Floor Statements

I want to thank Congresswoman Black for her leadership on this very commonsense issue, so commonsense at a time where it seems like Democrats and Republicans and the President in Washington rarely agree on anything, we all agree on this, on closing this loophole in the President's health care plan that really should have never been there in the first place.

We got good news last week when the President rescinded another big flaw in the President's health care plan, when he gave up on the CLASS Act. It was a plan for nursing home care and later care for elderly that was financed in a way that even Senate Democrats labeled it a Ponzi scheme. Thankfully, that's been repealed.

Today we're here to repeal another loophole in a really nonsensical part in the President's health care plan for couples who make more than the national average in income, $64,000 per year. Today, under the law, they can qualify for Medicaid. That's a program for the very poor in America. That's a program we don't have enough money for as it is.

And at a time when 25 million people are either out of work or can't find a full-time job, shouldn't our hard-earned tax dollars go to those who can't afford anything rather than those who are blessed with $5,000 or more a month to make ends meet; at a time, again, it seems to me, that a couple making four times the Federal poverty level shouldn't be able to draw down the dollars that you and I pay to help those who are truly needy in America, who, by the way, are growing by the day?

I will say my good friend from New York is very passionate about this issue, and I appreciate his passion, but this isn't about young kids paying off college student loans. This is not about couples struggling to make ends meet. This is about making sure couples making as much as $64,000 a year don't use the money that we reserve for our poorest in America.

Not at this time.

And I appreciate the gentleman from New York's effort on this. This is not about taxing millionaires and billionaires.

In fact, let me yield for just a moment.

Oh, no.

Actually, I was making the point that the very poor need our resources.

I tell you what, maybe we can continue this conversation off the floor. I know you feel strongly.

For those who are making $20,000 a year, it goes even less far.

Reclaiming my time, we've had great discussions about this, but, again, Medicaid should be for those who are very poor.

This loophole is being closed, and thankfully the President agrees with us. The Senate Democrats and Republicans join with us to close this loophole. That has to tell you that this is a loophole that Republicans and Democrats, the White House all agree needs to be closed.

Again, I thank Congresswoman Black for her leadership on this commonsense issue, and I urge support.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the brave men and women who answered the call when wildfires roared. Having survived Hurricanes Rita and Ike, my district and the people of Southeast Texas know and understand the devastation Hurricanes bring. This September we dealt with a very different kind of disaster in the form of massive wildfires.

Luckily for us, our September miracle was granted Labor Day weekend as fire crews from across Texas and in fact the entire country came to Magnolia to battle a three county blaze that threatened to consume well over ten-thousand homes and businesses in Magnolia as well as thousands more in neighboring Grimes and Waller Counties.

Having been out on the line with them to see for myself how the fire lines came right up to families' back porches--yet they saved home after home--it is impossible for me not to be in awe of these heroes. Their skill and dedication saved the town of Magnolia and I can't wait to join them this Saturday in Unity Park to honor their success and hard work.

Magnolia Volunteer Fire Chief Gary Vincent united over a hundred different fire fighting agencies by his side and with the help of our dedicated Sheriff Tommy Gage, his deputies, our constables, our police departments, our Fire Marshall Jimmy Williams, school districts, the Texas Forest Service and many others stepped up. California's Interagency Incident Management Team not only took our thanks back to the Golden State, they take back the model for how communities and first responders unite with charities from the United Way, Red Cross, local food banks, churches, YMCAs and Chambers of Commerce to provide a response that firefighters across this nation will be talking about for years to come.

If a firefighter was thirsty, three volunteers would rush over with water and there were likely two more behind carrying hot meals just in case that firefighter might be hungry as well. All the firefighters who came in from across the country could talk about was how well they were treated in Texas, God's country.

Today, it's an honor for me to be here on the House floor to honor my heroes who made it possible for thousands of families to have homes to go home to. This Saturday, our community will honor those who held the line by celebrating their service and by heeding their warnings that the fire danger remains extraordinarily high as the drought drags on.

Mr. Speaker, in having survived Hurricanes Rita and Ike, my district and the people of southeast Texas know and understand hurricanes and the devastation they can bring to our communities.

