[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 135 (Thursday, October 3, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H6212-H6218]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CELEBRATING NATIONAL MANUFACTURING DAY
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) is recognized for
60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be
here to do a Special Order.
We are here, and I am here as a cochair of the House Manufacturing
Caucus, to celebrate and recognize National Manufacturing Day. We know
there are a lot of divisive issues being talked about here in the
Nation's Capitol. But I think one issue, as we start to lay some
groundwork for what the world looks like after we shake this virus
that's happening here in Washington, D.C., I think manufacturing,
advanced manufacturing, additive manufacturing, three-dimensional
printing, and all of the issues that surround rebuilding the United
States of America, can happen. And we have an obligation, I think, as
we have arguments about the issues of the day, also to lay that seed
corn, that long-term investment in strategies that will help our
country grow.
We have a group of men and women, Members of Congress here this
evening, that would like to speak on that. And I would like to work
quickly through that list. First, I would like to yield to the
gentleman from Massachusetts. Congressman Kennedy, coming from New
England, coming from Massachusetts, which obviously is a huge
manufacturing State with a long history of manufacturing, beginning
with the early stages of our country.
Mr. KENNEDY. To my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), the chairman of
the House Manufacturing Caucus, I want to thank you for organizing this
and for your leadership on this issue.
On October 1, just 2 days ago, the Institute for Supply Management
reported the manufacturing index rose in September for the fourth
straight month to a reading of 56.2. Any reading above 50 indicates
growth, and it's the highest level we've seen since April of 2011.
Now a couple of monthly statistics about manufacturing: In 2011,
manufacturing contributed over $1.8 trillion to the Nation's economy
and accounted for 47 percent of all U.S. exports. For every $1 that we
spend in manufacturing, another $1.48 is added to the economy, the
highest multiplier effect of any economic sector. Nine percent of the
workforce, more than 11 million Americans, are employed in
manufacturing. And two-thirds of the U.S. private sector investment in
research and development occurs in the manufacturing sector.
The value and potential for future growth in manufacturing in
Massachusetts is a perfect example. The industry continues to be a
critical segment of our economy. Yes, in the downturn, we were hurt.
But what's remarkable is that the persistence and ingenuity of the
manufacturing industry statewide continues to rank above the national
average in terms of the concentration of manufacturing employment.
And after years of decline, in 2011, the total number of
manufacturing firms actually increased. This means that companies and
industries like aerospace, electronics, computers, pharmaceuticals,
they're central to the success of the Massachusetts manufacturing
economy. It's why I believe in advanced manufacturing in that it
promises future growth, and it's essential to the public-private
partnerships that are going to innovate and are going to be needed to
commercialize and bring new products to market.
That's why I'm proud to have written and introduced the Revitalize
American Manufacturing and Innovation Act, RAMIA, of 2013, along with
my Republican colleague Tom Reed of New York, the fellow cochairman
with you, Mr. Chairman.
The bill is designed to bring industry, universities and community
colleges, Federal agencies, and State and local governments all under
one roof to accelerate manufacturing innovation. It establishes public-
private sectors for manufacturing innovation that will help bridge the
gap between basic research and development and commercialization of
novel technologies.
The centers will serve as a regional hub of manufacturing excellence
and will provide access to cutting-edge capabilities and equipment,
creating an unparalleled environment to educate and train the next
generation of our workforce.
And as we've seen, Mr. Chairman, we've seen this model work right
there in your hometown of Youngstown, Ohio, the area that you
represent. There are great advancements that we have seen in additive
manufacturing in 3-D printing.
Our bill is locally driven manufacturing policy that addresses the
disconnect between research, commercialization, and workforce training.
We've seen that back in my district in communities like Taunton, Fall
River, and Attleboro, where industrial manufacturing and manufacturing
has been and can be a key to economic development in the future. That's
why I support this industry. That is why I am proud to support this
bill. And I thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman. And I would also like to
thank him for his leadership on that particular bill. We do have the
National Additive Manufacturing Institute in
[[Page H6213]]
downtown Youngstown, Ohio, and we're starting to see how that public-
private partnership is beginning to light up not only downtown
Youngstown but the entire tech belt region, from Cleveland to Akron,
Youngstown down to Pittsburgh.
And there are multiple companies involved in that. We just had
Siemens Corporation donate over $400 million in software to Youngstown
State University as we begin to create that pipeline for people to go
into this new and what will be a transformational industry.
Our next speaker is the gentleman from Delaware, also a State that is
crucial to our defense industrial base and our manufacturing base here
in the United States. I yield to Congressman Carney.
Mr. CARNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in the midst of this manufactured crisis
here in the Capitol to join many of my colleagues on the Democratic
side for something that we all can get behind, which is creating strong
manufacturing jobs here in our great country.
