79–006 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 111–128 

INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 

COOPERATION ACT OF 2009 

MAY 21, 2009.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee, from the Committee on Science and 

Technology, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 1736] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 1736) to provide for the establishment of a 

committee to identify and coordinate international science and 

technology cooperation that can strengthen the domestic science 

and technology enterprise and support United States foreign policy 

goals, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 

an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Bill ................................................................................................................ 2 

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 2 

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 2 

IV. Hearing Summary ....................................................................................... 3 

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 5 

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 6 

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (by Title and Section) .................................. 6 

VIII. Committee Views ........................................................................................ 6 

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 7 

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 7 

XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4 ........................................................... 7 

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 7 

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 7 

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 8 

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 8 

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 8 

XVII. Earmark Identification ............................................................................... 8 

XVIII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 8 

XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 8 

XX. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 8 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
2 

XXI. Exchange of Committee Correspondence .................................................. 9 

XXII. Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markup ................................................ 11 

XXIII. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup ............................................. 30 

I. BILL

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘International Science and Technology Cooperation 

Act of 2009’’. 

SEC. 2. COORDINATION OF INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIPS. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 

shall establish a committee under the National Science and Technology Council with 

the responsibility to identify and coordinate international science and technology cooperation that can strengthen the United States science and technology enterprise, 

improve economic and national security, and support United States foreign policy 

goals. 

(b) COMMITTEE LEADERSHIP.—The committee established under subsection (a) 

shall be co-chaired by senior level officials from the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy and the Department of State. 

(c) RESPONSIBILITIES.—The committee established under subsection (a) shall— 

(1) plan and coordinate interagency international science and technology cooperative research and training activities and partnerships supported or managed 

by Federal agencies and work with other National Science and Technology 

Council committees to help plan and coordinate the international component of 

national science and technology priorities; 

(2) establish Federal priorities and policies for aligning, as appropriate, international science and technology cooperative research and training activities and 

partnerships supported or managed by Federal agencies with the foreign policy 

goals of the United States; 

(3) identify opportunities for new international science and technology cooperative research and training partnerships that advance both the science and 

technology and the foreign policy priorities of the United States; 

(4) in carrying out paragraph (3), solicit input and recommendations from 

non-Federal science and technology stakeholders, including universities, scientific and professional societies, industry, and relevant organizations and institutions, through workshops and other appropriate venues; 

(5) work with international science and technology counterparts, both nongovernmental and governmental (in coordination with the Department of State), 

to establish and maintain international science and technology cooperative research and training partnerships, as identified under paragraph (3); and 

(6) address broad issues that influence the ability of United States scientists 

and engineers to collaborate with foreign counterparts, including barriers to collaboration and access to scientific information. 

(d) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—The Director of the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy shall transmit a report annually to Congress at the time of the President’s 

budget request containing a description of the priorities and policies established 

under subsection (c)(2), the ongoing and new partnerships established in the previous fiscal year, and how stakeholder input, as required under subsection (c)(4), 

was received. 

II. PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of this bill is to provide for the establishment of a 

committee under the National Science and Technology Council to 

identify and coordinate international science and technology research and training partnerships that can strengthen the U.S. 

science and technology enterprise, improve economic and national 

security, and support U.S. foreign policy goals. 

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

In 2008, the National Science Board (NSB) issued a report, 

‘‘International Science and Engineering Partnerships: A Priority for 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
3 

U.S. Foreign Policy and our Nation’s Innovation Agenda,’’ in which 

the Board made a series of recommendations for increased coherence and coordination of federally sponsored international science 

and engineering activities that serve both a domestic mission and 

a foreign policy mission. 

In particular, the NSB called on the White House Office of 

Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to take a more active and 

prominent role both in setting federal priorities for international 

science and engineering cooperation and in coordinating efforts 

across agencies, including by reestablishing a Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology (CISET) under the 

National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). Such a Committee existed in the 1990’s under the Clinton Administration. 

CISET’s mandate was not defined within any particular area of 

science and technology (S&T). Rather, CISET’s role was to review 

the wide range of bilateral and multilateral international scientific 

programs carried out by the technical agencies in the U.S. Government, and to identify opportunities for international cooperation 

and interagency coordination in response to new needs and opportunities. In particular, CISET was charged to: identify, and coordinate international cooperation that can strengthen the domestic 

S&T enterprise and promote U.S. economic competitiveness and 

national security; utilize American leadership in S&T to address 

global issues and to support the post-Cold War tenets of U.S. foreign policy—promoting democracy, maintaining peace, and fostering economic growth and sustainable development; and coordinate the international aspects of federal R&D funding across the 

Federal agencies. 

The Bush Administration OSTP disbanded CISET in 2001. Dr. 

Marburger, former Director of OSTP, explained in his testimony 

before the Research and Science Education Subcommittee in 2008 

that his approach to coordinating international S&T partnerships 

was to draw together agencies in meetings focused on specific 

science topics such as nanotechnology or genomics, or on specific 

countries such as China or Brazil. The former meetings occur naturally in the NSTC context, the latter occur on the schedule of highlevel bilateral commission meetings to review progress under the 

S&T agreements. But many other experts, including all of the witnesses at the March 24, 2009 hearing before the Subcommittee, 

argue that significant opportunities are missed by this ad hoc approach to international S&T cooperation, especially opportunities 

at the intersection of science and diplomacy. The witnesses at the 

March 2009 hearing agreed that a reconstituted CISET could serve 

an important role in ensuring that the international component of 

the national R&D agenda is sufficiently addressed and in helping 

to bring S&T to bear on our foreign policy goals. 

IV. HEARING SUMMARY

During the 110th Congress, the Subcommittee on Research and 

Science Education of the House Committee on Science and Technology held three hearings relevant to H.R. 1736. 

On February 7, 2008, the Honorable Brian Baird presiding, the 

Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held a hearing 

to review the status of visas and other policies governing the entry 

of foreign students into the United States. The witnesses and MemVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:43 May 23, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR128.XXX HR128

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
4 

bers also examined the ongoing impediments to implementation of 

the foreign student and scholar visa policies, as well as the impact 

that such impediments may be having on partnerships between 

U.S. and foreign scientists and on the U.S. scientific enterprise. In 

addition, the Subcommittee explored recommendations for changes 

or improvements to existing policy. There were four witnesses: (1) 

Mr. Stephen A. ‘‘Tony’’ Edson, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Visa 

Services, Bureau of Consular Affairs, Department of State; (2) Dr. 

Harvey V. Fineberg, President, Institute of Medicine, The National 

Academies; (3) Dr. Allan E. Goodman, President and CEO, Institute of International Education; and (4) Ms. Catheryn Cotten, Director, International Office, Duke University. 

On Wednesday, April 2, 2008, the Honorable Brian Baird presiding, the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held 

a hearing to examine the mechanisms by which federal priorities 

are set and inter-agency coordination is achieved for international 

science and technology cooperation, and to explore the diplomatic 

benefits of such cooperation. In particular, witnesses discussed the 

role of OSTP as well as the roles of the individual agencies represented. There were five witnesses: (1) Dr. John H. Marburger III, 

Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy; (2) Dr. Arden L. 

