Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1639) recognizing the contributions of the National Waterways Conference on the occasion of its 50th anniversary, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on House Resolution 1639.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1639 recognizes the contributions of the National Waterways Conference as it celebrates its 50th anniversary.

I applaud Mr. Hare of Illinois, the sponsor of this legislation, for introducing this resolution, and I urge its adoption.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4387) to designate the Federal building located at 100 North Palafox Street in Pensacola, Florida, as the ``Winston E. Arnow Federal Building''.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 4387.

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

I would urge the adoption of this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5591) to designate the facility of the Federal Aviation Administration located at Spokane International Airport in Spokane, Washington, as the ``Ray Daves Air Traffic Control Tower,'' 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 to include extraneous material on H.R. 5591.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 5591, and I urge support of this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6008) to amend title 49, United States Code, to ensure telephonic notice of certain incidents, and for other purposes, 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 to include extraneous materials on H.R. 6008.

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

Mr. Speaker, after the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, I never could have imagined that my community too could have been impacted by such an oil spill, but it happened.

On July 26, 2010, Enbridge Energy Partners reported a ruptured pipeline that spilled an estimated 1 million gallons of heavy Canadian crude oil into Talmadge Creek south of Marshall, Michigan, in my district. Oil-covered wildlife, a river and creek flowing black with oil for miles, and citizens were evacuated from their homes--these were all images from this oil spill that my constituents will not soon forget.

According to the National Transportation Safety Board, on Sunday, July 25, 2010, at 5:58 p.m., alarms began sounding in Enbridge Energy Partner's control room in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, on Line 6B of Enbridge's Lakehead Pipeline. For more than 13 hours, alarms continued in Enbridge's control room. Enbridge did not know what was wrong with their 6B pipeline until 11:18 a.m. the following day when another company's technician reported to Enbridge that there was oil in Talmadge Creek. The leak was confirmed by Enbridge personnel at 11:45 a.m. on July 26, and they began laying boom immediately but did not report the spill until 1:29 p.m., nearly 2 hours later, to the National Response Center.

Another recent incident in San Bruno, California, the tragic PG&E rupture, took the lives of four people--three more are still missing-- injured numerous others, destroyed 37 homes and damaged 11 others. This occurred at 6:11 p.m. on September 9, 2010. It wasn't reported to the National Response Center until 11:35 p.m., over 5 hours later.

When public's safety and health are at risk, every second counts. In the time Enbridge and PG&E waited to report these spills, Federal agencies and government emergency responders could have been en route or at the sites to help.

Congress directed that ``a pipeline facility shall provide immediate telephonic notice of a release of hazardous liquid.'' In 2002, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's predecessor determined ``immediately'' to be defined as between 1 and 2 hours after discovery. Congress said a reportable spill incident needs to be reported immediately. Five hours is not immediately. Two hours is not even immediately.

My bipartisan bill, H.R. 6008, the Corporate Liability and Emergency Accident Notification Act, the CLEAN Act, clarifies the congressional intent of the term ``immediately'' in reporting a spill incident to the National Response Center and defines ``immediately'' to be no more than 1 hour after the discovery of an incident. My bill also increases penalties for any violation of a Federal pipeline safety regulation, including failure to report a spill incident in a timely manner. Additionally, the CLEAN Act seeks to increase transparency by directing the U.S. Department of Transportation to create a

searchable public database of all reportable hazardous liquids incidents.

I urge Members to support H.R. 6008, the CLEAN Act, to hold companies accountable to reporting spill releases ``immediately,'' as Congress intended, and to increase transparency of spill incidents to the public. With the proper spill reporting standards, we can work toward preventing devastating spills in the future for safety and protection of our communities and our environment.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, over the last 75 years, Social Security has been secure and reliable for Americans approaching retirement. For some Americans, it's the backbone of their retirement; for others, it's all they have. Six out of 10 senior citizens in our country receive the majority of their income from Social Security and four out of 10 widows do. As a matter of fact, after our country's most recent economic disaster, even more seniors were left with only Social Security to rely on because they saw their retirement accounts dwindle at the hands of Wall Street.

We've already seen what can happen when we let Wall Street CEOs gamble with our life savings--we lose. We cannot afford to gamble with our Nation's golden years, and privatization is just that--gambling.

We must work together to strengthen the promise of Social Security for our children and for our grandchildren and still meet the needs of those who depend on it now for income.

Thank you, Mr. Perriello and Mr. Duncan.

We need common sense in Washington, and unfortunately there is too little of it at this time. That's why I decided to sign on and be a primary cosponsor of this bill, the Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010. The bill will lead to real savings and real deficit reduction, and we need to fight for that at this very difficult time in our country.

As has been said, the Surface Transportation Savings Act of 2010 reduces the contract authority that is currently available for certain highway safety and transit programs by $107 million. Let me say that again, $107 million. That's real money. While this may not, in and of itself, directly reduce outlays this current fiscal year, it takes $107 million off the table so that it cannot be used to increase spending in the future.

