[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 65 (Thursday, May 12, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H3257-H3263]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MAKE IT IN AMERICA
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, we just finished a very important debate
here on the floor dealing with the ability of the American Government
to understand the threats that face us across this world. I want to
commend my colleagues both on the Republican and Democratic side for
working long and hard on the intelligence legislation that will be up
on the floor, probably tomorrow.
In the hour ahead, what I would really like to focus on and bring to
the attention of the American people is the necessity for jobs. We
spend a lot of time talking about security, as we should, and we've
certainly seen that in the successful effort to bring down bin Laden
and finally see that justice was properly served. Congratulations to
the military, to the intelligence community, and particularly to
President Obama for his courage in ordering that action, risky to be
sure, but ultimately extraordinarily successful.
The other part of American security is our economy. At the end of the
day and even at the beginning of the day, this Nation will never be
secure unless we have a very strong, vibrant, growing economy that
provides every American that wants to work with the opportunity to go
to work. And so the focus of our attention for this hour ahead is
economic security: how to secure the economic well-being of every
American, how to secure the economic well-being of the American public.
It can be done.
There are essentially six elements to achieve economic security and
economic growth and strength, and we will cover many of those today as
we talk about this issue. Let me very briefly lay them out to you.
The first is education. I think we now understand that an individual
who has little or no education has very little opportunity to find
economic security. It's difficult to get a job if you don't have an
education. So for an individual, a good education is essential.
Unfortunately across America, report after report, usually every 6 or 7
years a new report comes out and says America at Risk. Our education
system isn't measuring up. Yet here in the last 3 months and in the
days ahead, my colleagues on the Republican side have consistently cut
the education programs that many, indeed millions of Americans depend
upon.
Back home in my State of California, education funding is similarly
cut, so that now a class that 5 years ago was 20 students is now 30
students. At the University of California, 10 years ago it may have
cost $1,500 or $2,000 to go to school to pay the tuition. Now it's
$8,000. And in the budget that's being proposed that was presented to
the Appropriations Committee today, the Republicans are virtually
reducing to a point of nonexistence Pell Grants necessary for higher
education.
So education becomes the first key pillar in building a secure
economy for an individual. Similarly, it is the pillar to secure a good
growing economy for this Nation, because this Nation will not be able
to compete economically unless we have the best educated workforce in
the world, and we're not even close today. We were in bygone years, 30,
40 years ago, and we can be in the future, but it's going to take a
change. As my colleagues come and join me during this hour, we will be
talking about the ways in which the education system can be improved
and the way in which we can transition people from education to work
and back to education and back to work.
The second pillar is research. Research is an essential element,
because from that research comes the new products of the future. I
think we only need to think about the things that are in our home. The
television, the VCR, the other things that we depend upon, were mostly
invented in America. The fundamental research for computer chips and
the like, America made, and much of the technology that we now find in
our green technology, a lot of the wind turbines, the initial wind
turbine industry, the solar industry, the photovoltaic and the rest,
research in America's great institutions, our universities, our
laboratories, led to these kinds of products. The battery technology
that we now find in the hybrids, invented in America, but I think most
of you would say, but not made in America today. That's true. So what
we have seen is that the research, while done in the United States, did
not lead to those things being manufactured in the United States. We
need to understand why, and we'll go into that today, also.
So education, research, and then the third element is making those
things in America. Manufacturing matters, and that is the core subject
of today's
[[Page H3258]]
discussion: Make it in America. You can educate, you can research, but
ultimately you have to make it in America.
Now, there are ways that we can enhance the American manufacturing
sector, and my colleagues and I on the Democratic side have put forth a
program that we called Make It in America, so that America can make it,
so that American families can make it, and we know that these programs
that we're proposing will cause that to occur.
{time} 1630
The remaining three things that we will talk about, not today, but I
want to make sure we lay them out there: Education, research,
manufacturing, make it in America, the next element is infrastructure.
You have to have roads and streets and sanitation and water systems,
communications systems. All of those things are critically important.
Fortunately, part of the stimulus program, not enough of it, but a big
part of it was to build the infrastructure. The largest surge in
infrastructure investment ever in the history of this Nation was the
stimulus program, overlooked and certainly overlooked in the politics
of last year's election, but it was there. It was a good point, but we
have to carry that forward.
Fifth point. We have to be international. Unfortunately, the word
``international'' in America has come to be that we give it all away.
The trade agreements of the past often led to the outsourcing of
American jobs, and so, as we look to the future, we want to make sure
that as we look international we talk about, as President Obama has
suggested, that we once again become an export Nation. We can do that.
There are programs that will cause that to happen, and also, we need to
be quite sure that when we talk about international we talk about fair
trade, trade that is fair to American workers.
And so as these trade programs come before us, we will be taking a
very hard look at are those programs good for American workers, or are
they simply good for Chinese workers. If they are good for those
workers overseas and not good for American workers, you can see strong
resistance from those of us on the Democratic side who say, wait a
minute, international is good. We understand the need to grow markets.
We understand the growing markets of the world, but we will no longer
allow American workers to be put at a disadvantage by some trade
agreement that is not fair to American workers.
