Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that American small businesses are entitled to a Small Business Bill of Rights.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 235, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 22) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that American small businesses are entitled to a Small Business Bill of Rights, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the goal of the Small Business Bill of Rights is to provide a blueprint for Congress to help small business employers create more jobs. A job is the best social program in the world. It provides income, health insurance, and dignity.

Significantly, 70 percent of all new jobs in the United States are created by small business people. In light of the fact that small business employers are the engine that drive this economy, I decided to meet with 20 very successful small business people in Orlando, Florida, to learn firsthand what, if anything, Congress could do to help small business employers create even more jobs.

I learned a lot by sitting down and listening to small business people. First, I learned that the number one issue facing small business people today is the skyrocketing cost of health insurance. In fact, a growing number of small businesses today are not able to provide health insurance to their employees, primarily because of the surging cost. Of the 45 million Americans without health insurance, 60 percent are small business employees and their families.

Right now, small businesses are unable to achieve the bargaining power of large corporations when negotiating with insurance companies to obtain affordable health insurance for their employees. The premiums that small businesses pay are typically 20 to 30 percent higher than those of large companies.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, small businesses that obtain insurance from association health plans can save up to 25 percent.

These small business people told me that they needed the right to be able to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for their employees so their workers have the opportunity to get the same health care benefits now reserved for those employees of Fortune 500 companies.

The second thing I learned is that many of these small businesses are family owned. Unfortunately, the death tax causes one-third of all family-owned businesses to liquidate after the death of the owner. If Congress does not undertake any meaningful reforms of the death tax laws, then small businesses will go back to paying up to 55 percent in tax rates in the year 2011. Unfortunately, the only small family-owned business in America that knows for sure whether they will die in the year 2010 is the Sopranos.

Understandably, these small business people want the right to tax laws that allow family-owned small business people to survive over several generations and offer them incentives to grow.

The third thing I learned is that frivolous lawsuits and the rising cost of liability insurance represent a very serious threat to small business owners. Unlike large, multinational corporations, small business owners do not have the resources to defend themselves against frivolous litigation and are often forced, for business reasons, to settle a claim for $5,000 to $10,000 rather than pay a defense attorney $100,000 to successfully defend them in court.

Finally, I learned that burdensome regulations and paperwork cost small business more than $5,500 per employee, and these small business owners understandably want the right to be free of unnecessary, restrictive regulations and paperwork which end up wasting their time and energy and prevent them from creating additional jobs.

After listening to the challenges and solutions proposed by various small business people, I worked with some of my Democrat colleagues to craft a Small Business Bill of Rights.

I want to particularly thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer) for being an original cosponsor of H. Res. 22.

Now, we had a hearing on the Small Business Bill of Rights last month. At that hearing, witnesses from NFIB and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce testified that the four issues identified in the Small Business Bill of Rights were in fact the top four issues affecting small businesses in the United States today, according to the surveys of their members.

After the hearing, we added language relating to the importance of lower energy costs, increasing access to capital, and opening access to government contracts for small business. To my left here is a chart which shows the Small Business Bill of Rights.

Number one. The right to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for small business employees, who make up a large portion of the millions of Americans without health insurance.

Number two. The right to simplify tax laws that allow family-owned small businesses to survive over several generations, and offer them incentives to grow.

Number three. The right to be free from frivolous lawsuits, which harm law-abiding small businesses and prevent them creating new jobs.

Number four. The right to be free of unnecessary restrictive regulations and paperwork which waste the time and energy of small business people.

Number five. The right to relief from high energy costs, which pose a real threat to the survival of small businesses.

Number six. The right to equal treatment as compared with large businesses when seeking access to start-up and expansion capital and credit.

Number seven. The right to open access to the government procurement marketplace through the breaking up of large contracts to give small business owners a fair opportunity to compete for Federal contracts.

Now, if someone is not in favor of the Small Business Bill of Rights, if they would be voting ``no'' on this, then what would they be voting in favor of? In favor of higher health insurance costs, higher taxes, more frivolous lawsuits, more paperwork and regulations, higher energy costs, more obstacles to getting capital, more obstacles to getting Federal contracts for small business people?

In fact, the Small Business Bill of Rights, as you might imagine, passed the Committee on Small Business on a voice vote. Not a single Republican or Democrat member voiced opposition to this. There is nothing here at any time that any Republican or Democrat during the markup process or the Committee on Rules or anywhere else sought to remove. There is no controversy that has been articulated so far about these seven things.

To the extent people may have criticisms, it is criticism of what is not on here. Some folks wish that there were a couple of things that were added that were not here. I can tell you that when I met with small business people, various of them told me different items that were not on here. But when I interviewed 20 people and then had testimony from the witnesses of large organizations, I tried to put together the top-tier issues that affect people across the board in the United States. And while some issues may affect this person or that person, these are the top-tier issues.