One of the frustrations about the impasse that we have here in the
House and in the Capitol is that we have some really serious issues
that confront us as a country. And I think the most important among
them is, where are the jobs of the future going to come from? We know
that in our districts--Mr. Ryan of Ohio and some of the other speakers
tonight, in my State of Delaware--that manufacturing has been the
backbone, particularly of those jobs that provide middle class incomes
for generations.
We've lost so many since 2008. My home State, we've lost both of our
auto manufacturing plants, the General Motors plant at Boxwood Road and
the Chrysler plant in Newark.
{time} 1715
We've lost, over the past 10 years or so, Avon Products, a
manufacturing facility in Newark. And for generations, downstate in the
town of Seaford, the Dupont nylon plant provided a pathway to middle
class for generations of families down there.
We know that the competition for those jobs, today and into the
future, is going to define the success of our own ability to maintain a
middle class here in the United States, and also, define the
competition that we have with our neighbors around the world.
There's some hope on the horizon. In recent years, we've seen a new
trend called insourcing. We're actually seeing companies moving back
jobs here into the United States.
General Electric, one of the premiere manufacturing industrial
conglomerates, international companies here in the U.S., has started to
move appliance manufacturing to the States of Indiana and Ohio and
other places in the Midwest from their plants that they moved some
years ago to Mexico.
Apple just announced it'll start manufacturing a new laptop here in
the United States.
But here's the thing. Not only do we have to attract and bring jobs
back to the United States, but once we get them back here through this
insourcing trend, we need to make sure that we keep them here.
Making things here at home, whether it's building new cars, the cars
of the future, whether it's building the appliances or electronics that
we're talking about, help create the strong economic foundation that
we've enjoyed as a country and will do so for future generations.
So it's our job, as Members of Congress, to pass laws that will
encourage innovation and job creation right here at home, and put
hardworking Americans back to work. And that's why I've worked with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come up with ways to attract
and keep U.S. manufacturing jobs here.
This summer, I joined my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Fitzpatrick) to introduce the Made in America Act. It's really a simple
bill. It creates a labeling system called the America Star labels, much
like Energy Star, that companies can use to identify the extent to
which their products are made in America.
Just this past summer I had to go shopping for a new air-conditioner.
My air-conditioner broke down. And it was difficult to determine what
products were made here, how much they were made here, what kind of
parts were made here.
Last year I bought a new front door, a new oak front door; spent a
lot of time going around trying to find a door that was made here in
the U.S., and found a wonderful product just over the line in
Pennsylvania.
Made in America is something that people want to see, and they want
to know what the products that they buy and that they see out there in
stores, how much is foreign-made and how much is made here in the USA.
And people, consumers, care about it, and that's why this piece of
legislation is important because it provides people with the
opportunity to know that.
I also got together with the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda),
who's here in the Chamber, with the Scaling Up Manufacturing Act. I'm
sure he'll talk about it. The bill creates a 25 percent tax credit for
the cost of construction or lease of a company's first domestic
manufacturing facility. Thank you, Mr. Honda, for that, for the
opportunity to join you on that.
I also introduced a bill to increase the research and development tax
credit from 14 percent to 17 percent and, more importantly, to make it
permanent, to create certainty for businesses to locate their research
and development facilities here in this country. This will give those
companies that certainty that they need to set up those operations.
These are just a few examples, Mr. Speaker, of the ways that Congress
can do something to make it possible for us to make things here in
America again. We all believe, many of us here, frankly, on both sides
of the aisle, believe that making things in America is the key to our
economic recovery.
We need to get our house in order here, with the impasse that we're
dealing with over the last week, and focus on these efforts, focus on
the things that we can do to incentivize U.S. manufacturing.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman from Delaware, who obviously
gets it, and is involved in, I think, a lot of initiatives that we're
beginning to push here in a bipartisan way.
And as I said, I hope when we get through the next few weeks and this
tough time that we're having here, that we can begin to push some of
these initiatives.
Our next speaker is the gentlelady from Connecticut, another New
England State that is deeply, deeply engaged in manufacturing in the
United States from very, very early on, a key component to our defense
industrial base, whether it's any branch, quite frankly, of the
military, especially the Navy, and the technologies that spin out of a
lot of the public investments that we make.
And I think when we talk about public/private partnerships, and when
we talk about public investments, Connecticut's the kind of State that,
if we make these investments, benefits a great deal. It has a very
skilled workforce, a well-educated workforce, but also a great
manufacturing workforce.
I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Esty).
Ms. ESTY. I want to thank you for your leadership, Mr. Ryan, and Mr.
Reed, your bipartisan cochair of the Manufacturing Caucus, for all you
have been doing in this Congress and in others, to promote
manufacturing.