This past September, we dealt with a very different type of disaster in the form of major wildfires in the Counties of Jasper, Tyler, Trinity, Walker, and in my home county of Montgomery. Luckily for us, we were also granted our September miracle on Labor Day weekend as fire crews from across Texas--and, in fact, from the entire country--came to Magnolia to battle a three-county blaze that threatened to consume well over 10,000 homes and businesses in Magnolia, as well as thousands more in neighboring Grimes and Waller Counties.

In fact, if you look at this map, you can see the structures lost in Montgomery County were a fraction of the percentage of those saved by the brave fire crews. The fire was in this area outlined here, but you can see from the red, the yellow, the green, and the blue going out all the thousands of homes and small businesses which were saved because of the actions of our local firefighters.

I had the privilege to go up twice to those fire areas to see for myself how the fire lines came right up to these homes--within 5 feet of their front doors. Somehow our firefighters saved them, and then they did it to the homes next to them and to the homes next to those. It is impossible for me and for anyone who could see that not to be in awe of these heroes. Their skill and dedication saved the town of Magnolia, and I can't wait to join them this Saturday in Unity Park to honor their success and their hard work.

Chief Gary Vincent led the Magnolia Volunteer Firefighters and exemplified their motto: a community of unity. Gary united over 100 different firefighting agencies by his side. The chief also had help from our dedicated sheriff, Tommy Gage, and his deputies; our constables; our police departments; our terrific fire marshal, Jimmy Williams, who you need to meet; our school districts; and the Texas Forest Service--just to name a few of the people and agencies that stepped up like you can't believe.

California sent from the Federal Government the Interagency Incident Management Team, and I think they had

their eyes open. They got to see what happens when a community rallies together as volunteers. It was a sight to behold. Everyday Texans and everyday citizens in the Montgomery/Magnolia County area joined with our charity agencies from the United Way, to the Red Cross, to our local food banks, to our churches, to our YMCAs, to chambers of commerce in order to provide a response to the firefighters across this Nation, a response that we will be talking about for years to come.

We saw the best of our communities and the massive volunteer effort to feed, clothe, and take care of our bravest. At the Magnolia West High School staging area, I got a tour. If a firefighter were thirsty, three volunteers would rush over with a bottle of water, and there were likely two more behind them, carrying a hot meal, just in case that firefighter might be hungry.

In speaking about the firefighters who came from across the country, all they could talk about was how well they were treated by the community of Magnolia. They came in looking for water and a FEMA bar, and what they got was home-cooked meals, fresh clothes and necessities. If they asked for it, a volunteer found it and brought it right over. When these volunteers ran low, they simply sent out a message on Facebook to the community; and within 3 hours, that staging area in the ag barn was filled to the brim again. It was amazing.

The outpouring of love and support was truly a sight to behold. It's no wonder, back home we consider this God's country.

Today, it's an honor for me to be here on the House floor to honor our heroes. Without all of you, thousands of families wouldn't have homes to go to tonight or businesses in which to work. The proof is right here on this map.

This Saturday afternoon, Unity Park in Magnolia, our community, will come together to honor the men and women who beat back the fire, held the line and saved our community. We'll also honor them by heeding their warnings if the fire danger remains extraordinarily high. We must remain vigilant in our prevention efforts. That's another way we can honor our bravest, who spent the month of September away from their families, saving homes and businesses in our community.

God bless our firefighters. God bless our volunteers and all who supported them, and God bless our community.

I rise in support of H.R. 2042, the APEC Business Travel Card, and I appreciate working with my counterpart, Congressman Larsen, on this legislation.

This bill provides security-vetted American business and government travelers the same time-saving benefits as their counterparts in other Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. The bill is supported by leaders in both parties, including the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, Representative Peter King. I appreciate his leadership, as this provision was included in the authorizing bill recently reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security.

The card was originally created to increase the economic engagement in a region that continues to grow and grow, and to expedite secure business travel for those who make frequent business trips to these economies. But today, the United States is only one of three economies within APEC that hasn't yet provided these travel cards to their frequent business travelers. This bill would allow Customs and Border Protection to issue the travel card to our citizens after conducting background checks, confirming frequent travel to the APEC region, and collecting fees to cover the full costs.

