[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 46 (Tuesday, March 20, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1823-S1824]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, this is a defining moment for the Senate
in a couple of ways. The Democratic Senators have an alternative to the
House-passed JOBS bill that will get a vote on their alternative. That
is good. I believe the House-passed JOBS bill had overwhelming
bipartisan support. It is a good document. I will support that version
over my Senate Democratic colleagues. But let me tell you what our
Senate Democratic colleagues have done that I think is very
constructive.
Ex-Im Bank is trying to be made part of the JOBS bill in the Senate.
This Export-Import Bank, what does this mean? This is a financing
ability by American companies that are selling overseas in volatile or
emerging markets. It is a financing system that has
[[Page S1824]]
been available since 1934. If you are going to try to sell a product
made in America to a place in the world where traditional banking is
hard to obtain, you can go to the Ex-Im Bank and they will give a
letter of credit, they will sometimes give a direct loan to people who
want to buy American products. The bank itself made $3.5 billion for
the taxpayer I think since 2005 and 2006.
Here is the reality: Every country we compete with has their version
of Ex-Im Bank. We financed $32 billion worth of American-made products
sold overseas through our Ex-Im system last year. Canada, one-tenth our
size, financed $100 billion. France has three Ex-Im Banks. China has
more Ex-Im activity than the United States, France, and Germany
combined. Every country American manufacturing competes with that
produces products has their version of Ex-Im Bank.
At the end of May, our Ex-Im Bank's authorization runs out. Our loan
limits run out a few weeks earlier. This would be devastating. Small
companies throughout this country depend on the Ex-Im Bank in order to
sell American-made products overseas.
Let me give you one good example that has been the topic of
conversation. Boeing Aircraft makes airplanes in America, the 787
Dreamliner. It was voted the best new airplane in a long time here
recently, something that Boeing is proud of. They make it in Washington
and now in South Carolina. The first airplane to be made in South
Carolina will roll out in about a month from now. The facility is under
budget and ahead of schedule, and we are proud of that airplane.
Eight out of the 10 airplanes being made in South Carolina in the
first year were Ex-Im financed. There was a deal between Boeing and Air
India where a letter of credit was issued by Ex-Im Bank to allow
traditional financing to occur, and Boeing was able to sell a big order
of American-made jets to Air India. That is just one example.
GE makes gas turbines to generate power for emerging areas such as
Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East, Africa. All these distressed areas
are going to grow and they are going to need power. One-third of the
sales coming out of Greenville, SC, for the gas turbines made in
America and creating American jobs goes through Ex-Im financing.
Here is the issue. If America allows our Ex-Im financing system to go
away in May, if that is the will of the Congress, then you have
destroyed the ability of many companies in this country to grow their
business. As the economy has been weak and stagnant here at home, here
is the good news: In terms of exports, we have increased our export
sales 20 percent.
Imagine an America that could not continue to increase export sales.
Imagine a Boeing manufacturer that could never sell an American-made
airplane in a volatile or emerging market because China is now making
airplanes and Airbus has access to three or four Ex-Im Banks. It would
be an ill-conceived idea. This program has been around a long time. It
has helped create thousands of jobs in the United States. Everybody we
compete with has a more aggressive form of Ex-Im financing than we do.
To my colleagues who want to eliminate this, I don't understand how
American business could ever successfully compete in these emerging
markets if we unilaterally disarm.
To my Democratic colleagues, thank you for bringing up Ex-Im Bank. To
our majority leader, Senator Reid, this is a good idea. What is a bad
idea is to not let anybody on the Republican side offer one amendment
to this bill. Some of the ideas to reform Ex-Im Bank I would agree to.
I think any organization, any entity, can be made better. I want to be
able to get back to being in a body called the United States Senate,
where people with different ideas on important topics can actually
vote.
To my colleagues on this side, I may vigorously oppose some of you
who decide the Export-Import Bank should go away because I think that
would be the worst thing you could do for the American economy,
particularly export jobs being created in this country, and it would be
unilaterally surrendering in the world marketplace. Whether you like it
or not, other countries are Export-Import Bank on steroids. If we just
get out of this business, companies like Boeing will be unable to sell
their airplanes, and you will shut down facilities such as those in
South Carolina--not a very good idea.
At the end of the day, you do have a right to have your say, and we
will have the debate and I am looking forward to the debate about what
we should or should not do. But under the process we have now, not one
amendment can be offered on our side. We have to do better. We had a
transportation bill pass with 74 votes. We have had a good exchange
here lately with judges. I am very proud of what our minority and
majority leader worked out on judges.
I want to get the Senate back to being the Senate. I think Ex-Im
reauthorization should be an integral part of any jobs bill. I want to
put it in the Senate bill. I will gladly vote for it. There are a bunch
of Republicans over here who will support extension of Ex-Im financing
with reforms, but none of us want to be put in a situation where our
colleagues cannot have a say where they disagree with us or that we
cannot reform the bill. That is not the way to go.
I hope that between now and 4 o'clock, the minority leader and the
majority leader can find a way to bring up the JOBS bill, allowing it
to be amended in an appropriate way and taking votes some of us don't
like, but it is part of democracy--have a robust debate on a jobs
package that could not come at a better time, and include in that
debate Ex-Im reauthorization at a time when America needs more jobs
here at home.
The economy here at home is weak. The one good thing about what is
happening here at home is that our export sales have gone up. The way
to create export jobs in America is to allow American businesses to
compete on a level playing field throughout the world. I wish the world
were different. I wish we had completely free markets. Every American
business could do fine in that world, but that is not the way it is.
The Ex-Im Bank doesn't cost the taxpayers one dime. It makes money
for the Treasury, and it allows American companies to make money. It
allows American businesses to be competitive.
I am urging the two leaders of the Senate to allow a jobs bill to
come forward, let us have our say, have our differences, let's vote,
let's amend, and let's create jobs in America.
I yield the floor.
____________________