[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 21 (Monday, February 5, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H1174-H1175]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             GLOBALIZATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, when we look at the issue of 
globalization, inevitably the question of wealth and equity comes up. 
We see reports of massive payouts for executives, and the natural 
inclination is to question the fairness of this.
  But the acquisition of wealth, we need to remember, is not a zero-sum 
game. If one worker brings in a big new client and gets a bonus as a 
result of that, that does not mean that someone somewhere else has to 
take a pay cut. The question we must ask ourselves is not are some 
individuals getting wealthier at a faster rate than others. The 
question is whether everyone is becoming more prosperous; is everyone's 
standard of living going up. If all individuals who wish to climb the 
economic ladder have the opportunity to do so, we are then on the right 
track. And the economic data show that that is exactly, absolutely the 
case in America today. With a workforce of 146 million, there are more 
Americans working today than ever before.
  Unemployment is at an incredibly low 4.6 percent. Two million new 
jobs were created in the last year alone. Average weekly earnings grew 
by 4.8 percent over the same time period. And as we had reported last 
week, gross domestic product growth grew at an

[[Page H1175]]

annualized rate of 3.5 percent last quarter, propelled by a dramatic 
rise in what? Exports. We have been exporting goods and services from 
the United States, and that has played a big role in the GDP growth.
  These are excellent numbers, Madam Speaker, and they demonstrate the 
strength and vitality of the U.S. economy. But to really understand 
what they mean for individuals and working families, we have to delve 
in a little deeper. We have to look at the broader context and the 
bigger picture. Let's focus on the issue of wages.
  As I have stated, earnings are on the rise. This is obviously 
extremely important to working families trying to make ends meet. But 
even more important than growing wages is growing purchasing power. A 
bigger paycheck is meaningless if the government increases taxes and 
takes a bigger portion of that paycheck. That is why Republicans have 
focused so heavily on the issue of tax relief.
  Because of the tax cuts we have passed in 2001 and 2003, after-tax 
income is up nearly 10 percent. That is extra disposable income that 
Americans have to pay college tuition, get their car fixed, or take a 
family vacation.
  It is extra income, Madam Speaker, that Americans would not have 
without the tax relief that Republicans provided. Now, the cost of 
consumer goods also plays a major role in a family's purchasing power. 
That is why keeping our economy open to imports is so important.
  A tariff on inexpensive clothes from Bangladesh, for example, is a 
tax on the American family. A tariff is a tax. A tariff on affordable 
furniture from China is a tax on the American family. What is more, 
tariffs and other protectionist barriers constitute a regressive tax 
because they hit and hurt working families the hardest.
  It is not Italian leather bags or antique Belgian furniture that gets 
slapped with tariffs. It is the low-cost everyday items that families 
need to buy. The more we open up our economy, the more we increase the 
purchasing power of Americans who need it most.
  Wages are rising, and that is essential. But we must remember that 
increased wages cannot be accompanied by a reduction in the purchasing 
power of those wages through greater protectionism and higher taxes.
  Republicans have pursued an agenda of economic liberalization and 
embrace the great benefits of globalization. As a result, we can look 
at the question of whether everyone is growing in prosperity. And we 
can answer the question with a definitive and decisive, yes, they are.
  Madam Speaker, I call on my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
continue on this path. I call on them to reject any calls to reverse 
the course to saddle Americans with greater taxes and cut off their 
access to the goods they need at prices that they can afford; to reject 
any efforts to impose the regressive taxes of protectionism. Our 
economy cannot afford it, Madam Speaker, and we must recognize that 
those who are struggling most can afford it least.

                          ____________________