Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank Ranking Member Capuano for yielding me this time. I want to thank the capable chairman of the committee, Mr. Shuster, and the chairman and the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. DeFazio, for bringing this important Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act before us. Mr. Chairman, as the Representative of the busiest Amtrak station in Ohio at Toledo and the Amtrak stations in Sandusky and Elyria-Lorain, I rise to urge the passage of this important bill to continue and advance passenger rail service across our Nation. When I was born, the population of the United States was 146 million people. Today, it surpasses 320 million. By 2020, our Nation's population is projected to reach over half a billion people--over 500 million. As time moves forward, the necessity for passenger rail will become clearer with each passing day. Many of our major urban centers are clogged with traffic jams daily, and the railroads across my region of our continent have severe freight rail and passenger rail conflicts because they are forced to use the same tracks. Imagine that we are living in the 21st century, and we are still tethered to 19th century rail pathways. Passenger rail travel in Ohio is booming despite these constraints-- up from 108,000 passengers in 2007 to 160,000 passengers in 2013. A trend in my district has grown as well, with Toledo passengers on the northwest Ohio corridor increasing from 53,000 to 77,000 over the same time. Imagine the traffic jams if all of these individuals traveled by car instead of rail. It is not just the northeastern part of our Nation that needs added attention to passenger rail service, as important as that is. It should also include the Great Lakes Region. The corridor that stretches the length of my district and connects our industrial heartland corridor from Pittsburgh to Cleveland to Sandusky to Toledo to Gary to Chicago needs special attention, too. During an extended stretch last year, between July and September, the Capitol Limited, which runs from Washington, D.C., to Chicago and includes my northern Ohio stretch, completed only 2.7 percent of its trips on time--2.7 percent out of 100 percent on time. The dramatic increase of freight rail consistently bumps passenger service. We need both, but what we have are these lengthy delays to passenger service across our vast region. I have two articles I would like to insert into the Record detailing these troubles. [From the Blade] Amtrak Trains Often Trickle Into Toledo After Rash of Delays (By David Patch) Christine Smith boarded Amtrak's Lake Shore Limited in Chicago on Tuesday night to visit a friend in Toledo. The train left Chicago two hours late and made it only about 15 miles to Indiana's northwest corner, where it sat for about three hours, Ms. Smith recalled. By the time it got to Toledo, it was six hours behind schedule. It was only the latest of a series of late Amtrak trains the Melbourne, Australia, resident said she had encountered since arriving in Los Angeles last month and riding from there to San Francisco, Portland, Ore., Spokane, and Chicago. Late trains are nothing new for Amtrak, particularly for the overnight, long-distance trains such as those that serve Toledo--the Lake Shore Limited and Capitol Limited. Trains running more than three hours late have become the norm recently, and they have often lost that much or more just on the Chicago-Toledo portion of trips. The Capitol Limited was 12 hours behind schedule on Sunday. While there have been exceptions, by far the biggest obstacle to Amtrak's time-keeping across northern Indiana and northern Ohio has been tracks blocked by freight trains belonging to Norfolk Southern, which owns and operates the line Amtrak uses between Chicago and Cleveland. ``It's absolutely unbelievable what they're doing to the American people. It's a fraud,'' Ms. Smith said. ``Every train I've been on has been late leaving and late arriving, and freight trains are given as the reason.'' During the 12 months that ended in August, Capitol Limited trains arrived at their end stations in Chicago or Washington within 30 minutes of schedule only 22.5 percent of the time, while the Lake Shore reached Chicago or New York on time 30.8 percent of the time, according to Amtrak. But August itself was significantly worse, and September data, when available, is unlikely to show improvement. In August, the best performer was the eastbound Lake Shore, which reached New York within 30 minutes of schedule 6.5 percent of the time--two trips. The westbound was late into Chicago every day of the month, and the Capitol Limiteds arrived on time once in each direction. Late westbound arrivals in Chicago also translate to late eastbound departures, because Amtrak lacks spare equipment in Chicago to make up replacement trains when equipment arrives late, and it also does not have enough engineers and conductors to always have an extra train crew ready to replace one that has worked the maximum 12-hour shift set by federal regulation. Marc Magliari, an Amtrak spokesman in Chicago, laid even the late departures from Chicago at Norfolk Southern's feet. ``If the train is late getting to Chicago, it's most likely going to be late eastbound while we're servicing equipment and getting proper rest for our crews,'' Mr. Magliari said. ``The result is to drive up our costs, dissatisfy our passengers, and create `never again' riders.'' While its ridership pales in comparison to major stations like New York and Chicago, Toledo historically has been Amtrak's busiest Ohio stop, and its ridership has declined of late. After peaking at more than 90,000 riders in 2010 and 2011, Toledo's Amtrak ridership dropped to 87,073 in 2012 and 86,252 last year, according to statistics provided to the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, which owns the Toledo station. During the first seven months of 2014, Amtrak's Toledo ridership has fallen by another 7 percent, those statistics show. David Pidgeon, a Norfolk Southern spokesman, said the freight-train backlog is a product of ``more trains and capacity challenges in the corridor between Chicago and Cleveland'' because the freight traffic exceeds what the company handled before the 2008 recession. ``We generally have a cooperative relationship with Amtrak because we are each other's landlords,'' Mr. Pidgeon said. ``We run on their network and they run on ours, so there's plenty of business and personal incentive to keep the cooperation going. ``We want to keep freight and passenger trains moving, period.'' One of the busiest pieces of railroad in the entire United States, Norfolk Southern's double-track main has become, to varying degrees, an obstacle course of stopped and slow- moving freight trains. A particular growth area has been oil shipments from the Bakken oilfields of North Dakota to terminals on the East Coast, rail traffic that simply didn't exist before 2009 but now accounts for dozens of trains through Toledo each week. Rail expansion Norfolk Southern is building a third main track between Chesterton and Gary, Ind., a 30-mile section that is the busiest stretch of the region's busiest freight railroad. It includes several major junctions and runs through the heart of one of America's most heavily industrialized areas, the steel mills and a major oil refinery along Lake Michigan's southern shore. Until that third track is ready for use, its construction is impairing train traffic. When only one track is open for trains, traffic only goes one way while opposing trains wait. The spot where Ms. Smith's train stopped is near the west end of the Chesterton- Gary construction zone. LaPorte, Ind.