Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Manzullo

Amendment No. 1: In section 8014(a) strike ``; and'' at the

end of paragraph (2)(B) and all that follows through ``health

benefits for civilian employees under chapter 89 of title 5,

United States Code.'' and insert a period.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and thank a public servant who dedicated a large part of her life to public service and in particular to helping small businesses.

Lorraine ``Rainnie'' Deane began her Federal career in 1977, serving as a staffer for the Committee on the Budget in the United States Senate and then later as a staffer for the Senate Committee on Small Business from 1981 to 1989. In 1989, ``Rainnie'' joined the Small Business Administration (SBA) and began working with the Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs. Ms. Deane retired just recently on May 31, 2005, after 28 years of distinguished service.

She has always been an outstanding help to us here in the Congress, and especially to my staff and their predecessors on the Committee on Small Business.

Prior to entering Federal service, ``Rainnie'' worked for the private sector in the late 1960's to the late 1970's. In the mid to late 1960's, ``Rainnie'' was self-employed as a model in the metropolitan DC area. As a take-off on Britain's Twiggy, ``Rainnie'' was named ``The Face of '68'' and articles appeared in the London Financial Times and the Washington Post. She also appeared on network TV doing fashion shows. She was a true entrepreneur in her own right.

In addition to her work for small business ``Rainnie,'' a breast cancer survivor, has been very active in raising funds for cancer research. ``Rainnie's Dream Team'' of over 50 friends and colleagues just participated in the June 3, 2005 Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure in Washington, DC, the most recent of her teams supporting this noble cause.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate my congratulations and gratitude to ``Rainnie'' for her excellent service to the Federal government, small business, and society. I wish her a happy and well-deserved retirement.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Mr. Hunter, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, for including my amendment in the en bloc package.

It is the intent of Congress and in the interest of national security that we maintain a strong and healthy industrial base if we are to remain the strongest nation on Earth. Even the founder of modern-day capitalism and free trade, Adam Smith, recognized the need for a nation to be able to depend upon its own industrial and agricultural base and not rely on foreign sources for its defense needs. We cannot maintain our role as global leader on a pure services-based economy.

This amendment strengthens the Buy American Act, BAA, by restoring the original intent that more than 50 percent of the components in end products purchased by the Department of Defense shall be mined, produced, or manufactured inside the United States.

The Buy American Act originally passed Congress during the Great Depression. The intent of Congress was that to qualify under the Buy American Act, a company had to have substantially all of a product made, grown, or mined in the United States. However, regulations implementing the Buy American Act have subsequently redefined ``substantially all'' to mean simply greater than 50 percent.

Yet even that regulation has been weakened even further over the years. The Pentagon has used the ``public interest'' exception to waive the Buy American Act to treat the purchase of some foreign goods as if they were made in America. The original intent of the Buy American Act has been undermined by procurement memoranda of understanding, MOU, and other agreements with various foreign countries that permit the substitution of foreign components for components mined, produced, or manufactured inside the United States. These are not treaties or trade agreements approved by Congress--these were Executive Branch agreements not subject to review by Congress.

Thus, the Buy American laws are basically worthless. There are so many holes in the law that it means nothing when a company says they comply with the Buy American Act. The exception--and it's a big one--is that the domestic content requirement doesn't have to be met if the items are procured from certain designated countries.

The Pentagon has MOUs with 21 developed countries that waive the Buy American Act because the Defense Department has determined that, for these countries, complying with the BAA is ``inconsistent with the public interest.'' Basically, a company getting an award from the Pentagon can claim compliance with the Buy American Act without having to actually make anything here, as long as the components come from one of the 21 countries.

Too often, agencies claim they need the best for the least, implying that Americans can't make the best or compete on price and quality. But ``best value'' is the standard, which means price shouldn't be the reigning factor. The best value for Americans is to have a strong industrial base and we can't do that if DOD forces U.S. companies to compete on price with foreign companies that are owned, subsidized, or controlled by their governments.

It is important to remember that this amendment does not increase the share of the Buy American content, but simply codifies the content percentage of what is in existing regulation.

Mr. Speaker, today I stand in this great Chamber of democracy to adopt a Cuban political prisoner, Mr. Hector Fernando Maseda Gutierrez.

Mr. Gutierrez was arrested on March 18, 2003 during a regime crackdown on dissidents, sentenced to 20 years in prison for associating himself with the Florida International University, participating in Radio Marti programs, writing articles for foreign magazines and possessing a typewriter, fax machine, and books in his home.

I urge Fidel Castro to release him immediately.

The Cuban authorities are refusing to give Mr. Gutierrez the medicine he needs for a skin ailment and several allergies. He is 62 years old, and therefore his health problems are of great concern to his family.

Faced with crude living conditions and the possibility of merciless consequences to his family, Mr. Gutierrez is determined not to back down from his conviction for a free Cuba.

Let me finish by saying that I am grateful that my distinguished colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), promoted this idea of adopting Cuban political prisoners.

Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

My amendment strengthens the Buy American Act and restores the original intent that more than 50 percent of the components in end products purchased by the Department of Homeland Security shall be mined, produced, or manufactured inside the U.S.

The Buy American Act originally passed Congress during the Great Depression. The intent of Congress was that to qualify under the Buy American Act, a company had to have substantially all of a product made, grown, or mined in the U.S. However, regulations implementing the Buy American Act have subsequently redefined ``substantially all'' to mean simply greater than 50 percent.

Yet even that regulation has been weakened even further over the years. The Pentagon has used the public interest exception to waive the Buy American Act to treat the purchase of some foreign goods as if they were made in America. The original intent of the Buy American Act has been undermined by procurement memoranda of understanding among the U.S. and various foreign countries that permit the substitution of foreign components for components mined, produced, or manufactured inside the United States. These are not treaties or trade agreements approved by Congress. These were executive branch agreements not subject to review by Congress.

