(House of Representatives - October 02, 2013)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Pages H6139-H6146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office []


  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 370, I call 
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 73) making continuing appropriations 
for the National Institutes of Health for fiscal year 2014, and for 
other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 370, the joint 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 73

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of 
     applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds, 
     for the National Institutes of Health for fiscal year 2014, 
     and for other purposes, namely:
       Sec. 101. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate 
     for operations as provided in the Full-Year Continuing 
     Appropriations Act, 2013 (division F of Public Law 113-6) and 
     under the authority and conditions provided in such Act, for 
     continuing projects or activities (including the costs of 
     direct loans and loan guarantees) that are not otherwise 
     specifically provided for in this joint resolution, that were 
     conducted in fiscal year 2013, and for which appropriations, 
     funds, or other authority were made available by such Act 
     under the heading ``Department of Health and Human Services--
     National Institutes of Health''.
       (b) The rate for operations provided by subsection (a) for 
     each account shall be calculated to reflect the full amount 
     of any reduction required in fiscal year 2013 pursuant to--
       (1) any provision of division G of the Consolidated and 
     Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-
     6), including section 3004; and
       (2) the Presidential sequestration order dated March 1, 
     2013, except as attributable to budget authority made 
     available by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 
     (Public Law 113-2).
       Sec. 102.  Appropriations made by section 101 shall be 
     available to the extent and in the manner that would be 
     provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
       Sec. 103.  Unless otherwise provided for in this joint 
     resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal 
     year 2014, appropriations and funds made available and 
     authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution shall be 
     available until whichever of the following first occurs: (1) 
     the enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or 
     activity provided for in this joint resolution; (2) the 
     enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act for 
     fiscal year 2014 without any provision for such project or 
     activity; or (3) December 15, 2013.
       Sec. 104.  Expenditures made pursuant to this joint 
     resolution shall be charged to the applicable appropriation, 
     fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such 
     applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained 
     is enacted into law.
       Sec. 105.  This joint resolution shall be implemented so 
     that only the most limited funding action of that permitted 
     in the joint resolution shall be taken in order to provide 
     for continuation of projects and activities.
       Sec. 106.  Amounts made available under section 101 for 
     civilian personnel compensation and benefits in each 
     department and agency may be apportioned up to the rate for 
     operations necessary to avoid furloughs within such 
     department or agency, consistent with the applicable 
     appropriations Act for fiscal year 2013, except that such 
     authority provided under this section shall not be used until 
     after the department or agency has taken all necessary 
     actions to reduce or defer non-personnel-related 
     administrative expenses.
       Sec. 107.  It is the sense of Congress that this joint 
     resolution may also be referred to as the ``Research for 
     Lifesaving Cures Act''.
        This joint resolution may be cited as the ``National 
     Institutes of Health Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
30 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
  The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston) and the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) each will control 15 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.

                             General Leave

  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 73, and that I may include 
tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Barton).
  (Mr. BARTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 

[[Page H6140]]

  Mr. BARTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. 
I am the chairman emeritus of the Energy and Commerce Committee and 
back in 2006 passed the reauthorization of the NIH, which authorized 
increased funding, set up some new programs, reformed the agency, and 
was viewed at that time as a landmark for the NIH.
  The bill before us today would fund the functions of the NIH for the 
next fiscal year. We all agree with the programs that NIH is engaged 
in, trying to find cures for cancer, Alzheimer's, heart disease, lung 
disease, autism, you name it.
  Unfortunately, yesterday, apparently the majority leader in the 
Senate doesn't agree with that. He was asked by a CNN reporter named 
Dana Bash about supporting this particular bill. The Senator gave a 
somewhat negative answer, so the reporter came back: ``But if you can 
help one child who has cancer, why wouldn't you do it?'' The answer 
from the majority leader was: ``Why would we want to do that? I have 
1,100 people at Nellis Air Force Base that are sitting at home. They 
have a few problems of their own. This is--to have someone of your 
intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you're irresponsible 
and reckless.'' The reporter responded: ``I'm just asking a question.''
  Mr. Speaker, we should pass this resolution, notwithstanding what the 
majority leader in the other body says. It is very straightforward. I 
think in any normal situation there would be bipartisan support for 
this. Ms. DeLauro and Mr. Kingston have worked very hard on a 
bipartisan basis. I am not aware that there are any real concerns about 
the funding that haven't been worked out in the committee. This is an 
example of bipartisanship that is working. There is absolutely no 
reason why we can't put our differences aside and pass this resolution. 
I ask that we support it at the appropriate time.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in opposition to this cynical and, quite frankly, offensive 
NIH funding bill. Instead of simply allowing a vote on the budget for 
the full government, the majority is continuing their hostage crisis 
approach to governing.

