Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I would just like to say, for investment in our ports, in our airports, in our rail, what could be more important to our country? When I was born, there were 146 million people in this country. We're now near 320 million people. By 2050, we will have 500 million people in this country. We cannot continue to live like it's 1950. We have to sort of catch up, which is where these public investments come in. They create jobs. They create real wealth that you can't take away or outsource. It belongs to the American people. It belongs here. I wanted to say a word about Ohio. We're facing this vote on Issue 2 in Ohio, which is an effort, as Congressman Ryan says, to dismantle what's left of the middle class in our State: our teachers, our firefighters, our police. We have a Governor who called an Ohio highway patrolman an ``idiot,'' which I consider a complete degradation of the Office of Governor and an insult to those who put their lives on the line for us every day. We stand against Issue 2. We're going to defeat Issue 2 in Ohio because we believe in building the middle class; and we are proud of our police, of our highway patrolmen, of our firefighters, of our teachers. They hold us together as a community, and it is our job to push investment into airports, highways, high-speed rail, trains, transit, ports, water and sewer--all of the pieces of ``community'' that hold us together and make our economies hum. Either you're looking through the rearview mirror or the windshield going forward. This is an ``I can'' Nation. The last four words of ``American'' are ``I can,'' and we are an ``I can'' country.

Ms. KAPTUR. Congressman Garamendi, I want to thank you for your leadership coming from California. And my dear, dear colleague Tim Ryan from the eastern quarter of Ohio, what a privilege it is to be here with you as well and to be a voice for we the people--we the people, not just the superrich people, not just the people running the six biggest banks in the country that just took the rest of America to the cleaners, but Americans who speak for the vast majority who, like that chart states, want a better deal for America. We want investment in America. We want to make goods in America because we know, when we create here and we make here, we create jobs here and we create real wealth here for everyone, not just the privileged few. It's really an amazing fact to think about that General Motors, when I was growing up, was the biggest employer in the country, and northern Ohio just hummed. Plants had 14,000 workers, 10,000 workers. Now you're lucky if a plant has 1,200 workers, and you see shuttered plants around our country. Thank God for the recovery package and what was done to resuscitate and refinance the U.S. automotive industry so that other countries can't eat our lunch, that they can't eat our investment capital and all of the investment that still exists around this country, the millions of families and retirees that depend on a healthy automotive sector. When you think about it, today, Walmart is the largest employer. We have gone from General Motors being the largest employer to Walmart being the largest employer. And this week, Walmart announced that even though it's the largest employer, even though it's making so much money for its shareholders and top executives, if you work for Walmart and you put in under 24 hours a week work, you're not eligible for their health insurance. Yup, I can just think of all those women, all those people that are working in Walmart around the country, their standard of living will drop. I agree with what Congressman Ryan says about the middle class. We believe in people earning a living and, as a result, being secure in the middle class--earning a decent wage, getting a decent health benefit, and having a retirement program you can depend upon. I'm really happy that the cost-of-living increase will give, on average, to seniors across this country 360 extra dollars--360 extra dollars a year on average--because they're going to be able to buy some food, better food for themselves. They're going to be able to pay their utility bills. Do you know the first thing they will do? I'll tell you the first thing they'll do. They're going to buy their grandchildren presents. They're going to go spend that money. They're going to spend it in the economy. Every single business in this country, what do they say? We need customers. We need customers. We don't have enough people working-- carrying 14 to 24 million people unemployed or underemployed--to really get this economy to hum. They're waiting for customers. Every Member of Congress, if they're awake, knows that. And so when we see a call for a better deal for America--for all the people, for we the people, not just for the Wall Street bankers who brought us to this juncture who, by the way, are doing very well and controlling two-thirds of the financial system of this country, which is part of the problem we are facing--too much power in too few hands. But as we look across our country to say what can we do, as Members, in order to create more of an investment climate here, you create investment when you create customers. And, honestly, you don't create customers and create wealth at the same time when you just take all the stuff that's made in China, bring it here and sell it. That money goes--most of it goes back to where those goods were made. We have a real challenge in our country to reward Make It In America, to make goods here and to sell goods here. And as Congressman Ryan says, for those countries that don't play by the rules--and China doesn't--whether it's on currency, whether it's on the environment, or whether it's on the fair treatment of workers, they're not even living in the same universe as we live in. Who would want to live in Beijing? You'd need a gas mask to survive. Is that really what we want to do is downgrade our standard of living for the American people to that level? And that is the course we are on. That is the course we are on, Congressman Garamendi. When you talk about how many people in America are poor today, do you think they like being poor? God loves them just as He loves everybody in the upper class and the middle class. They don't want to be poor. They want a job. Here's the figure. Let me put this one on the table. I was talking to one of the major rail executives today, and I was inviting him to come out to our region because we have a lot of railroads, and they're hiring. He said, Congresswoman, I want you to know something. We posted 4,000 jobs in rail across this country. And he said, Guess how many applications we got? Five hundred thousand. Five hundred thousand applications for 4,000 jobs. Think about what the American people are saying to us. Austerity will not bring prosperity. What will bring prosperity is investment in America, making goods in America, creating goods in America, growing products in America, processing products in America, and holding our trade partners accountable for their actions, whether it's currency manipulation or renegotiating trade agreements that are not operating in the interests of the United States and that are far out of balance. Let me tell you, the most out-of-balance trade agreement is with China. And if you go back to NAFTA when it passed here in 1993, they said, Oh, my goodness, there are going to be millions of jobs. Well, they're not in the United States. They're not here. In fact, we've amassed a $1 trillion trade deficit with Mexico since NAFTA passed. So all those people must live somewhere in outer space to think that that has actually created wealth in America. It has been a sucking sound, a sucking sound to other countries--not here. All you've got to do is know the math. Know the math. Just look at the numbers. You don't have to believe me. Look at the trade accounts. It's written in black and white every month. We aren't winning. We are losing the trade wars all over this world, and it is costing us investment here. It's costing us jobs here. It's costing us wealth here. And that is where those poverty figures are rising, because we aren't reading the math and we aren't making goods in America and balancing our accounts here at home by putting people back to work.

