Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a distinguished Ohioan, Ranjan Manoranjan. A native of Sri Lanka, Mr. Manoranjan is a tireless advocate of humanitarian efforts here in his adopted country and throughout the world. In July, Mr. Manoranjan was awarded the Ellis Island Medal of Honor, which honors American citizens who through struggle and sacrifice help build our Nation while preserving their own cultural identity. Past Ellis Island recipients include Bill Clinton, Rosa Parks, and Colin Powell. Co-founder of the International Relief Foundation, Mr. Manoranjan has raised millions of dollars to combat global poverty including significant support for tsunami relief. Mr. Manjoranjan's commitment to social and economic justice is evidenced in a letter I received from his business partner of 18 years. Nanda Nair wrote, ``He has been an example to me for giving back to the community, mentoring others, and preserving ancestral ties while celebrating America's tradition as the land of opportunity and self- improvement.''

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, for too long we have borne witness to relentless attacks on America's poor and working families. Abandoned by corporate America, betrayed by the political right, largely ignored by the mainstream media, our Nation's poor have become little more than an afterthought, most recently evidenced by what we as a Nation saw in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. While productivity and profit in America are up, wages are falling, and poverty is increasing. Since 1973, not coincidentally the year this country went from a trade surplus to a trade deficit, since 1973 the average worker has seen his or her wages go up about 10 percent in real dollars, while productivity has increased to almost 90 percent. It used to be in this country since World War II that when productivity went up that workers' wages went up roughly the same amount, that workers shared in the wealth that they created for their employer. Those days, unfortunately, have passed. An August census report revealed that in the United States the number of uninsured Americans has increased dramatically. In the last 5 years, the total number of Americans with employer-sponsored health coverage has fallen by almost 4 million. Because 1.1 million Americans dropped into poverty in 2004, almost 2 million more Americans enrolled in Medicaid that year; and yet in the face of growing poverty, the rising number of uninsured Americans, this administration and Republican leadership are demanding that we cut $10 billion from Medicaid. Just think about that again. More and more people need Medicaid, not just because of Katrina, but because of layoffs, because of plant closings, because more and more employers are dropping their coverage. More people need Medicaid. More people need health care because they have lost it. The congressional response is cutting Medicaid by $10 billion in order to continue to give even more tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent of people in this country. That is a choice this Congress is about to make, and it is scandalous. Household incomes fell for the fourth year in a row in 2004, something we had not seen in this country perhaps ever, at least since the Depression. The reality is that every segment of American society, except for the very wealthy, has seen its income decline under this administration. Men working full-time have seen their earnings drop below what they earned 6 years ago. Women working full-time have seen their annual incomes decrease also. America's men and women working full-time are the reason our Nation's productivity is up; and yet they are earning less every year. The number of people living in poverty increased in 2004 by 1.1 million people. Eight million children are uninsured. Thirteen million children live in poverty. The infant mortality rate is rising in the U.S. The infant mortality rate in Washington, D.C., is double that of the infant mortality rate in Beijing. This is the first year infant mortality has increased in this country since 1958. A U.N. report on global equality sheds light on the shadows of this administration's policies. This report said there are parts of the United States that are as poor as the Third World. One nation cannot survive as a thriving democracy, certainly our Nation cannot, under policies that rely on trickle-down economic theories. The aftermath of Katrina, when government should be at its most proactive to ensure the return of a thriving economy, this administration is working actively to lower wages in that region. An executive order handed down by President Bush will allow companies that win Federal contracts, companies that are the President's contributors, Halliburton, which is still paying Vice President Cheney retirement benefits of $3,000 a week, companies like that, while those companies are rebuilding, the President's executive order allows them to pay lower prevailing wages indefinitely. The community hit hardest by Katrina is the working poor. These men and women will literally do the heavy lifting in rebuilding the region. Yet the President is saying cut their wages. Cheating workers out of fair wages robs them of the ability to take ownership in their own community. One must ask why the President could depress wages for a community in crisis. It makes no sense. Mr. Speaker, these issues represent a divide in government policy, a betrayal of values that I thought Americans hold dear, that most of us do. These issues represent a moral obligation in the fight for dignity of every American.