                              {time}  1630

  Let us call this charade what it is. This is a desperate attempt by 
irresponsible lawmakers to play political games with a crisis they have 
created, a crisis that is costing the American economy $300 million a 
day. The number will go up as the shutdown continues.
  I am an ovarian cancer survivor. I stand here today because of the 
grace of God and because of the hard work done by the men and women at 
the NIH, so I know firsthand the value and the importance of medical 
  I have been fighting for months--for years--to get this majority to 
support the lifesaving medical research at the National Institutes of 
Health. If you factor in population growth and inflation, NIH funding 
right now is over 14 percent below what it was in 2010, which is when 
the majority took over. The number of research grants is lower than it 
has been since 2001. This diminishes the NIH's ability to fund 
research, to conduct clinical trials, and to develop new lifesaving 
  This majority has long refused to bring a labor, health and education 
funding bill up for consideration, though I have asked over and over 
and over again for them to bring it up. The budget they drafted a few 
months ago made deep and dangerous cuts to the NIH, and the bill before 
us seeks to make permanent the unacceptable funding cuts caused by 
sequestration--cuts that are stalling lifesaving biomedical research 
all across this country. The majority talks out of both sides of its 
mouth. I find this new attention to NIH funding disingenuous.
  Mr. Speaker, while medical research is vitally important, it is also 
only one of the many vitally important things our government does. We 
also help to feed women and children who are living on the edge, and 9 
million have been cut off from nutritional support. We also keep track 
of the spread of infectious diseases, and the Centers for Disease 
Control has been forced to halt those activities. We help students pay 
for college. We protect the Nation's food supply. We provide meals to 
low-income seniors. We help support food banks for the hungry. We 
shelter the homeless. We further the march of science. We provide job 
training for the unemployed and returning veterans. We ensure access to 
mental health services for those who need them. We educate the 
disadvantaged and the disabled. We ensure the Nation has clean water to 
drink and clean air to breathe. We help small businesses start and 
grow. We help middle class home buyers secure funds.
  Where is the funding for all of these other important activities?
  The American people are sick of this reckless behavior. It is time to 
act like responsible adults. Instead of letting the extreme wing of the 
majority shut down the government, instead of wasting time trying to 
play politics, instead of cherry-picking important programs like the 
NIH to fund, we should be working on a budget for the entire 
government, one that does right by all of our fundamental priorities--
creates jobs, supports the middle class and working families, and 
ensures long-term growth. That is what we were elected to do. That is 
our job. Let's stop playing games and get to work.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
  Mr. WOMACK. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution because it allows 
the NIH to continue to operate at the FY13 funding levels until mid-
December. The bill mirrors the clean CR that our friends across the 
aisle and Senate Democrats have said they will support. It should be 
supported by all Members of Congress.
  As you have heard, Mr. Speaker, the NIH's mission is to invest in 
basic biomedical research to uncover new knowledge that can lead to 
lifesaving cures for disease, like pancreatic cancer, like Alzheimer's, 
like diabetes. It supports 35,000 research grants at over 3,000 
institutes and universities across our country. In my home State of 
Arkansas, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences is one such 
institute; and just this morning, the UAMS Cancer Institute announced a 
new collaboration with Highlands Oncology. It will undoubtedly bring 
incredible opportunity to Arkansas, our research and our cancer 
  As many of my colleagues know, two-thirds of NIH's staff has been 
furloughed due to the lapse in appropriations. NIH has been forced to 
shut down the pipeline for finding future lifesaving cures, and it has 
shut off all systems that support grant review, leaving our researchers 
with many uncertainties. That's where this resolution comes in.
  Federal funding is essential to sustaining the mission of improving 
health through scientific breakthroughs and maintaining international 
leadership in biomedical research, which is why we must allow the NIH 
to stay open while we continue to work toward regular order and through 
funding the rest of our Federal Government.
  I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation, 
legislation on which our scientists, our doctors, our patients, and our 
futures depend.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Miller), my friend, the distinguished ranking 
member of the Education and the Workforce Committee.
  (Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, the House floor is 
starting to feel like a new episode of ``The Hunger Games.''
  Every day, the Republican leadership tries to find a new way to pit 
one desperate group of Americans against another. Today, because of the 
shutdown, Republicans are pitting kids with cancer against kids who are 
hungry. This bill is designed to release funds for the NIH today so 
that they can reduce funding for programs for kids, programs that keep 
children with the nutrition that they need. For a little bit longer, 
they can go hungry while we take care of the kids with cancer.
  I don't buy their newfound concern about NIH funding, and the 
American people aren't buying it either. What did they think was going 
to happen when they shut down the NIH? Did they have

[[Page H6141]]

any working knowledge of what takes place at the NIH?
  The gentleman from Arkansas has just related the integral nature of 
the NIH to universities and research facilities all across this 
country, and yet they thought it was free to shut down the NIH? Now 
they've discovered that hundreds of children are receiving treatment at 
the NIH for cancer, and now they think the NIH ought to be open, but 
they're not sure that the Head Start reductions ought to be brought 
back? This means kids can't get their meals during the day--some 85,000 
kids in Arkansas--and they'll go without nutritional assistance because 
of this shutdown. What about those? Are they next in the barrel here?
  Will you come and rescue them? Will you come and rescue the Head 
Start children who are losing the opportunities to go to school?
  What about the active servicemembers who are now facing 4-day school 
weeks in their classrooms? What about the elimination of important 
summer programs because of the shutdown? When are you going to take 
care of the military service's children? What is this going on here?