The final element is this: we have to change. We cannot be what we
were yesterday. We have to be what we can be tomorrow, and our
President very clearly points this out as he talks about capturing the
future. We can but only if we do these six things, and the final one is
change.
Let me go now to a couple of the specific elements that we need to
talk about here. Sometimes it's helpful to put up one of these
placards. It helps focus at least my attention and perhaps yours. This
is the Make It in America Agenda. These issues we've talked about,
trade, tax policy, energy policy. Let's pick up the energy policy here.
It is incumbent upon America to secure its energy future. I think all
of us go to the gas station from time to time, all too often it seems
to me, and you know now we're filling up with $4 a barrel oil. Why? Why
did that happen? Well, it basically has happened because for more than
30 years America has talked about energy security. We've talked about
ending the importation of oil. We've talked about how we can provide
the energy necessary for this Nation. Yet, we now find ourselves in a
situation very similar to what we found in the 1970s, that is,
insufficient energy available to us. The ``Drill, baby, drill''
mentality that we saw on the floor today is not the solution to this.
The solution to the energy issue is to transform our energy systems
from the 19th and 20th century energy system, the fossil fuels, where
we are dependent upon the petrol dictators of the world, and on coal,
which I think all of us have come to understand presents enormous
challenges for us, challenges of climate change, challenges of
despoiling the surface of the Earth as we now find in the Appalachian
Mountains and enormous health risks that come with the burning of coal.
We need to move away from these fossil fuels to the fuels of tomorrow.
As we do that, we need to use our tax dollars to accomplish this
goal. Right now, our tax dollars are used to support the oil industry.
The oil industry thinks that is all well and good, but how many of you
want to have $4 billion, $5 billion, $6 billion, even $12 billion of
your tax money go to the wealthiest, most successful industry in the
world as a subsidy? This is oil welfare, plain and simple, to the
industry that simply does not need it. We're talking about the
wealthiest, most successful industries in the world that have, for a
century, for a full century, enjoyed the generosity of the American
taxpayer. They receive welfare. Plain and simple, it's a subsidy, to
subsidize the oil industry.
Yet we know in the last few days the Big Five oil companies have
produced record profits in the last quarter. So much so that in the
last decade, the decade 2001 until 2010, the oil industry has had over
$1 trillion of profit, $1 trillion dollar of profit. At the same time,
they have received billions of dollars of subsidies. We need to bring
those subsidies back into the Treasury. Tell the oil industry, for a
century you have been living off the welfare of the American public
taxpayer. No more. That money is coming home.
And we're going to use it for two purposes: one, to reduce the
deficit. President Obama has suggested about $4 billion a year. I think
you can go as high as $12 billion if you add up all of the subsidies,
bringing that money back into the Treasury to be used to reduce the
deficit and to support industries of the future. We're talking about a
lot of money here. Take a look at this.
ExxonMobil, $10.7 billion of profit in just the last quarter.
Oxychem, $1.6 billion. Conoco, $2.1 billion. Oh, you're going to love
this. The CEO of Conoco oil a couple of days ago got in front of a
microphone and said it is un-American to take away our welfare, to take
away our subsidy. I don't think so. I think it is un-American to give
the wealthiest industry in the world a subsidy. We can go on and on
here. We see Chevron doing very well. Oh, yeah, BP--we know that bunch.
They're the ones that didn't have enough money to safely drill for oil,
but they did manage to make $7.2 billion of profit this last year.
So, as we look at the energy systems of this Nation, we need to
understand that the money that you and I are presently giving to the
oil companies as a subsidy needs to be brought back and used to reduce
the deficit and to support the energy systems of the future.
I'm going to wrap this very quickly with 2 pieces of legislation that
I've introduced that would take those subsidies back from the oil
industry and apply them to tomorrow's energy systems, the green energy
systems, solar, wind. Our tax money should be used to buy American made
solar, wind, turbines, and other green technologies. Right now, our tax
money, we do subsidize those industries. Our tax money is used to
purchase products that are manufactured offshore. My legislation says,
good, we need to subsidize. We need to promote those industries. Those
are the industries of the future. Those are energy sources of the
future. Let's use that money to buy American-made equipment.
If somebody wants to go buy Chinese solar cells, fine, use your own
money. One of these companies wants to go buy European-made wind
turbine, that is fine, do it. But don't use my tax money. Don't use
your tax money. American tax money must be used to buy American-made
equipment.
Similarly, with our gasoline taxes that are now being used to buy
buses, trains, and build highways and bridges, great. Good thing to do,
but make sure that those things are made in America.
{time} 1640
Now let me turn my attention to my colleagues. Three of them have
joined us. I notice that our minority whip has joined us today.
Mr. Hoyer, you've been the advocate, the leader, of developing the
Make It in America strategy. Please share with us your thoughts, and
then I'm going to turn to my other two colleagues.
Mr. HOYER. I'll be very brief.
I thank the gentleman for his continuing focus. If I am the corner of
the phrase and the focuser of Make It in
[[Page H3259]]
America, you are its chief spokesperson and salesperson, so I thank you
for that effort.
