Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to Pontiac Northern High School's ``Huskie Brigade'' for their victory at the U.S. FIRST Robotics National Championship in Houston, Texas last month. The twenty-four students, four teachers, and several engineers should be proud of this accomplishment.

Science and technology are the keystones to our economic prosperity. The quality education of America's youth is more critical now than ever as our society becomes more wired and globalized. Our students must be interested in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology to continue our success.

The For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) competition instills an appreciation of science and technology in students and teaches them how mastering these institutes can enrich our society. Corporations provide economic and professional support to FIRST and teams. General Motors Powertrain sponsored Pontiac Northern High School's team. Many Fortune 500 companies have significantly contributed to FIRST's growth and government organizations such as NASA are key partners. FIRST represents a cooperative team effort by students, teachers, communities, corporations, and our government.

The Huskie Brigade competed in two regional events leading up to the National Competition. At the Great Lakes Regional, they were awarded the prestigious 2003 Regional Chairman's Award. At the Mid-West Regional, the Huskie Brigade finished as a finalist and won the Johnson and Johnson's Sportsmanship Award.

I congratulate the Huskie Brigade on their fine achievements and awards and wish nothing but the best for all the members in their future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding Naval Officer, Commander Jeff Voltz, who has served with distinction and dedication for almost two years for the Secretary of the Navy, as the Congressional Liaison Officer for Civil Engineering, Appropriations Matters Office under the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial

Management and Comptroller). It is a privilege for me to recognize his many outstanding achievements and commend him for the superb service he has provided to the Department of the Navy, the Congress, and our great Nation as a whole.

During his tenure in the Appropriations Matters Office, which began in July of 2001, Commander Voltz has provided members of the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Military Construction as well as our professional and personal staffs with timely and accurate support regarding Department of Navy plans, programs and budget decisions. His valuable contributions have enabled the Subcommittee on Military Construction and the Department of the Navy to strengthen its close working relationship and to ensure the most modern, well trained and well equipped naval forces attainable for the defense of our great nation.

Mr. Speaker, Jeff Voltz and his wife Teri have made many sacrifices during his career in the Navy. His distinguished service has exemplified honor, courage and commitment. As they depart the Appropriations Matters Office to embark on yet another Navy assignment in the service of a grateful nation, I call upon my colleagues to wish them both every success and the traditional Navy send-off ``fair winds and following seas.''

Mr. Speaker, tomorrow this House will consider an economic growth and jobs creation initiative that will provide a much needed short-term stimulus while setting the groundwork for long-term growth. I strongly urge Members to support it.

The Jobs and Growth Tax Act will generate nearly 1 million jobs by the end of next year by putting more money in the hands of consumers and giving businesses incentives to hire and invest.

The naysayers ask how can we afford a tax relief plan at a time when our country faces so many challenges. The real question ought to be how can we expect to meet those challenges while our economy is growing too slowly.

As Rick Wagoner, the chairman of General Motors, said when he endorsed the President's plan, ``Growth goes a long way toward addressing what ails you.''

Let us take that advice and create economic growth by passing the Jobs and Growth Tax Act. Vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment that will do little more than punish the auto industry for the sin of building cars that people want to buy.

This amendment will force Americans to drive smaller cars that are less safe than what we drive now. Smaller cars mean more traffic fatalities, as noted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and confirmed by the National Academy of Sciences. Safety should not be sacrificed.

The auto industry is already moving on its own to increase fuel economy through the development and use of advance technologies such as hybrids and fuel cells. But they are doing so in a way that will produce cars that are safe and that people will actually want to buy. That is what we should be supporting.

I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the American people's right to drive safer cars and the ability of the auto industry to finish the job it is already doing.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act which, as has been mentioned, passed on a unanimous vote of 59 to 0 in the committee.

I wanted to extend a strong salute to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), to the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and also to the staff who worked, with barely a week, on the very extensive bill, and they worked to produce a bill that I believe deserves our thanks, and this also is one that is good and necessary and it protects the House priorities.

As chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Construction of the Committee on Appropriations, providing what our military personnel need to protect their lives and ensure their success is my top priority, and I believe this bill does that, we have made sure that our military personnel have all the tools necessary to ensure success.