Ms. KAPTUR. And Sandusky.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, this week marks the 82nd anniversary of Black Thursday, the start of the great stock market crash of 1929. On that day, rampant Wall Street speculation that had characterized the Roaring Twenties came to an abrupt end. Our country learned many valuable lessons about the banking system and took action to contain the severe risks of an unregulated banking system. This body passed the Banking Act of 1933, commonly called Glass-Steagall, named after the lead sponsors of the bill. Well, from the shape of our economy today, it appears the U.S. forgot important lessons of economic behavior. The banking system we have today again is too risky, too concentrated, and with too much absentee ownership. As a result, our system of credit is seized up and also less competitive. This results in lower capital formation in our local communities, which translates into fewer jobs. Our system also has become one that does not financially empower or reward the average depositor. Consumers know that their interests on certificates of deposit have fallen to all-time lows; yet we see banking fees increasing on all kinds of transactions. Yes, it almost seems like you have to pay the banks to take your money. Money center banks, meanwhile, are earning huge profits while tightly restricting loans and hindering our economic recovery. The U.S. has far fewer banks and savings and loan institutions today than we did a decade and a half ago. In fact, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's figures show our vast Nation has only 6,414 commercial banks today, half the number that existed in 1990. In addition, 856 banks are on the FDIC's watch list, a very high figure. Moreover, 60 percent of the savings institutions have disappeared over the same period of time. We see enormous accumulation of banking assets and vast financial power moved to a handful of powerful institutions that are making enormous profits, indeed, the highest profits in our Nation in addition to the oil companies. Fifteen years ago, the assets of the six largest banks were approximately 17 percent of gross domestic product. Today, after the recent financial panic, estimates for assets of those same banks are over half of our gross domestic product. So six financial institutions control an enormous percentage, not just of our banking system but, indeed, our economy and, in turn, our Nation's future. This is too much power in too few hands. The American people are feeling it in the restriction of credit, the lack of jobs with sluggish growth, and the lack of competitive capital opportunities. Over a decade ago, Congress' ultimate response to the stock market crash of 1929 was abolished. Yes, the law that had separated risky Wall Street speculations from prudent community banking--the Glass-Steagall Act--was obliterated by the conference committee on the Gramm-Leach- Bliley Act. That legislation became law and created an economic time bomb that started ticking and contributed in a major way to the economic explosion in September 2008. Financial abandon replaced prudence. Wall Street and its supporters in Congress became obsessed with stripping away all the prudent banking rules that were once the cornerstone of what had been a stable financial system. That system formed capital, protected consumer accounts, paid them a decent return on their money, and created the greatest period of growth in American history. That system built confidence, dependability, and wealth across our economy. Wall Street lobbyists were eager to walk back the hands of time, falsely claiming the Banking Act of 1933--that had formed the basis of stable credit for half a century--was quaint and outdated. But when Graham-Leach-Bliley was signed into law, the protections that had separated prudent banking from risks were swept into the dust bin and financial calamity followed. The Glass-Steagall protections are not outdated. Wall Street opposed them in the 1930s just as much as they do today. In the 1930s, it was the Pecora Commission--and we need another one--that was an instrument of this Congress that was charged with investigating Wall Street abuses in the banking system following the Great Depression. Their work is often credited with creating the momentum for passage of the Glass- Steagall Banking Act of 1933. And Pecora himself wrote that ``bitterly hostile was Wall Street to the enactment of the regulatory legislation.'' What is different today is how tamely Congress and the executive branch reacted to Wall Street abuse. Following the 2008 economic collapse, there was not an immediate recognition that what was needed was restoration of that sound financial framework. Mr. Speaker, I have a bill, H.R. 1489, the Return to Prudent Banking Act. I ask my colleagues to cosponsor this bipartisan legislation. America surely needs to restore a secure, dependable, and prudent banking system so we can get on with the job of job creation.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman. I'm from northern Ohio. Just to clarify what this means for one of America's lodestar industries, here's a little graph that shows how many Korean cars are coming into the United States today, over half a million. This little dot here represents what the U.S. is selling into the Korean market right now: 7,450 of our cars in that market versus over half a million of their cars sold here. This agreement basically says maybe America could sell 75,000 cars--but there's no guarantee, no guarantee--and if you go to Korea today, you see less than 5 percent of the cars on their streets are from anywhere else in the world. So, you think they're going to be reciprocal? Theirs is a closed market. When is America going to stand up in its trade policies to state-managed capitalism in these other countries and give our workers and our companies an even break? All this deal says is we might sell--it doesn't say must sell--it says we might sell up to 75,000 cars in that economy, but they're already eating our lunch. The Economic Policy Institute estimates this agreement will cost us another 159,000 net jobs. And you know, Mr. Speaker, I sure hope they don't come out of Ohio again. I hope they come out of the districts of every single person here who's going to vote for this agreement and cause more job hemorrhaging to this economy.

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman from Maine for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand here today voicing the concerns of America's workers and rise in opposition to the Panama free trade agreement, as well as the South Korean and Colombian. Like many others, in terms of Panama, I have expressed concerns about Panama's long history of being a tax haven. Supporters of this NAFTA- style trade deal claim that the Tax Information and Exchange Agreement, or TIEA, that Panama ratified in April of this year wiped away decades of secrecy as a tax haven there. We've been told that Panama's recent removal from the OECD's gray list indicates that it's a fresh start. Well, I ask, when have the promises made in other NAFTA-style trade deals that have brought us these trade deficits since NAFTA was first signed, when have they ever made good on their agreements? Public Citizen notes that the 2001 Panama tax agreement, called TIEA, includes a major exception, a major exception that allows Panama to reject specific requests if it's contrary to the public policy of Panama. Now, that's an interesting concept for a country that derives a significant national income from activities related to being a tax haven. Time has proven those who oppose these NAFTA-type trade accords correct. They have all been job losers. Otherwise, America would have a trade balance, but we have a half a trillion dollar trade deficit. Sure we might sell a few more pork chops and a few more soybeans. But, you know what, overall America loses almost all of its GDP growth simply because the growing trade deficit just squashes down the opportunity for job creation in our country. We've seen millions and millions of jobs outsourced. Let me say a word about the U.S.-Korea trade agreement. It's modeled after NAFTA too; and, again, it's one of these copy-cat agreements. In the last decade alone, these agreements have cost Americans over 6 million jobs, 55,000 plants have been lost, so many outsourced. I mean, what world do you live in if you don't even understand what's happening with job outsourcing to our country between our borders from Atlantic to Pacific.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank my dear colleague Mr. Michaud, who has fought equally hard. I'm proud to stand here on behalf of the communities and workers and businesses of our country that want to compete on a level playing field. The problem with our trade policies is they export more U.S. jobs than products. The gentleman talks about possibility. I don't want possibility. I want results. When you look at what's happened over the last quarter century, we don't have any balanced trade accounts. They're all in the red. And these trade deficits snuff out economic growth. Didn't anybody here take math? Look at the balance sheet. It's all negative. This is Korea today. All negative. Our trade accounts with them have been negative. They're already negative. What difference does this deal make? It only says ``maybe.'' Maybe Korea will allow us to sell more than 7,450 cars in their market when they're selling half a million here already. Shouldn't reciprocity be at the heart of our trade deals? We've got a half a trillion dollar trade deficit. How many times do you have to be hit over the head before you say, You know what? This isn't working. Soybean exports aren't enough. Cranberries aren't enough. Look at the job outsourcing of America from coast to coast. Our people's wages are going down. Their standard of living is going down. Their jobs have been outsourced. They're losing their homes. Unemployment is stuck. GDP isn't rising. Is anybody here listening? Is anybody paying attention? This is just another example of powerful Washington elites being totally out of step with Main Street and the American people. I'm proud of the Tea Partiers who are out there organizing and I'm proud of the Occupy Wall Street rallies because they're saying, You folks, you are out of step up here in Washington. Pay attention to what is happening on Main Street. I oppose this agreement with Korea as well as Colombia and Panama and ask this Congress to have some real common sense and move to trade balance rather than trade deficit. Create jobs in America by balancing our trade accounts.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I would like to insert into the Record a letter from the hardest-working workers in America--the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers--in opposition to this Korean free trade agreement. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers, Kansas City, KS, December 16, 2010. