Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act

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

I appreciate the effort, Mr. Speaker, by Chairman Levin to address the concerns of Ranking Member Camp and other Republican Members that were raised at our various hearings. And while the revised version addresses the WTO consistency issue, my view is that, on balance, the promises that this bill makes to compel China to appreciate its currency to reduce the trade deficit and to create U.S. jobs won't be realized, and, therefore, I oppose this bill.

Rather than focus on China's currency policy alone, a priority must be creating American jobs by promoting U.S. exports, and this bill doesn't do enough to provide new market access for American businesses, farmers, and workers. If we are to meet the President's goal of doubling exports, we must focus our energy on tearing down real substantive barriers to U.S. access to China's consumers. We must require China to better U.S. intellectual property rights and end its directed lending, cease its innovative policy, and move other artificial barriers to U.S. exports. Such an effort would benefit thousands more American workers than the focus on China currency alone.

I am concerned that moving on this bill makes it more difficult for us to resolve these other issues, and I think we ought to be careful to avoid doing more harm than good in tearing down these barriers.

Breaking down barriers to U.S. exports is difficult work and requires concerted effort by Congress and the administration. To begin with, rather than merely paying lip service to new and pending trade agreements, we have to find a way to move these agreements forward.

Currently, there is no clear end date for concluding the Trans- Pacific partnership negotiations, no plan from the administration on how it intends to resolve issues related to the U.S.-Colombian, -Panama trade agreements, and just limited discussion on the U.S.-South Korea trade agreement.

The administration must also return to the negotiating table and complete bilateral investment treaty negotiations with China. Entering into a bit with China could help on many of these issues and is necessary to ensure that Americans have the same rights in China as our other trading partners.

Mr. Speaker, while this bill is improved from its original version, it is no substitute for a comprehensive China policy that the administration and the majority have failed to give us. I urge, and strongly urge, a ``no'' vote on this legislation.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), who has played a key role in opening trade barriers for U.S. products.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

At this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), who is focused on jobs, spending, and getting this economy back on track.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.

I would make the point that the Chinese currency appreciated 20 percent during President Bush's administration. It had no impact on the trade deficit. It has only appreciated 5 percent under the current administration, with no impact on the trade deficit.

I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake), who is, again, focused on jobs and getting this economy back on track, as well as limiting the size of these dangerous debts and deficits.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I do think it is unfortunate to try to interject partisan politics into a serious issue. There is already concern that after 4 years this bill is now being rushed to the floor a few weeks ahead of the election. I think at this point on an issue so serious, we ought to be thoughtful, understanding there are Members on both sides of the aisle that have come to different conclusions about this bill.

With that, I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

General Leave

I am, Mr. Chairman.

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

This is an issue, I think, where good people can disagree. There is unanimity in the desire for China to appreciate its currency. There are differences of opinion about what impact that truly would have on our complex relationship with China economically. And there have been a number of issues raised throughout the hearings on this bill, and I do appreciate, to Chairman Levin, taking into account the number of the objections on the most, we think, troubling provisions that Ranking Member Dave Camp from Michigan and others raised during those hearings. I think some of those issues have been addressed in a very positive way, but there are real concerns about how effective this will be, and if it will truly compel China to change its currency regime or that it will significantly change our trade deficit.

I would like to submit for the Record a letter sent by, I think, almost 30 of our major job creators in America, groups that represent many of our agriculture companies and workers, our technology sector, our manufacturing and financial services sector, those who produce and sell medical devices and services throughout the world, including groups like the National Retail Federation; the broader job creators like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and companies that compete and succeed successfully selling U.S. products in China.

This letter agrees with Chairman Levin and others that China needs a yuan exchange rate response to trade flows and that China should move rapidly toward that. But it says:

``We do not agree, however, that H.R. 2378 as reported can help achieve that goal. To the contrary, we believe that passage of this legislation is counterproductive not only to the goals related to China's exchange rate that we all share but also to our Nation's broader goals of addressing the many and growing challenges in the U.S.-China economic relationship, including inadequate protection of intellectual property, restrictions on market access, financial services liberalization, export of commodities such as rare earths, discriminatory indigenous innovation and other industrial policies. Above all, this legislation will do more harm than good to job creation and economic growth at a time when we need both dearly.''