Thus, the Buy American laws are basically worthless. There are so many holes in that law that it means nothing when a company says they comply with the Buy American Act. The exception, and it is a big one, is that the domestic content requirement does not have to be met if the items are procured from certain designated foreign countries.

The Pentagon has memoranda of understanding with 21 developed countries that waive the Buy American Act because the Defense Department has determined that for these countries complying with the Buy American Act is ``inconsistent with the public interest.''

Basically, a company getting an award from the Pentagon can claim compliance with the Buy American Act without having to actually make anything in the United States as long as the components come from one of those 21 countries. Because the Department of Homeland Security has a very similar mission to the Department of Defense, protecting the territory of the U.S. from every possible enemy attack, we should not allow the DHS to waive the Buy American Act like the Pentagon has done without an affirmative vote by Congress.

The intent of Congress is to maintain the vibrant industrial base so that we may remain the strongest Nation on Earth. Even the founder of modern-day capitalism and free trade, Adam Smith, recognized the need for a nation to be able to depend upon its own industrial and agricultural base and not rely on foreign sources for its defense needs. We cannot maintain our role as global leader on a pure services- based economy.

It is also important to remember that this amendment does not increase the share of the Buy American Act. It simply codifies the content percentage of what is an existing regulation.

Madam Chairman, I urge adoption of this amendment.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) argues that the best technology is outside the United States. The whole purpose of this amendment is to try to do something about the 3 million manufacturing jobs we have lost in the past several years. This simply says whenever anybody agrees to abide by the Buy American Act, at least buy 50 percent of the content from America. The existing Buy American Act says they have to buy zero. Congress passed a law that says buy everything from America. The Department of Defense and other agencies say that only means 50 percent. Now there is a memorandum of understanding from the White House that says, by the way, if they buy from the 21 countries, they do not even need to meet the 50 percent.

This is very simple. It says if we want to keep technology in the United States, then buy the technology that is here. If a particular item has to be purchased and it is not made in the United States, then the Buy American Act simply does not apply.

This is a commonsense amendment. I am going to be offering it to every single authorization bill that I can, and I would urge Members to vote ``aye'' on this.

Offered By: Mr. Manzullo

Amendment No. 1: Page 79, after line 6, insert the

following new section:

Offered By: Mr. Manzullo

Amendment No. 2: At the end of title V, add the following

new section:

Mr. Speaker, a country that manipulates its currency for the purposes of gaining an advantage in foreign markets violates many of the basic rules of the international monetary system established after World War II. However, despite repeated evidence that numerous countries are not letting market forces determine the value of their currency, our nation's laws set an extremely high threshold for us to take any effective action against other nations that intervene heavily in currency markets. The main purpose of the Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 is to give our government agencies the tools they need to effectively combat illegal foreign government intervention in the global currency markets, particularly those efforts that are specifically designed to boost their local economy at the expense of the workers of the United States.

The Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 has three key provisions. The first would alter the criteria by which the Treasury Department is required to enter into negotiations with foreign countries that it labels as currency manipulators. The second would further clarify the working definition of manipulation under the Exchange Rates and International Economic Policy Coordination Act of 1998. Finally, the Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 would instruct the U.S. Treasury Department to undertake an extensive examination of China's trade surplus, with particular attention paid to China's suspect trade data, and report on its findings.

Current law requires that Treasury regularly make a determination of whether countries are manipulating the rate of exchange between their currency and the U.S. dollar for purposes of preventing effective balance of payments adjustments or gaining an unfair competitive advantage in international trade. If The Secretary of Treasury considers that such manipulation is occurring with respect to countries that (1) have material global current account surpluses and (2) have significant bilateral trade surpluses with the United States, the Secretary is required to take action to initiate negotiations with such foreign countries on an expedited basis. The Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 amends the 1988 Omnibus Trade

Act by eliminating the necessity that a country has both a significant bilateral trade surplus with the United States and a material global current account surplus, before the Secretary of the Treasury is required to enter into negotiations with the offending country to end its unfair practices. The change requires such negotiations if there is either a significant bilateral trade surplus with the United States or a material global current account surplus.

Under current law, even if manipulation is found, Treasury is not required to act unless the offending country has both a significant bilateral trade surplus with the U.S. and a material global current account surplus. Treasury repeatedly fails to make a determination that certain countries, most notably China, are manipulating their currency. The 1988 Trade Act unfortunately does not specifically define ``manipulating.'' The Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 clarifies that a country engaged in ``protracted large-scale intervention in one direction in the exchange market'' is manipulating its currency. However, the Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 does not preclude the Secretary of Treasury from finding a country to be manipulating its rate of exchange based on any other factor or combination of factors.

Finally, the bill addresses a problem with the way Treasury determines China's global current account and trade balances. Currently, the U.S. Treasury Department and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) use official Chinese statistics, which differ markedly from the aggregate statistics of its trading partners. This results in an inaccurate depiction of China's true surplus, which is presumably much larger than reported by China. The Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 requires that Treasury undertake an examination of China's trade surplus and report to the Congress on why China's reported trade surpluses differ from those reported by its trading partner countries.

Mr. Speaker, all nations, most particularly China, must let the free markets determine the value of their currency, not use government resources to artificially depress the value of a nation's currency to boost their economic growth. This scheme costs U.S. manufacturers billions of dollars in lost exports and decreased market share in the U.S. each year while putting American workers on the unemployment lines. We all know the specific problems in dealing with China--in 2004, the U.S. trade deficit with China reached a record level of $162 billion, the highest with any country in U.S. history. Yet, while China's economy has certainly grown and strengthened in recent years, China's currency has been tightly pegged to the U.S. dollar ever since 1994. Most economists believe that China's currency is overvalued at between 15 to 40 percent, making U.S. goods much more expensive in China and Chinese goods in the U.S. much more attractive to buy (at the expense of similarly-made U.S. products), contributing to as much as 25 percent of our bilateral trade deficit. China is long due for a correction in its currency value to reflect its global economic prowess. Americans stand ready to compete with anyone in the world. But the competition must be fair. The Fair Currency Practices Act of 2005 will give our government the tools necessary to hold all nations of the world accountable for currency manipulation (not just China) and level the playing field for our workers.