The two big benefits beyond increased security is the equal treatment for Americans. Our counterparts, frequent business and government travelers, who do business within these countries in the region already enjoy these benefits. This provides it to United States citizens. Basically, it then makes sure we stay competitive in that region, which is a region that is growing economically and represents more than half of the world's economy. They buy almost 58 percent of what America sells, so they are, as Congresswoman Sanchez says, major new customers for our farmers and ranchers, for our technology companies, for our manufacturing companies, and for our service workers as well.

I fully support this bill. It is important that our business travelers in America get out there to sell American products throughout this important region. It has strong business support, and I urge Member support as well.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to say that Our Lord has a new angel. Edrie Maurice Talley Parrish went to be with Our Lord on October 4, 2011. A beloved mother, grandmother, and great- grandmother, Edrie will be missed tremendously by all who were fortunate enough to have met this amazing woman.

Edrie was born to Robert and Mai Belle Talley on July 20, 1921, on the family's farm in Collin County, Texas, near the town of Frisco. When she was just 3 years old, she lost her father to pneumonia but continued to honor him through many great achievements in her long, rich life.

Edrie graduated from Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Texas, and soon after moved with her mother to Denton where she began attending North Texas State Teachers College, now known as University of North Texas. While in Denton, she met and married Herbert C. Parrish. Not long after their August 12, 1941, nuptials, the young couple packed their bags and moved across country to Columbus, Ohio, so Herbert could earn his Doctorate in mathematics. While in Columbus, Edrie finished her Bachelor of Arts in Institutional Management at Ohio State University. Shortly after the completion of both of their studies, Edrie and Herbert moved back to Denton in 1949 where Herbert accepted a job as a professor in the department of mathematics at North Texas State College and Edrie threw her boundless energy into raising a family of three.

She led a very active role in all of her children's activities, including being a Cub Scout leader and working with the Girl Scouts, and 4-H Club. She was well loved at Grace Temple Baptist Church in Denton where she was an active member of the congregation for half a century.

Her contributions to her church family include volunteering in the community and mission of her church, teaching Sunday school, committee service, visiting the sick and homebound, and helping out in numerous community service projects.

Edrie was preceded in death by her husband Herbert C. Parrish; and her sister Cloe Rita Talley Peck. She is survived by her three children: Byron Parrish of Brookline, Massachusetts; Norman Parrish of The Woodlands, Texas; and Roberta Parrish Starbird of Austin, Texas; seven grandchildren, and three great-grandchildren.

Madam Speaker, as a cosponsor and the proud parent of two young boys--adopted young boys--whose family exists only because two women in two difficult situations in two different States chose life and gave us a family, I am proud to rise in strong support of the rule to allow the House to consider the Protect Life Act, led by my friend and colleague, Congressman Joe Pitts.

Over a year ago, President Obama's health care plan was signed into law--despite a strenuous outcry by the American people--without significant and substantial prohibitions on federal funding for abortion. This funding of abortion through insurance plans, community health centers, and other programs created by the new health care law could have been avoided. But such language was intentionally left out. There have been restrictions on abortions and subsidies for over 30 years, beginning with the Hyde amendment in 1976, and I'm proud that today we are acting in that spirit.

Regardless of whether you are pro-choice or, like me, strongly pro- life, Americans have always agreed we will not use federal tax dollars to subsidize or incentivize abortion. And you don't have to take my word for it.

In poll after poll, more than 60 percent of Americans oppose using Federal funding for abortions. More recently, two-thirds of Americans said we shouldn't subsidize health insurance that includes abortions.

The President's health care plan fails to provide real conscience protection for health care providers who decline to participate in abortions by mandating that they not be discriminated against because of their religious faiths.

The bottom line is that this bill we take up today strikes an important balance. It makes sure your Federal tax dollars are not used to subsidize abortions in the President's plan, and we make sure that people and institutions are able to care for their patients and are not forced to violate their moral principles.

I strongly urge my colleagues to respect America's conscientious objections to abortion by voting for the rule and by voting for the Protect Life Act.

I thank the chairman for yielding time.

I first want to thank Chairman Camp and Speaker Boehner for insisting that the White House submit the Panama trade agreement along with those of Colombia and Korea to ensure that we open all three markets equally to American farmers, manufacturers, service, and technology companies. But for your work, we would not be here today.

