[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 53 (Wednesday, April 27, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H2558-H2562]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 22, EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE
HOUSE THAT AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESSES ARE ENTITLED TO A SMALL BUSINESS
BILL OF RIGHTS
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 235 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 235
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it
shall be in order without intervention of any point of order
to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 22)
expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that
American small businesses are entitled to a Small Business
Bill of Rights. The amendments to the resolution and the
preamble recommended by the Committee on Small Business now
printed in the resolution are considered as adopted. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the
resolution and preamble, as amended, to final adoption
without intervening motion or demand for division of the
question except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Small Business; and (2) one motion to recommit,
which may not contain instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs.
Capito) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 22 calls for a commonsense Small Business Bill
of Rights that spells out urgent actions that Congress should take to
allow small businesses to thrive.
Ninety percent of all employers in our country are small businesses,
and 70 percent of all new jobs created in America are created by these
small locally owned businesses. Small businesses, stores,
manufacturers, and farms drive the economic engine of many communities
across the country. They truly are the backbone of America.
Many obstacles confront a small business owner looking to expand his
or her company to provide more jobs and investment.
Frivolous lawsuits are a constant and a costly threat to small
businesses across the country. The rising cost of health care has made
it difficult and, in many cases, impossible for small business owners
to offer health care to their employees. Today, over 60 percent of
small business employees do not have health insurance.
Soaring energy costs make it difficult for small manufacturers to
produce goods at a competitive price. The cost of natural gas and other
feedstocks is taking up a larger and ever-growing share of the budget
of manufacturers.
In the 109th Congress, the People's house has already acted on
several of the items called for in this resolution. Two weeks ago, we
passed legislation to permanently repeal the death tax, a tax that puts
a huge burden on small business owners and takes away resources that
are vital to families seeking to keep farms and businesses in their
family.
Last week, we passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to help reduce the
cost of energy. The legislation provides money for clean coal
technology that will help coal continue to provide low-cost energy
while protecting our environment. Provisions will also open new
refineries and new oil reserves into the market. All of these measures
will help lower the cost of energy for small businesses.
In February, President Bush signed the Class Action Fairness Act into
law. This law is a strong first step in limiting frivolous lawsuits
that burden our economy and destroy job growth.
There is still much more to be done. In the past two Congresses, we
passed legislation allowing for Association Health Plans. These plans
would permit small businesses to join together through trade
associations across State lines to gain purchasing power in the health
insurance market.
Health insurance is the biggest challenge facing small business
today, hands down. Many small business owners want nothing more than to
offer affordable health care to all of their workers. These owners know
their employees personally and know their employees' spouses and
children, making that decision not to offer health coverage an
agonizing one. Yet many small business owners make this choice because
of the rising cost of health care.
We must pass legislation to allow small businesses to have the same
purchasing power as large corporations in the health insurance market.
With millions of small business employees among the uninsured,
association health plans are one of the most important things Congress
can do for our Nation's workers.
[[Page H2559]]
In order for small business to grow and produce more jobs in local
economies, we must have pro-growth policies. A national energy policy,
association health plans, and legal reform are some of the important
steps that will benefit small business owners and their employees
alike.
This resolution is an opportunity for Members to show their support
of small business to continue moving forward on crucial issues to
protect existing jobs and spur economic development. I urge my
colleagues to join me in supporting the rule and the underlying
resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia
for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks, and include extraneous material.)
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this closed
rule. Once again, the majority has muted debate on a piece of
legislation for no legitimate reason. The resolution has not been fully
debated before the committee of jurisdiction and, as a result, it fails
to include a number of priorities important to small businesses.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the engine of America's economy,
representing more than 95 percent of all employers, creating half of
our gross domestic product, and creating 3 out of 4 of new jobs
nationwide. Small business owners are leaders in innovation, creating
new technology, new products, and more effective business operations.
The government should help small business owners achieve their goals,
not stand in their way. I think this is something all Members can
support.
There are some very good elements of this ``small business bill of
rights'' resolution that I support. I believe small business should not
be hampered with unnecessary restrictive regulations and paperwork. I
support the provision insisting that small businesses have the right to
equal treatment and should have expanded access to capital and credit.
