Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act of 2012--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the comments made by the Republican Senate leader about the procedures in the Senate are comments I wish to speak to directly.

First, perhaps to his surprise, let me say I agree with him. The Senate is not what it should be. It is an important part of this government, it is an important part of this Nation, and it should be an important forum for the deliberation of critical issues that face us. Historically that is the role it has played.

But what we have found over the last several years is that we have lapsed into a new Senate--and not a very good one, from my point of view. It is a Senate that is overrun with filibusters. Filibusters used to be so rare, one or two a year in the early days and then maybe a few more in the last 50 years, but now virtually every single week. The filibuster is basically shutting down the Senate, saying that we will not go forward to vote on a measure. It has been abused, overused and, frankly, has denigrated the reputation of this important institution.

What are the points of view? The point of view of the minority was well stated by the Republican leader. The minority wants an opportunity to offer amendments. I know the feeling. I have been in the minority in the Senate. It is your only opportunity to have a voice on the floor of the Senate and to express a point of view that may not be reflected by the President or the Senate majority. That is an understandable impulse. The majority in the Senate is usually trying to move an agenda--many times, in this case, the President's agenda--and, frankly, does not want to see this slowed down by an onslaught of amendments. There has to be a happy medium, and that is what we need to see.

The suggestion of the Senate Republican leader that the problem we have with filibusters has to do with the fact, as he said it, that the Republicans insist on playing a role in offering amendments is correct to a point. But I might remind the minority leader, what happened last week? We brought up the college student loan bill. The object was to make sure the interest rate on college student loans did not double July 1, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent--widely accepted, widely endorsed by President Obama and by Governor Romney. How about that? Both leading contenders for the Presidency said don't let this interest rate double. You would think that would be an easy thing to accomplish.

What we offered on the floor to the Republicans was an opportunity to bring up the measure and they could bring up their amendments to the measure. That, I think, is what the Senate Republican leader just asked for. How many Republican Senators voted with us to bring up the student loan measure, subject to amendment? None. Not one. So this suggestion that we are in filibuster because we do not offer an opportunity for amendment overlooks what happened last week. The college student loan bill offered ample opportunity to the Republicans to offer an amendment, but they still refused to allow us to proceed to that measure.

Here is what I suggest--perhaps a cooling-off period; perhaps that both sides do sit down and try to work out something that is reasonable.

Some can argue--and perhaps at times I have argued--that the Senate should be an open forum, open debate of many different issues. But in the interest of achieving things here in a reasonable period of time, I suggest what Senator Reid, the Democratic leader, did on postal reform was a good-faith effort to come to some kind of compromise with the minority. If you will remember, Senator Reid came to the floor and said we will accept relevant amendments to postal reform. We had quite a few of them, if you remember. I think it was a healthy time. It was a rare occasion, unfortunately, on the Senate floor, but it was a good-faith offer by the Democratic leader. It gave the Republicans opportunity to debate amendments. We debated them, we voted on them, and we passed postal reform.

I think we need to find some commonality here, where we can offer to the minority, whichever party is in the minority, the opportunity to offer relevant amendments to a bill. That means, of course, it is an amendment that relates to the subject matter of the bill. Two recent examples show how far afield you can reach. Senator Blunt of Missouri offered an amendment to the transportation bill on the subject of birth control. Maybe there is some way you can link up transportation and birth control but I will not go there. I will just say that was a stretch to bring that issue to that bill, but he was given the chance. The junior Senator from Kentucky tried on bill after bill, totally unrelated to foreign policy, to offer an amendment on foreign aid to Egypt. That shows how far you can stretch the opportunity to offer a floor amendment.

As I said, there can be moments where we want to do that but as a matter of course around here I hope we will try to find some common ground. Wouldn't it be refreshing if the Senate floor was actually a floor where amendments were offered, debate ensued, and a matter moved to final passage instead of watching us lurch from one mind-numbing filibuster to another? I have said it on the floor before, but a lot of people with cable TV are complaining to the cable TV providers that there must by something wrong with C SPAN, nothing is happening on C SPAN. It is the Senate. And many times nothing happens because we are lurching through filibusters.

Today we are going to move to the Export-Import bill.

President Obama challenged us back in 2010 to create jobs by doubling exports of American-made products by 2015. It is a challenge to create and develop new technology, to tap into new markets and create new relationships, to more efficiently ship overseas our agricultural products and manufactured goods. In 2010, exports supported more than 9.2 million American jobs. Every $1 billion in new exports sales supports 6,000 additional jobs. By doubling exports, we have the opportunity to create millions of new jobs right here at home, jobs that could put the millions of Americans still unemployed or underemployed back to work.