This agreement is long overdue. As families know, the world has changed. It's not simply enough to buy American; we have to sell American all throughout the world. Panama is a dynamic new market for America with almost 9 percent a year in economic growth--far stronger than our own. Panama is important to our manufacturers in America, it's important to our farmers, it's especially important to our service companies because so much of Panama's economy matches up beautifully with America's economy. With the expansion of the Panama Canal, you're going to see increased cargo at our ports, increased jobs along our coasts, and lower prices in products in America as well.

Critics will say, Panama is too small an economy. Why do we bother?

In this dismal economy in America, every sale, every job counts. From Europe to Canada, to Thailand, to Singapore, and many more, our competitors negotiate sales agreements with Panama because they know those customers matter.

Critics say, Panama is a tax haven. Why are we doing this agreement? But those simply aren't the facts. They also often say that labor rights aren't what they ought to be.

Panama has passed more than a dozen labor laws that dramatically commit to raising the standard of labor protections in that country. They have passed tax information agreements with America and with other countries around the world, so much so that they are now considered in standing on tax transparency equal to the United States.

This is a valued ally in a strong and growing part of the world that, frankly, has waited far too long. It is embarrassing that it has taken 4 years to bring this agreement to the floor. But today it is here. Today, we will signal we are going to open those markets, that we are going to strengthen our ties, and that we are going to pass this sales agreement with Panama.

I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Agriculture Committee and a champion of new markets, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas).

I yield myself 10 seconds.

I would point out in manufacturing we actually run a trade surplus with our trading partners, including NAFTA, selling much more products there. It's our trade deficit with our nontrade agreement partners that we have troubles with. Panama is a surplus for America.

I now yield 2 minutes to a key member of the Ways and Means Committee, who has helped lead the freshman class in opening new markets and finding new customers, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed).

Madam Speaker, I would like to inquire as to how many speakers we have remaining, if I may.

We have two more and then closing.

At this time I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), the chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee for Appropriations.

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

Madam Speaker, I am proud to yield 1 minute to a freshman lawmaker who represents a region of Texas where international trade means jobs, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Canseco).

I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.

Yes, I am.

Madam Speaker, to close, I am proud to yield the balance of my time to a champion for job creation in America, the majority leader of the House, Mr. Cantor.

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

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 425, I call up the bill (H.R. 3078) to implement the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, at this time I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the chairman of the committee, Mr. Camp, and I ask unanimous consent that he may control the time.

Thank you, Chairman Camp, for your leadership on trade and, really, your critical role of working across the aisle and with this administration to finally bring this free trade agreement and others to the floor.

The world's changed. It's not enough to simply sell American or to buy American anymore. We have to sell American. We have to go out in every corner of this world and sell American products and services and agricultural products. But when we do, we find too much of the world was tilted against us. Too many countries have an America need not apply sign. But these trade agreements change that. They tear that sign down; and with our best trading allies, they level the playing field and create two-way trade, where it's not just sales into America, we get the chance to sell our products and compete for new customers in their country, and that's critical because so much of the world's consumers live outside of America.

This Colombia agreement is critical because, one, Colombia is such a critical ally of ours. As a country, they've made remarkable progress on human rights, labor rights, democracy and rule of law. They fought terrorism to a halt. They've created a much safer country than a decade ago. And, in fact, if they were a company, we would call them the turn- around of the decade.

Colombia is a trusted ally. More important, they're a dynamic economy that wants to trade first with the United States, and that's what this agreement does. It opens the door for over $1 billion of new sales from America into Colombia. It increases our economy by $2.5 billion. It creates new standards that allow, not just our agricultural community, not just our manufacturing community to sell two-way, but creates the standard so that our financial and telecommunications and energy management and accounting, and a whole list of other services, can sell on a standard equal to equal, plug in together so that we can both compete and buy and sell as equal trading partners.

It's critical, too, that we not allow America to fall farther behind. It has been, as Chairman Camp said, nearly 5 years since this agreement has been signed. President Bush signed, I think, a very strong agreement. President Obama, to his credit, continued to work with both sides of the aisle, I think, to put on some preconditions that have been very important to our Democrat Members and to labor.

