Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 53 (Wednesday, April 27, 2005)

[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 53 (Wednesday, April 27, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H2580-H2591]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

EXPRESSING SENSE OF THE HOUSE THAT AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESSES ARE
ENTITLED TO A SMALL BUSINESS BILL OF RIGHTS

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 235, I call up
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, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of House Resolution 22 is as follows:

H. Res. 22

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 235, the
amendments to the text and preamble printed in the resolution are
adopted.
The text of House Resolution 22, as amended, is as follows:

H. Res. 22

Whereas more than 90 percent of all American employers are
small businesses;
Whereas small businesses generate approximately 70 percent
of the new jobs created in the United States each year;
Whereas small businesses are crucial to the American
economy and account for a significant majority of new product
ideas and innovations;
Whereas small businesses, together with innovation and
entrepreneurship, are central to the American dream of self-
improvement and individual achievement;
Whereas 60 percent of the 45,000,000 Americans without
health insurance are small business employees and their
families;
Whereas most small businesses do not provide health
insurance to their employees, primarily because of the
surging cost;
Whereas the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is exceedingly
complex, making it difficult for small businesses to
understand it and comply with its requirements;
Whereas the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 discriminates, in
many instances, against small businesses and self-employed
persons by limiting the availability of certain tax
incentives to larger firms or corporations;
Whereas the death tax causes one-third of all family-owned
small businesses to liquidate after the death of the owner;
Whereas frivolous lawsuits and the rising costs of
liability insurance represent serious threats to small
business owners;
Whereas burdensome regulations and paperwork cost small
businesses more than $5,500 per employee;
Whereas adequate, affordable, and reliable energy supplies
are essential to the success of small businesses, especially
small manufacturers;
Whereas lack of access to capital and credit stifles new
business growth and economic opportunity;
Whereas both unsound contract bundling or consolidation and
the failure of various Federal agencies to closely monitor
the small business goals and subcontracting plans of large
businesses have dried up many procurement opportunities for
small businesses; and
Whereas Congress can help small businesses grow by
establishing a climate to encourage small businesses to
create jobs and offer more affordable health insurance to
employees: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of
Representatives that American small businesses are entitled
to the following Small Business Bill of Rights:
(1) The right to join together to purchase affordable
health insurance for small business employees, who make up a
large portion of the millions of Americans without health
care coverage.
(2) The right to simplified tax laws that allow family-
owned small businesses to survive over several generations
and offer them incentives to grow.
(3) The right to be free from frivolous lawsuits which harm
law-abiding small businesses and prevent them from creating
new jobs.
(4) The right to be free of unnecessary, restrictive
regulations and paperwork which waste the time and energy of
small businesses while hurting production and preventing job
creation.
(5) The right to relief from high energy costs, which pose
a real threat to the survival of small businesses, to be
accomplished by reducing the Nation's reliance on imported
sources of energy and encouraging environmentally-sound
domestic production and conservation of energy.
(6) The right to equal treatment, as compared to large
businesses, when seeking access to start-up and expansion
capital and credit.
(7) 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
Federal contracts.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) and
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) each will control 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller).
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, the goal of the Small Business Bill of Rights is to
provide a blueprint for Congress to help small business employers
create more jobs. A job is the best social program in the world. It
provides income, health insurance, and dignity.
Significantly, 70 percent of all new jobs in the United States are
created by small business people. In light of the fact that small
business employers are the engine that drive this economy, I decided to
meet with 20 very successful small business people in Orlando, Florida,
to learn firsthand what, if anything, Congress could do to help small
business employers create even more jobs.
I learned a lot by sitting down and listening to small business
people. First, I learned that the number one issue facing small
business people today is the skyrocketing cost of health insurance. In
fact, a growing number of small businesses today are not able to
provide health insurance to their employees, primarily because of the
surging cost. Of the 45 million Americans without health insurance, 60
percent are small business employees and their families.
Right now, small businesses are unable to achieve the bargaining
power of large corporations when negotiating with insurance companies
to obtain affordable health insurance for their employees. The premiums
that small businesses pay are typically 20 to 30 percent higher than
those of large companies.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, small businesses that
obtain insurance from association health plans can save up to 25
percent.
These small business people told me that they needed the right to be
able to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for their
employees so their workers have the opportunity to get the same health
care benefits now reserved for those employees of Fortune 500
companies.
The second thing I learned is that many of these small businesses are
family owned. Unfortunately, the death tax causes one-third of all
family-owned businesses to liquidate after the death of the owner. If
Congress does not undertake any meaningful reforms of the death tax
laws, then small businesses will go back to paying up to 55 percent in
tax rates in the year 2011. Unfortunately, the only small family-owned
business in America that knows for sure whether they will die in the
year 2010 is the Sopranos.
Understandably, these small business people want the right to tax
laws that allow family-owned small business people to survive over
several generations and offer them incentives to grow.

[[Page H2581]]

The third thing I learned is that frivolous lawsuits and the rising
cost of liability insurance represent a very serious threat to small
business owners. Unlike large, multinational corporations, small
business owners do not have the resources to defend themselves against
frivolous litigation and are often forced, for business reasons, to
settle a claim for $5,000 to $10,000 rather than pay a defense attorney
$100,000 to successfully defend them in court.
Finally, I learned that burdensome regulations and paperwork cost
small business more than $5,500 per employee, and these small business
owners understandably want the right to be free of unnecessary,
restrictive regulations and paperwork which end up wasting their time
and energy and prevent them from creating additional jobs.
After listening to the challenges and solutions proposed by various
small business people, I worked with some of my Democrat colleagues to
craft a Small Business Bill of Rights.

{time} 1415

I want to particularly thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer)
for being an original cosponsor of H. Res. 22.
Now, we had a hearing on the Small Business Bill of Rights last
month. At that 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 today, according to the surveys
of their members.
After the hearing, we added language relating to the importance of
lower energy costs, increasing access to capital, and opening access to
government contracts for small business. To my left here is a chart
which shows the Small Business Bill of Rights.
Number one. The right to join together to purchase affordable health
insurance for small business employees, who make up a large portion of
the millions of Americans without health insurance.
Number two. The right to simplify tax laws that allow family-owned
small businesses to survive over several generations, and offer them
incentives to grow.
Number three. The right to be free from frivolous lawsuits, which
harm law-abiding small businesses and prevent them creating new jobs.
Number four. The right to be free of unnecessary restrictive
regulations and paperwork which waste the time and energy of small
business people.
Number five. The right to relief from high energy costs, which pose a
real threat to the survival of small businesses.
Number six. The right to equal treatment as compared with large
businesses when seeking access to start-up and expansion capital and
credit.
Number seven. 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 Federal contracts.
Now, if someone is not in favor of the Small Business Bill of Rights,
if they would be voting ``no'' on this, then what would they be voting
in favor of? In favor of higher health insurance costs, higher taxes,
more frivolous lawsuits, more paperwork and regulations, higher energy
costs, more obstacles to getting capital, more obstacles to getting
Federal contracts for small business people?
In fact, the Small Business Bill of Rights, as you might imagine,
passed the Committee on Small Business on a voice vote. Not a single
Republican or Democrat member voiced opposition to this. There is
nothing here at any time that any Republican or Democrat during the
markup process or the Committee on Rules or anywhere else sought to
remove. There is no controversy that has been articulated so far about
these seven things.
To the extent people may have criticisms, it is criticism of what is
not on here. Some folks wish that there were a couple of things that
were added that were not here. I can tell you that when I met with
small business people, various of them told me different items that
were not on here. But when I interviewed 20 people and then had
testimony from the witnesses of large organizations, I tried to put
together the top-tier issues that affect people across the board in the
United States. And while some issues may affect this person or that
person, these are the top-tier issues.
Now, it does not list every issue in the world affecting small
business people. This is merely a blueprint. If I put every single
issue affecting small business people, all people, then what we would
probably have is something that is as thick as a phone book. But what
we have here are some consensus noncontroversial items, and I urge my
colleagues to vote ``yes'' in favor of H. Res. 22.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
As we are in the middle of recognizing National Small Business Week,
most small business owners are going forward with their daily routine;
waking up, heading into work, opening up their stores, and figuring out
ways to pay their bills, manage their employees, and satisfy their
customers.
All day today we have been hearing about the numbers of challenges
facing small firms, and we will continue to hear about these challenges
over and over again. But the sad reality is that small businesses are
facing tougher times today, now more than ever. With skyrocketing
health care, energy and gas prices, rising interest rates and a $427
billion budget deficit, there are already restrictions facing those
entrepreneurs who want to start and expand their business ventures.
And now I want to ask, what is Congress' answer to all this, to all
these challenges facing small firms? The answer is: Give small
businesses some rights. You should have the right to access health
care, the right to be relieved of regulatory burdens, and the right to
tax simplification. This is all good when it is said and done, but what
is Congress going to do to carry through on those promises? What action
is going to be taken to back up the rhetoric?
Supporters of this bill will tell you that opposition to this
resolution is opposition to helping small businesses. However, the
truth is that if you votes ``yes'' on House Resolution 22, you have
voted to do nothing more than offer empty promises to small businesses,
empty promises that Congress probably will not keep.
This is because tonight, when this Nation's small business owners go
home, probably somewhere around 10 or 11, well after we have been done
and gone for the day and after having missed a family dinner and maybe
even a Little League game because they believe so much in their
business venture, not one of their challenges will be solved because we
voted ``yes'' for House Resolution 22. Today's actions will not fix
even one of the problems that most small business owners went to work
with this morning.
The Small Business Bill of Rights will not provide health care, it
will not give entrepreneurs more access to capital, it will not relieve
them of regulatory burdens, and it definitely will not help minority-
and women-owned firms to grow a successful business. So continue
talking about what you want to do for small businesses today, keep
talking about what the challenges are, but what I want to know is when
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are going to stop talking
and start taking action.
The bottom line here is that voting for House Resolution 22 today
will not make a single thing better for this Nation's small businesses.
It might make a great press release for some and another opportunity to
boast support for entrepreneurs, but, sadly, that is all it will be.
This Small Business Week all that our Nation's entrepreneurs will be
getting are more empty promises. By voting for House Resolution 22, you
are voting to make more empty promises to small businesses this week.
What we need now is for small businesses to see some well-deserved and
long-overdue action taken to address their challenges. No more
rhetoric. That is the least we can do for this Nation's small
businesses this week.
This should be seen for what it truly is, a sham, and it should be
voted down.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H2582]]