Today, we celebrate the rebirth of manufacturing in Connecticut and
across America. My State is home to close to 5,000 manufacturing
companies, employing nearly 168,000 men and women. Our State has a long
tradition of manufacturing, dating back to Eli Whitney and the cotton
gin, and I am proud to see that that tradition is being carried on to
the next generation.
Tomorrow marks the Second Annual National Manufacturing Day, and in
Connecticut, we are celebrating manufacturing through what we are
calling the Dream It, Do It Initiative. Folks across the State will be
showcasing the importance of American manufacturing. Hundreds of middle
school students will participate in a Manufacturing Mania program, to
learn how Connecticut-made products impact their lives.
Throughout the month, manufacturing facilities will be giving tours,
and technical colleges and high schools will hold open houses to show
young people and their parents how rewarding a career in manufacturing
can be.
I've been meeting with manufacturers from across my district, and
I've
[[Page H6214]]
seen firsthand the innovative work that they are doing. In New Britain,
family-owned Peter Paul Electronics has been creating good jobs for
three generations. They strive every day to expand training and hire
new employees.
At Ward Leonard, in Thomaston, and Jonal Labs, in Meriden, employees
and managers are working together seeking ways to manufacture quality
products for customers across Connecticut, across the country, and
across the world.
I'm proud of the innovative, dedicated men and women of
manufacturing, and I want to make sure that they continue to succeed
for generations to come.
I also know firsthand how important manufacturing is because I come
from a family of manufacturers. My grandfather started a small
manufacturing company 61 years ago that I'm proud to say is still in
business today.
I know, from that experience, and from companies all across
Connecticut, the importance of providing a supportive environment for
manufacturing to grow and thrive and ensure that we are building jobs
right here in America.
That is why I'm introducing two bills, the First STEP Act, and the
STEM Jobs Act, that help students, employees, and small businesses
succeed by ensuring that our students have the skills for the future.
It's a need I've heard time and time again from manufacturers in my
district.
We have to ensure that the next generation has the skills to be
competitive in a global economy where manufacturing jobs pay those high
wages that we need to rebuild the middle class here in America.
I know that there is a lot of bipartisan support in this Chamber for
our efforts to promote American manufacturing, innovation, and
competitiveness. Many of us, on both sides of the aisle, are committed
to working together on this and many other issues to help the American
people.
The time has come for us to pass some real jobs bills for
manufacturers, for workers and for families across my district and
across this country.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentlelady for her good work and good
words.
Our next speaker is from the great State of California which,
obviously, has one of the most diverse economies. But many people think
California, and they don't necessarily think manufacturing. And the
leadership that the gentleman has been providing here, a number of
issues, a number of bills sponsored and pushed throughout his career
here, and we're going to learn more about, I'm sure, what's going on in
California.
So I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
Mr. HONDA. I thank my friend for leading this group, and also
providing the rest of the country the understanding and the idea that
there's work being done here. There are creative minds in Congress that
are looking at the issue of manufacturing and creating jobs.
I dare say that the word ``manufacturing'' probably, for many people
in this country, conjures up the old-fashioned traditional kinds of
work. But today we've heard nothing but the upgraded, the high tech,
the kind of manufacturing that requires many, many other States to
cooperate with each other in order for something to happen.
So the American manufacturing renaissance is really essential for a
full and sustainable economic recovery. National Manufacturing Day is
an opportunity to highlight manufacturing's importance and outsized
contributions to America's economy.
Manufacturing can generate 70 percent of exports in both advanced and
emerging manufacturing, and up to 90 percent of business research and
development spending.
Just in my home State of California, there are over 40,000
manufacturers that account for over 1.2 million jobs and $230 billion
of output. Small supplying contractor manufacturers like Cal Weld, in
Fremont, California, which I was going to visit, but I think that our
calendar is going to delay that visit. Cal Weld, in Fremont,
California, plays a key role in the worldwide supply chain system.
The term ``supply chain'' is a concept that's not well understood nor
well-discussed. But a supply chain is necessary for any manufacturer to
be able to produce their products.
These manufacturing jobs are high-paying, and they are job
multipliers, a term that's been used previously. High-paying and they
are job multipliers. Each manufacturing job creates 47 additional non-
manufacturing jobs in other industries like customer service,
transportation and other service-oriented sectors.
Manufacturing outputs are almost 12 percent of our gross state
product in California and account for 87 percent of our exports. So
manufacturing has and continues to be the platform for building a solid
middle class all across this country, the United States and abroad.
For these reasons and others, I remind my colleagues today that we
have plenty of work to do to provide appropriate funding for
innovation, appropriate funding for research and development to rebuild
and educate a skilled manufacturing workforce, and to provide targeted
tax incentives to protect and re-shore the manufacturing supply chain.