Now, it does not list every issue in the world affecting small business people. This is merely a blueprint. If I put every single issue affecting small business people, all people, then what we would probably have is something that is as thick as a phone book. But what we have here are some consensus noncontroversial items, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' in favor of H. Res. 22.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to briefly address some of the items raised by the gentlewoman from New York. This bill, House Resolution 22, is what it says it is, a blueprint for Congress to follow; that, if followed, will help small businesses create additional jobs. She says, well, it is not enough just to have a blueprint, we should do something about some of these things; and why has this Congress not done anything about it?

I had to smile when hearing that, and I will give three examples of why. The very first thing in the Small Business Bill of Rights says the right to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for small business employees. Now, I happen to be a cosponsor of that legislation, the Association Health Plans, as is the gentlewoman who uttered that statement. And, in fact, Congress has just acted on that bill on the Committee on Education and the Workforce, on which I serve, and we will be bringing that bill up to the floor for a vote in the future where it will surely pass the House of Representatives. I recently met with President Bush about that issue and asked him to help push this issue in the Senate.

The second issue mentioned in the Small Business Bill of Rights is the right to simplify tax laws that allow family-owned small businesses to survive over several generations and offer them incentives to grow. Why have we not done anything about that? In fact, just last week we passed a law repealing the death tax. In fact, I cosponsored that legislation.

The third issue was the right to be free from frivolous lawsuits which harm law-abiding small businesses and prevent them creating new jobs. In fact, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) has filed legislation called the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, which I have cosponsored, which says we will have mandatory sanctions for frivolous lawsuits, and three strikes and you are out for those attorneys who file frivolous lawsuits. This is not really a Republican issue, but as well as having support of people like myself, it had the support of Senator John Edwards and Senator John Kerry on the campaign trail, who said we should have tough sanctions and a three-strikes-and-you-are-out penalty. That is legislation that passed the House last time and we will surely seek to pass it this time.

So, Mr. Speaker, we have laid out the blueprint here and then said we are creating order out of chaos. Of all the different myriad issues, these are the top-tier issues, and now we must take action to pass these pieces of legislation. And in fact this Congress is committed to doing that and has already done that in the three instances I have talked about.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to insert for the Record a copy of the exchange of letters between the chairman of the Committee on Small Business, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo); the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas); and the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) regarding H. Res. 22.

And I will also insert into the Record a statement by the chairman of the Committee on Small Business, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

House of Representatives,

Committee on Ways and Means,

Washington, DC, April 26, 2005.

Hon. Donald A. Manzullo,

Chairman, Committee on Small Business,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Manzullo: I am writing concerning H. Res. 22,

a resolution ``[e]xpressing the sense of the House of

Representatives that American small businesses are entitled

to a Small Business Bill of Rights,'' which was reported by

the Committee on Small Business on Thursday, April 21, 2005.

As you know, the Committee on Ways and Means has

jurisdiction over the Internal Revenue Code. The second

resolution clause referring to the ``right'' afforded to

small businesses to simplified tax laws would require changes

to the Internal Revenue Code, and thus clearly falls within

the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. However,

the Committee will not take action on this particular

resolution. This is being done with the understanding that it

does not in any way prejudice the Committee with respect to

the appointment of conferees or its jurisdictional

prerogatives on this or similar legislation.

I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming

this understanding with respect to H. Res. 22, and would ask

that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be

included in the Congressional Record during floor

consideration.

Best regards,

Bill Thomas,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize how important access to capital is to America's small businesses. That is why we listened to small business owners when they testified here last month and included language in this bill emphasizing the importance of capital and credit to small business growth. I am very happy that the 7(a) program, referenced by the gentleman, is not only thriving but that it is self-sufficient, operating at a zero subsidy and saving American taxpayers millions of dollars.

With the passage of the Small Business Bill of Rights, we will be emphasizing Congress' commitment to access to capital for small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, again I have to smile listening to the gentleman's comments because he said this is a bill of platitudes that is a partisan Republican agenda, and then he turns around and

said that he proudly supports association health plans, along with the ranking member, and we need action on them. I think that is a bit inconsistent, although I will agree with the gentleman, association health plans are very important. I think it is fair to say that they will pass overwhelmingly in the House. We want to make that a priority. I think it is fair to say the Senate has not taken them up, should have taken them up, and darn well better take them up and finally pass them this term. I think we want to send a strong message that the House considers this a top priority of small businesses.

With respect to the other issues, certainly we want to focus on the top-tier issues, such as repealing the death tax, and not just a platitude. We want it to pass and we took action last week, and it is going to come back in the form of a conference report. We want the small business community to be on record as saying that we think that is important that we finally repeal the death tax once and for all.

With respect to frivolous lawsuits and liability concerns, we will have an opportunity to address that this Congress. We want this country to know we are listening to small business people when they say that they are concerned about frivolous lawsuits and there should be some sanctions. So we have simply taken many, many issues, identified them in this blueprint by saying these are the top-tier issues that the NFIB says are the top issues to their members, the Chamber of Commerce says, and the regular people that I have interviewed say, and say, we hear you, we know you want action, and we are identifying these top priorities, and we intend to take action on those top priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) just urged a ``no'' vote. Now what does that mean: A Member is not for the things that we have here in the bill of rights, seven things that no person at any time on the Committee on Small Business has ever moved to strike, and we are voting on this Small Business Bill of Rights. We are not voting on what is not here; we are voting on what is in front of us.