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
briefly address some of the items raised by the gentlewoman from New
York. This bill, House Resolution 22, is what it says it is, a
blueprint for Congress to follow; that, if followed, will help small
businesses create additional jobs. She says, well, it is not enough
just to have a blueprint, we should do something about some of these
things; and why has this Congress not done anything about it?
I had to smile when hearing that, and I will give three examples of
why. The very first thing in the Small Business Bill of Rights says the
right to join together to purchase affordable health insurance for
small business employees. Now, I happen to be a cosponsor of that
legislation, the Association Health Plans, as is the gentlewoman who
uttered that statement. And, in fact, Congress has just acted on that
bill on the Committee on Education and the Workforce, on which I serve,
and we will be bringing that bill up to the floor for a vote in the
future where it will surely pass the House of Representatives. I
recently met with President Bush about that issue and asked him to help
push this issue in the Senate.
The second issue mentioned in the Small Business Bill of Rights is
the right to simplify tax laws that allow family-owned small businesses
to survive over several generations and offer them incentives to grow.
Why have we not done anything about that? In fact, just last week we
passed a law repealing the death tax. In fact, I cosponsored that
legislation.
The third issue was the right to be free from frivolous lawsuits
which harm law-abiding small businesses and prevent them creating new
jobs. In fact, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) has filed
legislation called the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, which I have
cosponsored, which says we will have mandatory sanctions for frivolous
lawsuits, and three strikes and you are out for those attorneys who
file frivolous lawsuits. This is not really a Republican issue, but as
well as having support of people like myself, it had the support of
Senator John Edwards and Senator John Kerry on the campaign trail, who
said we should have tough sanctions and a three-strikes-and-you-are-out
penalty. That is legislation that passed the House last time and we
will surely seek to pass it this time.
So, Mr. Speaker, we have laid out the blueprint here and then said we
are creating order out of chaos. Of all the different myriad issues,
these are the top-tier issues, and now we must take action to pass
these pieces of legislation. And in fact this Congress is committed to
doing that and has already done that in the three instances I have
talked about.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to insert for the Record a copy of the
exchange of letters between the chairman of the Committee on Small
Business, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo); the chairman of
the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from California (Mr.
Thomas); and the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) regarding H. Res. 22.
And I will also insert into the Record a statement by the chairman of
the Committee on Small Business, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Manzullo).

House of Representatives,

Committee on Ways and Means,

Washington, DC, April 26, 2005.
Hon. Donald A. Manzullo,
Chairman, Committee on Small Business,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Manzullo: I am writing concerning H. Res. 22,
a resolution ``[e]xpressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that American small businesses are entitled
to a Small Business Bill of Rights,'' which was reported by
the Committee on Small Business on Thursday, April 21, 2005.
As you know, the Committee on Ways and Means has
jurisdiction over the Internal Revenue Code. The second
resolution clause referring to the ``right'' afforded to
small businesses to simplified tax laws would require changes
to the Internal Revenue Code, and thus clearly falls within
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. However,
the Committee will not take action on this particular
resolution. This is being done with the understanding that it
does not in any way prejudice the Committee with respect to
the appointment of conferees or its jurisdictional
prerogatives on this or similar legislation.
I would appreciate your response to this letter, confirming
this understanding with respect to H. Res. 22, and would ask
that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be
included in the Congressional Record during floor
consideration.
Best regards,
Bill Thomas,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Small Business,

Washington, DC, April 26, 2005.
Hon. William M. Thomas,
Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Thomas: Thank you for your letter regarding
H. Res. 22, which expresses the sense of the House of
Representatives that American small businesses are entitled
to a ``Small Business Bill of Rights.'' As you noted, some of
the provisions of the bill fall within the Rule X
jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. I appreciate
your willingness to forgo consideration of the bill, and I
acknowledge that by agreeing to waive its consideration of
the bill, the Committee on Ways and Means does not waive its
jurisdiction over these provisions.
A copy of your letter and this response will be included in
the Congressional Record during consideration of H. Res. 22
on the House floor.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
Donald A. Manzullo,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Government Reform,

Washington, DC, April 27, 2005.
Hon. Donald A. Manzullo,
Chairman, Committee on Small Business,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Government Reform Committee in
matters being considered in H. Res. 22, expressing the sense
of the House of Representatives that American small
businesses are entitled to a Small Business Bill of Rights.
I recognize the importance of H. Res. 22 and the need for
the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, while the
Committee has a valid claim to jurisdiction over certain
provisions of the resolution, I have not requested a
sequential referral of H. Res. 22. My decision to forego a
sequential referral does not waive, reduce or otherwise
affect the jurisdiction of the Government Reform Committee. I
respectfully request that a copy of this letter and of your
response acknowledging our valid jurisdictional interest will
be included in the Congressional Record when the bill is
considered on the House Floor.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Tom Davis,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Small Business,

Washington, DC, April 27, 2005.
Hon. Tom Davis,
Chairman, Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter
regarding the Government Reform Committee's jurisdictional
interest in H. Res. 22, expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that American small businesses are entitled
to a Small Business Bill of Rights, and your willingness to
forego consideration of H. Res. 22 by the Government Reform
Committee.
I agree that the jurisdiction of the Government Reform
Committee will not be adversely affected by your decision to
not request a sequential referral of H. Res. 22. As you have
requested, I will include a copy of your letter and this
response in the Congressional Record during consideration of
the legislation on the House floor.
Thank you for your assistance, as I work toward the passage
of this resolution.
Sincerely,
Donald A. Manzullo,
Chairman.
____

Statement of the Honorable Donald A. Manzullo on H. Res. 22

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the House is taking up this
resolution that essentially lists the small business
priorities for this Congress. It is particularly fitting that
on Small Business Week, we take time out of our busy schedule
to honor small businesses and list their top priority issues.
Representative Ric Keller has authored a commendable
resolution, based on input he has received from his small
business constituents, which expresses the sense of the House
of Representatives that the top challenges facing small
businesses are: staggering health care costs; a high tax,
regulatory and paperwork burden; frivolous lawsuits; growing
energy costs; inadequate access to capital and to federal
procurement opportunities. Surveys of small businesses
continually show similar priorities, which was reflected in
the hearing the Small Business Committee held last month.
These priorities should be the focus of Congressional action
to improve the climate for small businesses.