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Representative: On behalf of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, I write to express our opposition to the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA). This misguided agreement fails to address the long-standing concerns of American workers, will result in more lost American manufacturing jobs, and fails to establish an appropriate model for sustainable global trade. At a time when so many Americans are struggling in our weak economy, the KORUS FTA is the last thing our nation can afford to pursue. We continue to be disappointed the U.S. Trade Representative has failed to negotiate positive changes in core aspects of this agreement. The provisions on investment, procurement, and services continue to constrain both governments' ability to regulate in the public interest, promote domestic job creation through responsible procurement policies, and provide public services. The agreement's rules on procurement have the potential to restrict policy goals of vital importance to our union, including domestic sourcing requirements. It is inappropriate for trade agreements to restrict the ability of governments to invest tax dollars in domestic job creation and promote legitimate social objectives. In addition, the investment provisions of the agreement include provisions that allow foreign investors to claim rights above and beyond those granted to domestic investors. With respect to the labor chapter, no effort was made to improve and strengthen the labor provisions with the Korean Government. Contrary to popular belief, Korean labor laws fail to conform to norms established by the International Labor Organization (ILO). In fact, dozens of trade unionists have been imprisoned for exercising basic labor rights. Further, the Korean Government passed legislation several years ago weakening basic labor protections, contrary to the recommendations of the ILO. This trade agreement--the most significant in over a decade--fails to live up to the standards workers in both countries deserve. During the 2008 Presidential campaign, then candidate Obama promised to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Instead, two years later, the Obama administration is asking American workers to once again turn a blind eye to yet another unfair and unbalanced trade agreement. It is time to abandon the flawed model on which the KORUS FTA is based, and move toward a new policy that creates good jobs, benefits the U.S. economy as a whole, and protects fundamental rights. Thank you for your consideration of our views on this important matter. Sincerely, Newton B. Jones, International President.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk on two subjects: one, liberty and justice and, number two, our economy. On the first, as cochair of the House Ukrainian Caucus, I stand today and join my voice to the citizens of the free world who stand in solidarity with freedom lovers in Ukraine seeking liberty and justice for all. It is with the deepest concern that we raise strenuous objection to the political decision by Ukraine's Pechersk court that sentenced former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko to prison this October 11. The court's ``guilty'' verdict sentences her to 7 years in prison, bars her from holding office for 3 years, and effectively stops her from participating in Ukraine's upcoming elections. Ukraine's actions should also call into question Ukraine's accession to the European Union. I join with the members of the Ukrainian Congress of America in supporting immediate congressional hearings on what has transpired in Ukraine. I urge our leadership to allow the passage of a resolution expressing U.S. objection to the actions of Ukraine's politically driven judicial system that seem to have more to do with politics than justice. In furtherance of these objectives, I place on record on behalf of the Ukrainian Caucus the official statement of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, which represents over 1 million Americans of Ukrainian descent, equally incensed at what has occurred. From their statement, the Ukrainian Congress states: They call upon the Government of the United States to take appropriate measures to support democracy and human rights in Ukraine. They urge the United States Government to restrict visas and freeze assets of the current antidemocratic regime and to hold congressional hearings on sanctions and future foreign assistance to the Government of Ukraine. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me, to join our caucus; to speak out and to act then on behalf of the advance of democracy and justice in post-Soviet Ukraine. I also wish to address today the U.S. economy. We've heard a lot about the trade agreements that are going to come before us today dealing with so-called ``free trade'' for South Korea, for Colombia and Panama. I wish to place some information on the record. I've served in Congress awhile now, and fought against the NAFTA trade model back in the nineties when they said it would create jobs that would result in trade surpluses. Advocates promised we would have all this extraordinary economic growth and new jobs in the United States. Then after NAFTA was passed, we saw the beginning of these hemorrhaging trade deficits with Mexico, with Canada and, indeed, with the world. In 1997 and '98, when the China permanent normal trade relations, which I might add are anything but normal, kicked in, America went into an even greater trade deficit. Each billion dollars of trade deficit represented a loss of thousands upon thousands of lost jobs. So, as we look at the period that we've been living through over the last 20 to 25 years as these so-called free trade agreements locked down, with every single one, America goes deeper and deeper into trade deficit, which kills the economic growth in our country. Now, today, we're being delivered three more: South Korea, Panama, and Colombia. When we look back at CAFTA, which was passed in the early 2000s, what happened? Did we get trade balances with those countries? No. We got more U.S. job loss. Sure, there were a few industries that made out like bandits. Okay. that's fine, I'm glad that some industries can export, and generally, agriculture is able to sell a little bit more, but the overal net is negative. The net is negative. That translates into lost jobs. We've lost over 7 million jobs in this country because these agreements are not fair trade agreements. They really don't result in trade balances for our country, nor job creation. They yield job losses--coast to coast. Let's just take a look at what happened with Mexico alone. Back when NAFTA was passed, we had a trade surplus with Mexico. The same people who are arguing for these agreements today said, Don't worry about NAFTA--jobs are going to be even better. We said, No, no. It's not going to be better because there's not a real rule of law. There is no respect for the peasant class in Mexico, and the agricultural adjustment there is going to be horrendous. In fact, it is at the basis of the exodus of Mexican farmers and peasants into our country. That is what is fueling illegal immigration--the lack of a resolution to what occurred during NAFTA when the agricultural adjustment was not allowed to occur in a humane way in Mexico. What a pity to go to the communities and to see how people are living there, disrupted from their land, and then in our country to see the jobs outsourced from the United States down there or from the United States to almost anywhere--China, et cetera--to the low-wage havens with no rule of law. Every year, the trade deficit with Mexico has grown greater and greater. Remember when we began with NAFTA, we had a trade surplus with Mexico. That has disappeared and gone very negative translating into lost jobs. Now just take a look at Korea. They say this deal is going to make trade better. Well, do you believe that? We already have a trade deficit with Korea, and this agreement isn't going to solve it because Korea already sells over a half a million cars in this country, but we only sell a few thousand cars there now. This agreement will not change these numbers and will result in more lost jobs in our country. This agreement contains no requirement for reciprocity. I ask the Members to vote ``no'' on the agreements dealing with Korea, Colombia, and Panama. UCCA Condemns Tymoshenko Show Trial Verdict New York, NY.--The Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, the representative organization of the over one million Americans of Ukrainian descent, is outraged and strongly condemns the Pechersk court's sentencing of Yulia Tymoshenko. The October 11th guilty verdict, which sentences the former prime minister to 7 years in prison, and bans her from holding office for three years, displays the selective and political motivations of the current regime and leaves no doubt that the court's decision was dictated by the government to remove one of the top opposition leaders from taking part in upcoming elections. From the start, the UCCA, along with the international community, deemed the various court proceedings to be biased, not meeting international standards and selective in persecution of opposition leaders and former government officials. Thus, today's guilty verdict not only demonstrates the ongoing anti-democratic and authoritarian tendencies of the regime, but also severely threatens the country's European aspirations, specifically the expected ratification of an association agreement with the European Union. President Yanukovych's use of criminal law to serve his own political end, must not be tolerated! The UCCA calls upon the government of the United States to take appropriate measures to support democracy and human rights in Ukraine. We urge the United States government to restrict visas and freeze assets of the current anti-democratic regime and to hold congressional hearings on sanctions and future foreign assistance to the government of Ukraine.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank my dear friend Mr. Levin for yielding. It's time for America to negotiate fair trade agreements that create jobs in America and are based on a rule of law, respect for life and liberty before profits for the few. I rise in opposition to this Colombia deal. It's just another NAFTA- like trade accord that too often are job-killers, people-killers and democracy-killers. This administration promised an agreement with Colombia would not be moved forward until the violence and targeted killings of union leaders and religious leaders stopped. This is a picture of Father Jose Restrepo, who was found murdered along a roadside in rural Colombia, gunned down as he traveled through the countryside. The week before his murder, Father Restrepo had traveled to Bogota, the capital city there, to raise concerns of his community about the impact of a giant open pit gold mine. Father is one of six Catholic priests killed this year alone in Colombia, in addition to 22 union leaders that have been killed there just since January. What kind of a deal is this with a nation that has had dozens and dozens and dozens since 2010, 51 people murdered for their trade union activities in Colombia alone? What is wrong with our country that we cannot stand up for democracy, for human rights, and for job creation in this country?