I want to be very clear to Members who are heeding this gentleman's advice that they should vote ``no.'' If a Member votes ``no'' on what we are advocating, you are voting ``yes'' for higher health insurance costs, ``yes'' for higher death taxes, ``yes'' for more frivolous lawsuits, ``yes'' for more paperwork, ``yes'' for higher energy costs, ``yes'' for more obstacles to getting capital, and ``yes'' for more obstacles for getting contracts from the Federal Government for small businesses.

I believe the appropriate vote here is a ``yes'' vote to send a message to the small business people in this country that we appreciate the fact that they are creating 70 percent of all the new jobs in this country. We hear their concerns. We want to help them. We have listened to their top priorities; and by golly, we are going to work to pass each and every one of these items in this Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) had the opportunity to read the bill. She said it does not say anything about access to capital or contract bundling. In reality, it specifically says small businesses shall have the right to equal treatment as compared to large businesses when seeking access to start- up and expansion capital and credit. It says small businesses should have the right to open access to the government procurement marketplace through the breaking up of large contracts to give small business owners a fair opportunity to compete for Federal contracts.

We specifically added those provisions knowing that they were of concern to the minority members on the Committee on Small Business.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly respect the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) and appreciate the gentleman agreeing with at least some of the positions in here, although the gentleman's position is somewhat interesting to me because on the one hand he is demanding that certain items be included that are not included, and on the other hand he says the resolution is meaningless.

So if in reality the resolution is meaningless, then why is it so key to him to have those things included?

The second thing he mentioned is we must not care about minority- or women-owned businesses. There is not one single thing in the Small Business Bill of Rights that says anything bad about women or minority businesses. I have not heard from any colleague any ill feelings to any women or minority businesses. There is language talking about equal access to capital and government contracts.

His saying next, I believe, we must not have talked to any folks representing minority-owned businesses, in reality we had testimony from the Chamber of Commerce at this hearing which said they represent 3 million businesses, testimony from NFIB representing 600,000 small businesses, small business owners, white, black, Hispanic and others; and they gave us their top four issues as surveyed by their own members as association health plans, repealing the death tax, cracking down on frivolous lawsuits, and reducing paperwork. So these were the top-tier issues of these organizations, which do include small businesses.

I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, with respect to what was considered by the committee, the committee, minority members included, got a full hearing. Everybody got to ask questions twice. They then had three provisions added to the original Small Business Bill of Rights by me through substitute amendments, and then they got a vote on four of their six amendments before time expired. No, there was not a vote on the 8(a) program. There is nothing in here that says 8(a) is bad or good.

I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, and certainly she can get her own time to respond, but, no, there was a lady who was invited to testify before the committee representing herself. She certainly did not represent 100 percent of all minorities in the country. She did not pretend to represent any minorities other than herself.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I will respond to the comments of the gentlewoman from California. Mr. Speaker, no one, no one, at the hearing of this resolution, either submitted written testimony or spoke about the Small Business Administration's microloan program. That is not to say that the program is unimportant. The Committee on Small Business has argued against eliminating the microloan program in the past. However, the main purpose of this resolution is to include only those issues that affect a broad cross-section of all small businesses. The microloan program serves a small niche marketplace. Access to capital issues are already addressed in the Small Business Bill of Rights. We specifically say small businesses should be entitled to the right to equal treatment as compared to large businesses when seeking access to startup and expansion capital and credit.

Again, this is an example of someone criticizing the resolution not for what it says. They do not disagree with what it says. It is something that is not even there in it, and it confounds me a little bit. And I have to tell my colleagues when I interviewed various businessmen, they had a lot of ideas that they thought should be included and focused on in Congress that, frankly, I did not include in this resolution, even though I like them and they are sincere and it is important to them, because it was not a top-tier issue. It did not affect a broad cross-section of people. It was not a consensus noncontroversial issue.

Just to give one example, one of the businessmen I interviewed was Mr. Bruce O'Donohue, who installs traffic lights. He says the biggest frustration as a small business person is getting reimbursed from the local, State, and Federal Government when they install traffic lights. It has a big impact on a small business guy to do work and then wait 4 or 5 months to get paid much more than it does a Fortune 500 company. I am sure for him this is more important than death tax laws and association health plans and frivolous lawsuits, and I do not doubt the sincerity. But I did not include it because it was the only time I heard it. It did not come up in the hearing. It was not a broad consensus issue.

So I could have made this piece of legislation as thick as a phone book and included everything in the world, but then nothing would ever get done. Instead, we decided to go with a blueprint of the top-tier issues that essentially says to Congress these are important; and if we do nothing else, let us at least achieve these top priorities.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, just to respond to one allegation by the gentlewoman which essentially was that Republicans have been in power for a while and have done nothing to help small businesses with respect to tax relief. I would dispute that pretty vigorously, and I do not need to look for too many examples of that.