[[Page H2583]]

On many fronts, Congress is making progress addressing
these issues. In February, we were finally able to break the
logjam in the Senate on class-action litigation reform and it
is now the law of the land.
This Committee held two hearings on health care in recent
weeks and I am optimistic that we can build on the success in
the previous Congress that established Health Savings
Accounts to break the impasse in the Senate on Association
Health Plans and medical liability reform.
I am pleased that the President's Fiscal Year 2006 budget
request and the House FY '06 Budget resolution includes
making the tax cuts we already passed into law permanent,
which helps about 85 percent of all small businesses that pay
their taxes on an individual--not corporate--basis. Two weeks
ago, the House passed making permanent repealing the estate
or ``death'' tax repeal so that small businesses can be
passed on to the next generation.
I am going to work very hard this Congress to see
meaningful reform of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to
insure that no federal agency bypasses the concerns of small
business in the regulatory process. As a first step, the
Committee held a hearing on legislation to improve the RFA
last month.
Last week, the House passed a comprehensive energy bill
that is one part of the solution to help lower the price of
energy in the United States through increasing supply and
encouraging conservation.
Finally, various SBA programs can help improve access to
capital and procurement opportunities for small business. Now
that the 7(a) loan guarantee program is on a stable footing,
it has grown by 27 percent during the first six months of
this fiscal year as compared to a similar period last year.
It is on track to reach a record level of usage both in terms
of the number of small businesses served and the dollar
amount loaned out. The 504 Certified Development Company
(CDC) and the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC)
programs also play critical roles in meeting the expansion
and venture capital needs of small business. In addition, SBA
oversight over many of the federal procurement programs has
produced positive results for small businesses--for the first
time in many years, the federal government met its overall 23
percent small business goal by providing $65.5 billion in
prime contracting opportunities for small business in FY
2003.
I encourage my colleagues to support H. Res. 22 and commend
Representative Keller's leadership in offering this
initiative.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds. I would say
that a blueprint is important, but at some point we need to start
building a house.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Price).
(Mr. PRICE of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, it is ironic, or perhaps
hypocritical is the right word, to be passing a Small Business Bill of
Rights when in fact our Republican friends are gutting the very
programs that support small businesses in this country. We will very
likely pass this so-called bill of rights, but the danger is that in
this Congress, this will become a smoke screen for inaction or worse.
The Bush administration can find a trillion here and a billion there
for tax cuts of questionable benefit to the economy, but they cannot
find the funds necessary to help our small businesses that have time
and time again proven their power to create jobs and spur economic
growth.
The Small Business Administration budget proposed by President Bush
would provide the SBA with just over half the funds they had during the
final year of the Clinton administration. That is like taking money
right out of the hands of our small business owners.
One out of every three small business loans in this country has been
provided by 7(a). Last year the Bush administration eliminated funding
to subsidize this critical program, and for the life of me I cannot
figure out why.
The return on this government investment is staggering. In 2004, 7(a)
loans returned an estimated $12 billion on an $80 million investment.
That is a more than a 100-fold return to the economy. It does not take
a genius to realize that is good business and it is good common sense.
Despite this, the President says he thinks it is not the government's
business to support this program. Instead, he wants to pass the cost
along to small business owners, significantly raising the fees they pay
to use the program, up to $50,000 in some cases. That is ironic coming
from a President who claims that any change in his tax policy will
stall our economic recovery.
Mr. Speaker, Democrats understand small businesses and their need for
accessible capital. In vote after vote, we are willing to support this
vital sector of our economy. If the Republican leadership of this body
feels the same, I suggest we stop wasting our time with feel-good
resolutions and start putting our money where our mouth is.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I recognize how important access to capital is to
America's small businesses. That is why we listened to small business
owners when they testified here last month and included language in
this bill emphasizing the importance of capital and credit to small
business growth. I am very happy that the 7(a) program, referenced by
the gentleman, is not only thriving but that it is self-sufficient,
operating at a zero subsidy and saving American taxpayers millions of
dollars.
With the passage of the Small Business Bill of Rights, we will be
emphasizing Congress' commitment to access to capital for small
businesses.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1430

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Wynn).
Mr. WYNN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this
time.
This is very interesting, this is a resolution, sense of the
Congress. It is all the good things one can imagine. They have also
just recently called it a blueprint. What it is not is action. It is
not concrete action to solve the problems of the small business
community, and that is what Democrats are trying to say today.
If we look at it, and this is the irony, some of the things they are
trying to advocate have already been passed. They talk about tort
reform, and they passed some tort reform. This House has passed
association health plans. I am for them; the gentlewoman is for them.
My point is they are talking about things that have passed or things
that they have no intention of passing. They have had every opportunity
to do something about bundling, the consolidation of Federal contracts.
They have not done a thing. Democrats have been talking about this for
years.
There are a lot of things in this bill that on its face are not
necessarily objectionable, they are not so bad, but they do not mean
anything. At the end of the day, they are empty platitudes. I do not
take great offense at these platitudes, but Congress has to be candid
with the American people and the American small business community and
say these are platitudes that do not do anything. It is time we do
something.
Let me mention one other item, and that is what is not in this bill
of platitudes, and that is it does not address the concerns of the
minority community. The minority community in America is about 32
percent of our population, 13 percent of our companies. The Democrats
said, look, let us not just do platitudes, let us do some things to
improve the condition of minority businesses, let us improve those
government programs that are targeted at the minority communities, such
as the 8(a) program. Let us streamline it and let us modernize it. They
were not interested in that. The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr.
Price) just pointed out we need to beef up the 7(a) program. The
administration is trying to zero out that program so we do not have
loans for small businesses.
What we have here is a bill of platitudes that sound nice that
ignores the minority community and does not really do anything except
rehash some of the ideological positions of the Republican side of the
aisle, without really offering the business community any real meat.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to reject this bill of platitudes, and
let us do something for small businesses.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, again I have to smile listening to the gentleman's
comments because he said this is a bill of platitudes that is a
partisan Republican agenda, and then he turns around and

[[Page H2584]]