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, for too long we have borne witness to relentless attacks on America's poor and working families. We saw those divisions up close in the aftermath of Katrina as the poor and especially the working poor were left behind. Abandoned by corporate America, betrayed by the political right, largely ignored by the mainstream media, our Nation's poor, again especially the working poor, the people that clean hotel rooms, the people who provide security at businesses, the people in this country who are largely not seen and not much thought about, have become little more than an afterthought. While productivity and profit in America are up, wages are falling and poverty is increasing. The average working American over the last 30 years has seen her or his income go up 10 percent, yet their productivity has increased 80 percent. It used to be in our Nation if productivity went up, then wages have gone up, but there is now a disconnect. In other words, workers who create wealth for their employers, workers who create profits for their employers, are simply not sharing in the wealth and the profits that they have created. An August U.S. census report revealed that in the United States, the number of uninsured Americans increased. Fewer than 60 percent of employers now offer health insurance. Since 2000, the total number of Americans with employer-sponsored coverage has declined by 3.7 million people. Only because of Medicaid, a program that is a government insurance program, has the number of uninsured not dropped even more precipitously. Yet in the face of growing poverty, in the rising number of uninsured Americans, in the disaster that we saw from Katrina, this administration and the leaders of this Congress are demanding that we cut Medicaid by $10 billion. They want to cut Medicaid by $10 billion so they can give greater tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent of people in this society. Think of that choice. As the poor were left behind and the working poor were left behind in Katrina, this government, the President and the leaders in this House, want to do more tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent and they want to cut Medicaid $10 billion. Household incomes fell for the fourth year in a row in 2004. The reality is that every segment of American society has seen their income decline except for the wealthy under this administration. Men working full time have seen their earnings drop below what they earned 6 years ago, even though they are more productive, even though profits are up. Women working full time have also seen their annual incomes decrease. The media love to tell us, most of whom are pretty well paid, and politicians in Washington love to tell the public, hey, the economy is going great. It is for a lot of us, but overall wages have declined and poverty has gone up. Profits may be up for corporations and on a large scale the economy may look good, but to most people in this country the economy is not looking so good. America's men and women working full time are the reason that productivity is up, are the reason that profits are up, but they are simply not sharing in the wealth that they have created. The number of people living in poverty in America increased over 1 million people in 2004 alone. Eight million children are uninsured. Thirteen million children live in poverty. The infant mortality rate in Washington D.C. is twice as high as the infant mortality rate in Beijing. How shameful is that? The infant mortality rate in this country went up for the first time since 1958. How shameful is that? A U.N. report on global equality sheds light on the shadows of this administration's policies. Parts of the United States are as poor as the Third World. Our Nation cannot survive as a thriving democracy under policies that rely on trickledown economics. Poverty and social breakdown are core components of the global security threat. We cannot really be secure in this country until our people are secure. It is not just about a military. It is also about economic security for the people that clean our hotel rooms, that serve us food, that provide our security, that work at minimum wage jobs. Economic growth alone is not enough to reduce poverty, as long as we deny our most vulnerable citizens access to health care, access to education, and an opportunity to share in the wealth that they create. These issues represent a divide in government priorities and values that extend far beyond the halls of Congress. These issues represent a moral obligation in a fight for the dignity of every American.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Adolfo Aguilar Zinser was a scholarly and outspoken Mexican diplomat and politician whose independent struggle for democracy helped end 71 years of single-party rule. Ambassador Zinser was killed in a traffic accident while driving back from his country home south of Mexico City. He was only 55. It is my honor to lend my voice to the many admirers of Ambassador Zinser whose untimely death is a tremendous loss for all of us who believe in the fight for social and economic justice. A tireless defender of democracy and human rights, Mr. Aguilar Zinser will be remembered as a true patriot, a true fighter for his country, and a friend to so many of us. In recognition of his outstanding and valuable service to Mexico, I want to offer my deepest sympathies to his family and to his many friends around the world.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Katrina put a human face on hardship. It reminded us that there are Americans who work hard and pay their taxes and play by the rules, yet are still hanging on by a thread. It reminded us how easily that thread can break. In the clearest terms possible, it communicated the value, both tangible and intangible, of government assistance. Many people who suffered from Katrina have relied on Medicaid, a government health care program for poor families, for families who are working but do not make enough or have health insurance. Yet as we return to Washington this week after surveying the damage from this terrible storm, Republican leaders are pursuing $10 billion, $10 billion, in cuts to that Medicaid program, in large part because they are insisting on more tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of the people of our country. As we saw the poorest in New Orleans left behind while those who were more affluent were able to escape, this Congress, frankly, is mimicking that same process, that same scenario, where we are giving tax cuts to the wealthiest citizens, while the poorest and the middle class and those who are working hard and playing by the rules and paying their taxes but who cannot afford health care, we are leaving them behind. Our Nation's leaders must stop blaming the poor for having the same health care needs we all do. Helping the poor secure health care is not a frivolous extravagance; it is an expression of our values as a Nation. Health care is expensive. No one has figured out, especially in this institution, with the power of the drug