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank my good friend from Ohio for yielding me the time and for his steadfast opposition to these free trade agreements, and I rise in strong opposition to this proposed Panama Free Trade Agreement. Who in their right mind could believe any free trade agreements modeled on NAFTA would create jobs in our country? I remember during the 1990s fighting the first NAFTA accord here, and Newt Gingrich saying at that time NAFTA would help the United States ``by increasing American jobs through world sales.'' Sure. Here's what NAFTA yielded: a trillion dollars in accumulated trade deficit, and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of lost American jobs that moved from Cleveland and moved from Avon Lake and moved from Sandusky and moved from Toledo and moved from Madeira to other places in this world south of the border. Why don't we go back and fix this? Now, let's be honest. Panama's entire GDP equals about 6 percent of the economy of the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. So what could this Panama agreement actually be about? Well, letters we've received give us some insight into what it might be about. With Panama, we know the country has a long-standing money laundering problem and that it is a tax haven for corporations. How convenient. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office included Panama on its 50-country tax haven list. Get the picture? Starting to clear some of the fog? We all know about some of these Cayman Island accounts. Well, why don't we add Panama right to the stack. Panama was long on the OECD's gray list of countries that failed to implement internationally agreed upon tax standards. These guys have got something really good going. But you know what? In this country it would be illegal. According to Public Citizen, approximately 400,000 firms and numerous wealthy individuals use Panama's offshore financial services industry to dodge paying their taxes. I thought we were supposed to be for returning those tax dollars to the United States, not giving them another escape hatch. AFSCME has said that Panama has a history of failing to protect workers and enforce labor rights. And the Sierra Club points out that the Panama free trade agreement has the same investment chapters proposed in other trade agreements that allow foreign investors and corporations to directly challenge public interest laws for compensation before international tribunals, bypassing domestic courts. In other words, the rule of law gets shredded piece by piece by piece. Why does America keep shooting itself in the foot? As the building and construction trades at the AFL-CIO have noted, the Panama proposed agreement, like all others, ``undermine the Buy America policies that reinvested our taxes in our communities.'' You know, it's really sad when an institution and an administration keeps doing the same thing over and over and over again that is hollowing out the jobs in the United States of America. We want to make it in America. We don't want to outsource more jobs, provide more tax havens, provide more escape hatches. When you campaign and you try to represent the people in places like Ohio, as Congressman Kucinich knows, we've tried so very hard, every time you create 100 jobs, they snatch away 300. And then they say to the workers: You know what, you're earning too much money; $14 an hour, you're going down to $9. You don't like that? Well, there's the door because there are 7,000 workers lined up for part-time jobs in places like northern Ohio. This Congress had better wake up and renegotiate these trade deals that have cost the middle class across this country their ability to earn a living in America. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time and look forward to the continuing debate.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman from Maine for yielding and rise in opposition to the proposed South Korea trade accord. Look, my friends, South Korea's market is basically closed. You can't see any other cars on the road there other than Korean cars. And American policy has allowed jobs to be whittled away here at home through a trade agenda that outsources U.S. production and American jobs. Every single year we have a trade deficit with South Korea now. Why do we want to make it worse? Do you know what? The American people know it. They're living it. They want us to fix it. They're pouring out into the streets of America to tell us. Last year, our trade deficit with South Korea already was over $10 billion. That translates into more lost jobs here at home. But rather than stopping this outsourcing of America, the executive branch and some of their allies up here keep concocting more of the same NAFTA- type trade agreements that increase our trade deficit, and obviously even more with South Korea now. The Economic Policy Institute analysis predicts this proposed agreement with South Korea will cost us 159,000 more lost jobs, net, and the International Trade Commission verifies that. Isn't it time that we put Americans back to work here inside our country rather than giving them more of the same red ink?

