Speaker Ryan Wants to Return to Regular Order… Sort Of

As the House votes on Republicans’ science bill on the Floor today, we wanted to bring to your attention a quote from Speaker Ryan on the day he was elected to be the Speaker of the House about the importance of following regular order and allowing Members to participate in an open process:

“Open up the process. Let people participate… [W]e need to return to regular order. Now, I know that sounds like process. But it’s actually a matter of principle.”

That’s nice rhetoric, but Speaker Ryan isn’t exactly living up to that promise in reality.  Last night, the Rules Committee made in order only six amendments to the science bill while refusing to make in order dozens of others. Since Democrats won’t have the opportunity to offer or debate these amendments on the Floor – so much for that whole new era of “openness” – we wanted you to see some of the amendments that Democrats attempted to offer. These amendments would have changed what should be considered as being in our national interest and therefore worthy of a National Science Foundation Grant:

  1. Rep. Adams’ amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the role of SNAP in addressing child hunger.
  2. Reps. Beyer and Van Hollen’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine climate change, including its causal forces, impacts, mitigation, adaptation, and prevention. Another amendment they offered would have amended the definition to include studies that examine the manners in which human activity may generate environmental impacts.
  3. Reps. Beyer and Kildee’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine drinking water management practices to reduce lead levels in the nation's drinking water supplies.
  4. Rep. DelBene’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine climate change and develop solutions to address its adverse effects in the U.S.
  5. Rep. DeSaulnier’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the causes of income inequality and wage discrimination.
  6. Rep. Esty’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the causes of and ways to prevent opioid and heroin addiction. Another amendment she offered would amend the bill's definition to include studies on increased diversity in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, concentrating on women and minorities in STEM.
  7. Rep. Kirkpatrick’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the role of immigrants in promoting economic growth.
  8. Rep. Lieu’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the causes of and ways to prevent discrimination against minorities on the basis of ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.
  9. Rep. Sewell’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the role of telehealth in promoting increased access to health care in rural communities. Another amendment she offered would have amended the definition to include studies that examine the causes, prevention, and mitigation of health disparities among minority communities.
  10. Rep. Torres’ amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the impact of access to reproductive health services on the risk of contracting the Zika virus during pregnancy. Another amendment offered by Rep. Torres would have amended the definition to include studies that examine the causes of efforts to suppress the voting rights of minorities.
  11. Rep. Watson Coleman’s amendment would amend the bill's definition of research that is worthy to receive NSF grant funding to include studies that would examine the role of labor unions in improving wages and benefits of union and non-union workers. Another amendment she introduced would have amended the definition to include studies that examine the effects of high quality child care on future economic growth.

Issues: