10:40 PM EDT

Frank R. Wolf, R-VA 10th

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

10:40 PM EDT

Frank R. Wolf, R-VA 10th

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

10:40 PM EDT

Frank R. Wolf, R-VA 10th

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.

Pursuant to the order of the House of today, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.

10:40 PM EDT

Paul Gosar, R-AZ 4th

Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a multifaceted amendment to limit funds within the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act to programs that are constitutional, appropriate, and sane.

For the sake of time, I will just highlight some of the provisions within my amendment.

My amendment protects Second Amendment rights and individual liberties. It does so by prohibiting a Federal firearm registry from being created with funds in this bill. Similar language has previously passed the House.

I also want to bring the House's attention to some of the ludicrous studies that taxpayers have funded via the National Science Foundation.

First, I appreciate the National Science Foundation's mission and its work. The National Science Foundation grantees and funds have been instrumental in advances in the Internet, astronomy, energy, chemistry, and many other important aspects of scientific scholarship; but, like our well-funded government operations, the bureaucracy begins to grow and proper oversight of the grant process begins to wane.

In 2011, Senator Tom Coburn released a publication titled ``The National Science Foundation: Under the Microscope.'' In that document, he outlined a litany of wasteful, superfluous, and seemingly idiotic studies, some of which I will outline here.

There was a study on human reaction to popular baby names. There was a $580,000 grant to study racial preferences in online dating. There was nearly $1 million in multiple grants to study how rumors are started.

There have been nearly two decades of grants awarded to a certain panel in which the National Science Foundation has granted about $60 million. One of the panel's studies covered how much housework a man creates for a wife in his household. There was a $90,000 grant to study the relationship between a researcher and their online avatar in virtual worlds and differences in their behaviors.

Since 2000, grants provided by the National Science Foundation have been used to study crustaceans running on tiny treadmills after being exposed to different microbes.

These little shrimp were also given tiny backpacks to weigh them down, so researchers could study test variables such as weight and resistance. In 2011, the lab said it planned to build treadmills and create studies for lobsters and blue crabs as well. This amendment would prevent these types of abuses.

There was a 2009 grant disbursed to the tune of $300,000, to study how humans ride bicycles. There was another $300,000, which actually came from the stimulus funds, that was disbursed to a married couple to travel to seven countries around the world to study stray dogs in an effort to discover how dogs became man's best friend. Sounds like a heck of a honeymoon to me.

Possibly the most ridiculous grant highlighted by Senator Coburn's report was a National Science Foundation grant to support a robot rodeo hoedown. Let me repeat that: a robot rodeo hoedown. I would like to point out how laughable it was to my staff to work with legislative counsel to define what a hoedown is for the purpose of this amendment.

The project involved programming small robots to dance to ``Chicken [Page: H4998]

Coop Shuffle,'' but I suppose the event wasn't a total loss. It produced hundreds of YouTube views.

I want to, again, thank Senator Coburn and his staff for producing these reports that shed light on these issues. My amendment will not prohibit all future ridiculous taxpayer-funded studies, but hopefully, I can take part in shedding a little bit of light of those that are the most egregious.

The hope is that those people awarding these moneys wake up and use a little more discretion with hard-earned taxpayer money, but I have a feeling I will be back here next year offering a similar amendment. I urge passage of this commonsense amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

POINT OF ORDER

10:43 PM EDT

Frank R. Wolf, R-VA 10th

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

The rule states in pertinent part:

``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.''

The amendment requires new determinations.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.

The Chair finds that this amendment includes language requiring a new determination. The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not in order.

[Time: 22:45]

AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR.

GOSAR