On the recordJune 22, 2011
I thank Jared Polis, who is a brilliant former member of the Judiciary Committee, and we miss him very much. Ladies and gentlemen, the reason these two bills are put together is very easy to fathom, that is that we have started off by, for the first time in the 112th Congress, violating the CutGo rule, formerly known as the pay-as-you-go rule, and we're trying to mask it by talking about how wonderful the second bill, the Jobs and Energy Permitting Act, H.R. 2021, is. But it's not going to work, friends, because we know why we're trying to play down the patent bill that the rule is originally committed to. {time} 1310 It is because there are growing numbers of Members that are not only going to vote ``no'' on the rule, but they are going to vote ``no'' on the bill since for the first time since January that this CutGo rule was instituted, which prohibits consideration of a bill that has the net effect of increasing spending within a 5-year window, it is waived. In other words, you can't pass a bill that will increase spending without providing an offset. There is no offset. That is understood. But here is what the Congressional Budget Office said, that this bill will increase direct spending by $1.1 billion over the 2012-2021 period. It will increase it by $140 million by establishing a new procedure post-grant review. It will increase it by $750 million, because they establish a procedure that would allow patent holders to request the PTO to review an existing patent.…





