an exciting moment in this Chamber. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I thank my colleagues for their words of support for this motion. As I said when we began this debate, we have a once-in-a-generation chance to strengthen U.S. science and technology and secure a place in the global economy. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has passed strategic, bipartisan legislation to do just that. Our bills double our investment in critical research and technology. They are a strong commitment to America's technological development. There is no question that our bills should be the core of the final conferenced legislation. We can't afford to pollute these critical policies with partisan poison pills and throw away our deliberate, strategic approach for long-term growth in favor of the one-time spending spree in the COMPETES Act. There is a difference between empty spending and making an investment. The COMPETES Act is empty, unfocused spending. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has passed targeted, bipartisan investments in research and technology. They will pay off in more jobs, a stronger economy, and a more secure homeland. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support that approach and to support guardrails to ensure that our taxpayer investments aren't going to Communist leadership in China. That is why this motion is so important. This isn't a partisan issue. It has been part of Senator Schumer's legislative text on competitiveness from day one. That is because this is basic, commonsense policy, and I can't imagine that any of our constituents would disagree with that. Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to pass this motion, and I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired. Without objection, the previous question is ordered. [[Page H4053]] There was no objection. The question is on the motion to instruct. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to instruct will be followed by 5-minute votes on: The motion to recommit on H.R. 6833; and Passage of H.R. 6833, if ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 351, nays 74, not voting 6, as follows: [Roll No. 100] YEAS--351 Adams Aderholt Aguilar Allen Allred Amodei Arrington Auchincloss Axne Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Beatty Bentz Bera Bergman Beyer Bice (OK) Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NC) Boebert Bost Bourdeaux Boyle, Brendan F. Brooks Brown (OH) Brownley Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Calvert Cammack Carbajal Cardenas Carey Carl Carson Carter (GA) Carter (LA) Carter (TX) Cartwright Case Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Cawthorn Chabot Cherfilus-McCormick Cleaver Cline Cloud Clyburn Clyde Cole Comer Connolly Cooper Costa Courtney Craig Crawford Crenshaw Crist Crow Cuellar Curtis Davids (KS) Davidson Davis, Rodney Dean DeFazio DeLauro DelBene Delgado Demings DeSaulnier DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Doggett Donalds Doyle, Michael F. Duncan Dunn Ellzey Emmer Eshoo Estes Fallon Feenstra Ferguson Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fletcher Foster Foxx Frankel, Lois Franklin, C. Scott Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Gallego Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gibbs Gimenez Gohmert Golden Gonzales, Tony Gonzalez (OH) Gonzalez, Vicente Good (VA) Gooden (TX) Gosar Gottheimer Granger Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Greene (GA) Griffith Grijalva Grothman Guest Guthrie Harder (CA) Harris Harshbarger Hayes Hern Herrell Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Higgins (NY) Hill Himes Hinson Hollingsworth Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Hudson Huizenga Issa Jackson Jackson Lee Jacobs (CA) Jacobs (NY) Jayapal Johnson (GA) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jones Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Kahele Kaptur Katko Keating Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim (CA) Kim (NJ) Kinzinger Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster Kustoff LaHood LaMalfa Lamb Lamborn Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latta LaTurner Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Lesko Letlow Levin (CA) Lofgren Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Luria Lynch Mace Malinowski Malliotakis Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Mann Manning Massie Mast McCarthy McCaul McClain McClintock McCollum McEachin McHenry McKinley McNerney Meijer Meuser Miller (IL) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Mooney Moore (AL) Moore (UT) Moore (WI) Morelle Moulton Mrvan Mullin Murphy (FL) Murphy (NC) Neguse Nehls Newhouse Norcross Norman O'Halleran Obernolte Owens Palazzo Pallone Palmer Panetta Pappas Pascrell Pence Perlmutter Perry Peters Pfluger Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Posey Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Reed Reschenthaler Rice (NY) Rice (SC) Rodgers (WA) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rosendale Ross Rouzer Roy Ruiz Ruppersberger Rutherford Ryan Salazar Scalise Scanlon Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Schweikert Scott, Austin Sessions Sewell Sherman Sherrill Simpson Sires Slotkin Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Soto Spanberger Spartz Stansbury Stanton Stauber Steel Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Strickland Swalwell Taylor Tenney Thompson (CA) Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Titus Tonko Torres (CA) Turner Underwood Upton Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Veasey Vela Wagner Walberg Walorski Waltz Wasserman Schultz Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westerman Wexton Wild Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Zeldin NAYS--74 Barragan Bass Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Bowman Brown (MD) Bush Butterfield Casten Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cohen Correa Davis, Danny K. DeGette Dingell Escobar Espaillat Evans Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gomez Green, Al (TX) Huffman Jeffries Johnson (TX) Kelly (IL) Kind Lee (CA) Levin (MI) Lieu Lowenthal Matsui McBath McGovern Meeks Meng Mfume Nadler Napolitano Neal Newman Ocasio-Cortez Omar Payne Pressley Roybal-Allard Rush Sanchez Sarbanes Schakowsky Scott (VA) Scott, David Smith (WA) Speier Stevens Suozzi Takano Thompson (MS) Tlaib Torres (NY) Trahan Trone Vargas Velazquez Waters Watson Coleman Williams (GA) Wilson (FL) Yarmuth NOT VOTING--6 Armstrong Brady Bustos Cheney Fortenberry Hartzler {time} 1724 Mses. CHU, LEE of California, Mr. TRONE, Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts, Messrs. VARGAS, COHEN, Mrs. McBATH, Messrs. MFUME, GREEN of Texas, SMITH of Washington, LIEU, TAKANO, BROWN of Maryland, Mrs. TRAHAN, Messrs. MEEKS, EVANS, THOMPSON of Mississippi, Ms. BARRAGAN, Mrs. DINGELL, Mses. BLUNT ROCHESTER, and PRESSLEY changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.'' Messrs. MOORE of Alabama, SCHNEIDER, CARDENAS, Mses. SEWELL, UNDERWOOD, Mr. RASKIN, Ms. KAPTUR, and Mr. JONES changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So the motion to instruct was agreed to. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress Baird (Walorski) Bilirakis (Fleischmann) Bowman (Meng) Brooks (Green (TN)) Cawthorn (Nehls) Comer (Fleischmann) Crist (Wasserman Schultz) Cuellar (Pappas) Curtis (Stewart) DeGette (Blunt Rochester) Espaillat (Correa) Harder (CA) (Gomez) Jayapal (Gomez) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Joyce (OH) (Garbarino) Kahele (Takano) Kind (Beyer) Kinzinger (Meijer) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) Krishnamoorthi (Beyer) LaMalfa (Palazzo) Lawson (FL) (Wasserman Schultz) Mace (Rice (SC)) Manning (Beyer) McClain (Fitzgerald) Mrvan (Takano) Newman (Beyer) Owens (Stewart) Roybal-Allard (Wasserman Schultz) Salazar (Gimenez) Sanchez (Gomez) Scott, David (Jeffries) Sessions (Babin) Sires (Pallone) Speier (Scanlon) Steel (Obernolte) Strickland (Takano) Suozzi (Beyer) Taylor (Carter (TX)) Thompson (MS) (Evans) Trone (Beyer) Waltz (Mast) Wilson (FL) (Jeffries) Wilson (SC) (Rice (SC)) Yarmuth (Beyer) ____________________