On the recordJune 22, 2011
I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to raise my concerns about H.R. 1249 and the rule and in particular the manager's amendment. America's uniquely innovative culture is the source of our economic strength, and I have long supported fundamental reforms to our patent system that would reduce the patent backlog, increase the quality of patents, and ensure that the patent system is not abused in ways that threaten innovation. One of the best things in the bill up until now has been a provision to attack the backlog by devoting all of the fees gathered in the patent process to the Patent Office. We are asking the stakeholders of invention to pay higher fees to reduce the backlog. How can we ask them to do that if we are going to divert the fees they pay to paying general government expenses? The provision in the underlying bill would have ended that practice, would have ended fee diversion, a diversion that has cost the invention community and our economy over a billion dollars in diverted funds. Unfortunately, the manager's amendment would severely undercut and really do away with that principle. I know as an appropriator I'm not supposed to be saying this. As a former member of the Judiciary Committee, however, I am, and that is, we should not be diverting these fees. We should not be diverting fees that need to be used to take down that backlog, to make sure that inventors can quickly patent their products and take them to market.…