When I was elected to Congress in the year 2000, small businesses, most of which are subchapter S pass-through entities, were paying a tax rate of 40 percent. On the other hand, the Fortune 500 corporations were paying a corporate tax rate of 35 percent. President Bush thought that was unfair, and we passed President Bush's tax relief initiative and brought small businesses from 40 percent down to 35 percent. We have seen 2 million new jobs created in the past year in large part because of that tax policy, and, in fact, 70 percent of those new jobs were created by small business people.

He also thought it was important that people have incentives to invest, so he asked us and we complied, and we lowered the capital gains tax from 20 percent down to 15 percent. We have had extraordinary tax growth. So I think the President has taken the lead with respect to tax relief, and the Congress has agreed with him, and we have had some pretty good success with that.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Again, I respect the comments and enthusiasm of the gentleman from Illinois, and I wish I had his wonderful voice, by the way; maybe I would be more persuasive.

We hear criticisms that, well, this is just a blueprint, we need action. And then it is criticized because it does not have a thing or two that they want in there. So if it is, in fact, a meaningless blueprint and does not in fact do what I say it does, and that is provide a blueprint of action for this Congress, why are they so desperately trying to get their provisions in here?

I have to tell my colleagues that there are some folks who do not agree with their characterization that this is not important. The NFIB, which represents 600,000 small businesses, sent out a letter yesterday to every Member of Congress, please vote for the Keller Small Business Bill of Rights. This is important to us to have this blueprint.

The Chamber of Commerce sent out a letter on April 25, 2 days ago, which represents 3 million people, asking each Member of Congress, please vote for this Small Business Bill of Rights. This is a blueprint that is critical to have on the record so that this Congress will follow it.

I believe that we do need to have action after this. I believe that the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) was smart and right to cosponsor the Association Health Plans. I share her criticism as to why the Senate has not acted, but we are going to act on this, and we are going to demand they act.

She inquired of me earlier, well, you, and I assume she meant my party, control the White House and the Senate; why do you not do something and get the President to act? I have to share with my colleagues that on March 18, just a little while ago, I had the happy privilege of flying down to my home district of Orlando with President Bush on Air Force One and he invited me up to his cabin there where his mom, Barbara Bush was, and I got the chance to chat with them, just he and I and Senator Martinez, for an hour. He said, if you could have me do anything, what would you want me to do? I said, sir, I want you to use your bully pulpit to help us pass association health plans in the Senate. He said he supports it and he would agree to do that.

So I do not know what more I can do, other than asking the Commander in Chief, one on one, and getting his commitment that he is going to push for that. But I have tried. I wish I were a dictator for a day sometimes, because if I was, we would have association health plans.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let us talk a little bit about this Small Business Bill of Rights and whether or not it accurately represents small business people. When I was assigned to the Small Business Committee, before accepting my Chair there, I decided to personally go interview small business people in my district.

I did not pretend to have any idea as to what their top issues were. I just knew that they were creating 70 percent of all new jobs in this country; and I wanted to see what, if anything, I and other Members of Congress could do to help them. I went into those meetings with an open mind. I then came out learning that the skyrocketing health insurance was the number one issue, and they wanted association health plans.

I learned their number two issue was small family-owned businesses wanting to pass the businesses from one generation to the next under some reformed death tax laws. Right now what we have was unacceptable.

I have learned that they had concerns about frivolous lawsuits, and their liability premiums were going up, and that it was hard for them to defend a case in court, even if they were not at fault, because attorneys are so expensive, and so they would rather pay 10 grand to settle a case where they did nothing wrong rather than pay $100,000.

I also learned that they were spending about $5,500 per employee on unnecessary paperwork and regulations. I learned from these meetings that, in fact, those were not only the top four issues, but in about that order.

And then later, when the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) said that she wanted to have a hearing on this matter, we had the majority and minority call witnesses. And I did not know what these witnesses were going to say at that hearing.

But when we got to the hearing, we had the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which does represent 3 million businesses, and not just the 20 I spoke of, say that, in fact, according to the polls of those members, those four issues that consistently came up in my district of Orlando were the top four issues in the country facing small businesses.

We then had a gentleman testify on behalf of NFIB named Jerry Pierce. And he testified those were the top four issues according to him and NFIB. And so, in fact, we had isolated the top four issues affecting small businesses, and they rightfully deserve to be there.

So we put together this Small Business Bill of Rights; did not do it alone, sat down and talked with a Democrat colleague of mine who is the original cosponsor of this, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), and put together what we thought were the top four issues.

We then had a hearing. And the minority said, well, there are some other issues that are also important dealing

with energy costs and access to capital and contract bundling. We put those there as well.

And so we came up with this Small Business Bill of Rights, not by accident or witchcraft or consulting some psychic. We came up with these issues by talking directly to business people out in the field, in congressional hearings, and listening to what they said in their surveys. And we came up with a pretty good bill that almost everyone, Republican and Democrat, should support.