companies and the influence of the insurance industry, no one here has been willing to find a solution to contain medical costs without stifling medical progress. Our Nation's leaders must stop pretending that taking health care away from the poor solves that dilemma. They must stop pretending that the poor take advantage of Medicaid, as if enrollees look for excuses to take off work and see the doctor. The Nation's leaders must stop pretending that taking health care away from the poor will not hurt them. It is a convenient theory. It is also patently false. Hurricane Katrina forced this Nation, if only for a few days, to see through the eyes of Americans living in poverty. It was a grim reminder that Americans from all walks of life can be financially independent one day and in desperate need the next. A natural disaster, a catastrophic illness, a stock market crash, an aging parent, a sick child, that is all it takes. Katrina reminded us that when Americans witness human suffering, they do everything in their power as a great Nation, as the people, not the government, they do everything in their power to alleviate that suffering. Medicaid is the Nation's insurer of last resort. It simply is a financing mechanism that, with modest adjustments and sufficient resources, can accommodate the health care needs of the hurricane victims without delay, without red tape. Medicaid serves people who have virtually no resources of their own. In Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, we have seen what that kind of poverty looks like. Some policymakers have proposed saving money by increasing the cost- sharing burden on Medicare enrollees, people who already ration every dollar to get through their daily lives, to cover their basic necessities. Medicaid enrollees are not going to respond to increased cost-sharing by forsaking discretionary care. Other obstacles, like transportation costs and hourly wage jobs, already force those choices. Increased cost-sharing will deter timely, necessary health care. That is not right, that is not smart, that is not compassionate. Delays increase the cost of treating illnesses. Policymakers have also proposed ``tailoring'' Medicaid coverage to fit the health care needs of different beneficiaries. That is not an efficient way of cutting costs; it is an efficient way of cutting care. It is the wrong decision to make, to make this $10 billion Medicaid cut.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, our hearts go out to all who have suffered the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina. Our hearts also go out to those who have suffered the tragedy of a failed Federal Government in coming to their aid in saving people's lives. I ask my friends on the other side of the aisle to step back for a minute, to stop their campaign out of the White House blaming local and State officials for their role in this tragedy. I also ask my friends on the other side of the aisle to step back from their mission to cut Medicaid $10 billion, that they step back from their drive to cut taxes for the wealthiest 1 percent of people in this country; because instead of those tax cuts for the wealthy, instead of cutting Medicaid $10 billion, this Congress should, first of all, adopt legislation that anybody in need of disaster-related assistance should only have to fill a single form out for Medicaid, if they have lost their job, for TANF, for unemployment insurance, for food stamps. The simplified form, instead of the bureaucracy we know they will deal with, could be used to determine eligibility for all Federal programs for a 90-day period, just showing you have lost your job because of Hurricane Katrina, and then they could be helped.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is one of the major civil rights victories of the past half- century. The ADA ensures that governments and businesses cannot discriminate against individuals with disabilities in employment. Passage of the ADA has widened access, deepened involvement, and raised the level of engagement for people with disabilities at every level of society. This is particularly true in the government, where the voices of disabled Americans are heard and help shape new policies and laws. We're not there yet--with hard work and diligence, we'll continue to move our country toward being a place where disabled individuals are treated like every other American. But we're making some progress. I believe the federal government should take a leadership role in advocating on behalf of disabled Americans. Social Security's disability insurance program is one important aspect of that leadership role. Here in Ohio and nationwide, Americans seeking Social Security disability benefits wait more than 3 years on average for final decisions on their appeals. In some cases, they are losing their family car, their savings, and even their homes--while they wait for their government to act. I support responsible proposals to reform the disability appeals processing system. I have urged congressional appropriators to provide appropriate funding to help the Social Security Administration reduce the appeals backlog and reduce the wait for disabled Americans. Disabled Americans have a huge stake in the fight to strengthen Social Security's solvency. Plans to privatize Social Security put the income security of American workers at risk--especially workers whose careers are cut short by a disabling illness or injury. With more than 230,000 Ohioans currently receiving Social Security disability benefits, there is too much at stake to play games with Social Security's future. It's appropriate for us to gather to celebrate the ADA--an important first step. Working together, we can fix these and other roadblocks for the millions of Americans who live full lives every day with disabilities.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) who has been a strong advocate during his several terms in Congress for patient safety and for patients generally.