It's so important because, clearly, Americans are rightfully very
concerned at the fact that we don't have enough jobs for the people who
are looking for jobs. We've got to have a growth agenda in America.
We've got to have an agenda in America that focuses on expanding
opportunities. We've got to have an agenda that gives to Americans the
sense that they and their families and their children can make it in
America.
You have been focusing night after night, week after week, month
after month on a jobs agenda, which we call ``Make It in America.''
We've introduced over 25 bills that are focused on trying to help us
focus on that agenda, on trying to help business--small, medium and
large--expand their businesses and on trying to give them assistance in
doing so.
I want to say to the gentleman that, in his continuing to focus on
this jobs agenda, it is critically important that Americans understand
what the Make It in America agenda is all about so they can contact
their Members of Congress and Members of the United States Senate and
say, Look, we support the Make It in America agenda. We believe that
it's an agenda for our opportunities and our children's opportunities.
I want to say something about the statement, to which the gentleman
referred, made by the president of Conoco, a statement that apparently
indicates he believes that his company is entitled to a tax preference
and that if we did not give that tax preference that somehow it would
be un-American. Of course, life, as I like to say, is a series of
trade-offs: if we're buying things; national defense; defeating
terrorism; making sure our seniors are secure in their pocketbooks and
in their health; making sure that we participate in helping young
people, particularly disadvantaged young people, get the educational
start that they need; making sure that our college students can develop
their talents so they can make us a more competitive Nation; and that
the innovation, an innovation to which the gentleman referred earlier,
will still be done in the United States. Then we need to make sure that
the products and technologies that are developed through that
enterprise are, in fact, then subject to a Make It in America reality.
As for the gentleman from Conoco, I don't know him, but I applaud the
oil companies, and we need the energy that they give us. The fact of
the matter is we gave subsidies, and we give subsidies in various
areas, as the gentleman from California knows, to encourage doing
things that are not now profitable but that will have a long-term
payoff for not only the companies but for America. That is why the
government invests its money, as governments all over the world do, in
developing emerging technologies. The gentleman spoke, of course, of
solar, wind and other renewable technologies that will have a
tremendous payoff but not in the short term; therefore it's hard to get
investors to put money in. That's why governments, not just in this
country but all over the world, have done this in the past: for
instance, when the prices of gasoline were not such that they provided
the resources to encourage research, which we knew we needed, and
drilling, which we knew we needed.
Yet now, when you have the profits of the product, I am shocked,
frankly, that those who promote the free market system, which ought to
be driven by the markets, driven by demand, driven by profits, would
now say, notwithstanding the fact that oil profits among the Big Five,
in particular, are up to historic levels, that we should still continue
to ask our taxpayers to subsidize them even further. That seems to me
to make no sense.
But back to the principal focus of making it in America: The
gentleman has been so right in his focus of making sure that we create
the kind of environment in this country that will empower people to
make things in America, to grow things in America, to sell them here,
but also to sell them around the world. The President has indicated he
wants to double exports. The only way we're going to double exports is
if we make things in America to sell overseas. That's the only way you
can get exports whether they be goods, frankly, or services. We ought
not to preclude the growth of the service sector in our economy
servicing overseas, whatever that service agency might be.
So I want to thank the gentleman for continuing to keep the focus on
an agenda that, I hope, our Republican colleagues will embrace as well.
This is not a partisan agenda. I don't think there is a Member of this
Congress who doesn't want to grow the economy and create jobs. We
believe that the Make It in America agenda is focused on doing just
that, and I would encourage our Republican colleagues, our Democratic
colleagues, our brethren in the Senate to join together to pass this
Make It in America agenda so we can see a resurgence of the
manufacturing might of this great country that when we continue to be
the inventing, innovative, developing center of the world's economy
that we also, once we've done all that, then bring it to scale, or make
it in America.
Andy Grove of Intel, as you know, has observed that if, in fact, what
we continue to do is do the voltaic cells, do the chips, do the other
technologies and if we then take the products to scale overseas,
inevitably, Andy Grove believes--and I share this view--that our
inventors, innovators and developers, themselves, will go overseas. The
American public, by large numbers, understands that that's not a policy
that is defensible or profitable for them, for their families or for
America in the long term.
So I thank the gentleman from California for his focus, for his
tenacity and for his compelling advocacy of the Make It in America
agenda.
Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank you very much, Mr. Leader, for what you've
done. Mr. Hoyer, you've been on this, actually, longer than I. You have
some history in this House that goes way back. I think about a program
that you and the Democrats put forward before I arrived. I've only been
here now about 20 months. It was the stimulus bill, the American
Recovery Act.
In that Recovery Act, there was about $12 billion for transportation.
In that transportation program, you and the Democrats, signed by
President Obama, said that the money had to be spent--and this was the
high-speed rail program--on American-made high-speed rail.
Guess what happened?
Of the high-speed rail companies of the world--none were made in
America--the Japanese, the Chinese, the Germans, the French, and the
Spanish all began to find American manufacturing plants because they
wanted access to the high-speed rail money that was in the stimulus
bill.