Now, there is a reason not to support this; and I will tell you, in the interest of straight talk. If you disagree with what this says, and you believe there should be higher health insurance, then do not support it. If you think there should be more taxes, then do not support it. If you think we should have more frivolous lawsuits, do not support it. If you want more red tape and paperwork, do not support it. If you want higher energy costs, do not support it. If you want more obstacles to getting contracts, do not support it. If you want it to be harder to get access to capital, do not support it. But if you are a small business person and you represent small business people, realize that this Small Business Bill of Rights represents what they tell us they want Congress to do.

During this week, National Small Business Week, let us send a message to small business people: we hear you, we have a resolution listing these as the blueprint for our priorities in Congress, and we are going to vote ``yes'' to send a message that we are going to get these things done, if nothing else.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``yes'' on H. Res. 22 and vote ``no'' on the motion to recommit.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 22.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

As we are in the middle of recognizing National Small Business Week, most small business owners are going forward with their daily routine; waking up, heading into work, opening up their stores, and figuring out ways to pay their bills, manage their employees, and satisfy their customers.

All day today we have been hearing about the numbers of challenges facing small firms, and we will continue to hear about these challenges over and over again. But the sad reality is that small businesses are facing tougher times today, now more than ever. With skyrocketing health care, energy and gas prices, rising interest rates and a $427 billion budget deficit, there are already restrictions facing those entrepreneurs who want to start and expand their business ventures.

And now I want to ask, what is Congress' answer to all this, to all these challenges facing small firms? The answer is: Give small businesses some rights. You should have the right to access health care, the right to be relieved of regulatory burdens, and the right to tax simplification. This is all good when it is said and done, but what is Congress going to do to carry through on those promises? What action is going to be taken to back up the rhetoric?

Supporters of this bill will tell you that opposition to this resolution is opposition to helping small businesses. However, the truth is that if you votes ``yes'' on House Resolution 22, you have voted to do nothing more than offer empty promises to small businesses, empty promises that Congress probably will not keep.

This is because tonight, when this Nation's small business owners go home, probably somewhere around 10 or 11, well after we have been done and gone for the day and after having missed a family dinner and maybe even a Little League game because they believe so much in their business venture, not one of their challenges will be solved because we voted ``yes'' for House Resolution 22. Today's actions will not fix even one of the problems that most small business owners went to work with this morning.

The Small Business Bill of Rights will not provide health care, it will not give entrepreneurs more access to capital, it will not relieve them of regulatory burdens, and it definitely will not help minority- and women-owned firms to grow a successful business. So continue talking about what you want to do for small businesses today, keep talking about what the challenges are, but what I want to know is when my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going to stop talking and start taking action.

The bottom line here is that voting for House Resolution 22 today will not make a single thing better for this Nation's small businesses. It might make a great press release for some and another opportunity to boast support for entrepreneurs, but, sadly, that is all it will be.

This Small Business Week all that our Nation's entrepreneurs will be getting are more empty promises. By voting for House Resolution 22, you are voting to make more empty promises to small businesses this week. What we need now is for small businesses to see some well-deserved and long-overdue action taken to address their challenges. No more rhetoric. That is the least we can do for this Nation's small businesses this week.

This should be seen for what it truly is, a sham, and it should be voted down.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds. I would say that a blueprint is important, but at some point we need to start building a house.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price).

(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, yes, I agree with the gentleman that we have association health plans, and that is a bipartisan issue that has support; but we have voted in this House four times on that issue. How many more times do we need to vote in the House? The other side controls the White House and the Senate. On the one issue where there is bipartisan support, the other side cannot get the President to call the Senate and get this legislation passed. That is how much the other side of the aisle cares about access to health care for small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, two things. Only one person, one witness, testified on behalf of the 8(a) program. So she represented 100 percent of minority businesses in this country. Secondly, is it not true that in the list of priorities for NFIB, frivolous lawsuit does not make the top 50, it does not rank?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I just would like to say that more than 50 percent of the microloan program loans went to minority entrepreneurs, making it a critical source for funding for new minority-owned firms. That is quite a niche for us. It might not be for the other party.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of the Chair how much time is remaining on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

(Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, small businesses got only $500. That is nothing compared to the $3,000 that they have to pay in fees through the 7(a) program.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes, 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

(Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire how much time is left.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

Mr. Speaker, who was the right to close?

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 1\1/2\ minutes for myself.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

My colleagues have all heard about the challenges facing small business today during this debate. It has become very clear that House Resolution 22 will do nothing to address these issues, and it is nothing more than pure rhetoric.

This resolution fails terribly in providing strong solutions and action items to help this Nation's small businesses. It also fails terribly in representing the needs of all sectors of the small business community. With all the respect due to the main sponsor of this resolution, 20 small businesses from his district do not represent 20 small businesses in my district, or 20 small businesses in any other Members' district. By voting for House Resolution 22, you are merely casting a blank ballot. This bill of rights is nothing more than empty promises to our Nation's small businesses.