Bement, Jr., Director, National Science Foundation; (3) Dr. Nina V. 

Fedoroff, Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State; 

(4) Mr. Jeff Miotke, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 

Science, Space and Health, Bureau of Oceans and International 

Environmental and Scientific Affairs; and (5) Mr. Michael F. 

O’Brien, Assistant Administrator for External Relations, National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

On Tuesday, July 15, 2008, the Honorable Brian Baird presiding, 

the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held a hearing to examine the role of U.S. non-governmental organizations and 

universities in international science and technology cooperation, in 

particular relative to the role of the Federal government, and to explore the diplomatic benefits of such cooperation. In addition, the 

witnesses made recommendations for how the U.S. government 

could strengthen the role of science in foreign policy. There were 

four witnesses: (1) Dr. Alan Leshner, Chief Executive Officer, 

American Association for the Advancement of Science; (2) Dr. Michael Clegg, Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Sciences; (3) 

Dr. William Wulf, Member of the Board of Directors, Civilian Research and Development Foundation; and (4) Dr. James Calvin, Interim Vice President for Research, Texas A&M University. 

During the 111th Congress, the Subcommittee on Research and 

Science Education of the House Committee on Science and Technology held one hearing relevant to H.R. 1736. 

On Tuesday, March 24, 2009, the Honorable Daniel Lipinski presiding, the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education held 

a hearing to receive testimony on a draft legislative proposal to 

recreate a committee under the National Science and Technology 

Council for the coordination and planning of international science 

and technology activities and partnerships between and among 

Federal research agencies and the Department of State. Witnesses 

were very supportive of the draft legislation and made some specific recommendations for improving it further. There were four 

witnesses: (1) Dr. Jon Strauss, Chairman of the National Science 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
5 

Board Task Force on International Science; (2) Dr. Norman 

Neureiter, Director of the Center for Science, Technology and Security Policy at the American Association for the Advancement of 

Science; (3) Mr. Anthony ‘‘Bud’’ Rock, Vice President for Global Engagement at Arizona State University; and (4) Dr. Gerald Hane, 

Managing Director of Q-Paradigm. 

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

As summarized in Section IV of this report, the Subcommittee on 

Research and Science Education heard testimony in the 110th Congress relevant to the activities authorized in H.R. 1736 at hearings 

held on February 6, April 2 and July 15, 2008; the Subcommittee 

on Research and Science Education heard testimony in the 111th 

Congress relevant to the activities authorized in H.R. 1736 at a 

hearing held on March 24, 2009. 

On March 26, 2009, Representative Brian Baird of the Committee on Science and Technology, for himself and Representatives 

Ehlers, Lipinski, Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, and Carnahan, 

introduced H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology 

Cooperation Act of 2009, to provide for the establishment of a committee to identify and coordinate international science and technology cooperation that can strengthen the domestic science and 

technology enterprise and support United States foreign policy 

goals. 

The Subcommittee on Research and Science Education met to 

consider H.R. 1736 on Tuesday, March 31, 2009 and considered the 

following amendments to the bill: 

1. Mr. Baird offered an amendment to ensure that the committee 

established under H.R. 1736 work with other NSTC committees to 

help plan and coordinate the international component of national 

S&T priorities; to clarify that the committee should work with both 

non-governmental and governmental foreign counterparts, in coordination with the Department of State; and to clarify and remove 

redundancies in the reporting requirement for the committee. The 

amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. 

2. Mr. Griffith offered an amendment to add the words ‘‘improve 

economic and national security’’ to the description of the potential 

benefits of the committee’s work. The amendment was agreed to by 

a voice vote. 

3. Mr. Carnahan offered an amendment to require that the committee be co-chaired by senior officials from the Department of 

State and OSTP, and to make sure the committee addresses broad 

issues that influence the ability of U.S. scientists to collaborate 

with foreign counterparts, including barriers to collaboration. The 

amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. 

4. Mr. Lipinski offered an amendment to require the committee 

to seek input and recommendations from non-Federal S&T stakeholders through workshops and other appropriate venues. The 

amendment was agreed to by a voice vote. 

Mr. Lipinski moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the 

bill, H.R. 1736, as amended, to the full Committee. The motion was 

agreed to by a voice vote. 

The full Committee on Science and Technology met to consider 

H.R. 1736, as amended in Subcommittee, on Wednesday, April 29, 

2009. No further amendments were offered. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
6 

Mr. Gordon moved that the Committee favorably report the bill, 

H.R. 1736, as amended, to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill, as amended, do pass. The motion was agreed to by 

a voice vote. 

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

H.R. 1736 would require the establishment of a committee under 

the National Science and Technology Council with the responsibility to identify and coordinate international science and technology cooperation that can strengthen the U.S. S&T enterprise, 

improve economic and national security, and support U.S. foreign 

policy goals. Furthermore, the bill requires that the committee report to Congress annually on its activities. 

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS (BY TITLE AND SECTION)

Sec. 1. Short title—The International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009 

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Science and Technology Partnerships—Establishes a committee under the National Science 

and Technology Council to— 

• Plan and coordinate international S&T research and education activities and partnerships across the Federal agencies 

and work with other NSTC committees to help plan the international component of national S&T priorities; 

• Establish priorities and policies for aligning, as appropriate, international S&T partnerships with the foreign policy 

goals of the United States; 

• Identify opportunities for new international S&T partnerships that advance both the science and technology and the 

foreign policy priorities of the United States. 

• Solicit input from non-federal S&T stakeholders; 

• Work with foreign counterparts (in coordination with the 

Department of State) to establish and maintain S&T partnerships; and 

• Address broad issues that influence the ability of U.S. scientists to collaborate with foreign counterparts, including barriers to collaboration. 

Requires that the committee be co-chaired by senior officials from 

OSTP and the Department of State. 

Finally, requires an annual report to Congress with a description 

of activities carried out in the previous fiscal year and of how 

stakeholder input was received. 

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

The Committee intends that the NSTC committee, in setting priorities and carrying out its charge, will take into account not just 

Federal offices and programs that support international S&T partnerships, but also the role that non-governmental organizations 

with expertise in developing and maintaining international S&T 

partnerships, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Academies of Science, the Civilian 

Research and Development Foundation, and the U.S. Israel Science 

and Technology Foundation, might play in helping the agencies 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
7 

achieve their goals. The Committee also intends for the NSTC committee to take full advantage of the wealth of S&T expertise at 

U.S. universities and other non-governmental research institutions 

rather than relying solely on Federal agencies. 

IX. COST ESTIMATE

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on 

Science and Technology prior to the filing of this report and is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, 

clause 3(c)(3). 

H.R. 1736 does not contain new budget authority, credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. H.R. 1736 does not 

authorize additional discretionary funding. 

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

H.R. 1736—International Science and Technology Cooperation Act 

of 2009 

H.R. 1736 would require the Office of Science and Technology 

Policy (OSTP) to create a new committee under the National 

Science and Technology Council. The committee would facilitate 

international research and training activities, primarily those to 

aid U.S. domestic science and technology and support U.S. foreign 

policy goals. Senior-level officials from the OSTP and Department 

of State would co-chair the committee. 