Now, as my colleague, Mr. Perriello, said, there are a couple of ways that this $107 million could be used to increase spending and increase the Federal budget deficit. We know that a future appropriations act could use these dollars and appropriate them and spend them on these current programs within the Department of Transportation. But let's be clear, there is a very real threat. The Congressional Budget Office may not see it, and I can understand why they may not trust the Congress to act responsibly, but twice already this Congress has tried to use these available dollars within other programs.

H.R. 4899, the FY 2010 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill that was passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month included $2.2 billion of rescinded highway contract authorities. So these are dollars that were budgeted but were not spent. And again, if we don't act, those kinds of available dollars will be spent.

Now, to make it even more directly relevant to this bill and to the Congressional Budget Office's analysis, H.R. 4899, this Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, tried to spend $25 million that would be taken off the table by this Surface Transportation Savings Act. So I don't think we could be any more clear than the threat that is before us.

I couldn't agree more that we must address real deficit reduction one step at a time. This is a critical, critical step to do that. And I'll tell you, the people in Michigan's Seventh Congressional District believe $107 million is real money.

By not acting, the threat is real that these available dollars will be spent. By passing this bill today, the United States House of Representatives will remove $107 million that would likely be spent for some other program.

We must act to make sure that we restrain and constrain spending in a way that results in deficit reduction. That's why I'm proud to stand in support of this bill and hope that both my Democratic and Republican colleagues take decisive action to make sure that neither this Congress nor future Congresses spend money that we can't afford.

Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to be here to address the House of Representatives, to address the people of America, especially to address

the people of Michigan. No State has suffered more under the failed policies of the previous administration than the people of Michigan.

We are very resilient people, and I will say, for my colleagues to understand, and for everyone watching, the people of Michigan and Michigan's economy, never came out of the last economic recession.

This, and as a first-term Member of Congress, I remember being sworn in just about a year and a half ago, and it was that time, this was January of 2009, that we learned that our economy had been in recession for a full year, for a full year.

So my freshman colleagues and I, regardless of what side of the aisle they come from, all walked in to a year into the deepest economic recession since the Great Depression. The closest thing I can remember was when I was in college in the early 1980s, not being able to find a job, and it was very, very difficult at that time. But that's the story of many in Michigan. It has hit my family just like practically every family in America.

So what I am here to talk about this evening, and I will be joined by some of my Democratic colleagues, is really where are we in America with our economy? What is the policy direction that we should be going in? What is the choice for America?

This is the body, this is the people's House, where we discuss and debate these choices, and the American people hear what my Republican colleagues say and there isn't necessarily a complete partisan difference, I don't want my constituents to feel that, because I always look for that common ground.

But I think the choice is very clear: Does America and our economy, our fragile economy, that is recovering, continue to move forward and dig out of this economic hole, this economic mess that we are in, or do we go backwards?

I would like to share a quote, and I am hoping that people can see it, and this is a statement that one of my Republican colleagues made, one of the Republican leaders. He was on one of the Sunday morning talk shows. I don't get to watch these very often. I guess some of my constituents and the American people do, but this is one of the national shows, ``Meet the Press,'' this Sunday, July 18.

The host of the show said ``I think what a lot of people want to know is if Republicans do get back into power, what are they going to do?'' And I think the American people deserve to know that, because we have a new President that has helped us move in a new direction, we have a Congress that I am a part of, that the Democrats control, that is working to move us in a new direction.

But Congressman Pete Sessions of Texas said, here is his quote, ``We need to go back to the exact same agenda.''

Well, that is the choice. Do we, as the House of Representatives, as a Congress, go back to those exact same policies that created this economic catastrophe, or do we move in a new direction, do we continue in the direction that we are going in?

Now, I want to be clear that as a Member from Michigan, where our unemployment rate is still slightly over 13 percent, in my district in south central Michigan it's slightly under the State average, but we are gradually digging out of this hole. Or do we want to go back to the policies that created this economic catastrophe? These are very, very important questions, and what I have been working on, my Democratic colleagues and I have been working on, is addressing the problems that created this economic catastrophe, and it is a catastrophe.

I will tell you a personal story. My son-in-law, a journeyman electrician, a trade that, you know, should guarantee you employability for sure for life, with intermittent unemployment, I understand, that's the nature of that business, he was unemployed for the better part of a year. He is married to our oldest daughter, who is a nurse. They had a baby. She was on maternity leave, and our son-in-law, Paul, living in Ypsilanti, just outside of Ann Arbor just east of my district, was laid off from the steel mill where he had been employed for some time, for the better part of a year. Unfortunately, that's the story that's the result of economic policies that this Congress inherited.

But why did this happen? Unfortunately, there was an ideology under the former administration that said, you know, we need to let the marketplace regulate itself.

Well, I remember about a month or so before the last election, even Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve Chairman, said, I was wrong. I thought Wall Street, I thought the markets could regulate themselves. We saw the meltdown that resulted from that, a gambling mentality on Wall Street that played a cruel game that affected millions of families, and it was a game of heads I win, tails you lose, gambling irresponsibly with the retirement savings of the American people.

So this week, this week, the President will sign a landmark Wall Street reform bill that will crack down on the big banks, that will protect consumers, and this is perhaps the biggest consumer protection legislation in decades, and it will bring greater economic security to families and small businesses across our country.