  Every day, we pit one unfortunate victim of this shutdown against 
another helpless victim of this shutdown, and they think that they can 
cure it one bill at a time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. There are millions of people all 
across the country and millions of businesses and millions of 
unfortunate people who have nowhere else to go to get help because of 
diseases, because of the threats to their lives.
  I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this opposition to the 
resolution to the floor.
  I would hope that all Members of Congress would just do what they can 
do, which is, in the next couple of hours, simply have a clean CR to 
open up the government. Let the people get the services that they need, 
and let the public servants who provide them those services go back to 
work in the name of country.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton), the distinguished chairman of the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, let's face it: the failure of not having a CR 
is that both sides have failed to negotiate an agreement to keep the 
government open.
  Let's hope that the 5:30 meeting this afternoon between Speaker 
Boehner, Leaders Pelosi, McConnell and Reid, and the President is not a 
finger-pointing meeting and that it's not a ``my way or the highway'' 
meeting but, in fact, a constructive way to get an agreement that most 
of us, Republicans and Democrats, can support. Whether that agreement 
comes tonight or tomorrow or, God help us, next week or the following 
week, at some point, the Sun is going to come up. It's going to happen. 
In the meantime, we shouldn't harm the folks who are in dire need.
  I strongly support the NIH. I look at Mr. Waxman, my colleague and 
ranking member on the Energy and Commerce Committee, as the two of us 
led the effort to double the money for the NIH a number of years ago. 
We have folks waiting in the queue to participate in lifesaving 
clinical trials. They have every right to be furious with this body, 
but we can fix that by passing this bill so that they don't have to 
  Come on. Let's put policy over politics and do this, not for us but 
for them.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member on the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, let's put policy over politics by funding 
the government.
  What this reckless closing of the government has accomplished is to 
stall a lot of government agencies from doing their mission, and one of 
the most important agencies that has a mission that is irreplaceable is 
the NIH. Yet, if you look at the underlying bill--the Republican bill 
to fund the government, which we are willing to accept--it puts NIH at 
a really low amount for appropriations, so it's hard to take this claim 
that they want to help the NIH seriously.
  The Republican agenda is reflected in its budget. Republicans 
proposed a 20 percent cut to health, education and labor programs, and 
that's a $5 billion loss for NIH. What does that mean? That means that 
the NIH Clinical Center has to turn away hundreds of patients, many of 
them children who desperately need care. This is singling out NIH.
  What about the other important work that is done to prevent and cure 
diseases? What about the efforts for the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention? They are not going to be reopened by this legislation, 
and they detect and respond to disease outbreaks. The Food and Drug 
Administration, they're not going to get any money by virtue of this 
special singling-out bill. They won't even be able to do their routine 
inspections of food and drugs to protect the public from abuses.
  If the Republicans were truly interested in the NIH, they would 
remove the sequester and restore funding for the NIH and other critical 
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say to my distinguished friend from California 
that I would like to move the CDC and would ask him to cosponsor that 
legislation if we could do similar to the CDC what we are doing to the 
NIH, because I agree with you in that I think it's very important.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Let's refund all of the government efforts, including the 
CDC and the NIH and the FDA, and not single them out and leave 
everybody else behind.
  Mr. KINGSTON. In reclaiming my time, I will say this to my friend: a 
long journey begins with small steps. If we can just take a few, small 
bipartisan steps together, I think it would change the entire tone of 
this debate, and I say that with sincerity.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Funding the government is one bipartisan step we could 
take. It is a compromise for us, and I would vote for it.
  Mr. KINGSTON. In reclaiming my time, that's a leap. I'm talking 
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlelady from 
North Carolina (Mrs. Ellmers), a former nurse.
  Mrs. ELLMERS. Thank you to my colleague from Georgia.
  Mr. Speaker, this is such an important issue on which to be speaking 
here at the House. I rise in support of the Research for Lifesaving 
Cures Act and in support of the funding of the NIH in order to help 
bring lifesaving cures to sick Americans. The situation in Washington 
today should not be standing in the way of this important lifesaving 
work. There is no defensible argument against this legislation.
  NIH has been in the forefront of biomedical discoveries that have 
revolutionized the field of medicine. These discoveries have laid the 
foundation for treatments and cures for many diseases, including cancer 
and including improving the lives of countless Americans. The 
government shutdown is preventing new patients from entering clinical 
trials. For those patients, it is a matter of life and death; it is not 
a matter of politics. About 200 people register at the NIH every week. 
About 30 of those are children, 10 of whom have cancer. We must ensure 
that medical care is not suspended for these patients, especially for 
those children who are faced with difficulty.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 7\3/4\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from Connecticut has 8 minutes 
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, there is no defense for keeping this 
government closed, and if the majority were serious about funding the 
NIH in their 2014 appropriations bill, they would have provided it with 
adequate funds.
  With that, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlelady from New York 
(Mrs. Lowey), my friend and the ranking member of the Appropriations 

[[Page H6142]]