Mr. Speaker, in today's times, we often find that the principle values and activities of the United States are under attack. Too few defenses are offered against such attacks, even if they question the very fundamentals of how we live and work. It is therefore helpful and encouraging to see when someone takes this responsibility seriously. Here are some thoughts of Professor Michael R. Czinkota of Georgetown University who professes his belief on how to advance the cause of freedom.

On Freedom and International Marketing

(By Michael R. Czinkota)

The Issue of Freedom

You may ask what freedom has to do with international

marketing. Freedom is about options. If there is no

alternative, there is no freedom. A true alternative provides

the opportunity to make a decision, to exercise virtue. In

the blaze of the klieg lights, it is easy to make the

``right'' decision. That's not an exercise in virtue, because

real alternatives are effectively removed. The true selection

among alternatives takes place in the darkness of night when

nobody is looking.

The focus and aim of international marketing is on crossing

borders. The goal is to provide more than one choice for

customers, letting them pick from a selection of options in

order to maximize their satisfaction. International marketing

does so in all comers of the globe, the glamorous ones as

well as in the small and remote ones where the efforts are

not seen by others. By operating both in the limelight and

also well outside of it, international marketing offers the

freedom to exercise virtue both to the seller and the buyer--

be it in decisions of supplying or purchasing, pricing or

selecting.

Another key dimension of freedom is not to confine,

allowing people to go outside of the box. As a concept,

freedom knows no international boundaries. But national

borders usually are the box where business and government

find their limits. Such borders are a mere point of

transition for international marketing. The discipline

thrives on understanding of how to successfully cross

national borders, on coping with the differences once the

crossing is done, and on profitably reconciling any

conflicts.

International marketing contains the freedom of almost

unlimited growth potential. Activities confined to domestic

borders may well run into limits of expansion. International

market opportunities relax these limits quickly. Instead of

restrictions, the international marketing paradigm encourages

the stripping away of restraints; instead of limitations,

there is the encounter of opportunity.

Freedom also means not being forced to do something one

does not want to do (Hayek, 1971). There are economic

migration pressures that force people to move from their

rural homes into urban areas or from their developing

countries into industrialized ones. Industrialized nations,

in turn, speak about immigration pressure. For both sides,

little if any freedom is involved here. Most individuals who

do the moving would much rather stay home but cannot afford

to do so due to economic exigencies. The recipient countries

might not want to welcome the migrants but do so in response

to political and humanitarian pressures. International

marketing may have been part of what triggered some of these

migrations, but it also can be instrumental in stemming the

tide. It can provide the economic opportunity for individuals

at home so that they need not migrate. Thus, it lets

individuals become productive contributors to the global

economy free from pressures to shift locations.

When the long-standing rivalry between socialism and market

orientation was resolved, market forces and the recognition

of demand and supply directly affected human rights and the

extent of freedom. With all humility and gratefulness we can

conclude: Markets were right! In country after country,

market forces have demonstrated typically greater efficiency

and effectiveness in their ability to satisfy the needs of

people.

International marketing has been instrumental in

stimulating these newly emerging market forces. In spite of

complaints about the slowness of change, the insufficiency of

wealth redistribution, and the inequities inherent in

societal upheavals, a large majority of participants

in market-oriented changes are now better off than they

were before. Without the transition provided by

international marketing, these changes would not have come

about that swiftly.

The Cost of Freedom

One keeps healing about the large segment of the world

population that is poor and therefore supposedly excluded

from any international marketing efforts; the World Bank's

former president called them the 3 billion $2-a-day poor

(Wolfensohn, 2001). By contrast, international marketers see

them as an attractive $6 billion-a-day opportunity for

valuable exchanges!

What's more is that international marketing provides the

opportunity to acquire resources without the deployment of

force. Why fight if you can trade? Countries that have been

historic enemies such as France, England and Germany are now

all united in their close collaboration through international

marketing. (Farmer, 1987) The field is, therefore, at the

very least contributing to freedom from war while providing

additional choices for consumption.

But the cost of freedom is rising. Terms like free trade or

free choice are misleading since they all come with a price,

which international marketers pay in terms of preparing their

shipments, scrutinizing their customers, and conforming to

government regulations.

We all are paying a higher price due to global terrorism.

As freedom suffers, so does international marketing. In most

instances, terrorism is not an outgrowth of choice but rather

the lack of it. Terrorists may succeed in reducing the

freedom of others but not in increasing their own. Who is

typically most affected by terrorist acts? Attacks aimed at

businesses, such as the infamous bombings of U.S. franchises

abroad, do not bring big corporations to their knees. The

local participants, the local employees, the local investors,

and the local customers are affected most. Who can protect

themselves against such attacks and who can afford to protect

targets? Only the more wealthy countries and companies can.

They have the choice of where to place their funds, with whom

to trade, and whether to hold the enemy at bay through a

security bubble created by changing business forn1ats via

exporting or franchising. The poor players do not have

choices. The local firms, the nations with economies in

development, and the poor customers continue to be exposed to

further acts of terrorism with very limited indigenous

ability to influence events.

But international marketing can enable the disenfranchised

to develop alternatives. Multinational firms can invest in

the world's poorest markets and increase their own revenue

while reducing poverty. With support from shareholders and

the benefit of good governance, international marketers can,

and should, continue in their role as social change agents.