--where the Chicago- bound Amtrak trains from Toledo have often sat for hours in recent weeks--is near the east end. And not only have passenger trains to and from Toledo been affected by that problem, so too have Amtrak's five daily round-trip trains between Chicago and Detroit, Grand Rapids, and Port Huron, Mich., which use the same rails west of Chesterton. The third track in northwest Indiana is one of several capacity-improvement projects under way on Norfolk Southern in the region. Most prominent among the others is a $160 million expansion of the Bellevue, Ohio, yard, which will double in size when the project is done later this year, easing congestion at other yards, Mr. Pidgeon said. That ``will ease the demand for space in Elkhart and hopefully significantly reduce transit times for our freight trains, keeping us moving and the network fluid,'' he said. Norfolk Southern has 50 new locomotives soon to be delivered and also has bought several hundred used ones in the past year or two to address shortages. It also is hiring close to 100 new train conductors in the Toledo area and has transferred 120 more from other parts of its system to the Cleveland-Chicago corridor to alleviate crew shortages, Mr. Pidgeon said. The Ohio Association of Railroad Passengers, an advocacy group, cites another factor in the freight-train delays: An automated dispatching system Norfolk Southern has been introducing on portions of its rail network during the past two years. The system, called the Auto-Router, is designed to mimic a job human train dispatchers have done for years--deciding which trains run on which tracks at what time. The automated system could supplement that work, allowing the human dispatchers to work larger territories, or eventually it could replace them. Train dispatching is a job with a lot of variables because freight trains don't all travel at the same speed. Some are long, heavy, and slow; others are short and, ideally, fast. Hills, track repairs, and certain trains' need to stop at yards along the way to pick up or drop off cars also can factor into how trains are dispatched. Critics of the system including OARP--also known as All Aboard Ohio--and Norfolk Southern sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because they're not authorized to talk to reporters said the Auto-Router system's flaws are contributing to the railroad's congestion. Passenger complaints While Amtrak riders interviewed by The Blade said they understand how the passenger trains are at the freight railroads' mercy, some said the passenger-train operator could handle the situation better, too. Jean McGraw of Port Clinton, who boarded the Boston-bound Lake Shore in Sandusky in late September to visit a sister in New Hampshire, said she and her travel companion got two emails ``in the middle of the night'' about train delays but got no updates after that. And when the bus Ms. McGraw and other Boston-bound passengers rode from Albany got to Boston at 4 a.m. the next day, the station there was locked. The passengers cajoled the bus driver into letting them take shelter in a neighboring bus garage, she said. ``That was it--it was ridiculous,'' Ms. McGraw said. As compensation, Amtrak offered vouchers good toward future train travel. Ms. McGraw said she hopes to use hers once the current problems are resolved, but her companion swore off train travel because of the experience. Untested is whether Norfolk Southern's handling of Amtrak violates a 1973 federal law directing the freight railroads to give the passenger trains preferential handling. A more recent federal law, passed in 2008, directed the Federal Railroad Administration and Amtrak to develop performance standards for Amtrak trains. However, a later appellate court ruling stalled this. According to the rail passengers association, Amtrak's overall on-time performance has plummeted since that 2013 ruling, which is the subject of a pending Supreme Court appeal. Dan McMackin, a United Parcel Service spokesman, said his company has recently changed the train routes it uses to move packages in response to train delays, though he did not confirm that the company specifically removed its cargo from the Norfolk Southern route. ``We have seen some recent lower reliability in several lanes and are adjusting accordingly, with guidance from our rail service partners as to appropriate network corrections,'' Mr. McMackin said. ``While there have been lanes affected over the last several months, we expect long- term reliability to return and most of our adjustments are seen as temporary.'' But while UPS may be ready to send packages back to the Cleveland-Toledo-Chicago corridor once Norfolk Southern's problems are resolved, Amtrak could have a harder time winning back Tanya Miller, of Taylor, Mich., one of the riders who boarded the New York-bound train in Toledo on Wednesday morning. ``This is my first time and my very last time taking Amtrak,'' she said. ``I'm not recommending Amtrak to anyone.''

Ms. KAPTUR. Customers are understandably frustrated. Our region needs customer-convenient hours and passenger-friendly arrivals and departures. Our Great Lakes Region needs a capital investment plan, too, for passenger service. We need evaluation for State-supported routes. Our region needs expedited attention, methodology development, and service planning to remedy growing congestion inefficiencies that benefit no one, not the freight lines, not the passenger service, and surely not the communities they are supposed to serve--nor connectivity to inner city passenger rail service. I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Shuster and of Ranking Member DeFazio, as well as of Subcommittee Chair Denham and Ranking Member Capuano, in working together to produce this bill.

Ms. KAPTUR. I ask that our vast Midwest industrial heartland region not be excluded for alternative passenger rail service pilot programs, opportunities for rail investment, station improvements, and historic preservation, nor for public-private partnerships that can advance modern passenger rail in this vital corridor of our country. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking Member, and I urge the adoption of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the House bring up H.R. 861. Let's protect the American people. The clean Department of Homeland Security funding bill should be brought before the House so we can keep it open and carry out its mission of keeping the American people safe.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I stand here this morning as a member of the Appropriations Committee and its Subcommittee on Homeland Security. Our subcommittee is responsible for setting and overseeing funding for the operations of the Department of Homeland Security. In 2 days, on February 27, astoundingly, funding for the Department of Homeland Security runs out because the Republican majority can't agree on a bill due to their internal disagreements on the immigration provisions which are contained in the same bill because it is in the same Department. Although a clean funding bill, H.R. 861, could quickly be brought to this House floor for a vote to fund the entire Department for the remainder of this fiscal year, Republicans have defaulted to the rightwing extremists in their own party and instead have chosen to hold the security of our Nation hostage in order to contort the legislative process. They would defund the President's immigration executive order merely because they want a partisan win more than they want to govern. What a tragedy. To quote an editorial from yesterday's Washington Post: ``The fervor of Republican partisanship, especially in the House, is immune to logic beyond an insistence on victory at any cost.'' This is a Republican Party that just a year and a half ago shut our Nation's government down for 16 days, stopping critical services and doing significant harm to the U.S. economy; then, too, they seemed more interested in a political win than responsible governance. Recall, their party also had the opportunity last Congress to bring a bipartisan comprehensive immigration bill to the floor for a vote but declined to act. They have chosen not to address a concern that an overwhelming number of Americans believe needs to be resolved. There are grave consequences for forcing the Department of Homeland Security into a shutdown. The Republican Congress would cripple the Federal Emergency Management Agency's preparations for future disasters as more than a fifth of personnel are furloughed. The Republican Congress would end the Federal Emergency Management Agency's training activities with local law enforcement for weapons of mass destruction. The Republican Congress would cut off pay to thousands of Department of Homeland Security employees who are personally tasked with protecting our homeland. The Republican Congress would stop research and development work on countermeasures to protect us against devastating biological threats, on nuclear detection equipment, and on cargo and passenger screening technologies. The Republican Congress would shutter the Department of Homeland Security's Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, meaning there will be no alerts or coordination efforts with local law enforcement agencies if a nuclear event occurs. This is so utterly irresponsible. In an era of amplified global threats, brutal terrorist attacks throughout Europe, and escalating tension throughout the Middle East, to cut off funding for the Department tasked with ensuring our homeland security is safe and secure is truly dangerous. This sort of behavior throws sand into the gears of a great society, of a great country, the oldest Republic on the face of the Earth. The American people surely are looking for reassurance that their government will offer them the security and dependability they expect. We have a responsibility to protect their security, even if it means we no longer can indulge in political brinksmanship. Mr. Speaker, we have a working bipartisan majority here in this House that holds the power to govern this Nation. All it needs is the will. Let's bring the clean Department of Homeland Security funding bill to the floor today. Let's stop playing political games with the safety and security of the American people. We owe it to them to govern and to do the job we were elected to do.