[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 92 (Wednesday, June 10, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4017-S4018]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           AMENDMENT NO. 1986

  Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, I am very excited about the Kirk-
Heitkamp amendment getting an overwhelming show of support. The reality 
is that if we do not vote on the Kirk-Heitkamp bill itself and pass it 
out of this Chamber, at the end of this month, the charter for the Ex-
Im Bank will expire.
  This vote has nothing to do with the charter for the Ex-Im Bank. It 
does nothing to prevent the charter for the Ex-Im Bank from expiring. 
This is at a time when China and India are pumping billions of dollars 
into their export credit agency. This is at a time when we have $15 
billion worth of credit waiting to move through the Ex-Im Bank so we 
create jobs here in our country--jobs for American workers--and we are 
stalling the Bank.
  When we had this discussion during the TPA debate, we wanted to have 
a vote that would guarantee we would have an opportunity to prevent the 
charter for the Ex-Im Bank from expiring. That is not this vote today.
  I am extraordinarily gratified by the show of support because what it 
really does tell us is if we bring up an Ex-Im Bank bill on its own--an 
extension bill on its own--we will be able to prevent something from 
happening that could have catastrophic economic results in this 
country. So I urge this body to find a path forward to prevent the Ex-
Im Bank charter from expiring, to have a path forward to honor our 
commitments that were made during an earlier vote so we can have a vote 
and actually move this bill forward and not simply have a vote to show 
support but actually pass a bill.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, will the Senator from North Dakota yield 
for a question?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Yes.
  Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Senator for her comments and I ask her this 
question: So that we understand the procedure that just took place, 
there was an amendment offered that would have extended the Ex-Im Bank 
and then a motion to table it, and I believe 60 Members or more voted 
against the motion to table, which shows a positive sentiment about 
extending the Ex-Im Bank charter. After that vote, the sponsors of the 
amendment withdrew the amendment from this bill.
  So at this moment in time, I wish to ask the Senator, for absolute 
clarity: We have nothing before us that would extend the Ex-Im Bank 
either in this bill or in any other manner before the end of June when 
it expires; is that correct?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. That is absolutely correct.
  Mr. DURBIN. And that creates a disadvantage for businesses in 
Illinois, and I am sure in North Dakota, in terms of exports and jobs, 
and unless we do take this seriously and quickly, they will be 
jeopardized.
  Ms. HEITKAMP. I think the other thing it does also is it is a signal 
to all of those companies we are competing with, whether it is China or 
India, that we are out of the business, and that opens a wide path for 
them to be in the business of exports. So this takes us out of the 
business of financing exports, which is going to have and will have 
catastrophic results. We don't have a path forward, and the charter of 
the Bank expires at the end of this month. Without a path forward, we 
are opening an opportunity for our competitors to take those exports 
and to take away our opportunity to have those jobs.
  So I am very gratified by the result of this vote because I think it 
signals support for Ex-Im Bank. When we get this kind of support from 
the U.S. Senate--almost veto-proof support--maybe we ought to move the 
bill. People will say there isn't an opportunity to do that; there is 
no path forward. Let me tell my colleagues that there is no one in the 
country who believes that is true. If there is a will, there is a way.
  We have to have a vote on the Export-Import Bank by the end of the 
month and get it over to the House so the House can support it and move 
this forward or we will be playing chicken with the exports of the 
United States of America.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Will the Senator yield for another question?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Yes.
  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Senator Ayotte, in offering this amendment, talked 
about a forum in New Hampshire at General Electric where a number of 
small businesses participated. Senator Cantwell and I were at that 
forum. We heard testimony from an employee of a company called Goss 
International, which makes large printing presses and competes mostly 
with Germany but with countries around the world. One of the issues she 
spoke about is that they have $10 million in deals that are sitting on 
the table at Ex-Im that they need to have approved before the end of 
June when the authorization expires. If those don't get approved, they 
are not going to be able to create 45 new jobs they are talking about 
being able to create as part of that deal.
  So if the authorization for Ex-Im expires, not only is Goss going to 
have trouble with those jobs, but companies across this country are 
going to lose jobs that would be created if those financing deals could 
go through; isn't that the case?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. In fact, the case is nearly $16 billion worth of 
American business and American exports that create American jobs will 
languish in the pipeline at the Ex-Im Bank because we foolishly let a 
charter expire at a time when we are in competition for exports, a 
competition for commerce throughout the world.
  When we debated trade promotion--and a lot of us took some tough 
votes on TPA--we were promised a vote that would be mutually agreed 
upon here so we could advance the Ex-Im Bank by the end of June. We 
haven't gotten that vote because today all we did was show--I think 
rightfully so--that we have tremendous support in this body for the Ex-
Im Bank and we shouldn't be held hostage to the narrow ideology of a 
few.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Yes.
  Ms. CANTWELL. The Senator from North Dakota has obviously been 
working so hard on this in the Banking Committee, and she understands, 
I believe, that when the Bank expires on June 30, there is about $12 
billion of approved deals that are in the process, and they will not be 
approved while the Bank is not operating; is that correct?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. That is correct. The last number I was given, I say to 
my friend, the Senator from Washington, was almost $5.5 billion.
  Ms. CANTWELL. So today's vote is a symbolic vote but does nothing to 
help us resolve the issue for getting this approved before June 30.
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Unfortunately, too often we have symbolic votes that 
don't have real consequences in the real world. Our wonderful 
businesses that are outcompeting and outmanufacturing and outdeveloping 
and outresearching the rest of the world are now with their hands tied 
behind their backs and losing credits as we stand.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Are there a lot of small businesses in South Dakota 
that are a part of this export economy?
  I say that because I think a lot of people get the impression that 
this is about big manufacturers. I have always said those guys will 
take care of themselves; they have lots of people here to take care of 
them. But the small people who will actually lose business on June 30 
don't have people here and that is why we are fighting so hard to get a 
vote before June 30 that actually will go over to the House on a 
vehicle.
  Ms. HEITKAMP. We have companies in Wahpeton, ND, where bankruptcy has 
been prevented because they have been able to find their way to the Ex-
Im Bank and actually find their way to a credit relationship with their 
importers.
  We have a company in West Fargo that builds portable wheelchair ramps 
and they have saturated the market here and they are marketing these 
all