said that he proudly supports association health plans, along with the
ranking member, and we need action on them. I think that is a bit
inconsistent, although I will agree with the gentleman, association
health plans are very important. I think it is fair to say that they
will pass overwhelmingly in the House. We want to make that a priority.
I think it is fair to say the Senate has not taken them up, should have
taken them up, and darn well better take them up and finally pass them
this term. I think we want to send a strong message that the House
considers this a top priority of small businesses.
With respect to the other issues, certainly we want to focus on the
top-tier issues, such as repealing the death tax, and not just a
platitude. We want it to pass and we took action last week, and it is
going to come back in the form of a conference report. We want the
small business community to be on record as saying that we think that
is important that we finally repeal the death tax once and for all.
With respect to frivolous lawsuits and liability concerns, we will
have an opportunity to address that this Congress. We want this country
to know we are listening to small business people when they say that
they are concerned about frivolous lawsuits and there should be some
sanctions. So we have simply taken many, many issues, identified them
in this blueprint by saying these are the top-tier issues that the NFIB
says are the top issues to their members, the Chamber of Commerce says,
and the regular people that I have interviewed say, and say, we hear
you, we know you want action, and we are identifying these top
priorities, and we intend to take action on those top priorities.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, yes, I agree with the gentleman that we have association
health plans, and that is a bipartisan issue that has support; but we
have voted in this House four times on that issue. How many more times
do we need to vote in the House? The other side controls the White
House and the Senate. On the one issue where there is bipartisan
support, the other side cannot get the President to call the Senate and
get this legislation passed. That is how much the other side of the
aisle cares about access to health care for small businesses.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Grijalva).
Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
this time.
The resolution we are talking about today is supposed to express the
sense of Congress that we are committed to meeting the needs of small
businesses. But, frankly, as we fiddle away, we ignore that small
businesses need action now. We have been speaking of the most glaring
example, where Congress and the administration have been long on
promises and very short on action. A comprehensive health care reform
for small business needs to be a priority.
The number one challenge facing our Nation's businesses today is
inability to access affordable health care. The problem has deepened in
the past 5 years, an increase in cost of over 60 percent over the past
5 years. While it seems that everybody recognizes there is a problem,
there has been no major reforms in the last 5 years. Since 2001, the
President has repeatedly talked about bringing down health care costs
for small businesses, but he has done little in the way of making any
real changes.
In the meantime, we have passed a bankruptcy bill, four tax cuts, a
Medicare bill, a class-action bill; but the number one problem facing
small businesses continues to see no action. Meaningful support means a
comprehensive approach to health care reform for small business and not
merely an unworkable gesture. Bringing down health care costs for small
business and the self-employed is and should be a top priority.
Unfortunately, Congress and the President have failed to do so. That
means health care costs are going to continue to skyrocket.
We need to end the back and forth. We need comprehensive health care
reform and to start taking steps forward to implement a solution that
is workable and actually helps small business owners.
As the economic engines of this great Nation, small businesses
deserve to be confident in their ability to provide health care for
themselves, their families, and their employees. I urge a ``no'' vote
on this resolution.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) just urged a
``no'' vote. Now what does that mean: A Member is not for the things
that we have here in the bill of rights, seven things that no person at
any time on the Committee on Small Business has ever moved to strike,
and we are voting on this Small Business Bill of Rights. We are not
voting on what is not here; we are voting on what is in front of us.
I want to be very clear to Members who are heeding this gentleman's
advice that they should vote ``no.'' If a Member votes ``no'' on what
we are advocating, you are voting ``yes'' for higher health insurance
costs, ``yes'' for higher death taxes, ``yes'' for more frivolous
lawsuits, ``yes'' for more paperwork, ``yes'' for higher energy costs,
``yes'' for more obstacles to getting capital, and ``yes'' for more
obstacles for getting contracts from the Federal Government for small
businesses.
I believe the appropriate vote here is a ``yes'' vote to send a
message to the small business people in this country that we appreciate
the fact that they are creating 70 percent of all the new jobs in this
country. We hear their concerns. We want to help them. We have listened
to their top priorities; and by golly, we are going to work to pass
each and every one of these items in this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Nevada (Ms. Berkley).
Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me
this time.
Mr. Speaker, today we are going to vote on a resolution that will do
nothing to help small businesses in Nevada and throughout this country.
My friends on the other side of the aisle call this resolution the
Small Business Bill of Rights; yet in my opinion this is another case
where their rhetoric does not match the reality.
Small business is very important to me. Half of the businesses in
Nevada are small businesses. We are all concerned about the cost of
health care to small businesses. We are all concerned about the amount
of paperwork that small businesses are deluged by, and we are all
concerned about the skyrocketing costs of energy for all business,
including small business.
But the bill before us does a disservice to small business. It fails
to recognize the importance of women-owned small businesses. This is
especially important in Nevada which has over 50,000 women-owned small
businesses and has the fastest growing number of women-owned small
businesses in the country.
The number one issue for the women in Nevada that own small
businesses is access to capital. It is the number one issue for women.
It is the number one issue for women-owned businesses. Gutting the 7(a)
loan program and microloans is a disaster for these businesses.
House Resolution 22 also fails to condemn the illegal practice of
Federal Government contract bundling. When small business owners come
to see me, one of the first issues they bring up is lack of access to
Federal contracting opportunities. Contract bundling shuts small
businesses out of the marketplace and should certainly be included in
any genuine Small Business Bill of Rights.
Nevada has been rated among the best States for entrepreneurs to
start a small business. These businesses must have opportunities in the
Federal marketplace. Increasing small business participation in Federal
contracts will result in lower cost to taxpayers and give small
businesses more opportunities in the Federal marketplace. Small
businesses make up 97 percent of all business in the United States; yet
the Federal Government does more than 77 percent of its business with
only 3 percent of our Nation's companies.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on House Resolution
22 and ``yes'' on the Velazquez motion to recommit.

[[Page H2585]]

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms.
Berkley) had the opportunity to read the bill. She said it does not say
anything about access to capital or contract bundling. In reality, it
specifically says small businesses shall have the right to equal
treatment as compared to large businesses when seeking access to start-
up and expansion capital and credit. It says small businesses should
have 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 Federal contracts.
We specifically added those provisions knowing that they were of
concern to the minority members on the Committee on Small Business.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Watt).
Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, there are some things in this resolution I
agree with, and there are some things that I do not agree with; but the
real problem that I have with the resolution is it does nothing. It is
just a bunch of rhetoric. Where I come from, we say it is a lot of
words with sound and fury signifying nothing. Nothing will be done for
small businesses at the end of the day under this bill.
Why we need a blueprint or a road map to address something in
Congress escapes me. This bill does nothing.
The 20 businesses the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Keller) says he
talks to obviously did not include any minority businesses, and the
number one issue that minority people are indicating to us as members
of the Congressional Black Caucus is they cannot even get into
business.
Mr. Speaker, that is 21 percent of the population, 7 percent of the
small businesses, 7 percent of the businesses in this country; and yet
when we tried to offer amendments to this bill to address the access to
capital needs, 8(a), 7(a) and the things that are important to
incentivizing minority businesses, the committee objected to including
those things in this bill, and the Committee on Rules said, no, you
cannot offer those amendments.
We want access to capital. We want the ability to just be able to get
into business. We want access to contracts; and while the bill talks
about unbundling Federal contracts, nobody on the other side of the
aisle has done anything about unbundling contracts.
We have met with administration officials time after time after time,
and they have done nothing. This resolution does nothing, and I
encourage my colleagues to vote against it.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I certainly respect the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Watt) and appreciate the gentleman agreeing with at least some of
the positions in here, although the gentleman's position is somewhat
interesting to me because on the one hand he is demanding that certain
items be included that are not included, and on the other hand he says
the resolution is meaningless.

{time} 1445

So if in reality the resolution is meaningless, then why is it so key
to him to have those things included?
The second thing he mentioned is we must not care about minority- or
women-owned businesses. There is not one single thing in the Small
Business Bill of Rights that says anything bad about women or minority
businesses. I have not heard from any colleague any ill feelings to any
women or minority businesses. There is language talking about equal
access to capital and government contracts.
His saying next, I believe, we must not have talked to any folks
representing minority-owned businesses, in reality we had testimony
from the Chamber of Commerce at this hearing which said they represent
3 million businesses, testimony from NFIB representing 600,000 small
businesses, small business owners, white, black, Hispanic and others;
and they gave us their top four issues as surveyed by their own members
as association health plans, repealing the death tax, cracking down on
frivolous lawsuits, and reducing paperwork. So these were the top-tier
issues of these organizations, which do include small businesses.
Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KELLER. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. WATT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding to me.
I just want to be clear on whether this committee considered any
amendments dealing with 8(a) or any of the incentivizing provisions and
what disposition this committee made and what disposition the Committee
on Rules made of efforts to amend this resolution to include some
incentives for minority business participation that would close the gap
that exists between minority individuals in business and other
individuals in business. Did they consider anything?
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, with respect to what was
considered by the committee, the committee, minority members included,
got a full hearing. Everybody got to ask questions twice. They then had
three provisions added to the original Small Business Bill of Rights by
me through substitute amendments, and then they got a vote on four of
their six amendments before time expired. No, there was not a vote on
the 8(a) program. There is nothing in here that says 8(a) is bad or
good.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. KELLER. I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, two things. Only one person, one witness,
testified on behalf of the 8(a) program. So she represented 100 percent
of minority businesses in this country. Secondly, is it not true that
in the list of priorities for NFIB, frivolous lawsuit does not make the
top 50, it does not rank?
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, and certainly she can
get her own time to respond, but, no, there was a lady who was invited
to testify before the committee representing herself. She certainly did
not represent 100 percent of all minorities in the country. She did not
pretend to represent any minorities other than herself.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).
Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 22, the so-called Small
Business Bill of Rights. There is nothing that is right about this
resolution since it does not recognize the right of small businesses to
have access to capital that meets their needs.
Last night I offered an amendment to the Committee on Rules that
recognized the right of small businesses to have access to capital; and
I am extremely disappointed that, despite valiant efforts on the part
of Democrats, this amendment was not made in order. Small businesses
need the 7(a) loan program, the microloan program, and other SBA access
to capital programs that help them maintain and expand their
businesses.
My amendment would have also recognized the importance of the
microloan program, which provides small loans to startups that are not
served by traditional lenders. I know for a fact that access to capital
programs are vitally important to small businesses in my district
because when I held a small business roundtable meeting, access to
capital was the number one issue each business brought forward as being
an obstacle; and I know that this is the number one issue across the
country.
Why are we not helping small businesses? They produce two-thirds to
three-quarters of all the new jobs in this country, and they are the
backbone of our economy. Unfortunately, many small businesses continue
to face barriers to accessing the capital they need.
And I believe that Congress needs to take a stand today and
strengthen these programs. It is time for Congress to go on the record
in support of access to capital programs, like the microloan program,
like the 7(a) loan program. Small businesses need more than just
rhetoric and good intentions. They need action by this Congress.