Based on information from the OSTP, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1736 would cost about $3 million annually, subject 

to the availability of appropriated funds. That amount includes the 

costs to coordinate activities, provide reports, and hire new staff for 

the OSTP. The bill would have no effect on direct spending or revenues. 

The legislation contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 

would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew Pickford. The 

estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

H.R. 1736 contains no unfunded mandates. 

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The oversight findings and recommendations of the Committee 

on Science and Technology are reflected in the body of this report. 

XIII. STATEMENT ON GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of H.R. 

1736 are to strengthen interagency coordination of international 

science and technology programs and activities that will strengthen 

the U.S. science and technology enterprise, improve economic and 

national security, and support U.S. foreign policy goals. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
8 

XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 

grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1736. 

XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 1736 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of 

any advisory committee. 

XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 1736 does not relate to the terms 

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1). 

XVII. EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

H.R. 1736 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), 

or 9(f) of Rule XXI. 

XVIII. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or tribal law. 

XIX. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

None. 

XX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On April 29, 2009, the Committee on Science and Technology favorably reported the bill, H.R. 1736, as amended, by voice vote to 

the House with the recommendation that the bill, as amended, do 

pass. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
9 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 11 here HR128.001
10 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 12 here HR128.002
11 

XXII: PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND 

SCIENCE EDUCATION ON H.R. 1736, THE 

INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION ACT OF 2009 

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:08 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Daniel Lipinski 

[Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee will come to 

order. Pursuant to notice, the Subcommittee on Research and 

Science Education meets to consider the following measures, H.R. 

1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009, and H.R. 

1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 

2009. 

We will now proceed with the markup. This afternoon, the Subcommittee will consider H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009, and H.R. 1736, the International Science and 

Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. 

The first bill we will consider, H.R. 1709, will improve the coordination of STEM education programs at the federal agencies, so that 

federal efforts in STEM education can be better focused and more 

effective. An area we explored in great detail in the last Congress 

was the role the Federal Government can play in improving STEM 

education. One conclusion that came up time and time again was 

that coordination and collaboration across the agencies must be improved in order to make the most of our tax dollars. H.R. 1709 establishes a mechanism to ensure that, through better planning, coordination, and evaluation, we are maximizing the impact of federally funded STEM education activities. I commend Chair Gordon 

and Mr. Hall for introducing this good bipartisan legislation. 

I also want to thank Dr. Baird for introducing H.R. 1736, the 

International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009 and 

for all of his work over the last two years that led up to this legislation. I would also like to thank Dr. Ehlers for his support, passion and work on international science cooperation and science diplomacy. We held a hearing specifically on a draft version of this 

bill last week, and the feedback from a panel of diverse experts, 

each with many decades of experience, was very positive. 

The shared conclusion was that a committee under OSTP devoted to interagency coordination of international science and technology partnerships would serve both our domestic science and 

technology agenda and our foreign policy goals. I believe that the 

new Administration gives us a tremendous opportunity and a fresh 

outlook for both science and foreign policy, and H.R. 1736 is right 

at the intersection of those two realms. I commend Chair Baird and 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
12 

Dr. Ehlers for this important and timely legislation. I thank the 

Members for their participation this morning, and I look forward 

to a productive markup. 

[The prepared statement of Chair Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIR DANIEL LIPINSKI

This morning the Subcommittee will consider H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009, and H.R.1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. 

I thank the Members for their participation. The first bill we will consider this 

morning is H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009. This legislation will improve the coordination of STEM education programs at the federal agencies, so that federal efforts in STEM education can be better focused and more effective. An area we explored in great detail in the last Congress was the role the Federal Government can play in improving STEM education. One conclusion that came 

up time and time again, was that coordination and collaboration across the agencies 

must be improved in order to make the most of our tax dollars. H.R. 1709 establishes a mechanism to ensure that, through better planning, coordination, and evaluation, we are maximizing the impact of federally funded STEM education activities. I commend Chairman Gordon and Mr. Hall for introducing this good bipartisan 

legislation. 

The second bill we will consider this morning is this morning is H.R. 1736, the 

International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. I want to thank Dr. 

Baird for introducing this bill and for all of his work over the last two years that 

led up to this legislation. I would also like to thank Dr. Ehlers for his support, passion and work on international science cooperation and science diplomacy. We held 

a hearing specifically on a draft version of this bill last week and the feedback from 

a panel of diverse experts, each with many decades of experience, was very positive. 

The shared conclusion was that a committee under OSTP devoted to interagency coordination of international science and technology partnerships would serve both 

our domestic S&T agenda and our foreign policy goals. I believe that the new Administration gives us a tremendous opportunity and a fresh outlook for both science 

and foreign policy, and H.R. 1736 is right at the intersection of those two realms. 

I commend Chairman Baird and Dr. Ehlers for this important and timely legislation, and I look forward to a productive markup. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Now, I recognize Dr. Ehlers to present his opening remarks. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am pleased we have the 

opportunity to markup these two important pieces of legislation 

today in the Research and Science Education Subcommittee, and I 

thank you for scheduling these bills. It is good to see that we are 

following regular order and are giving these matters the appropriate amount of attention they deserve at all levels of the Committee process. 

I will reserve a majority of my comments on each individual bill 

until the appropriate time but will open by simply stating that I 

am pleased to be an original co-sponsor of both H.R. 1709 and H.R. 

1736, and I look forward to a productive discussion of both measures this afternoon. 

With that, I yield back the remainder of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that we have the opportunity to markup these two 

important pieces of legislation today in the Research and Science Education Subcommittee, and I thank you for scheduling it this afternoon. It is good to see that 

we are following regular order and are giving these matters the appropriate amount 

of attention they deserve at all levels of the Committee process. 

I will reserve a majority of my comments on each individual bill until the appropriate time, but will open by simply stating that I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of both H.R. 1709 and H.R. 1736 and look forward to a productive discussion of both measures. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
13 

I yield back the remainder of my time. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. Members may now place 

statements in the record at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Carnahan follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RUSS CARNAHAN

Mr. Chairman, thank you for hosting today’s markup of H.R. 1709, the STEM 

Education Coordination Act of 2009, and H.R. 1736, the International Science and 

Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. 

As a Member of both the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education and 

the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, I am extremely interested in the coordination of international science and technology diplomacy. The United States has a central role in science diplomacy, building more positive relationships with other countries through science. We also understand that the U.S. can better affect national 

security and economic interests by helping to build and partner with technological 

capacity in other countries. 

Today, I offer an amendment to H.R. 1736 which will add a requirement that the 

committee to coordinate international science and technology be co-chaired by senior 

level officials from the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Department 

of State. Also, my amendment would add language to H.R. 1736 that would require 

the committee to address broad issues that influence the ability of the U.S. scientists and engineers to collaborate with foreign counterparts, including barriers to 

collaboration and access to scientific information. 

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to H.R. 1736 and I would like 

to thank the Chairman for the ability to offer the amendment. 

Chair LIPINSKI. We will now consider H.R. 1736, International 

Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. 