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. It is tragic when Americans die prematurely despite modern medicine. It is heartbreaking when Americans die because of modern medicine. Medical errors take lives, medical errors waste money, and medical errors are largely preventable. Based on available data, medical errors kill up to 100,000 Americans every year. That number, for sure, is a ballpark estimate because we know that medical errors are underreported. That is disturbing, but hardly surprising. The reality is that the consequences of reporting medical errors can be onerous, which deters some who commit or witness medical errors from documenting them. This legislation is intended to overcome that obstacle. To reduce the number of medical errors, we need to understand what causes them and address those causes. Accurate and complete information on medical errors is the first step. H.R. 3205, or S. 544, creates a secure voluntary medical error reporting system. The system is carefully crafted to encourage information-sharing without undermining the ability of patients to obtain justice when they are harmed and to help the health care system identify the root causes of medical errors without hindering the prosecution of criminal acts. My friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), and I have been working on this legislation for several years. I appreciate his leadership on this issue, as well as that of the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal), and our ranking member on the full committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), along with the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton). I would also like to commend committee staff on both sides of the aisle for their hard work to reach a solid bipartisan, bicameral compromise on this bill. H.R. 3205/S. 544 will strengthen our health care system and save lives, and I urge my colleagues' support of this measure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 544 is identical to the bill passed out of the Committee on Emergency and Commerce, H.R. 3205. Therefore, the committee report we will be filing based on H.R. 3205 is directly relevant to S. 544. I wanted that part of the Record.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Drug addiction is a problem we must face both at the individual and the systemic level. We bear the cost of addiction as a society. These costs are measured in lives and unmet human potential; and, frankly, in dollars. A recent study by the National Institutes of Health found the economic cost of drug abuse totaled some $100 billion a year, costs borne by all members of society by increased demand on our health care system and our criminal justice system. H.R. 869, the Drug Addiction Treatment Expansion Act, addresses an anomaly in the current law that limits access to an effective drug addiction treatment. To ensure proper oversight of drug addiction treatment, current law limits the number of patients any one doctor can treat. However, this restriction inadvertently limits group practices to the same 30-patient limit. This legislation clarifies that each doctor in a group practice is subject to the 30-patient limit, not the group practice as a whole. This bill will expand access to effective addiction treatment. When we come together to fight addiction, we must use every means available. This bill gives doctors an improved and important tool. H.R. 869 has the support of a range of organizations, including the American Psychological Association and the Partnership for a Drug Free America. I am pleased to support its passage. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano).

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes. Prescription pain relievers, stimulants, and other controlled substances play a crucial role in health care; but when misused, these same medicines can be enormously destructive. Some are addictive. Some are life-threatening. Many are both. As these medicines proliferate, so, unfortunately, does the risk of misuse. Over the last decade, use of prescription pain relievers increased by almost 200 percent while the use of stimulants increased by more than 150 percent. An estimated 6.2 million Americans misuse prescription medications for nonmedicinal purposes. In 1999, a quarter of those taking prescription drugs for nonmedical purposes were new users. In other words, this problem is not just growing, it is exploding. To combat this abuse, physicians and pharmacists need information. This legislation, the culmination of hard work and compromise, as the gentleman from Georgia pointed out, by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) who is here today, and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), will provide the information and coordination necessary to stem the misuse of prescription medicines. The legislation creates grants to establish State-run programs for prescription monitoring that will be administered and coordinated at the Federal level. Over 20 States currently have such a program in place or are working to develop one. Fighting prescription abuse and preventing nonmedical use is a difficult problem that requires doctors and law enforcement authorities to acquire and share information. For this reason, groups like the American Medical Association and the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians have lent their endorsement to this bill. I believe this bill is an important step forward in this fight and am pleased to support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), a member of the Health Subcommittee.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, before yielding to my friend from Guam, I would like to make a couple of opening comments. The Controlled Substances Import and Export Reform Act is commonsense legislation that would lift unnecessary barriers to the export of controlled substances. I was pleased to join my colleague on the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), as a sponsor of this legislation. Our bill expands the U.S. role in an important export while maintaining safeguards to prevent illegal diversion of controlled substances. The key provisions of this bill create a regulatory mechanism by which U.S. exporters can ship controlled substances efficiently from one country to another, enabling those companies to compete on a global scale. The Drug Enforcement Administration worked with us on this legislation to ensure sufficient protections for consumers and safeguards against illegal activity. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) and his staff for their work on this bill. I am pleased to support its passage. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo).