[[Page H2586]]

So I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution because it leaves
out this critical priority.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I will respond to the comments of the gentlewoman from California.
Mr. Speaker, no one, no one, at the hearing of this resolution, either
submitted written testimony or spoke about the Small Business
Administration's microloan program. That is not to say that the program
is unimportant. The Committee on Small Business has argued against
eliminating the microloan program in the past. However, the main
purpose of this resolution is to include only those issues that affect
a broad cross-section of all small businesses. The microloan program
serves a small niche marketplace. Access to capital issues are already
addressed in the Small Business Bill of Rights. We specifically say
small businesses should be entitled to the right to equal treatment as
compared to large businesses when seeking access to startup and
expansion capital and credit.
Again, this is an example of someone criticizing the resolution not
for what it says. They do not disagree with what it says. It is
something that is not even there in it, and it confounds me a little
bit. And I have to tell my colleagues when I interviewed various
businessmen, they had a lot of ideas that they thought should be
included and focused on in Congress that, frankly, I did not include in
this resolution, even though I like them and they are sincere and it is
important to them, because it was not a top-tier issue. It did not
affect a broad cross-section of people. It was not a consensus
noncontroversial issue.
Just to give one example, one of the businessmen I interviewed was
Mr. Bruce O'Donohue, who installs traffic lights. He says the biggest
frustration as a small business person is getting reimbursed from the
local, State, and Federal Government when they install traffic lights.
It has a big impact on a small business guy to do work and then wait 4
or 5 months to get paid much more than it does a Fortune 500 company. I
am sure for him this is more important than death tax laws and
association health plans and frivolous lawsuits, and I do not doubt the
sincerity. But I did not include it because it was the only time I
heard it. It did not come up in the hearing. It was not a broad
consensus issue.
So I could have made this piece of legislation as thick as a phone
book and included everything in the world, but then nothing would ever
get done. Instead, we decided to go with a blueprint of the top-tier
issues that essentially says to Congress these are important; and if we
do nothing else, let us at least achieve these top priorities.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I just would like to say that more than 50 percent of
the microloan program loans went to minority entrepreneurs, making it a
critical source for funding for new minority-owned firms. That is quite
a niche for us. It might not be for the other party.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Napolitano).
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I am sitting here listening to the
information being disseminated in regards to small business.
I have been for many years a small business entrepreneur, if the
Members will. I have sat on the committee for 6 years and have seen how
the funding for some of the programs that are most helpful to minority
business and other small business have dwindled and we have had to
fight, especially for women-owned businesses. One year it was from 8
million, increased by 3 million to all of 11 million for the whole of
the United States. Yet women-owned businesses were the biggest growing
segment of new business in the United States.
So here we have areas that need help. The ability for some of our
small business to grow, to be able to start up, grow, to be able to
expand, to create the jobs. Small business is the recovery engine of
our United States; and yet we are saying these are important things,
that it does not really say anything about it, it just does not say
anything about them to help them grow in these hard economic times that
we are facing right now. When we are talking about the reimbursement of
business license, that is a local issue. That is local government. It
has nothing to do with the Federal Government. Those are reimbursement
issues that procurement at the local level is handling. That has
nothing to do with assistance in programs that will enable small
business to be able to produce the jobs that we need to recover.
And, yes, there are a lot of other issues that I could bring up, but
I stand here and cannot help but wonder why they are so adamantly
opposed to add provisions in a bill this year that we can institute to
be able to further along our engine of recovery through our small
business assistance.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Barrow).
Mr. BARROW. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of today's Small Business
Bill of Rights, but I feel it necessary to address the concerns of the
one small business community whose concerns are not addressed in this
resolution, America's minority-owned businesses. This is not a small
part of the small business marketplace. It is not a niche market,
though this resolution treats the minority small business market as
though it were a niche market.
Despite the fact that nearly one-third of America's population
consists of minorities, these individuals own only 15 percent of
America's small businesses.
Earlier this month, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) and I
attempted to offer an amendment to address this disproportion. Our
amendment was simply a call for modernizing and streamlining the
eligibility criteria of the Small Business Administration's 8(a)
program so that minority-owned small businesses had substantially the
same eligibility criteria that we use to serve the rest of the small
business community.
The 8(a) program was created nearly 40 years ago, and it is the major
business development program that this government offers to help
minority business development.
Currently, businesses applying for 8(a) certification have to meet a
number of restrictive criteria. These include a net worth cap of
$250,000; a 9-year maximum time in the program; a weaning off of
government contracts; having been in business for 2 years prior to
entering the program; and having to show written proof of ``prospects
for success.''
Today these restrictions apply only to the 8(a) program. The
eligibility criteria for the 8(a) program has not been updated,
revised, or changed at all in the last 17 years. During that time, we
have seen many other improvements in the Federal marketplace, including
three new procurement programs targeting specific sectors of the small
business community: the HUBZone program, the Women's Procurement
program, and the Small Disadvantaged Business program. These are good
initiatives that help America's small businesses; but in order to
qualify for them, they do not have to jump through the same hoops they
have to jump through to get 8(a) certification.
Mr. Speaker, 17 years without a legislative update is the equivalent
of repeal by neglect. Instead of ensuring that minority entrepreneurs
have equal access to Federal contracts and subcontracts, this
resolution does nothing to eliminate out-of-date and unnecessary
obstacles for minority-owned companies.
Mr. Speaker, this amendment was not even given the chance to be
considered in committee. Just when it was time for us to introduce our
amendment, a motion for previous question was made, preventing us from
even introducing our amendment.
Yesterday, I argued before the Committee on Rules that this amendment
be considered today, and that request too was denied.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that this is a House of procedure and
protocol. But the curious and unusual procedure and protocol afforded
this amendment has been unfair and unjust.
This resolution offered us an opportunity to help remove antique
barriers that limit the potential of our Nation's minority-opened
businesses. Until this Congress addresses the fact that minority small
businesses have to jump

[[Page H2587]]

through hoops that do not apply in other small business programs,
minority small businesses will continue to be second-class concerns.
A bill of rights for small businesses ought to fix that.