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the House bring up H.R. 861, the clean Department of Homeland Security funding bill, that would keep the Department open so it can carry out its vital mission of keeping the American people safe.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Drinking Water Protection Act, to arm communities against the threats posed by toxic algae. The water emergency across the Toledo region for three days last August highlighted the need for a more robust federal response to harmful algal blooms in our Great Lakes and around the country. Nearly half a million people, businesses, and hospitals were without fresh water from the city's system. First and foremost, Northern Ohio--which draws its sustenance from Lake Erie--has to guarantee our water is safe to drink. Our communities must be informed and prepared to respond, in the event of another emergency. This bill is an important step in the right direction. It is my hope that it expedites work at the U.S. EPA to publish long- overdue guidelines on safe consumption limits and testing protocols, in addition to treatment methods--information the EPA has been working on for more than a decade and a half. This is information that our mayors, our governor, and our citizens are clamoring for. Congress needs to pass this bill, and I hope our counterparts in the Senate will take up the measure quickly. Still, this bill only addresses one facet of the challenge. We must meet the larger challenge of stopping the growth of these blooms at their source--the nutrients flooding through our rivers, into Lake Erie. That imperative is not included in this particular bill, but we are working through programs like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to install conservation projects across our watershed. Congress should overturn the ill-advised proposed cuts to the GLRI program and fully fund it. The EPA and Corps of Engineers are also working to better protect our waterways through the Clean Water Act. If we are interested in protecting our Lakes and rivers and the communities that rely on them, Congress should stop opposing this important progress. Until the flow of algae-feeding nutrients into the lake is stopped, the risk of further water emergencies will persist. I urge my colleagues to join me in this broader effort, and that starts by supporting the bill before us today.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the noble life of Toledo Mayor D. Michael Collins, a true American and public servant whose life was tragically cut short. Mr. Collins was sworn into office one year ago as the 62nd Mayor of Toledo, Ohio, and every day he showed his dedication to the words ``duty'' and ``honor.'' An Irish-American from the South End of Toledo, he was a son and a father of Toledo. The love that our community felt for Mayor Collins was shown by the thousands who attended his wake and funeral this week. He served honorably with an honest soul that ferried our great city through a very difficult year. Dedicated to the people of Toledo, he spent his entire adult life and work serving our community and country. Following his high school graduation he enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps, attaining the rank of Corporal, and every day exemplified the motto of the Corps, Semper Fidelis, ``Always Faithful.'' After returning home, his public service continued for nearly three decades with the Toledo Police Department. He was later elected President of the Toledo Police Patrolmen's Association. In 2007, he ran for City Council and quickly earned a reputation as a problem solver with deep knowledge of the City's finances and budget. He ran for Mayor in 2013 in a heavily contested race, won with broad public support and was sworn into his first term. Mayor Collins lived the City's motto ``Laborare est Orare,'' to work and to pray. He assiduously applied himself to every task he undertook. Throughout his life, he was an indefatigable learner attaining many degrees that served him well in his leadership roles. He also taught at his alma mater, the University of Toledo. During his time as Mayor, he shepherded the City through three major crises: the tragic loss of two firefighters in an arson-related fire, the shutoff of City water for three days because of contamination by algal blooms in Lake Erie due to cyanotoxins, and, most recently, a snow emergency of the highest level. Through it all, Mayor Collins' steady leadership, humble manner, and broad smile gave confidence to the public. On behalf of our entire community, I extend my deepest condolences to his beloved wife Sandy, who was always at his side, and to his daughters and grandchildren. Our citizenry has been blessed to know him, to work with him and for his service to us. May God bless him and bring him peaceful rest.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the planned upcoming speech before Congress by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been mishandled from the start. It is being brought forward in a manner that is in total contravention of important diplomatic protocols that exist to support America's strategic interests and, frankly, Israel's. Mr. Speaker, this speech was agreed to unilaterally by the Republican Speaker of this House. He provided no courtesy nor prior notification to the executive branch, as is the standard course of protocol with foreign leaders. This is a fundamental violation of our national unity on foreign policy. Our Constitution assigns the office of the President the right and responsibility to negotiate with foreign governments. To circumvent this imperative and to invite a sitting head of state with no notification to the executive branch does harm to our national interests and our standing throughout the world. At this time, while our executive branch is pursuing sensitive and promising nuclear negotiations with Iran, why would our Speaker behave so cavalierly? Shouldn't our Nation's executive and legislative branches be unified in matters of foreign policy with such grave ramifications beyond our shores? As this pending visit comes 2 weeks before the Israeli elections, it appears that our Congress will be used as a campaign backstop and backdrop for Israeli election politics. How unfortunate and how wantonly crass and insulting to this Congress and the Constitution we are all sworn to uphold.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the millions of high-quality jobs this Nation has outsourced over the last quarter century because of flawed free trade deals. These job-killing deals, like NAFTA, have been incredibly harmful to the American economy, racking up a massive, massive trade deficit of $9.5 trillion. And they have failed to live up to the promise of creating jobs. Instead, they have wiped out good jobs, high-paying jobs across our country. Take Motorola Solutions, for example, which shut down plants all over our country, from California to Florida. Motorola shut down those operations and moved production to China, to South America, to Eastern Europe. Take Walgreens, which has outsourced its information technology operations to Mexico, to India, leaving its Illinois employees jobless. Meanwhile, 6 years after the recession, Ohio and 14 other States have job markets that have not yet recovered from the number of jobs during the recession. Hundreds, thousands, millions of quality, good-paying manufacturing jobs have not returned. Citizens of these States, like Ohio, are fighting for honest employment. Since 1976, America has literally outsourced 47.5 million good jobs. We have a budget deficit because we have a $9.5 trillion trade deficit. We must support job seekers. More lopsided trade deals are not the answer. We simply have to reform our trade policies.