The point of that, I think, is that there are a number of barriers to selling U.S. products fairly and successfully in that growing Chinese market. We all have the same goal. How we achieve it is where we honestly differ.

This group concludes this way:

``We share Congress' desire to have China act more quickly to adopt a market-determined exchange rate, but the proposed unilateral measure is not going to achieve that result. We urge you to oppose H.R. 2378 and, instead, work with and vigorously call on the administration to develop a robust bilateral and multilateral approach to

achieve tangible results, not only on China's exchange rate policies, but also on other Chinese policies that are harming American businesses, workers and farmers.''

I think that is the point, perhaps, of those of us who believe this bill will not achieve what we hope.

While I urge opposition of this bill, there are those who believe that, as we move forward, regardless of the outcome, we ought to, Republicans and Democrats, join hands and insist on fair access to Chinese markets, on a level playing field and on a growing trade relationship that is balanced to increase Chinese consumption, as well as to increase U.S. savings that will rebalance the trade relationship for decades to come. We share those goals and look forward to working with those in Congress who also share them.

September 28, 2010.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

Speaker, House of Representatives,

U.S. Capitol, Washington, DC.

Hon. Steny Hoyer,

Majority Leader, House of Representatives,

U.S. Capitol, Washington, DC.

Hon. John Boehner,

Republican Leader, House of Representatives,

U.S. Capitol, Washington, DC.

Dear Speaker Pelosi and Leaders Hoyer and Boehner: Like

Congress and the Administration, we agree that China needs a

yuan exchange rate that responds to trade flows and that

China should move rapidly towards a market-determined

exchange rate. In addition to continuing U.S. government

efforts, our organizations support strong, coordinated and

enhanced multilateral pressure, including at the early

October Finance Ministers' Meeting in Washington and

continuing at the November G20 Leaders' Meeting in Seoul, to

achieve concrete progress on China's currency and exchange

rate policies.

We do not agree, however, that H.R. 2378 as reported by the

Committee on Ways and Means can help achieve that goal. To

the contrary, we believe that passage of this legislation is

counterproductive not only to the goals related to China's

exchange rate that we all share, but also to our nation's

broader goals of addressing the many and growing challenges

in the U.S.-China economic relationship, including inadequate

protection of intellectual property, restrictions on market

access, financial services liberalization, export of

commodities such as rare earths, discriminatory indigenous

innovation and other industrial policies. Above all this

legislation will do more harm than good to job creation and

economic growth at a time when we need both dearly.

Unilateral legislation, which seeks to increase tariffs on

imports from China, is unlikely to incentivize China to move

expeditiously to modify its exchange policies. Rather, it

would likely have the opposite effect and could engender

retaliation against U.S. exports into the Chinese market,

currently the fastest-growing market for U.S. exports. Our

companies do not fear retaliation--if it were based on WTO-

consistent actions that would achieve the desired result,

with benefits outweighing the costs. But counterproductive

tariff legislation will not get us closer to the goal of a

market-driven exchange rate and will shift the focus away

from the core issue of China's currency and onto U.S.

unilateral action. Such an action would embolden PRC

retaliation and undermine U.S. government efforts to address

a growing number of discriminatory Chinese policies,

weakening our economy by harming American exports of

manufactured goods and farm products.

Despite efforts to make H.R. 2378 consistent with the rules

of the WTO, it is not clear that the legislation meets the

WTO's standards for the application of countervailing duties

(CVDs). The legislation would require the Commerce Department

to estimate what the ``true'' exchange rate is, a process

that will be highly subjective and potentially politicized.

Since application of CVDs to imports from China on the basis

of this legislation is of questionable WTO legality, China

would almost certainly challenge this action as violative of

U.S. WTO obligations, which would focus the world's attention

on the United States and WTO technicalities, and away from

China's exchange-rate policies.

We share Congress' desire to have China act more quickly to

adopt a market-determined exchange rate. But the proposed

unilateral measure is not going to achieve that result. We

urge you to oppose H.R. 2378 and instead work with and

vigorously call on the Administration to develop a robust

bilateral and multilateral approach to achieve tangible

results not only on China's exchange-rate policies, but also

on other Chinese policies that are harming American

businesses, workers and farmers.

