[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 124 (Wednesday, September 15, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H6691-H6694]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BERRY AMENDMENT EXTENSION ACT
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3116) to prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from
procuring certain items directly related to the national security
unless the items are grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the
United States, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 3116
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page H6692]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Berry Amendment Extension
Act''.
SEC. 2. BUY AMERICAN REQUIREMENT IMPOSED ON DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY; EXCEPTIONS.
(a) In General.--Subtitle H of title VIII of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 890. BUY AMERICAN REQUIREMENT; EXCEPTIONS.
``(a) Requirement.--Except as provided in subsections (c)
through (e), the Secretary may not procure an item described
in subsection (b) if the item is not grown, reprocessed,
reused, or produced in the United States.
``(b) Covered Items.--
``(1) In general.--An item referred to in subsection (a) is
any item described in paragraph (2), if the item is directly
related to the national security interests of the United
States.
``(2) Items described.--An item described in this paragraph
is any article or item of--
``(A) clothing and the materials and components thereof,
other than sensors, electronics, or other items added to, and
not normally associated with, clothing (and the materials and
components thereof);
``(B) tents, tarpaulins, or covers;
``(C) cotton and other natural fiber products, woven silk
or woven silk blends, spun silk yarn for cartridge cloth,
synthetic fabric or coated synthetic fabric (including all
textile fibers and yarns that are for use in such fabrics),
canvas products, or wool (whether in the form of fiber or
yarn or contained in fabrics, materials, or manufactured
articles); or
``(D) any item of individual equipment manufactured from or
containing such fibers, yarns, fabrics, or materials.
``(c) Availability Exception.--Subsection (a) does not
apply to the extent that the Secretary determines that
satisfactory quality and sufficient quantity of any such
article or item described in subsection (b)(2) grown,
reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States cannot
be procured as and when needed.
``(d) Exception for Certain Procurements Outside the United
States.--Subsection (a) does not apply to the following:
``(1) Procurements by vessels in foreign waters.
``(2) Emergency procurements.
``(e) Exception for Small Purchases.--Subsection (a) does
not apply to purchases for amounts not greater than the
simplified acquisition threshold referred to in section
2304(g) of title 10, United States Code.
``(f) Applicability to Contracts and Subcontracts for
Procurement of Commercial Items.--This section is applicable
to contracts and subcontracts for the procurement of
commercial items notwithstanding section 34 of the Office of
Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 430).
``(g) Geographic Coverage.--In this section, the term
`United States' includes the possessions of the United
States.
``(h) Notification Required Within 7 Days After Contract
Award if Certain Exceptions Applied.--In the case of any
contract for the procurement of an item described in
subsection (b)(2), if the Secretary applies an exception set
forth in subsection (c) with respect to that contract, the
Secretary shall, not later than 7 days after the award of the
contract, post a notification that the exception has been
applied.
``(i) Training.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall ensure that each
member of the acquisition workforce who participates
personally and substantially in the acquisition of textiles
on a regular basis receives training on the requirements of
this section and the regulations implementing this section.
``(2) Inclusion of information in new training programs.--
The Secretary shall ensure that any training program for the
acquisition workforce developed or implemented after the date
of the enactment of this section includes comprehensive
information on the requirements described in paragraph (1).
``(j) Consistency With International Agreements.--This
section shall be applied in a manner consistent with United
States obligations under international agreements.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Section 890 of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with
respect to contracts entered into by the Department of
Homeland Security on and after the date occurring 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Richardson) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
{time} 1040
General Leave
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and to insert extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Berry Amendment
Extension Act, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 3116, the Berry Amendment Extension Act, was introduced by the
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Kissell). This legislation would
apply procurement requirements that have been in place since 1941 at
the Department of Defense to the Department of Homeland Security.
As approved in 1941, the purpose of the Berry Amendment was to
protect the United States from our enemies by requiring that the
military maintain rules and regulations regarding the uniforms worn by
our soldiers.
Extension of the Berry Amendment to the Department of Homeland
Security is the necessary thing to do from a security standpoint.
Currently, there are not any requirements on where uniforms worn by
enforcing agencies such as the Transportation Security Administration
and Customs and Border Protection are manufactured.
In light of ongoing threats which require the utmost protection of
our safety resources and personnel, the extension of the Berry
Amendment is appropriate. Further, the failure to utilize American
invested workers to produce military resources is not only detrimental
to American manufacturing jobs, but it is also detrimental to our
Nation's security.
A beneficial side effect of the Berry Amendment is its impact on
jobs. Data shows that the Berry Amendment has allowed for the
sustainment of over 450,000 textile and manufacturing jobs here in the
United States. Further, using data from the U.S. Department of
Commerce, it is estimated that for every $1 billion in manufacturing
output, 12,500 jobs are created in the United States.