Opening up assets to government contracts for small businesses should
be a top priority for Congress. I support the principle in House
Resolution 22 that we must consider legislation to create a fair and
open Federal contracting system to make sure that everyone has a fair
shot in winning a Federal contract. There must be an end to the
practice of awarding ``mega contracts'' that take opportunities away
from small businesses at no savings to the taxpayer. We must institute
a fair contracting appeals process for small businesses to be heard.
I also support expanding contract opportunities for women, low-income
individuals, and minorities by strengthening such key business
development programs as 8(a). These actions will reduce current
barriers and ensure small businesses have access to perform Federal
contracts.
But small businesses have expressed additional priorities, and I wish
we would have included them in the resolution. Instead, the majority
chose to insert partisan agenda items.
During the committee markup, the chairman restricted debate time on
all amendments to 4 minutes per side. After considering the first 5
amendments, the chairman moved to cut off debate, which passed on a
strict party-line vote. This was done despite having two Democratic
amendments still pending before the committee.
One of these amendments, offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Barrow) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), would have
strengthened programs for minority entrepreneurs. The other, offered by
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda Sanchez), would express
support for the microloan program which the administration eliminated
in its fiscal 2006 budget.
I understand that the chairman had only allotted an hour for the
committee markup, but we have an opportunity today with this rule to
provide time for the debate we should have had. These thoughtful
amendments should be heard. So far this year, the Committee on Rules
has only reported one open rule, just one, out of 21 rules. It is time
to allow Congress to do its job, and part of that job is to openly
discuss the priorities facing our Nation.
Why not make time for this debate? The Members that were denied
debate in committee came before the Committee on Rules last night to
urge their amendments be made in order. Several other amendments were
also offered. I cannot help but point out that our legislative schedule
this week has plenty of room in it. Not surprisingly, however, the
majority chose not to have a full debate and ignored amendments that
could have improved this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that the amendments blocked from consideration
today would have made House Resolution 22 a complete bill of rights.
For instance, small business owners need access to capital and
technical expertise if they are to make the most of their
opportunities. The Small Business Administration provides this critical
assistance to small business owners. The gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Sanchez) and the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean) offered
amendments recognizing that we should be supporting all of SBA's
programs, including the microloan and 7(a) lending programs. But,
again, this rule risks leaving a gaping hole in this list of rights.
House Resolution 22 could also be strengthened to ensure that
minority business owners retain their place as a vibrant part of the
U.S. economy. The Barrow-Moore amendment, if made in order, would do
just that. While minority individuals comprise nearly one-third of the
population, only 15 percent of businesses are minority-owned. These
businesses employ 5 million people and generate nearly $600 billion in
revenue. Given the gap between the number of individuals and the
business ownership rate, it is clear that an entrepreneurial divide
exists in this country. One of the most significant reasons for this
divide is the fact that minority-owned companies have not seen
legislative updates for nearly 20 years. Congress must bring these
programs into the 21st century. Minority business owners deserve the
right to have these important initiatives modernized.
The only way to achieve a complete bill of rights is to include all
of the rights small businesses are asking for. A closed rule does not
do this. An open rule, a better rule, would allow full debate on small
business priorities. An open rule today would allow the House of
Representatives to consider the importance of such issues as access to
affordable capital and changing the Federal marketplace to meet the
needs of small business. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this closed
rule.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller), the author of the resolution and a
champion of small business.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from West Virginia
for yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of the
rule and H. Res. 22.
The purpose of the small business bill of rights is to provide a
blueprint for Congress to follow to help small business employers
create even more jobs. A job is the best social program in the world.
It gives a person income and health insurance and dignity. Since 70
percent of all new jobs in this country are created by small
businesses, I met personally with 20 very successful small business
employers in central Florida to learn firsthand what, if anything,
Congress can do to help them create more jobs. Four top-tier issues
consistently emerged from these meetings.
First and foremost, they had the problem of addressing skyrocketing
health costs, and they wanted the ability to join together to negotiate
lower prices.
Second, family-owned businesses, we are seeing one-third of them
having to liquidate because of the death tax, and they needed some
commonsense reform there.