And my wife and I own a small business. She runs a business, it's her business, she employs three people. She is thinking about employing another person, probably part-time. That's the story of America, and it's businesses that went bankrupt during this Wall Street meltdown and families that lost their homes, but this Wall Street reform bill puts in place the strongest consumer protections in history, with an independent watchdog whose sole purpose is to enforce those protections and look out for the American consumer.

So, let's go back to what Alan Greenspan said. He said that I thought the markets, I thought Wall Street could regulate itself. I was wrong.

Now, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle somehow are trying to convince the American people that this legislation is somehow, to use their words, another ``bailout.'' Well, we saw the bailout that resulted from the Republican philosophy of deregulation. We saw the almost complete meltdown of our economy, and we saw the results of that and this mentality. And it's a similar approach to protecting the environment that has resulted in this catastrophic oil spill, the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. But the reforms in this Wall Street reform bill will protect consumers when they take out a mortgage or sign up for a credit card. It will prevent the kind of shadowy deals that led to this crisis and will never again put taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's mistakes.

Now, let's talk about this bailout. And I want to be clear to my constituents at home, I said when I was running for office I never would have supported that bailout. And when I had to vote, and a number of us took this position, voted against the second part of this bailout, but the problem with the bailout was that it put more money in the hands of the big banks that actually caused the economic collapse in the first place. Those big Wall Street banks refused to lend to small manufacturers, tool and dye shops, machine shops, auto suppliers, those businesses that I work with every day in my district that are diversifying into renewable energy technology, life sciences technology, defense technology, and so many ways to create jobs. But these big banks even that were bailed out wouldn't lend to them.

So under this Wall Street reform legislation, the American people, the taxpayer will never be stuck with a tab again, never under any Democratic legislation that finally passed the Senate, and I will commend some of my Republican colleagues in the Senate that saw that that was the right thing to do for the American people.

Despite the benefits the American people will enjoy from these reforms, the Republican leader in the House is already calling for its repeal. So even before the President has signed this bill, which he will do this week, the Republican leader in the House of Representatives has called for its repeal. But let's be clear, America cannot afford to go backwards to the days when our financial laws were written by the corporate lobbyists. And the fact of the matter is that corporate lobbyists, the Wall Street banks and their lobbyists were huddling with Republican leadership as the House was taking up this legislation, actually trying to kill this legislation, devising a plan, coming up

with language trying to fool the American people that this historic Wall Street reform legislation was another bailout when it couldn't be anything further from the truth. Failure to act would doom us to repeat the same kind of economic catastrophe that the failed policies of the Bush administration created in the first place.

So to move forward, we not only need to demand greater accountability from Wall Street. We need to help those people who are struggling on Main Street, those folks who are facing the loss of their home, the loss of their business, looking for capital, for basic loans to expand their businesses. That's why the President and Democrats in the House of Representatives are fighting to provide emergency relief to American workers who have been laid off in this recession due to no fault of their own.

It is tragic that millions of workers--and 23,000 in my district alone in south central Michigan--are facing losing their unemployment benefits by the end of this year. And talk about a failed ideology, even John McCain's own economist told us--us collectively, the American people, Members of Congress--that for every dollar of unemployment insurance--and it is insurance. It is a form of insurance, unemployment insurance. For every dollar of unemployment insurance that is provided to a family of a laid off worker, there is $1.61 in economic impact.

So not only were the Republicans holding hostage families who are losing their unemployment benefits in a tough economy, in a recession caused by the failed policies of the Bush administration, but they were also holding our economy hostage, where these unemployment benefits of about--it's less than the wages that people were earning, but those dollars were actually being put into local grocery stores, local gas stations, local businesses. And for every dollar of unemployment benefits, there was $1.61 of economic impact. But those emergency benefits for American workers are in jeopardy because those same Republicans who didn't have any problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars on tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans are now saying we shouldn't offer relief to middle class families who really need help.

So we have an economic storm, and the choice is a very clear one: Do we rebuild our economic foundation for a stronger future or do we return to the failed policies of the previous administration?

Let's have a little history lesson here. When I came to office a year and a half ago, when Barack Obama came to office a year and a half ago, our economy was losing an average of 750,000 jobs each month; 750,000 jobs each month were being lost in this economy. During the last 5 months of the Bush administration, our economy lost an average of almost 640,000 jobs. In the last 5 months, we have added an average of 174,000 jobs a month. So let's do the comparison.

Now, I don't want to give anyone in my district or in my State in Michigan the idea that we are anywhere where we need to be from an economic standpoint. Nationally, the unemployment rate is still 9.5 percent. We are digging out of this hole. We've got a long way to go. But if you look at during the last 5 months of the Bush administration, our economy lost an average of almost 640,000 jobs. In the last 5 months, our Nation's economy has added an average of almost 174,000 jobs. So if my math is right, that's a swing of almost 800,000 jobs, almost 800,000 jobs a month net increase.

Let's talk about our Nation's economic health as a whole. During the last quarter of the Bush administration, the economy shrunk by over 5 percent, almost 5.5. Almost 5.5 percent our economy was shrinking. Hello. I think we really need to take stock--and I heard it earlier today in the House of Representatives, my Republican colleagues, their mantra is, ``Where are the jobs?'' Well, I don't know if they were asking that question in January of 2009, or 1 year prior to that when the recession began or when the economy collapsed because of Wall Street's behavior. So where was the hue and cry when our economy was shrinking by almost 5.5 percent and we were losing, on average, 640,000 jobs a month?