Sincerely,

Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed);

American Chamber of Commerce in China; American Chamber

of Commerce in Shanghai; American Chamber of Commerce

in South China; American Apparel & Footwear Association

(AAFA); American Soybean Association; American Meat

Institute; Business Roundtable; Coalition of New

England Companies for Trade (CONECT); Coalition of

Service Industries; Consumer Electronics Association;

and Corn Refiners Association.

Distilled Spirits Council of the United States; Emergency

Committee for American Trade (ECAT); Fashion

Accessories Shippers Association (FASA); Financial

Services Forum; Financial Services Roundtable;

International Dairy Foods Association; Los Angeles

Customs Brokers and Freight Forwarders Association;

National Cattlemen's Beef Association; National Customs

Brokers and Forwarders Association of America (NCBFAA);

National Fisheries Institute; National Foreign Trade

Council; and National Retail Federation.

Pacific Coast Council of Customs Brokers and Freight

Forwarders (PCC); Retail Industry Leaders Association;

Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association;

Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association; Toy Industry

Association; Travel Goods Association (TGA); United

States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel

(USA-ITA); U.S. Chamber of Commerce; US-China Business

Council; U.S. Council for International Business; USA

Poultry & Egg Export Council; and Washington State

China Relations Council.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Arcuri), for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Today, the majority brings to the floor another closed rule denying the minority, denying all Members, the right to offer amendments, in this case, to three very important bills. Despite debating over 130 rules bringing legislation to the floor of this Congress, we have yet to see one open rule. We have before us a closed rule, as I said before, Mr. Speaker, bringing three important pieces of legislation to the floor:

The 9/11 Health and Compensation legislation. It is important that we honor the police and firefighters, the first responders and volunteers also, that served New York and, really, our entire country in the aftermath of the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks.

Those brave men and women deserve to be treated fairly, and their families as well. Unfortunately, as noble as this bill is, it is paid for by increased taxes on companies located in the United States that are employing American workers. Many of us believe that at a time of high unemployment and really evident economic stagnation, our country should not allow the majority to raise taxes.

With regard to the currency legislation, it is meant, Mr. Speaker, to provide leverage to the administration, to the President, in what is America's ongoing work to achieve a proper valuation of the Chinese regime's currency. Despite the best efforts of the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Geithner, and others, the PRC regime has given no indication that they are willing to advance efforts to create a level playing field, and that is not acceptable.

The distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Camp, has included changes in the legislation meant to make the bill compliant with WTO regulations. But, Mr. Speaker, make no mistake, the bill is about sending a message to the PRC regime, a message of American unity, and it is important, it is very important at this time. I think the legislation will move us closer to correcting an obvious unacceptable situation which the PRC regime insists on maintaining, but they need to be clearly informed that they are wrong.

With regard to the intelligence authorization, this is the third time in this Congress that legislation has been brought to the House floor. The most recent delay was the result of a disagreement between the Speaker and the administration, and that has caused a significant delay, about an 8 month delay.

But the third time doesn't seem to be the charm for the majority to allow an open process to consider this legislation that is very important to our national security. One Republican amendment was allowed during the first consideration of the legislation; four Republican amendments the second time, while 26 majority amendments were made in order; and now we are facing a closed rule, no amendments.

The underlying bill contains changes that were negotiated with no House Republican input. The collaboration of one Republican Senator led the majority to declare that this is a bipartisan bill. That is not serious.

Despite the Speaker's insistence on delaying the legislation, the delay has resulted in little tangible change to the requirement to notify leaders of this body in the Intelligence committees. Instead, the administration under the bill retains authority to decide on its own which Members of Congress receive those vital briefings.

The legislation also removes the prohibition on using intelligence funding to bring prisoners from Guantanamo to the United States, and it excludes a bipartisan amendment that would prohibit the granting of Miranda rights to foreign terrorists captured overseas.

I know, Mr. Speaker, the majority wishes to rush to the exit to be back in their districts campaigning, but we should not pass a bill that hurts the intelligence community in the process.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend, the great leader from New York (Mr. King).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen).

It is my pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished Republican whip, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the great young leader from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry).