Third, they had a problem with frivolous lawsuits and skyrocketing
liability insurance. Unlike a big corporation, if someone sues them,
they do not often have $100,000 to successfully defend the claim, even
if frivolous. They have to settle it for a nominal amount, $5,000 or
$10,000.
[[Page H2560]]
The fourth problem they mentioned over and over was paperwork and red
tape.
After listening to their concerns, I joined with my original
cosponsor, a Democrat, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), and
wrote and filed House Resolution 22.
We have given plenty of opportunity for people to be heard on H. Res.
22. For example, other nonbinding House resolutions sometimes go right
to the floor with no hearings, no markups, no motion to recommit. They
just get an up-or-down vote on a Suspension Calendar, with no chance to
amend at any point. Well, that is not what happened here. In this
particular instance, the minority requested that we have a hearing. We
readily agreed and had a hearing. At this hearing, witnesses from NFIB
and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce testified that the four issues
identified in the small business bill of rights were, in fact, the top
four issues affecting small businesses in the United States right now.
{time} 1130
The minority was allowed to call witnesses at that hearing, and they
did. Every member of the hearing, Republican and Democrat, was afforded
two full rounds of questioning. Afterwards, the minority said, well,
now we want to have a markup on this nonbinding resolution. We agreed
to that as well.
At the markup, in an effort to reach out, I offered a substitute
amendment which addressed three additional issues that the minority
thought were important to them, issues relating to energy costs and
access to capital and contract bundling. The substitute amendment I
offered was approved by a voice vote.
Even though I had already included these three additional issues at
this markup, the minority offered amendment after amendment after
amendment after amendment. For example, one of the amendments called
for Members to take a controversial stand on whether or not people
agreed with the personal retirement accounts under President Bush's
Social Security proposals. Things like that ate up time. The four
amendments offered by the minority were defeated. But each time they
insisted on calling for a roll call vote which ate up additional time.
Now, it is my understanding that the minority Members had two more
amendments that they wished to offer, but the chairman had only
scheduled an hour for the markup under the understanding that the
minority would have few amendments.
So what exactly did the minority get in terms of due process here?
They got a full blown hearing. They got three additional issues added
to the original resolution, and they got votes on four of the six
amendments they offered.
H. Res. 22 was passed by the full committee on a voice vote. Not a
single person on the committee, Republican or Democrat, voiced
opposition to H. Res. 22 during that voice vote, and the reason is it
represents a noncontroversial consensus of what small business
employers tell us they need.
Now, what are the Small Business Bill of Rights? There are seven:
first, the right to join together to purchase affordable health
insurance for small business employees. The right to simplify tax laws
that allow family owned businesses to survive over several generations.
The right to be free from frivolous lawsuits which harm law-abiding
small businesses and prevent them from creating new jobs. The right to
be free of unnecessary restrictive regulations and paper work which
wastes the time and energy of small businesses while hurting production
and preventing job creation. The right to relief from high energy costs
which pose a real threat to the survival of small businesses. The right
to equal treatment as compared to large businesses when seeking access
to capital and expansion capital and credit. The right to open access
to the government procurement marketplace through the breaking up of
large contracts to give small business owners a fair opportunity to
compete for the Federal contracts.
This is what the small business people in America tell us that they
want. This is what we learned from the hearing, and this is what is
included as the top tier issues in the Small Business Bill of Rights
affecting small business people.
Now, if someone is opposed to this Small Business Bill of Rights,
what would they be for? They would be for higher health insurance
costs, higher taxes, more frivolous lawsuits, more paper work and red
tape, higher energy costs, more obstacles to getting capital and more
obstacles to getting government contracts.
Now, significantly, at no time in this process, during the markup or
otherwise, has there been any attempt to strip away one of these seven
rights. To the extent the minority has a controversy with this, it is
not anything that is on the board here. It is they think one or two
additional things should be there.
Well, let me remind you. The Small Business Bill of Rights is a
blueprint that lists the top tier issues facing small businesses in the
United States. It does not list every small business issue known to
man. If it did, this thing would be as thick as a phone book, and it
would not list the priorities.
Some of the business people I met with had things that I did not list
because, while it was important to that person or this person, it was
not something that was a consensus issue affecting the small business
people across the country.