I recognize Dr. Baird to talk about his bill. 

Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Chair, I will be brief as we have a vote on. We 

have had a number of hearings on this topic. Essentially, science 

is one of our key diplomatic tools. This legislation is designed to 

move that forward. Rather than reiterate all that it contains, because we had a good hearing on it just a few days ago, I will encourage its passage. I have an amendment which I will address 

very briefly, but in the interest of passing it, I will conclude at this 

point. Thank you. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Baird. Does anyone else wish to 

be recognized? Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chair, just very briefly because indeed we do have a vote on, and I think we can speedily conclude 

the business before us, but I just wanted to say the distinguished 

witnesses we heard from last week on this topic reiterated what we 

already know, that the United States has much to gain by having 

in place a well-organized, focused, and sustainable commitment to 

encourage and support international science and technology cooperation, and with your permission I will enter the remainder of 

the statement in the record and yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

The distinguished witnesses we heard from last week on this topic reiterated 

what we already know: that the United States has much to gain by having in place 

a well-organized, focused and sustainable commitment to encourage and support 

international science and technology cooperation. 

Not only do these international science and technology partnerships help to spur 

U.S. innovation and economic competitiveness, foster collaborative solutions to global challenges, and give U.S. scientists access to facilities and equipment all over the 

world, but they also serve an important diplomatic role. 

Re-establishing a Committee under the National Science and Technology Council 

of the Office of Science and Technology Policy is a step in the right direction to enVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:43 May 23, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR128.XXX HR128

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
14 

sure that these international partnerships continue in ways that are of benefit to 

the Nation. It is my understanding that we plan to use another Committee’s comprehensive bill as the vehicle to advance this measure. I encourage you, Mr. Chairman, that as we move forward, we proceed carefully, making sure that we preserve 

the jurisdiction of the Science and Technology Committee on this matter. 

I look forward to the discussion on the pending amendments and to working with 

you, Mr. Chairman, on ways to continue improving the bill as we move to the Full 

Committee. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. We are going to move 

and see what we can get done before we move down to the Floor 

to vote, so I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as 

read and open to amendment at any point and that the Members 

proceed with the amendments in the order of the roster. Without 

objection, so ordered. 

The first amendment on the roster is a manager’s amendment 

authored by the gentleman from Washington, 

Dr. Baird. Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Mr. BAIRD. I am, sir. 

Chair LIPINSKI. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1736, amendment number 012 

offered by Mr. Baird of Washington. 

Chair LIPINSKI. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the gentleman 

for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Mr. BAIRD. Thank you, Mr. Chair. As mentioned a moment ago, 

we had a panel of distinguished witnesses last week. I thought 

they offered some very useful and constructive suggestions, and 

working on a bipartisan basis and with staff we have offered some 

amendments, some of which are minor, wording changes, others of 

which are substantive matters like recommending that the Committee proposed be co-chaired by someone from U.S. AID or rather 

from the State Department and from OSTP. I think that is a good 

recommendation and similar measures as that are included in this. 

And with that I will recommend the passage and yield back my 

time. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Chair, I simply want to say that I agree with 

Dr. Baird’s amendment, and I believe we should adopt them. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

I thank Dr. Baird for his thoughtful amendments to this bill. I think it is particularly important that other NSTC Committees be consulted when it comes to international coordination planning. Likewise, I’m pleased to see that he is clarifying 

that international counterparts can be either governmental or non-governmental 

and that he is removing the inventory requirement clauses from the underlying 

measure. I believe these changes strengthen the bill, and I support the adoption of 

this amendment. 

With that, I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. Any further discussion on 

the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in 

favor say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it, and the 

amendment is agreed to. 

The second amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 

by a gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Griffith. Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chair. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
15 

Chair LIPINSKI. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1736, amendment number 005, 

offered by Mr. Griffith of Alabama. 

Chair LIPINSKI. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the gentleman 

for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and Congressman Baird, 

we appreciate the bill, and Ranking Member Ehlers, we appreciate 

your being here and being supportive. 

As we know, research and science and education is absolutely at 

the top of our list. We recognize that we are competing with China, 

India, and other countries in a race for the top as far as scientific 

education is concerned. This legislation, the International Science 

and Technology Cooperation Act, will work to reaffirm our international cooperation with other countries. We in the scientific community recognize that both negative and positive information being 

shared helps the entire scientific world. I support the creation of 

a Committee to oversee international science and technology cooperation. However, we must clearly define the role of this Committee which is why I am offering my amendment. 

My amendment will strike ‘‘domestic’’ from page 2 line 8 and insert ‘‘United States’’ and also will strike the word ‘‘enterprise’’ from 

page 2, line 8, and insert ‘‘enterprise, improve economic and national security.’’ I believe these are important changes in this bill 

as we know how closely economic security and national security are 

linked. I hope other Members understand the importance of these 

changes, and I ask for your support for this amendment and I yield 

back my time. 

Chair LIPINSKI. I thank the gentleman. Is there any further discussion on the amendment? Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I certainly appreciate what 

Mr. Griffith is trying to accomplish with his amendment. Economic 

and national security are certainly fundamental beneficiaries of our 

science and technology, and I would support this amendment on 

those grounds. But I have to say, the Science Committee always labors under a problem and that is that it is the youngest Committee 

of the House of Representatives. Now, that may seem strange since 

it is 50 years old, but since it was last created, it was never given 

the jurisdiction power that I think it should have. 

And so I am afraid if we include this language, we are subject 

to a referral to another committee. I would much prefer that we 

put this in abeyance and handle this amendment when we get to 

the Floor where no one can raise a jurisdictional question about it. 

I am afraid if we do it now we may lose control over this and have 

it referred to another committee. 

So my recommendation would be that we defer on this and deal 

with it later or at least get clarification from the parliamentarian 

on the jurisdictional aspects to make sure that this bill does not get 

waylaid by some other committee at some point. I would yield back. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. I understand your point, 

and 50 certainly is young, isn’t it, I would think? 

Mr. EHLERS. Especially for me. 

Chair LIPINSKI. But I respectfully don’t agree with the issue that 

you raise, but I would be very happy to work with you as we move 

to Full Committee to make sure that there are no problems on this. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
16 

So I continue to support the amendment, but we certainly can work 

to allay any concerns as we move forward on this. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor say aye, those opposed say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The third amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by 

the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Carnahan. Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Yes. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chair LIPINSKI. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1736, amendment number 009, 

offered by Mr. Carnahan of Missouri. 

Chair LIPINSKI. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the gentleman 

for five minutes to explain the amendment. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Chair, I will try to do this in one minute because we are pressed for time. This does two things, simply clarifies the leadership of the Committee established under Section (a), 

that it be co-chaired by senior-level officials from the OSTP and the 

Department of State, and secondly it adds language that addresses 

the broad issues that influence the ability of U.S. scientists and engineers to collaborate with foreign counterparts to encourage that 

kind of collaboration at the scientific level, and I would move adoption of the amendment. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Carnahan. Is there further discussion on the amendment? The Chair recognizes Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I raise the same point as I 

did before and that is the jurisdictional issue. I do support the 

amendment as I did the previous one, and I am confident that we 

can work out this problem. But I prefer that we defer adopting the 

amendment until we have it worked out. So I will be opposing this 

amendment in spite of its merits. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Well, then I will go ahead with the same statement I made on the last amendment. I don’t believe we will have 

those issues, but I am certainly happy to work with Dr. Ehlers and 

the Minority to make sure that we work those issues out as we 

move forward. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor say aye, those opposed say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The fourth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by 

the Chair. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1736, amendment number 015, 

offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois. 

