[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 133 (Wednesday, September 16, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6666-S6668]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise to speak today on another topic,
and that is the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank. Senator
Cantwell is going to be here shortly, and I thank her for her strong
leadership. We will also be hearing at some point from Senator
McCaskill and Senator Heitkamp. This has been a bipartisan effort. I
thank the other Senators who have joined in this fight--Senator Graham
and Senator Kirk.
The reason I am here today is to say that America needs to be a
country that exports, a country that thinks, that invents, that builds
things, and that exports to the world. When 95 percent of the world's
customers live outside of our borders, there is literally a world of
opportunity out there for U.S. businesses. We simply can't afford to
pass this up.
We know there are about 85 credit export agencies in over 60 other
countries. So all of these other countries, over 60 countries--major
developed nations--have an Ex-Im type bank. Our businesses in the
United States are competing against companies in those countries, so
when they are bidding against each other for a contract, the companies
in the other countries can say: Well, I may not be a huge business, I
am a small business, but I know I can get financing from my country's
bank--whether they are in Germany or whether they are in China.
Do you know what our companies have to say right now? Well, the Ex-Im
Bank's charter has lapsed. We can't get financing.
And if you don't think their competitors know this--their competitors
know it. We have already heard that they have lost contracts because of
this shortsightedness of letting the Ex-Im Bank lapse. So they are
competing against these foreign businesses that are backed by other
countries' credit export programs, and they often also receive
government subsidies. So why, I ask, would we want to make it harder
for our own companies to compete across the globe and create jobs right
here at home?
In 2014, the Ex-Im Bank provided support for $27 billion worth of
U.S. exports. That sounds like a lot, but in the same year--are you
ready for this?--China financed more than double that amount, $58
billion. So their Ex-Im type bank financed $58 billion, ours only did
$27 billion, and now we are not doing anything. South Korea and Germany
have already provided more support for their exports than we have in
the United States of America.
So if we don't get this done and reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank,
countries like China are going to eat our lunch. That is why I am
urging my colleagues to include the reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank
in the spending bills we must pass to keep the government open and
running. If we want to level the playing field for our businesses, we
need to have the U.S. Ex-Im Bank open and running too. This is about
jobs.
In June I led a meeting of the Steering and Outreach Committee on the
importance of the Ex-Im Bank. Several of my colleagues were at that
meeting, too, and I will tell you what we heard. We heard from small
business owners from all over the country. They did not mince words.
Frankly, they were furious and frustrated after watching some Members
of Congress throw up roadblock after roadblock and refuse to do the
commonsense thing--reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank. These small business
owners, like the many small business owners I have met in my State,
told me the Ex-Im Bank is essential for their ability to export. Many
of these smaller businesses don't have an expert on every country in
the world. They rely on the Ex-Im Bank to help them with that
expertise, to get the financing. And what do they get now? This is what
they get. This is what is on the Web site right now of the Ex-Im Bank:
Due to a lapse in EXIM Bank's authority, as of July 1,
2015, the Bank is unable to process applications or engage in
new business or other activities. For more information,
please click here.
Then you click here, and it says:
To Customers and Stakeholders of the Export-Import Bank of
the United States:--
This is the United States of America. It says--
Due to a lapse in our authority, as of midnight on June
30th the Export-Import Bank of the United States ceased
processing new applications or engaging in new business.
Last week, Congress adjourned for their August recess
without reauthorizing EXIM. Both the Senate and the House of
Representatives return to Washington on September 8th. This
means that EXIM will focus on the management of our $107
billion portfolio . . .
But they cannot do anything new.
Guess who else is reading that. Our foreign competitors, companies
and countries all over the world. They are able to show the people for
whom they are bidding: Look what happens when you go to the Ex-Im type
financing site in the United States. Guess what it says. It says:
Sorry, we are lapsed; we can't do anything.
That is what these companies from other countries are seeing.
We heard from Boyle Energy Services in New Hampshire, Air Tractor in
Texas, the Orbital Sciences Corporation in Virginia, and FirmGreen in
California. Most were headed up by Republican CEOs. They all said the
same thing--that Ex-Im Bank has been critical in building their
businesses and supporting their ability to export all over the world.
Many of them told us they would lose business, not be able to enter
into contracts, and may even have to lay off workers if they lose the
support of the Ex-Im Bank. And now it is not just the possibility of
having to lay off workers; that is actually happening in our country
due to this problem with the Ex-Im Bank.