[[Page S4018]]

over the country. They will tell us today and tell anyone who will 
listen that the only reason they are as successful as they are is 
because of the credit agency, the Export-Import Bank.
  Ms. CANTWELL. I thank the Senator for her leadership in committee. As 
she said, with 65 votes, we can do a lot of things to get this 
legislation out of here, so we will certainly be looking for those 
opportunities.
  Mrs. BOXER. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. I will.
  Mrs. BOXER. First, before I ask my question, I wish to thank Senator 
Heitkamp and Senator Cantwell and Senator Shaheen. These three women 
have been just stalwart on this. We were on different sides on the 
trade vote, and I remember how hard they pushed for a real commitment, 
which I think in good faith they believed they got.
  I am afraid what we saw here tonight is quite cynical. It doesn't do 
anything. I don't get what the point was.
  Wouldn't it be far better if we got a commitment from the majority 
leader to set aside some time right after this bill--certainly before 
the end of this month, because as Senator Cantwell always tells us, the 
end of the month is the end of the Bank.
  So if we could get a commitment, I am asking my friend, would she be 
willing to agree to a time agreement so we wouldn't have to take up 
days and days and days to get this reauthorization done?
  Ms. HEITKAMP. Absolutely. I think we have a vehicle, as we can say, 
for the Kirk-Heitkamp bill, which was, in fact, this amendment we just 
voted on. We have overwhelming support in the Senate. We will do 
anything we can to move this authorization forward because without it 
we are costing American jobs.
  Mrs. BOXER. Another point I wish to make to my friend is I don't know 
if she is aware, but California has well over $1 billion of projects on 
the line. Even in our State, that is significant.
  I just wanted to thank her and Senators Cantwell and Shaheen and 
others who have worked so hard. I have been here a long time, and I 
know a cynical ploy when I see it. I just saw it.
  I know how easy it is to resolve this problem. You have an 
overwhelming, filibuster-proof number of people who want this Bank 
reauthorized. All you probably need is an hour or so. Anytime night or 
day, we will come in. I would hope and I would ask my friend if she and 
her colleagues will pursue a meeting or ask directly at some point in 
time for a commitment to take this up and, within a reasonable time 
limit, get it done.

  In my State, many jobs are dependent on this, and all across the 
Nation, as you have eloquently pointed out, as well as Senators 
Cantwell and Shaheen. I thank you for your leadership.
  Ms. HEITKAMP. I thank my friend from California.
  I would say that as much as relationships here matter, what matters 
more to me is Americans working. What matters more to me are the jobs 
that will be lost and the opportunities that will be lost, as these 
manufacturing facilities and as these great innovative manufacturers 
have worked so hard. Think about all the work that is behind almost $16 
billion worth of credit, all the relationships. All of a sudden, they 
have to say to their customer: Guess what. I am not there.
  I would suggest that one of the most heart-wrenching stories I have 
heard about the loss already of a big deal came out of California--a 
100-percent disabled vet who told us he has already lost $57 million 
and he is on a path to lose a $200 million deal out of the Philippines, 
and that means jobs, jobs, jobs.
  In California, jobs matter. In North Dakota, jobs matter. All across 
this country, jobs matter. If we can start putting the focus on jobs 
and the American worker first instead of ideology and politics, if we 
stop playing games, we can get things done here.
  What was interesting to me is people say: Well, there is no path 
forward.
  Really? I think that if we needed a bill passed, if, in fact, we were 
in a spot where in 2 weeks or 2-plus weeks we were going to lose the 
charter of the Ex-Im Bank--and we are in that spot. If you really care 
about the Ex-Im Bank, if you really care about American jobs, you would 
figure out a way to pass this bill out of the Senate for which we have 
65 votes.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  (The remarks of Mr. Whitehouse pertaining to the introduction of S. 
1548 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FLAKE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________