The discipline has value maximization at its heart. If it is

worthwhile to fulfill the needs of large segments of people,

even at low margins, then it will be done. International

marketers after all have as their key desire the creation of

new customers and suppliers and they are delighted when, in

fulfillment of their aims, they can bring about freedom from

extremes of hunger, sickness, and intolerance.

Value and Freedom

In a global setting, freedom can take on many dimensions.

Privileges and obligations that are near and dear to some may

well be cheap and easily disposed of by others. The views of

one society may differ from views held in other regions of

the world. Such differences then account for

misunderstandings, surprises, and long-term conflicts.

There are two value dimensions at work here, both of them

highly relevant to international marketing. One may be

circumscribed as the freedom and values of a market economy.

To make them work governmental, managerial, and corporate

virtue, vision, and veracity are required. Unless the world

can believe in what institutions and their leaders say and

do, it will be difficult to forge a global commitment between

those doing the marketing and the ones being marketed to. It

is therefore of vital interest to the proponents of freedom

and international marketing to ensure that corruption,

bribery, lack of transparency, and poor governance are

exposed for their negative effects in any setting or society.

The main remedy will be the collaboration of the global

policy community in agreeing on what constitutes

transgressions and swift punishment of the culprits involved,

so that market forces can work free from distortion.

A second and even more crucial issue is the value system we

use in making choices. Some years ago, the Mars Climate

Orbiter mission failed spectacularly as a result of the use

of different values by the mission navigation teams. One team

was using metric units and the other used the English system

of measurement. This mistake caused the orbiter to get too

close to the atmosphere, where it was destroyed (``NASA's

Metric Confusion,'' 1999).

There are major differences among what people value around

the world. Contrasts include togetherness next to

individuality, cooperation next to competition, modesty next

to assertiveness, and self-effacement next to self-

actualization. Often, global differences in value systems

keep us apart and result in spectacularly destructive

differences. How we value a life, for example, can be crucial

in terms of how we treat individuals. What value we place on

family, work, leisure time, or progress has a substantial

effect on how we see and evaluate each other.

Cultural studies tell us that there are major differences

between and even within nations. International marketing,

through its linkages via goods, services, ideas, and

communications, can achieve important assimilations of value

systems. On the consumer side, new products offer

international appeal and encourage similar activities around

the world: many of us wear denim, dance the same dances, and

eat pizza and sushi (Marquardt & Reynolds, 1994). It has been

claimed that local product offerings help define people and

provide identity and that it is the local idiosyncrasies that

make people beautiful (Johansson, 2004). Some even offer the

persistence of the specific breakfast habits of the English

and the French as evidence of local immutability in the face

of globalization (de Mooij, 1998). Yet, we should remember

that values are learned, not genetically implanted. As life's

experiences grow more international and more similar, so do

values. Therefore, every time international marketing forges

a new linkage in thinking, new progress is made in shaping a

greater global commonality in values. It may well be that

international marketing's ability to align global values

which makes it easier for countries, companies, and

individuals to build bridges between them, may eventually

become the field's greatest gift to the world.

A joined occurrence

How do freedom and international marketing match with

today's discontent so forcefully expressed by the

disgruntlement of the anti-globalists? Many claim that never

before in history has there been so much evidence about such

strong opposition to globalization and to Americans as

harbingers of international marketing.

Perhaps those making such claims are sadly mistaken. In

looking at other ``globalizers'' in world history, such as

the Vikings, the Mongols, the Tatars, and the Romans, there

probably was both intellectual and physical opposition (or do

we really believe that everybody enjoyed Genghis Khan?). But

protest was never allowed to become very vocal, or to engage

in repeated, large demonstrations or widespread

pamphleteering. Due to rather harsh policies of dealing with

the opposition, very few records of such resistance are

available today. Consequently, comparisons with past events

are difficult to make and are likely to be highly inaccurate.

Today's news is good. The nations, institutions and

individuals around the world are increasingly accepting

freedom as the key foundation of the good life. We are

discovering that international marketing, both as a

discipline and as an activity is very closely interwoven with

freedom--some even call it essential. It is the freedom

Thomas Aquinas saw as the means to human excellence and

happiness (Weigel, 2001) which international marketing helps

us reach. In reciprocal causality, freedom causes and

facilitates international marketing, while international

marketing is a key support of the cause of freedom. A

productive symbiosis at work!

Mr. Speaker, I recently presented a joint statement with Senator Snowe regarding small business contracting and would like to submit it for the Record.

Section 6022 of H.R. 1268, as adopted in the Conference

Report, H. Rep. 109-72, contains certain provisions

concerning small business contracting at the Department of

Energy. These provisions were inserted as a substitute for

Section 6023 of the Senate version of H.R. 1268. Section

6023, among other things sought to amend the Small Business

Act to authorize counting of small business subcontracts at

the Department of Energy's large prime contractors for

purposes of reporting small business prime contracting

results. Because the substitute language was not adopted by

Congress through regular legislative proceedings in the

Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and

the House Committee on Small Business but was adopted anew

during the House-Senate conference, the committees of

jurisdiction take this opportunity to provide guidance

generally provided through their reports to Senators and

Representatives prior to their vote on the Conference Report,

and to affected Federal agencies prior to their

implementation of the Conference Report if adopted.

In subsections 6022 (a) and (b), the language chosen to

replace Section 6023 in the Conference Report directs the

Department of Energy and the Small Business Administration to

enter into a Memorandum of Understanding for reporting small

business prime contracts and subcontracts at the Department

of Energy. This replacement language does not change the

Small Business Act's clear distinction between prime

contracts and subcontracts, does not amend the statutory

small business prime contracting goal requirements which are

binding on the Department of Energy, and does not obviate

Congressional and regulatory policies against contract

bundling. This language does not repeal the President's

Executive Order 13360 directing the Department of Energy to

comply with its separate statutory prime contracting and

subcontracting goals for awards to small businesses owned by

service-disabled veterans. Any interpretation to the contrary

would be unreasonable and contrary to Congressional intent.