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Garamendi for bringing us together again. He is truly a leader on growing American jobs, all of the way from California, way out on the west coast, to the gentleman from New York's community on the east coast. I commend both of you for your dogged determination to keep expanding the recovery and doing everything we can to help the American people have increasing paychecks and fulfilling work and a good family life where they are able to raise their children and fulfill their dreams, whatever they might be. I just wanted to come to the floor and talk about America's trade policies for a brief moment and the records. Statistics don't lie, and our trade policies have been costing us more jobs than they have been yielding us for a very long time. The trade policies that have been enacted have actually caused the United States to cumulate since 1976 a staggering number--$9.5 trillion--in trade deficits. That means more imports coming in than our exports going out. Translating that into lost jobs, foregone jobs, 47.5 million lost jobs in that little over a quarter century. The American people say: Why do we have a budget deficit? Well, I will tell you why. When you lose this much productive wealth inside your country to other places, our people start to backslide, and they have been backsliding since the 1980s. Despite our hard work here to try to make a difference, trade policies have an enormous impact on the ability of the American people to maintain a standard of living and to both remain in the middle class or aspire to it and earn their way forward. It now takes two in a family to earn enough, whereas when I grew up, our father worked and that was enough to support our family--until he became ill, and that is a whole other story. But today, it is so hard for people to have two people working in the family and hold their household together. They are scrimping every week as to where they are going to put their limited incomes. I just wanted to put this so people start thinking: How did America get in this deep a hole on trade? I believe before we sign any more trade agreements, we ought to go back and fix what is wrong with the current ones. Wouldn't that makes sense? They promised us with Korea, which is one of the most recent agreements, that we would be exporting 50,000 automobiles over there. It hasn't happened. In, fact we have already lost 17,000 additional jobs because of the Korean agreement not being in balance. So I think we have to be rigorous and ask ourselves: How do we fix this for the sake of the future, not just this generation but the next? I have a long list, and I am going to be coming to the floor many evenings going through this list, talking about companies that we have known in this country and where they have relocated. I know that the workers in those places and the executives who used to run those companies, I know how hard they worked to create great American products, and they didn't deserve the fate they were dealt because of bad trade policies. Let's look at Huffy Bicycle in Celina, Ohio. Huffy Bicycle used to be known coast to coast. It was made in western Ohio, and it actually became and is currently a Wal-Mart supplier. Unfortunately, well over 1,000 people lost their jobs at Huffy Bicycle in Ohio in the late 1990s--1998--and the plant first moved from Ohio to Missouri, and then it moved from Missouri to Mexico, and then it made its final move from Mexico to China. So if you look at Huffy Bicycle today, you will see the paint job is not the same. You will see the tires aren't the same. The quality of the metal is not the same. It is not the bicycle that used to be made in Ohio that lasted a lifetime. So there has been a knockdown, a decrease in quality, that has come with that manufactured product, which is then shipped back here to the United States and sold in different locations. It is kind of sad, really, what happens. I love chocolate. I used to really like to buy Hershey bars, and I still eat Hershey. But Hershey had always been manufactured in Pennsylvania--in Hershey, Pennsylvania. In fact, when you walked through Hershey, you could smell the chocolate in the streets. It was just absolutely captivating. But if you have noticed, Hershey has changed. The recipe has changed. They will deny it, but a large part of their production was moved to Mexico. They even had to change the wrapper to withstand the warmer temperatures, and the recipe changed, and all of those workers in Hershey, Pennsylvania, in 2011. That happened in 2011. These are brand-name products that we know in our country. Dell--Dell had been located in the Carolinas, and in 2009 they moved to Mexico, too. So you think about the manufactured products that we have known, and companies like Bank of America that had offices in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Independence, Ohio, they moved production to Mexico too, in 2013. So if people think they are safe in their service job because they are not in manufacturing, they will be very surprised to learn that the service jobs will follow. How many phone calls have you gotten in your home from a call center located in--and it could be anywhere in the world but here. And I always ask the person from the call center: Where are you calling from and how much do you earn? I find that their earnings are so low they can't buy the very product that they are selling over the telephone. What kind of world are we creating? The markets that exist in other places like Korea, Japan, and China are closed to us. We are racking up these gigantic trade deficits because we can't get our products in there, and the people in those places don't earn enough money to buy some of what we export. So it is really a rather vicious cycle. I am not going to take up much more time except to say that I believe where America went wrong was about 30 years ago. We should have signed a trade relationship with Europe which shares our political and legal values. They subscribe to a rule of law: ``We can do business.'' Though their markets aren't completely open, they are pretty open, and we could work with them. Then we should have invited into that structure, which starts with a belief in democracy and representative government, these other countries that are aspiring to be better than they are, but without the political advancement, their economic system will never work for them without the rights the American people have. We could have invited in Mexico. We could have invited in the CAFTA countries. We could have invited in Korea, et cetera, to that union of democracy-loving republics. We didn't do that. What worries me over time is, in the end, we might be cashing out our very liberty because, if you look globally at what is happening, you will find in those places that the people are not treated well that are doing this work. Over time, what kind of residue does that leave toward our country and toward those who are their new overlords? I have walked through some of these places; I have walked through some of these companies. I remember walking through with our mother-- God love her--when she was still living, through one company in Mexico. She said, ``Marcy, look at the women's faces,'' and I did. They were so afraid. They were afraid of their boss. They were afraid of us. They were afraid of losing their work because there was no worker representation. What kind of a world are we contributing to in these other places that most Americans will never visit? I thank the gentleman. As I see your title there, ``Grow American Jobs,'' I would say, ``Grow American democracy. Grow representative government at the same time as we do trade.'' I think we really got way out of kilter back in the 1980s when these agreements began to be imbued with the kind of power they had.

