[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 25, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H2842-H2844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           MAKE IT IN AMERICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fitzpatrick). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 3, 2017, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Garamendi) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority 
leader.
  Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, the good news is this will probably be 
about 15--maybe 20--minutes, but it is a subject that is very, very 
important to all of us.
  Actually, I am going to start on a slightly different subject, and 
that is what is wrong with this picture. A master sergeant at one of 
the air bases in the United States who has served for some almost 30 
years, married the last 18 years to a young woman with three children. 
She attempted to return from deployment in the United Kingdom, had her 
passport removed, and she was deported to Mexico. Her children are in 
the United States. She served for 18 years alongside her husband as he 
built and maintained America's fleet of spy planes.
  What is wrong with this picture, America, that a wife of a 
servicemember who served for 18 years alongside her husband, a master 
sergeant, cannot come back into the United States because of an error 
that was made years and years ago?
  We are going to follow this up. When our generals talk about taking 
care of their troops, may I suggest they also take care of their 
spouses. We have got work to do here.
  But the subject matter for tonight is a little different, although 
that issue is much on my mind. Some of you may have seen this on the 
news a month and a half ago. That is the Oroville Dam spillway. A 
maintenance problem not paid attention to over the years resulted in a 
massive failure of the spillway and put 188,000 of my constituents and 
Mr. LaMalfa's constituents at risk.
  This is the Interstate 5 bridge in Washington State connecting the 
United States to Canada. It collapsed. We could put up pictures of 
other bridges in Minnesota, et cetera. What we are talking about 
tonight is infrastructure, not just about infrastructure. The President 
wants a trillion-dollar infrastructure program, and we await his 
proposal. It would be good. We would put millions of Americans to work 
if we were to have that infrastructure program.
  But there is more to it than just infrastructure. In the last 5-year 
transportation bill, I was successful in working with other Members 
here to insert into that bill that at least 70 percent of the value in 
our transit systems be American made. So tonight's subject matter is 
really about the failing infrastructure, but it is also about making it 
in America.
  This is a subject matter that, for 7 years, I have talked about on 
the floor here: Make It In America. Our President wants to talk about 
this and, in fact, recently issued an executive order that says we 
ought to make it in America. He instructed his administration, as few 
as they are, to make sure that, in every effort, the Buy American 
provisions be honored. That has not been the case in the past. What we 
need to do is make certain that we make it in

[[Page H2843]]

America, that we spend the American taxpayer money on American-made 
products.
  Let me give you an example of what it means when you actually do 
that--or maybe an example of what it means when you don't do that.
  Now, Californians take great pride in their State. We have the Golden 
Gate Bridge. We have Yosemite. We have the great industries of southern 
California--the entertainment, the movie industries and the rest--and 
we have San Francisco. We also have major policy problems. Make It In 
America: I want to give you two different examples.
  The San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, now completed. It is a 
beautiful bridge, and it replaces an old bridge that was built in the 
1930s that was seriously deficient. However, it was made with a large, 
large input of Chinese steel. It actually came in $3.9 billion over 
budget, but we did provide some 3,000 jobs in China, and we allowed the 
Chinese steel industry to build a new steel mill to be able to produce 
the very high-quality steel that was supposed to be in the bridge. 
However, the steel that they shipped wasn't exactly high quality, the 
welds weren't exactly good, and we wound up seriously over budget for 
that as well as other reasons.

  So maybe Californians don't always have the position of taking pride 
in all that is done. This I take no pride in. This was a serious 
mistake by the State government, a serious mistake by the agency that 
ran and put this bridge into process. What would it mean if, for 
example, instead of trying to save 10 percent on the cost of steel, our 
Californian colleagues would have actually said, well, maybe those jobs 
should be in America and that new steel mill should be in America? 
Could have, should have, but it didn't happen.
  Now, on the other side of the continent we have New York. Now, we 
Californians don't much like to talk about New York but, hey, here is 
something to talk about. Here is something that really worked out well.
  It seems as though New York wanted a new bridge over the Hudson 
River, the new Tappan Zee Bridge in New York, and they made a decision: 
it was going to be built with American steel. Wow, what a noble 
thought. And all of that from New York, as opposed to California that 
said: Oh, let's go with China.
  So what happened? The steel arrived. The steel was quality. The 
bridge was built, $3.9 billion, on budget, on time, and there was some 
7,700-plus American jobs. It makes a difference when you make it in 
America and when your tax dollars--State, local, and Federal--are spent 
on American-made equipment and supplies: American steel, American jobs, 
an American bridge.
  The Oakland Bay Bridge, San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge: Chinese 
steel, Chinese jobs, over budget, bad quality, and the story is not a 
good one.
  So the issue of the day is: Buy American. Yes, indeed, we should and 
we could. Let me give you an example of what happens.
  My Republican colleagues like to take on the bailout. They like to 
talk about how bad the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was. It 
wasn't bad. It was actually very good. It could have been better if 
there had been more infrastructure and more Buy American, but there is 
one provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that really 
made a difference.