I am going to request a motion to recommit this bill back to the committee. By voting for this motion to recommit, you will be voting to give small businesses the opportunity to truly receive more capital through SBA lending programs and to protect them from free trade agreements. Most importantly, you will be voting to make the needs of women- and minority-owned businesses a true priority. These are critical provisions that need to be addressed.

This resolution does not represent the needs of all our Nation's small businesses. In order to enhance House Resolution 22, I urge you to vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit this legislation to the committee. And I urge you to vote ``no'' on final passage.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Yes, in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I might consume.

(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this closed rule. Once again, the majority has muted debate on a piece of legislation for no legitimate reason. The resolution has not been fully debated before the committee of jurisdiction and, as a result, it fails to include a number of priorities important to small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the engine of America's economy, representing more than 95 percent of all employers, creating half of our gross domestic product, and creating 3 out of 4 of new jobs nationwide. Small business owners are leaders in innovation, creating new technology, new products, and more effective business operations. The government should help small business owners achieve their goals, not stand in their way. I think this is something all Members can support.

There are some very good elements of this ``small business bill of rights'' resolution that I support. I believe small business should not be hampered with unnecessary restrictive regulations and paperwork. I support the provision insisting that small businesses have the right to equal treatment and should have expanded access to capital and credit.

Opening up assets to government contracts for small businesses should be a top priority for Congress. I support the principle in House Resolution 22 that we must consider legislation to create a fair and open Federal contracting system to make sure that everyone has a fair shot in winning a Federal contract. There must be an end to the practice of awarding ``mega contracts'' that take opportunities away from small businesses at no savings to the taxpayer. We must institute a fair contracting appeals process for small businesses to be heard.

I also support expanding contract opportunities for women, low-income individuals, and minorities by strengthening such key business development programs as 8(a). These actions will reduce current barriers and ensure small businesses have access to perform Federal contracts.

But small businesses have expressed additional priorities, and I wish we would have included them in the resolution. Instead, the majority chose to insert partisan agenda items.

During the committee markup, the chairman restricted debate time on all amendments to 4 minutes per side. After considering the first 5 amendments, the chairman moved to cut off debate, which passed on a strict party-line vote. This was done despite having two Democratic amendments still pending before the committee.

One of these amendments, offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), would have strengthened programs for minority entrepreneurs. The other, offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda Sanchez), would express support for the microloan program which the administration eliminated in its fiscal 2006 budget.

I understand that the chairman had only allotted an hour for the committee markup, but we have an opportunity today with this rule to provide time for the debate we should have had. These thoughtful amendments should be heard. So far this year, the Committee on Rules has only reported one open rule, just one, out of 21 rules. It is time to allow Congress to do its job, and part of that job is to openly discuss the priorities facing our Nation.

Why not make time for this debate? The Members that were denied debate in committee came before the Committee on Rules last night to urge their amendments be made in order. Several other amendments were also offered. I cannot help but point out that our legislative schedule this week has plenty of room in it. Not surprisingly, however, the majority chose not to have a full debate and ignored amendments that could have improved this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the amendments blocked from consideration today would have made House Resolution 22 a complete bill of rights. For instance, small business owners need access to capital and technical expertise if they are to make the most of their opportunities. The Small Business Administration provides this critical assistance to small business owners. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean) offered amendments recognizing that we should be supporting all of SBA's programs, including the microloan and 7(a) lending programs. But, again, this rule risks leaving a gaping hole in this list of rights.

House Resolution 22 could also be strengthened to ensure that minority business owners retain their place as a vibrant part of the U.S. economy. The Barrow-Moore amendment, if made in order, would do just that. While minority individuals comprise nearly one-third of the population, only 15 percent of businesses are minority-owned. These businesses employ 5 million people and generate nearly $600 billion in revenue. Given the gap between the number of individuals and the business ownership rate, it is clear that an entrepreneurial divide exists in this country. One of the most significant reasons for this divide is the fact that minority-owned companies have not seen legislative updates for nearly 20 years. Congress must bring these programs into the 21st century. Minority business owners deserve the right to have these important initiatives modernized.

The only way to achieve a complete bill of rights is to include all of the rights small businesses are asking for. A closed rule does not do this. An open rule, a better rule, would allow full debate on small business priorities. An open rule today would allow the House of Representatives to consider the importance of such issues as access to affordable capital and changing the Federal marketplace to meet the needs of small business. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this closed rule.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

(Ms. VELAZQUEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

(Mr. GRIJALVA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can change this rule to include three very important Democratic amendments that were not allowed by the Committee on Rules last night. In fact, two of the amendments, one offered by my colleagues, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), related to the rights of minority business owners. Another offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda Sanchez) relating to expanding the microloan program was denied not only in the Committee on Rules but in the Committee on Small Business as well.

The third amendment denied by the Committee on Rules, offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean), would have put the House on record in support of the 7(a) loan program.