Ms. KAPTUR. I appreciate your focus on growing the middle class and helping those who aspire to be in it to be successful in that journey. There is no question that when you have a robust middle class, it creates the demand that then buys the products from the corporations across this country that want to earn dividends, so that they can share those with their shareholders. Growing the middle class drives our economy and it creates the jobs, and the people who do those jobs really create the company, they make the company work. It isn't the shareholders who are down there on the lines, although I believe very much in shareholder equity for workers. I wish I could encourage more of it. Wouldn't that be great if they could all have a part of the indexes that the wealthy invest in? Because they certainly have earned it. Through good jobs with decent wages, through the transportation and infrastructure bill I hope we can pass this year, which would be one action we could take that would help to give a big boost to this economy from coast to coast, all of that can help lift people's boats across this Nation. I join in alliance with my two dear colleagues, Congressman Tonko and Congressman Garamendi, who are down here all the time. You are such good Representatives from your respective States, fighting on behalf of the American people. Most of the rest of the place has gone home, but you are on the job. You remind me of members of my family. They always worked overtime.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to give reassurance and hope to Sandy Collins and the family of the mayor of Toledo, Mike Collins, who, yesterday, was involved in a very serious automotive accident. He apparently had a heart attack while he was driving after trying to prepare the city crews for the level 3 snowfall that was about to come. Then there was the heroic act that has saved his life, though he is in critical condition at the University of Toledo Medical Center. A woman named Evelyn Johnson--mother of eight children and grandmother of five--saw his SUV that had crashed into this telephone pole. She stopped her car on her way to work, and she and another man, a good Samaritan who came along, had to pry him out of the car. It was still running. He still had his foot on the gas, but he was completely unconscious. She and the other gentleman administered CPR at the direction of the 911 crew in the city of Toledo. I am so proud of my hometown and the love and the care and the preparedness that they demonstrated to care for our mayor. We pray to God that he will fully recover and that his injuries will be healed. We give comfort to his wife, Sandy. We know she is at his side. Our entire community reaches out to them. And we congratulate Mrs. Johnson for her incredible heroism in helping our mayor.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call for the immediate release of Ukrainian fighter pilot Nadiya Savchenko, who remains illegally jailed in Russia. Ms. Savchenko was captured by Russian-directed forces in eastern Ukraine in June of 2014 and transferred to a prison in Voronezh, Russia. She is still imprisoned there today, now in her second month of a hunger strike that demonstrates to the world the inhumanity of her capture. We recall the shocking footage of her interrogation in which she was handcuffed to a metal pipe, and yet we are assured by Russia she is ``being treated well.'' Why, if Russia is not invading Ukraine, as we are so often assured by Russia, should they hold Ms. Savchenko at all? Yesterday, January 26, was Free Savchenko Day, a global, digital effort to raise awareness to her ongoing fight. The campaign shines a light on the disrespect for international law the Kremlin continues to demonstrate. I was honored to participate in that campaign and introduce, along with our colleagues from the Ukrainian Caucus, House Resolution 50, calling to mind her struggle and demanding her immediate release. The hunger strike began on December 13 and her health continues to deteriorate. Mr. Speaker, Nadiya Savchenko has been a beacon for liberty. I salute her bravery in the face of overt Russian aggregation. Her courage shines like a brilliant, brilliant beacon for liberty-loving people everywhere. God bless her, God bless America, and God bless Ukraine.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. What a pleasure it is to join you this evening, and thank you for your continuing leadership on jobs, infrastructure--jobs in America, not outsourcing our jobs elsewhere--and to also be joined by Congresswoman Hahn, such an incredible leader who has made such a difference not just in California, but in communities across this country. We really appreciate everything that she has done legislatively over these last 5 years to help our ports develop, to connect rail to ports, highway to rail. It is really amazing what her leadership has done in forming the PORTS Caucus. Thank you very much, Congresswoman Hahn. I rise this evening to join both of you. Obviously, I am in a different part of the country, but we understand what it means to Make It In America. I think the last company in Washington, D.C., our Nation's Capital, was the old Government Printing Office that used to print some of its goods here, but it doesn't anymore. To Make It In America creates jobs here, and what is interesting to look at, Congressman Garamendi talks about the transportation and infrastructure bill. No bill that this Congress could pass would create more jobs than that bill. We hope to have it cleared. I know Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio are working very hard on that. I know Members like Congressman Garamendi are helping lift them across the finish line. The Make It In America agenda will create tens of thousands of jobs across this country. Look at every community you go to, and look at what is unfinished. Old bridges are falling down. There used to be a song, ``London Bridge is Falling Down.'' Well, I think they are falling down in America now. Highways are not complete. We have old airports.

Ms. KAPTUR. I can only imagine. We have so many unmet needs in my own community that spans a river called the Maumee River, the largest river that flows into the Great Lakes. We built a new bridge, but the challenge there today is with the weather. Ice is forming on the tensile spans, and they have had to close the bridge for 3 or 4 days at a time, for fear that these ice plates will fall on trucks and cars. We have to fix this problem. All these issues are all over the country, so the transportation and infrastructure bill is essential. I thought in discussing this tonight that I would put a couple of really important figures on the Record. Congresswoman Hahn talked about ports and her championing the PORTS Caucus here and how much gets imported into our country and what gets exported. Well, here is a chart that gives you a sense of how many more imports come in here than exports go out. Since the mid-1970s and then the passage of NAFTA here, this represents the growing share of imports over exports into our country. Since about 1975, our country has amassed $9.5 trillion in red ink with the world. That is hard to imagine for most people, but that translates into 47.5 million lost jobs in our country just due to trade--not technology, but more imports coming in than exports going out. We have lost two-thirds of our manufacturing jobs. So when the gentleman champions development in America which yields jobs in America, these are just the figures relating to one country with which we have held a massive deficit since the passage of NAFTA. NAFTA passed back in 1993. Our country moved into a gigantic deficit with Mexico. Recently, I don't know if the--and this means lost American jobs, to other places, and our people struggling, wages not rising, more part- time work, fewer benefits. I don't know if the gentleman was able to see what happened with the recent Department of Transportation ruling. They gave a green light to long-haul, cross-border trucking by Mexican-based carriers, despite lingering safety concerns. It is the jobs, but it is also the safety that you talk about. The Department of Transportation simply looked the other way when the inspector general found serious flaws in the pilot program meant to test this new authority. Once again, NAFTA led to the lowest common denominator for the continent. Foreign corporate interests trump the safety of the American people. And we know that flawed trade deals cost us jobs. They harm our economy, and they put people at risk on both sides of the border. So it is time to start fixing the damage, not creating more. I thank the gentleman for allowing us the time to express our views this evening.

Ms. KAPTUR. Yes, I thank the gentleman so much for pointing that out. You know, when the administration and others talk about this latest NAFTA deal, they are calling it the TPP now. They always give it initials or something--NAFTA, CAFTA, KORUS--it is always initials so the American people really can't quite understand what all that is about. This one they are calling TPP.

Ms. KAPTUR. And the last deal we had was Korea. With Korea they promised, they said, we will be able to sell 50,000 American cars in Korea. Well, what has happened is they have sold, the Koreans have sold 500,000 here. We never got the 50,000 in there, didn't get it--closed market, deal not kept. I have a bill that I have introduced in several Congresses called the Balancing Trade Act, which basically says to the executive branch, for any country with which the United States has amassed a $10 billion trade deficit, let's go back and figure out what is the problem? Why do we have a deficit rather than a balance or a surplus? And before we pass any more trade deals, fix that first.