The point here is that, if we use our tax money wisely and say to the
world ``come and build a high-speed rail, but you're going to make it
in America,'' they will establish those manufacturing plants here in
America. It's already happening. In Sacramento, Siemens, and in New
York, a couple of the European companies are already locating those
manufacturing plants.
Sheila Jackson Lee, from the great State of Texas, has now joined us,
and she has been on this issue for a long time.
So, if you would, share with us your thoughts on how America can make
it by making it in America.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from California.
If it were allowed on the floor, I would say, ``Yippee,'' but I will
try to adhere to protocol or take a lariat and circle it around out of
excitement.
{time} 1650
Thank you very much for the years of tenure and leadership that you
brought from the legislature in the State of California. You brought it
here with a sense of action, and we thank you. I am delighted that our
Democratic whip has been at the forefront of this issue. And the
gentleman from Rhode Island--I know others may be coming--is a mayor, a
former mayor who understands the importance of jobs.
Let me just say, to add to your comment, both President Clinton and
President Reagan have quotes that suggest that if you build
infrastructure, it is an investment that will continue to give and give
and give. Since 9/11, my good friend, I have been on the Homeland
Security Committee, and
[[Page H3260]]
the attention of the United States, rightly so, has been on securing
the homeland and national security. And just one moment so I can
transfer into this discussion, 70 percent of the American people now
with the capture and demise of Osama bin Laden still are concerned
about our security but, in actuality, believe that our troops can come
home completely. I hope that we can move in that direction. This is not
a Republican issue or a Democratic issue. Seventy percent of the
American people frankly believe our troops have done an enormous
tribute to themselves and to the American people.
What does that mean? It means bright young men and women are going to
be coming home. And let it be known that they will not just come home
in need of health services. They will come home eager to participate in
the American Dream. And, frankly, I want to make sure they can do that,
and I want to make sure we end the war in Afghanistan.
But I believe we have, as you have mentioned, the tools of the trade.
I see this word ``trade,'' and some of us get a little nervous about
that. But let me tell you how I explain trade. I want every item that
can be sold overseas to someone else from the United States to be sold.
I have taken to inventorying the manufacturers in the 18th
Congressional District in Texas. And if I might, if you are listening,
call (713) 655-0050 and let our office know you exist, that you make
something in the 18th Congressional District in Texas. And I would
venture to say that my colleagues will tell you call them or get on
their Web site, because we want you to be able to sell it overseas.
Make It in America is to recognize the validity of the product you
have made. We want to make sure that there are taxes that are fair to
manufacturers. I am in the Manufacturing Caucus. We want to generate
it. Energy means all kinds of energy, and I will dwell on that very
lightly. But I am a person who is an equal opportunity welcomer of
solar and biofuels and a number of other energy types to join in
energy.
Labor, I have already said to you, I am trying to bring our soldiers
home. But there are young people graduating from college in 2011. They
were at my town hall meeting, to my distinguished friend, and they
asked me about work. And I said to them that we in this Congress are
working to provide jobs for the talented young people that will walk
across those various stadiums and auditoriums getting their diplomas,
doing what we asked them to do. Can we put them to work?
And then, of course, if you reinvest in America, I will tell the
State of Texas--I don't want to get into anyone else's business--that
we don't have to close schools. We don't have to lay off teachers. We
can educate the workforce. And some of the workforce can be those with
their hands, vocational trades, learning to manufacture, building the
high-speed rails that I am so excited about that I am trying to find
some land in the 18th Congressional District or somewhere in Texas and
say, Come one, come all.
By the way, I serve on the Intellectual Property Committee on
Judiciary, and every time I have a hearing in that committee, I say
that this is the work of the 21st century, protecting the genius of
America, and it's a lot of them. It's unbelievable the inventors who
are here. I want them to know that there is some value of first to file
to protect their product.
And lastly, what you have been talking about, the idea of redoing our
infrastructure. A good friend of ours who served as the chairman of the
Transportation Committee was such a leader, a distinguished gentleman
from Minnesota. He, in the course of his service in the last couple of
years, had a bridge collapse in that State. He kept saying over and
over again, Build infrastructure and you'll put America to work.
I wanted to capture these words as a mandate, as an instructive
vision that the Democrats have captured. And the only thing we need are
partners. The President has already shown his proudness and his ability
to put dollars to make jobs and to build infrastructure. I have seen
public housing go up. I have seen roads being improved, dams, bridges,
and of course, light rail and high-speed rail. So we've got the right
thinking.
And I don't want to stop without just adding this point: There's not
one of us that does not have the consciousness and the sense to
recognize that we must have responsible spending and responsible
reduction. I take great offense to anyone who suggests that I am
opening the treasure chest and throwing money to the wind. I believe
that education is valuable. Infrastructure is valuable. But there are
ways that we can reasonably, down the road, as Mark Zandi has said,
begin our belt tightening. But we have to recognize that the debt
ceiling is not for the State of Texas or California--it is to help this
Nation--but we do it sensibly. I hope we can do a clean one, by the
way. But the point is that Make It in America is an engine of job
creation.