In subsection 6022(c), the replacement language mandates a

study of changes to management prime contracts at the

Department of Energy to encourage small business prime

contracting opportunities. The object of the study is to

examine the feasibility of establishing a procurement agency

relationship between the management prime contractors and the

Department of Energy in accordance with the requirements of

Federal procurement laws, Federal procurement regulations,

the ``Federal norm'' of government contracting as recognized

by the Comptroller General, and applicable judicial precedent

such as U.S. West Communications, Inc. v. United States, 940

F.2d 622 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

Finally, in subsection 6022(d), the replacement language

imposes certain requirements upon the Department of Energy

concerning break-outs of services from large prime contracts

for awards to small businesses. First, the Secretary of

Energy is required to consider whether services performed

have been previously provided by a small business concern.

This requirement is for acquisition planning purposes only,

and shall not be construed as imposing a restriction of any

kind on the ability of the Department of Energy to break out

its large prime contracts for award to small businesses.

Congress recognizes that most of work currently contracted by

the Department of Energy to its large prime contractors has

never been historically performed by small businesses.

However, this does not waive the application of the Small

Business Act, the President's Executive Order 13360, or the

President's initiative against contract bundling to the

Department of Energy. Second, the Secretary of Energy is

required to consider whether small business concerns are

capable of performing under the contracts which are broken

out for award. This requirement is simply a restatement of

current statutory and regulatory requirements on contractor

responsibility. Subsection (d)(2) direct the Secretary of

Energy is required to--impose certain subcontracting

requirements. As the text plainly indicates, this provision

applies solely to small, business prime contracts which were

formerly small business subcontracts for services.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer legislation that would amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States and clarify the article description relating to certain monochrome glass envelopes. These components are incorporated into monochrome cathode ray tubes used in computer monitors, terminals, medical imaging monitors, and avionic displays. A company in the 16th Congressional District of Illinois, which I am proud to represent, manufactures these monochrome cathode ray tubes.

There are no remaining manufacturers of monochrome glass envelopes in the United States; and therefore, no rationale of retaining the current 5.2 percent duty on these components. The small manufacturer who needs this component in their final product is unnecessarily harmed by the import duty. U.S. manufacturers are struggling to survive, and we must end policies that make it more difficult for our manufacturers to compete and succeed in the international market.

Once again, I anticipate no adverse impact on any domestic producer or industry should this legislation be enacted. I know the permanent removal of this duty would be beneficial to some good, hard working people in Loves Park, Illinois. I urge my colleagues to support inclusion of this legislation into the Miscellaneous Tariff Correction bill to be moved later this year.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 130) recognizing the contributions of environmental systems and the technicians who install and maintain them, the quality of life of all Americans and supporting the goals and ideals of National Indoor Comfort Week, as amended.

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 this resolution.

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

This resolution recognizes the contributions of indoor environmental systems, commonly known as heating and air conditioning, and the technicians who install and maintain these systems. On a day like today where the temperature is expected to go above 80 degrees, I am particularly grateful for air conditioning that makes it easier to do our jobs each day. Heating and air conditioning provide a high quality of life for all Americans. This resolution simply supports the goals and ideals of National Indoor Comfort Week, which is taking place this week and sponsored by the Air Conditioning Contractors Association.

The Air Conditioning Contractors of America are comprised mainly of small businesses. In fact, over 98 percent of HVAC contractors are small businesses. This is an industry that many of us take for granted, until we call upon them for service. They are responsible for ensuring that in the winter our heating systems work and in the summer our air conditioner hums along without interruption.

And it is because of air conditioning that many parts of our great Nation, particularly in the South and West, have grown into booming areas, creating new jobs and enhancing our economy.

There are very few people left in our country who can remember what it was like without refrigeration. Now refrigeration takes away most of the concerns we used to have about how our food is preserved. Refrigeration also protects vital medicines from contamination and helps us conquer diseases that have plagued mankind for generations.

Children and seniors have cleaner, safer air to breathe. The filtration systems in many HVAC units in our homes, office buildings and factories help purify the air that we breathe, helping to lower the effect of airborne diseases.

For all these reasons and more, I urge all of my colleagues to support passage of this resolution and salute the small business men and women who work in the HVAC industry.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 8, the Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act of 2005. As Chairman of the Small Business Committee, I've heard horror story after horror story from small business owners who worry about the future of their small business because their heirs will not be able to pay the death tax and also continue the business. Why should they spend countless thousands of dollars for life insurance premiums, attorney and accountant fees just to plan to pay the death tax? Those monies are better invested in their small businesses. Raising the cap is just a band-aid that

postpones the inevitable decision to abolish the death tax once and for all.

Permanent repeal of the death tax will protect millions of small and family-owned businesses from the return of this devastating tax. I have seen the effects of the death tax firsthand in my district. Before I came to Congress in 1992, I practiced law in a rural county in northern Illinois. I was there at the estate sale when the mom and her kids had to sell off half the family farm because they couldn't afford to pay the death tax after dad died. All they wanted to do was continue on with their lives, work the farm, and put food on the table. But in their most vulnerable time, after they had lost their dad and husband, after they had spent their lives paying taxes, the government came to them and said, ``We want more!'' And their American Dream was crushed.

Despite serious estate planning efforts, 70 percent of small and family-owned businesses do not survive through the second generation and 87 percent do not make it through the third generation. In fact, 9 out of every 10 successors whose family business failed within three years of the owner's death said death taxes played a major role in their company's demise.

The death tax is one of the most archaic and destructive taxes to small businesses in our tax code. The death tax discourages savings and investment, reduces wages and job creation, and is a leading cause of dissolution for thousands of small businesses. This is an immoral tax. It's time to once and for all permanently do away with the death tax that confiscates the hard work and savings of the most productive and important part of the U.S. economy, our small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Clause 2a of House Rule XI, I submit our attached Rules for the 109th Congress into the Congressional Record for publication.