The term ``re-shore'': bringing back the manufacturing supply chain
that has been decimated for over the 30-year period of outsourcing.
We can and must rebuild manufacturing capacity and leadership in the
United States.
For those reasons, I'm very proud to be part of this caucus, the
Manufacturing Caucus. And we shall work together to knit together all
our ideas and our bills to make sure that we have a network of supply
chains and manufacturers that will provide all the jobs that we need to
build a stronger middle class.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman. And that point of the supply
chain, I think, is essential; to recognize that it's not just the
General Motors plant, but it's all of the Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3
suppliers right down the line that are making component parts, that are
providing good manufacturing jobs for Americans.
Those jobs, as has been stated here several times, pay a lot more.
The average manufacturing worker makes about $77,000 a year. The
national average is $60,000 a year.
So more patents, more innovation coming off the factory floors around
the country, in the field of manufacturing, and so that happens in
supply chains, the companies that are involved in the supply chains,
and also the big manufacturers that we often think of.
One statistic I'd like to make, too, before I introduce the gentleman
from Rhode Island, is we think of big companies like Boeing and like
Facebook. And Facebook, which has a lot of prominence today, Facebook,
they both have market values over $50 billion.
Facebook employs about 5,000 workers. Boeing employs about 170,000
workers because you need the manpower, the woman power in these
facilities to make that happen.
So I'd like to yield to my friend, a strong advocate for working-
class people on the House Budget Committee, and it's always fun to be
on that committee with him.
I yield to my friend, the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr.
Cicilline).
{time} 1730
Mr. CICILLINE. I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding and for
your very powerful leadership of the Manufacturing Caucus here in the
House.
As you know, tomorrow, October 4, we celebrate National Manufacturing
Day, which is an opportunity to underscore and reaffirm our commitment
to manufacturing and to remember that manufacturing helped build this
country. It made this country a great and powerful Nation. It helped
build a thriving middle class and has created good-paying jobs for
hardworking men and women all across our country.
This is especially true in my home State of Rhode Island, which is,
as you all know, the birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution,
and has a very long and important history in American manufacturing--
more than anyplace in the country--and I know the gentleman from Ohio
will contest this a little. But Rhode Island understands the importance
of a strong manufacturing sector; and if we want to get our economy
back on the right track, it's critical that we start making
[[Page H6215]]
things again here in this country and support those companies that are
already manufacturing things in America.
So I am really proud to stand with my colleagues today as we salute
American manufacturing and to really underscore our commitment to
helping rebuild and strengthen manufacturing in this country, and
particularly to pay attention to the House Democratic Make It in
America agenda, which is a very comprehensive set of bills that will
help reinvigorate American manufacturing and put folks back to work in
my home State of Rhode Island, and I think all across this country.
As part of that package is the Make It in America Manufacturing Act,
which is legislation I introduced to help manufacturers buy new
equipment, retrofit their factories, retrain their workers, and
increase their exports, but really, help to jump-start what we're
already seeing in this manufacturing renaissance.
As you know very well, market conditions are such that wages are
starting to rise in Asia. Energy costs remain high, so the cost of
transporting goods is expensive. So this is a real opportunity, a real
moment to seize. And if we change some policies here in Washington and,
instead of undermining American manufacturing, replace it with policies
that support American manufacturing, we have a tremendous opportunity
for additional job growth.
Earlier this week, we saw even more evidence that our manufacturing
sector is growing stronger, again. In the September report, the
Institute for Supply Management found that manufacturing was growing at
its fastest pace in almost 2\1/2\ years. And as has been said--and we
all know--manufacturing is a jobs multiplier. For every new
manufacturing job we create, it results in an additional 4.6 jobs being
created. Support it. Of course, with high-tech manufacturing, it adds
an additional 16 jobs.
So this is very, very important in our ongoing effort to grow the
economy and create jobs. I think it particularly is important to make
note that in the area of manufacturing, we need to be very focused on
job training and be sure our young people are prepared to compete for
the kinds of jobs that are becoming available in advanced
manufacturing.
I visit manufacturers in my district all the time and hear from them
the importance of skills development and job training for the new
workers in the manufacturing sector. It's not the case anymore that you
can walk down to your neighborhood manufacturer and get the job your
father or grandfather or mother or grandmother got. It requires a
different set of skills, and it requires additional training.
So as part of our strategy, we have to focus on how do we ensure that
young people and people entering the manufacturing sector have the
skills necessary to compete successfully.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Will the gentleman yield on that point?
Mr. CICILLINE. Of course.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I think it's important and it's a critical point.