This agreement has strong bipartisan support, has strong economic support, and is critical for a national security ally like Colombia that we wait no longer; that Congress stand up, Republicans and Democrats together, to pass a bipartisan jobs bill that creates two-way trade, creates real jobs, and strengthens our security relationship with a remarkable ally in our hemisphere.

I strongly support this agreement, and I urge its passage.

Madam Speaker, I am very pleased that we have finally reached this important moment. Next month we will mark five years since the United States and Colombia signed the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement. U.S. workers and job-creating exporters have had to wait for far too long for the President to submit this promising agreement to Congress, but it has now reached the floor--and I look forward to a bipartisan vote to approve the agreement.

This agreement, like our other trade agreements, will create well- paid American jobs without any government spending. I like to call our trade agreements ``Sell American'' agreements because they lower other countries' barriers to American goods and services. More U.S. exports translate into more U.S. jobs. With over 90 percent of consumers living outside our borders, we must look to other markets in order to sell more of our goods and services.

The U.S. International Trade Commission estimates that the Colombia trade agreement alone will increase U.S. goods exports by $1.1 billion and expand U.S. gross domestic product by $2.5 billion. This agreement is all upside for us. Last year, Colombian exporters to the United States paid an average tariff of less than one percent because, under the Andean Trade Preference Act, most Colombian goods entered duty- free. In contrast, U.S. exporters to Colombia paid an average tariff of over eleven percent last year--and now this agreement will eliminate Colombian tariffs on most U.S. exports.

As co-chairman of the Congressional Services Caucus, I should also note that this trade agreement with Colombia will reduce non-tariff and regulatory barriers and provide expanded market access and increased protections for U.S. services exporters. For example, Colombia estimates that its public infrastructure spending will exceed $55 billion this decade--and our world-class construction, energy, engineering, and other services firms will now have a leg-up in pursuing that work, which will generate substantial economic growth and jobs back home.

The United States has been sitting on the sidelines for far too long. Now we finally have the opportunity to get back in the game, so I ask my colleagues to join me in voting to approve the United States- Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, as well as our other two pending agreements.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bipartisan legislation to create jobs in America and to strengthen our relationship with a strong, long-standing ally in our hemisphere, Panama.

Why wouldn't we sign this sales agreement? Panama is a growing market; almost a 9 percent growth in their economy and in a major way in our backyard. They are an economy that matches up beautifully with America. Most of its economy is the services sector, like the United States, and it provides brand new markets, new customers, not just for manufacturing, not just for agriculture, as important as they are, but for our services sector, which is critical to so many communities across this country.

It's time to act now because we're falling behind. While America has been off the trade agenda, other countries have moved forward very aggressively. And Panama, recognizing its strategic importance and its economic growth, has signed similar sales agreements with Taiwan and Singapore, and with Europe and Canada, and many more are in line. Every day we wait, American manufacturers, American farmers, American technology companies lose out.

Finally, Panama has done so much to tackle issues, like labor rights. They have strong commitment to labor rights, having recently passed under President Martinelli almost a dozen laws strengthening labor rights in Panama.

And to address the issue of tax avoidance and tax havens, Panama has signed many agreements, including with the United States, to be transparent to the point where they are now recognized internationally as being as committed to open tax treaties and tax treatments as the United States is today.

Madam Speaker, there is no reason to wait. Implementing the Panama agreement will benefit our economy, it will benefit the Panamanian economy, and strengthen this crucial ally and keep America from falling further behind.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Camp and Ranking Member Sandy Levin for working together with this President, with the Senate, and with the auto companies and autoworkers to improve this agreement to ensure we sell more American cars into Korea. This is why, among many other reasons, this agreement has so much strong bipartisan support.

As I've already said tonight, I'm excited to be here. This trade agreement improves as well as strengthens our security relationship with one of our strongest allies. This is the most commercially significant trade agreement the United States has signed since I've been in Congress.

The delay in implementing the sales agreement has been felt across America. If our exporters can't compete because of high tariffs or nontariff barriers, they can't grow their businesses and put Americans back to work. That's why expanding opportunities for U.S. exporters and finding new customers is so critical to our workers, so critical to putting our economy back on the right track and creating good-paying American jobs right here in the United States.