Now, during the last three quarters, so the last 9 months, there has been economic growth. The most recent economic growth is 2.7 percent. It's not enough, it's not nearly enough, but we are seeing the economy gradually beginning to rebound.

But the question is: Which path do we take?

The choice is very clear to me. What I have seen in my own district in south central Michigan--and we have seen it all over the State--is a transformation of our economy.

Now, what I have told the President of the United States personally and have told some of his chief economic advisers is that our recovery has one hand tied behind our back. One of the biggest reasons is that the big Wall Street banks have refused to lend to businesses, to manufacturers. A lot of these are small automotive suppliers, suppliers in the aviation and aerospace industries and the defense industry.

I told a story on the House floor about a bank in my district-- Citizens Bank. I'll mention it again--that had had a relationship for many years with a company in my district, RTD Manufacturing. This company won an Army contract. It won an Army contract to build a bracket to go on a mine resistant vehicle, an MRAP, in Afghanistan, to protect our warfighters. This bank would not make the loan. Their loan officer said that they would be fired if they made a loan to a Michigan manufacturer. This was a bank that was bailed out by the taxpayers.

So our recovery would be much further along if these banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer due to failed economic policies would actually use that money and invest it in businesses that were hanging on and had the potential to grow. Yet what I am seeing in my district are businesses just like RTD Manufacturing, which are working hard, which are diversifying from--in this case, they were 100 percent automotive and had begun doing work for the Department of Defense to protect our warfighters.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is having an impact in my district and all around our State. The American people may know that President Obama was in Holland, Michigan, which is about an hour and a half from where I live in Battle Creek. He was at the groundbreaking for a new battery plant for the automotive industry--400 new jobs in addition to all of the construction jobs that are being created for this new technology.

Now, that's not the only battery plant in Michigan that has been jump-started by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act dollars. There is a company in my district, in Battle Creek, that is called Toda America. It received $35 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to attract the private investment to locate this battery facility there. This could have gone anywhere in the world.

Because of a proactive policy to invest in clean and renewable energy technology, in this case for the automobile industry, I think the question we have to ask is: Are we going to continue to manufacture here in America, or are we going to be buying everything from South Korea, from China, from Japan, from all of our global competitors?

You know, we have put a stake in the ground in Michigan--and there are stories like this all over the country--that we will make things here. In this case, as a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, we are making batteries for vehicles of the future. We are making technology for our warfighters.

I want to tell you another great story about a wind energy cluster that didn't just happen by accident. It happened, in part, because of policies that the Michigan legislature adopted, some of which were put in place when I was still in the legislature there. It happened with investment through the Department of Energy to help wind energy companies.

There is a new company in Eaton Rapids, Michigan, called Astraeus, which is developing the best technology--the best technology in the world--to develop windmill blades and windmill turbine components, and they have actually attracted--this is a great story. You know, we often don't hear this from colleagues on the other side of the aisle because they don't want to

acknowledge some of the successes of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

There is a company based in Finland that has a U.S. subsidiary. It is called URV USA, which is a foundry. We used to have foundries all over my State and all over the country. This company, URV USA, whose parent company is in Finland, is locating a foundry in Eaton Rapids, Michigan, to manufacture some of the heavy components for windmill turbines.

So we have a cluster of wind energy companies locating in this town of about 2,500 people, south of Lansing, that will be the home for thousands of jobs, for thousands of renewable energy jobs; and these companies there are positioning themselves to actually export this technology. So it is not just about beating the competition from China, but it is about being able to build it faster, more cheaply and to be able to export that technology.

So, when my Republican colleagues ask, Where are the jobs? the choice is: what policies do we put forward here, and do we continue with policies that are creating jobs, that are transforming our economy or do we go backwards to what Congressman Sessions says--that we need to go back to the exact same agenda? This is the agenda that nearly bankrupted the United States of America, that drained the retirement funds of millions of senior citizens, that made the dream of retirement slip away for many Americans, and that really left us with an economy completely on its knees.

The industrial sector talked about that. It is very much a part of Michigan's past, a part of Michigan's present and, I hope, a part of Michigan's future. Total industrial production in America has increased 8.2 percent during the past year. That is the largest 12-month gain since 1998. I need to repeat that because, you know, what you hear from folks on the other side of the aisle would make you think that the economic challenges we face magically began in January of 2009.

Total industrial production--making things, making things in America--has increased 8.2 percent during the past year, which is the largest 12-month gain since 1998. In June, industrial production increased a tenth of a percent. It grew to a 7 percent annual rate in the first quarter to a 6.6 percent rate in the second quarter, and this rapid industrial expansion is consistent with solid growth for our Nation's economy, and that is according to the Federal Reserve. Don't take my word for it. That is according to the Federal Reserve.