Last year, Congress passed free trade agreements that will increase exports and provide access to markets in South Korea and Panama for US exporters. The South Korea Free Trade Agreement alone is estimated to support 70,000 additional jobs by opening up Korea's $560 billion market to U.S. companies.

Earlier this year, I introduced a bill with Senators Boozman and Coons in the Senate and Congressmen Chris Smith and Bobby Rush in the House that would boost U.S. jobs by increasing American exports to Africa by 200 percent in real dollars over the next ten years. This broadly bipartisan legislation takes common sense steps. The bill would coordinate the various U.S. Government export efforts aimed at Africa, make sure our Foreign Service Officers have appropriate training on helping U.S. companies understand new markets, and ensure that our Department of Commerce keeps a focus on Africa. And the bill makes a change at the Export Import Bank--a bank which actually makes hundreds of millions of dollars in profits for the American taxpayer.

Our bill empowers the Export Import Bank to be more aggressive in countering concessional--or below market--loans being offered by China and others to help their businesses crack into African markets.

You see this is a global economy and the competition from other nations and industry is fierce. Our government should be helping our businesses--and our workers--crack through to new markets where American quality and standards are in high demand. This isn't corporate welfare, it is smart business. It doesn't cost the American taxpayer anything--in fact it generates jobs and funding. These are all steps that will get us closer to meeting President Obama's challenge.

We have another opportunity to help U.S. businesses export more by reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank that is set to expire at the end of this month. The Export-Import Bank makes loans to firms exporting American-made products. These loans allow businesses--including a large number of small businesses--across the U.S. sell their goods to businesses all over the world. The Bank makes money off of these loans, money that is returned to the U.S. Treasury year after year. The bank has a loan loss rate of less than 2 percent--a figure most banks would envy.

It is estimated that the Export-Import Bank will return $359 million to the United States Treasury in fiscal year 2013 alone, and according to CBO the bank will return almost $1 billion over the next 5 years. This money is used directly to reduce the deficit. The Export-Import Bank is responsible for supporting 288,000 jobs at more than 2,700 U.S. companies. Mr. President, 113 of these companies are located in my home State of Illinois, and 80 of those are small businesses.

One of these companies is NOW Health Group in Bloomingdale, IL. This company is a natural food and supplement manufacturer with more than 640 employees, 35 of which are supported by assistance from the Export-Import Bank. According to NOW's Chief Operating Officer Jim Emme, ``The flexibility in the payment terms we can offer through our Export Import Bank policy has allowed us to grow our business in existing markets as well as open new ones.'' NOW has grown its exports from 2 percent of their overall business to more than 10 percent. They could not have done this without the Export Import bank. There are thousands of stories just like this all over the U.S.

The reauthorization increases the Bank's lending cap from $100 billion to $140 billion and authorizes the Bank through 2014. Legislation reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank has received overwhelming bipartisan support in the past. Similar legislation reauthorizing the Bank received bipartisan support in the Banking Committee and was reported out of Committee by a voice vote, and a similar Export-Import Bank reauthorization was introduced by a Republican back in 2006 and passed the Senate by unanimous consent.

I hope we can come to an agreement soon to quickly pass a bill to reauthorize the Export Import Bank, a bill the House has already passed with broad bipartisan support. This bill has support from labor organizations such as the AFL CIO and the Machinists as well as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers.

Mr. President, this is a bill that gives American corporations, large and small, a fighting chance to build the products here in America and sell them overseas, creating jobs right here at home. We live in a world where China--most important China, but many other nations, have government support for their businesses' exporting. This is our government's support for our businesses to export. Boeing has its national headquarters in Chicago and most of their manufacturing operations in the State of Washington. Boeing is competing with Airbus. Airbus is a product, a plane that is created by a conglomerate of European nations which do their best to make sure that Airbus wins a contract. I think it is not unfair that Boeing have the same opportunity, nor Caterpillar in my State, nor many businesses much smaller.

So the Export-Import Bank reauthorization is a good idea. It will create jobs. The amendments being offered on the Republican side, by and large, limit the opportunities to help American businesses. I will be resisting those amendments. I hope we can move to passage of this measure in a timely fashion.

I yield for Senator Lautenberg.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source