                              {time}  1645

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the reckless 
Republican shutdown.
  There's no stronger supporter of the National Institutes of Health. 
Members on both sides of the aisle have long supported the crown jewel 
of the government, but we didn't have an opportunity to vote on the 
bill funding this year because Republicans didn't have the courage of 
their convictions to stand behind the 22 percent cut. Funding one 
budget item at a time, even one as important as the NIH, does nothing 
to help children get immunizations, conduct disease surveillance, 
provide meals for seniors and poor children who depend on assistance 
for survival, or continue food inspections to protect the food supply.
  This bill is nothing more than a Republican ploy. It would not be 
necessary if Republicans had not been so irresponsible throughout the 
budgetary process, forcing us into a shutdown. We could end the 
shutdown today if the majority would only allow a vote on the Senate-
passed bill, which includes the funding levels Republicans support and 
would be signed by the President.
  If you really care about biomedical research and public health, you 
should vote ``no'' on this bill and demand that the Republican 
leadership allow the House to vote on the Senate bill immediately and 
end the reckless Republican shutdown.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Dr. Tim Murphy, a 
distinguished psychologist, lieutenant commander in the Navy, and the 
chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Committee of the Energy 
and Commerce Committee.
  Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friends, 
colleagues, and fellow Americans.
  Please, listen. I'm not here to defend this government shutdown. Long 
after we are gone, people are going to remember the rancor of this 
House, not the good we've done. I don't defend the decision to shut 
down the National Institutes of Health. It's too valuable. It funds 
lifesaving research and has a hospital that cares for 200 adults and 
children waiting for experimental treatments to save their lives.
  When asked about shutting down the NIH, even if it saves one child 
with cancer, Senator Reid said, Why would I want to do that? He added 
that he has people on an Air Force base with ``problems of their own.'' 
Now, I don't think the Senator is heartless as some have alluded. 
Rather, I believe he's an honorable man, and it pains him to know that 
the NIH is closed just because reasonable people cannot sit down and 
  I also believe the President is an honorable man who doesn't want the 
NIH to close, even though with the stroke of his pen he could declare 
it open. But here he is immersed in a battle just because some people 
refuse to sit down and talk.
  I believe our colleagues are honorable, Mr. Speaker. None of us want 
people with terminal illness hurt. Let's not make the NIH a political 
battlefield. While some still refuse to sit down and talk, at least let 
our hearts be with those who suffer. Let us do the honorable thing and 
keep alive the hopes of those who wait for a cure.
  Friends, colleagues, fellow Americans. I'm not here to defend this 
government shut down. Long after we are gone people will remember the 
rancor of this House, not the good we have done.
  It is not good for America when we fight partisan politics rather 
than work out our differences. It is not good when we confuse anger 
with action and rage with results.
  I believe members here are more honorable than to just play out each 
vote in a way that they can use against each other in the next 
  I do not defend the decision to shut down the National Institute of 
Health. It is too valuable. Not just because it funds life saving 
research, and has a hospital where 200 adults and children lay waiting 
for experimental treatments to save their lives.
  When asked about shutting down the NIH even if it saves one child 
with Cancer, the leader of the Senate Harry Reid said ``why would I 
want to do that?'' and added folks at Nellis Air Force base have 
``problems of their own''. Now I don't think the senator heartless as 
some have alluded. Rather, I believe he is an honorable man and it 
pains him to know the NIH is closed just because reasonable people 
could not sit down and talk.
  I believe the President is an honorable man who does not want the NIH 
closed. He could with the stroke of a pen declare the NIH open, but 
here he is, immersed in a battle just because some people refuse to sit 
down and talk.
  And I believe all our colleagues are honorable. None of us want 
people with terminal illness hurt wondering if they will get life 
saving treatment. NIH is a hospital and an institute; don't make it a 
political battlefield.
  At least let our hearts be with those who suffer. Let us do the 
honorable thing and keep alive the hope of those who wait for a cure.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it would seem that no one cares much about 
the 9 million women and children who are going to be cut off from 
nutrition programs or what happens to the spread of infectious diseases 
or people who need to pay for college.
  I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van 
Hollen), the ranking member of the Budget Committee.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I have the great privilege of 
representing the congressional district that is home to the national 
treasure that we call the National Institutes of Health where you have 
scientists doing critically important work, looking for treatments and 
cures to diseases that plague every American. These are scientists. 
They're not Republican scientists. They're not Democratic scientists. 
They're scientists. They're very smart people.
  I've heard from some of them, and they say they are not fooled by the 
cynical ploy in the House today because they know that the fastest way 
to open up the National Institutes of Health would be to take up the 
clean Senate-passed bill and send it to the President tonight. That's 
how you help the National Institutes of Health.
  They also have kids in schools, so they'd also like to keep open the 
Department of Education and help the Department of Veterans Affairs. 
They know that the way to do that is not to cherry-pick little pieces 
of government and leave the rest of it to die on the vine, but to pass 
a clean CR and keep NIH open, the Department of Veterans Affairs open, 
all the parks open, the Defense Department open, to keep the government 
  Why hasn't that happened? The Speaker of the House refuses to hold a 
vote in this people's House. What's he afraid of, the democracy? What's 
he afraid of, we are going to vote to open the government? Because 
that's exactly what would happen.
  If you want to help NIH, vote for the clean CR. Get it done tonight. 
Quit the game-playing.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Harper).
  (Mr. HARPER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
  Mr. HARPER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Research for 
Lifesaving Cures proposal.
  This vote is about helping some of our country's most vulnerable 
patients: seniors hoping for cures to long-time illnesses, precious 
children and their families looking for answers about genetic 
disorders; and the scientists who are moving ever so close to 
discovering America's next medical breakthroughs find themselves asking 
if they'll be able to continue their life's work.
  The National Institutes of Health provide support to promising 
research leading to lifesaving treatments, innovative clinical trials 
aiming to reverse the core symptoms of disorders such as fragile X 
syndrome, autism, spinal muscular atrophy, down syndrome, Angelman 
syndrome, and cystic fibrosis to name a few. These give families hope, 
the research that is there. But this is just the beginning. These 
studies help our Nation's most dedicated scientists build on promising 
  To continue these trials, Congress must allow the NIH to stay open 
while we work on getting the government back up and running. This isn't 
about scoring political points. It's about principles. As the father of 
a special-needs child, I know the challenges that these families face. 
Vote ``yes.'' Vote for fairness.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Once again, if the majority had been interested in the 
NIH, it would have moved to introduce its appropriations bill with an 
increase in funding for the NIH, which it didn't.