Now, if a Member has some issue that was not included, and they think
it is a real important issue, then there is nothing preventing them
from filing their own nonbinding House resolution and having that
proceed under the regular order.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule. Plenty of
opportunity has been heard for both sides to give their input to the
Small Business Bill of Rights. It is a bipartisan Small Business Bill
of Rights from the get-go when it was filed by a Democrat and myself,
and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Small Business Bill of
Rights, H. Res. 22.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Ms. Velazquez).
(Ms. VELAZQUEZ asked and was given permission to revise and extend
her remarks.)
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California
for yielding.
As we take this week to honor our Nation's small businesses, it is
important to notice the everyday challenges that are standing in their
way. As the main job creators and stimulators of the economy, there are
far too many obstacles that still remain.
Small businesses have received a number of promises over the last 4
years. But as the ranking member on the House Small Business Committee,
I can tell you that what entrepreneurs need now is no more rhetoric.
What they need is more action. Unfortunately, rhetoric is all that they
have gotten up to this point.
One of the most obvious challenges is that a number of small
businesses are not able to access health care. Six out of every 10
uninsured families are headed by a small business employee. This is
simply unacceptable. Yet Congress has passed no solutions to the health
care crisis.
My colleagues on the other side love to talk about how many times
this House has passed association health plans. The bottom line is that
Republicans control the White House, the Senate, and the House of
Representatives. How many more times do we have to pass association
health plans to get it done? Stop the rhetoric. What we need is action.
With the skyrocketing prices of gas and energy, small businesses are
having an even more difficult time starting and expanding their
ventures. Just last week the House passed an energy bill that does not
do anything to help this Nation's small businesses. For the small
business owner that works in the transportation industry, this bill has
done nothing to help reduce the record highs in gas prices we are
seeing today.
Compounding entrepreneurs' difficulties even further are regulatory
burdens. Too often a small business owner does not have the resources
to comply with a number of Federal regulations. Despite the promises
made by this administration, small firms have seen little relief. The
reality is that this administration holds the record for the single
largest increase in paperwork burden in 1 year in our Nation's history.
Again, the rhetoric needs to end.
[[Page H2561]]
Our Nation's entrepreneurs deserve to see some real action, some real
solutions. And as we honor our Nation's entrepreneurs this week for
National Small Business Week, all Congress is going to give them is
this legislation, the Small Business Bill of Rights. Let me tell you,
this Nation's small businesses deserve much more than some rhetoric
included in House Resolution 22. And that is all this bill does. They
deserve to be assured that Congress will work to address their
challenges, that we will go on the record listing the priorities we
will work to address for their businesses. Sadly, that is not what
House Resolution 22 does.
Yes, the Small Business Bill of Rights contains some lofty rhetoric
on taxes, regulations, and capital. But what it fails to do is really
recognize the fact that small businesses do not get capital the same
way that large businesses do. Small firms cannot head over to Wall
Street. Instead, they rely heavily on loan programs. To tell them that
loan programs are not important is disingenuous.
House Resolution 22 also says that some contract bundling is okay and
that is okay for small businesses to lose out on contracting
opportunities. The Small Business Committee has always been on the
record protecting small businesses. Every economic analysis and
indicator says that contract bundling is bad. Yet, this bill wants to
say it is okay.
Most upsetting is that House Resolution 22 mentions absolutely
nothing about the needs of minority and women business owners, the
fastest growing sectors of our economy. This is despite the fact that
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow), the gentlewoman from Wisconsin
(Ms. Moore), and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez)
all tried to include these provisions in a markup in which the chairman
of the committee blocked these amendments from even being offered.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) spoke about due process that
was provided. What the gentleman does not tell you is that the chairman
took the unprecedented step of moving the previous question. I will
challenge any chairman to come to the floor and talk about when they
moved the previous question to block the minority from offering
amendments. They were then rejected again by the Rules Committee.
Despite the overwhelming growth of minority- and women-owned
businesses, this Small Business Bill of Rights tells them that their
needs are not a top priority, and that is ridiculous.
This is Small Business Week, and all we are giving to our Nation's
entrepreneurs, the main job creators, are some promises in House
Resolution 22. These promises are not helping to give small businesses
more loans. They are not opening up the fair marketplace, and they are
certainly are not giving small firms any solutions to the health care
crisis. Maybe next time Congress can promise to help small businesses
to pay their bills and again follow through with no action.