I would like to bring the attention of the House to two important provisions in this wartime supplemental bill. The first is the additional funding for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, which will receive some 428 million. The bill sets asides 80 million of that amount for new inspectors and Border Patrol agents at the northern border ports of entry. For those whose districts and States lie on the northern border, this funding is critical not only to the safety of our constituents but also to the economic safety of our country.

I am pleased that the administration and the House continue to place such an emphasis on filling the needs we have at the northern border.

I would also like to bring to the House's attention the foreign assistance portion of the bill. Foreign assistance is critical to our overall foreign policy and the President needs these funds immediately. This money is necessary to support the stabilization of Iraq and also support our key partners in the war with Iraq and the global war on terrorism.

I also support strongly the Middle East partnership initiative, or MEPI. This initiative is critical to our country's policy toward the Middle East because it strengthens our policy on economic, political, and educational reforms in that part of the world. The administration should be commended for initiating and funding this program to work with our Arab and Muslim allies on these issues.

Mr. Chairman, it is clear that our men and women in the Armed Forces, along with our allies, will prevail in Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. This supplemental will ensure that they have the resources they need to finish that job. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, as the attention of the country is focused on the men and women of our armed forces who are fighting to liberate Iraq, we must not forget about those who are serving elsewhere around the world. That's why I am introducing today the ``United States Forces Korea Quality of Life Act.'' I, as well as my original co- sponsors, believe this bill is essential in providing much needed relief to our military personnel in Korea.

As Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, improving the quality of life for our military is one of my foremost goals. No place needs improvement more than our facilities in Korea. Simply put, the conditions our troops in Korea must currently endure are unacceptable.

But you don't have to take my word for it. In recent testimony before Congress, Admiral Thomas Fargo, Commander, United States Pacific Command and General Leon LaPorte, Commander United States Forces Korea, testified that conditions on the Korean Peninsula

for U.S. service personnel are ``the worst in the Department of Defense.''

My bill provides members of the U.S. armed forces, the benefit of a tax exclusion to help offset the high cost of living and the poor quality of life while serving in South Korea and applies to personnel who execute permanent change of station orders or orders for temporary duty exceeding 30 days. Service members will be provided with an immediate boost in their quality of life as they keep more of the money they earn.

Why should we provide this benefit to our soldiers in Korea?

An unusual hardship of family separation for more than a year is borne by 94 percent of the 37,000 plus personnel who serve in Korea. Conditions are so poor for personnel that one third of those authorized to bring family members choose voluntary family separation before subjecting their families to the conditions on the peninsula.

Seoul is the third most expensive city in the world to live according to a recent United Nations survey. Despite this, our service men and women receive no cost of living allowance, COLA, for being stationed there. That means they receive no additional compensation to help offset higher costs in Korea. Working and living facilities in Korea, as well as living conditions for our service personnel are sub-standard by any measure.

Even the living quarters on post are smaller than typical military installations, and all our soldiers must live in an environmentally degraded region. Beyond cost and comfort, let's not forget that these soldiers live under the threat from an unpredictable North Korea.

It's no wonder then that those who are allowed to bring their families to Korea rarely do so and that those who are given the opportunity to command forces in Korea decline at a rate five times the normal Army wide rate.

There are many uncertainties about the future of our forces abroad as we re-examine our overseas basing and force structure. Unfortunately, discussion of overseas re-alignment may lead to further neglect of the critical quality of life and infrastructure requirements of our forces in Korea.

As we work to rectify the inequities in pay/benefits for those stationed in Korea, I believe it is so important to give our soldiers there an extra boost now. The United States Forces Korea Quality of Life Act won't fix all the hardships that our service members face in Korea, but it will give them a chance to make their life there a little better and their time there more agreeable.

I encourage all my colleagues to join me in giving our soldiers in Korea the additional assistance they need and deserve.

Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to provide permanent normal trade relations to our ally Armenia. I hope colleagues will join me in passing this bill at the earliest opportunity.

Since declaring its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia has made great strides in developing a stable democratic and open society. This includes an adherence to the fundamental principle free emigration. I am pleased that Armenia has been found to be in full compliance with the Jackson-Vanik requirements regarding free emigration under title IV of the Trade Act of 1974. The time has now come for Armenia to be graduated from this annual review.