We have legislative fixes and we have strategies down here, but much of
this is cultural. As you said, these facilities are not your
grandparents' manufacturing facilities. In Youngstown and Akron and in
Rhode Island, we remember growing up and hearing about that long legacy
of the steel mills blowing out soot. You've got to sweep your porch off
two or three times during the course of the day because of the soot
that's coming out. The mill was running and people said, That means
we're working. It's gold dust, really.
Today, it's much different. You can eat your breakfast off the floor
in some of these facilities.
And so how do we break with guidance counselors with, in my
estimation, the robotics in the schools, Legos in the early schools,
and begin this pipeline to get people excited about using their hands
and making things again. And not everyone is going to go to college and
get a 4-year degree.
Mr. CICILLINE. I think you raise a very important point. Of the
things I think we have seen, unfortunately, is the way that we have
approached manufacturing in this country the last couple of decades
where we have actually sent messages to young people that they should
think of something other than manufacturing, that it's sort of a dead-
end career and manufacturing doesn't exist here anymore. We're going to
be a service economy.
And you hear it in the language of guidance counselors and sometimes
in parents. I would say if kids came home and said, Mom, Dad, I want be
to a manufacturer, their parents would say, Really? That doesn't have a
bright future.
I think what we have to really do is support both in career and
technical academies manufacturing tracks to be sure people see this as
a career path and to remind people that manufacturing jobs pay, on
average, above nonmanufacturing jobs. So these are good-paying jobs.
And that it requires a different skill set today--a more advanced skill
set.
But when you look particularly at what's happening with innovation
and design and 3-D printing and all the intersections of making things
with this new technology, it's a career path that has tremendous
opportunities. But I agree with you very much that we have to stop
saying to young people, Your life is only a success if you go to
college.
When I was the mayor of Providence, I used to visit schools all the
time and very often hear principals or teachers say, Everyone is going
to go to college, right? And they would encourage everyone to raise
their hands.
The truth is, we have to send a message to young people that if you
want to go to college, and you're interested in that, great. We want to
be sure you have all the tools to be successful. But you can have a
fulfilling, successful, wonderful life or you can support yourself with
your family in other careers like advanced manufacturing and realize
that's a valuable, important, valued part of our economy. And I think
there needs to be a lot of language around that and a lot of support so
that people see that as a career path.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Yes. I think a lot of the jobs people have today,
you're tied to a Blackberry after 5 or 6 o'clock, your iPhone on the
weekend. A lot of these manufacturing jobs you put a good hard day's
work in, you go home. You go home and get the grill going. You go to
your kid's little league game. You go watch the Browns. You do whatever
it is you've got to do. The Patriots or whoever you're rooting for. You
have time to do other important things and be with your family and
other things.
And I remember looking back in the heyday in Youngstown and Niles,
where I grew up, my grandfather had a great job, was well paid in the
steel mill, and at 3 or 4 o'clock, he was gone. And he would go to his
garden, they would have time to make dinner, have a happy hour where
the families would come together and be together and have that quality
of life.
And I think we can look at manufacturing and say, Well, hey, it's
clean, it's a new skill set, it's exciting. There's a lot of really hot
things going on in manufacturing today. You can work in a team. You're
creating new products in all different sectors of the economy, and you
have a life outside of your work that is important for your family,
your children, your kids, and everything else.
Mr. CICILLINE. And you are making things that are sought by the rest
of the world. I think one of the things we should never lose sight that
those words ``Made in America'' still mean a lot. And people understand
when a product is made in America, it's made by the best trained
workers in the world; it has the best quality standards in the world.
And so people all over the world want to buy stuff made in America.
So I think given the opportunity to do that--and, certainly, I think
all Americans want to do that--given that opportunity, we will see
tremendous growth in our manufacturing sector. But I think it's very
important that in this moment we understand the significance of
changing some of the policies in Washington that undermine American
manufacturing.
I want to take a minute to applaud the President, who has really made
the rebirth of American manufacturing an important priority. He talks
about a lot of this in the State of the Union, I know, and addresses to
the country.
He established recently this Investing in Manufacturing Communities
Partnership, a program to help
[[Page H6216]]
strengthen manufacturing and to help States develop regional
manufacturing strategies. I am particularly proud that Rhode Island
received one of the first grants in the first phase of this program.
That will really allow us to develop a strategy that will help to
support and strengthen Rhode Island manufacturing and, obviously,
recognize what that will mean for job growth.
But it's been, I think, very valuable to have the President take a
leadership role and continue to make the case that manufacturing and
making things and rebuilding American manufacturing is a key part of
our economic recovery.
It's one of those issues where one would hope that there's bipartisan
support. You have been a great leader of the Manufacturing Caucus with
a bipartisan leadership there. You look at the Make It in America
agenda and you think, Why hasn't every single bill on that agenda
already become law? These are good, commonsense bills that support
American manufacturing, which is so critical to our country.