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Guam, and I will work with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) and the gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the congressional Representatives from other U.S. territories to secure the inclusion of U.S. territories in the conference report on the prior legislation reauthorizing the State high-risk pool grant funding; and I thank the gentlewoman from Guam and also the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen) in joining us on the floor. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes. I am pleased to join the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) in supporting H.R. 3204, which reauthorizes funding for State high-risk insurance pools. I commend my colleagues, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), for their work on this legislation. In many States, high-risk insurance pools are the only option for individuals who have been denied access to coverage in the commercial insurance system. The legislation before us is intended not only to strengthen existing high-risk pools, but to help States without such pools, my home State of Ohio is one of them, to help States without such pools to establish them. But as we reauthorize this legislation, it is important to place high-risk insurance pools in context. These pools are a symptom of a troubled insurance system, not a cure for it. The fact is, health insurance itself is supposed to serve as a high- risk pool. It used to be that health insurance was offered to everyone at the same premium, because any one of us could be the unlucky one to need the health care we cannot afford. By spreading risk broadly, good health insurance can be affordable for everyone regardless of their health needs, regardless of their health status. But commercial insurers did what businesses do, they figured out how to maximize profits. You can hardly blame them for that. You can, however, blame policymakers in this body and other places. You can blame policymakers for letting the insurance industry get away with that. The best way to earn profits in the health insurance industry, of course, is to avoid insuring people who may actually use the coverage. And health insurers use every trick in the book to do that, to avoid those people. To the extent they can get away with it, commercial insurers underwrite and price people who need coverage right out of the insurance market. Private health insurance used to be a community; now it is almost a country club. So we are left with stopgap mechanisms like high-risk insurance pools. They are far from ideal, but our most vulnerable citizens certainly would be worse off without them. We should make sure high-risk insurance pools are available. We should also keep working until we render them unnecessary. I appreciate the author's willingness, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), and the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) to accept an amendment I offered during committee consideration to ensure that States use at least 50 percent of the bill's funding to expand access to the pool or to improve the high-risk coverage. As it stands, States can and have used Federal risk-pool funding to replace dollars collected for the pool from private insurers, leaving the risk pools themselves no better off. That is a subversion of the bill's purposes and a questionable use of Federal funding. My amendment that the committee accepted reminds the States that Federal high-risk pool funding is intended to expand the quality and reach of high-risk pools, not to let commercial insurers off the hook for making those pools unnecessary. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation on behalf of individuals disenfranchised from private health insurance because they are not in perfect health. That hardly makes sense. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I have been privileged to work closely with dozens of Democrats and Republicans in building a strong coalition against the Central American Free Trade Agreement. I would like to thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter) and their staffs for their outstanding efforts in helping to build this coalition. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for their leadership, as well as Tim Reif and Julie Herwig and, in my office, Joanna Kuebler and Brett Gibson for their outstanding work. A special thank you to the members and staff of the CAFTA whip operation, a grassroots bipartisan operation numbering literally in the hundreds, made up of Members and staff on both sides of the aisle. CAFTA faces broad and deep opposition because it was crafted by a select few for a select few. More than 200,000 Central Americans have protested the Central America Free Trade Agreement. In the United States, thousands, literally thousands of Democrats and Republicans, business and labor groups, small manufacturers, family farmers and ranchers, religious leaders have called on the administration not to reject any CAFTA, but to renegotiate this Central American Free Trade Agreement. We do want trade with Central America, but we want a trade agreement that deserves to pass Congress based on its merits. CAFTA supporters have resorted to toothless side deals and strong-arm tactics. Late last week, a CAFTA supporter and member of the congressional leadership said they would win this vote by twisting arms until they break in a thousand pieces. By twisting arms until they break into a thousand pieces. When facts fail, they twist arms. They make deals. They buy votes. The CAFTA debate is not a Democrat or Republican issue. The call to renegotiate crosses party lines and ideologies, as we have seen tonight. Tonight's debate is about social and economic responsibility to our families in this country and our communities and our trading partners abroad. This agreement is about U.S. companies moving plants to Honduras, outsourcing jobs to El Salvador, and exploiting cheap labor in Guatemala. It is not about lifting up standards in the developing world. It hurts our families in this country. It does nothing for the Dominican Republic and the five Central American countries. Mr. Speaker, when the nations' poor can buy American products, not just make them, then we will know finally that our trade policies are succeeding.