In 2002, despite the dual blockades by Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia was ranked 44th on the Heritage Foundation and Wall Street Journal's Index of Economic Freedom. According to this study, Armenia remains the most economically free country in the region, including all countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Armenia is poised to play a pivotal role as a commercial hub and has established a positive legal, regulatory and tax climate for foreign investment, reflecting the country's commitment to open and free trade.

Armenia's strategic location at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, democratic stability, entrepreneurial spirit and western value system make Armenia an increasingly important partner for the United States in the Caucasus region. Total United States-Armenia bilateral trade for 2002 amounted to more than $134,200,000.

An indication of the progress Armenia has made is its success in pursuing membership in the World Trade Organization. On December 10, 2002, the World Trade Organization's General Assembly unanimously voted to approve Armenia's full accession to the Organization.

Armenia's accession to the WTO is a momentous event for this proud country that has worked hard to enact free-market reforms within a stable democratic framework. However, the full benefits of accession will not be realized unless Permanent Normal Trade Relations is granted to Armenia. Passing this bill will result in tangible benefits for Armenia and the United States and an even stronger relationship between our two countries.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill into law.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution regarding the Steel Safeguard Program that was initiated on March 5, 2002. This resolution asks for little, but could mean everything to steel-consuming manufacturers in this country.

By introducing this resolution I, along with 51 of my colleagues, are merely asking that the President direct the International Trade Commission (ITC) to include in its mid-term review of the Steel Safeguard Program an assessment of the Program's impact on steel consumers. Currently the ITC is under no obligation to report on these effects. By affirmatively accepting our request, the President will have a complete picture of the economic effects of the Program when he considers in September of this year whether or not to extend the tariffs for another eighteen months.

Last March, the Bush Administration imposed tariffs on imported steel, some as high as 30 percent, in an attempt to limit low-price imports in order to give our domestic steel industry time to reorganize and become more competitive. At that time, it was obvious that

steel-consuming manufacturers were going to feel pain, but we didn't know how bad the pain would be. Nobody knew how bad it would be.

Mr. Speaker, the pain is real and it is deep.

Since last year, I have been hearing stories of skyrocketing steel prices, broken contracts, and supply disruptions. Now, we have layoffs. Now, we have companies buying more steel from foreign countries exempt from the tariffs. And, now, more and more manufacturers, both large and small, are being forced to move production overseas. And once those jobs go, they aren't coming back.

Two days ago, I was joined by representatives from six automotive parts supply companies to discuss the effects of the tariffs. Let me give you just a taste of what these companies are doing to cope with the tariffs.

Arvin-Meritor, which is based Troy, Michigan, in my district, bought one million tons of steel globally last year. They recently closed down a Tennessee plant that employed 317 people in part because of higher steel prices and are now exploring options for buying cheaper steel from non-U.S. suppliers who are exempt from the tariffs.

Dura Automotive Systems, Inc., which is based in Rochester Hills, also in my district, cut 60 jobs after the tariffs were imposed and business was lost.

Metaldyne, which is based in Plymouth, Michigan, is expecting to source 30-40 percent of its steel from abroad within the next few years because of rising prices and supply shortages. They currently buy 98 percent of their steel domestically.

Dana Corp., which is based in Toledo, Ohio, is considering not only buying more steel from abroad, but buying components and finished parts from abroad as well because they can be made cheaper in foreign plants that don't have to pay inflated prices for steel.

All of these companies, and others throughout the steel consuming manufacturing industry, are forced to respond to this pain in order to remain globally competitive. Many of these companies will expand their purchases of finished steel products from overseas, because finished products are not covered by the tariffs. Sourcing parts from overseas causes more pain for companies up the manufacturing stream. Companies are being forced to make these decisions because of the steel tariffs.

Let's be clear. Right now, the unintended consequences of the steel tariffs are killing American jobs in steel consuming companies. This clearly was not the intent of the Steel Safeguard Program. This is the collateral damage. But we can't ignore the fact that the tariffs are costing jobs.