Rules and Procedures of the Committee on Small Business

1. general provisions

The Rules of the House of Representatives, and in

particular the committee rules enumerated in rule XI, are the

rules of the Committee on Small Business to the extent

applicable and by this reference are incorporated. Each

subcommittee of the Committee on Small Business (hereinafter

referred to as the ``committee'') is a part of the committee

and is subject to the authority and direction of the

committee, and to its rules to the extent applicable.

2. referral of bills by chairman

Unless retained for consideration by the full committee,

all legislation and other matters referred to the committee

shall be referred by the Chairman to the subcommittee of

appropriate jurisdiction within 2 weeks. Where the subject

matter of the referral involves the jurisdiction of more than

one subcommittee or does not fall within any previously

assigned jurisdictions, the Chairman shall refer the matter,

as he may deem advisable.

3. date of meeting

The regular meeting date of the committee shall be the

second Thursday of every month when the House is in session.

A regular meeting of the committee may be dispensed with if,

in the judgment of the Chairman, there is no need for the

meeting. Additional meetings may be called by the Chairman as

he may deem necessary or at the request of a majority of the

members of the committee in accordance with clause 2(c) of

rule XI of the House.

At least 3 days notice of such an additional meeting shall

be given unless the Chairman determines that there is good

cause to call the meeting on less notice.

The determination of the business to be considered at each

meeting shall be made by the Chairman subject to clause 2(c)

of rule XI of the House.

A regularly scheduled meeting need not be held if there is

no business to be considered or, upon at least 3 days notice,

it may be set for a different date.

4. announcement of hearings

Unless the Chairman, with the concurrence of the ranking

minority member, or the committee by majority vote,

determines that there is good cause to begin a hearing at an

earlier date, public announcement shall be made of the date,

place and subject matter of any hearing to be conducted by

the committee at least 1 week before the commencement of that

hearing.

After announcement of a hearing, the committee shall make

available as soon as practicable to all Members of the

Committee a tentative witness list and to the extent

practicable a memorandum explaining the subject matter of the

hearing (including relevant legislative reports and other

necessary material). In addition, the Chairman shall make

available as soon as practicable to the Members of the

Committee any official reports from departments and agencies

on the subject matter as they are received.

5. meetings and hearings open to the public

(A) Meetings

Each meeting of the committee or its subcommittees for the

transaction of business, including the markup of legislation,

shall be open to the public, including to radio, television

and still photography coverage, except as provided by clause

4 of rule XI of the House, except when the committee or

subcommittee, in open session and with a majority present,

determines by record vote that all or part of the remainder

of the meeting on that day shall be closed to the public

because disclosure of matters to be considered would endanger

national security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement

information, or would tend to defame, degrade or incriminate

any person or otherwise

would violate any law or rule of the House; Provided,

however, that no person other than members of the committee,

and such congressional staff and such executive branch

representatives as they may authorize, shall be present in

any business meeting or markup session which has been closed

to the public.

(B) Hearings

Each hearing conducted by the committee or its

subcommittees shall be open to the public, including radio,

television and still photography coverage, except when the

committee or subcommittee, in open session and with a

majority present, determines by record vote that all or part

of the remainder of the hearing on that day shall be closed

to the public because disclosure of testimony, evidence or

other matters to be considered would endanger the national

security, would compromise sensitive law enforcement

information, or would violate any law or rule of the House;

Provided, however, that the committee or subcommittee may by

the same procedure vote to close one subsequent day of

hearings. Notwithstanding the requirements of the preceding

sentence, a majority of those present, there being in

attendance the requisite number required under the rules of

the committee to be present for the purpose of taking

testimony, (i) may vote to close the hearing for the sole

purpose of discussing whether testimony or evidence to be

received would endanger the national security, would

compromise sensitive law enforcement information, or violate

clause 2(k)(5) of rule XI of the House; or (ii) may vote to

close the hearing, as provided in clause 2(k)(5) of rule XI

of the House.

No member of the House may be excluded from non-

participatory attendance at any hearing of the committee or

any subcommittee, unless the House of Representatives shall

by majority vote authorize the committee or subcommittee, for

purposes of a particular series of hearings on a particular

article of legislation or on a particular subject of

investigation, to close its hearing to members by the same

procedures designated for closing hearings to the public.

6. witnesses

(A) Statement of witnesses

Each witness who is to appear before the committee or

subcommittee shall file with the committee at least two

business days before the day of his or her appearance, 100

copies of his or her written statement of proposed testimony.

At least one copy of the statement of each witness shall be

furnished directly to the ranking minority member. In

addition, all witnesses shall be required to submit with

their testimony a resume or other statement describing their

education, employment, professional affiliations and other

background information pertinent to their testimony unless

waived by the Chairman.

Each witness shall also submit to the committee a copy of

his or her final prepared statement in an electronic format

no later than the day of the hearing unless waived by the

Chairman.

The committee will provide public access to its printed

materials, including the proposed testimony of witnesses, in

electronic form.

(B) Interrogation of witnesses

Whenever any hearing is conducted by the committee or any

subcommittee upon any measure or matter, the minority party

members on the committee shall be entitled, upon request to

the Chairman by a majority of those minority members, to call

one witness selected by the minority to testify with respect

to that measure or matter. The witness requested by the

minority shall furnish at least one copy of his or her

statement and any supplementary materials directly to the

Chairman within two business days before the day of his or

her appearance unless waived by the Chairman.

Except when the committee adopts a motion pursuant to

subdivisions (B) and (C) of clause 2(j)(2) of rule XI of the

rules of the House, committee members may question witnesses

only when they have been recognized by the Chairman for that

purpose, and only for a 5-minute period until all members

present have had an opportunity to question a witness. The 5-

minute period for questioning a witness by any one member can

be extended only with the unanimous consent of all members

present. The Chairman, followed by the ranking minority

member and all other members alternating between the majority

and minority, shall initiate the questioning of witnesses in

both the full and subcommittee hearings.