[[Page H6143]]

  I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), 
the distinguished Ways and Means Committee ranking member.
  (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I've listened to the debate. Nobody on the 
Republican side has answered this question: Why not a vote on the clean 
  Why not? It would pass. That's why you're not bringing it up. It's 
politics within your conference, but it's harming the people of this 
country. Piece by piece it's hiding the reality. Let me just point to a 
bit of it.
  I'm reading from an NIH document, 2013 figures compared to the 2012 
figures for NIH. There were approximately 700 fewer competitive 
research project grants issued; approximately 750 fewer new patients 
admitted to the NIH clinical center; cuts to research delaying progress 
in development of better cancer drugs that zero in on a tumor with 
fewer side effects; research on a universal flu vaccine that could 
fight every strain of influenza without needing a yearly shot.
  Come forth and tell us why not a vote on a clean CR. Don't give us 
all the other stories. Come, someone, and say why not, why not a clean 
vote. It would pass. We can do it, a long journey, in one step, right 
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the chairman of the Republican Study 
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for 
  I rise in strong support of this bill that funds the NIH and makes 
sure that cancer patients are able to get the treatments that they need 
and that that vital research continues to move forward.
  Clearly, we've got some disagreements between the House and Senate on 
other areas of government funding, but shouldn't we at least be able to 
come together on this area where we all have agreement and make sure we 
take care of those cancer patients so that they're not held hostage to 
these other negotiations?
  In fact, we should be able to get that, but Senator Reid, the Senate 
Majority Leader, was earlier asked, ``But if you could help one child 
who has cancer, why wouldn't you do it?''
  Senate Majority Leader Reid's response was, ``Why would we want to do 
  It would be disgraceful, Mr. Speaker, for Senator Reid to deny cancer 
patients the treatment and the research they deserve just because he 
wants to score some kind of political point.
  Mr. Speaker, it's not too late for Senate Majority Leader Reid to 
have a change of heart. Stop holding people hostage. We can come to 
agreement as Republicans and Democrats. Let's do that, and then deal 
with the other areas of disagreement. Let's at least take care of our 
cancer patients.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the Senate or individual Members of 
the Senate.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 4\3/4\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from Connecticut has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  Mr. COHEN. Mr. Speaker, I take umbrage at this whole process.
  In September of 1954, I came down with polio, which affects me to 
this day. The vaccine which was helped developed by the National 
Institutes of Health didn't become available until about 6 months 
later. I've asked Mr. Kingston, I've asked people in this House for 6 
months, I've spoken on this floor, I've written editorials to fund the 
National Institutes of Health to find cures for cancer and heart 
disease and stroke and diabetes and Parkinson's. They can do it, but 
it's cut by the sequester by $1.6 billion and not once have the 
Republicans said, We'll fund it and we'll find cures to disease. We'll 
use this, our ``Department of Defense'' for human beings, and fund it 
at the level it should be so that other people like me won't get a 
disease 6 months earlier than the cure was available.
  They haven't come forth once. These are crocodile tears. This is 
politics. It's not trying to cure people. It's not trying to stop 
illness and create cures. And I really object to this being used 
  I spoke 6 months ago to put the money back and find cures, and I got 
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I say to my good friend from Tennessee 
that if you take out the TANF funding, which the Obama administration 
charges the NIH to conduct business, this is level funding.
  I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Rothfus).
  Mr. ROTHFUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Research 
for Lifesaving Cures Act.
  To take a minute, you wonder why we're here right now. It's because 
the NIH has been closed. Why is it closed? We passed a bill just the 
other night to keep the NIH open and to hold government open, but we 
wanted to stop the special treatment that Members of Congress were 
  As a cancer survivor and someone who has benefited from work by 
doctors who have worked at the National Cancer Institute at NIH, it's 
important that we continue to fund NIH. And I rise in strong support of 
this legislation.
  It's time to end Senator Reid's government shutdown, which threatens 
not only research at the NIH, but work across the government. It's very 
simple to do it. Just stop the special treatment for Members of 
Congress, and stop the special treatment for the friends of the 
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Tennessee (Mrs. Black), a former nurse.
  Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, as a registered nurse for over 40 years, I 
am privileged to speak on the importance of funding NIH, and the 
research that is done at this institute is invaluable to our health 
care system and the future of our medical industry. Most importantly, 
it is important to people's live. But I think it's important to 
remember exactly how we got here today, to the point where we're voting 
on this important measure on its own measures.
  My House Republican colleagues and I have said at the very beginning 
that the American people didn't want a government shutdown, and they 
also didn't want ObamaCare. So we sent three different measures to the 
Senate that would keep the NIH and the rest of the government open, but 
also to help shield the people from the harmful effects of ObamaCare, 
this disastrous law, and also to create fairness for everyone.

                              {time}  1700

  But it was a block by Senator Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats, 
effectively shutting down the government to protect their own ObamaCare 
carve out. What we truly need is for the Democrat-led government 
shutdown to stop and for Senator Harry Reid to drop his tactics and to 
restore these programs.
  Ms. DeLAURO. I just might quickly say to my colleague from Georgia--
and I know he knows this--that Congress set the cap percentage and 
instructs the Secretary on how it should be used.
  And with that, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
  Mr. ELLISON. You know, Mr. Speaker, it reminds me of the case where 
someone stole another person's coat and then came back and offered very 
piously to help them find it, all the while knowing that it's stashed 
away. The fact is that we are here for one reason and one reason only, 
and that is the Republicans object to the Affordable Care Act and 
refuse to fund the government unless it is defunded. How many times 
have we heard, delay, defund, and all that little jingle they do? That 
is why we are here.
  And now we have people coming to the floor, piously urging for 
funding for D.C. and young people and all this kind of stuff. You know, 
it's as if they didn't know, when they shut down the government, that 
D.C. and young people and the NIH were going to be cut. Obviously they 
knew it. Did they just find out after they read their bill? No. They 
knew it. They knew it all the time. They know it now. And we can solve 
everyone's problem by putting a clean CR on this moment.