For example, this agreement turns one-way trade into the United States into two-way trade. The average South Korean tariff on our exporters is more than four times what it is when South Korea exports to us. This agreement addresses that imbalance.

The job-creating benefits of this agreement will be enjoyed broadly

among manufacturers, agriculture, service, and technology companies. The American Farm Bureau estimates that U.S. farm exports will increase by more than $1.8 billion to this market. Moreover, 90 percent of American companies selling to South Korea are small and medium-sized enterprises in our neighborhoods and in our communities, and it will lead to an additional $3 billion in exports for these small businesses.

It's no longer enough to buy American; we have to sell American. And this ``Sell American'' agreement is essential if we are to get our economy back on track. I strongly support it.

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in strongly supporting passage of this legislation which renews the Generalized System of Preferences program and also reauthorizes a smaller Trade Adjustment Assistance program. This bill is a key part of the bipartisan trade package before us today and is crucial to letting the world know the United States is back on the trade field again.

The legislation has two very important parts: GSP and Trade Adjustment Assistance. With regard to preferences, this program provides preferential access to certain imports from selected developing countries. And, importantly, it also benefits U.S. manufacturers and creates U.S. jobs. Nearly three-quarters of all the eligible imports are raw materials, component parts, or machinery and equipment used by American companies to manufacture goods in America. That means our manufacturers can make things here in the United States more cheaply and employ more Americans in the process. As far as I'm concerned, that is a real win-win. Moreover, I must note that this program is fully offset with spending cuts.

On Trade Adjustment Assistance, I applaud Chairman Camp for his scaled-back version of TAA that he was able to negotiate with the White House and Chairman Baucus from the Senate. At the outset, the White House demanded that there be a straight extension of the 2009 law for 5 years and held the trade agreements, frankly, hostage. Chairman Camp, however, refused to accept that ultimatum. He instead negotiated a strong agreement and forced the White House to accept deep cuts to the programs as well as other significant spending cuts, including cuts to other unemployment benefit programs. Overall, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the Trade Adjustment Assistance package costs one-half of what the administration had originally demanded and is fully offset with spending cuts.

Now, there is fair criticism of Trade Adjustment Assistance. It is expensive, not especially efficient, and has grown over the years to not really serve the people that it needs to. In this tight fiscal situation, these are fair concerns. In an ideal world, the President would have needed no persuading to send up the trade agreement to Congress and we would have considered them long ago. However, the reality is different, and we were told in order to move forward bipartisan legislation on trade, we had to work with the Senate and the White House on this issue. In this case, Chairman Camp, on behalf of Republicans in the House and the Senate, secured significant reforms to the programs, including key spending cuts, consolidations, and other concessions. The program has been cut in some cases below the 2002 trade adjustment levels, all setting the stage for sunset of the program at the end of 2014.

All in all, our constructive bipartisan work on trade has yielded a victory for the American people both through the trade agreements and this bill. I urge my colleagues to support this measure and consider this to be part of the comprehensive package, a comprehensive bipartisan jobs package for America.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the House Republican Conference, I send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, our economy is in a tough situation here. Two-and-a-half years after recovery has supposedly started, we have almost 20 million Americans unable find a full-time job; yet we have companies, ranchers, businesses, technologies, small business anxious to sell their products around the world. But this administration, unfortunately, has not moved the free trade agreements that would allow us not simply to buy American, but to sell American in every corner of this globe.

I am pleased to announce that today, nearly 5 years after America signed a sales agreement, a trade agreement with Colombia, that the White House has submitted agreements, these agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama, to the United States Congress and the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives. We are going to move quickly and deliberately and strongly to pass these trade agreements so we can level the playing field and allow our farmers and companies and manufacturers and workers to compete and win around the world on that level playing field.

Tonight, we have a number of distinguished lawmakers who have focused on finding new customers for our companies and our farmers here at home.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Jenkins), a member of the Ways and Means Committee and Trade Subcommittee.

I thank the gentlelady from Kansas for making the point that agriculture has paid a steep price as a result of the delays of these agreements, yet with the potential of signing these agreements has the ability to sell, win, and compete in these three important, growing, dynamic markets.

At this point, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis), one of the key members of the Trade Subcommittee, with a manufacturing background, who understands the need for America to lead in the global marketplace.

