Providing for the Expenses of Certain Committee of the House of Representatives in the 114th Congress, and Providing Congressional Disapproval of a Rule Submitted by the National Labor Relations Board

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I, indeed, rise to oppose the request for a previous question in order that we might get on with the task of deliberating on reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank.

Just to remind people, the Export-Import Bank provides loans or loan guarantees to the foreign purchasers of American-made goods and services--American-made goods and services.

This venerated institution has been around for 80-some years, it has been enthusiastically supported by every single President since; Democratic and Republican, liberal and conservative, all have supported reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank.

This federally chartered Bank disappears in 103 days if we do not act. If the House continues to refuse to place it before the committee of jurisdiction for a hearing, refuses to place it before the committee of jurisdiction for a markup, refuses to consider it on this floor, the Bank will disappear in 103 days.

The problem is that is not when the damage is done. The damage is already beginning because of the cloud of uncertainty that hangs over the Export-Import Bank. Air Tractor, a company in Texas, which manufactures airplanes for use in firefighting and agriculture, lost a multimillion dollar order to Africa because they were told: We don't
know if the Bank will be around.

Last year, FirmGreen, a California-based firm that was founded by a wounded Vietnam veteran, lost a multimillion dollar deal overseas because they were told there is too much uncertainty, there is too big a cloud of uncertainty hanging over the Export-Import Bank.

Ladies and gentlemen in the House, I don't know what to say, I don't know what to say to Terry and Stacie Cochran, the owners of a business in eastern Washington that have grown their business from one-third based on exports to two-thirds based on exports as a consequence of their relationship with the Export-Import Bank. I don't know what I
would say to Terry and Stacie if this cloud of uncertainty continues to hang and the Bank goes away.

I don't know what to say to STAC, a business located in my district in Sumner, Washington, an idea in a gentleman's head--also, by the way, a veteran--who formed a business to sell adhesives into the marketplace that now employs 8 or 10 people with a significant export business. Why? Because of the Export-Import Bank.

I don't know what to say to Manhasset, of all places in Yakima, Washington, one of the world's leading music stand manufacturers. Indeed, 90 percent of the transactions, approximately, of the Export-Import Bank are for small businesses.

The damage is being done now in the absence of action and the failure of this House to take up this issue. The real damage is long term, and it is significant, and it is material.

I talked the other day on the floor about the fact that commercial airlines is basically a manufacturing duopoly. We all know that. One is based in France. It is Airbus.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Airplane manufacturing currently is a duopoly, a French-based business and an American-based business, which I want to remind people is the heart and soul of engineering manufacturing in this country, it is the heart and soul of it.

It is not going to remain the case, in any event, because, as we all know--and if we don't, we should--China is right now in the process of developing a wide-body commercial aircraft for entry into the world marketplace. I think it is tentatively named the C919.

China's export credit authority, which I remind the Chamber every other developed nation on the Earth has, is multiple in size of America's export credit authority, the Export-Import Bank. They are literally--not figuratively--they are literally sitting over there, rubbing their hands in glee, waiting for this Chamber to refuse to act
because when their airplane comes online in 2 to 8 years, they are going to jump into this market like there is no tomorrow.

The damage to the heart and soul of our manufacturing sector cannot be exaggerated; indeed, to remind you, every advanced economy on the face of the planet has an export credit authority, and if we allow ours to expire, it is tantamount to unilateral disarmament.

An amazing array of groups support this. Everybody from--yes, believe it or not--the Sierra Club, to the Chamberof Commerce, to the International Association ofMachinists, to the National Association of Manufacturers. Everyone supports our bill; yet we dither.

In summary, to repeat, the Export-Import Bank is a job-creating machine, 1.2 million jobs in the last 5 years. The Export-Import Bank is a deficit-reducing machine, $6.9 billion to reduce our deficit. It doesn't cost us anything. There are no Federal taxpayer dollars involved. It is a superperforming agency. It creates jobs; it reduces our deficit--and significantly--and it goes away in 103 days if this Chamber fails to act.

I oppose the demand for the previous question so that we might get on with the business of strengthening America's economy.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Green's repeated reference to the United States Chamber of Commerce's point of view prompted me to believe that entering their actual words, that of the Chamber's, into the Record would be a constructive addition to this debate. So I read from their letter:

``Failure to reauthorize Ex-Im would put at risk more than 150,000 American jobs at 3,000 companies that depend on the Bank to be able to compete in global markets. Ex-Im is especially important to small- and medium-size businesses, which account for more than 85 percent of Ex-Im's transactions. Tens of thousands of smaller companies that supply goods and services to large exporters also benefit from Ex-Im's activities.

``Other countries are providing approximately 18 times more export credit assistance to their exporters than Ex-Im did to U.S. exporters last year.''

Further, the ``reauthorization of Ex-Im would benefit taxpayers by reducing the deficit by hundreds of millions of dollars. Far from being a subsidy, Ex-Im has generated $2.7 billion for taxpayers in the last six years, mostly through fees collected from foreign customers. Eliminating Ex-Im would increase the U.S. budget deficit.''

I am going to repeat that. ``Eliminating Ex-Im would increase the U.S. budget deficit.''

``Ex-Im's overall active default rate hovers below one-quarter of one percent, a default rate lower than commercial banks.

``The U.S. Chamber, the world's largest business federation representing the interests of more than three million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local chambers and industry associations, and dedicated to promoting, protecting, and defending America's free enterprise system, urges the House to pass long-term Ex-Im reauthorization as expeditiously as possible.''

Those are verbatim words from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's position on the long-term reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank. Why? Because they know that the failure to do so 103 days from now will materially damage the U.S. economy and will reduce the numbers of jobs. I urge you to support the long-term reauthorization of the Ex-Im.

Source