Mr. Speaker, this should not be about partisan politics. It is about fairness. It is bad enough that most Democratic amendments are blocked from floor considerations around here; now the Republican leadership does not even want them considered in the committees of original jurisdiction. I am very disturbed by the pattern of abuse that seems to be spreading in this House, first on the House floor and now in the committee process as well. This must stop.

Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can include these three thoughtful amendments. I want to make it very clear, that a ``no'' vote will not stop us from considering this legislation; however, a ``yes'' vote will block these amendments from any type of congressional action in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendments immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia for yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of the rule and H. Res. 22.

The purpose of the small business bill of rights is to provide a blueprint for Congress to follow to help small business employers create even more jobs. A job is the best social program in the world. It gives a person income and health insurance and dignity. Since 70 percent of all new jobs in this country are created by small businesses, I met personally with 20 very successful small business employers in central Florida to learn firsthand what, if anything, Congress can do to help them create more jobs. Four top-tier issues consistently emerged from these meetings.

First and foremost, they had the problem of addressing skyrocketing health costs, and they wanted the ability to join together to negotiate lower prices.

Second, family-owned businesses, we are seeing one-third of them having to liquidate because of the death tax, and they needed some commonsense reform there.

Third, they had a problem with frivolous lawsuits and skyrocketing liability insurance. Unlike a big corporation, if someone sues them, they do not often have $100,000 to successfully defend the claim, even if frivolous. They have to settle it for a nominal amount, $5,000 or $10,000.

The fourth problem they mentioned over and over was paperwork and red tape.

After listening to their concerns, I joined with my original cosponsor, a Democrat, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), and wrote and filed House Resolution 22.

We have given plenty of opportunity for people to be heard on H. Res. 22. For example, other nonbinding House resolutions sometimes go right to the floor with no hearings, no markups, no motion to recommit. They just get an up-or-down vote on a Suspension Calendar, with no chance to amend at any point. Well, that is not what happened here. In this particular instance, the minority requested that we have a hearing. We readily agreed and had a hearing. At this hearing, witnesses from NFIB and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce testified that the four issues identified in the small business bill of rights were, in fact, the top four issues affecting small businesses in the United States right now.

The minority was allowed to call witnesses at that hearing, and they did. Every member of the hearing, Republican and Democrat, was afforded two full rounds of questioning. Afterwards, the minority said, well, now we want to have a markup on this nonbinding resolution. We agreed to that as well.

At the markup, in an effort to reach out, I offered a substitute amendment which addressed three additional issues that the minority thought were important to them, issues relating to energy costs and access to capital and contract bundling. The substitute amendment I offered was approved by a voice vote.

Even though I had already included these three additional issues at this markup, the minority offered amendment after amendment after amendment after amendment. For example, one of the amendments called for Members to take a controversial stand on whether or not people agreed with the personal retirement accounts under President Bush's Social Security proposals. Things like that ate up time. The four amendments offered by the minority were defeated. But each time they insisted on calling for a roll call vote which ate up additional time.

Now, it is my understanding that the minority Members had two more amendments that they wished to offer, but the chairman had only scheduled an hour for the markup under the understanding that the minority would have few amendments.

So what exactly did the minority get in terms of due process here? They got a full blown hearing. They got three additional issues added to the original resolution, and they got votes on four of the six amendments they offered.

H. Res. 22 was passed by the full committee on a voice vote. Not a single person on the committee, Republican or Democrat, voiced opposition to H. Res. 22 during that voice vote, and the reason is it represents a noncontroversial consensus of what small business employers tell us they need.

Now, what are the Small Business Bill of Rights? There are seven: first, the right to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for small business employees. The right to simplify tax laws that allow family owned businesses to survive over several generations. The right to be free from frivolous lawsuits which harm law-abiding small businesses and prevent them from creating new jobs. The right to be free of unnecessary restrictive regulations and paper work which wastes the time and energy of small businesses while hurting production and preventing job creation. The right to relief from high energy costs which pose a real threat to the survival of small businesses. The right to equal treatment as compared to large businesses when seeking access to capital and expansion capital and credit. The right to open access to the government procurement marketplace through the breaking up of large contracts to give small business owners a fair opportunity to compete for the Federal contracts.

This is what the small business people in America tell us that they want. This is what we learned from the hearing, and this is what is included as the top tier issues in the Small Business Bill of Rights affecting small business people.

Now, if someone is opposed to this Small Business Bill of Rights, what would they be for? They would be for higher health insurance costs, higher taxes, more frivolous lawsuits, more paper work and red tape, higher energy costs, more obstacles to getting capital and more obstacles to getting government contracts.

Now, significantly, at no time in this process, during the markup or otherwise, has there been any attempt to strip away one of these seven rights. To the extent the minority has a controversy with this, it is not anything that is on the board here. It is they think one or two additional things should be there.

Well, let me remind you. The Small Business Bill of Rights is a blueprint that lists the top tier issues facing small businesses in the United States. It does not list every small business issue known to man. If it did, this thing would be as thick as a phone book, and it would not list the priorities.