In recognizing members to question witnesses, the Chairman

may take into consideration the ratio of majority and

minority members present in such a manner as not to

disadvantage the Members of either party. The Chairman, in

consultation with the ranking minority member, may decrease

the 5-minute time period in order to accommodate the needs of

all the Members present and the schedule of the witnesses.

7. subpoenas

A subpoena may be authorized and issued by the Chairman of

the committee in the conduct of any investigation or series

of investigations or activities to require the attendance and

testimony of such witness and the production of such books,

records, correspondence, memoranda, papers and documents, as

he deems necessary. The ranking minority member shall be

promptly notified of the issuance of such a subpoena.

Such a subpoena may be authorized and issued by the

chairman of a subcommittee with the approval of a majority of

the members of the subcommittee and the approval of the

Chairman of the committee.

8. quorum

No measure or recommendation shall be reported unless a

majority of the committee was actually present. For purposes

of taking testimony or receiving evidence, two members shall

constitute a quorum. For all other purposes, one-third of the

members (or 11 Members) shall constitute a quorum.

9. amendments during mark-up

Any amendment offered to any pending legislation before the

committee must be made available in written form when

requested by any member of the committee. If such amendment

is not available in written form when requested, the Chairman

shall allow an appropriate period for the provision thereof.

10. proxies

No vote by any member of the committee or any of its

subcommittees with respect to any measure or matter may be

cast by proxy.

11. postponement of proceedings

The Chairman in consultation with the Ranking Minority

Member may postpone further proceedings when a record vote is

ordered on the question of approving any measure or matter or

adopting an amendment. The Chairman may resume proceedings on

a postponed request at any time. In exercising postponement

authority, the Chairman shall take all reasonable steps

necessary to notify members on the resumption of proceedings

on any postponed recorded vote. When proceedings resume on a

postponed question, notwithstanding any intervening order for

the previous question, an underlying proposition shall remain

subject to further debate or amendment to the same extent as

when the question was postponed.

12. number and jurisdiction of subcommittees

There will be four subcommittees as follows:

Workforce, Empowerment and Government Programs (seven

Republicans and six Democrats).

Regulatory Reform and Oversight (seven Republicans and six

Democrats).

Rural Enterprises, Agriculture and Technology (six

Republicans and five Democrats).

Tax, Finance and Exports (eight Republicans and seven

Democrats).

During the 109th Congress, the Chairman and ranking

minority member shall be ex officio members of all

subcommittees, without vote, and the full committee shall

have the authority to conduct oversight of all areas of the

committee's jurisdiction.

In addition to conducting oversight in the area of their

respective jurisdiction, each subcommittee shall have the

following jurisdiction:

workforce, empowerment and government programs

Oversight and investigative authority over problems faced

by small businesses in attracting and retaining a high

quality workforce, including but not limited to wages and

benefits such as health care.

Promotion of business growth and opportunities in

economically depressed areas.

Oversight and investigative authority over regulations and

other government policies that impact small businesses

located in high risk communities.

Opportunities for minority, women, veteran and disabled-

owned small businesses, including the SBA's 8(a) program.

General oversight of programs targeted toward urban relief.

Small Business Act, Small Business Investment Act, and

related legislation.

Federal Government programs that are designed to assist

small business generally.

Participation of small business in Federal procurement and

Government contracts.

regulatory reform and oversight

Oversight and investigative authority over the regulatory

and paperwork policies of all Federal departments and

agencies.

Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Paperwork Reduction Act.

Competition policy generally.

Oversight and investigative authority generally, including

novel issues of special concern to small business.

rural enterprises, agriculture and technology

Promotion of business growth and opportunities in rural

areas.

Oversight and investigative authority over agricultural

issues that impact small businesses.

General oversight of programs targeted toward farm relief.

Oversight and investigative authority for small business

technology issues.

tax, finance and exports

Tax policy and its impact on small business.

Access to capital and finance issues generally.

Export opportunities and oversight over Federal trade

policy and promotion programs.

13. committee staff

(A) Majority staff

The employees of the committee, except those assigned to

the minority as provided below, shall be appointed and

assigned, and

may be removed by the Chairman. The Chairman shall fix their

remuneration, and they shall be under the general supervision

and direction of the Chairman.

(B) Minority staff

The employees of the committee assigned to the minority

shall be appointed and assigned, and their remuneration

determined, as the ranking minority member of the committee

shall determine.

(C) Subcommittee staff

The Chairman and ranking minority member of the full

committee shall endeavor to ensure that sufficient staff is

made available to each subcommittee to carry out its

responsibilities under the rules ofthe committee.

14. powers and duties of subcommittees

Each subcommittee is authorized to meet, hold hearings,

receive evidence, and report to the full committee on all

matters referred to it. Subcommittee chairmen shall set

meeting and hearing dates after consultation with the

Chairman of the full committee. Meetings and hearings of

subcommittees shall not be scheduled to occur simultaneously

with meetings or hearings of the full committee.

15. subcommittee reports

(A) Investigative hearings

The report of any subcommittee on a matter which was the

topic of a study or investigation shall include a statement

concerning the subject of the study or investigation, the

findings and conclusions, and recommendations for corrective

action, if any, together with such other material as the

subcommittee deems appropriate.

Such proposed reports shall first be approved by a majority

of the subcommittee members. After such approval has been

secured, the proposed report shall be sent to each member of

the full committee for his or her supplemental, minority, or

additional views.

Any such views shall be in writing and signed by the member

and filed with the clerk of the full committee within 5

calendar days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal

holidays) from the date of the transmittal of the proposed

report to the members. Transmittal of the proposed report to

members shall be by hand delivery to the members' offices.