And I just want to thank the gentlemen for constantly bringing us to
the floor, giving us the opportunity, of course, to do as the Boy
Scouts may have done and to recite these words: Trade, taxes, energy,
labor, education, intellectual property, and infrastructure, and go
around to our constituents in telling them we are not going to forget
you. And I believe that we're going to create some jobs and watch
America continue to have its economy not only make baby steps, but it's
going to be spinning. It's going to be humming, and people are going to
be back to work. I am grateful for this philosophy and this mission.
Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank you so very much, Ms. Jackson Lee. You have
been a leader in all of these issues over these many, many years and
speak wisely and legislate very wisely on that.
The tax issue out there is one that just always befuddles me. It
befuddles me as to why my colleagues on the Republican side just don't
seem to get the message. We passed a tax bill last year that ended the
subsidy that international, multinational companies were given to off-
shore jobs. $12 billion a year of our tax money was given to these huge
American companies when they off-shored jobs. What was that all about?
I still haven't found out where that law came from. But it was in the
Tax Code, and American companies were taking advantage of that tax
reduction, tax subsidy, corporate welfare to send jobs overseas. We
passed a bill. It's over. The President signed it. Not one of my
Republican colleagues voted for that. I don't understand. I'm befuddled
by their lack of support for American companies who want to keep jobs
here. Apparently they're willing to support American companies that
want to send jobs offshore. Anyway, one small example.
I wonder what it's like to be the mayor of the largest town in Rhode
Island. It was probably an enormous experience. And then to bring that
experience here to the floor of the Congress and to the committees and
to share with us all of that down-home, on-the-ground experience of
bringing jobs to the community.
Mr. Cicilline, if you would care to share with us some of that
experience in the legislation that you've brought to us.
Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentleman from California for his
leadership on Making It in America, and I certainly thank our leader,
Mr. Hoyer, for making this a priority.
I think we all realize the single biggest responsibility that we have
is to get the American people back to work. I know in my home State,
families are hurting. With one of the highest unemployment rates in the
country, our single greatest responsibility is to do everything we can
to get people back to work. And I've been disappointed that we've been
here for 5 months and there hasn't really been, from our friends on the
other side of the aisle, a jobs agenda, jobs legislation. And I'm
really pleased that we on the Democratic side have put forth a very
ambitious but very important agenda of Making It in America.
{time} 1700
When you think about it, we've had an economy that was built on
bubbles and credit swaps and all kinds of things, and they all failed
and they hurt families in this country very, very badly.
I think what we need to do is return to this idea of making things
again in this country that we can sell all over the world, and having
policies developed at the national level, at the State level, at the
local level that support
[[Page H3261]]
manufacturing, that give American manufacturers the ability to compete
in the global marketplace, give them an ability to grow jobs, and to
create opportunities to make things that we can sell to the rest of the
world so we can export American-made goods, not export American jobs.
We have the best workers, the best minds, we have the best innovators
in the world, and what we need is to have policies at the national
level that recognize we have to make things again. We need to stop the
Chinese from cheating in manufacturing and having an unfair advantage,
and we need to recognize that this is an important part of rebuilding
the economy of this country.
We've put forth, as you know, Mr. Garamendi, with your leadership, a
whole agenda, a whole set of bills that will help jump-start and
support what's already happening in American manufacturing.
Try to go into a store and find something with those three words:
Made in America. It's almost impossible. We can change that. We have to
change it. And the agenda that we've put forth will help to do that.
The bill that I am lead sponsor on is the Make It in America Block
Grant. It's a simple idea: take resources and invest them in American
manufacturing. Help manufacturers retrofit their buildings for more
energy efficiency, retrain workers for the new equipment of the 21st
century. Buy new equipment, increase their exports. The kinds of tools
that we know, that I hear from manufacturers when I travel throughout
my district and talk to them and listen to them, what they need to give
them a chance to compete in this global marketplace.
We have responsibilities to do that. It's the best way we can grow
jobs. You're absolutely right. It's unimaginable that tens of billions
of dollars in subsidies are being given to big oil companies, corporate
welfare at a time when our constituents are facing some of the highest
gas prices ever.
The short-term strategy is we have to pass anti-gouging legislation,
we have to release some of the strategic reserves that will lower the
price at the pump now, and we have to invest in a long-term strategy of
clean energy, renewable energy, the kinds of investments in the
manufacturing area particularly that will lead to a good energy future
for our country.
I thank you, Mr. Garamendi, for your leadership. This is an important
agenda. It's not just about job creation. It's about regaining that
position as the leaders of the world of manufacturing.
Rhode Island led the Industrial Revolution. We have a long history of
innovation, of manufacturing. This country can lead again in this area,
but we need to have policies that support the great minds that are
doing this work, the great manufacturing. We need to have job training
that gives people the skills necessary to take these jobs, and we need
to make it a national priority so that we can start making things here
again, and so that American families can make it in America by relying
on manufacturing.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you very much, Mr. Cicilline. And we note that
your part of the Nation was where the manufacturing started in America,
and the rivers, taking the power of the rivers and using it to start
the mills and eventually creating the early American economy and
continuing on to this day in a very special part of this Nation, the
Rhode Island and the New England area.