At the end of June when the Ex-Im Bank expired, there were nearly 200
transactions totaling over $9 billion in financing pending. Letting the
Ex-Im Bank's charter lapse meant lost contracts and layoffs. It means
European and Chinese workers will be doing the jobs Americans are now
doing.
My colleagues, I don't think we can wait any longer. I will put in
the Record the evidence from my own State and what it has meant in my
own State.
Every year I visit all 87 counties in Minnesota and I meet with all
kinds of small business owners. One thing that I find over and over is
that these small businesses are exporting and many are using the Ex-Im
Bank to provide them with the expertise they need to enter new markets
all over the world and the vital loans, loan guarantees or credit
insurance they need to access these markets.
The list of Minnesota companies that have told me of their strong
support for the Ex-Im Bank is long. Let me share a few examples.
I have met with the people at Balzer--an agricultural equipment
manufacturer based in Mountain Lake--a town of 2,000. They told me that
they have grown their exports to about 15 percent of total sales with
the help of the Ex-Im Bank. They export from Canada to Kazakhstan--from
Japan to Australia--and now South Africa too.
With the help of the Ex-Im Bank, Superior Industries in Morris has
been able to export to Canada, Australia, Russia, Argentina, Chile,
Uruguay, and Brazil.
I have heard from the Trade Acceptance Group in Edina which provides
credit insurance to businesses that export. They rely on the Ex-Im
Bank. I heard from Fastenal and Miller Ingenuity, both from Winona.
They told me how the Ex-Im Bank helped them reach new markets in
Mexico, Indonesia, and Africa. And the list goes on.
The Ex-Im Bank was helping these small businesses from all over
Minnesota and all over the country compete and export globally. These
are success stories and we need more of them. There are success stories
like this in every State. And these are the stories we want to hear--
not stories about losing jobs and business opportunities to Europe and
China.
I have given speeches on this before. We cannot wait any longer. We
need to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank now.
I will end with this, as I see Senator Cantwell, our great leader on
this, is in the Chamber. The Ex-Im Bank has been reauthorized 16 times
in its 81-year history, every time with broad bipartisan majorities,
and Ex-Im has the support this year. The Senate has voted twice with
bipartisan support to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank, and over 250 House
Members have cosponsored bills supporting the Ex-Im Bank.
[[Page S6667]]
The time is here. It is time to stop playing procedural games, get
this reauthorized so our great U.S. companies no longer have to go to a
Web site that says: Due to a lapse of authority, the Export-Import Bank
of the United States is unable to process applications or engage in new
business.
We are all about new business in this country. That is what we have
always been all about. So it is time to change that Web site, and we do
it by reauthorizing Ex-Im.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Minnesota for
her work and her leadership position in the Senate and for focusing on
economic policy and constantly doing the research and legwork on how
our economy is moving forward and what key essentials we need to move
forward. The fact that she is here this morning to speak about the
Export-Import Bank and the fact that the lapse of the Bank itself is
causing us great economic challenge--I certainly very much appreciate
everything she is doing. She comes from a State that has businesses
that are exporters. Minnesota has a lot of exporters, so she knows this
is causing a big challenge.
I know my colleague Senator Heitkamp, who is an original sponsor of
this legislation, is speaking out on this issue as well. I think
Senator McCaskill may be joining us this morning.
I don't know if the American people know, but many of our colleagues
know that the Export-Import Bank is tooled to help U.S. manufacturers
export products overseas by financing the deals--not really financing
them so much as basically helping private banks finance them when the
banks won't take all the risk. The program works just like the SBA--the
Small Business Administration--does to help small businesses with bank
financing. This helps businesses that are trying to export their
products overseas get financing where these developing countries may
not have banks to do that. So it has expired, which means it is cutting
off economic opportunity here in the United States to grow jobs.
When we think about it, with 90 percent of consumers living outside
of the United States, the biggest economic opportunity for our country
is to sell those consumers products that the United States of America
makes. But we have to have financing for developing countries.
There are 478 Ex-Im Bank guarantees and credit insurance policies
worth $3.2 billion set to expire October 1. If we don't quickly
reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, that money will be lost. And those
are programs that are already underway. As this shows, there are 116
pending deals--deals we could do, deals we could get approved. That
would be basically $9.3 billion in revenue to those companies, and
obviously companies could grow their economic bottom line.