Trade, which is an issue that's very important to me. I was recently named to the President's Export Council. So I look forward to fighting for American companies to sell their goods abroad and to tear down trade barriers, like I am working on with China, to make sure that American companies can compete. But nominal exports are up 21 percent from a year ago. In May, nominal exports grew rapidly by $3.5 billion, or 2.4 percent. Year-to-date, exports are up 18 percent for the first 5 months of the last year.

So we've got a big hole to dig out of. Remember, the last 5 months of the Bush administration our economy, our country lost an average of almost 640,000 jobs. Just in the last 5 months we've added an average of 174,000 jobs. There is a swing. We have a long way to go.

Initial unemployment insurance claims fell by 29,000 in the week that ended July 10. Too many people are unemployed. I will not be satisfied until everyone who is looking for a job has a job. Spending in core retail sales rose by two-tenths of 1 percent in June. Small business owner economic confidence increased by 2.6 percent during the second quarter. This is the largest 3-month increase since last July. So there are signs of progress.

I think the question, again, is do we move forward or do we go back to the exact same agenda? That is the choice. I'm not willing to go back. Too many people in my district are hurting. And too many families are hurting. And candidly, many people have lost hope. But we must continue to move forward and we must put the American people over any political agenda. You know, this is not the time to put the next election before the American people. The American people must come first. Their ability to have opportunities for jobs in new economic sectors is what the Democrats stand for and we will continue fighting for.

I also want to talk a little bit more about manufacturing, and particularly about Buy American provisions. I am looking forward to having a very vigorous debate in the House of Representatives, candidly, about whose side we are on. And we must be on the side of the American people. I have been pushing in every way possible that we expand and strengthen Buy American provisions.

I just received a letter from the Vice President of the United States in response to a very real situation that a company in my district faces, a company called Full Spectrum Solutions. They make high-tech, energy-efficient lighting. And they have been more and more making their light fixtures in America from suppliers all over my State and all over the Midwest. And they have been bidding on energy-efficient lighting contracts with municipalities. They received American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds.

Unfortunately, some of their competitors--and there are Buy American provisions. I was asked by a reporter today, Why are Buy American provisions important? Here's the point. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act dollars are your tax dollars. So I think the American people expect a little common sense out of their government, which unfortunately there's not enough of. But they expect that their tax dollars be used to create jobs here in America, not jobs in China.

And so there is a Buy American provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. What Full Spectrum Solutions found was some of their competitors were actually taking light fixtures made in China and putting a label on these light fixtures that says ``Made in the USA'' to defraud the government, defraud the taxpayers, and hurt American companies and cost us American jobs.

So I worked with Mike Nevins, the CEO of Full Spectrum Solutions, and went down every path to find relief for this company. I went to the Department of Energy, Department of Commerce, Customs and Border Protection, the U.S. Attorney's office. No relief. No mechanism for relief for complaints of competitors cheating and mislabeling their products as made in America.

So I wrote the Vice President about 3 weeks ago, and I received a very, very specific response that is creating a new hotline within the Department of Energy for complaints about companies that are mislabeling their products as made in the USA, a means to investigate these complaints, and a notice to all grant recipients of these American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to be aware that there are some companies, unfortunately some American companies, that are defrauding the taxpayers and cheating and using our tax dollars to buy goods made in China rather than goods made in America.

So I received this very specific response, and it underscored just what we should be fighting for. We need to be fighting for American workers, American companies, and strengthen these Buy American provisions. I look forward to taking up legislation, Democratic- sponsored, hopefully bipartisan, but I know there are Democratic bills that I cosponsored as a part of the House Bipartisan Trade Working Group that will strengthen Buy American provisions.

I talked about a week ago about another fair trade bill with China. We are letting China eat the lunches of American workers. We are letting them do it. China, when they joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, never signed the government procurement agreement. This is the agreement that sets the terms for companies in one country to bid on and compete for government contracts with other countries.

Well, China, they know what they're doing. Just like they know what they're doing when they manipulate their currency. Just like they know what they're doing when they steal our patents, our intellectual property. Just like they know what they're doing when they subsidize their companies, tilting the playing field in their favor. And so what they've done for the last 9 years is they have blocked our companies from doing business with their

government, while for some reason, I haven't been able to figure out yet, it's because there's no good reason, we're allowing Chinese companies to bid on and win contracts with our Federal Government paid for by your tax dollars. I don't think the American people have in mind that we use their tax dollars to create jobs in China rather than jobs in America.

So my bill, H.R. 5312, is very simple. It's a reciprocal trade bill. It truly is a fair trade bill. It says to China that their companies can do the same dollar amount of business with our government as our companies can do with their government.

Now, I flew when I came to Washington from my home in Battle Creek, Michigan, yesterday. There was a Ford Motor Company engineer on the plane. And we talked about this issue. I talk about this issue everywhere I go. And I said, ``Do you manufacture in China?'' He says, ``Yeah, we manufacture in China.'' And I said, ``You are not able to do business with the government in China, right, for any of their vehicle purchases or motor pools, whatever it might be?'' And he said, ``No, you know, now that you mention it, we're not able to do that.'' So I said, ``Well, you know, China can do business with our government even though they're blocking our companies from doing business with their government?'' Even, here is the point of the Ford conversation, even when they're manufacturing in China. So our companies are investing there, they're making their products there.