There are many, many things to say. As you were talking, Mr.
Cicilline, and bringing us up to date on how we can do these things, I
notice that two of my colleagues came in to join us.
Again, Mr. Tonko, you were here for the very first Make It in America
discussion, you and I, on this floor some months ago talking about what
we can do in this rebuilding the great American manufacturing base, the
strength of America, the incredible innovation that's possible, and you
just happen to come from one of those areas where it was done and it's
still being done.
Mr. TONKO. Absolutely.
Mr. GARAMENDI. You're from New York, right? The Albany area, upstate
New York.
Mr. TONKO. Absolutely, Representative.
Thank you, Representative Garamendi, for bringing us together in what
is this usual important discussion. You have done that time and time
again for us to focus on an innovation economy, on building it, and
making it in America is an important aspect of the work we do. Thank
you for bringing that to the attention of the greater public that
watches these proceedings.
I do represent this region in upstate New York where we have the
confluence of the Hudson and Mohawk Rivers, and it was birth to the
Erie Canal, and that birth to the Erie Canal developed a port called
New York, which became a major metro area, and a necklace of
communities that were given birth to by that canal movement that became
epicenters of invention and innovation, that then inspired a westward
movement, and not only inspired the growth of this great Nation, but
impacted the quality of life of people throughout the globe.
That pioneer spirit should speak to us again as we develop budgets,
as we promote public policy. It should be about investing, not dis-
investing. It should be about funding, not defunding.
The current climate here in this House with the new majority is to
defund, to take those dollars away from economic recovery and to shift
them over to tax cuts for millionaires, tax cuts for billionaires,
ending Medicare, block granting Medicaid, dis-investing, providing for
corporate loopholes.
This is not the strategy that America needs. This attack on middle
class America is unwarranted. It is not going to resolve what we need
to resolve here in the great United States of America.
We need to invest in a way that allows us to bulk up and compete and
compete effectively on the global scene so that we can drive this clean
energy economy, this innovation economy.
I know from my work prior to coming here to the House of
Representatives, with NYSERDA, the New York State Energy, Research and
Development Authority, there is job opportunity galore. There are
entrepreneurs, there are innovators that work with the Angel Network,
work with venture capitalists, and work with public funding like that
from the Federal Government that enable us to take ideas and move them
along. Where R&D is, where research and development lands, so will
manufacturing. That's what we have within our grasp, but what I see
happening is walking away from that progressive approach and catering
to a crowd that has grown stronger and stronger through this recession.
When we look at some of the outcomes as the majority here challenges
us about not doing the mindless handouts to oil companies, we're seeing
some of the CEOs garnering some quarter of a million shares, prime
shares of stock. That's what they're doing with these payments, these
handouts to the oil companies, when we could invest that in job
creation, and that's what this Make It in America is all about.
I know when we put those down payments on invention and innovation,
we can expect lucrative dividends and we can have job growth, and the
kind of job growth that is secure because it stakes itself in the
community as small business and they grow within the community; they
grow and expand their opportunity.
I have, within the capital region of New York, the third fastest
growing hub for science and tech jobs, and that's happening because of
investment from the public sector, partnered with private sector
investments, and it works. It's a winning formula, and I would say that
we just need to pursue in that fashion and we can gain tremendously.
And why would you change that slow but steady growth upward in recovery
from the recession? After 8.2 million jobs lost through the Bush
recession, why would you turn that around? And that's the attempt right
here. Stop it, turn it around and go back into the ditch that drove
this recession.
I just think we don't want to repeat that recent history of
Reaganomics and the second Bush Presidency. It is devastating to the
economy. It's devastating to America's working families, middle class.
It's devastating to job growth.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you very much, Mr. Tonko.
You started with the Erie Canal. It's interesting to note that at
that period of time, which was the last decades of the 1700s and the
early 1800s, the
[[Page H3262]]
United States Government set out on a course to build infrastructure,
and the infrastructure was the canal systems at that time, and you so
quickly and correctly pointed out the growth that came from that. That
lesson, now more than 200 years old, needs to be repeated in America
once again.
Mr. TONKO. Absolutely. I think what people will say too is, well, we
don't make those products anymore in America. Well, we might be able to
if we modernize our manufacturing processes.
But also, if you're going to try and convince, if we try to convince
each other that all the products that America can make, design,
engineer, discover and manufacture are over, what are we telling
ourselves?
There are products coming out as we speak. There are products coming
out every week, and a sophisticated society braces itself to invest in
education, in R&D, in the down payments of taking ideas and moving them
along; and we can then manufacture those latest products on the scene.
That's the growth of a sophisticated society.
{time} 1710
So this can-do spirit prevails in the Democratic Caucus in this great
House in which we serve. I am proud to serve with these Members who are
visionary, who are supportive, reinforcing the efforts of manufacturing
of a newest kind here in the country.
Mr. GARAMENDI. You talk about innovation and new things.