[[Page H6144]]

  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, if I could ask how much time we have 
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 2\3/4\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from Connecticut has 1\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  I just want to say this: It scares me to death that America is going 
bankrupt. Our national debt is 100 percent of the GDP. For every dollar 
we spend, 42 cents is borrowed. ObamaCare adds to that $1.7 trillion. 
If we don't get control of our spending, then we are not going to have 
an America as we know it. That's what this fight is about.
  Now, what we're trying to do today is say there are tiny steps in 
which there is an agreement, and the NIH is one of them. We've already 
done this for military pay. This bill should not be a stretch. It 
should have widespread bipartisan support.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  First of all, I would just say very, very quickly to my colleague 
from Georgia, the affordable care bill is launched. It is the law of 
the land. It's going forward. I'm sorry to tell my friends on the other 
side of the aisle: Get over it. It is the law of the land.
  What we have here is really, quite frankly, reckless behavior on the 
part of the majority, and what you have done is shut this government 
down. And instead of wasting time trying to play politics, and instead 
of cherry-picking important programs like the NIH to fund, we should be 
working on a budget for the entire government, open the government, and 
move to negotiations.
  With regard to health care issues, I think it's important to note--
and that's why we shouldn't be opening the government on a piecemeal 
basis--we need a comprehensive short-term continuing resolution that 
keeps the entire government open and at work.
  What other activities are engaged in health that you are bypassing or 
ignoring or don't believe they have any priority? Centers for Disease 
Control, two-thirds of their personnel are now on furlough. Important 
programs like protecting public health are going by the wayside: 
monitoring for flu, other infectious diseases; promoting and 
coordinating immunizations; assistance to State and local departments 
in detecting and responding to disease outbreaks; programs to prevent, 
detect, or better manage chronic diseases--diabetes, heart disease, 
stroke, and, yes, cancer. The Food and Drug Administration, you've sent 
the staff home. Our food safety is in danger. HRSA, HIV/AIDS, and 
others, mental health services.
  If you care about health, open the government and negotiate on a 
long-term CR.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I will repeat that if I can get a Democrat 
Party Member to cosponsor a continuation of the CDC, I would be glad to 
work together to move that bill.
  And with that, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from 
Maryland, Dr. Andy Harris, a distinguished committee member.
  Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, when the President and Senate shut down the 
government yesterday, I don't think they realized what was going to 
happen at the NIH with pediatric cancer patients.
  I want to thank the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee 
for bringing it to the attention of the House yesterday in her 
comments, because we get to solve the problem today.
  You see, Mr. Speaker, during a temporary lapse in funding, the 
Department of Justice guidance for continuing government operations 
includes activities that protect ``the safety of human lives.'' So 
although over 40 percent of the Office of the Secretary were exempt in 
this furlough, strangely enough, some lawyer in the executive branch 
decided that pediatric cancer patients seeking to enroll in research at 
NIH don't merit those services necessary to protect ``the safety of 
human life.''
  Now, look, I hope everybody here disagrees with that interpretation. 
Having taken care of many pediatric cancer patients in my medical 
career and being a parent, I know that pediatric cancer deals with the 
safety of human life.
  Mr. Speaker, interestingly enough, to their credit, the Indian Health 
Service stayed opened. So if you have a common cold, you get treated, 
but if you have pediatric cancer, you don't. The lab animals at NIH are 
being taken care of, but if you have pediatric cancer, you aren't. I 
would hope we could agree that they should be. This bill solves the 
problem. This bill protects children seeking to enroll in cancer 
programs at the NIH.
  The President and the Senate have already accepted a step-by-step 
approach when they accepted legislation over the weekend to fund our 
men and women in uniform during this lapse in funding. That bill was 
signed into law with bipartisan support. And this bill should be signed 
into law with bipartisan support so that we can help those cancer 
patients, especially those 30 children or so a week.
  Now, look, I admit because of what the Senate majority leader said 
today that we may have a tough hill to climb with this bill in the 
Senate, but the House has to do what is right, even if for only one 
child with cancer whose life rests with the NIH.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCHWARTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for medical research and my equally strong opposition to this 
legislation, which effectively extends cuts to funding for the National 
Institutes of Health and exacerbates uncertainty and instability in the 
federal government.
  The effects of the government shutdown are already rippling through 
every aspect of American society and threatening the health and well-
being of our citizens. NIH is the nation's largest single source of 
biomedical research. It funds research efforts in medical centers, 
cancer centers and universities across the country. Its work is unique 
and essential. Its value is personal for the many patients they care 
for and significant to our economy as the engine of American life-
science innovation.
  Even before the government shutdown, NIH lost $1.55 billion in fiscal 
2013 because of budget cuts required under sequestration. In my home 
state of Pennsylvania, these cuts to NIH mean the loss of 1,200 jobs 
and $73 million in grant awards. These devastating cuts threaten 
America's capacity to cure diseases, treat chronic and acute 
conditions, and find new technologies that advance the health of people 
worldwide. And, as if those cuts weren't devastating enough, the 
government shutdown is forcing NIH to turn away patients who have come 
to NIH as their last best hope.
  On just the first day of the shutdown, NIH Director Francis Collins 
estimated that for each week of the shutdown the agency would be forced 
to deny care to about 200 patients, 30 of them children, who are 
seeking to enroll in studies of experimental treatment. Many of these 
patients turn to the NIH because they have no other options. This 
crisis is shameful, unnecessary and unworthy of our great nation. It 
breaks your heart.
  The bill before us today will exacerbate the challenges facing NIH 
and the people it serves. I urge my colleagues to vote against this 
misguided plan to cut NIH further. I call on my Republican colleagues 
to allow an up-or-down vote today on a clean continuing resolution so 
we can reopen the government immediately and enable NIH to resume the 
critical services they provide to our nation. The time has come for 
Republicans to work with Democrats on a balanced plan that replaces the 
sequester, fully funds NIH and provides the certainty that our families 
and businesses need to grow our economy.
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition 
to H.J. Res. 73 which is a political gimmick designed to distract 
attention from the great harm being caused by the GOP government 
shutdown and Republican budget policies.
  When you consider what makes America ``great'', you may think of the 
America's public schools where every child, rich or poor, can get an 
education unlike other countries. You may think of our civil liberties. 
You may think of the architectural wonders like the Sunshine Skyway 
Bridge across Tampa Bay.
  I am inspired by the talented young researchers across America who 
are searching to find the cure for cancer or study treatments for 
Alzheimer's or advance the artificial pancreas for people with 
  The Republican bill on the floor today relating to the National 
Institutes of Health is a whitewash and a sham. Despite GOP assertions 
that they support NIH and research across America, the record proves 
  Over the last two years Republicans in Congress have taken a fiscal 
hatchet to the positions of young and talented researchers in 
hospitals, universities and cancer centers across America. For FY13 and 
FY14, President Obama and Democrats proposed healthy funding for the 
NIH. Republicans have cut it back by almost two billion dollars each 

