Eric Cantor

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, providing about 70 percent of U.S. jobs, small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy. When they struggle, when they contract, when they fail to obtain credit and put capital to work, America struggles. And right now our small businesses are struggling like never before. With such an ominous backdrop, it is only logical that we do everything in our power to strengthen our small businesses and make it easier for them to create jobs and put people back to work. But as small business owners across this country have told us for months now, Washington is doing the opposite. The wave of newly proposed tax increases, health care mandates, and financial and energy regulations are adding fresh gasoline to the fire. They have created a pervasive state of fear about the future cost of doing business that is enveloping reluctant job creators. Madam Speaker, if the economy is going to be resurgent, small business owners will have to provide the spark. I know many of us have met with our small business owners over the last several months. I have. I have conducted several small business forums in my district. One of those, in Richmond, I heard the message loud and clear. Small businesses want to expand. They want to hire more workers. They want to invest. But they can barely afford to keep the lights on right now. The message to me, Madam Speaker, was very clear. Of all times, now is the wrong one for Washington to go and slap more taxes and regulations on us. These small businesses asked me: Why is there such a huge disconnect between what we in the small business community need and what our government thinks we need? Why does Washington spend so extravagantly and fund this spree by squeezing the very people who can create and provide jobs? The point was this: It was that the misguided policies being brought forward either siphon capital away from small businesses or cause them to hoard capital out of a grave concern. Talk of card check, surtaxes, marginal tax hikes, minimum health coverage mandates, cap-and-trade, et cetera, all of this adds new and unnecessary layers of concern. This concern will harm small business employment, and has, and the number of business establishments and the types of such establishments, such as sole proprietorships, corporations, and partnerships. Madam Speaker, we will see repercussions in the amount of capital investment small businesses attract; in the number of business formations and failures; and the amount of sales and new orders and investment in plant and equipment because of the very actions being proposed in this House and throughout Washington. The bill before us today proposes to modify and expand a variety of SBA loan programs. The SBA plays an important part in helping America's small businesses. But let us be clear, Madam Speaker, the vast majority of small businesses do not participate in SBA programs. They rely on community banks, investment capital, and other forms of credit to start and expand their business. In fact, the Discovery Financial Services small business survey recently found that 90 percent of small businesses report that they have never even applied for an SBA loan. Reports from banks confirm that most small business credit is supplied outside of the SBA. In 2007--the most recent data-- banks reported through the CRA that they originated or purchased $329 billion in loans for small businesses. By comparison, Madam Speaker, the SBA averages between $20 billion and $30 billion in lending a year. Small businesses, whether they use SBA or other sources of financing, will all be impacted by massive tax hikes, regulations, and mandates being proposed currently by the Democratic majority. Madam Speaker, the bottom line is this. The resulting loans being called for under this bill by the Small Business Administration will not even come close to offsetting the cost to small businesses caused by the concerns businesses have over the majority's agenda in this House. So, Madam Speaker, I suggest this. Abandon your proposals to impose record-high taxes. Abandon the proposals for underfunded mandates on our businesses and costly regulations. Provide our small business job creators with the certainty that Washington isn't going to be saddling them with new penalties, with new taxes and with new high costs. We take a first step towards that goal today, Madam Speaker, by adopting this motion, and I urge the House to do so. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CANTOR

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland, the majority leader, for the purpose of announcing next week's schedule.

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman if he can give us any indication about the days on which we could expect these particular bills to be debated and voted upon on the House floor.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman for that. Madam Speaker, I would like to say to the gentleman that I noticed that this morning we Republicans, just like the public, were not allowed to attend the Speaker's unveiling of the public option bill. I know that the gentleman here on this House floor and I have always talked about the need for transparency, certainly at this particular occasion, and at the press conference the public nor any Republican was allowed to attend. I would note for the record, Madam Speaker--I know the gentleman knows this--that the steps of the Capitol are and should be open to the public. I would think, Madam Speaker, that in the spirit of trying to work together, when we have such a transformative piece of domestic legislation, that if there is a press conference for the public on public grounds to discuss public option, it should be open to all. Madam Speaker, I just felt that the gentleman would agree with me on that. But I would like to at this point turn to what the events of next week will be.

Mr. CANTOR. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker--and I don't intend to belabor this point with the gentleman--but I do know for a fact that individuals were precluded from entering. And I'm told that invitations were issued with RSVPs, and if you were not on the list of RSVPs, you couldn't enter. And I do know for a fact that people were prohibited from doing so. Again, Madam Speaker, I would say, this is not just some ordinary press conference. This was a press conference held on the front steps of the Capitol. This was a press conference, the subject of which was a piece of legislation that portends to transform one-sixth of this economy of this country and to deal with the most personal issues of health care universally applied to all people. So I do thank the gentleman for his concern and his belief that it should have been open, because I believe as well.