During these trying economic times, H.R. 3116 provides us with a
unique opportunity to create new jobs here in America, thereby giving
U.S. workers any opportunity to ``Make it in America.'' This is where
we all should stand.
As a strong supporter of U.S. manufacturing, I believe that it is our
duty as a Congress to protect American jobs through our support of
those small businesses that manufacture high quality textile products
here in the United States.
Lastly, let us not forget most importantly that H.R. 3116 takes away
a vulnerability in the procurement system. The law enforcement
officials who work to protect our southern border--and northern border,
for that matter as well--have witnessed drug couriers using phony
uniforms to avoid detection in the smuggling of illegal drugs into the
United States.
Considering the loose regulations on the location and types of
facilities that manufacture uniforms worn by those who protect our
Nation, we must take necessary steps to prevent smugglers from using
our own uniforms to assist in their illegal activities and, worse,
highlight vulnerabilities in the U.S. Homeland Security environment.
I fully support this legislation, H.R. 3116, under consideration and
urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote for its passage.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3116, the Berry
Amendment Extension Act.
This bill amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to prohibit the
Secretary of Homeland Security from procuring certain items--including
textiles such as clothing, tents, canvas and cotton--unless they are
grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States. By
requiring the Secretary to procure certain items from within the U.S.,
this bill takes an important step in promoting U.S. job growth and
supporting large and small businesses alike.
The Department of Homeland Security employs over 150,000 uniformed
men and women who are dedicated to the Department's vital mission of
protecting the homeland against a range of threats. The U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, for example, employs over 21,000 officers and
20,000 Border
[[Page H6693]]
Patrol agents, and these numbers continue to grow. The Transportation
Security Administration has 48,000 officers. The U.S. Coast Guard has
over 50,000 uniformed personnel. These growing numbers represent an
opportunity to produce uniforms and other materials in the U.S. to
support their mission, rather than overseas. This, in turn, will help
create American jobs in this troubled economy.
The bill provides for exceptions in certain situations, including
procurements by vessels in foreign waters, emergency procurements, low-
cost procurements, and if items of sufficient quantity or quality are
not available when needed.
The bill also includes language requiring its provisions to be
applied in a manner consistent with U.S. obligations under
international agreements.
H.R. 3116 is a commonsense piece of legislation.
I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Kissell).
Mr. KISSELL. I would like to thank my colleague from California for
yielding the time and also for her strong support for made in America
and U.S. manufacturing.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3116, the Berry
Amendment Extension Act. For over 60 years, the Berry Amendment has
served as the law by which the Department of Defense has had to
purchase uniforms for our military. It has served its purpose well in
protecting the men and women of our services with having the best
uniforms and also protecting Americans that make these uniforms in
providing for the jobs thereof.
In January of 2009, shortly after I was sworn in as a freshman
Congressman, folks came to me and asked me if I would help extend the
Berry Act in homeland security to just the TSA part. Now, I could not
understand why this had not been done before, but I was assured it had
been tried and had been unsuccessful because there was apparently a lot
of special interest that was in opposition to this.
Having worked 27 years in textiles myself, I gladly took on this
initiative, and with a lot of help, we were able to overcome the
special interest, and we were able to get the extension of the Berry
Act to the amendment for the Recovery Act applying just to TSA. We
immediately went to work to introduce a bill of legislation that would
complete this process by making all of Homeland Security very
compliant.
I'm glad to say with a lot of support, and a lot of bipartisan
support, today we are successful in bringing that bill to the floor. It
makes sense. It's only logical for all of the reasons that have been
given that we extend to Homeland Security and all the people that work
there, whether it be Border Patrol, TSA, ICE, Coast Guard, and Secret
Service, in whatever function that they have, the uniforms that are the
best, and the best is always made in the United States.
Textiles have suffered a lot through the years. It's estimated that,
since December of 2000, the United States has suffered a $575 billion
deficit in textiles and apparel, a loss of over 587,000 jobs. In the
most recent economic downturn, textiles has lost 60,000 jobs with the
closing of over 44 textiles plants.
But textiles has not gone away. Textiles is energetic. It's creative.
It represents the American entrepreneurial spirit, and it is surviving.
This bill is a logical step to not only protect our Nation's security
by having American uniforms on those that protect us in Homeland
Security, but also protects American security by protecting American
jobs.