After the expiration of such 5 calendar days, the report

may be filed as a House report.

(B) End of Congress

Each subcommittee shall submit to the full committee, not

later than November 15 of each even-numbered year, a report

on the activities of the subcommittee during the Congress.

16. records

The committee shall keep a complete record of all actions,

which shall include a record of the votes on any question on

which a record vote is demanded. The result of each

subcommittee record vote, together with a description of the

matter voted upon, shall promptly be made available to the

full committee. A record of such votes shall be made

available for inspection by the public at reasonable times in

the offices of the committee.

The committee shall keep a complete record of all committee

and subcommittee activity which, in the case of any meeting

or hearing transcript, shall include a substantially verbatim

account of remarks actually made during the proceedings,

subject only to technical, grammatical, and typographical

corrections authorized by the person making the remarks

involved.

The records of the committee at the National Archives and

Records Administration shall be made available in accordance

with rule VII of the Rules ofthe House. The Chairman of the

full committee shall notify the ranking minority member of

the full committee of any decision, pursuant to clause

3(b)(3) or clause 4(b) of rule VII of the House, to withhold

a record otherwise available, and the matter shall be

presented to the committee for a determination of the written

request of any member of the committee.

17. access to classified or sensitive information

Access to classified or sensitive information supplied to

the committee and attendance at closed sessions of the

committee or its subcommittees shall be limited to members

and necessary committee staff and stenographic reporters who

have appropriate security clearance when the Chairman

determines that such access or attendance is essential to the

functioning of the committee.

The procedures to be followed in granting access to those

hearings, records, data, charts, and files of the committee

which involve classified information or information deemed to

be sensitive shall be as follows:

(a) Only Members of the House of Representatives and

specifically designated committee staff of the Committee on

Small Business may have access to such information.

(b) Members who desire to read materials that are in the

possession of the committee should notify the clerk of the

committee.

(c) The clerk will maintain an accurate access log, which

identifies the circumstances surrounding access to the

information, without revealing the material examined.

(d) If the material desired to be reviewed is material

which the committee or subcommittee deems to be sensitive

enough to require special handling, before receiving access

to such information, individuals will be required to sign an

access information sheet acknowledging such access and that

the individual has read and understands the procedures under

which access is being granted.

(e) Material provided for review under this rule shall not

be removed from a specified room within the committee

offices.

(f) Individuals reviewing materials under this rule shall

make certain that the materials are returned to the proper

custodian.

(g) No reproductions or recordings may be made of any

portion of such materials.

(h) The contents of such information shall not be divulged

to any person in any way, form, shape, or manner, and shall

not be discussed with any person who has not received the

information in an authorized manner.

(i) When not being examined in the manner described herein,

such information will be kept in secure safes or locked file

cabinets in the committee offices.

(j) These procedures only address access to information the

committee or a subcommittee deems to be sensitive enough to

require special treatment.

(k) If a member of the House of Representatives believes

that certain sensitive information should not be restricted

as to dissemination or use, the member may petition the

committee or subcommittee to so rule. With respect to

information and materials provided to the committee by the

executive branch, the classification of information and

materials as determined by the executive branch shall prevail

unless affirmatively changed by the committee or the

subcommittee involved, after consultation with the

appropriate executive agencies.

(l) Other materials in the possession of the committee are

to be handled in accordance with the normal practices and

traditions of the committee.

18. OTHER PROCEDURES

The Chairman of the full committee may establish such other

procedures and take such actions as may be necessary to carry

out the foregoing rules or to facilitate the effective

operation of the committee.

The committee may not be committed to any expense whatever

without the prior approval of the Chairman of the full

committee.

19. amendments to committee rules

The rules of the committee may be modified, amended or

repealed by a majority of the members, at a meeting

specifically called for such purpose, but only if written

notice of the proposed change has been provided to each such

member at least 3 days before the time of the meeting.

Mr. Speaker, today I wish to recognize the outstanding dedication and leadership of Leonard (Nick) Hall for his efforts in administrating federal tax law. He has served for over 30 years in the Internal Revenue Service, IRS. He also served his country in the Army and worked for a time with the United States Department of Defense. Nick is retiring after over 35 years of federal service and I want to thank him for his contributions to Illinois and our country.

Nick is a dedicated and proud member of the IRS executive staff. Nick has served as an Area Director for Small Business/Self-Employed Division, Taxpayer Education and Communications, TEC, in Chicago, IL. As the Chairman of the Small Business Committee, I work closely with TEC, which is a small business focused function of the IRS. It closely works with small business organizations and industry leaders to educate and ensure IRS products and services fit the needs of small business/ self-employed taxpayers. He leads about 100 employees responsible for taxpayer education and communications programs in 13 states, including Illinois. His employees deliver federal tax information to over hundreds of state and industry organizations and millions of people. He has been a leader in reducing taxpayer burden and ensuring fair tax law administration. He was very involved in the most recent comprehensive reorganization and modernization of the IRS in nearly half a century.

In 2004, Nick received a TEC Director's award for his efforts to taxpayer burden reduction, taxpayer outreach and compliance assistance. This award was to recognize his participation at the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act hearings.

In 2000, Nick received a Commissioner's Award for his contributions as an executive team leader, serving under the Deputy Commissioner for Modernization. This award is considered the highest honor an IRS Commissioner can bestow to an employee. The Commissioner cited Nick's extensive experience in IRS operations as extremely invaluable to modernization initiatives.

Nick is a resident of Illinois after spending many years living in many or various cities in the United States. His wife, Mona, is a native of Illinois and also a 25 year employee of the IRS. They plan to continue to reside in Illinois upon Nick's retirement from the IRS on February 25, 2005.

My wife, Freda, and I wish Nick and his family a happy future, and I wish to thank him for all of his dedications, commitment, and hard work.