[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 137 (Wednesday, October 1, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12270-S12271]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            SUPPORTING AMERICAN JOBS & THE BUY AMERICAN ACT

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I rise today for the second in a series 
of statements that I plan to deliver about the hemorrhaging of American 
manufacturing jobs and the steps that I think that we ought to take to 
stem the flow of manufacturing jobs abroad and to strengthen our 
deteriorating manufacturing base.
  Recently, I talked about how tax policy can help to strengthen 
American manufacturing. Today, I want to discuss the role of Federal 
procurement policy in supporting American businesses and American jobs.
  The Buy American Act of 1933 is the primary statute that governs 
procurement by the Federal Government. The name of the act accurately 
and succinctly describes its purpose: to ensure that the Federal 
Government supports domestic companies and domestic workers by buying 
American-made goods.
  It only makes sense for the Federal Government to make every effort 
to purchase goods that are made in America. A law requiring this 
commonsense approach should not be necessary. Unfortunately, this law 
is necessary and, even more unfortunately, the law contains a number of 
loopholes that make it too easy for government agencies to buy foreign-
made goods.
  I have often heard my colleagues say on this floor that American-made 
goods are the best in the world. I could not agree more. For 
generations, Wisconsin has had an economy dominated by manufacturing, 
and Wisconsinites have proudly made goods under name brands that are 
known around the country and even around the world brands such as 
Oshkosh B'Gosh, Harley-Davidson, Snap-On Tools, Masterlock, and S.C. 
Johnson. Many Wisconsin factories have churned out products for the 
Federal Government, including for the Department of Defense.
  Regrettably, thousands of good-paying manufacturing jobs have left my 
State--77,000 jobs of this kind in the last 2\1/2\ years. Those 
companies that remain in my State often struggle to compete with 
cheaper foreign goods that flood into U.S. markets--even when they may 
be competing for contracts to supply our own Federal Government.
  This Congress should do more to ensure that the Federal Government 
makes every effort to buy American-made goods by strengthening the 
provisions of the Buy American Act.
  Some argue that the Buy American Act has outlived its usefulness in 
today's global economy. I could not disagree more. I strongly disagree. 
The act is as relevant today as it was when it was enacted in 1933. The 
passage of 70 years has not diminished the importance of this act for 
American manufacturing companies or for those who are employed in this 
crucial sector of our economy.
  In fact, a strong argument can be made that this act is even more 
necessary today than it was 70 years ago. With American jobs heading 
overseas

[[Page S12271]]

at an alarming rate, the Government should be doing all it can to make 
sure that U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent to support American jobs.
  Some argue that the Buy American Act is protectionist and anti-free 
trade. I disagree. Supporting American industry is not protectionist; 
it is just common sense. The erosion of our manufacturing base needs to 
be stopped, and Congress should support procurement and trade policies 
that help to ensure that we do not continue to lose jobs in this vital 
segment of our economy.
  Recently I introduced the Buy American Improvement Act, which would 
strengthen the existing act by tightening its waiver provisions. 
Currently, the heads of Federal Departments and Agencies are given 
broad discretion to waive the act and to buy foreign goods. We should 
ensure that American companies are given a fair chance to compete for 
Federal contracts.
  Companies in Wisconsin tell me that they do not mind having to 
compete for Federal and other contracts. In fact, they welcome the 
chance to compete and to put their high-quality products up against the 
best that the United States and the world has to offer. What they are 
concerned about is an uneven playing field that tilts in favor of 
foreign companies, which enjoy advantages including government 
subsidies, lower labor costs, little environmental regulation, and 
devalued currencies.
  My constituents are also concerned about the prospect of certain 
types of industries leaving the United States completely, thus making 
the Federal Government dependent on foreign sources for goods, such as 
plane or ship parts, that our military may need to acquire on short 
notice.
  In order to get a better picture of how often the Federal Government 
buys foreign goods, my bill also would expand annual reporting 
requirements regarding the use of Buy American Act waivers that 
currently apply only to the Department of Defense to include all 
Federal Departments and Agencies. I am pleased that the Senate has 
adopted amendments based on this provision that I have offered to a 
number of appropriations bills, thus putting the Senate on record in 
support of increased public disclosure regarding the use of Buy 
American Act waivers.
  I am also pleased that my legislation is supported by a broad array 
of business and labor groups including: Save American Manufacturing, 
the U.S. Business and Industry Council, the International Association 
of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the national and Wisconsin AFL-
CIO, and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers.
  In addition, I believe that the Senate itself should lead by example 
and make every effort to purchase American-made goods. For that reason, 
I recently sent a letter to the chairman and ranking member of the 
Senate Committee on Rules and Administration asking them to support 
strengthening current law governing Senate procurement to clarify that 
the Senate should comply with Buy American requirements.
  My letter also asks that the Rules Committee direct the Secretary of 
the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms to provide to the Senate an annual 
report, beginning at the end of the current fiscal year, describing the 
dollar value of any articles, materials, or supplies purchased that are 
manufactured outside of the United States, outlining the reasons for 
such foreign purchases, and providing a summary of total procurement 
funds spent on goods manufactured in the United States versus funds 
spent on goods manufactured outside of the United States. This report 
is consistent with the annual report already required of the Pentagon. 
I think we in the Senate ourselves should comply with the same 
requirement we impose on the Pentagon.
  As I have repeatedly noted, Congress cannot simply stand on the 
sidelines while all these American jobs continue to be shipped 
overseas. While there may be no single solution to this problem, I 
believe that one way in which Congress should act is by strengthening 
the Buy American Act. I will continue to come to the floor to discuss 
other ways in which we can work to strengthen this crucial segment of 
our economy in the coming weeks.

                          ____________________