Mr. Speaker, just two examples of the good that came out of just the
TSA amendment. We received a letter shortly after we passed this act
that was from Arkansas. Twenty people wrote to thank us for passing
that act because it saved their jobs. Now, that's just 20 people, but
that's 20 families in an economic downturn that didn't have to worry
about jobs. Richmond Yarns, located in a small town near my hometown,
credits the TSA amendment for not only their survival but creating 80
additional jobs. We have seen this and heard this time and time again
from just the amendment that we passed with TSA. We will see this
expand even further when we pass this legislation.
I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this
commonsense H.R. 3116, the Berry Amendment Extension Act.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress who grew
up in a family that depended on a textile plant check to put food on
the table, I am proud to yield 3 minutes to a real champion of the
textile industry, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).
{time} 1050
Mr. COBLE. I thank my colleague from Alabama. You indicate your
involvement and exposure to textile employment, as did my friend from
North Carolina. My late mom was a textile worker, so I, too, appreciate
the significance of textile employment.
The Berry amendment requires the U.S. Defense Department to buy
American for certain products that are judged to be essential to our
military readiness. Buy American means that 100 percent of the product
is produced and manufactured in the United States.
The Berry amendment helps ensure that we have a reliable domestic
source for certain vital goods during time of war, and that our troops
are equipped with the highest quality equipment. The Berry amendment
has worked well. I am not aware of any situation, Mr. Speaker, where it
has limited the ability of our military to procure items, and it has
ensured that our troops receive the highest quality essential
equipment. Finally, it helps contain costs in the long term.
H.R. 3116 will expand this requirement to the Department of Homeland
Security. DHS, as we all know, has grown. And while the Berry amendment
has been successful for our military, I see no reason why it would not
be equally successful for DHS. The requirement is not unlimited because
government procurement policies are also covered by the World Trade
Organization rules. Berry-type requirements are only permissible for
agencies that are critical to national security. As a result, Mr.
Speaker, it is my understanding that H.R. 3116 would only apply to the
Transportation Security Administration because of its national security
role in securing our various and sundry airports.
I am pleased that President Obama supported the Berry amendment while
he was serving in the Senate and hope that his views on this matter
have not changed, and I think they probably have not.
The Berry amendment, furthermore, has been endorsed by AMTAC, the
American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition, and NCTO, the National
Council for Textile Organizations. Economically, this requirement makes
a lot of sense. Currently the Berry amendment is responsible for
approximately 70,000 jobs, half of which are in the domestic textile
industry. Conservative estimates from textile industry associations
indicate another 21,000 jobs could be created by extending the Berry
amendment to the Department of Homeland Security.
I urge my colleagues to support this Berry amendment, a very
worthwhile proposal.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. I urge Members to support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3116, the Berry amendment, extends the wisdom of
our forefathers to properly secure our military uniforms to the 21st
century of our extended protectors in homeland security such as the
airport TSA workers and Customs and Border Protection workers. H.R.
3116 is putting American workers and the American economy first by
making it in America.
I thank Mr. Kissell and Chairman Thompson for their leadership, and I
encourage my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to
speak in support of H.R. 3116, the Berry Amendment Extension Act.
As introduced by the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Kissell, H.R.
3116 would require the Department of Homeland Security to purchase
uniforms and textiles that are Made-
[[Page H6694]]
in-America under the Berry Amendment, just as the Department of Defense
has done since 1941.
I am pleased to support this legislation which will serve as a means
to support hardworking farmers and small textile manufacturers that
are, unfortunately, becoming more and more uncommon in the United
States.
Moreover, as Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I
am always looking for ways to provide greater security for the United
States. Representative Kissell's legislation does just that.
At present, the uniforms worn by Department of Homeland Security
personnel such as Customs and Border Protection Officers and
Transportation Security Administration Officers are made in locations
outside our Nation's borders.
On August 31, 2010, the Washington Post reported that drug couriers
often move illegal drugs across the United States-Mexico border through
the use of disguises.
Often times these ``cloners'' as they are referred to by law
enforcement officials, wear false law enforcement uniforms made outside
of the United States.
Under current policy, there is nothing to prevent these ``cloners''
from obtaining uniforms from foreign factories and using them to
transport illegal drugs and other contraband across our borders.
By restricting the manufacturing of Department of Homeland Security
uniforms to the United States, we will be taking a smart step forward
to prevent foreign access to the badges, patches, and uniforms that
identify our homeland security personnel.
This legislation has the support of the American Manufacturing Trade
Action Coalition, the National Council of Textile Organizations and the
American Apparel and Footwear Association.
Considering our Nation's current economic situation and the need to
take every effort to secure our borders, I urge my colleagues to join
me in supporting this legislation, which will take sensible steps to
create opportunities for domestic manufacturing, promote job creation
in the United States, and make our country safer.
Ms. RICHARDSON. I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3116, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________