Include, even with that, China's policy. They know what they're doing. They didn't sign this government procurement agreement 9 years ago when they joined the World Trade Organization, and they are playing us for fools.

You know, according to the Economic Policy Institute, in Michigan, we have lost 68,000 jobs due to China's unfair trade policies since 2001. In Michigan, in my district--I represent seven counties in south central Michigan--2,700 jobs. That's the size of a medium-sized village within my district, wiped out completely, because of China's unfair trade.

So I want to stop in a moment. I want to yield to an outstanding leader, Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz from Florida, to talk about our economy. I have been talking about the choice. I've been talking about the choice. Do we move forward and dig out of this economic hole that was caused by the failed economic policies of the Bush administration? And one of our Republican colleagues on one of the national press shows on Sunday says, when asked--they often don't like to talk about policy. They don't like to do that. When they were asked to talk about Medicare, their solution was to voucherize Medicare. Even though they don't like the term that is really true about their position on Social Security, they want to privatize Social Security. They don't like to talk about policy ideas. But when they were asked if Republicans get back into power what are you going to do, Pete Sessions says, We need to go back to the exact same agenda.

We cannot go backwards. We must go forward, and we must continue to fight for the American people. We must continue to fight for the American workers. We must continue to fight for manufacturing, for making things in this country. And I talked earlier about great progress that's being made in renewable energy, battery technology, wind energy technology, life sciences technology, the Chevy Volt. The Chevy Volt will be the first battery electric car, will roll off the assembly line in October in Hamtramck, Michigan. We are making things.

And if we don't have the kind of policy foresight that Democrats in this House of Representatives have been putting forward and will continue to put forward aggressively, we will go backwards.

So we've got a long way to go. I am not satisfied. I said I will not be satisfied until every unemployed worker in my district that's looking for a job has a job, until seniors again feel secure with the promise of Social Security. You know, these are the basic values that I hold, and this is the fight that I signed up for.

So it's been a pleasure to talk a little bit about Michigan, a little bit about my home, a little bit about what's going on. I even talked a little bit about my family and my son-in-law that was unemployed for the better part of a year and, unfortunately, I don't think I finished that story. The good news is they're still in Michigan. They moved to the beautiful Upper Peninsula. It's where my wife, Christine, is from, from the Upper Peninsula. They got a job there. They bought a house.

But too many families can't tell that story. And we are fighting for the American people.

It is my pleasure to yield to my colleague, Debbie Wasserman Schultz from south Florida, to talk about this choice.

I would like to thank my colleagues, Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, Paul Tonko of New York. Our time is about up, but I will give you two numbers that summarize the Bush policies: 8 million lost jobs, $14 trillion in wealth lost to American households--8 million, $14 trillion. Trillion.

Now, Americans can do it. We have been through tough times before, but we have always pulled together as a Nation to overcome our challenges. After challenges, Americans return stronger, more determined and more united.

Democrats came together and faced the challenges that we were handed by mismanagement of the Bush Republicans and, together, we are pulling our economy back from the brink of economic ruins.

As Americans, I know we can do it. That's why we are here tonight. I received a couple of texts from folks at home. They are watching. Americans know we can do it. We can turn our economy around and get our economy back on track.

I will yield back. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I ran for Congress to support ideas, no matter whose they were, to get our economy going. Well, unemployment rates across my district in Michigan are gradually falling. There are 23,000 people that I represent that will lose their lifeline by the end of the year unless the Republicans end their filibuster in the Senate.

Let's be clear: Our economy will worsen and our deficit will worsen if unemployment benefits aren't extended. I repeat that: Our economy will worsen and our deficit will worsen if unemployment benefits aren't extended at this critical time. Don't take my word for it--economists of all political stripes agree. Even John McCain's economic adviser, Mark Zandi, said, No form of the fiscal stimulus has proved more effective during the past 2 years than emergency unemployment insurance benefits providing a bang-for-the-buck of $1.61 for every dollar of unemployment benefits.

It's time for us to act to provide a lifeline and help our economy.

Thank you, Congresswoman. I'm proud to be here tonight to talk about our recovery, our economic recovery, about jobs, about a manufacturing agenda, and a ``made it in America'' agenda.

The people that I represent in Michigan understand that we have a fundamental problem with our economic recovery, and that is unfair trade policies that have cost us in Michigan hundreds of thousands of jobs.

I've cosponsored a bill to repeal NAFTA. I know there are different views on that. My views are very clear, that we need to support trade policies that put American jobs and American workers first.

The people at home that I represent have heard me say it, and I'm proud to say it on the floor of the House of Representatives here today. The time is now to fight for American jobs. The time is now to fight for American jobs.

There's an issue that I'm working on that I think I've gotten some attention of certainly Democratic leadership that wants to fight for American jobs and manufacturing and American workers, and I think this is an issue where my friends on the other side of the aisle will embrace as well. I've already got one Republican cosponsor on H.R. 5312. And it's a very simple issue. It's about fairness. It's about fair trade rather than trade policies that, again, have cost us millions of jobs in this country.