Chair LIPINSKI. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize myself for five 

minutes to explain the amendment. 

I think we can get through before we have to go vote, so I will 

simply say that it is critical, and this point was raised, I raised this 

point during the hearing last week, that we have coordination. And 

we hear from, as we set up this committee, that we hear from all 

the stakeholders involved because we know research in science and 

technology does not move forward just at universities, just in industry. From all over we get a lot of good work that is done. We 

need to bring all the stakeholders together. So my amendment 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
17 

would ensure that all stakeholders in U.S. science and technology 

enterprise provide input to the process in which CISET identifies 

opportunities for new international S&T partnerships to serve both 

the domestic mission and policy goals. It also requires CISET to report to Congress on how this input was solicited, and I believe this 

is the best way to move forward and the important benefits that 

come from the universities, industry, non-profits and other scientific organizations will help strengthen our international collaboration and strengthen our own science and technology in this country. And with that, I will yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Chair Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIR DANIEL LIPINSKI

When we look at collaboration internationally, and the scientific communities in 

other countries look at us, our counterparts anticipate that they are building a relationship with the broad, U.S. scientific enterprise. When their only partners are the 

federal agencies, they are not accessing the full breadth of opportunities to collaborate with U.S. scientists. In addition, if the State Department is the only face of 

scientific partnerships, there is a political dimension that does not always favor scientific relationships and may in fact undermine efforts to use science as a diplomatic tool. 

My amendment would ensure that all stakeholders in the U.S. S&T enterprise 

can provide input to the process in which CISET identifies opportunities for new 

international S&T partnerships that serve both a domestic S&T mission and the foreign policy goals. It would also require CISET to report to Congress on how this 

input was solicited. 

By involving input from the diverse stakeholders in the U.S. scientific community, 

including universities, industry, non-profit associations and other scientific organizations, the international collaboration is strengthened and our own scientists, engineers and businesses benefit from the expertise and resources of their foreign counterparts. 

These are important benefits, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

Dr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I totally agree with you that 

non-governmental stakeholders have input crucial to the goals of 

international science cooperation, and I strongly support your 

amendment and would be pleased to vote for it. I yield back. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. Is there further discussion on the amendment? If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. 

All in favor say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it, and 

the amendment is agreed to. 

Are there any other amendments? If no, then the vote is on the 

bill, H.R. 1736 as amended. All those in favor will say aye, all 

those opposed will say no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes 

have it. 

I recognize myself to offer a motion. I move that the Subcommittee favorably report H.R. 1736 as amended to the Full Committee. Furthermore, I move that the staff be instructed to prepare 

the Subcommittee report and make necessary technical and conforming changes to the bill in accordance with the recommendations of the Subcommittee. 

The question is on the motion to report the bill favorably. Those 

in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye, opposed, no. The 

ayes have it, and the bill is favorably reported. Without objection, 

the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. Members will have 

two subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental, 

Minority, or additional views on the measure. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
18 

I want to thank Members for their attendance and very quick 

work that we made of these bills. Dr. Ehlers, you are recognized. 

Mr. EHLERS. Just one quick comment. After this performance, I 

think you are ready for NASCAR. 

Chair LIPINSKI. Thank you very much. I am all set. I want to 

thank everybody, and we have plenty of time to get down to vote. 

This concludes our Subcommittee markup. 

[Whereupon, at 2:34 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(19) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1736, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS, AMENDMENT ROSTER


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
20 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736c.eps
21 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736d.eps
22 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736e.eps
23 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF

H.R. 1736, INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

COOPERATION ACT OF 2009 

Sec. 1. Short title. 

International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009 

Sec. 2. Coordination of International Science and Technology Partnerships 

Requires the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), to establish a committee to coordinate international science and technology (S&T) cooperation that can strengthen the 

domestic S&T enterprise and support U.S. foreign policy goals. Specifically, requires 

this committee to plan and coordinate interagency international S&T activities and 

partnerships; establish policies for aligning, as appropriate, international research 

partnerships with U.S. foreign policy goals; identify opportunities for new partnerships and work with international S&T counterparts to establish those partnerships; and establish and maintain an inventory of non-classified international research partnerships of a minimum size. Finally, requires a report to Congress on 

any policies established to align research partnerships with foreign policy goals and 

publication of the required inventory. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
24 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736a.eps
25 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736b.eps
26 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736f.eps
27 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736g.eps
28 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736h.eps
29 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736i.eps
30 

XXIII: PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 1736, THE INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION ACT OF 2009 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bart Gordon 

[Chair of the Committee] presiding. 

Chair GORDON. Good morning, everyone. The Committee will 

come to order pursuant to notice. The Committee on Science and 

Technology meets to consider the following measures: H.R. 2020, 

the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2009, H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009, and H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009. 

I would like to thank Chair Lipinski and Ranking Member 

Ehlers and other Members of the Research and Science Education 

Subcommittee for their work to improve these bills at the Subcommittee level, and I think we should also in abstentia thank Jim 

Wilson. I hope that you will pass it onto him for leaving a good legacy to us, which was certainly improved with our current staff and 

Members. 

While the subject matter varies greatly, there is a common 

theme in all three of the bills before us today. They all strengthen 

an interagency coordination process to achieve the set of goals that 

no one agency can achieve on its own. In fact, this theme cuts 

across many of the priorities of the Science and Technology Committee of this Congress, beginning with the National Nanotechnology Initiative Bill that passed the House in February, to the National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 2009, that 

passed the House by a vote of 413 to 10 just last week. 

H.R. 2020, the Networking and Information Technology Research 

and Development Act of 2009, continues to improve and update a 

program that was originally created by the Committee in the High 

Performance Competing Act of 1991. The NITRD Program, as it is 

known, involves a collaboration of more than a dozen federal research and development agencies for current total federal investment of approximately $3.5 billion. This may sound like a lot, but 

the European Union is investing $7 billion over the next five years 

in cyber physical systems alone. To ensure that we make the most 

effective use of our own resources to remain a leader in these 

fields, it is critical that these many agencies come together to develop common goals and well-defined strategies for networking and 

information technology R&D. 

H.R. 2020 strengthens the interagency strategic planning process, formally authorizes the National Coordination Office that overVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:43 May 23, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR128.XXX HR128

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
31 

sees and enforces this process, and requires that a wide range of 

industry and academic stakeholders have input into the process. 

Given how rapidly this field evolves, a regular and comprehensive 

look at the NITRD Program by Congress is timely. 

And I want to thank Mr. Hall for introducing this important 

piece of legislation with me, and I urge my colleagues to support 

it. 