{time} 1500

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of the Chair how
much time is remaining on both sides.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley). The gentleman from Florida (Mr.
Keller) has 9 minutes remaining; the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Velazquez) has 8 minutes remaining.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Mrs. Jones).
(Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I want to, so the world knows, speak
in support of all of the work that the gentlewoman from New York (Ms.
Velazquez) has done on behalf of small business across this country.
Without her leadership, small businesses might not have a voice in this
Congress.
I rise to speak in opposition to this resolution and, specifically,
on the importance of tax relief for American small businesses. This
bill specifies that small businesses have ``the right to be free of
unnecessary, restrictive regulations and paperwork which waste the time
and energy of small business, while hurting production and preventing
job creation.''
My only question is, what have the Republicans done since they took
the majority in 1994 to relieve the tax burden on small business? Over
a decade ago, when Republicans took control of the House, they promised
that they would make our tax laws more simple and fair. Former
Committee on Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer promised on many
occasions that he was going to rip the code out by its roots and
replace it with a simpler one. This has not happened.
Actually, Mr. Speaker, the truth is no action has been taken. The
Republicans have done the very opposite of what they promised.
Here are some disturbing facts. The IRS estimates that the average
taxpayer with self-employed status has the greatest compliance burden
in terms of preparation: 59 hours. This is about 10 hours longer than
in 1994. According to the GAO, in 2000 and 2001, small businesses
overpaid their taxes by $18 billion because of return errors and
complexity in the Tax Code. The Small Business Act of 1996 made 657 Tax
Code changes that expanded the code by more than 50 pages. The Job
Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2003 made 51 Tax Code changes and expanded
the Tax Code by nearly 12 pages. During the 108th Congress, the
Republicans orchestrated nearly 900 changes to the Tax Code. And it
goes on.
I just rise to say, Mr. Speaker, that I rise in opposition to the
legislation. Small businesses need a simplified Tax Code.
An analysis of the legislation by the Joint Committee on Taxation
describes how the new law will require more than 10 percent of all
small businesses to keep additional records, result in more disputes
with the IRS, increase tax preparation costs, and require additional
complex calculations.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses are the foundation of our economy. They
need a tax system that frees resources for investment and encourages
job creation. We must support small businesses and American
entrepreneurship.
When this resolution before us states that small businesses have
``The right to be free of unnecessary, restrictive regulations . . .,''
we can't help but question the sincerity of that declaration.
Since they took the majority in 1994, Republicans have enacted 42 new
tax laws. These new laws contain 4,268 changes to our tax code,
resulting in over 500 additional pages to our tax code. These changes
have made the tax code significantly more complex for Americans and
small businesses, with no serious effort to provide tax simplification.
Mr. Speaker, when we say that small businesses have the right to be
free from unnecessary regulation and deserve tax simplification, we
cannot just ``talk the talk.'' We must also ``walk the walk.'' This is
the time in which we need to initiate fundamental tax reform; it has
become vital to our small businesses and American entrepreneurship. We
must act now.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
just to respond to one allegation by the gentlewoman which essentially
was that Republicans have been in power for a while and have done
nothing to help small businesses with respect to tax relief. I would
dispute that pretty vigorously, and I do not need to look for too many
examples of that.
When I was elected to Congress in the year 2000, small businesses,
most of which are subchapter S pass-through entities, were paying a tax
rate of 40 percent. On the other hand, the Fortune 500 corporations
were paying a corporate tax rate of 35 percent. President Bush thought
that was unfair, and we passed President Bush's tax relief initiative
and brought small businesses from 40 percent down to 35 percent. We
have seen 2 million new jobs created in the past year in large part
because of that tax policy, and, in fact, 70 percent of those new jobs
were created by small business people.
He also thought it was important that people have incentives to
invest, so he asked us and we complied, and we lowered the capital
gains tax from 20 percent down to 15 percent. We have had extraordinary
tax growth. So I think the President has taken the lead with respect to
tax relief, and the Congress has agreed with him, and we have had some
pretty good success with that.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, small businesses got only $500. That is
nothing compared to the $3,000 that they have to pay in fees through
the 7(a) program.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes, 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
(Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to revise and
extend her remarks.)
Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I will not repeat the many
cogent remarks that my colleagues have made, but I would like to
address some of the things that the gentleman from Florida has said.
First of all, minority- and women-owned businesses are very, very
proud to have contributed to this economy. The 3 million businesses
with close to 5 million workers have generated close to $600 billion in
revenue. My concern is that there will be a serious attrition because,
in fact, the programs that have helped to create these businesses are
being gutted and have not been improved in 17 years. As a result of our
not modernizing these programs, there has been a loss of $10 billion in
Federal contracting opportunities.
I would also like to address the gentleman's remarks about no one
having a complaint about things in this bill. I suppose, Mr. Speaker,
that the welcome for me, a new Member of Congress, is that I was not
even allowed to debate my amendment, something that I regret, because I
feel that I am a great contributor.
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to share a few of the staggering
economic statistics in my district of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. In the past
5 years, the city of Milwaukee has lost 33,000 manufacturing jobs. We
have had an 80 percent unemployment increase among residents in the
city of Milwaukee. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 59
percent, 59 percent of African American males are unemployed, and 92
percent of them live in the city of Milwaukee.
The late great Ronald Reagan once said anecdotally, the best way to
address minority business unemployment is to create minority
businesses. I could not have said it better.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses create nearly 75 percent of all new
jobs, account for 99 percent of all employers, and make up half of our
nation's Gross Domestic Product, GDP. Many people of color have
embraced the idea of the American dream through business ownership, as
minorities own more than 3 million businesses with close to 5 million
workers and generate close to $600 billion in revenue.
However, despite the fact that minorities make up one-third of the
population, minority-owned businesses account for only 15 percent of
all U.S. companies. It seems that an ownership divide exists in this
country and more of an effort should be made to encourage minority
entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, H. Res. 22 does not adequately reflect
the challenges facing many of today's minority entrepreneurs.
Let me briefly run down a few staggering statistics in terms of my
district:

[[Page H2588]]