Mr. Speaker, it's my privilege to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, on the heels of consideration of legislation last week that I referred to as ``Junior TARP,'' where the majority added another $30 billion to the Nation's debt, I think it seems fitting that we, Republicans, are bringing forward another YouCut proposal, voted on and recommended to this House by the American people. The people really are sounding an alarm, and we have to change course. We must focus on reducing the size of government and not continuing programs that dig our fiscal hole deeper and deeper, and this process is going to require bipartisanship. Certainly I hope

that the Nation can witness bipartisanship soon, but we're not seeing it yet, and that's worrisome.

Over the last week, participants in Republican Whip Cantor's YouCut initiative voted on programs for us to bring to this floor for cutting spending. To date, participants in that program have voted to cut over $150 billion in spending. This week, the participants in that program voted to end the TARP program.

I was surprised to learn that TARP is still scheduled to spend billions of dollars in the next years. We must take action to end TARP now.

I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can have a vote on Congressman Paulsen's bill on ending TARP. I would like to remind the membership that a ``no'' vote on the previous question will not preclude consideration on the underlying legislation before us today.

Let me take a minute, at this point, if I may, Mr. Speaker, to a point of personal privilege. This may be the last rule that I come to the floor to debate because, in January, as you know, I will be leaving Congress. And it has been an extraordinary honor to be a Member of the United States Congress for 18 years, to represent an honorable and hardworking constituency.

I will leave Congress in January with a sense of duty fulfilled, Mr. Speaker, with infinite love and admiration for the most generous and noble Nation in history, the United States of America, and with profound gratitude to my wonderful staff for their hard work and their loyalty in representing our constituents and the Nation, and of gratitude to all of my colleagues for the honor of having been able to serve with them.

At this point, I reserve the balance of my time, as I ask my friend Mr. Arcuri if he has any other speakers.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1674 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz- Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only.

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1674.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1674 provides for the consideration of three bills in one rule:

H.R. 847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate, with 30 minutes controlled by the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 20 minutes controlled by the Committee on the Judiciary, and 10 minutes controlled by the Committee on Ways and Means. The rule considers as adopted the substitute amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit H.R. 847, with or without instructions;

H.R. 2378, the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act. The rule provides 1 hour for general debate controlled by the Committee on Ways and Means. The rule makes in order the substitute that was adopted by voice vote in the Ways and Means Committee last week. And, finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions; and, three,

The Senate amendment to H.R. 2701, the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2010. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that the House concur in the Senate amendment. The motion is debatable for 1 hour, controlled by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, all three bills that this rule provides for consideration of are important and very pressing matters. I

will speak to the merits of each this morning, but let me take this opportunity to begin by discussing H.R. 847, the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act.

I want to start by thanking Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, Speaker Pelosi, and Leader Hoyer for their dedication to the heroes and heroines and survivors of 9/11. I would like to thank all my colleagues in the New York delegation. With their support, we will finally do, after 9 years, what has been so long overdue--guarantee help for the survivors who served their country in the time of a national emergency.

The 9/11 attacks were attacks on the United States. The response was a national response, and providing for those heroes who served our Nation is our responsibility because many of them are sick and dying today as a result of their service to our country. This is not a New York bill, no. This is a bill for America.

As has been repeated many times, there are more than 71,000 people enrolled in the Federal World Trade Health Registry from--and I cannot stress this enough--every single State in the country. Thousands of firefighters, rescue workers, first responders, medical personnel, and construction workers traveled to Ground Zero to help search for survivors, to help clean up, and to help New York City recover. Many spent days, weeks, or months doing this hard work on behalf of our Nation. These heroes are now sick. We owe them more than we are currently providing. We are indebted to their service, and we must repay that debt if we hope to be able to count on others to act with similar valor if, God forbid, we were ever to face another national emergency of that nature again.

I strongly urge my colleagues, whether they be Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, northern or southern, eastern or western, to vote ``yes'' on the previous question and to vote ``yes'' on the rule and vote ``yes'' on the bill. Those who stood up for our country in the wake of 9/11 are now counting on each of us to stand up for them.

Another important measure of this rule allows for the consideration of H.R. 2378, the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, which is necessary to level the international playing field so that United States manufacturers can fairly compete with our trading partners.

China is, without a doubt, undercutting our Nation's industrial base by devaluing its currency and dumping products into our markets, and we must do something about it.