[[Page H6145]]

  Despite GOP assertions that they support research, Republicans have 
held firm to the sequester cuts for NIH which has led to the 
elimination of researchers across America. America's researchers, the 
scientific community, patients, doctors and all of us are not fooled by 
the Republican hoax here.
  For example, at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, one of 
America's leading cancer research centers, researchers on staff have 
been cut from 120 to 100. This is devastating for America's ability to 
investigate and eliminate cancer and treat the disease. America has 
invested in our best and brightest young men and women in the science 
and math fields and the Republican budget policies are eliminating 
their positions, cutting back their work and ceding America's top 
position in medical research to China and India.
  This is the same story at the University of South Florida, and the 
research in Alzheimer's nursing, neurology, heart disease or mental 
health. The budget ax employed by Congressional Republicans is hurting 
us all.
  We have fought back. In the Budget Committee, I cosponsored an 
amendment last spring to restore funding to NIH and cancer research. It 
was defeated with all Republicans on the Committee voting no. Democrats 
also offered a balanced sequester replacement plan numerous times, but 
the GOP has shot it down.
  With this context, it is easy to see through the House GOP's ploy to 
fund the NIH through this bill. They are not beefing up funding levels. 
They lock in the devastating sequester and thereby lay off more 
researchers and put diagnoses and treatments further out of reach. The 
cumulative impacts of year-after-year cuts in research erodes America's 
status as the world leader in scientific research.
  The American people are not fooled by the political games of my 
Republican colleagues.
  And let's not forget that this Republican government shutdown has 
lead to the NIH turning away new patients from clinical trials--in 
particular children. Grant applications will not be considered. And the 
NIH will stop answering hotline calls from our constituents with 
medical questions.
  The legislation we will be debating today is a ruse. It won't work.
  Let's stop playing games, and end the irresponsible Republican 
shutdown. Then, rather than the empty rhetoric relating to scientific 
research, commit yourself to making America great rather than tearing 
it down.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, today on the House floor, instead 
of putting an end to the damaging Republican government shutdown by 
passing a clean funding compromise passed by the Senate, the House 
Republican leadership has chosen to take a different path to vote on 
more political ploys. They are doing this by continuing to offer mini-
versions of appropriations bills in a cynical effort to give themselves 
political cover for causing this shutdown in the first place.
  These bills are political gimmicks, not a responsible approach to 
governing. Republicans have shut down the government and are damaging 
our economy and the middle class. And today the House is considering 
the following five GOP piecemeal bills, which only fund selected pieces 
of the government--National Institutes of Health, local funds for the 
D.C., the National Parks, certain funding for Reserve/Guard, and part 
of the VA.
  Like my colleagues in the Democratic Caucus, I wholeheartedly support 
veterans, our National Guard and Reserve, the District of Columbia, 
important medical research, and our national parks. However, these 
bills leave out many of the crucial services relied on by the American 
people such as Head Start programs, veterans' cemeteries, small 
business loans, education for our children, equipping and training our 
troops, building housing for military families, getting decisions on 
veterans disability claims, among many others.
  Instead of opening up a few government functions, the House of 
Representatives should re-open the entire government. The harmful 
impacts of a shutdown extend across government, affecting services that 
are critical to small businesses, women, children, seniors, and others 
across the Nation.
  The American people have seen enough, and the time has come for 
Republicans to abandon their reckless and irresponsible agenda and join 
Democrats to honor America's commitments to provide vital services our 
citizens pay for with their hard earned tax dollars. I urge Speaker 
Boehner, Leader Cantor, and the Republican Party to end its shutdown by 
working with Democrats to pass a clean funding bill and end this 
charade immediately.
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, here we are day two of the 
hurtful Republican Government Shutdown.
  We still don't have a viable solution to reopen the government.
  The Republican refusal to back off their extreme, ideological demands 
has taken our country down a dangerous path that will surely push 
millions more families into hunger and poverty.
  Mr. Speaker, while all of us believe it is important to keep the 
government functioning, hostage taking is no way to run federal 
departments and agencies.
  Members of Congress are elected to make sure our government 
  Yet, instead of working on a serious option to reopen the government, 
Republicans latest strategy is to exploit cancer patients and the staff 
who work at the National Institutes of Health by voting on piecemeal 
bills that will not end impacts of a shut down that extend across our 
  Mr. Speaker, of course we research and funding for the NIH, But let's 
not use them to score political points to advance an ideological 
  The Senate passed continuing resolution would fund the government for 
an additional six weeks and all this House has to do is pass that bill 
to end this manufactured crisis.
  This hostage taking must end.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, here we go again--the majority instead 
of opening Federal government they are introducing another scheme to 
waste time trying to make what they are doing even more painful to the 
American public.
  I rise to speak on the Continuing Resolutions to re-open the National 
Institutes of Health (NIH), one of many very important Federal 
government agencies.
  NIH is comprised of many institutes that specialize in seeking cures 
for some of mankind's most dreaded and difficult diseases and 
afflictions such as: blindness, heart disease, blood diseases, 
infection diseases, cancer, stroke, alcoholism; arthritis, 
musculoskeletal and skin diseases, hearing and balance disorders, drug 
abuse, and mental illness.
  NIH institutes focus solely on finding cures for the list of 
illnesses that I just mentioned. Researchers work often within a closed 
sterile world for decades looking for that one piece of information 
when placed within the body of knowledge known about a disease may save 
lives or health.
  The NIH Institutes include the following, the: National Cancer 
Institute, National Eye Institute, National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institute 
on Aging, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, National 
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institute of 
Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Institute of 
Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National 
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institute on 
Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, National Institute of 
Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institute 
of General Medical Sciences, National Institute of Mental Health, 
National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National 
Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of 
Nursing Research, and National Library of Medicine.
  Because of the work of NIH to identify potential treatments and cures 
each year and a rare few are allowed into treatment and drug trials to 
discover if what the Institutes' researchers have discovered will yield 
beneficial results for the entire population, not just in the United 
States but the entire world.
  NIH's work is racing against the clock to find cures in time to save 
or improve the quality of lives. There are medical professionals who 
are serving in the Congress and you have each benefited from the work 
of NIH and so have your patients.
  We should listen to what researchers are saying about the Federal 
government shutdown:
  Mary Woolley, president and CEO of Research! America, said: ``On a 
micro level, we are concerned that an incremental approach to the 
shutdown neglects disruptions to lifesaving funded by other federal 
agencies, as well as access to treatments in the pipeline at the Food 
and Drug Administration,'' Woolley said. ``And because it is unlikely 
that this measure would pass both houses, it may simply delay funding 
for NIH.''
  Benjamin Corb, director of public affairs for the American Society 
for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology: ``The data shows that deep cuts 
to federal investments in research are tearing at the fabric of the 
nation's scientific enterprise and have a minimal impact on overcoming 
our national debt and deficit problems,'' he said. ``I hope leaders 
from both parties in Washington review these findings and join with 
scientists to say `enough is enough.' ''
  Chris Hansen, president of American Cancer Society Cancer Action 
Network said ``Every week the government is shut down, the NIH Clinical 
Center will have to turn away cancer patients who are eligible to start 
potentially lifesaving clinical trials--a devastating impact that 
compounds the problem created by the sequester that resulted in 1,000 
people being turned away from clinical trials in the past year.''

