House Science Subcommittee Mark-Up of DOE Authorization Bill

What was scheduled to take only a hour or two last Thursday morning ended up taking the entire day as the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment completed its work on the Department of Energy Civilian Research and Development Act of 1995. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA), sitting in the chairman’s seat for the first time, guided this mark up in a firm but friendly manner that was characterized by renewed strains of bipartisanism.

While the mark up proceeded amicably, its purpose was serious, as the subcommittee cut $1.361 billion from DOE’s authorization for FY 1996 (see FYI #78 for an explanation of how this bill relates to actual spending.) Rohrabacher put his colleagues on notice that he would hold them to the subcommittee’s budget cap that was drawn from the House Budget Resolution. He said that program authorization levels in the bill could be adjusted by a majority vote of the subcommittee, as long as the cap was not breached. “Today we will set an example for every authorizing committee to follow,” Rohrabacher said. This sentiment was echoed by House Science Committee Chairman Robert Walker (R-PA) who declared that the draft bill would meet “the test of budget relevancy,” by the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee, which marks up its bill tomorrow.

With that said, the subcommittee moved on to its consideration of a series of amendments. The first amendment, offered by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) would have increased authorization levels on such programs as energy conservation, renewable, and fossil R&D, as well as some physics programs. Doyle based these higher authorization figures on a higher subcommittee cap (made possible, he said, by what he predicted would be the House’s eventual dropping of proposed tax cuts.) Rohrabacher declared Doyle’s figures “smoke and mirrors” that “just don’t add up.” This amendment was roundly defeated.

Other defeated amendments included one to increase solar and renewable spending at the expense of fossil fuel research, another to delete spending on the Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor, and one to retain DOE’s energy efficiency standards program. The subcommittee agreed to an amendment to provide funding for the AP600 light water reactor and another clarifying language for petroleum research. Other amendments were withdrawn from consideration.

Toward the end of the hearing, Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), a physicist by training, offered an amendment to provide an additional $28 million for university based research in the nuclear physics program. Ehlers said that this program had been zeroed out, and spoke highly of this research, saying that it yielded more return than any other DOE program. Chairman Rohrabacher agreed with Ehlers’ position, and then called for a voice vote. Rohrabacher determined that Ehlers’ amendment had carried. A subcommittee member called for a roll call vote, which was tied at 12/12; the result being that the amendment failed.