This rhetoric needs to end. Our Nation's small businesses deserve
much more than rhetoric this week. They deserve commitment and action
all year long to address their challenges. Clearly, House Resolution 22
will not do that. We should vote down this rule, and we should not be
passing promises without action in the House of Representatives.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
(Mr. GRIJALVA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from
California for yielding this time. And I would also like to thank the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the ranking member, for her
consistent and valuable advocacy on behalf of the small businesses in
this country. It is an honor to serve with the gentlewoman.
It is a funny situation to be here today during Small Business Week
speaking on a resolution that is intended to benefit our Nation's small
businesses; but, in reality, this resolution ignores a pressing issue
that has the potential to very severely burden the small business
community of our country.
I believe this resolution has less to do with priorities and more
about a partisan political agenda that does not address a myriad of
realities for small businesses. And I want to talk about one reality.
The reality in this situation is this:
The President has spent millions of dollars pitching privatized
personal accounts as the answer to Social Security. But he has failed
to address how these personal accounts will adversely affect the
administrative costs for small businesses.
Small firms are already responsible for withholding billions of
dollars a year of payroll taxes for their employees. The creation of
private savings accounts sticks them with a severe logistical headache,
in fact an unfunded mandate.
Consider this: under a personal savings plan, small businesses would
be responsible for everything from providing, collecting, filing
paperwork, to establishing an accounting system to ensuring proper
payment over time, to handling quarterly and annual reporting to the
employee.
Furthermore, the administration has been telling Americans that this
plan is only, is just like a Thrift Savings Plan. The truth of the
matter is that there are tremendous costs associated with administering
these types of plans, and most often those costs will fall on the
employers.
And judging by the experience with TSPs and other retirement
accounts, employees will look to their employers if there is a problem.
Who knows how responsibility and liability will be determined? Small
firms will be sued if anything goes wrong with an account or with the
investment.
In light of the facts that I have laid out, Congress should be taking
a harder look at the realities of having small businesses assume the
administrative burden of collecting and paying out for private
accounts. A proposed blueprint that does not address all the realities
and the real needs of small businesses is once again a one-way street
with a dead end.
I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule.
{time} 1145
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
state my opposition to House Resolution 22 and the rule expressing the
sense of the House that American small businesses are entitled to a
small business bill of rights.
I want to especially thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from New
York (Ms. Velazquez) and applaud her for her hard work on behalf of
small businesses. If the only rights small businesses are entitled to
are listed in House Resolution 22, I feel sorry for all small
businesses; because for all small businesses give to this country, this
bill gives them nothing in return.
Small businesses, including minority- and women-owned businesses, are
the backbone of this country, and most especially to my State of Texas.
Where are the small businesses rights to, one, participation in the
Federal marketplace; two, assistance from the government's lending
programs which account for 40 percent of all long-term small business
financing; three, targeted tax relief similar to that provided to the
big corporations; and, four, strong technical assistance from the
Federal Government that deals with issues faced by small businesses;
and, five, protection from contract bundling, combining two and three
contracts together to eliminate small businesses competition?
These are challenges and there are many challenges facing small
businesses as they attempt to gain a foothold in this Federal
marketplace.
We should be about the business of ensuring full and fair access for
small firms. We should be about helping them overcome the obstacles in
their way instead of coming up with the blank checks under the guise of
giving them rights that large companies are afforded.
Vote against this rule. Vote against this bill, because it does
nothing to allow for rights that small business need or the
opportunities. Amendments
[[Page H2562]]
to correct all this were attempted in the Committee on Rules but
denied. So I would say go and fix it or defeat it.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
close.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question
so we can change this rule to include three very important Democratic
amendments that were not allowed by the Committee on Rules last night.
In fact, two of the amendments, one offered by my colleagues, the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barrow) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin
(Ms. Moore), related to the rights of minority business owners. Another
offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda Sanchez) relating
to expanding the microloan program was denied not only in the Committee
on Rules but in the Committee on Small Business as well.
The third amendment denied by the Committee on Rules, offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean), would have put the House on
record in support of the 7(a) loan program.