Ms. KAPTUR. Well, I wanted to divert just a moment, if I could, to tell the story of one valiant American who is a very hardworking American, and when we don't make it in America, what happens to our people. And I want to encourage citizens who may be listening to call their Member of Congress if they have a story like this from someone in their family, to please share it with us so that we can be a voice for these families across our country who have been harmed and are waiting for a transportation bill to be passed so they can go to work rebuilding America but, meanwhile, being hurt by international trade agreements that have outsourced their jobs. Tonight, I would like to tell, very briefly, the story of Richard Hahn, a tradesman from northern Ohio whose job was outsourced to Mexico, one of the countries we talked about, and whose current job faces new trade threats as foreign steel floods our market. Richard Hahn spent a long career with York International as an electrician, 23 years to be exact. He rose through the ranks to the status of 100th in seniority from his dedication and commitment to York International. But in 2001, York International closed its Elyria, Ohio, facility and moved production to Monterrey, Mexico, leaving 900 workers without work, without a paycheck, without any assistance to move on. After uprooting production to Mexico, York reached status as the world's largest independent manufacturer of air-conditioning, heating, and refrigeration machinery, and this left it as a prime buy for Johnson Controls, which acquired the company in 2005. Mr. Hahn and many of his colleagues were given no training or retraining to find a replacement job, but York International continued to thrive. Its parent company, Johnson Controls, even continues to receive Department of Defense contracts to manufacture the same air- conditioning, heating, and refrigeration machinery. For nearly a year, Mr. Hahn was forced to accept unemployment as he desperately sought work in Elyria, Ohio. Many of his 900 colleagues moved their families out of Ohio, not finding any hope for reemployment in their hometown where they wanted to stay. Fast forward, a little over a decade now, and Mr. Hahn is facing the trade theft of his job all over again. Although currently employed with U.S. Steel as an electrician, his and 614 colleagues' positions are under threat of layoff. U.S. Steel will have to idle its plant in coming months because they cannot continue to secure contracts to keep it running. They have had international trade complaints about foreign-dumped steel and, unfortunately, Mr. Hahn's story is not unique. In fact, he said, his story is depicted best by quoting Billy Joel: ``We're all waiting here in Allentown, but it sure is getting hard to stay.'' The promise of jobs and lives better than your parents' is dissolving, and free trade deals are to blame for the shuttered factories. Millions of Americans from across this great land have lived their own tale, in their own Allentown, and I encourage them to write or call their Member of Congress, just as Richard Hahn has bravely shared his story with me. Tell us, tell the Members how trade has impacted your life and your ability to provide for your families. The more stories we receive from the American people, the more tales we can tell here on this floor and work with Congressman Garamendi to free our Nation from these flawed deals and make goods in America again so that our people can lead a decent way of life and not have their futures taken from them. So I wanted to thank the gentleman for holding this Special Order tonight. I used Mr. Hahn as an example of someone who has the finest work ethic, so highly trained, struggling out there to try to maintain work. It shouldn't be this hard in the greatest nation in the world.

Ms. KAPTUR. That is really exciting, Congressman Garamendi. And when you think about our strategic reserve in terms of the military, if America enters conflicts, often we don't have those fleets within the Department of Defense. We have to lease them from the private sector. So we would modernize that capacity for our country in the event it would be needed.

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to say, Congressman Garamendi, you are such a leader for jobs in America. I am sure your constituents are cheering not just tonight but every day for you and for your work here. You keep the Congress focused, both sides of the aisle, on Make It In America, on trade, taxes, energy, labor, education, research, infrastructure, and, over them all, jobs. As we close this evening, let me say, this is what the trade deficit looks like today when we know we aren't building, whether it is tubes or whether it is trains or whether it is enough trucks in this country, cars. Imagine if we were to turn it the other way and America started making it in America and exporting to the world rather than the reverse. We would have such an economic recovery, it would astound the American people. It is amazing what we have been able to retain, even with this hemorrhage that has occurred over the last three decades. Thank you for drawing our attention to the importance of transportation and infrastructure as a key job creator in this country. If we could pass that bill early this year, what we would do for this economy, and add Buy America provisions to several of the bills that will be coming before us. I will join you in that effort.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wish to associate myself with the prior gentleman's commendation of those who fought on behalf of liberty at the Battle of the Bulge. We bow before them. They bequeathed liberty to this generation. It is a heavy burden. Let us hope that we can measure up to it in tribute to their valor. At last night's State of the Union Address, passing a transportation and infrastructure bill to repair America and build forward a new century, as we create hundreds of thousands of jobs, got the broadest bipartisan applause. You could hear it on both sides of the aisle. So I come to the floor this morning to say, Let's do it. Let's do it. Chairman Bill Shuster and Ranking Member Peter DeFazio are two Members who can get us there. We want to help them. I know the majority of Members feel that way. So my words to them are: Onward, gentlemen; lead America forward by passing that bill through us. On another front, I rise to express deep dismay at what I believe to be Republican efforts to weaken and begin dismantling the Social Security and disability insurance program that so many Americans depend upon. The headline in yesterday's Politico reads: ``Social Security disability under attack by the GOP.'' As this Congress starts, Republicans have quietly and without consulting Democrats tucked into the rules of this House a point of order provision that aims to harm our Nation's 8,950,000 disabled citizens and weaken the related Social Security earned benefit program. The number of Americans on disability today in a Nation of over 310 million people amounts to less than 3 percent of our population. That is actually a very small number when you think about it. God has been good to most of us, but that isn't true physically and mentally with many of our fellow citizens. Mr. Speaker, even though the number of disability approvals has been declining since 2010, Republicans have begun this Congress by singling out the disabled. They haven't targeted Wall Street moguls who brought our economy down and stole trillions of dollars of home equity and the very homes from our families. No, Republicans are targeting the injured, the suffering, and those not able to fend for themselves. Even to touch this subject so callously is a cruelty. It causes worry and trepidation. It makes life more uncertain. Why should such an important change not be debated on this House floor? Republicans instead hope to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people by hiding it in an obscure rule that was part of a massive parliamentary package for this 114th Congress. But I tell you what, not all Americans have been fooled. Despite this subtle attempt to pit Social Security pensioners against disabled beneficiaries, our office has already received a great number of calls and letters from citizens sick over the possibility that a 20 percent benefit cut could adversely affect our neighbors and relatives most in need. These proposed cuts in Social Security and disability insurance--and I underline the word ``insurance''--set the stage for what Republicans truly want, and I fear: severe cuts, a weakened Social Security system, and ultimately dismantling one of our greatest American legacies, earned Social Security benefits and earned disability benefits for our old, our ill, and our disabled. Our disabled and senior citizens have the right to live out their lives with dignity. And for so many, their lives are not easy. I remind my colleagues who visit nursing homes and who have neighbors or relatives in their own family who endure pain every day how vital these programs are. There but for the grace of God go you. This Congress should oppose these backhanded cuts, and at the same time we should support the passage of the transportation and infrastructure jobs bill to build our Nation forward. There are items we can agree on, and there will be items that we disagree on. But our roads, our bridges, our harbors, our airports, our rail systems, the St. Lawrence Seaway System, and navigable waters all deserve our attention. We can make it happen this year. Let's do it. [From POLITICO, Jan. 20, 2015] Republicans Target Social Security Disability (By David Rogers) Like Mrs. O'Leary's cow, House Republicans