H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation 

Act of 2009, would create a committee under the National Science 

and Technology Council to coordinate international S&T activities 

at our federal agencies by bringing together the Department of 

State and the R&D activities to focus on the international component of national R&D priorities. A similar committee in the 1990s 

launched some important initiatives, most notably in the area of infectious diseases. 

It is critical that we don’t miss opportunities to leverage our resources against those of other nations to tackle today’s greatest 

global challenges, including energy and water, and to strengthen 

the contribution of U.S. science and technology to our national security. There is no existing entity whose primary purpose is to look 

across the Federal Government for such opportunities, and I commend Dr. Baird and Dr. Ehlers for introducing this legislation, and 

I urge my colleagues to support it. 

H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009, would 

strengthen and elevate an existing committee under NSTC to coordinate STEM education activities across the Federal Government. When half the world’s workers earn less than $2 a day, we 

cannot compete on numbers. To stay competitive we must keep 

feeding the marketplace with new ideas that lead to new U.S. companies and new highly-paying jobs. The foundation for this innovative economy is the 21st century skilled workforce. 

The Federal Government can play an important role in STEM 

education at all levels because of the richness of S&T resources at 

our science agencies. It may not surprise you to learn that our 

science agencies have little idea what other science agencies are 

funding in terms of STEM education and often don’t even communicate between offices within a single agency. This is not an acceptable situation. Mr. Hall has joined me in introducing this bill because we agree that agencies need to be sharing best practices with 

each other, evaluating their programs for effectiveness and generally making more efficient and effective use of taxpayers’ dollars. 

And I want to thank Mr. Hall and the Chair and Ranking Member of the Research and Science Education Subcommittee for introducing this bill with me, and I urge my colleagues to support it. 

These are three good bipartisan bills that strengthen interagency 

coordination and as President Obama has said in his inaugural, 

make our government smarter. I thank my colleagues and staff for 

their hard work on these bills, and I look forward to improving 

them even further with your amendments today. 

And I now recognize Mr. Hall, who will soon be recognizing his 

49th what, birthday, several times over. 

Mr. HALL. My 39th. 

Chair GORDON. Thirty-ninth. Thirty-ninth. 

Mr. HALL. Thirty-ninth reunion of my 39th birthday. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
32 

Chair GORDON. And I now recognize the spry Mr. Hall for 

his—— 

[The prepared statement of Chair Gordon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIR BART GORDON

Pursuant to notice, the Committee on Science and Technology meets to consider 

the following measures: 

• H.R. 2020, the Networking and Information Technology Research and 

Development Act of 2009; 

• H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009; 

and, 

• H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009. 

As I mentioned, the Committee will consider three good bills today. 

I would like to thank Chairman Lipinski and Ranking Member Ehlers and other 

Members of the Research and Science Education Subcommittee for their work to improve these bills at the Subcommittee level. 

While the subject matter varies greatly, there is a common theme in all three of 

the bills before us today. They all strengthen an interagency coordination process 

to achieve a set of goals that no one agency can achieve on its own. 

In fact, this theme cuts across many of the priorities of the Science and Technology Committee this Congress, beginning with the National Nanotechnology Initiative bill that passed the House in February, to the National Water Research and 

Development Initiative Act of 2009 that passed the House by a vote of 413 to 10 just 

last week. 

H.R. 2020, the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2009, continues to improve and update a program that was originally 

created by this committee in the High Performance Computing Act of 1991. 

The NITRD Program, as it is known, involves a collaboration of more than a 

dozen federal research and development agencies for a current total federal investment of approximately $3.5 billion. 

This may sound like a lot, but the European Union is investing $7 billion over 

the next five years in cyberphysical systems alone. 

To ensure that we make the most effective use of our own resources to remain 

a leader in these fields, it is critical that these many agencies come together to develop common goals and well defined strategies for networking and information 

technology R&D. 

H.R. 2020 strengthens the interagency strategic planning process, formally authorizes the National Coordination Office that oversees and enforces this process, 

and requires that a wide range of industry and academic stakeholders have input 

into the process. Given how rapidly this field evolves, a regular and comprehensive 

look at the NITRD program by Congress is timely. 

I thank Mr. Hall for introducing this important piece of legislation with me and 

I urge my colleagues to support it. 

H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009, 

would recreate a committee under the National Science and Technology Council 

(NSTC) to coordinate international S&T activities at our federal agencies. 

By bringing together the Department of State and the R&D agencies to focus on 

the international component of national R&D priorities, a similar committee in the 

1990’s launched some important initiatives, most notably in the area of infectious 

diseases. 

It is critical that we don’t miss opportunities to leverage our resources against 

those of other nations to tackle today’s greatest global challenges, including energy 

and water, and to strengthen the contribution of U.S. science and technology to our 

national security. 

There is no existing entity whose primary purpose is to look across the Federal 

Government for such opportunities. I commend Dr. Baird and Dr. Ehlers for introducing this legislation and I urge my colleagues to support it. 

H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act of 2009, would strengthen and 

elevate an existing committee under NSTC to coordinate STEM education activities 

across the Federal Government. 

When half the world’s workers earn less than $2 a day, we cannot compete on 

numbers. To stay competitive, we must keep feeding the marketplace with new 

ideas that lead to new U.S. companies and new highly paying jobs. The foundation 

for this innovation economy is the 21st century skilled workforce. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
33 

The Federal Government can play an important role in STEM education at all 

levels because of the richness of the S&T resources at our science agencies. It may 

not surprise you to learn that our science agencies have little idea what other 

science agencies are funding in terms of STEM education and often don’t even communicate between offices within a single agency. 

This is not an acceptable situation. 

Mr. Hall joined me in introducing this bill because we agree that agencies need 

to be sharing best practices with each other, evaluating their programs for effectiveness, and generally making more efficient and effective use of taxpayers’ dollars. I 

thank Mr. Hall, and the Chair and Ranking Member of the Research and Science 

Education Subcommittee for introducing this bill with me and I urge my colleagues 

to support it. 

These are three good bipartisan bills that strengthen interagency coordination to, 

as President Obama said in his inaugural, make our government ‘‘smarter.’’ I thank 

my colleagues and staff for their hard work on these bills and I look forward to improving them even further with your amendments today. 

I now recognize Mr. Hall to present his opening remarks. 

Mr. HALL. Good morning, Mr. Chair, and I thank you for several 

reasons. I don’t know why I have to thank you because it is your 

duty to schedule this markup, but I still thank you for doing it, and 

whoever wrote this for me thanks you, and that means that all of 

us on this side thank you. So—and you thank me, and we are all 

thanked today. 

It would appear that we are doing a great deal of coordinating, 

and that is true. In addition to authorizing the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development, the NITRD Program, we are also marking up legislation to improve STEM education coordination among the federal agencies and a bill to coordinate science and technology initiatives that can help foster international cooperation. 

All of these bills do exactly what this committee should be doing; 

ensuring that our government is effectively and efficiently using 

federal science and technology dollars to guarantee we stay on top 

of cutting-edge research, both domestically and internationally, 

while continuing to develop the best and brightest STEM workforce 

for our future. 