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, some pundits are criticizing the Wall Street demonstrators as unfocused, inchoate, and disorganized. Well, let me render this opinion: It is Congress that is unfocused, inchoate, and disorganized. It is Congress that has not met its obligation to the American people. Congress has not addressed the real damage caused by Wall Street greed. This institution can't even do rigorous oversight hearings across America--starting on Wall Street. The demonstrators have found the right piece of geography. They have their eyes on the right subject. It is this body that has allowed justice to be denied to millions of our fellow Americans harmed by Wall Street wrongdoers. Wall Street has taken bonuses as we've seen the largest transfer of wealth from Main Street to Wall Street in modern history--too much power in too few hands. I am placing in the Record today 12 bills Congress needs to pass to yield long overdue justice, restore a trustworthy competitive banking system and get the big money out of politics influencing this Congress. These bills include restoring Glass-Steagall to separate prudent banking from speculation, helping those facing foreclosure, and adding 1,000 FBI agents to do real investigation and prosecution, along with forensic accounting, to bring those who have done wrong to this Republic to justice. It's long overdue for Congress to do its job.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise to defend Social Security. We've heard Social Security derided by certain extreme politicians lately claiming it can't survive, that it's unsustainable and that the beneficiaries who earned their retirement benefits need to face the hard truths. Well, here are some really hard truths about Social Security: The average retirement benefit is merely $14,000 a year; The median income of senior households is only $25,000 a year; One in three seniors depend on Social Security for 90 percent or more of their income. The fact is that Social Security is a critical program for seniors across our country. It is a lifeline to half of all seniors who make under $25,000 a year. This is a chart that shows the various income levels. Half of the people of our country who are seniors receive less than $25,000 a year on the program. It is even more important to the 25 percent of seniors who earn less than $15,000 a year. And for the nearly 4 million seniors who earn less than $10,000 a year, it is the difference between scraping by or having nothing at all. According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, Social Security keeps 20 million Americans out of poverty. It is especially important for women. Women over the age of 80 are most likely to be living at or below the poverty level. Nearly a quarter of women in that age group are officially destitute. Pay attention to them. When you're at the supermarket and you see them looking at cases and they can't buy anything, give them $5. Social Security benefits millions of older women and helps keep them out of poverty. What many people seem--or choose--to forget is that Social Security is an insurance program for retirement, for disability, and for survivorship. It is not designed to give you higher returns or beat the Standard & Poor's 500 or bolster your stock portfolio. It is not welfare. Social Security is an earned insurance benefit designed to give retirees, the disabled, and survivors stable, guaranteed benefits each month for the rest of their lives. It is financed by the taxes retirees paid into the system during their working years matched by their employer. Born out of the Great Depression, President Roosevelt ensured the program would be financed by payroll deductions, matched by employers, so Americans would understand this insurance program is an earned benefit. This arrangement would guarantee, as he put it, that: no politician can ever scrap that Social Security program. This is exactly why putting people back to work and creating jobs is the best long-term financing solution to ensure Social Security's long- term solvency. There are 14 million Americans out of work, and getting the unemployed back to work is the fastest way to inject billions of dollars back into the Social Security trust funds, stabilizing the program for generations to come. With all of the misleading Republican rhetoric about Social Security being broken and a so-called ``lie,'' they claim, some have forgotten that the other side has always been opposed to the program. In 1935, the Social Security Act made its way through the Ways and Means Committee but received not a single Republican vote on the committee. The ranking Republican said at that time that he would ``vote most strenuously in opposition to the bill at each and every opportunity.'' Republicans have opposed the program every step of the way. In 1984, former Representative Dick Armey, now a Tea Party godfather, described Social Security as a ``bad retirement'' plan and a ``rotten trick'' on the American people. He said, ``I think we're going to have to bite the bullet on Social Security and phase it out over a period of time.'' And then in 1987, former Representative Newt Gingrich said, ``While many politicians are still afraid to mention abolishing Social Security,'' he said, ``I am convinced this generation is ready for honest talk and real leadership.'' These are not retired politicians speaking. One is a leader in the Tea Party, and the other is a candidate for the Republican nomination for President. Even today in our House, we have Members who still are beating the tired, failed horse that Social Security is unconstitutional. But the numbers are clear. Half of all seniors live near or below the poverty line, and one in three seniors depends on Social Security for more than 90 percent of their income. What happens to these Americans if we start violating the program they depend on, frankly, for their lives? Let me close with some comments from Americans in Ohio about Social Security. A woman from Toledo wrote: ``My retiree insurance was canceled last year. I had to get a plan to pay for my medicine. Even though I have part D, I still have to pay for my prescriptions because I'm in the doughnut hole. It costs me more than $700 a month. That's half my Social Security check.'' Her story is the story of millions of Americans across this country. I urge my colleagues to stand with me to protect Social Security and its guaranteed secured benefits for all retired Americans. Our seniors have earned these benefits.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of William Ensign a respected and jovial Toledoan whose ethic of public service resulted in his being elected Mayor of Toledo in 1967, and then reelected again in 1971. We offer our condolences to his wife of 61 years, Joan, their children Maria, Kimberly, Madonna, Christopher, Joel and Thomas, as well as their families. William J. Ensign was born in 1924. He grew up in Cleveland and went on to serve as a Marine in the Pacific Theatre in World War II. He earned his undergraduate and graduate degrees in sociology and criminology from the University of Notre Dame. He came to Toledo in 1951 to work in the legal system until he became the director of the county welfare agency in 1963, a position he held until he was elected Mayor of Toledo in 1967. He was re-elected by a landslide in 1969. He resigned in 1971 after then Ohio Governor John Gilligan appointed him Director of the Ohio Youth Commission. He then served for a year with the Ohio Department of Administrative Services. Beginning in 1975, he was the Director of the Criminal Justice program at Ohio Dominican University. Even as he raised his family and pursued his career, William Ensign developed his passion for music. He received his first drumsticks at age six, plated piano and was a drum major in the college band. He played with the Cleveland Philharmonic Orchestra and the Marine Corps band. William Ensign's legacy is well-described by a former political foe, ``He was bright and engaging and never had a bad word about anybody.'' True testament to a life lived in service to others, his community and nation.