Mr. Davis, thank you for your leadership and for making the point tonight that these agreements, as important as they are for jobs and new customers, they are also important to enhance our security relationships in the growing Asia Pacific region, and in Latin America as well. Thank you for your leadership.

Now I would like to introduce the chairman of the Korean Trade Agreement Working Group. He is a key member of the Ways and Means Committee, and comes from a region that understands exports and imports create jobs in America. I yield to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert).

I appreciate the gentleman from Washington making the point that Korea is such an important growing market in the Asia Pacific region. If America hopes to continue economic growth and to have the strongest economy in the world, we must engage in that region of the world, and the free trade agreement working group that Mr. Reichert heads here in the House is critical to that.

I would now like to introduce the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Charles Boustany, a valuable member of the Ways and Means Committee, who is so strong on trade, and comes from a State that understands trade means jobs, and I yield to Dr. Boustany.

I appreciate the gentleman from Louisiana making the key point of how America is falling behind and how it's hurting our local economies, our local ranchers, our local service technologies, and our local ports as well.

I would like to yield to a gentleman from California, the former chairman of the Trade Subcommittee, who comes from a State and a district that is rich in the institutions of ranching and technology companies that export successfully around the world. I would like to yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Well, Chairman Herger, thank you for your leadership in trade throughout the years. I know especially in California, but for all the country, trade means jobs. These new customers mean jobs. The longer we delay, the more other countries step in front of us and take our customers and, unfortunately, take our jobs. So thank you for your leadership.

One of the bright new members of the Ways and Means Committee is a gentleman from Nebraska. He comes from a State that understands agriculture. He understands you can't survive just by selling to America. There are so many customers around the world that need to buy American products in agriculture that it's key to survival and it's key to job creation.

I would like to yield to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).

I appreciate the gentleman from Nebraska talking

about the lost opportunities of delayed trade and the job opportunities of passing these three agreements with South Korea, Colombia and Panama, all of whom are dynamic economies we ought to be competing in.

I'm glad at this moment to yield to a gentleman from Illinois, a State that understands the importance of competing and winning around the world and that does so successfully.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Dold).

I appreciate the gentleman from Illinois, who comes from a State that understands trade means jobs. And I appreciate his leadership and effort in this area.

Minnesota is also a State that is growing and recovering from this economy because it knows how to sell American throughout the world, especially in medical technology and a number of other key sectors.

I'm glad to yield to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen), a key member of the Ways and Means Committee.

I appreciate the gentleman from Minnesota quickly leaping into this issue, recognizing the jobs potential, and his hard work in moving these trade agreements forward.

We have another speaker from Illinois, a key trade State. Judy Biggert, a Congresswoman from Illinois, has long been a leader in trade, helping shepherd through Congress some of the key trade pacts in the past that have turned trade deficits into trade surpluses for America. She continues to be a leader who understands if we tear down these barriers for American companies, American jobs are produced.

I am proud to yield to the gentlelady from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

I appreciate the gentlelady from Illinois, both for her long leadership role in trade and her remarks tonight.

San Antonio and southTexas, these communities understand a strong economy depends on strong trade. They are fortunate to have a freshman lawmaker who, in arriving in Congress, quickly realized--in fact, before he came to Congress--the need to get out and have a level playing field to compete and win for American companies and ranchers and agricultural interests throughout this country.

I'm glad and proud to yield to my Texas colleague from San Antonio (Mr. Canseco).

Congressman Canseco, thank you for your leadership on this important jobs and trade issue.

Our next speaker is laser focused on jobs in Arkansas. He's made a big impact coming in as a freshman lawmaker, understands the need to find new customers.

I am proud to yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin).

I appreciate the gentleman from Arkansas laying out just the economic impact that these agreements have on the Arkansas communities, on ranchers, on businesses, small businesses, and on the economy as a whole.

Our next speaker is from Pennsylvania. He understands the importance of trade to his State. I'm pleased to welcome the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania again for his leadership on this bipartisan jobs issue. Again, the focus on creating jobs in communities in Pennsylvania by finding new customers is key to the growth of our economy and America's wealth.