There is no way our domestic manufacturers can compete globally when our trading partners don't play by the same rules. Without action, we face the possibility of losing thousands of fair wage manufacturing jobs in upstate New York as well as across the Nation.

I have dealt with this countless times with the steel industry and have testified before the House Ways and Means Committee and the International Trade Commission to express my views. It is one of the reasons I became a cosponsor of the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, along with 159 of my House colleagues, Republicans and Democrats alike, because we feel that countries like China that devalue their currency should be held accountable, and, as a Nation, we should have the ability to defend our domestic business.

This rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2378, the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act, which will require the Department of Commerce to assess whether a Nation's currency rules grant a benefit in terms of the additional currency the country's exporters receive as a result of the undervaluation and to use widely accepted IMF methods for determining the level of undervaluation.

As amended, H.R. 2378 is WTO consistent, because countervailing duties may only be imposed when commerce finds, based on an assessment of all the facts, the WTO criteria for an export subsidy have been met.

Again, I urge all Members to support this rule so that we can have a debate here today on this legislation which is so important to the businesses and employees that each of us represent.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the amount of time I have remaining?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the sponsor of the 9/11 bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague and friend from New York, Representative Weiner.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), my colleague from the Rules Committee.

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

I have no additional speakers, and I am ready to close.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1674, I call up the bill (H.R. 2378) to amend title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify that fundamental exchange-rate misalignment by any foreign nation is actionable under United States countervailing and antidumping duty laws, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.

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

Colleagues, this is an important moment for this House and for the people of our Nation. There is a real problem--China's persistent manipulation of its currency. That requires real action, and under our leadership, real action is now being taken in this House.

China's practices represent, as the Secretary of the Treasury indicated in his testimony before us, ``a major distortion in the global economy.''

For our country, it is impacted on our trade deficit with China--in 2009, $226 billion--and it is impacted on our jobs. Their goods come to us, as a result of their manipulation, cheaper, and our goods to them, more expensive. There is a 15-35 or 40 percent imbalance, a tilted field of competition. The estimates mean 500,000 to 1.5 million jobs. This manipulation is one of the causes of the outsourcing of our jobs-- of manufacturing and other good jobs.

Talk hasn't worked. Less than 2 percent appreciation has occurred since just before the last G-20 meeting when the Chinese said that they would make their currency more flexible.

Additional steps are needed, and this bill is just such a step. So, after 2 days of hearings before our committee, I worked over the weekend with our majority staff to modify, to make sure this bill was fully compliant with our international WTO obligations. It is compliant.

China has an economic strategy. For our businesses and workers, it is vital that our Nation has an active economic strategy, and this is one important piece of that strategy.

I strongly urge support of this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 15 seconds.

That statement really rewrites the history of this legislation. I suggest to everybody, go back and look at the opening statement of the ranking member. Also, we have urged support of the green 301 petition. Only three Republicans supported it. I regret the partisan inflection here. I won't engage in it. I hope we get bipartisan support.

I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), a gentleman who is so actively engaged on these issues.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), another active member of our committee.

I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra), another very distinguished member of our committee.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson), another member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), another very, very distinguished member of our Ways and Means Committee.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez), another distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), the very distinguished chair of the Rules Committee.

I yield myself 10 seconds.

To the gentleman who just spoke, without a job, one can't buy goods at any price. This bill is about jobs.

I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boccieri).

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), a member of our Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, it is now my special pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman who is an original cosponsor of this important legislation, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, how much is there on both sides?

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud), an active participant in discussions of trade issues.

Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Sutton).

Mr. Speaker, it is now my privilege, a deep privilege, to yield

1 minute to our distinguished Speaker, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman and colleague from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).

I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).

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

It is now my special privilege to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Perriello).

Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on either side?

I yield now 1 minute to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch).

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 H.R. 2378.

Is the gentleman ready to close?

So am I.

I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, international trade is here to stay. The question before us today is whether we shape its course or simply let it roll--whether there are rules of competition that allow us to compete or whether we look the other way.

A 25-40 percent tilt against us is unacceptable. This bill says we cannot and will not look the other way. We are going to act. I say the more multilateral effort the better, but the lack of it should not leave us without a remedy.