                              {time}  1945

  It was for the Amtrak systems. Basically, the systems here on the 
East Coast, the electrification. New locomotives for the East Coast 
corridor. Wow. Some $700 million. I think it was 80, maybe 90 new 
locomotives to be built.
  American companies looked at this and said: We don't build 
locomotives anymore. We certainly don't build diesel electric or all 
electric locomotives, so we will let this one go.
  Well, there is that German company called Siemens.
  They said: $700 million, 80 or so locomotives.
  We have a manufacturing plant out in Sacramento, California. We make 
light rail cars out there and transit cars.
  You say: 100 percent American made? Everything from the electric 
motors to the brakes, to the wheels, to the paint, 100 percent American 
made?
  The German company said: We can do that. We could make it in America.
  And they did. The last train has been produced. This is the first 
train.
  Don't tell me we can't make it in America. Don't tell me that our 
American taxpayer dollars should be spent in China, Japan, or someplace 
else. No. Build it in America. Buy American. And we will put 
thousands--in fact, tens of thousands of people to work.
  I want to give you another example. The American maritime industry 
has been in a very steep decline for the last 4 decades. Following 
World War II, we had over 1,500 American ships. A decade ago we had 
over 200 ships on the ocean. Our shipyards were making LNG tankers 20 
years ago, and they were American flagged. There were American mariners 
on those ships. Today, we have less than 80 American flagships, and we 
don't make large commercial ships in the United States, except on rare 
occasions.
  The maritime industry is absolutely critical for national defense.
  How do you think our men, women, and equipment get to the troubled 
spots of the world?
  You don't fly the M1 tank on an airplane. You put it on a ship. You 
put the trucks on a ship. You put the artillery on a ship.
  But where are the American ships?
  Oh, I know. We will call China and they will deliver our goods to the 
South China Sea. I doubt it. I don't think so.
  If you are concerned about national security, you had better be 
thinking about the American maritime industry.
  Are you thinking about it? Are you thinking what is really possible 
if we were to write 16 lines of law this year?
  It has to do with the export of two strategic national resources: oil 
and natural gas.
  Now operating in Texas is an LNG--liquefied natural gas--facility 
exporting American natural gas. They liquefy it, put it on a ship, and 
off it goes to somewhere in the world like China. That is okay.
  It will take 100 or more LNG tank ships to meet the full export 
potential of that one facility when it comes fully on line. There are 
five other LNG export facilities licensed in the United States, one 
which is being built near the Washington Capital, in Maryland.
  Perhaps 250--225 new liquefied natural gas tank ships are going to be 
needed in the next decade or so.
  Are any of them to be built in America?
  No, nada, none, unless we pass a piece of legislation that we call 
energizing American shipbuilding. There are 16 lines of law that say it 
is a strategic national security issue to be able to build commercial 
ships in the United States. The export of an equally strategic national 
asset--LNG and crude oil--should be on those ships.
  This is not new policy. When the North Slope of Alaska opened nearly 
50 years ago, it was American steel in the pipeline, it was American 
ships that were taking that crude oil out of Valdez, Alaska. Over the 
years, we kind of forgot about that and the law disappeared. Now it is 
not American ships and not American sailors.
  We can do this. The energizing American shipbuilding piece of 
legislation will be introduced this week. We have some 20 or more 
coauthors. We want to follow what our President says about: Buy 
American, build it in America.
  How many jobs are we talking about?
  Well over a couple hundred thousand in the shipyards. And if that 
bill passes as we have written it, that would require that the engines, 
the compressors, the pumps, the anchors, and the electronic equipment 
be American made also. We are talking about a whole supply train 
throughout most every State and businesses that are as reflective as 
the American manufacturing sector used to be.
  There is enormous potential in public policy that actually puts in 
place laws that build upon the strength of America, strengthening our 
national security, and at the same time strengthening a critical 
industry in America: the shipbuilding industry.
  And, of course, American ships will be American flagged with American 
mariners.
  This is a good thing for America. This is a very good thing for our 
national security. It is a very good thing for jobs.