[[Page H6146]]

  This Congress has done harm to NIH research through Sequestration: 
funding cuts occurred indiscriminately across all areas of research. 
Cell lines were lost that had been developed over generations to see 
how they change to learn more about what goes wrong within cells and 
what may be done to prevent cancers from developing.
  Sequestration damaged NIH research that involved a study of rabbits 
that were carefully breed over years to learn about inherited 
disorders, but due to the Sequestration an entire line was destroyed 
because they could not be cared for nor were there funds to keep the 
copious and careful notes needed to document each generation's 
  It should chill us all to think about what may be lost in NIH 
research because of the last few days of government shutdown. Our tools 
are words, the work of NIH researchers are cells and specimens that 
cannot wait for the majority to figure out why the Federal government 
  Every 36 minutes a child is diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. That's 
enough children to fill a classroom each day, which adds up to almost 
15,000 new cases of childhood cancer each year.
  Children under the age of 21 are diagnosed with cancer every year; 
approximately \1/4\ of them will not survive the disease.
  Each year in Texas, almost 1,200 children and adolescents younger 
than 20 years of age are diagnosed with cancer. Approximately 200 
children and adolescents die of cancer each year, making cancer the 
most common cause of disease-related mortality for Texans 0-19 years of 

                       Treatments and Death Rates

  Approximately 2,300 children will die this year from cancer.
  The five-year survival rates for childhood cancer have increased 
greatly over the past 30 years.
  Prior to 1970, children diagnosed with cancer would survive less than 
50 percent of the time.
  Today, due to modern forms of treatment, the five-year survival rate 
is almost 80 percent.
  Cure rates vary for specific cancers depending on the stage of 
diagnosis and the cancer type; some forms of cancer remain resistant to 
  For example, due to better treatments and research, children with 
leukemia can be cured almost 80 percent of the time. Neuro-blastoma is 
among the most difficult childhood cancers to cure.
  More kids die from childhood cancers than any other disease.
  In fact, cancer kills more children than asthma, cystic fibrosis, 
diabetes, and pediatric AIDS combined.
  By the age of 20, one in every 330 Americans will develop cancer.
  Approximately 10,400 children and teens ages 0-14 years will be 
diagnosed with cancer this year in the United States.
  Treating childhood cancer differs greatly from treating adults with 
  Those children who do survive may have serious health challenges to 
long term survival--for example a treatment that saves a child's life 
may cause a severe heart problem that threatens the long term health of 
that child.
  Today, more than 90% of 13,500 children and adolescents diagnosed 
with cancer each year in the United States are cured because of the 
work of researchers like those working at NIH.
  Research is needed to help these young cancer survivors' live full 
and productive lives.
  I know that members of the majority now know that there is a 
government agency called the National Institutes of Health and that the 
work that this government agency does is important, but the work of all 
of our federal agencies are important.
  For this reasons, we cannot wait for the majority to discover all of 
the reasons why we have a federal government or the importance and 
purpose of each agency.
  We have to pass a clean CR now--we do not need to wait, just bring to 
the floor the bills sent to this body by the Senate.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 370, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the joint resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.