Mr. Speaker, this should not be about partisan politics. It is about
fairness. It is bad enough that most Democratic amendments are blocked
from floor considerations around here; now the Republican leadership
does not even want them considered in the committees of original
jurisdiction. I am very disturbed by the pattern of abuse that seems to
be spreading in this House, first on the House floor and now in the
committee process as well. This must stop.
Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can include these three
thoughtful amendments. I want to make it very clear, that a ``no'' vote
will not stop us from considering this legislation; however, a ``yes''
vote will block these amendments from any type of congressional action
in the House.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the
amendments immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Is there objection to the
request of the gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This resolution outlines the areas that the 109th Congress needs to
highlight for all small businesses.
In previous Congresses we have initiated many areas of small business
in terms of trying to help them grow and flourish where they are
employing so many Americans. They are the very engine of our Nation's
economy and it is time that we start acting on legislation to help them
continue to do so.
I thank the gentleman from Florida for bringing the measure to the
floor. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the underlying resolution.
The material previously referred to by Ms. Matsui is as follows:
Previous Question for H. Res. 235 H. Res. 22--Expressing the sense of
the House of Representatives that American small businesses are
entitled to a Small Business Bill of Rights
Strike all after the resolved clause and insert:
That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order without intervention of any point of order to consider
in the House the resolution (H. Res. 22) expressing the sense
of the House of Representatives that American small
businesses are entitled to a Small Business Bill of Rights.
The amendments to the resolution and the preamble recommended
by the Committee on Small Business now printed in the
resolution are considered as adopted. The previous question
shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and
preamble, as amended, to final adoption without intervening
motion or demand for division of the question except: (1) one
hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small
Business; (2) the amendments printed in section 2, if offered
by the Member designated or a designee, each of which shall
be in order without intervention of any point of order or
demand for division of the question, shall be considered as
read, and shall be separately debatable for 20 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit, which may not
contain instructions.
Sec. 2. The amendments referred to the first section of
this resolution are as follows:
(1) Amendment by Representative Barrow of Georgia or
Representative Moore of Wisconsin.
Amendment to H. Res. 22, as Reported
Offered by Mr. Barrow of Georgia and Ms. Moore of Wisconsin
Page 6, after line 7, insert the following:
(8) Minority business owners have the right to participate
fully in the Federal marketplace and to receive the ``maximum
practicable opportunity'' promised them under section 8 of
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637). To accomplish this,
programs aimed at minority business development must be
modernized, adequately funded, and supported by the Small
Business Administration. This will ensure that the Nation's
minority entrepreneurs receive the support they need and
rightfully deserve, allowing them to serve as an important
catalyst to the economy.
In the fourteenth whereas clause, strike ``and'' at the
end.
After the fourteenth whereas clause, insert the following:
Whereas a business ownership divide exists in this country.
Despite the fact that people of color represent 32 percent of
the United States population, these individuals own only 15
percent of businesses. These same barriers exist for
minority-owned companies attempting to access the Federal
marketplace. Today, fewer than 5 percent of Government
contracts go to minority businesses. This is due, in large
part, to a lack of support by Federal officials for key
minority business development programs designed to assist
this segment of the business population. Programs once
embraced by agencies and administrations have stagnated and
been allowed to deteriorate without legislative improvements
for nearly 20 years, leaving minority business owners without
the assistance they need to reach their full potential; and
____
(2) Amendment by Representative Sanchez.
Amendment to H. Res. 22, as Reported
Offered by Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of California
In the fourteenth whereas clause, strike ``and'' at the
end.
After the fourteenth whereas clause, insert the following:
Whereas traditional lenders do not make loans to many of
the Nation's low-income entrepreneurs, which creates a gap in
the capital markets; and
Page 6, after line 7, insert the following:
(8) The right to a strengthened and expanded microloan
program under section 7(m) of the Small business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(m)), which will ensure that low-income small
businesses can contribute to the economic development of
local communities.
____
(3) Amendment by Representative Bean of Illinois.
Amendment to H. Res. 22, as Reported
Offered by Ms. Bean of Illinois
Page 6, line 3, insert before the period, ``which would be
accomplished by restoring funding for the loan program under
section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a))''.
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________