Mr. CANTOR. Again, I don't want to belabor the point any further. I just politely disagree with the gentleman, having known, and the fact is there were people stopped from entering. With that, Madam Speaker, I would turn to some inquiries that I have about how we are going to proceed in discussing this massive 1,990 pages of legislation; how it is that if the gentleman believes that we are going to be taking it up as early as Thursday, then could he tell us if the bill itself, in general, does it resemble H.R. 3200?

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. As the gentleman knows, Madam Speaker, not every one of the Members in this body serve on those three committees. From what I can gather of the gentleman's statement that if the discussion in the committees and the discussion in the town halls across this country over the summer were indicative of the discussions surrounding this new bill, then perhaps I am to conclude that this bill is H.R. 3200, because the point, Madam Speaker, is that this is a new bill. It was unveiled today, and, again, I pointed out to the gentleman, Madam Speaker, very troubling that it was unveiled in a closed press conference. Somehow the majority felt and the Speaker felt it necessary to block Republicans and the public from that unveiling. Now we have a new bill, it is over 1,900, nearly 2,000 pages long. We do have a concern that we have adequate time to look at this bill, to understand this bill, to debate this bill. I would ask the gentleman how much time for debate will be given on this House floor of this 1,990-page bill? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman for that history.

Mr. CANTOR. And the interpretation of that history. I asked a simple question, Madam Speaker, of how long the debate will be on this House floor of a bill that has been just introduced, and, according to the gentleman, maybe it's not this bill that's just been introduced, maybe it is H.R. 3200, because that's what's been the discussion across this country up until now. But, Madam Speaker, this is a bill that is now being reported to be presented at a cost of $2 million a word, five times longer than the Torah, longer than the well- known work of War and Peace. That's how long this bill is. It's a new bill. I am simply asking how much time can we expect to have for debate on the floor of this transformative piece of legislation that will alter one-sixth of the country's economy. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I am just asking a simple question. There is no criticism here. There is plenty of that I know in this body. I am asking a simple question, Madam Speaker. How long are we going to be allowed for debate on this floor on this bill?

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. As I am not, Madam Speaker, being too successful in eliciting a response that is definitive, I would ask the gentleman, when we are considering this bill that is not affecting one program like Medicare, like he referred to in 2003 in part D, while we are considering a bill that is dealing with one-sixth of our economy, every aspect of health care in America comes under this bill. What is it that the majority leader has in mind in terms of the ability for all Members of this body to represent their constituents, to offer amendments, to have their voices heard on this floor? If the gentleman could please enlighten me and our colleagues as to what the amendment process will be on this bill. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. I would ask the gentleman if he could be a little bit more specific about the amendment deadline so our Members can be adequately put on notice for that. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. Madam Speaker, I would ask the gentleman, then, does that mean there will be no amendments allowed? I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. I would expect that he would inform us of exactly when that vote will take place in order for us to know when that 72-hour period will be triggered as far as our substitute, if the gentleman is offering us a substitute, would be submitted in order to meet what he imposes as a deadline on us. Madam Speaker, I would ask, though, I still don't understand about the posture of amendments. I know that there are many Members in this House, in fact, there may very well be close to a majority if not more than a majority of Members in this House, who are interested in amendments having to do with the protection of life in this bill on health care and the question of prohibiting government funding of abortion. And I would ask the gentleman whether we are going to be given an opportunity to vote on that issue through the amendment process. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I'm sorry?

Mr. CANTOR. I thank you. Madam Speaker, there is also the issue of the conscience clause, as to whether that will also be a subject of an amendment to this bill, as many of our Members, if not a majority, are interested in that as well. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman, and I thank him for taking note of our concern on that issue.

Mr. CANTOR. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. That is correct, and I appreciate the gentleman's comments there. I would ask the gentleman, Madam Speaker, about the question of the manager's amendment, when we can expect that to be online and whether the public will have 72 hours to view that amendment prior to any vote. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. Finally, on the issue of this massive bill on health care that we are about to debate next week, I would ask, Madam Speaker, the gentleman whether we can expect the doctor reimbursement bill to be included in this bill or whether it will be coming as a separate bill to the floor. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. I know that, as he discussed the Senate's experience with that bill, obviously the question of a deficit is looming large surrounding that issue, and I would note that, Madam Speaker. But in closing----

Mr. CANTOR. I yield.

Mr. CANTOR. I thank the gentleman. And I know that he knows the reported agreement on all of this excludes the doc fix as well as those other items from being paid for, which is of concern to him, I know, as well as many of us when we're considering this health bill and then choose to leave out a significant portion of government expense under Medicare in terms of reimbursing providers under the SGR.