Tom Reed is a new member of the Ways and Means Committee who has quickly established himself as one of our brightest stars on trade. He understands it means jobs to New York, and he knows that it means jobs to America as well. Earlier this year, he helped lead a letter from our freshman Republicans to the White House insisting the President submit these three agreements so we have a chance to compete and win around the world in these growing new markets.

I am proud to yield to a friend and a fellow member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Reed of New York.

Again, I appreciate the gentleman from New York for his leadership on this key jobs issue.

With so many Americans out of work, the President was standing in this Chamber not too many days ago urging Republicans and Democrats to come together to create new jobs. Can you imagine if there was an issue that the White House and Congress both agreed on, that Republicans and Democrats across the spectrum supported, a bill that created jobs not by government spending but by allowing the free market to do its work, to granting economic freedom to Americans to buy and sell and compete in key markets throughout the world?

Well, today we have that issue. It is the three pending sales agreements with Korea, Colombia, and Panama. As we have said tonight, they represent almost $13 billion of new sales for American companies, because we know we have to seek and compete and win around the world for these new customers. We know, too, that these agreements have been delayed far too long. Colombia is an old and trusted friend who's made remarkable progress in the economy, in labor rights, in human rights, in environmental issues. Today we're on the cusp finally of passing a free trade agreement that recognizes our security relationship and our economic relationship. Today we have that opportunity.

I thank the President for sending these agreements to us. As late as they were, the fact of the matter is he has made each of them better, has helped increase and improve bipartisan support for all three, but each day we delay, we lose jobs in America. Each day we delay, Canada and Europe and China and others move ahead of us, take our customers and our jobs. It's time for the delays to end. It's time for Republicans and Democrats to come together and pass these three trade agreements for America.

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

Madam Speaker, the President's jobs message was clear and powerful: Government made America great, and government can make it great again. This misguided view explains why 2 years after the recession supposedly ended, we are still left suffering with a second- rate economy that is being held up to ridicule by the world as our Nation sinks deeper into debt and 22 million Americans can't find work.

I was looking for real leadership--an admission the President's economic policies have failed and a call for a new start, a fresh new direction for this dismal economy. Other than the call for passing the free trade agreements, which the President himself continues to hold up, what America witnessed was a shopping cart of gimmicks to special interest voting blocs paid for by crushing tax increases on the very consumers and job creators we need to get out of this dismal economy.

If you liked the leadership of the last 2 years on the economy, you're going to love this President's jobs agenda.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You may not sense it from some of the remarks today, but, in truth, this bill has strong bipartisan support, and I rise in support of this legislation renewing the Preference program as one valuable step Congress can take together to help spur economic and job growth here in America.

As last week's jobs number--or, more importantly, zero jobs number-- showed

us, our economy is struggling, and there are 14 million Americans who want a job that can't find a job. Twenty-two million Americans want a full-time job and can't find one. The lapse of this Preference program has hurt the competitiveness of our American manufacturers and others who rely upon these GSP imports as raw materials and inputs.

We all know our States best. In Texas, 27 companies have asked Congress to renew this Preference program. These companies import such products as chemicals, iron and steel flanges, and ceramics for use as inputs in their manufacturing operations at home in Texas. These imports support jobs in my local communities and make our manufacturers more competitive when they compete against companies overseas. And the program benefits every State in this way, not just mine.

The lapse of the program since the beginning of the year has cost these Texas companies over $21 million in unnecessary duties. That $21 million could have been used to hire more employees and invest in new equipment. Instead, it was taxed away from them. This legislation would provide a retroactive renewal of the program and give these companies the opportunity to get these duties refunded to them. And I know they can use this money more effectively to promote jobs and invest in our economy than sending it here to Washington.

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly pleased there is strong bipartisan support for this legislation under the leadership of Chairman Dave Camp, along with Ranking Member Levin and Congressman McDermott--my friend and coworker on the Trade Subcommittee--who are original cosponsors of this legislation. As a result of this strong bipartisan support, I expect it to pass strongly tonight in the House. I hope the other body will move quickly to consider this legislation.

Last December, during the holidays, the House passed by voice vote a renewal of this program that would have prevented the lapse of the program. Unfortunately, it never made it out of the Senate. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge not only bipartisan support for this legislation but bicameral support for it as well so we can get this money back in the hands of American manufacturers and job creators.