What I learned as I've been fighting for fair trade and giving our businesses, small businesses and large, an opportunity to make things again in my State and in this country, is that we have been using our tax dollars to support and create jobs in China rather than jobs here in the United States of America. As I dug into this issue, quite innocently, I was looking through some census promotional materials, and I was shocked to find that some of those materials to promote something that I support 110 percent, the United States Census, each of our communities needs to get its fair share of dollars to support education and housing and public safety, and so forth, but some of these promotional materials, you guessed it, were made in China.

This is a key ring that--I carry this everywhere I go. And I show small businesses, tool and die shops, small manufacturers, they tell me that they could tool this little key chain, and it says, United States Census 2010. They could have the tooling done, they could have their manufacturing process ready in 1 week to make this little metal key chain.

Now, what you may not be able to see at home, you may not be able to read where it says United States Census. And again, I want to remind you that your tax dollars are paying for this. There's a little sticker, and you guessed it, it says ``made in China.''

Now, we can and we should make this with our tax dollars here. Now, China, when they joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, did not sign the government----

I will yield.

I have. Thank you for asking me that. I've heard a couple of interesting answers.

And I also have a hat. The people that I represent at home see me with this hat. It's white, a very poor quality hat that says ``United States Census 2010,'' you guessed it, made in China. And the United States Census says, well, if products are substantially altered, substantially altered--this sounds like bureaucratic speak--can qualify as made in America.

So I guess what they consider substantially altered is this little metal key chain that was made in China, apparently had the ``United States Census 2010'' printing done in the U.S., and that's substantially altered. The hat that I usually have with me--I don't have it tonight--same thing: the hat is made in China.

Correct.

It satisfies the Buy American provision. I actually met with Commerce Secretary Gary Locke

about this--and by the way, I have been appointed to the President's Export Council, and I plan to work on these American jobs issues--is if there are certain orders that have to be done quickly, that there is a loophole.

Yes.

Exactly.

Exactly right. Exactly right.

The point is there is no good answer. And so we as Democrats have to look at--we have to scour the law, all of our laws, and look at Buy American provisions and make sure there are no loopholes like these that allow our tax dollars to create jobs in other countries. It's not just China. There are T-shirts, I think it was, made in Honduras and so forth.

I was in Reading, Michigan, at a small business appreciation dinner. And I took the hat, took the key chain, and I said, Can anyone here make these? Hands went up. I mean, we can make these things. We do. And, in fact, when I testified before the House Ways and Means Committee on this issue, Congressman Sandy Levin held a hearing on our trading relationship with China. And the other thing that the Census Bureau says is, well, we don't make these things here, or we don't put them out--you know, we can't find folks here in the United States that make these.

I took seven or eight hats from my office representing different groups in my district. One was from Grand Ledge High School, their baseball team cap. They were all made in America. And of course those items were of a much better quality than the hat that was made in China.

My ultimate point is that China has been playing us for fools. China has been playing us for fools. They are eating our lunch. We are letting them do it. And so it's time for us collectively as Democrats, and I hope our Republican colleagues join us in this fight, it's time to fight for our jobs. This is a simple matter of fairness.

I will sum up this issue that what my bill does, it's a straight issue of reciprocity, a true fair trade issue. And the way it works is that we will allow Chinese companies the same access to our government contracts as China's government is allowing our companies to have access to their government contracts. So if that number in China is zero, then you guessed it, no Chinese company will have access to our government contracts. If the number is a million, then there will be straight reciprocity. So it's time for us to decide which jobs we are going to use our tax dollars to support. And I think the answer for us as Democrats is those jobs are American jobs.

I thank you, Mr. Dingell, and it is an honor to be here during this hour to talk about a man who has shaped our Nation's economy and manufacturing; and it is an honor to follow Congressman Sandy Levin, also from Michigan, who has been a fighter for jobs.

Ron Gettelfinger, from my experience I can best describe him in a couple of stories. We are here to congratulate him on his retirement and his legacy with the United Auto Workers. Chairman Dingell and a bipartisan delegation from the House of Representatives visited the auto show, the North American International Auto Show, at the beginning of this year.

We met with the top leadership of Ford, GM and Chrysler. Ron Gettelfinger was right there. It was apparent, as these companies have worked through a very challenging time, they had a true partnership in their workers; the best workers in the world, and their leader, Ron Gettelfinger, was there as each of the management leaders of Ford, GM and Chrysler talked about their new technology. They talked about their innovations, and they talked about retraining of their workers. They talked about more efficient and cost-efficient manufacturing processes. Ron Gettelfinger was there as a true partner with each of those companies as they talked about their exciting new products made in the United States of America by American workers that Ron Gettelfinger represented. The best products in the world, the best automobiles in the world, that is Ron Gettelfinger.

Another story hits close to home for me. I represent a lot of auto workers and a lot of families that earn their living from manufacturing. I have an automotive assembly plant in my district. It is General Motors Lansing Delta Township Assembly Plant in Eaton County in my congressional district. It is the auto industry's most modern, efficient plant in the world.