We're in a difficult period where there's not a lot of bipartisan
support, but I'd love to hear the gentleman's thoughts on that because
it seems so critical.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I agree. The issue really is we need to get on the
stick because China, the European Union, many other countries are
pumping a good deal of money into 3-D printing. We have one set up. The
President wants to do an additional 7 to 10 or 20, maybe 30 additional
centers, where you have these public-private partnerships where you're
innovating in areas of the economy. We have the first in Additive
Manufacturing. You have one of the first grants to start developing in
Rhode Island.
The Chinese are dumping tons of money in 3-D printing. They're going
to have 10 innovation centers in China. So they're full speed ahead.
And this is an area that we want to win. We want to make sure that we
are on the cutting edge, not just because we're Americans, but because
our success is the world's success.
I think making these investments is critical. There really isn't that
much money. In the grand scheme of things, putting hundreds of millions
of dollars into these critical areas of the economy, if you look at
three-dimensional printing, it's a printer, in essence, like the
printer you would have on your desk, except you pump materials into the
printer, and it can print your iPhone, it could print a shoe. They have
YouTube videos of houses being printed one day.
It's just amazing how this is going to revolutionize manufacturing.
We used to have the mainframe computers that became desktops.
So we have manufacturing today that builds rooms that could also be
shrunk. And parts. And it has a transformational effect to have a
desktop manufacturing unit that every American could utilize. And the
kind of innovation that's going to come from this, the kind of
decentralizing, streamlining efficiencies in the supply chain, all of
these things that can revolutionize our country. Look at what the
Internet has done for wealth creation. But this is the kind of wealth
creation that hits people in Rhode Island, hits people in Youngstown
and Akron, Ohio. It's not just Silicon Valley. They benefit,
manufacture it somewhere else, and no one else really benefits from it
other than the product, which is a significant benefit. This, I think,
can be very revolutionary in that regard.
So we've got an obligation here. Seeing the tea leaves, reading the
leaves, we've got to make those investments.
Mr. CICILLINE. Absolutely. First and foremost, I want to congratulate
you again because you have led the country with the manufacturing
center, being the very first one. And I'm hoping we're going take a
group from Rhode Island soon to visit so we can see the success of what
you've done and the kind of model it can provide for the whole country.
But I think you're absolutely right. I think 3-D printing is one
example that is really going to transform the way we make things in
this country. We have some great partners in Rhode Island--the Rhode
Island School of Design--where I think we're going to really begin to
understand that design is going to be such an important part of this
new manufacturing, and it's going to make everyone a manufacturer, in
some ways--to have the ability to print products.
So you're right: our competitors around the world also know this. And
they're making very substantial investments. So I think this is one of
those moments in the history of our country where we have to realize
that if we're going to continue to lead the world economically and
continue to be a place where products are produced that are the envy of
the world, we have to create conditions that help companies and
individuals innovate and be successful in making things so that we can
start shipping American-made goods all over the world.
One of the things I think we have to look at is how do we support
American manufacturers in tax policies so that we're not incentivizing
companies to ship jobs overseas and instead incentivizing companies to
keep jobs here; how do we provide research and development tax credits
that are more generous and more permanent so they can plan the kinds of
investments that will help grow jobs.
I know you have the same experience. You go to a manufacturer in your
district, and you're awed by the entrepreneurship and the commitment
and dedication of the workers there and the quality of the products
they're producing. And all they're asking from us is give them a set of
tools to level the playing field to help them succeed so they can sell
their products to the rest of the world.
{time} 1745
That should be a bipartisan effort. Making things and taking pride in
making things in America should be something we all agree on. I hope
that we will enjoy a lot of bipartisan support in making that a
reality.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Well, it takes some public investment. That's what
I worry about and I talk to our Republican colleagues about.
My concern really is this national narrative that there isn't
anything that the government could spend money on that would be a good
thing--it's all bad, any spending at all. So that is a bad narrative to
operate from when you're trying to say, hey, here's the public-private
partnerships that we want to see, as I said in my opening.
So the public-private partnership with NAMII in Youngstown, the
Additive Manufacturing Institute, public-private partnership; a lot of
companies, defense companies--companies like Siemens. So here is the
investment in Youngstown. Now there is the building that was
refurbished was an old warehouse--and that's great--in old downtown.
Now there's other businesses looking to locate. They say well, we want
to be around the innovation that's happening there. So for an older
industrial area, fantastic for us to have that opportunity.
Then Siemens comes in, and Siemens donated $440 million worth of
software to Youngstown State University to create that pipeline. You
can see how just that little public investment is driving all of the
private investment that's not just going to help our region--the tech
belt from Cleveland to Pittsburgh, to Akron and Youngstown, that whole
region--but transform throughout the entire country. Everyone will
benefit from this.