Since 1999, the number of unemployed residents in Milwaukee has
increased by close to 80 percent.
According to the 2000 census, 59 percent of African American working
age males in Milwaukee are either unemployed or out of the workforce.
In the past 5 years, the city of Milwaukee has lost 33,000
manufacturing jobs.
Ninety-two percent of the Metropolitan Milwaukee area's African
American labor force lives in the city of Milwaukee.
I know the creation of a handful of new small businesses in my
district would be a step in the right direction towards addressing some
of the eye-opening figures I mentioned a moment ago. But the resources
have to be made available in order to make this happen. Sadly, the
actions of the federal government indicate the opposite.
It concerns me that programs established by Congress to promote
minority business development, such as the SBA's 8(a) program, have
been ignored and allowed to fall behind the times--with no action taken
during the past 17 years to ensure that these vital services are able
to meet the demands of today's small business marketplace. This is
unacceptable.
In the meantime, numerous reforms occurred in the federal procurement
process that made it quicker and easier to participate in contract
practices. Regrettably, minority-owned firms were unable to capitalize
on these improvements due to the outdated procurement initiatives
offered through minority business development programs. As a result,
these companies lost out on nearly $10 billion in Federal contracting
opportunities.
In addition, there are significant racial disparities in Small
Business Administration's lending practices. The average loan size for
7(a) loans is $170,000. However, the average 7(a) loan for African
American-owned companies is $86,000, and the average 7(a) loan for
Hispanic-owned businesses is $128,000.
The Federal Government has also added to the barriers to success
already facing minority small business owners though the shutdown of
the Small Business Investment Company's, SBIC, Participating Securities
program. In 2003, 14 percent of all SBIC's program financings in 2003
went to minority-owned businesses. Entrepreneurs now have one less
avenue for capital.
Furthermore, the administration also recommended eliminating the
SBA's MicroLoan and PRIME programs, which provide financing and
technical assistance to budding minority entrepreneurs. Given the
importance of small businesses to the American economy and the serious
problems facing urban communities, Congress should take proper action
to accommodate the needs of small business owners.
Mr. Speaker, along with my colleague from Georgia, Representative
Barrow, I made a good faith effort to introduce an amendment during the
Small Business Committee Markup of H. Res. 22 which would have added
the concerns of minority small business owners. Unfortunately, we were
never granted the opportunity to offer our amendment.
To paraphrase former President Reagan, ``the best way to increase
employment in minority communities is to increase the number of
minority-owned businesses.'' I couldn't have said it better myself.
This Small Business Bill of Rights does not accurately reflect the
concerns of all small businesses in my district. Therefore, I cannot
support the resolution. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H. Res.
22.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire how much time is
left.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from New York has 3\3/4\
minutes remaining; the gentleman from Florida has 7\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Davis).
(Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, in my community, there is an old
saying that goes: After all is said and done, much more is said than
done.
Now, we have heard a great deal about what some people have called
the do-nothing, the empty-promises Small Business Bill of Rights. The
gentleman from Florida asked the question, if you vote against this,
what are you really voting against? What you are voting against is the
gamesmanship of playing games with the needs of small businesses.
Yes, small businesses need some things. They need access to capital,
money, cash. They need venture capital, money, cash to expand and grow
their businesses. They need protection from the inopportunity to do
business. They need the big contracts broken up, unbundled, so that
they can compete. So they need assistance. They do not need rhetorical
commentary, they do not need advice, they need help.
I am afraid that my colleagues have been correct. This legislation is
full of empty promises. As my colleague from North Carolina said, sound
and fury signify nothing.
We all love small businesses, but we want them to know the truth. The
Bible says, ``Know ye the truth, and the truth will set you free.''
The truth is, this administration has not been supportive of small
businesses.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, I respect the comments and enthusiasm of the gentleman from
Illinois, and I wish I had his wonderful voice, by the way; maybe I
would be more persuasive.
We hear criticisms that, well, this is just a blueprint, we need
action. And then it is criticized because it does not have a thing or
two that they want in there. So if it is, in fact, a meaningless
blueprint and does not in fact do what I say it does, and that is
provide a blueprint of action for this Congress, why are they so
desperately trying to get their provisions in here?
I have to tell my colleagues that there are some folks who do not
agree with their characterization that this is not important. The NFIB,
which represents 600,000 small businesses, sent out a letter yesterday
to every Member of Congress, please vote for the Keller Small Business
Bill of Rights. This is important to us to have this blueprint.
The Chamber of Commerce sent out a letter on April 25, 2 days ago,
which represents 3 million people, asking each Member of Congress,
please vote for this Small Business Bill of Rights. This is a blueprint
that is critical to have on the record so that this Congress will
follow it.
I believe that we do need to have action after this. I believe that
the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez) was smart and right to
cosponsor the Association Health Plans. I share her criticism as to why
the Senate has not acted, but we are going to act on this, and we are
going to demand they act.
She inquired of me earlier, well, you, and I assume she meant my
party, control the White House and the Senate; why do you not do
something and get the President to act? I have to share with my
colleagues that on March 18, just a little while ago, I had the happy
privilege of flying down to my home district of Orlando with President
Bush on Air Force One and he invited me up to his cabin there where his
mom, Barbara Bush was, and I got the chance to chat with them, just he
and I and Senator Martinez, for an hour. He said, if you could have me
do anything, what would you want me to do? I said, sir, I want you to
use your bully pulpit to help us pass association health plans in the
Senate. He said he supports it and he would agree to do that.
So I do not know what more I can do, other than asking the Commander
in Chief, one on one, and getting his commitment that he is going to
push for that. But I have tried. I wish I were a dictator for a day
sometimes, because if I was, we would have association health plans.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Guam (Ms. Bordallo).
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address a provision of H.
Res. 22 that states that small businesses have a right to be free from
unnecessary regulation and paperwork. Small business is important to
me, Mr. Speaker, since 95 percent of the businesses in Guam are small
businesses. My concern is the practical aspect of including this
language in a bill that is meant to serve essentially as a statement of
legislative goals for the 109th Congress.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act is routinely ignored by Federal
agencies who are supposed to review regulations every 10 years. The
Office of Advocacy and the Office of Information and Regulatory Policy
are the offices assigned to review proposed regulations.
The point is that sufficient authority exists to protect small
businesses against unnecessary regulatory burdens but, unfortunately,
Mr. Speaker,

[[Page H2589]]

these laws are not being carried out to the intended level by the
executive branch. I agree with the regulatory provision of H Res. 22.
However, this issue should remain where it belongs: in the committee's
oversight plan.
Mr. Speaker I, therefore, support House Resolution 22.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to address a provision of H. Res. 22 that states
that small businesses have a right to be free from unnecessary
regulation and paperwork. My purpose is not to judge the merits of this
provision in the rhetorical sense, as I too agree that we need to do
more to relieve the regulatory and paperwork burden on small
businesses. My concern is the practical aspect of including this
language in a bill that is meant to serve essentially as a statement of
legislative goals for the 109th Congress, particularly a bill such as
H. Res. 22 that has unfortunately poisoned some of the bipartisan
spirit that I believe made the Small Business Committee so strong and
effective in past Congresses.
Section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires federal
agencies to review regulations every ten years in order to strike or
revise those provisions which are obsolete or for which a more modern
perspective would lead to a better rule. This Act is routinely ignored
by federal agencies. The Office of Advocacy and the Office of
Information and Regulatory Policy are the offices assigned to review
proposed regulations for their impact on small businesses and to ensure
that agencies comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
paperwork Reduction Act. Both offices have been provided fewer
resources than in previous years, with the administration now proposing
to eliminate the line item for advocacy's research budget.
The point is that sufficient authority exists to protect small
businesses against unnecessary regulatory burdens, but unfortunately
these laws are not being carried out to the intended level by the
executive branch. I agree with the regulatory provision of H. Res. 22
in substance, however, this issue should remain where it belongs: in
the committee's oversight plan. As the ranking member of the Regulatory
Reform and Oversight Subcommittee, I am very much looking forward to
conducting oversight hearings on the challenges facing the Federal
agencies in complying with existing mandates. The chairman of my
subcommittee is a good man, with whom I know there exists much common
ground for which we can work on a bipartisan basis.
Last year, we worked on a bipartisan basis to advance an SBA
reauthorization that had many important provisions. We worked together
on a number of other items such as small business health care and
restoring funding for the 7(a) Loan Program that we felt were of mutual
interest to small businesses despite objections from other members of
our own parties. Unfortunately many of the bipartisan points were
scuttled, including a very important provision for my district, and
many of the issues for which there is not as strong a consensus are now
being advanced. I don't question the commitment to small businesses of
those supporting or not supporting H. Res. 22. I do however question
whether or not this strategy is conducive to what we really need to be
doing as a committee and as a Congress in advancing the interests of
our small business community, particularly those issues on which we all
agree.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, who was the right to close?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has the right to
close.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for an additional
1\1/2\ minutes for myself.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New
York (Ms. Velazquez).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman is yielded an additional 1
minute then, for 2\1/4\ minutes.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
My colleagues have all heard about the challenges facing small
business today during this debate. It has become very clear that House
Resolution 22 will do nothing to address these issues, and it is
nothing more than pure rhetoric.
This resolution fails terribly in providing strong solutions and
action items to help this Nation's small businesses. It also fails
terribly in representing the needs of all sectors of the small business
community. With all the respect due to the main sponsor of this
resolution, 20 small businesses from his district do not represent 20
small businesses in my district, or 20 small businesses in any other
Members' district. By voting for House Resolution 22, you are merely
casting a blank ballot. This bill of rights is nothing more than empty
promises to our Nation's small businesses.
I am going to request a motion to recommit this bill back to the
committee. By voting for this motion to recommit, you will be voting to
give small businesses the opportunity to truly receive more capital
through SBA lending programs and to protect them from free trade
agreements. Most importantly, you will be voting to make the needs of
women- and minority-owned businesses a true priority. These are
critical provisions that need to be addressed.