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker. I rise today to recognize the life of Mary E. Gerken, who passed from this life at age 90 years. She was an indefatigable educator, brilliant student, source of inspiration, enduring mother for her family and our community, and woman of deep, abiding faith. Her life truly can be described as a woman for others. We offer our condolences to her family, especially her children Cathy, Fran, George and Pete. Born August 29, 1920 to Nettie Mosher, a World War I Army nurse, Mary Gerken grew up in Northwest Ohio and was the Valedictorian of her Perrysburg High School graduating class. She went on to obtain a Bachelor's Degree in Biochemistry from Mary Manse College and her Master's Degree in Science Education and Microbiology from the University of Toledo. Married following World War II, Mary then was widowed with four young children. Long before women were welcomed in the sciences, she was blazing a path for those that would follow. Even as she raised her family and cared for her mother and mother-in-law, Mary taught at the high school and college levels. A conscientious parent, she instilled in her children a core of social justice, exposure to the liberal arts, and insisted on a college education for each of them. After her retirement--in her seventies--Mary traveled a new path. She taught Native Americans in Minnesota and worked with a community of religious sisters. When she came home several years later, she began a tenure of public service as an industrial hygienist with OSHA. She served as a Eucharistic Minister in her church and was a member of Zonta International. Mary E. Gerken is an example of a life well-lived. She leaves a legacy of service, compassion and industry to her family and our community. Our community expresses its gratitude for her many decades of exceptional teaching, good humor, humility, and encouraging nature. We shall miss her spirited presence but remain grateful always for the lasting legacies her life's work generously gave to us.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the ranking member, Ms. Slaughter of New York, for granting me this time to say, at first, I really didn't believe it when someone suggested to me that the Republican Party would really like to defeat President Obama by raising the unemployment rate. I thought, that's too cynical to really believe. But in this particular proposal tonight, what we see is a proposal by the Republican Party to take money from the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing program to help America compete in the auto industry with state-managed economies like China's and Japan's, and take it away from recovering auto firms and unemployed auto workers to give to disaster victims around this country. It's a no-win game. We're hurting the American people. We take from one sector that is suffering for another sector that is suffering? In the greatest automotive manufacturing country in the world, we don't want to put more people back to work because we want to defeat the President next year? I'm starting to believe those that suggested this cynical ploy. Why should we hurt the automotive industry that is just beginning to hire back and starting to lift this economy in the industrial Midwest and through hiring at parts suppliers coast to coast? Vote ``no'' on this cynical ploy to set disaster victims against unemployed auto workers in the automotive industry of this country, which has a right to compete. If you want to offset $1.5 billion in costs of disaster assistance, take it from the bonuses Wall Street titans keep pocketing. For them, it's only pocket change.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, listening to the prior Member talk about small business, I have to say I agree that small business is the biggest engine for job creation in this country. It was such a pleasure today to join Vice President Joe Biden at Wrap-Tite, Inc., in Solon, Ohio, and to see the role that government must play when the market isn't fully functioning and when the banks aren't fully lending, and to see the Small Business Administration's 504 loan guarantee program at work creating jobs at this wonderful, wonderful company that now has millions and millions of dollars in sales. When the regular banks weren't working, it was the SBA, Small Business Administration, that we support, some of us support, that was able to draw on the capital that made possible the investment for expansion, and they have hired five more people. Imagine if there were 30,000 more companies in America that could do that, with the changes in the Jobs Act that the President is proposing, in order to reduce payroll taxes on individuals, as well as businesses and the other incentives for small business creation, we can really help lift this economy when she can't lift herself alone. It was a pleasure to be there today. I congratulate Wrap-Tite and want to say it was great to celebrate that patriotic spirit of making the market work.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of Ukrainian independence. Twenty years ago Ukraine succeeded from the Soviet Union and on August 24, 1991 asserted its independence. For the first time since 1921, Ukraine was once again free. The Western world and in particular the United States welcomed Ukraine's sovereignty and its pursuit of democratic ideals. Ukraine as a new nation has achieved much in the short time. Ukrainians enjoy the ability to share with the world their language, culture, history, and heritage without fear of persecution. During the Orange Revolution of 2004 the world saw Ukrainians united to uphold the sacred belief that in a democracy the will of the people must be fulfilled. As we look back, we must remember that the path to democracy faces difficulties. Ukraine still struggles with its past, both inside and outside its borders. Legacies of the Soviet Union can still be seen in Ukrainian politics today. Political opponents have been intimidated and journalists harassed. Ukraine struggles to maintain civil liberties and the national identity of Ukraine has been endangered. Russia continually attempts to subjugate Ukraine by threatening Ukrainian territorial integrity, attempting to create Ukrainian reliance on Russian energy, and threatens Ukraine's pro-European ambitions. There are many challenges in democratization, but with the will of the Ukrainian people and the support of the world they can be realized. On this twenty-year anniversary of independence I would like to offer my best wishes to all Ukrainians around the world who join us in celebrating this great milestone. It is important that we all reaffirm our strong commitment to Ukraine's independence as well as our tireless efforts to help democracy live strong in Ukraine.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, you want to know why we have a budget deficit? We have a budget deficit because we have a jobs deficit, and we have a jobs deficit because our Nation has been outsourcing millions of jobs for over a quarter century. White House after White House and Congress after Congress have allowed our manufacturing and jobs base to be whittled away through a trade regimen that outsources U.S. production and American jobs, financed by the same big Wall Street banks that caused the financial meltdown. Year after year the United States continues to rack up enormous trade deficits with nation after nation. The numbers don't lie. They tell us that over 2.7 million manufacturing jobs alone were lost just during the Bush administration. Washington must finally confront our so-called free trade failed policies if we are going to be serious about creating jobs in order to balance the budget. Last year, the trade deficit was another astonishing half a trillion dollars. Imagine a half a trillion, plus a half a trillion, plus a half a trillion, plus a half a trillion year after year after year. That equaled, just for last year, 7 million American jobs that were not created here because of our job-killing trade policies. Rather than stopping this enormous outsourcing of America, we're being offered up more of the same, more failed free trade agreements, this time with Korea, Panama, Colombia. Has Washington learned nothing, or are the economic powers that outsource these jobs bearing down on Washington so greatly that the American people can't be heard? The public's interest is being suppressed. These agreements are another expansion of the same policies and processes that were enacted with NAFTA. We were all told in 1993 that NAFTA would create millions of jobs. Instead, we have seen exactly the opposite, millions of jobs decimated. Our trade deficit with Mexico last year was over $66 billion in the red. In 1993, proponents of NAFTA, like Gary Huffbauer and economist Jeffrey Schott, promised we would have, and I quote them, ``an annual current account surplus with Mexico of about $10 billion through the 1990s.'' That was an absolute falsehood. Obviously, they were all wrong, dead wrong. Instead, we saw over a third of all manufacturing jobs in the United States disappear since we signed that agreement and $1 trillion accumulated trade deficit with Mexico. Not a single year since NAFTA's is passage was the U.S. in the black. We heard the exact same fairy tale regarding China's Permanent Most Favored Nation Status. We were told that that agreement in 1998 would create millions of jobs in America. Instead, the result has been a cumulative $2 trillion trade deficit with China alone. When you think about the budget deficit, you'd better think about the trade deficit because they are absolutely interlinked. You're not going to balance the budget until the American people go back to work, and they can't go back to work when their jobs are being sent elsewhere. If you always do what you have always done, you will always get what you always got. The Economic Policy Institute's analysis predicts that the agreement that's proposed with South Korea will cost us an additional 159,000 jobs in our country. Since this January, we have already