So you begin to see that pipeline that you can create. And as you
said, get on a track for manufacturing when you're in high school so
that when you're 18, you're not wandering around saying what car can I
go buy and get myself into debt, or go to college for 1 year and
accumulate debt and drop out because it's not your thing. We want kids
to graduate from high school with a skill, to be able to go out in the
world and earn if they don't want to go to college.
Get these 3-D printers in the schools. These kids are amazing.
They'll learn it like that. That's going to take some public
investment.
Mr. CICILLINE. You're absolutely right. In my State, in the cities of
Woonsocket and Pawtucket and Central Falls and Providence, which all
have mill buildings that were filled during a different time, filled
with good-paying jobs, and so we have to make adjustments to sort of
what the demands are of the marketplace: What are the new technologies
that are
[[Page H6217]]
available, like 3-D printing? What are the skills that workers need?
And what are the incentives we need to create to help those buildings
be filled with manufacturing jobs of the 21st century?
And you're right, it's going to require some public-private
partnership--thoughtful, careful, efficient kinds of relationships, but
a real public investment that will bring tremendous benefit not only to
my State, but to our country.
I, too, worry that there is a group of folks here in the Congress who
believe we can't invest in anything that's important for our future.
And as you mentioned, our competitors are doing it, and they're doing
it at a much faster pace. So if we're going to be successful, we need
to seize this moment and build on the rich and wonderful manufacturing
history of our country. I think we will see tremendous opportunities in
my State, and I know in Ohio and across this country.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I appreciate the gentleman being here. I see States
represented here, Rhode Island and Connecticut and Massachusetts and
Ohio and California, and you could go on into Michigan and Indiana and
Wisconsin and all through New England and into Maine and New Hampshire.
We are a manufacturing country. We always have been. So I thank the
gentleman.
Can I ask, Mr. Speaker, how much time I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 19 minutes remaining.
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I would like to make a few comments slightly off
topic for celebrating Manufacturing Recognition Day tomorrow and just
explain to my constituents at home in a couple of minutes--because I
don't want to take the entire time, but in a couple of minutes, explain
to my constituents at home my feelings and how I think things are
playing out here in Washington. I haven't had an opportunity to be
home, and I want to communicate to them.
My position here obviously is we need to get the government up and
running. We have the national discussion going on about health care,
the Affordable Care Act. I voted for the Affordable Care Act, support
the Affordable Care Act. We're going to have its glitches as it rolls
out. But prior to a few years ago, as we were getting into the run-up
of the Affordable Care Act, I had 1,700 families in 1 year go bankrupt
because of health care costs, numerous people losing their insurance.
As we're talking about the next generation of manufacturing, it has
been an ugly process in communities like ours with people losing their
jobs and not having health insurance, and 45, 50, 55, 60 years old
can't yet qualify for Medicare, are stuck, can't get any insurance.
That was a problem. Health care costs going up dramatically.
But what's happening here is we're now having a discussion from a
smaller group in the Republican caucus of Tea Party members who are
hellbent on killing the Affordable Care Act and dismantling it.
Now, here is the problem: They have every right as an American
citizen and as an elected Member of the United States Congress to have
that opinion and to fight for that.
Here's where I think there is a problem: We have an obligation here
in this Chamber to make sure that the government runs--runs smoothly,
gets funded. We're going to have our arguments as to what the
investments are, what the Tax Code looks like, what are the trade
agreements. These are all fights we have in this Chamber. I'm not here
to say that democracy is pretty. It's ugly. It's messy. There's a House
of 435 Members, a Senate of 100 Members, a President, an executive
branch. This is an ugly process. It is inherently ugly. As Churchill
said, it's the worst form of government on the planet, except for all
the others.
We have an obligation to keep the government running. So my argument,
my complaint with what the Tea Party members are doing by saying, well,
we'll extend what we call a continuing resolution--funding of the
government--we will agree to extend it for 6 more weeks if you defund
ObamaCare or if you delay ObamaCare.
Now, as I said, they have every right to make that argument and they
have every right to have that belief, but a couple of points.
We fund the government, and then through the normal process of
governing--committee process, the struggle between the House and the
Senate, the Republican House and the Democratic Senate and a Democratic
President--we have that fight through the normal budgetary process.
You do not shut down the government because you don't like a piece of
legislation that passed the House, passed the Senate, was signed into
law by the President of the United States, and the Supreme Court deemed
it constitutional. You do not shut the government down because of that.
You continue the government operating, and then you have this other
fight.
And guess what? Maybe you won't win the fight. I was here in 2003,
2004, 2005, 2006. The Iraq war was going on. I was against the Iraq
war, had no interest in us going to Iraq, campaigned against it my
first election. But when we got down here, we, through the political
process, fought it and we tried to end it. Then, eventually, in 2006,
Democrats won the House, won the Senate. We began the process of trying
to continue to end the war in Iraq. We didn't do a very good job of it
because President Bush was still in office. President Bush had just won
reelection in 2004, but we continued the fight.