{time} 1515

This resolution does not represent the needs of all our Nation's
small businesses. In order to enhance House Resolution 22, I urge you
to vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit this legislation to the
committee. And I urge you to vote ``no'' on final passage.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley). The gentleman from Florida has
the right to close.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 4\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, let us talk a little bit about this Small Business Bill
of Rights and whether or not it accurately represents small business
people. When I was assigned to the Small Business Committee, before
accepting my Chair there, I decided to personally go interview small
business people in my district.
I did not pretend to have any idea as to what their top issues were.
I just knew that they were creating 70 percent of all new jobs in this
country; and I wanted to see what, if anything, I and other Members of
Congress could do to help them. I went into those meetings with an open
mind. I then came out learning that the skyrocketing health insurance
was the number one issue, and they wanted association health plans.
I learned their number two issue was small family-owned businesses
wanting to pass the businesses from one generation to the next under
some reformed death tax laws. Right now what we have was unacceptable.
I have learned that they had concerns about frivolous lawsuits, and
their liability premiums were going up, and that it was hard for them
to defend a case in court, even if they were not at fault, because
attorneys are so expensive, and so they would rather pay 10 grand to
settle a case where they did nothing wrong rather than pay $100,000.
I also learned that they were spending about $5,500 per employee on
unnecessary paperwork and regulations. I learned from these meetings
that, in fact, those were not only the top four issues, but in about
that order.
And then later, when the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez)
said that she wanted to have a hearing on this matter, we had the
majority and minority call witnesses. And I did not know what these
witnesses were going to say at that hearing.
But when we got to the hearing, we had the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
which does represent 3 million businesses, and not just the 20 I spoke
of, say that, in fact, according to the polls of those members, those
four issues that consistently came up in my district of Orlando were
the top four issues in the country facing small businesses.
We then had a gentleman testify on behalf of NFIB named Jerry Pierce.
And he testified those were the top four issues according to him and
NFIB. And so, in fact, we had isolated the top four issues affecting
small businesses, and they rightfully deserve to be there.
So we put together this Small Business Bill of Rights; did not do it
alone, sat down and talked with a Democrat colleague of mine who is the
original cosponsor of this, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer),
and put together what we thought were the top four issues.
We then had a hearing. And the minority said, well, there are some
other issues that are also important dealing

[[Page H2590]]

with energy costs and access to capital and contract bundling. We put
those there as well.
And so we came up with this Small Business Bill of Rights, not by
accident or witchcraft or consulting some psychic. We came up with
these issues by talking directly to business people out in the field,
in congressional hearings, and listening to what they said in their
surveys. And we came up with a pretty good bill that almost everyone,
Republican and Democrat, should support.
Now, there is a reason not to support this; and I will tell you, in
the interest of straight talk. If you disagree with what this says, and
you believe there should be higher health insurance, then do not
support it. If you think there should be more taxes, then do not
support it. If you think we should have more frivolous lawsuits, do not
support it. If you want more red tape and paperwork, do not support it.
If you want higher energy costs, do not support it. If you want more
obstacles to getting contracts, do not support it. If you want it to be
harder to get access to capital, do not support it. But if you are a
small business person and you represent small business people, realize
that this Small Business Bill of Rights represents what they tell us
they want Congress to do.
During this week, National Small Business Week, let us send a message
to small business people: we hear you, we have a resolution listing
these as the blueprint for our priorities in Congress, and we are going
to vote ``yes'' to send a message that we are going to get these things
done, if nothing else.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle to vote ``yes'' on H. Res. 22 and vote ``no'' on the motion to
recommit.

General Leave

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H. Res. 22.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me the
opportunity to offer my remarks today regarding H. Res. 22. As a member
of the House Small Business Committee, small business creation and
development is one area in which I take great interest. As the
Representative from a largely rural district, I understand that small
businesses are the livelihood of rural America. They bring goods and
services to these communities, providing the foundation for local rural
economies. They also are the main source of employment in many rural
areas.
In many rural areas, it is a priority to ensure small businesses
access to capital. Without access to financing, small businesses are
unable to target new markets, grow, or even hire new workers. Often,
undercapitalized businesses go bankrupt, leaving a void in rural
communities across the country.
The Small Business Administration's 7(a) loan program was created to
fill this void as well as to ensure that small businesses would always
have an available source of affordable capital. The program is
administered by a network of lenders, which based on SBA rules, sets up
its own processes. SBA provides a guarantee on a portion of the loan,
and allows the bank to extend more capital than they would without the
guarantee. The 7(a) loan program, which is the SBA's core lending
program, is responsible for 30 percent of all long-term lending to
small business owners.
Unfortunately, the Administration recently shifted the cost of the
7(a) program to small businesses and their lenders--raising fees on
these loans for both the borrowers and lenders. Upfront fees were
raised by nearly $1,500 for smaller loans and as much as $3,000 for
larger loans. For the largest loans available, which are for $2
million, these fees are now over $50,000. This has doubled lenders'
annual costs for making loans and reduced their incentives for
participating in the program.
The Administration's actions are starting to take their toll. During
the last quarter of FY04, when the program was operating unfettered and
with lower fees in place, the program did $3.94 billion worth of
business. Recent quarterly figures show that this has dropped to $3.42
billion--a 14 percent decline. And the Administration has now proposed
more fees for next year. This will only serve to further harm small
businesses and the communities that they are located in.
There are many creditworthy businesses that are in need of capital
but that do not fit a lender's traditional underwriting standards. Some
entrepreneurs put off needed improvements or forgo potential expansion.
Others are forced to turn to costly lending alternatives and end up
financially strapped with insurmountable debt before their companies
have even had a chance to get off the ground.
To make things worse, credit conditions are tightening for small
business owners. The Federal Reserve has just raised interest rates for
the seventh time since last June. Many lenders have followed suit,
lifting their prime lending rates to 5.75 percent. Small business loans
are tied to the prime lending rate, and as a result many small
businesses will face higher interest rates.
It is evident that many small business owners are unable to access
the capital they need. This creates a situation where not only is the
entrepreneur unable to achieve their goal, but our local communities
lose out on the potential job creation and economic growth that these
new firms bring with them.
Small businesses are critical to our nation's economy and we must
ensure that they have access to capital. Yet, this resolution fails to
call for Congress to help strengthen the SBA programs that best help
small businesses. This resolution falls far short of helping small
businesses. As such, I urge my colleagues to oppose H. Res. 22.
Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 235, the previous question is ordered on
the resolution and the preamble, as amended.

Motion to Recommit Offered by Ms. Velazquez

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the
resolution?
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Yes, in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Ms. Velazquez moves to recommit the bill, H. Res. 22, to
the Committee on Small Business.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 188,
nays 222, not voting 24, as follows:

[Roll No. 140]

YEAS--188

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cooper
Costello
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herseth
Higgins
Hinchey
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kucinich
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Maloney
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Menendez
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Rangel
Reyes
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz (PA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Spratt
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz

[[Page H2591]]

Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn

NAYS--222

Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachus
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bass
Beauprez
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bonner
Bono
Boozman
Boren
Boustany
Bradley (NH)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Buyer
Calvert
Camp
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Case
Castle
Chabot
Chocola
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Costa
Cox
Crenshaw
Culberson
Cunningham
Davis (KY)
Davis, Jo Ann
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeLay
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick (PA)
Foley
Forbes
Fortenberry
Fossella
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Green (WI)
Gutknecht
Hall
Harris
Hart
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hunter
Hyde
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Jenkins
Jindal
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (IL)
Jones (NC)
Keller
Kelly
Kennedy (MN)
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Latham
LaTourette
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McHugh
McKeon
McMorris
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moran (KS)
Murphy
Neugebauer
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nunes
Nussle
Obey
Osborne
Otter
Oxley
Paul
Pearce
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Platts
Poe
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Royce
Ryun (KS)
Salazar
Saxton
Schwarz (MI)
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shaw
Shays
Sherwood
Shimkus
Shuster
Simmons
Simpson
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Sodrel
Stearns
Sullivan
Sweeney
Tancredo
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Terry
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walden (OR)
Walsh
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Whitfield
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)

NOT VOTING--24

Brady (TX)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Burton (IN)
Cubin
Doolittle
Feeney
Flake
Hensarling
Hinojosa
Istook
Johnson, Sam
Lynch
Musgrave
Myrick
Pence
Pitts
Rothman
Ryan (WI)
Scott (GA)
Shadegg
Souder
Westmoreland
Wicker

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Foley) (during the vote). Members are
advised there are 2 minutes remaining in the vote.

{time} 1546

Messrs. KIND, THORNBERRY, LEACH, PETERSON of Pennsylvania and REGULA
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay''.
Messrs. ENGEL, DAVIS of Tennessee and OBERSTAR and Mrs. MALONEY
changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea''.
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 140, had I been present, I
would have voted ``yes.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________