[[Page H2844]]

  For our taxpayers, what does it mean?
  Well, these are commercial ships, so no direct. However, if the 
American shipyards are able to reconstitute their ability to build 
large commercial vessels, they will also be able to compete for the 
naval vessels and begin to give America naval construction competition 
in the shipyards. It is not a bad thing to have competition. That is 
one.
  Number two. For more than 3 decades we have had the School Lunch 
Program, which is also the School Breakfast Program, which is a 
critical program that provides nutritious meals to students in our 
schools who would not otherwise be fed.
  Now, there is one genius here that said: Well, hungry kids can learn.
  Really?
  I know a lot of my colleagues that can't think if they are hungry. At 
least that is a good reason to assume what they are actually talking 
about in policy. But a hungry kid will not be able to learn. They are 
thinking about their stomach. They are thinking about that ache. We 
have had the school nutrition program for some time--lunches and 
breakfasts.
  The law says that the food should be produced in America, but the 
practice is different. The practice is: We will buy wherever we can.
  Now, I will give you an example. A school district in Sacramento, 
California, whose name actually happens to be similar to the city, 
decided that they should purchase Chinese peaches in big cans. Yet, 
within 10 miles of that school there were three packing plants that 
produced California-grown peaches.
  It turns out that the Chinese peaches have some label on it that says 
organic. Right. Now, there is a label you can believe. It turns out 
that they are really not too organic at all.
  So in terms of quality, in terms of food that is produced 
domestically and locally, the Buy American provisions that have been in 
the law for the School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program need 
to be observed by school districts across this Nation.
  So we have introduced another bill called American Food for American 
Schools. It doesn't change the basic requirement that the food be 
American-produced food by our farmers and by our packing houses and by 
the facilities that take that food and bring that nutritious meal to 
the schools. No. It simply says that school districts can no longer 
ignore the law. That they are going to be required to follow the law, 
to report and to seek a waiver if the cost of domestically-grown 
peaches, peaches grown within 10 miles of the Sacramento school 
district, are too expensive compared to peaches that are imported from 
California or some other part of the world. They could seek a waiver. 
They could prove that those peaches are nutritious and that they are 
not somehow contaminated.
  We have done the studies, and there is some question about whether 
there is or is not contamination. But I know that in California, we 
have the strictest laws concerning the quality of the food, both on the 
tree and in the can.
  I want our students to have the best. If the cost is way out of line, 
a waiver can be sought and granted. But no more willy-nilly not paying 
attention to the law, which says: American food for American schools. 
And now there will be somebody watching to make sure that that law is 
followed.
  I would also add that a similar bill is now being pushed through the 
California legislature.
  So, once again, it comes back to this issue: Do you want to grow the 
American economy? Do you want to use our taxpayer money to support 
American jobs and American manufacturing? Or are you willing to just 
not worry about it and let the jobs go wherever they may?
  I am still trying to find who it was; maybe one of my colleagues here 
in the House of Representatives or a Senator, but quite probably some 
staff person that when they wrote the American Recovery Act, they said: 
Great, we need new electric locomotives on the Eastern corridor. And 
they said: 100 percent American made. Hundreds of jobs in Sacramento 
building these. And the electric engines, the brakes, the steel, all 
the rest of it, all gathered from America, 100 percent American made.
  So don't let anybody tell you it can't be done. If we write the law, 
it will be done. Those LNG ships, those oil tankers that will take our 
crude oil and ship it around the world, those can be built in America, 
in the American shipyards with American welders and plumbers and 
boilermakers and naval architects and American businesses providing the 
jobs here in the United States. It is possible.
  But, colleagues, it takes a law. That is our business: to pass laws 
that support the American jobs, that support American businesses, just 
like the American Recovery Act. Sixteen lines of law. The export of 
crude oil, the export of LNG, starting with 5 percent in the first 
year, and then building up to 25 percent over the next 7 years. 
American ships will be built, American sailors will be on it, and 
American jobs will be here in the United States. We can do it if we 
want to.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________