rung up, look at the numbers, over $7 billion trade deficit with South Korea. With passage of the proposed agreement, do you think it's going to make the job situation better? If you want to see just how poorly negotiated the Korea deal is, take a quick look at the auto provisions. There's no reciprocity. Last year, Korea sold nearly half a million cars in our country; 500,000 cars. The United States, you know how much we sell to them? Six thousand. What kind of deal is that? And we'll be lucky if, under this agreement, where there's a hope that we might sell perhaps, 75,000 cars to Korea, so, they get a half a million, we get a handful? How's that a credible plan to create jobs in our country? And then there are the other two proposed agreements with Panama and Colombia, the latest NAFTA expansion. What are the major commercial interests there? The Government Accountability Office has identified Panama as a major haven for, guess what, tax avoidance. Panama is a popular destination for the very same multinational corporations that want to avoid paying their fair share of U.S. taxes by creating offshore subsidiaries. And how about Colombia, which is the most dangerous country in the world if you care about labor rights, and no free country in the world does not have labor rights. Over 2,000 trade unionists, 2,000 have been assassinated there since 1990. What a pleasant place to do business. And there has been no justice for their victims and their families in the majority of those murder cases. And what is the largest economic interest we have with Colombia? It has three letters. It isn't a place to export U.S.-made goods. Rather, it's more oil imports. How can those that support these failed trade agreements want more? We need to create jobs in this country again because, in order to balance the budget, you have to put the American people back to work, and you can't do that when you're outsourcing more of their jobs and importing more into our nation than we export.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the ranking member, Ms. Slaughter, for her generosity. I advise my colleagues, budgets will balance when people go back to work. I rise against this amendment, the rule, and the underlying bill as ``inartful'' dodges from necessity. When a patient is weak, do you pull out their intravenous feeding tubes, or do you help them recover? Do you do everything possible to build their strength, or do you keep shutting off their oxygen machine? America's economy is struggling to grow after the deep Bush recession triggered by his bailout of Wall Street abuse, two wars, and trillions in tax cuts to the super-rich who, by the way, didn't create any jobs with it. Revenues to our Federal Government have fallen over $400 billion a year due to unemployment. That's $4 trillion over a decade. So what does the majority do to the patient? They pull out the tubes, and they now shove them down the elevator chute. Never before has any political party chosen to hurt America when she was recovering by edging her toward default. Their dangerous behavior has already caused hundreds of billions of dollars of losses in the stock market, pension funds and annuities. Social Security and Medicare checks are threatened, and economic growth and jobs are stalled due to all this uncertainty in the markets. Madam Speaker, America needs a Congress and President that focus on economic recovery and job creation. Budgets will balance when people go back to work. To delude oneself the cause is otherwise is to take America down the proverbial black hole. Jobs are the answer--not more dodges, not pushing the patient down the shaft, and not proposing amendments that truly dodge the real question, which is full economic recovery for the people of this country.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Republican majority has once again proven its complete irresponsibility by putting our economy at risk in handling our Nation's finances. A little over a decade ago, there were projected surpluses as far as the eye could see. The Nation had achieved a firm financial footing. That was before the George Bush administration and the Republicans took us on a spending spree, paying out trillions in huge tax cuts, skewed to--guess who?--the top 2 percent, the wealthy, whose investment decision then killed jobs in our country. The last month that George Bush was in office, we lost over 700,000 jobs just in that month. The Bush Administration plunged the Nation during that decade into two wars they refused to pay for. History tells the story. Then came the big economic collapse of 2008 during the Bush Administration that included a loss in Federal revenues, which followed the largest economic downturn since the Great Depression, due to George Bush's capitulation to Wall Street abuse. Now, Republicans claim to care about the Federal deficit? Well, yes, revenues have shrunk by about $400 billion a year because of the financial crisis they created we're trying to dig ourselves out of. Spread out over 10 years, that covers the, roughly, $4 trillion we're trying to eke out of this sick economy to pay down our debt. But it's a very delicate balance we're attempting because there are 14 million Americans out of work and up to 24 million who are working part time, who want to work full time, or others who have completely given up and dropped out. We can't hurt them more. Fewer jobs mean lower revenues at all levels. It means lower profits to many companies, and it certainly means lower revenues into the Federal Treasury because there are more people who are on unemployment: more people who rely on government assistance, more people who rely on public health because their private insurance has dried up. How many people now can't afford to pay their COBRA? Millions who are not earning paychecks are not able to pay their contributions to Social Security and Medicare. So it's a vicious cycle. In any time of economic downturn, national economic policy must act like a fulcrum on a teeter-totter. It has to level impacts on people so they can reposition. The government has to at the Federal level help prop up the American people until they can find their footing again. It doesn't take a mental giant to figure that out. Unemployment is the major cause of the deficit that we are bearing now; yet we hear almost no discussion about jobs and how to create jobs, to get rid of unemployment, as the reemployed and lift the economy--healing the Republic. Rather than talking about how to create jobs and how unemployment causes lost revenues and kills more jobs, all we're hearing is take more flesh off the bones of families and communities. House Republicans have placed the entire economy at risk now to satisfy the ideological wishes of a few. The American public sees what's happening. Importantly, they're feeling directly what is not happening. Nobody is being fooled. I've heard from thousands of people back home in northern Ohio who are concerned that the Republican leadership is playing politics--playing with fire--during a time when our economic recovery is very, very fragile. Putting our Nation's credit rating at risk is totally irresponsible and will cause more economic harm. I had somebody tell me yesterday he's trying to renegotiate his home loan, and the mortgage company wanted to raise the interest rate a quarter percent because of the market uncertainty all of this is causing. Since World War I, our country has always received a AAA status from credit rating agencies because, until now, we have always put the Nation first--not any political party first, but the Nation first. To force America to default for the first time in history would hurt our Republic and every working family, and it would hurt those who are out of work even more. It would mean higher interest rates on cars, on home loans, on credit cards, on student loans. It would mean fewer jobs and less growth. Instability, uncertainty, creates a downdraft on the recovery. Congress should be focusing on economic recovery and creating jobs if we want to close that deficit gap. You balance budgets by full employment economies. We surpassed the debt limit over 2 months ago, and come August 2, the Treasury will simply not be able to pay all the bills that are currently due. Yes, it's long overdue to reach a compromise. Instead, Speaker Boehner has walked away from the negotiating table and has chosen to roll out a hasty bill that hasn't gone through the normal committee process. Apparently, many in his own party reject it. This isn't leadership for America at a time when she needs it. It may be capitulation to Grover Norquist and his lobby, but our responsibility is far greater. Mr. Speaker, the way that you balance budgets is to put people to work and grow the economy. I support a balanced, bipartisan solution to reduce our deficit, create jobs and grow our economy, to expand our middle class and protect Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid beneficiaries. The solution to deficits is robust job growth and full economic recovery. Let's spend two months putting that initiative forward!