Just a year and a half ago or so, that plant was down to just one shift making a crossover vehicle. At that time it was the GMC Acadia; the Buick Enclave; the Saturn Outlook, a great, best in class, most fuel-efficient vehicle in its class. They were down to one shift. Ron Gettelfinger, in partnership with General Motors management, made some important decisions about that plant, about its products, about its company. That plant, which is represented by UAW Local 602, Brian Fredline is their president, now today is back to three shifts plus overtime. And in addition is making the Chevy Traverse. It is a world- class vehicle; and Ron Gettelfinger, through his partnership with this automotive company, has put people to work. In fact, Michigan, which has struggled with high unemployment over the years, actually saw about 450 families move from Tennessee to work in that plant. And I thank Ron Gettelfinger and I thank General Motors for that.

By the way, the Buick version of this vehicle made in my district by UAW Local 602 workers is China's number one imported vehicle.

What Ron Gettelfinger's work and career and his legacy mean to me is he is a champion for manufacturing, and in this country we must fight for manufacturing. It is a national security issue. This is the industry, the auto industry that built our middle class and that is part of Ron's legacy.

Another is fair trade. We must continue to fight for fair trade, as Ron Gettelfinger did in his career, to make sure that our workers, the best workers in the world, the most innovative companies in the world have a chance to compete on a level playing field. Ron Gettelfinger fought for fair labor practices for his workers. He helped transform America's economy. And retirees to Ron Gettelfinger were more than legacy costs, as some consider them. They are real people.

So to Ron Gettelfinger, congratulations and thank you for your commitment to the United States of America for good jobs, a middle class, for advanced manufacturing and an industry that is on its feet again. Bob King will be a very able new president. I wish him well, but I am here today, Chairman Dingell, to thank Ron Gettelfinger for all he has done for the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, the Seventh Congressional District of Michigan and our country lost a hero. On June 9, First Lieutenant Joel Gentz of Grass Lake, east of Jackson, was killed while completing a helicopter rescue mission in southern Afghanistan. He was 25 years old. The people that I serve will never forget the sacrifices he made because of the love of his country. I would like to share his story with you.

Joel ran cross-country at Chelsea High School, where he graduated in 2002. He attended Purdue University and graduated with honors in aerospace engineering in 2007. In June 2008, Joel married Kathryn Sullivan, his college sweetheart. They had just celebrated their second wedding anniversary when he lost his life. I spoke with Kathryn on Saturday. She has truly lost her best friend.

Joel originally wanted to be an astronaut, but through his ROTC program, he met combat rescue officers, learned about their mission, and decided what he wanted to do most was to help people. As part of the Air Force's 58th Rescue Squadron, First Lieutenant Gentz spent 2 years becoming a combat rescue officer. He completed Superman School, a training program with a 60 to 90 percent dropout rate. The intense program takes 2 years, and only the strongest finish. Joel was one of about 14 that graduated of the 90 that started in his class.

When he died, First Lieutenant Joel Gentz was flying eight helicopter rescue missions a day into hostile territory in Afghanistan to rescue both Americans and Afghanis. He told his dad there was no greater joy than saving an Afghani child and seeing the look on the faces of the parents. He saved a lot of children. His mother said, He was more of a peacekeeper than a fighter, and his service to others demonstrates this.

Just a month ago, Joel emailed Ellen Harpin, the founder of The Ships Project, asking her to send toys to Afghani children that could be dropped off during his unit's missions. The Ships Project sends packages to servicemen and -women in Iraq and Afghanistan. The toys had been gathered, and she was just waiting to hear back from Joel for an address to ship them when he died. She promises to make sure they are all shipped and Joel's wishes are honored.

The Pararescue Code states, ``It is my duty as a Pararescueman to save life and to aid the injured. I will be prepared at all times to perform my assigned duties quickly and efficiently,

placing these duties before personal desires and comforts. These things I do, that others may live.'' Joel lived and breathed this code. He knew when he chose his career that he would have to make sacrifices. He understood that someday, he might lose his life serving others.

First Lieutenant Gentz accepted this responsibility willingly because he wanted to help. He leaves behind not only his grieving family but his fellow officers and the people he saved who are still alive because he bravely put their lives ahead of his own.

``These things I do, that others may live.''

First Lieutenant Joel Gentz is truly an American hero.

Today I offer my sincere condolences to Joel's parents, Steven and Judith Gentz; siblings Jared and Rachel; and to his loving widow, Kathryn. May God's grace be upon them. May they find peace in knowing that Joel's service and his sacrifice mean everything to our country's freedom. He will never be forgotten. Our Nation's debt to him will never fully be repaid.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I testified before the Ways and Means Committee about U.S. trade with China because I'm tired of seeing millions of American jobs lost to China because of blatantly unfair trade practices.

China is playing us for fools regarding the Government Procurement Agreement, the GPA. Upon joining WTO in 2001, China said it would sign the GPA as soon as possible; 9 years later it still hasn't happened. Since that time, we've lost 2.4 million American jobs--68,000 in Michigan, 4,700 jobs in my district alone--due to China's unfair trade.

It's time that we get tough. We need to show China that we're willing to be strong until they open their procurement markets to us. I've introduced H.R. 5312 as a way of addressing the issue, to limit the amount of U.S. Government procurement of Chinese goods to the amount of American goods purchased by the Chinese Government.

How about fairness for a change? How about no more U.S. census materials paid for by our tax dollars made by Chinese workers? Please join me in protecting American jobs.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.