I thank the gentleman, regretfully, because I know how passionate the gentleman from New Jersey is about this important issue. Madam Chairman, I rise in opposition to this well-intentioned amendment, which seeks to add $2.5 million to reestablish the Office of Technology Assessment, which did have an important scope of work for Congress during its existence in the 1990s. Unfortunately, the amendment takes the funding from the House Historic Buildings Revitalization Trust Fund. This fund is critical for the long-term maintenance for such items as the Cannon House Office Building's rehabilitation, which is an ongoing project that has already begun. The fund was established so we could bank resources over several years for the revitalization of our House office buildings and stave off cost overruns that have plagued previous projects. I have been a supporter of the Office of Technology Assessment dating back to my time as chair of this subcommittee. In fact, in fiscal years 2008-2010, I included $2.5 million in this bill within the Government Accountability Office for activities similar in scope to the work of OTA's. I also supported an identical amendment offered by Mr. Holt in fiscal year 2012, as the Cannon project had not yet commenced, but now that it has, I cannot support an amendment in good conscience that would take critical resources from a fund that supports ongoing rehabilitation projects on the Capitol complex.…
On the recordMay 1, 2014
Share & report
More from Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Dec 4, 2024
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank my good friends from Maryland, Mr. Mfume and Mr. Raskin, for their diligent work on this bill to honor the life and legacy of Elijah Cummings. Chairman Cummings was known throughout…
May 1, 2025
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be physically present for votes today. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 113 and NAY on Roll Call No. 114. Personal Explanation
Jan 21, 2025
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 the subject of this Special Order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection…





