[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 81 (Tuesday, June 7, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3523-S3524]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVITALIZATION ACT OF 2011--MOTION TO PROCEED--
                               Continued

  Mr. INHOFE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, earlier today I was on the floor speaking 
about the importance of a program called the economic development 
revitalization. It has been in place since 1965. It has run out of its 
authority. Our committee, the Environment and Public Works Committee, 
in a near unanimous vote--almost unanimous--decided it was really worth 
making some reforms to the program to make it work even better and to 
reauthorize it.
  I am going to turn the time over to my wonderful friend, Jim Inhofe. 
He and I, as everybody knows, are good friends. We work very well 
together. There are issues on which we sharply disagree. I think they 
would fall on the environmental side. But when it comes to public 
works, when it comes to building the infrastructure of our country, 
when it comes to jobs related to the private sector, we are very much 
joined at the hip. On this particular issue, we are together because we 
look at this and we say that at a time when there need to be jobs, over 
a 2-year period beginning in 2009, grantees estimate that EDA-funded 
projects created over 160,000, and for every $1 invested by the Federal 
Government $7 came from the private sector.
  It is my pleasure to yield to make sure my ranking member has 
sufficient time for whatever he would like to speak to this issue.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, the EDA is something that has worked very 
well in our State of Oklahoma. First, let me say the Senator from 
California is right--there are many issues on which we do not agree. In 
fact, we have fought tooth and nail for a long time against the cap-
and-trade and a lot of these environmental issues and will continue to 
do so. However, what we agree most on is not necessarily the EDA 
program but the need for reauthorization of transportation.
  We have a very serious problem. In my State of Oklahoma, just a short 
while ago a young lady, the mother of two small children, was driving 
under a bridge, and it crumbled and fell and killed her. There are 
things like that, crises that are going on right now.
  We were very proud when we had what we thought at the time was a very 
robust highway reauthorization bill, a transportation reauthorization 
bill in 2005. While the amount sounded like quite a bit, it was really 
just barely enough to maintain what we had. There are some things 
government is supposed to be doing. I am always ranked as one of the 
most conservative Members, but I am a big spender in areas such as 
national defense and infrastructure. Those are needs we have.
  In putting together this bill and taking it out of committee--and it 
did come out of committee unanimously--there had been a GAO report that 
talked about duplication. I put in language in order to have them 
identify anything that would be duplicative so that would come out. 
That was a little bit of a surprise to a lot of us. I don't question 
the report. I think it was probably accurate. But we took care of that 
because we don't want to have any duplication of efforts.
  The chairman said there is a 7-to-1 ratio. We have actually done 
better than that in the State of Oklahoma. In one area, it was a $2.25 
million EDA grant, in Elgin, OK, which is adjacent to Fort Sill, OK, 
which is adjacent to a live range. It was one that was intended to 
actually produce a 150,000-square-foot manufacturing business employing 
many people. Because this administration axed some of the military 
programs, it did not turn out to be that beneficial, but the ratio 
there was still well in excess of 10 to 1.
  If we want to get the economy moving, this is a way of doing it. We 
have to do it in a way that is well thought out. I am hoping this bill 
will be. It is my understanding it will be open to amendments, and 
there will be a lot of amendments and a lot of my friends who are not 
supportive of this want to have this vehicle for that purpose. I 
certainly respect that and look forward to working on this bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I thank the ranking member. I know he has 
a series of meetings and he is off to those, but I again thank him. I 
know he may look at reducing this authority. It is his right to do so. 
My own opinion is, if there were ever a time to support programs that 
leverage dollars the way this one does, this is one of them. But I 
respect whatever he feels he needs to do to feel better about the bill.
  He talked about one of the important amendments he wrote which would 
eliminate duplication. There are other reforms that allow private 
parties to buy out the Federal Government investment. There is much we 
have done to update this program, but it is very important today.
  The one word I have come to use--perhaps overuse--is ``leverage.'' 
Leverage is crucial. We know we are facing deficits and debts. We know 
we have to do something about spending, so we want to be wise, we want 
to see that when we do spend $1 of Federal money, it really has a punch 
behind it. This is one example, again, of that occurring. There is $7, 
on average, for every dollar invested, and in the case of Oklahoma, in 
this one example, $10. There are others where it is even higher than 
that.
  I think it is very clear. I am not sure this is the up-to-date list, 
but we have many supporters of EDA. I am going to show some of them 
here.
  The U.S. Conference of Mayors, the American Public Works Association, 
the National Association of Counties--I mentioned this morning that I 
started out in my first elected office as a county supervisor. They 
understand how important the EDA is because they are on the ground in 
these counties, as are the mayors in the cities. They see the needs in 
these underserved areas, in these redevelopment areas. They want to 
attract the private capital, so they really need the help the EDA gives 
them to do it.
  The Association of University Research Parks--let me tell you why 
they like this. We have seen incubator projects, small business 
incubator projects that start in these research parks that grow into 
mature, job-producing businesses. EDA is the spark, EDA is the leverage 
we need. That is why you see the Association of University Centers, the 
International Economic Development Council, the National Association of 
Development Organizations, the National Business Incubation 
Association.
  We know today it is tough for some businesses to get the capital. 
Some of them are fortunate--they go to Silicon Valley, and they get 
some dollars there. Some will go to banks, and they will be told it is 
too risky. The banks are not lending the way they, frankly, should to 
create the jobs, so the leverage that is gotten for these programs from 
the Federal Government goes a very long way.
  The State Science and Technology Institute, the University Economic 
Development Association, and the National Association of Regional 
Councils.
  We see we have a record of job creation. We have a lot of support, 
and in 2009--this really says it all: 160,000 jobs over a 2-year 
period, in 2009. This is a story that is a success story. It is why 
Senator Inhofe and I join together on this issue.
  I know this is going to be a contentious time in the next few days on 
this