kick-started a bigger fire than many imagined with an opening day rules change that revived Social Security as a hot issue for this Congress--and the 2016 presidential elections. The GOP's immediate target is Social Security's sprawling disability insurance program, which has grown at a pace far beyond its revenues and will exhaust its trust fund reserves by December 2016, threatening a 19 percent cut in benefits. In the past, Congress has simply shifted revenues from Social Security's larger retirement account to fill holes in the disability fund. But the new House rule throws up a roadblock by creating a point of order against any such bill that does not improve the ``actuarial balance'' of the combined funds. ``What we want to do is not kick the can down the road anymore,'' said Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas), who promoted the change as chairman of the Social Security panel on the House Ways and Means Committee. ``The rule is intended to get the Congress to at least take a first step toward solving the Social Security problem. If we continue the way we are, it's a go-broke operation.'' ``If all they're doing is rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul, that's going to be subject to a point of order, and rightly so in my opinion,'' added Rep. Thomas Reed (R-N.Y.). ``We have to protect the retirement fund and the retiree.'' It all sounds like ``good government,'' but the politics are rich. House Democrats were not consulted on the rules change, and liberals accuse the GOP of trying to cull the weak from the herd, pitting the disabled against pensioners to undermine the larger Social Security coalition. In fact, the new rule's fine print leaves an escape hatch for Republicans to move tens of billions into the disability fund if this gambit fails. Still, the upshot could be a one- two punch Democrats most fear: a first-round debate over disability funding in 2016 followed by a bigger battle over all of Social Security in 2017, when Republicans hope to control both Congress and the White House. ``They're looking for a new weapon,'' said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the ranking Democrat on Ways and Means. ``What they're doing in this rule is to use any problems within disability as a way to attack the whole system. It's dangerous doubletalk when they have been the problem, not the answer.'' Adding to Levin's fears was testimony last week before Ways and Means, in which Harvard economist Martin Feldstein promoted the idea of Congress gradually raising the eligibility age for full Social Security benefits to as high as 70. That would increase labor-force participation among people older than 65, expanding the economy, Feldstein said. But raising the retirement age would add to the strain on the disability fund, which has had to cover more workers longer since the retirement age was raised from 65 to 67. These tensions fueled a separate uproar last week over remarks by 2016 presidential hopeful Sen. Rand Paul about the disability program. Testing the waters in an appearance in New Hampshire, the Kentucky Republican suggested that half the people on Social Security disability had no more to worry about than achy backs and anxiety in the morning. ``Join the club. Who doesn't get up a little anxious for work and their back hurts,'' Paul said disparagingly. After video of his remarks went online, Paul quickly backtracked: ``We absolutely should take care of those truly in need of help,'' he said in a statement. At this stage, the White House and Treasury show no sign of backing down from their intent to pursue a straight reallocation of funds from the retirement account, formally known as the Old Age Survivors Insurance or OASI trust fund. Given all the divisions already in Washington, adding a new procedural hurdle is ``unhelpful,'' an administration official said icily. Indeed, transfers between the two Social Security funds have gone on for years. Each relies on a percentage of the same payroll tax, and the disability program helped the retirement trust fund in the 1980s by reducing its own share of the tax revenue. What's most changed now is that critics are singling out the disability fund as the profligate partner--and a harbinger of bad times ahead for all. Without doubt, the growth of the disability program has been explosive. In the past 20 years, the number of workers getting disability payments has more than doubled to 8.95 million last month. About $140 billion went out the door in fiscal 2013, double what the costs were just 10 years before. And like food stamps in the Farm Bill debate, disability payments are common enough now to be a whipping boy for conservatives like Paul, playing on resentment toward people receiving government aid during hard economic times. At one level, this is all political catnip for Democrats, eager to be seen as defenders of Social Security and its New Deal heritage. But given their history, Republicans don't come to the table with clean hands. For example, the GOP's 2011 budget deal with President Barack Obama held out the promise of millions in appropriations to help the Social Security Administration fight precisely what Republicans complain about in the disability program: medical fraud. But for 2012 and 2013, House Republicans failed to approve the money, thereby adding to Social Security's woes. Moreover, an analysis by Social Security's chief actuary, Stephen Goss, suggests there's less to the new House rule than meets the eye. That's because the point of order is triggered only if lawmakers exceed a ``0.01 percent'' threshold, which equates to a $38.6 billion cap on what any one Congress can move from the retirement fund, Goss told

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to paint a picture of U.S. job loss resulting from our trade policies extending back now almost three decades. I rise because America has a huge ``good jobs'' deficit because we have a gigantic trade deficit. That means more imports come in here than our exports go out, largely because markets and other places are closed. Our workers and our communities have paid a tremendous price for this. I oppose any further NAFTA-like trade agreements, such as the Trans- Pacific Partnership, which the administration is proposing. That will ship out more U.S. jobs. We have had enough. The American people have had enough. Since 1975, when Wall Street's free trade job outsourcing roulette began, America has amassed a $9.3 trillion trade deficit with the world. If you look at this chart, we have on here every single trade agreement that was signed and all of the lost jobs that resulted from the growing trade deficits we are amassing with countries around the world. This has never happened before over our history in the United States of America. It is a very serious problem. The staggering loss of productivity associated with this deficit translates into a huge job loss here at home. In fact, that $9.3 trillion of accumulated trade deficit of more imports coming in here than exports going out has actually cost us over 47,500,000 lost American jobs. Most of those were really good jobs that paid living wages, jobs that just evaporated from our communities, jobs that were shipped to Mexico or to China, Korea, Bangladesh, Honduras, Guatemala, Turkey, El Salvador--everywhere in the world--largely to the Third World, and, frankly, to undemocratic countries where workers are treated like a bonded class. Our workers, no matter how loyal or hardworking, became expendable as this began. In fact, they were treated like expendable widgets. What is being hurt in the process is the belief of the public that the value of hard work has any meaning. There are some workers who have simply dropped out. Yes, American jobs are being outsourced year after year--for over a quarter century now--and workers are being treated like a game of musical chairs. Our jobs have been shipped out to penny-wage sweatshops hidden behind the Iron Curtain of anonymous towns in distant places most Americans will never visit. Anonymity, exploitation, and hidden squalor are as fundamental to free trade as the hollowing out of American jobs, our communities, and our middle class. Those who exploit workers in our country and globally believe they are so powerful that the American people won't be able to rein them in, and they think this Congress will continue to behave as it did before, despite the evidence that this doesn't work for the American people. Some of those very powerful interests are asking for another Fast Track trade deal to do it all over again in something called the Trans- Pacific Partnership, on an even bigger scale, including nations with the grossest violations of basic human rights. Let me turn first to the broken promises of NAFTA, which was really the fundamental agreement passed--over my objections--in the early 1990s and another agreement, CAFTA, that dealt with Central America. Fast-forward to this past summer when thousands of migrant children from Central America swarmed our southern border. Remember that? The American press acted surprised upon their arrival, and some people even threw tomatoes at buses that carried children from one detention facility to another. These children had lived under 20 years of NAFTA and CAFTA in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. They had experience with the NAFTA trade agreement and the CAFTA trade agreement, which covers those countries, trade agreements that were sold as opportunities that would rise the tide of all boats, of all workers. What happened? Here in the United States, we had a huge loss of jobs to those countries, and Mexico's and Central America's infrastructures were