Manufacturing Technology Competitiveness Act of 2004

MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY COMPETITIVENESS ACT OF 2004 -- (House of Representatives - July 09, 2004)

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 706 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 3598.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, with 2.5 million manufacturing jobs lost in 3 years, including 40,000 in my State of Connecticut, many outsourced to other countries like China and Singapore, we all understand that steps must be taken to revive what is the very backbone of America's economy. Reauthorizing the valuable Manufacturing Extension Partnership, a critical program that supports high-risk, early-stage research and development, is certainly a part of that effort.

If we are going to help manufacturers become more productive and innovative, if we are going to boost sales and invest in modernization and employment, a strong reauthorization of the MEP program is critical.

But none of us are under any illusion that this program alone will revive the struggling sector; and, frankly, the other provisions in this bill are little more than a Band-Aid for an economic sector that is bleeding jobs. What our manufacturers need from this body is not window dressing; what they need is a bold vision, one that makes our Federal Tax Code work for, and not against, our manufacturers.

American companies should not have to resort to transferring jobs to countries where workers make less and have fewer benefits just to stay competitive. We should encourage good corporate citizenship and incentivize work done right here on our shores. We should ban the use of taxpayer dollars to outsource or take offshore work formerly done in the United States. We should get serious about making our trading partners live up to their obligations under the World Trade Organization, and we should reform our nonimmigrant visa programs that allow companies to displace American workers by bringing foreign workers in at lower wages, and we should prohibit companies that move their headquarters overseas to avoid paying American taxes from receiving any Federal contracts. That is what we should be doing to keep this country competitive, but we are not.

While I am glad the administration has finally agreed to support the MEP program at the levels that we supported 2 years ago, I believe we have missed a real opportunity to do something meaningful on behalf of all of our manufacturers, whether they be large or small. That is what the task of this body ought to be, rather than just putting off what we ought to do for manufacturers in this country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I believe there is a real need for a manufacturing czar. The administration has said it much, but one would never know it from the underlying bill. They have created a position not of real authority and substance, but rather a marginal position in the trade agency, and this administration has shown its hand by doing this.

The National Coalition For Advanced Manufacturing has said this position should focus solely on manufacturing. It should be an under secretary position within the Department of Commerce. Instead, the administration has named an assistant secretary for manufacturing and services within the International Trade Administration, an agency that does not have the range of expertise to address the issues before our manufacturers. As if to prove they are not serious about this position, the administration proposes no funding to support it.

Mr. Chairman, what we should be doing is creating a manufacturing and technology administration that provides a comprehensive approach, and sends a signal that Congress takes this crisis seriously.

Mr. Chairman, 8.2 million workers are unemployed in this country right now. They face rising health care costs, rising college tuition, and rising gas prices. What could possibly be more important than revitalizing one of the backbones of our economy? Nothing, Mr. Chairman. Support the Larson amendments.