I am pleased to join you as an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2020 

and the Federal STEM Education Coordination Act, 2020 and 

1709. I also want to thank you for maintaining regular order with 

both H.R. 1709 and H.R. 1736 and giving everyone the opportunity 

to work on these at Subcommittee level first. That is the way you 

work things out. 

When it comes to STEM education in particular, I think we are 

all better served to have Dr. Ehlers involved in the beginning as 

he brings so much to the table along this line. 

I know that all—both of our staffs have worked diligently to get 

these bills to where we are today, and I look forward to a discussion and proposed amendments, and I thank you. 

I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you for scheduling this markup 

and for the bipartisan spirit in which the bills before us today have been handled. 

It would appear that we are doing a great deal of coordinating today. In addition 

to authorizing the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) program, we are also marking-up legislation to improve STEM eduVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:43 May 23, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR128.XXX HR128

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
34 

cation coordination among the federal agencies and a bill to help coordinate science 

and technology initiatives that can help foster international cooperation. 

All of these bills do exactly what this committee should be doing, ensuring that 

our government is effectively and efficiently using federal science and technology 

dollars to guarantee we stay on top of cutting edge research both domestically and 

internationally, while continuing to develop the best and brightest STEM workforce 

for our future. 

I am pleased to join you as an original co-sponsor of H.R. 2020, the NITRD Authorization Act, and H.R. 1709, the Federal STEM Education Coordination Act. I 

want to also thank you for maintaining regular order with both H.R. 1709 and H.R. 

1736 and giving everyone the opportunity to work on these at the Subcommittee 

level first. When it comes to STEM education, in particular, I think we are all better 

served to have Dr. Ehlers involved from the beginning, as he brings so much to the 

table. 

I know both of our staffs have worked diligently to get these bills to where we 

are today, and I look forward to a discussion of proposed amendments. 

Chair GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Hall. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRY E. MITCHELL

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Today we will mark up the Networking and Information Technology Research and 

Development Act, H.R. 2020, the International Science and Technology Cooperation 

Act, H.R. 1736, and the STEM Education Coordination Act, H.R. 1709. 

Last Congress, we took a critical step in encouraging students and teachers to 

focus on STEM education in the America COMPETES Act, which is now law. Ensuring that our students receive a top level STEM education is vital to grow our economy and remain competitive in the global economy. 

However, I have heard from STEM teachers in Arizona that they are struggling 

to identify federal resources to help them develop effective STEM lesson plans. 

H.R. 1709 would help STEM teachers in Arizona and nationwide by establishing 

a committee to coordinate federal programs and activities in support of STEM education through the Office of Science and Technology and Policy (OSTP). 

I encourage my colleagues to support this important legislation. 

I yield back. 

Chair GORDON. We will now consider H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009. I recognize the gentleman from Washington to describe this bill. 

Mr. BAIRD. I thank the Chair very much, and I want to thank 

my colleagues who have worked very diligently on this, particularly 

Dr. Lipinski, Dr. Ehlers, Ms. Johnson, and Mr. Carnahan, and as 

well as our committee staff. 

Mr. Chair, we have held several hearings on this. As you know, 

it is an issue I am very passionate about as are many in the 

science and the diplomatic community as well. The question really 

is how can we use our substantial scientific and technological resources to promote our diplomatic agenda and vice versa. 

Bud Rock, who is the Vice President for Global Engagement at 

Arizona State University, has been a vocal advocate of this and defines what he refers to as the four Ds of international collaboration; 

discovery, diplomacy, decision making, and development. In addition, Norm Neureiter, who has been a leader in this field, has said, 

‘‘International cooperation in S&T can be a highly-effective, softpower instrument for a constructive foreign policy.’’ 

H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation 

Act would reconstitute a committee on international science, engineering, and technology under the National Science and Technology Council. A renewed and reinvigorated CISET would facilitate the identification and building of international partnerships to 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
35 

meet any or all of these objectives by strengthening interagency coordination among the technical agencies and between the technical 

agencies and the Department of State. 

Specifically, H.R. 1736 would charge CISET with planning and 

coordinating international S&T research and training partnerships, 

identifying opportunities for new international partnerships that 

serve both domestic S&T missions and foreign policy goals, and 

working with international S&T counterparts to establish such 

partnerships. 

Finally, the bill would require an annual report to Congress on 

CISET’s activities. 

Again, I want to thank my colleagues and our outstanding staff 

for their work on this. Thank the Chair again and would urge passage. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN BAIRD

Thank you, Chairman Gordon. We have held several hearings in the last two 

years exploring various topics around international science and technology cooperation and specific mechanisms for facilitating partnerships between U.S. and foreign 

scientists and engineers. 

International S&T cooperation, in addition to strengthening our domestic scientific enterprise and economic security, is a valuable tool for strengthening our national security, by helping us to achieve many different foreign policy objectives in 

disparate regions around the world. 

I would like to borrow from my good friend, Bud Rock who is the Vice President 

for Global Engagement at Arizona State University, and who has been vocal advocate for improved science diplomacy. He cites four core principles of international 

scientific collaboration: discovery, diplomacy, decision-making, and development. He 

describes these four Ds as follows: 

(1) Discovery—By discovery, he means the simple acknowledgement that there 

exists an immeasurable and universal quest and need to advance the frontiers 

of human understanding. 

(2) Diplomacy—Diplomacy refers to the recognition that these partnerships and 

cooperation toward common goals are themselves expressions of broader trust 

and mutual respect. International S&T partnerships can help build more stable relations among communities and nations by creating a universal culture 

based on commonly accepted values like objectivity, sharing, integrity, and 

free inquiry. 

(3) Decision-making—Mr. Rock describes this as, ‘‘The growing imperative to 

ensure that policies and actions of governments and individuals (domestically 

and internationally) are rooted as much as possible in objectivity and informed exchange. National policies informed by global science provide objectivity, transparency, and consistency domestically and across borders.’’ 

(4) Development—And, finally, by development, Mr. Rock means, ‘‘The necessity, unchanged for generations, to put these tools of knowledge to work for 

the lives of those in greatest need and to serve the interests of those whose 

aspirations are to even greater achievements.’’ 

Finally, I would like to quote my good friend, Dr. Norman Neureiter, another advocate for the importance of international science collaboration. In his words, ‘‘International cooperation in S&T can be a highly effective soft power instrument of a 

constructive foreign policy . . ..’’ 

H.R. 1736, the International Science and Technology Cooperation Act of 2009, 

would reconstitute a Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology (CISET) under the National Science and Technology Council. A renewed and 

reinvigorated CISET would facilitate the identification and building of international 

partnerships to meet any or all of these objectives by strengthening interagency coordination among the technical agencies and between the technical agencies and the 

Department of State. 

Specifically, H.R. 1736 would charge CISET with planning and coordinating interagency international S&T research and training partnerships; identifying opportuniVerDate Nov 24 2008 00:43 May 23, 2009 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR128.XXX HR128

jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
36 

ties for new international partnerships that serve both our domestic S&T mission 

and our foreign policy goals; working with international S&T counterparts to establish such partnerships; and establishing an inventory of international partnerships 

of a minimum size in terms of U.S. investment. Finally, the bill would require an 

annual report to Congress on CISET’s activities. 