And I have to ask this question: what good will the tariffs have achieved if there are no customers left to buy steel from U.S. steel companies?

I am not here to criticize the President. In fact, I don't think the President would've supported these tariffs if he could've seen in a crystal ball the full damage they're causing. These effects have come about more rapidly and more severely than anyone predicted.

And let me emphasize that I fully support a healthy domestic steel industry. These are good American companies that employ good Americans.

But companies in my district and across the country are hurting. They are good American companies that employ good Americans. They deserve the consideration along with the steel industry when the steel tariff regime is reviewed.

This resolution is not anti-steel or pro-steel consumer. It is simply an attempt to ensure that when the President decides whether to extend the Steel Safeguard Program for another 18 months, he has all the information he needs to make the best choice for our nation's economy.

This is a modest request. We are not asking that the tariffs be lifted immediately and we're not attempting to change trade law. I urge all my colleagues to cosponsor this moderate, bipartisan resolution to simply consider the impact the steel tariffs have had on steel consumers.

Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced the Job Creation Act of 2003. The country is now in its second year of economic growth, but we are not growing fast enough. We must continue to look for ways to continue and quicken our economic recovery.

President George W. Bush recently announced his economic growth and jobs plan to strengthen the American economy by providing accelerated tax relief to every American paying income tax, encouraging job creation by giving small businesses incentives to grow, and helping displaced workers.

This is a step in the right direction, but we must also address the numerous benefits that an elimination of capital gains taxes would have on our economy. The Job Creation Act would eliminate capital gains taxes for individuals.

By cutting the capital gains tax, we create greater incentives to invest and start new businesses, which means more jobs available. In addition, a cut in the capital gains tax will almost certainly generate more revenue, as was the case when the tax was reduced in the early 1960s and late 1970s.

Furthermore, it is estimated that trillions of dollars are being held in investments such as stocks, bonds, and market funds to avoid the tax. Relief from the capital gains tax would induce people to profit from their investments, leading to the potential of ``unlocking'' hundreds of billions of dollars of stored up wealth.

The elimination of the capital gain tax would also eliminate a complex and confusing portion of our tax code. Relief would enable people to better plan for retirement by knowing the true value of their investments without worrying about federal taxes.

I am pleased to have introduced the Jobs Creation Act and look forward to working with my colleagues on this important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this continuing resolution, and I really want to thank Chairman Young for all the hard work that he has put into this process. I want to thank also the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) on the minority side. It is not easy. I know. This may be one of the hardest jobs in the House that the chairman has and the ranking member, too. The continuing resolution is an essential bill, and obviously I strongly urge all my colleagues to support it. I do not think the appropriations process has ever been easy, and I think this particular situation is maybe one of the most difficult that we have ever had, at least in my understanding. All we can do is take the situation that we have and do the very best that we can. I believe that is exactly what we are going to do.

The President has made it pretty clear, quite clear, that he will not sign any bills that push us over the discretionary level of $750.5 billion. I believe we have to pay attention to that. We have to respect that. And I believe we will. The gulf between the spending levels between the two bodies has now been closed. I understand that we are now close to agreeing to new allocations for the fiscal year 2003 bills that have not been completed.

As my colleagues will remember, this was one of the key problems last year as we attempted, as some attempted, rather, to throw fiscal discipline out the window. Not everybody may be happy, either, with the final allocations; but they are critical to move this process forward. Time is of the essence. We have to complete the fiscal year 2003 bills so we can properly focus on fiscal year 2004, which is why again we must pass this continuing resolution. Further delays run the risk of the Federal Government operating for an entire year under a continuing resolution. That is the alternative. What is it you want to do? If that is what you want as an alternative, that is the only thing that is out there. I do not think either side of the aisle will be satisfied with that outcome. The blame game is easy. By the way, if I were in the minority, I might be saying some of the same things that you are saying and doing some of the same things.

But the hard work, by the way, is being done by Chairman Young and, yes, Ranking Member Obey to bring the fiscal year 2003, I am talking about 2003, by the way, and we should be talking about 2004, bring the fiscal year 2003 appropriation bills to a successful resolution.

I just say, let us pass this CR and let us get back to work. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.