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of transferring $50 million in funding from EPA climate change programs to support the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. While I have serious concerns about the offsets used in Mr. LaTourette's amendment, I strongly believe that we need to continue to restore the Great Lakes to preserve its many rare environmental attributes and to strengthen the American economy. The Great Lakes are vitally important to the American manufacturing industry. According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, nearly 200 million tons of cargo travel through the Great Lakes each year. The Corps reports that the Great Lakes saves manufacturers and other industries approximately $3.6 billion per year in transportation costs. Studies undertaken by the University of Michigan show that more than 1.5 million jobs are directly connected to the Great Lakes generating $62 billion in wages. The Great Lakes help provide nearly 1 million manufacturing jobs, over 200,000 jobs in tourism and recreation, nearly 120,000 jobs in shipping and more than 118,000 jobs in agriculture, fishing and food production. The University of Michigan study also states that the 83 million people living in the Great Lakes area helped produce 27 percent of the Nation's gross domestic product and 24 percent of the country's exports in 2009. The basin is home to 38 percent of Fortune 500 companies. Moreover, the region's colleges and universities award 32 percent of the nation's advanced science and engineering degrees resulting in a stronger American workforce to compete against nations such as China and India. Furthermore, the Great Lakes are an environmental treasure containing nearly 20 percent of the world's fresh surface water. The lakes also support over 200 globally rare plants and animals, and more than 40 species that are found nowhere else in the world according to the U.S. Department of the Interior. In addition, the Great Lakes provide one of the best areas for fishery and other recreational activities in the world. It is estimated that 180 species of native fish, including small and large mouth bass, the northern pike and lake herring all reside in the Great Lakes. A study conducted by the Great Lakes Commissions reports that there are 4.3 million boats registered in the Great Lakes states, which is nearly one-third of all registered boats in the United States. The many environmental and economic benefits generated by the Great Lakes are in danger because of its damaged ecosystem and numerous environmental conditions. Despite recent improvements, there is much work still to be done such as eliminating toxic substance pollution, controlling invasive species, reducing nonpoint source pollution and protecting against habitat and species losses. Recognizing the importance of the Great Lakes, the Federal Government developed the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan to implement solutions to the many environmental challenges facing the Great Lakes. The Initiative has been focusing on ecosystem protection, enhancement, rehabilitation, and remediation within the Great Lakes Region. According to a study by the Brookings Institution, fully implementing the Great Lakes restoration strategy would not only protect various rare fish and wildlife it would also generate $50 billion in long-term economic benefits and $50 million to $125 million in reduced costs to municipalities. In closing, I urge my colleagues to support protecting our environment and our economy by voting to transfer funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative--so vital to restoring fresh water resources for the next generation and beyond.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, too often, Congress and Washington deal with symptoms, not underlying causes. And that's what's going on with this current debate about the debt limit. It's kind of like you have an ill patient that has a fever, and you say, well, they're sick so throw some water on the patient and their fever will go down. But you never deal with the underlying infection, the underlying cause that is tripping the fever in the first place. Let me put a little map on the table here this morning, to look at the nature of current economic challenge. When you have 14 million Americans out of work, and up to 24 million who are working part-time that want to work full-time or others who have completely dropped out of the workforce, none of them are earning a full check. Money is not being taken out of that check to pay their social insurance for Social Security, and they're not going to pay their regular income taxes either. And so the government falls short on revenues. It's quite clear. We have a jobs problem. That's the causal problem that underlies the deficit problem that America faces. Now, if you look just at this year alone, 2011, so far this year the government's taken in over a trillion dollars--$1.2 trillion in revenue. That's not bad for an economy that's just limping along. But we've spent $1.8 trillion. So we've spent already this year over $600 billion that we didn't have. We've had to borrow that money. That borrowing gets added to the long-term deficit. But why do we have that deficit this year? We have that deficit because the revenues aren't coming in at the same rate as in prior years because there is a jobs problem. When you have 14 million to 24 million people who want a better job and can't get one, that's the underlying cause which Washington fails to see or address. Now, the cost of that unemployment with the attendant shortage of revenues, is added to this huge accumulated debt, which now is over $14 trillion. So where did that come from? Let me outline the reasons. The largest share, not only of this year's deficit but of prior debt that we've accumulated, is due to a lagging economy. Families know this. They can't pay as much in taxes or any taxes when they're out of work. Companies, banks, and real estate firms that go bankrupt can't pay taxes either. Revenues fall short. If you take a look at the cost of our sluggish economy triggered and caused by Wall Street abuse, that's what threw us into this mess in the first place, right, back in 2008. The increased costs of resulting unemployment are staggering indeed: Add them up. First, we have to pay the unemployment checks, and some people even got 99 weeks of unemployment because jobs are scarce. Add to it the costs of food for those unemployed people. They are enormous. When an economy isn't fully functioning, the Federal costs of medical care skyrocket because people fall off their own insurance. So many in this country simply can't get good care, and that's all tied in to a very sluggish economy. Yes, the costs of unemployment are huge. Then let's add the cost of the housing meltdown. All of the bad mortgages, four out of five bad mortgages were dumped on the Federal Government. Did Wall Street take care of its dirty laundry? No. They gave it to you, the American people. At the FHA, the Federal Housing Administration, at Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, the Veterans Administration, guess who's holding all of the mortgages that are under water? Eighty percent of them. Us, the people of the United States, because Wall Street's insurance company or vacant units become the property of Uncle Sam; not Wall Street. Did Wall Street write off any losses? Oh, no, no, no. They gave them to us. That is a huge and growing part of the Federal deficit related to the housing crisis and what it is going to cost to revitalize or demolish that housing inventory. Then, add to all this a trillion dollars more that's been spent on two wars that have not been paid for. That is a major part of the growing deficit. We can't ignore that. Do we say we should have a war tax? Do we say we should end the wars? Do we say our allies should pay more? The point is we haven't said anything other than just add that trillion dollars on the deficit. Now let's take a look at the Bush trillion-dollar tax giveaway to the very wealthy, who said that if we gave them the money, they would create jobs in our country. Guess what? They took the money and they created jobs offshore. Corporate profits are at all-time highs, but are jobs increasing in this country? No. Those corporate profits are due to the booking here in our country of profits earned offshore. So some say give them more tax breaks. Why, unless they invest in our country in job creation here at home. We would be foolish to waste precious dollars on more outsourcing. And finally, former President Bush had this idea for pharmaceuticals. He said don't let the Federal Government bargain the cost of pharmaceuticals in Medicare and Medicaid expenditures. Yet when we can't do that, when we fail to negotiate the best, competitive prices, that omission adds hundreds of billions of dollars to our debt. Mr. Speaker, to solve the deficit problem, Congress and the executive branch must focus on employing the citizens who are out of work. That is the real cause of our economic sluggishness. America ought to address causes, not symptoms.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to the amendments that would reduce funding appropriated in H.R. 2551, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2012 for the U.S. Botanic Garden. As you may know, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison initially had the idea of starting a national botanic garden and helped to establish one on the National Mall in 1820. It is a keystone on our mall and belongs to the American people. The mission of the U.S. Botanic Garden is to demonstrate the aesthetic, cultural, economic, therapeutic and ecological importance of plants to the well- being of humankind. It is a national and global center for learning about how to sustain life on our planet, especially as climate changes and new challenges confront our society's plant life. According to the Architect of the Capitol, approximately 1 million people visit the U.S. Botanic Garden each year. About 12,000 different plant accessions comprising more than 60,000 plants are displayed for exhibition, study, conservation and exchange with other institutions. The Botanic Garden is America's encyclopedia for sustaining production and life itself. In addition to displaying some of the world's most rare and endangered plants, the U.S. Botanic Garden provides numerous educational opportunities through its partnerships, workshops, lectures, tours and demonstrations. Some specific education programs include the opportunity to earn a Certification in Botanical Art and Illustration, the Junior Botanist Program and several hands-on activities exploring plant materials. The Gardner instructs the next generation with partnerships across our nation. Mr. Chair, we are still in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and a series of odd weather events. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service reports that greenhouse, nursery and floriculture operations account for 2.5 percent of all U.S. farms but employ nearly 5 percept of hired farm workers. This sector has a sales value of $16.6 Billion. It is a one-of-a-kind endowment America depends on. From my perspective, it is vitally important that we continue to support institutions such as the U.S. Botanic Garden not only because of its ability to preserve rare and vital plants essential to life but also for its potential to inspire the entrepreneurial spirit. We know its visitors will one day lead to increased economic output and job creation in the agricultural sector of our economy so dependent on innovation and advanced technology. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject any amendment that would reduce funding to the U.S. Botanic Garden.