Last week, I was out in my district talking to manufacturers. One
company is called Bridgelux--``lux'' I think is light, bridge lighting
to the future. They make LED lights. The kind of things that are now in
the stores--when you get a flashlight, it's an LED flashlight. They
have taken those LEDs to a whole new level of technology and
advancement.
In fact, if we would put them in these lights here in the Chamber, we
could reduce the energy consumption by about 90 percent, which wouldn't
be a bad thing for the taxpayers. Their particular system would allow
those lights to change color, which might put me in a better color;
that wouldn't be such a bad thing, and to dim when people are not here,
and move the lights, and in that way improve our ability to see while
simultaneously saving us a lot of energy.
The company is 2 years old, has 250 employees, is manufacturing these
advanced LED lighting systems in Livermore in my district, and I am
going, ``Go Bridgelux, go!''
They need something, though. They need access to the American
markets. And that is where the use of our tax dollars, in this case
perhaps the local tax dollars in the cities around that area, would
reach out and save the taxpayers a bundle of money by buying lights
from that company.
Mr. TONKO. Not only is it promoting energy efficiency; it can help us
along this trail of energy self-sufficiency, which then pulls us out of
our dependency, which is gluttonous to date, on unfriendly nations
providing us our supplies for energy. It just doesn't make any sense.
The clarion call that we heard at the voting booth last fall was to
start growing the economy, stop shrinking the middle class, and that is
what we are about with this Make It in America.
I know our friend, Representative Tim Ryan from Ohio, has something
to add to that agenda because he has been aggressive on this, also.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Indeed.
Mr. Ryan, you come from a part of the world that was and is going to
be, given your leadership and the leadership of this Make It in America
agenda, the premier manufacturing place in the world. We will contend
in California; we will be happy to contend for that and compete for
that title, but you are in the process of rebuilding the manufacturing
base in the heartland of America.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. It's interesting. My district, the Youngstown-
Warren metropolitan district, was the fastest growing in job
development in the last month or two.
Mr. GARAMENDI. Name those places again.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Youngstown and Warren, Ohio.
Mr. GARAMENDI. We are talking about what America thinks was
yesterday, and you are telling me it's the fastest growing?
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And it is just recent. But in large part, a couple
of different things.
There is $1 billion invested into a steel mill, but also we have a
major auto plant. And it was the work of the last Congress and the
President saying we cannot lose the American auto industry, and they
made investments in companies like General Motors. Now we have three
shifts selling the Chevy Cruze all over the world. Every employee got a
$4,000 bonus a few weeks back that they are spending in our community.
These are the kinds of things that happen when you make things in
America, when you manufacture products in the United States of America.
But the goal here I think for all of us is to wrestle control from
the major multinational corporations who are running this institution
and then have undue influence over the government. Whether it is
globalization moving manufacturing offshore, or if it is the oil
companies who not only aren't paying taxes but are completely content
with our citizens sending $1 billion a day out of the United States to
go try to find cheap oil, which isn't so cheap anymore, and diminishing
day by day, what we are saying here is, if we drive that $1 billion a
day back into the United States economy for the kind of research and
development that is going on in Upstate New York, that is going on in
California, that is going on in Youngstown State University and Akron
University with polymers, if we pump billions of dollars into this,
instead of falling from first to second to third in the green energy
revolution behind China and Germany, we will start leading it. And it
is about coming up with the next technologies that you gentlemen were
sitting here talking about, whether it's lightbulbs or something else.
We need to discover that here in the United States, and then make it
here in the United States.
But what all the major tech companies are saying now, they want to
manufacture here in the United States. There is so much risk when you
move your operations to China, losing intellectual property, losing the
cutting edge, losing the quality, that there is an incentive here.
But if we don't pump money into research, that is why this whole
philosophy that every single thing the government ever does is awful
and the government should just serve big business, cut taxes for the
oil companies, make sure that the big multinationals don't pay anything
in taxes, and we will come back and cut NIH, cut energy investment, cut
the National Science Foundation, cut the National Institutes for
Science and Technology, their standards and technology. These are the
kinds of things that we have got to be investing in. It starts with
let's get out of this dependency on foreign oil, $4 a gallon is
nonsense, and this illusion that if we continue to keep drilling, we
are somehow going to drop the price, is an illusion. Let's take control
of our own destiny here.
I want to just show real quick this chart. This is the U.S. balance
of trade from 1960 to 2010. If you will look in the last 10 to 15
years, we now have $500 billion in a trade imbalance. Most of this is
energy. Most of this is oil. What are we thinking? We are giving away
the house.
This is not good public policy. This is not good economics. Let's
take control. Let's invest in our own people. A billion a day we send
to another country that doesn't like us, and it finances the war on
terrorism? And then we take our budget and have three wars going on at
the same time. So we pay them to run the terrorist operations, and then
we pay our own military to go to the Middle East to try to stop it.
Meanwhile, the middle class in the United States, we have a $3 trillion
deficit on the roads and bridges and infrastructure, sewer. College
expenses are going up. We're not doing research. This is a recipe for
disaster for the United States.