I want to thank my colleagues, Dr. Lipinski, Dr. Ehlers, Ms. Johnson, and Mr. 

Carnahan, for introducing this bill with me and for their support in making international science cooperation a priority for this committee. H.R. 1736 is an important 

step forward in bringing science and technology to bear on both national and global 

challenges, and I urge my colleagues to support it. 

Chair GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Baird. I think passion was certainly the right term. You have spent a great deal of time. This is 

going to be a mark of yours. There will be other marks, but this 

will be one mark in Congress, and not just this bill but what you 

have done in the area. Not only will it help to improve relations 

between countries, but many of the research goals we want to attain, particularly in the area of energy, are expensive, and it is 

tough to do them just with one nation and here we both share the 

cost and the intellectual ability. So this very good, and I thank you. 

And I now recognize Mr. Hall to present any remarks on the bill. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chair, as you have said and as has been well said, 

International Science and Technology Cooperation is an incredibly 

important issue and one that presents not only great prospects in 

collaborations for scientific breakthroughs but also cultivates promising diplomatic opportunities and sometimes even unpredicted 

challenges. 

I appreciate the work that the Research and Science Education 

Subcommittee has done on this issue, both under the leadership of 

Dr. Baird and Chair Lipinski, and I would like to yield the remainder of my time to Dr. Ehlers, the Ranking Member. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Mr. Chairman, international science and technology cooperation is an incredibly 

important issue and one that presents not only great prospects and collaborations 

for scientific breakthroughs, but also cultivates promising diplomatic opportunities 

and, sometimes, unpredicted challenges. I appreciate the work that the Research 

and Science Education Subcommittee has done on this issue both under the leadership of Dr. Baird and Chairman Lipinski and would like to yield the remainder of 

my time to Dr. Ehlers, the Ranking Member. 

Mr. EHLERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

Many of us may recall in the 1970s and ’80s we first began using 

science as part of diplomacy, and that played a key role in bringing 

the Soviet Union and the United States closer together and eventually ended with the downfall of the Iron Curtain. 

I was surprised when I first came to Congress, and Newt Gingrich asked me to write a science policy statement since we hadn’t 

had one since 1945, and when I began writing this, discovered that 

there is no one in the State Department who is representing 

science in dealing with other countries. 

Well, we have managed to change that since, but there still—it 

still needs strengthening, and identified in coordinating activities 

within the Federal Government, which mutually benefit our scientific enterprise and our foreign policy goals as a valuable mission. 

And I am pleased the Full Committee is considering this legislation today. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
37 

I would also like to acknowledge the work of the former Subcommittee Chair, Mr. Baird, for pursuing avenues that the Science 

and Technology Committee can use to support the intersection and 

expansion of science and diplomacy. 

Today’s legislation reestablishes a committee under the National 

Science and Technology Council, designed to coordinate and plan 

international science and technology activities. We have worked to 

ensure that high-level officials from the Department of State and 

the Office of Science and Technology Policy will provide the leadership necessary to make such collaborations more successful across 

the Federal Government. 

I look forward to seeing this in action. I also look forward to 

monitoring the fruit of this committee and will continue to support 

this bill as it moves closer to becoming law. I think we have a golden opportunity to return to the golden age of the ’70s and ’80s, and 

really set up good cooperative efforts with many nations and bringing all the nations together as a resound. 

With that I will yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE VERNON J. EHLERS

Identifying and coordinating activities within the Federal Government which mutually benefit our scientific enterprise and our foreign policy goals is a valuable mission, and I am pleased the Full Committee is considering this legislation today. I 

would also like to acknowledge the work of the former Subcommittee Chair, Mr. 

Baird, for pursuing avenues that the Science and Technology Committee can use to 

support the intersection and expansion of science and diplomacy. 

Today’s legislation re-establishes a committee under the National Science and 

Technology Council designed to coordinate and plan international science and technology activities. We have worked to ensure that high-level officials from the Department of State and the Office of Science and Technology Policy will provide the 

leadership necessary to make such collaborations more successful across the Federal 

Government. I look forward to monitoring the fruit of this committee and will continue to support this bill as it moves closer to becoming law. 

Chair GORDON. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers. More importantly, thank 

you for your long history in working on this. You know, certainly 

if our Majority and Minority can work together on this bill, other 

countries can work together on important items, too. So we have 

established that. Thank you. You have been very important here. 

Does anyone else wish to be recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chair. 

Chair GORDON. Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You got that right. Okay. I would just like to 

underscore the point that Mr. Ehlers has just made about cooperation. There are so many areas right now that we need to cooperate 

internationally in terms of the science community, and Mr. Baird 

is very involved with scientific research dealing with the oceans, 

and that is not something we should be doing on our own. That 

should be a joint effort with other countries, and we should look 

to other countries as playing an important role in whatever research we have with the ocean. 

Most of the people on this committee understand that I have a 

keen interest in near-Earth objects and the fact that there may be 

some asteroid or comet or meteorite that might hit the Earth and 

that we should be prepared for that. And in order to accomplish 

these ends, we need to be working with other countries, and I just 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
38 

would like to stress that essential point, and that is what this bill 

is all about. So just wanted to add that thought. 

Thank you. 

Chair GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. I heard Mr. Sensenbrenner the other day say that you were a near-Earth object. 

Does anyone else wish to be recognized? 

Then I ask unanimous consent the bill is considered as read and 

open to amendment at any point. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

Are there any amendments? 

Mr. HALL. You know, we make Jay Leno look serious. 

Chair GORDON. If no, then the vote is on the bill, H.R. 1736. All 

those in favor will say, aye. Opposed, no. In the opinion of the 

Chair the ayes have it. 

I recognize myself for a motion. 

I move that the Committee favorably report H.R. 1736 as amended to the House with the recommendation that the bill do pass. 

Furthermore, I move that the staff be instructed to prepare the legislative report and make necessary technical and conforming 

changes, and that the Chair take all the necessary steps to bring 

the bill before the House for consideration. 

The question is on the motion to report the bill favorably. Those 

in favor of the motion will signify by saying, aye. Opposed, no. The 

ayes have it, and the bill is favorably reported. 

Without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

Members will have two subsequent calendar days in which to submit supplemental, minority, or additional views on the measure. 

And let me point out to everyone, particularly our newer Members, we won’t file this bill until next week, and so if any of you 

would like to become co-sponsors of any of these bills, we welcome 

that. I think you should all go home, take credit for these. These 

are good bills, and once again, I hope you are not disappointed that 

we are not arguing and fighting, and you know, and having a big 

rumpus here, but that doesn’t mean that these aren’t good, 

thoughtful bills. They went to the regular order, a law that was 

taken care of at the Subcommittee level, and so, again, we welcome 

all to be co-sponsors, and I want to thank the Members for their 

attendance. 

This concludes our markup. 

[Whereupon, at 10:51 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
(39) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1736 (AS AMENDED) 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTS
40 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736j.eps
41 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736k.eps
42 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with REPORTShr1736l.eps