In my visits with companies in the State of Washington, I have seen
that a lot of businesses are looking at maybe 20 percent of their
revenues coming from overseas markets, so having the Ex-Im Bank helps
them reach new market opportunities. Every time I talk to them--what
happens if this program goes away and you can't get financing? Most of
them will say: That 20 percent of our business will result in layoffs--
those people who are associated with that business.
So right now what we need to do is to help these businesses that are
in their fourth quarter have the certainty and guarantee that we are
going to compete on the playing field of what is called a global
economy. If you are not interested in that, if you think we are just
going to make U.S. products and sell them to U.S. people, I guess that
could be your strategy. I think it is a wrongheaded strategy.
So we are here today to talk about how this is impacting small
businesses, big businesses, and what we need to do to get this
reauthorized.
Why are we here this morning? Because yesterday we heard news from a
major manufacturer that basically talked specifically about what is
going to happen. It is not that the Koch brothers are going to win or
the Heritage Foundation is going to win; it is that companies such as
GE and others are going to ship their jobs overseas so they can get
financing for the manufactured products they make. So what happened? GE
basically has said it has been forced to move 500 jobs from the U.S. to
France, China, and Hungary. Why? Why are they moving jobs overseas?
Because they still have a credit agency. France has one and is willing
to provide export financing as a major component of wind turbines that
would otherwise have been built in the United States. Altogether, GE
has $11 billion in contracts that require export credit agency support.
So they are going to meet customer demand.
I worked in business for 5 years. I know what it is like to build and
ship a product to meet customer demand. They cannot sit around and wait
for Congress to stop catering to special interests to get their
customer applications filled. They either do it or they lose business.
And that is what is happening today--the American economy is losing
business because people here are playing politics with an important
tool that helps U.S. manufacturers.
GE isn't the only one. Boeing is also facing job loss. On July 31,
Boeing announced that it had lost a contract for communications
satellite ABS-8, which will provide service to millions of people in
the Asia-Pacific region. We know this is important business, satellite
communication. Think about the developing world in places such as the
Pacific islands, Indonesia, the Philippines, New Zealand, Papua New
Guinea. This company specifically cited Ex-Im's lapse as the reason
they did something else besides going with a U.S. manufacturer. These
satellites will still be launched. There will be massive growth in the
middle class of Asia that demands it, and they will continue to get a
product. It just won't be from a U.S. manufacturer. Why? Because we
have chosen to let the Export-Import Bank fail.
All in all, this Export-Import Bank is on track to support 58,000
fewer jobs in 2015--jobs that, if they were able to operate, they would
be able to continue. So the fact is that Boeing and GE may be hurting,
but they will come up with strategies that work well for them because
that is what you do when you are a big company--you figure out how to
compete. But the small businesses in America that might be the job
engine of growth for the future are not so easily able to move their
company or move overseas to get the financing. For example, since 2007
Export-Import Bank has supported more than 230 business exporters in
the State of Washington. Two thirds of those are small businesses. So
these companies aren't going to be able to all of a sudden stop what
they are doing, go to France or go to another country, and start a
manufacturing facility just to get credit agency support. The damage
that is being done to small businesses in America right now is acute,
and we need to make sure we get this export agency reauthorized.
An example of this: My colleague Senator Merkley and I visited Bob's
Red Mill. I think that about everybody in America, if they don't know
Bob's Red Mill, knows they have bought a product from Bob's Red Mill
when they have gone and bought oatmeal or grains. It has grown their
export revenue about 35 percent since they started working with the
Export-Import Bank in 2012. Think about that: Those consumers--90
percent outside of the United States--want to basically consume more
products like Bob's Red Mill, a great product. I personally think these
are the kinds of things the United States ought to be focusing on. We
are still number one in agriculture. We still should be focused on
shipping agriculture products to developing markets around the world.
This is one of the biggest and easiest opportunities, feeding the world
with a product like Bob's Red Mill. But no, no, no. Bob's Red Mill will
lose business because they will not have an export authority. I doubt
that Bob at his age--a great man, a very vibrant guy at 80-some years
old--is going to start a business somewhere else in Europe or in Africa
just to export to that market and try to get the financing.
Texas-based Air Tractor will lose up to 25 percent of their sales
because the Export-Import Bank is stopping. Pennsylvania-based
Precision Custom Components, which manufactures parts for the nuclear
industry, says it has over 100 jobs linked to their ability to service
people with export-import financing.