I yield to my friend from California.
Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank you very much for that.
You just reminded me of last night at 2:30 in the morning, the House
Armed Services Committee completed the markup that is moving out of
committee, the National Defense Act. We do it every year. Seven hundred
billion dollars.
[[Page H3263]]
A study done by one of the think tanks came up with the number that
America spends about 17 percent of its total defense budget protecting
the flow of oil out of the Middle East. So you can add that to the
deficit. That is over $100 billion a year that we spend of our tax
money to protect the flow of oil, not only for us, but for the rest of
the world.
We need to build a domestic energy system not based on carbon-based
fuels, but rather the future energy, all of the clean green
technologies, nuclear and others, that will provide us with the energy
security we need.
In doing so, each and every one of those, if we spend our tax dollars
on buying American-made systems, will come back, just as you say, and
build our communities stronger along the way.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We had a group in Cleveland, Ohio, do a study a few
years back that, if you added in that cost, the 17 percent of our
military budget that protects the oil lines, supply lines for oil all
over the world, the actual cost of a gallon of gas would be another $1,
$1.50, because of the subsidy. It's another subsidy to make oil come
here.
All we are saying is pump that money back into the research. Somebody
in this country will come up with some synthetic, some magical
something or other that will replicate diesel fuel. It will happen if
we put the money into it.
Mr. GARAMENDI. It is actually already there. It is called advanced
biofuels, algae-based fuels, everything from cosmetic oils to fuel for
the Navy ships. So we can do these things. But, again, it is how we
deploy our resources.
We have about 5 minutes, and we are going to do a lightning round
between the three of us. I am going to turn to Mr. Tonko.
{time} 1720
Mr. TONKO. I would just encourage us here in Washington on the Hill
as we develop policy and debate budgets to keep in mind the history
that should be replicated, sound history, history that had a proven
track record, like that of the global race on space.
Some of us are old enough to have been youngsters or adolescents when
that message, that very noble vision, of President JFK and his offering
in an inaugural address that we are going to win the race on space, the
global race on space, and land a person first on the Moon. And it was
more than that poetry of landing the first astronaut on the Moon, that
happened to be an American, and his quote of ``one small step for man,
one giant step for mankind.'' It went well beyond that. It was this
opening of the gates to technology that then invaded every sector of
our economy, all aspects of life. And it was that technology investment
that grew because of the soundness of a plan that enabled us to win a
global race.
Now, that was done with passionate resolve and a thoughtfulness and a
clear vision. We need to embrace that sort of American spirit, that
pioneer spirit in this present moment and repeat good history, sound
history, that grew our economy. I think we can do it and I believe we
can do it, and Make It in America is the way to make it all happen.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Give him a minute of my time. He's from
Pennsylvania. He can't help it.
Mr. GARAMENDI. I look up and find another colleague here. We have
just a few moments left.
Mr. ALTMIRE. I appreciate the gentleman from California. I come from
a region of the country, western Pennsylvania, bordering my friend from
Ohio, and I was listening to the debate, and I just wanted to talk
about this same issue.
This is the key to our recovery and our continued leadership and
innovation in this country because, as we have seen in western
Pennsylvania and all across this country, the American worker is going
to compete and win on a level playing field against anybody in the
world any day of the week. We just want to make sure that we have a tax
policy that is in place, a trade policy that is in place, and a
manufacturing and jobs policy that is in place that is going to allow
the American worker that level playing field to compete and win against
the rest of the world.
Mr. GARAMENDI. As a great example, your colleague next to you there
has a piece of legislation that calls for fairness in the financial
markets, the value of the dollar versus the value of the Chinese yuan.
Mr. Ryan, you have put it out there. You say it has to be fair. Wrap it
for us.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. It is clearly currency manipulation. Here is the
deal: Chevron, $19 million refunded from the IRS last year. They made
$10 billion. Valero Energy, 25th largest company in America, $68
billion in sales last year; they got a $157 million tax refund check
subsidized by the taxpayer.
If we are going to do this, we need shared sacrifice. We need
everybody to contribute, especially those people making a lot of money,
to help us reinvest. These folks are benefiting from an old-age
industry--that we are running out of oil. It only makes sense. It went
into the ground for 4 billion years. We pulled it out in 150 years, and
we are burning it. Something is happening. It is an old industry and we
are subsidizing it. We need to be Americans who invest in the next
great technology to lead the world.
Mr. GARAMENDI. And indeed we will. Over the weeks and months ahead,
we are going to talk about the Make It in America agenda, the
legislation that has been introduced by the Democratic Caucus here in
the House of Representatives. There are about 25 pieces of legislation,
ranging from the ones that we talked about here, using our tax money
when we buy solar equipment, make sure it is made in America. A bus, if
you are going to use our tax money, make sure where it is made.
Innovation, the innovation economy, all of those things. This is
legislation that we have, infrastructure financing and all the rest. We
are going to talk about it piece by piece.
I thank my colleagues for joining us. I have the sense that behind me
we are about to be gaveled that we are out of time. I want to thank the
American public for listening to the Make It in America agenda.
____________________