China's manipulation of its currency is a major unilateral act, and we need to act. The President of our country said to the Chinese Premier, ``Make your currency flexible or we have other means.'' This is just such a means.

This is a real problem. No more excuses. Goodwill isn't enough. We need a real answer. This is a real answer. Support this legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, this day has been long in coming. In 2003, I was one of the first Members of Congress to introduce legislation on this topic to stop this anti-free market practice of foreign governments of deliberately undermining the value of their own currency to make their exports less expensive and foreign imports more costly. We have had some modest progress over the years but the overall practice continues to the detriment of our manufacturers and farmers.

Currently, counties in northern Illinois have an official unemployment rate of between 8 and 16.4 percent. The unemployment rate in the cities of Rockford, Belvidere, and Freeport are 17.4 percent, 17.8 percent, and 13.3 percent respectively. But if you include those who have given up looking for work, the real unemployment rate for these counties and cities is probably somewhere between 18 and 28 percent. We can't wait any longer for more promises to solve this problem in the future.

I am pleased to support the ``new and improved version'' of the legislation introduced by my fellow co-chair of the House Manufacturing Caucus, Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio, to combat exchange rate misalignment by China and other foreign governments. I am a proud original co-sponsor of this legislation. Regardless of any person's view on free trade, opposing exchange rate undervaluation is an area where both sides of the trade debate should come together. We must take a stand to stop China and other nations from making their imports cheaper in the U.S. and our exports more expensive in their country.

Let me relate the experience of one manufacturer from Rockford, Illinois, Jerry Busse of Rockford Toolcraft. He was quoted in the Rockford Register Star last August saying, ``We have done work for a big manufacturer in Chicago for 20 years. All of a sudden we lost a lot of their business because they decided to move the work to China.'' Jerry Busse asked the Chicago company what he had to do to get the work back. The prices they were getting from China were close to what Rockford Toolcraft had been getting. Jerry Busse thought to himself that he could do the work for that amount but the Chicago company refused. According to Jerry Busse, the management of the Chicago firm said anyone in America has to be 30 percent under the Chinese price. Mr. Speaker, 30 percent is approximately the undervaluation of the Chinese currency. Suffice it to say that Rockford Toolcraft couldn't meet this predatory price and lost a customer.

Despite any differences we may have over trade policy, we should all agree on the need to stop foreign governments from undervaluing their currencies to gain an economic advantage over us by making their goods artificially less expensive in the United States and making our exports more expensive overseas.

This bill is not targeted at one country. Currency undervaluation is not just a problem that plagues our trade relationship with China. About two weeks ago, Japanese monetary authorities sold a large amount of yen against the dollar to stem the Japanese currency's sharp appreciation against the U.S.--the first time since 2004. Other countries have joined in this anti-capitalistic, mercantilist behavior over the years and they should be equally condemned. It is in their long-term self interest to eventually move to a valuation of their currency that is based on the marketplace--not by a government official.

Fred Bergsten, Director of the highly respected Peterson Institute for International Economics, estimated that correction of all of the Asian currency undervaluations would cut the global U.S. trade deficit by about $100 billion and generate at least 700,000 jobs.

This legislation provides another weapon in our trade arsenal to empower our trade enforcement officials to confront unfair trade practices by China and others. The revised bill

gives discretion to the Department of Commerce to consider currency undervaluation as another form of a government subsidy that is eligible for higher countervailing duties.

This legislation is preferable to other bills that would impose blanket, across-the-board tariffs on just Chinese goods that would almost immediately be ruled illegal by the World Trade Organization. This approach is WTO compliant and does not target one specific country over another for currency undervaluation. This bill should unite both spectrums of the trade debate and one that should send shockwaves to capitals of foreign governments that deliberately undervalue their currency for a trade advantage. The frustration level is high among our small manufacturers such as Jerry Busse and the time is ripe for Congress to act.

I'm here as a proponent of free but fair trade in support of this carefully crafted legislation and I urge my colleagues to do the same. If you want to stop Chinese imports coming in at predatory prices and give our manufacturers and farmers the chance to fairly compete, then support this bill. If you don't like government subsidies and interference in the marketplace; if you prefer capitalism to mercantilism; then you vote for this bill.