Some of the business people I met with had things that I did not list because, while it was important to that person or this person, it was not something that was a consensus issue affecting the small business people across the country.

Now, if a Member has some issue that was not included, and they think it is a real important issue, then there is nothing preventing them from filing their own nonbinding House resolution and having that proceed under the regular order.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule. Plenty of opportunity has been heard for both sides to give their input to the Small Business Bill of Rights. It is a bipartisan Small Business Bill of Rights from the get-go when it was filed by a Democrat and myself, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Small Business Bill of Rights, H. Res. 22.

Mr. Speaker, I will not repeat the many cogent remarks that my colleagues have made, but I would like to address some of the things that the gentleman from Florida has said.

First of all, minority- and women-owned businesses are very, very proud to have contributed to this economy. The 3 million businesses with close to 5 million workers have generated close to $600 billion in revenue. My concern is that there will be a serious attrition because, in fact, the programs that have helped to create these businesses are being gutted and have not been improved in 17 years. As a result of our not modernizing these programs, there has been a loss of $10 billion in Federal contracting opportunities.

I would also like to address the gentleman's remarks about no one having a complaint about things in this bill. I suppose, Mr. Speaker, that the welcome for me, a new Member of Congress, is that I was not even allowed to debate my amendment, something that I regret, because I feel that I am a great contributor.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to share a few of the staggering economic statistics in my district of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. In the past 5 years, the city of Milwaukee has lost 33,000 manufacturing jobs. We have had an 80 percent unemployment increase among residents in the city of Milwaukee. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 59 percent, 59 percent of African American males are unemployed, and 92 percent of them live in the city of Milwaukee.

The late great Ronald Reagan once said anecdotally, the best way to address minority business unemployment is to create minority businesses. I could not have said it better.

Mr. Speaker, small businesses create nearly 75 percent of all new jobs, account for 99 percent of all employers, and make up half of our nation's Gross Domestic Product, GDP. Many people of color have embraced the idea of the American dream through business ownership, as minorities own more than 3 million businesses with close to 5 million workers and generate close to $600 billion in revenue.

However, despite the fact that minorities make up one-third of the population, minority-owned businesses account for only 15 percent of all U.S. companies. It seems that an ownership divide exists in this country and more of an effort should be made to encourage minority entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, H. Res. 22 does not adequately reflect the challenges facing many of today's minority entrepreneurs.

Let me briefly run down a few staggering statistics in terms of my district:

Since 1999, the number of unemployed residents in Milwaukee has increased by close to 80 percent.

According to the 2000 census, 59 percent of African American working age males in Milwaukee are either unemployed or out of the workforce.

In the past 5 years, the city of Milwaukee has lost 33,000 manufacturing jobs.

Ninety-two percent of the Metropolitan Milwaukee area's African American labor force lives in the city of Milwaukee.

I know the creation of a handful of new small businesses in my district would be a step in the right direction towards addressing some of the eye-opening figures I mentioned a moment ago. But the resources have to be made available in order to make this happen. Sadly, the actions of the federal government indicate the opposite.

It concerns me that programs established by Congress to promote minority business development, such as the SBA's 8(a) program, have been ignored and allowed to fall behind the times--with no action taken during the past 17 years to ensure that these vital services are able to meet the demands of today's small business marketplace. This is unacceptable.

In the meantime, numerous reforms occurred in the federal procurement process that made it quicker and easier to participate in contract practices. Regrettably, minority-owned firms were unable to capitalize on these improvements due to the outdated procurement initiatives offered through minority business development programs. As a result, these companies lost out on nearly $10 billion in Federal contracting opportunities.

In addition, there are significant racial disparities in Small Business Administration's lending practices. The average loan size for 7(a) loans is $170,000. However, the average 7(a) loan for African American-owned companies is $86,000, and the average 7(a) loan for Hispanic-owned businesses is $128,000.

The Federal Government has also added to the barriers to success already facing minority small business owners though the shutdown of the Small Business Investment Company's, SBIC, Participating Securities program. In 2003, 14 percent of all SBIC's program financings in 2003 went to minority-owned businesses. Entrepreneurs now have one less avenue for capital.

Furthermore, the administration also recommended eliminating the SBA's MicroLoan and PRIME programs, which provide financing and technical assistance to budding minority entrepreneurs. Given the importance of small businesses to the American economy and the serious problems facing urban communities, Congress should take proper action to accommodate the needs of small business owners.

Mr. Speaker, along with my colleague from Georgia, Representative Barrow, I made a good faith effort to introduce an amendment during the Small Business Committee Markup of H. Res. 22 which would have added the concerns of minority small business owners. Unfortunately, we were never granted the opportunity to offer our amendment.

To paraphrase former President Reagan, ``the best way to increase employment in minority communities is to increase the number of minority-owned businesses.'' I couldn't have said it better myself.

This Small Business Bill of Rights does not accurately reflect the concerns of all small businesses in my district. Therefore, I cannot support the resolution. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H. Res. 22.