[[Page S3524]]

bill because some contentious amendments that have nothing to do with 
the underlying bill are going to be offered. All I would say to 
colleagues is let's not allow these jobs bills to be weighed down so we 
do nothing. The American people are sick of it.
  We have had a small business bill. Mary Landrieu, the chair of the 
Small Business Committee, stood right here day after day begging 
colleagues: Don't offer poison pill amendments to that bill. Do you 
know who lost? Not Mary Landrieu. The American people lost and the 
small businesses lost because this bill, the small business bill, 
became the way everybody offered everything they had ever dreamed about 
and thought about, and a lot of it was controversial.
  So I urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle, if you are going to 
offer amendments that are not related, please agree to time agreements. 
Let's get rid of these amendments one way or the other. If they pass, 
fine; if they don't, that is life. But let's get to the reauthorization 
of the EDA. It started in 1965. It has saved jobs, it has created jobs, 
and any problems we have had because of some of the rules, we have 
addressed in this reauthorization.
  I have here a letter, a legislative alert, hot off the press from the 
AFL-CIO. They support the passage of S. 782, the Economic Development 
Revitalization Act of 2011. They say it ``has played an often 
unheralded but important role in creating jobs and spurring economic 
growth in economically distressed communities.''

       The public investments supported by this legislation make a 
     little funding go a long way by leveraging private dollars in 
     support of these projects. Resources for technical assistance 
     and research infrastructure, and assisting in the development 
     and implementation of economic development strategies helps 
     revitalize communities. EDA established an admirable track 
     record in assisting economically troubled low income 
     communities with limited job opportunities by putting their 
     investments to good use in promoting needed job creation and 
     industrial and commercial development.
       Today when the lack of jobs and income stagnation are the 
     primary issues facing this Nation, S. 782 is a bipartisan 
     bill that can help make a difference. We urge Congress to 
     pass the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011.

  I think that really says it.
  I have one more letter I just got. We have a letter from the U.S. 
Chamber, the Business Civic Leadership, saying how much they support 
the program. They say, ``I am writing to share with you the U.S. 
Chamber Business Civic Leadership Center's positive experience in 
working with the EDA. EDA has served as a valuable partner in many 
communities''--they cite ``San Jose, California; Seattle, Washington; 
Cedar Rapids, Iowa; Mobile, Alabama; New Orleans, Louisiana; Atlanta, 
Georgia; Boca Raton, Florida; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Newark, New 
Jersey'' and many others.
  I know some of these programs that went into these cities with this 
relatively small investment by the Federal Government spurring all this 
private sector capital and local and State funds. They say they worked 
with the EDA in ``conducting regional forums to bring corporate 
contributions professionals together with economic development 
experts.'' They provide ``opportunities to build up relationships 
between and among companies and government agencies.''
  They developed ``a report that maps how and why companies invest in 
communities across the U.S.''
  They believe that as they work with them on these programs, including 
``working with local chambers of commerce in disaster affected regions 
to provide local recovery grants,'' that that worked very well.
  They say they are the ``corporate citizenship arm of the U.S. Chamber 
of Commerce.'' They ``work with thousands of businesses and local 
chambers of commerce on community development and disaster recovery.''
  They are consistently looking for ``best practices, lessons learned, 
technical assistance, planning and strategy support, and other 
insights, tools, and techniques to make their communities as 
economically competitive as possible.''
  They say:

       In our experience EDA members have displayed a high degree 
     of professionalism and technical expertise. They have engaged 
     with us on multiple levels from consultations at the national 
     level to sharing valuable field experience at the state and 
     local levels.

  They say:

       We have canvassed many businesses and local chambers about 
     their community development needs, and they almost 
     unanimously tell us that some of their highest priorities 
     include business recruitment and retention and helping small-
     and-medium sized businesses grow. They also tell us that 
     support for regional economic development planning that 
     transcends municipal boundaries is an increasing area of 
     interest, and that this is a unique capability that EDA can 
     and does support.
       As you consider EDA's future roles and responsibilities, we 
     would be happy to share with you our experiences and lessons 
     learned in working with the agency and to provide you with 
     additional information.

  Signed by Stephen Jordan, executive director of the Business Civic 
Leadership Center of the Chamber of Commerce.
  So here we have an arm of the Chamber of Commerce sending us a letter 
of praise for the EDA, and we have the AFL-CIO doing the same.
  Senator Inhofe referred to the highway bill. That is another example 
where we have both sides coming together, and what I want to say to 
colleagues who may be watching in their office or hearing this as they 
do their other work, please, let's get this done.
  Every single person in this Chamber goes home and talks about jobs, 
jobs, jobs. If we mean it, if we are not just posturing or posing for 
pictures and we mean it, then let's get it done.
  We had a bad experience here with the small business bill. It got 
loaded up with things that had nothing to do with anything, and we 
didn't get time agreements and we couldn't get it done. Let's hope that 
this gets done.
  I cannot imagine anybody holding up this bill when we know that in 
2009 it funded over a 2-year period 160,000 jobs at a very small cost 
to Federal taxpayers because that cost is leveraged.
  I could go on about EDA, and I will later. I think I have spoken 
enough at this particular time.
  Mr. President, unless there is someone on the floor, I suggest the 
absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________