not modernized. Their standard of living was not raised. In fact, the promise that those countries somehow would turn into stylistically rustic versions of the American consumer market never happened. They were told new jobs would abound, but our Nation began to hemorrhage jobs to Mexico as wages in Mexico and throughout Central America began to drop. Those deficits became part of the overall total. The problem is that in most of these countries where the free trade agreements were signed, what you see happening is more goods coming in here than our goods going out, a little trickle going to some places. In Mexico, what happened ever since NAFTA's passage was that we were promised trade balances. Every single year, it has gotten worse and worse and worse. This week, the broken promises sold to the American public and their elected officials is that these agreements would really work. The people who voted for those agreements should pay some attention to the debate of trying to withhold funding for the Department of Homeland Security because of the President's action on immigration. The stories of the youth being shipped back by the planeloads tell of families' lands being stolen from under them. The land was handed over to multinational corporate agricultural groups that come in and grow, for example, palm oil. Local displaced farmers were forced into urban settings--desperate, in search of food, in search of work at factories where jobs that were promised in return for the land--guess what--never materialized. Here on our own continent, the children became the refugees of transnational economic policies that harmed the entire continent. Hardly anyone even talked about that; but when you have this kind of disruption, when you have so much job loss, and when you have land, transferring title with millions of farmers disrupted from their way of life, what do we expect? Millions of displaced people in Mexico and Central America living in the shadow of border plants and urban factories exist in a state of peonage that makes older versions of slavery look positively beneficent, squatting on poisoned ground in jerry-rigged plywood and tar paper shacks. I have been in those shacks. I have gone to those places. When you do, you never forget it. Next door, water in gullies that surround these places is so polluted that communities smell of a rancid odor, and even chickens that they keep to try to feed themselves die from the drinking water. We have seen it. We have been there. The displaced population on the run is surging, thanks in large part to NAFTA and CAFTA's agricultural provisions, those very flawed provisions that provided no opportunity for adjustment as a First World nation met the economy of Third World nations. The terms of the agreement forced the revocation of land and allowed multinationals to begin buying up vast tracts in the interior, pushing untold millions of peasant farmers, who remain nameless, off their land and into the labor pool of the maquiladoras; yet we, as Americans, are surprised when their children, as migrants, flock to our southern border. If we seriously looked at the impact of our free trade agreements, we would easily see the havoc wrought on local economies throughout the lands on the other side of the border. Those who forced this to happen should know the consequences of their policies and what they reap: legions of desperate workers willing to do anything to survive. Now, let me turn to the Trans-Pacific Partnership that proposes to expand trade into regions with the worst labor violations and working conditions. We can't be fooled into thinking expanding trade agreements with 11 new nations in the Pacific rim will actually be the end to American jobs being shipped overseas. Of the 11 nations with which the United States is negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership, nine have wage levels significantly lower than our own. This will only intensify the already real reduction in wages American workers are experiencing year after year as our jobs are shipped overseas to increase profits of shareholders as they take advantage of impoverished laborers. Worse yet, for the immigration debate, as those who run the maquilas of Mexico and Central America realize, the next move will be to Vietnam for even cheaper labor. Factories on this continent will shut down, further exacerbating the poor economic conditions of our southern neighbors, leaving even fewer options other than for those individuals to flee north, seeking any economic opportunity to sustain themselves. I wanted to spend a moment looking at the Korean agreement because that was one of the latest ones they brought up here as a free trade agreement. They promised there would be thousands of jobs and that America would be able to sell 50,000 vehicles to Korea. Well, guess what. We haven't even hit 10,000, while there have been over 561,000--half a million--vehicles sent from Korea here. So look at what is happening with the Korean agreement, another free trade agreement which just passed a couple of years ago. The proof is in the pudding. The Fast Track procedure, which allows no amendment here on the floor, yields this--more red ink for the United States. We were promised that the Korean agreement would create jobs and help balance our trade deficit in an effort to strengthen our economy and rebuild the American auto industry. Nothing could be further from the truth, as with every other agreement. We are in a deep trade deficit with Korea. The U.S.-Korean free trade agreement promised 70,000 jobs. In actuality, we have already lost 40,000. It is going in exactly the opposite direction. The U.S. Census Bureau recently revealed that the United States had a $2.8 billion monthly trade deficit with Korea just in November of last year, the highest monthly U.S. goods trade deficit with Korea on record. The historic U.S. trade deficit with Korea was driven by a record-setting $6.3 billion in imports from Korea and a lackluster $3.5 billion in exports to Korea from the United States. Auto sales did not surge, as we were promised. Exactly the reverse is true. And now we can look at China. You know, the story is no different. You would think we would have learned something. But if you look at trade with China--and China became a member of the World Trade Organization in 2001--Americans were promised, again, that that deal would expand market opportunities for United States companies, thereby increasing jobs here and American prosperity. How has this worked out? Let me share some specifics: The United States has lost over 64,000 manufacturing firms and at least 5.8 million manufacturing jobs to China. In the year 2013, the latest complete year of data, America actually racked up a $319 billion trade deficit with China. And you know this to be true because everything you buy--coffee cups, clothing, electronics, even solar panels--are all made in China. And the massive deficit we have racked up with China just in 1 year--that 1 year--amounted to a loss of 1.5 million American jobs. And that is just 1 year's damage. What America needs is not more of the same NAFTA-styled trade agreements. What America and American workers need is a trade policy that creates jobs, opportunity, and wealth in this country first. We need balanced trade accounts, not trade accounts that are in the red with every single country with which we have racked up these deficits. The American people--not just the global corporate elite--need to be in the driver's seat again, and that is where Congress has to do its job. Our Nation needs a trade policy that is results-oriented, that will yield jobs in America. We must open closed markets of the world. We must grow our exports. We must hold those who wrote these agreements accountable for the damage that they have done, and we must not create any more free trade agreements that dig the hole deeper. We must create jobs here in our country by moving our Nation toward economic independence--not dependence--by rebuilding our own manufacturing base here at home, by restoring our domestic energy security, and by making sure that these agreements result not in deficits, but in trade balances and, even more importantly, trade surpluses. Mr. Speaker, there are ways that a developed nation can trade with the developing world without gutting its own economy. America has got to figure out how to get there. And no trade deal should be brought up here under that Fast Track procedure where Congress can't amend until we fix what is wrong with these agreements. Haven't we learned in three decades that that flawed trade model just simply isn't working? Pushing huge trade agreements, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, through Congress on a Fast Track course with no opportunity for amendment is not the way to create a strong middle class, rising wages, and real opportunity for the American people. Now is the time to hold this administration and this Congress accountable for changing course and start to invest in this country again and make sure that these trade partners with whom we do business open their markets. To do any less is to continue to harm the American people and continue to have this enormous downward pressure on job creation in this country and wage levels and benefit levels in this country, where the average American hasn't seen a raise in years. We have to change. This is too great a price for the American people to pay. So this evening, I thank those who are listening for their time. I thank the Speaker for the time this evening. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Section 8: ``The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; . . .''