[[Page S6668]]
This is a loss of real jobs. When people talk about what we are
dealing with in our fiscal crisis--the fact that people are talking
about shutting down Government--to me, if you want to be a good fiscal
steward, then reinstitute the Export-Import Bank.
In 2014 alone, Export-Import Bank paid $675 million into our
Treasury. That is deficit reduction. In fact, in the previous 5 years,
it had generated somewhere around $5 billion in deficit reduction. Not
only are we taking away a key tool, where are you going to plug the
hole in our budget from the hundreds of millions of dollars this year--
to say nothing of next year and the next year--that you don't have from
killing the Export-Import Bank? People need to realize, these people--
small businesses, big organizations seeking financing--have to pay a
fee. That fee generates revenue. That revenue is used to pay down the
Federal deficit. Not only do we create jobs and not only do we reach
market access, we actually have a government program that is helping us
pay down the Federal deficit.
Why would you not want to reinstitute that? The good news is that the
Senate voted to do that. From what I hear, there are enough people in
the House of Representatives. People have continued to hold this
program hostage because people are anxious about the politics of the
Heritage Foundation, the Koch brothers, or people sending out emails or
challenging them when in reality you just need to stand up and speak
for the fact that you want U.S. job creation, and you believe that U.S.
manufacturers making and building a product and selling it overseas is
a winning economic strategy for the United States of America. It is. To
boot, it pays down the deficit. We know that American businesses are
obviously working hard to try to communicate this. Everybody from the
manufacturers association to individual workforce organizations is
trying to express this. I know my colleague Senator Heitkamp has been
working very hard on this on the banking committee.
With just a short period of time left before whatever this proposal
is to shut down the government, which I certainly don't support, we
have to say to our colleagues that you either have to get this on the
highway bill--which it is as part of a package that we passed out of
the Senate--and get either the package that was passed here in the
Senate passed by the House or come up with another vehicle that gets
this done, as my colleague from Minnesota just suggested, on the
continuing resolution or some other bill so that we actually know we
are giving American businesses the opportunity to continue to compete.
I hope we will get a long-term solution here. The fact that we have
sent this message around the United States and the world--that there is
no longer financing available--has really hurt our competitive
opportunity at a time when America needs to embrace the fact that there
is so much business in these developing middle-class markets around the
globe.
You can sit here and trade away our opportunity to compete by saying
I don't want U.S. job creation or deficit reduction. Instead, I want to
ship jobs overseas. I don't get the strategy. I don't get what someone
thinks is smart about allowing U.S. jobs to be shipped overseas just
because they can't get financing here. If the market were willing to
take those risks without some of the security put forth here, obviously
people would want to see that. But that is not happening because if you
are selling grain silos like we are to African nations, there is no
bank there that is financing that deal. If you are selling product to
Asian countries that are just developing, whether it is seafood or
whether it is grain like Bob's Red Mill, they are not always able to
get financing. This is a way for the United States to win. All we have
to do is embrace this and make sure that we pass the Export-Import Bank
as soon as possible.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, how much time is remaining in morning
business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democrats have 9 minutes remaining.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague from
Washington for taking the floor and supporting the reauthorization of
the Export-Import Bank. She has been diligent in coming to Congress and
explaining that this agency not only facilitates exports from the
United States, which creates jobs and helps businesses here, but it
also generates a surplus for the Treasury. What is wrong with that
picture? Why would the Republicans be so opposed to an agency that
helps American businesses, large and small, export more goods and
doesn't cost the Federal Government any money? Why do they want to kill
this agency? Why do they want to kill these jobs? I don't understand
it.
We had a vote on the floor of the Senate a few weeks ago on the
Transportation bill to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank and it
passed. We sent it over to the House of Representatives which, sadly,
has become the graveyard for big issues, important issues when it comes
to the future of America. I hope it changes. I hope they will listen to
business leaders--that Republicans in the House will listen to business
leaders and not just Boeing aircraft. Of course I am interested in
that. It is headquartered in Chicago and is a major employer in the
United States, but large and small companies alike feel the same.
Export-Import Bank gives our companies in America the ability to
finance export deals so they can compete with other countries.
When we decide--or at least some in the Senate decide--to take the
United States out of the export business, who is going to step in? Who
will take over and create the jobs? Sadly, our competitors, China. They
are not waiting around for their legislature, whatever it may be, to
give permission for them to dramatically increase exports. They are on
the road to do that. I support what the Senator from Washington said.
____________________