My friends say the Affordable Care Act is not affordable and not
popular. Guess what? The Iraq war was not affordable. The Iraq war was
not popular. Well over 50 percent of Americans did not want us to be
there at one point. But you just don't shut down the government because
a policy has shifted in the country or the mood of the country has
shifted on something. You have to work through the political process.
So let's have that fight. And if you don't win it--if I were the Tea
Party, I'd say: Boy, this ObamaCare is so bad, set it up and let it go.
Wait until the American people see this. We're going to sweep them in
2014. We're going to win the Presidency back in 2016.
Why wouldn't you just let it go? If it's so bad, let it go. You win
the House back. You could defund it. You could strip it down. You win
the Presidency. Start back over. We could go back to that old system
where people are going bankrupt with their current health care plan or
getting kicked off or not getting coverage for a preexisting condition.
You have every right to do that.
So let's get back to regular order. If Speaker Boehner brought a bill
to the House floor today, right now, called all Members and said we're
having what we call a clean CR, we're just going to extend funding from
the current levels out for 6 weeks or 8 weeks--whatever the number
would be--and he brought it to the floor, it would pass, Democrats and
Republicans. The Senate would send their bill over; the President would
sign it. The government would open back up, and we could go back to
having our fights about the Affordable Care Act; and the Tea Party
folks could talk about how bad it is, and we'll have examples of people
that have benefited and we'll move on.
Now, the other problem I have is that we've already had this
political fight. It doesn't stop us from having it again. Sometimes
political fights take some time. So we just had this fight.
Our friends on the other side called this ``ObamaCare,'' and
President Obama just won reelection--clean sweep across the country;
more Democrats in the Senate in States like Indiana. Sherrod Brown won
reelection in Ohio. President Obama won Ohio and a bunch of other key
swing States where the central issue was repeal ObamaCare. So that
battle was just fought, and to shut down the government in this
process, I think, is improper.
Here we have now all these other issues with the debt ceiling coming
up and all of these other things. Let's have the fight, win the
political argument, win the political battle. Take it back to the
people in 2014 and 2016 if that's ultimately what you want to do. As I
said, you have every right to do that. This is a democracy. The
political system will allow for it.
So I just want my constituents to know, you know, I don't think we
should get into a position of necessarily picking what parts of the
government should open and not open. Open it up.
The other point is, the Democrats, for the number we want to open it
up at, we wanted a much higher number. There's been too many cuts, in
our estimation, for some of these essential
[[Page H6218]]
programs that are long-term investments for our country. So we already
compromised, because our number was $1.58 trillion, or something like
that, and the Republican number was $986 billion. And the President
said we'll take that number, so we already compromised.
If you go out and want to buy a car and someone makes an offer for
$10,000 and you say, ``No, I'll give you 9 for it,'' and they say,
``Okay, we'll take it for 9,'' that was a compromise. That's what
happened here.
But still, to be clear to my constituents, every bill that has come
off this floor didn't just say we're going to extend funding for the
government. It said we're going to extend funding for the government
and we want to repeal ObamaCare, we want to repeal the Affordable Care
Act, and we want to delay it for a year. That is an issue that has been
argued. We can continue to do it, but let's do it through the normal
political process.
Let's get NIH back up and running, Centers for Disease Control, Food
Safety. All of these things can be funded with a total package.
If Speaker Boehner brought a bill to the floor, a clean continuing
resolution that funded the government without any of this extraneous
stuff, it would pass with Democrats and Republicans. The Senate would
agree to it, the President would sign it, and the doors would open back
up.
Lastly, let me say--because my friends have come up on the other side
and said, well, we want to fund NIH because there's pediatric cancer
patients there that need help, and I say of course we want to do that.
But we want every family in America to have insurance if their child
gets cancer. We want every citizen to have access. And the Affordable
Care Act has done that for millions and millions of people. It got rid
of preexisting conditions. It has taken the insurance companies out of
the doctor/patient relationship.
Before, if you were a child or you had cancer, you could hit your
lifetime limit on your insurance policy and then you were screwed. You
couldn't get insurance because you hit your lifetime limit in just a
year or two. The Affordable Care Act removed that cap and it allows
those investments to be made and allows that person to be able to get
their health care.
These are commonsense things. So I wanted to communicate that to my
constituents.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you. We are here also to recognize
National Manufacturing Day tomorrow. I want to thank Congressman Reed,
who is the cochair of the House Manufacturing Caucus, for his
leadership on establishing more of these innovation centers, along with
Congressman Kennedy and all of our speakers here tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________