Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Will the gentleman be kind enough to yield?

Ms. KAPTUR. Yes. First of all, let me just say, Congressman Garamendi, it is such a joy to have Congressman Clarke here from the wonderful city of Detroit. I really loved that commercial because I think it captured the struggle of our country through the lens of Detroit and, I might say, Toledo, just a few minutes south of Detroit. It talked about how the city had been to hell and back, and the trials and tribulations that manufacturing in our region has really experienced over the last quarter century. There is, without a doubt, as Congressman Clarke says, that Detroit was the arsenal of democracy, and it still is. All along I-75, from Detroit down through Toledo, that as you take it down through Ohio and into the areas south, the automobiles, the tanks, all of our overland vehicles, the expeditionary fighting vehicle for the Marine Corps, all of that, the Warren Tank Command, is all along that region. In Toledo, I have to brag a little bit, my hometown, that toddlin' town, still is, for all intents and purposes, home to the Jeep, the general purpose vehicle for which General Marshall ordered production for our troops in the European and Pacific theaters and we won the war. Rosie the Riveter, she had presence in Toledo, Ohio, at places like Champion Spark Plug where our mom worked, or at then Kaiser Jeep Corporation from which our father retired. One of the most important challenges we have in this Congress is to have patriotic capitalism, to reward investment in America through our tax code. Not to let outsourcing win, but to let insourcing win, in the way we look at the books here at the national level. In addition to that, I have a bill to renegotiate NAFTA; because back in 1993, NAFTA gave the green light to globalization and outsourcing, and every other trade agreement that has come down the pike has outsourced more jobs than insourced jobs for us. We got away from making it in America, and in sector after sector, closed markets in Japan, in China, in South Korea snuffed out production here as their production grew. But it has reached a breaking point. It has reached a breaking point in our country. We have had to, through defense legislation we passed, saved the strategic metals industry, beryllium, titanium, magnesium, all of these important metals, both in defense as well as in the commercial industrial sector we could lose to other places. Our ability to do machine tooling, that was one of the first fights I had in here in the President's investment tax credit for investment in the United States to save the tooling, which is located within 300 miles of Detroit and Toledo. That's what America has. Is it any wonder that unemployment is 9 percent when you have these wacko trade deals that outsource more jobs? The one bill I haven't mentioned, which is short-term, but we have so many people who are long-term unemployed. This morning I asked Chairman Bernanke from the Federal Reserve, what do we do with people that want to work in Detroit, in Toledo, in places across this country? And he basically answered the question. I said, ``Please give us your suggestions.'' And he said, ``Well, you know, we ought to tie unemployment compensation to somehow job training so people can be retooled back into the workforce in a very productive way, because I think we could lose the value of the work ethic itself.'' So the issue of training, the issue of education is a very important one, Congressman Garamendi, that you have well outlined there.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, this past Thursday marked the one year anniversary of the United States Supreme Court's ruling on the case Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission. That is the day the liberty of the American Republic want on sale to the highest bidder. And today, the House gathers to remove one of the few remaining tools the average American has to voluntarily participate in a presidential election--let me remind those in support of H.R. 359 that the average American is not a multi-national corporation with hundreds of millions of dollars at their disposal. My friends on the other side have said that this bill has nothing to do with the Citizens United case; I respectfully disagree. Because of the overreaching ruling in Citizens United, not only are large corporations now allowed to reach into their deep pockets to spend unlimited funds in support of those running for office. But they can pay for political advertisements in the days leading up to an election--a provision previously banned by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. The winner in this case was not Citizens United and the loser was not the Federal Elections Commission. The winners are multi-national corporations and Wall Street. The loser is the liberty of the American people. For if money = free speech, then lack of money = lack of free speech. Corporations have always had heavy influence in the U.S. government. But today, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision one year ago, we have entered a new era in the corporate ownership of America. In this past mid-term election, the fallout of Citizens United v. FEC saw close to $4 billion poured into the mid-term cycle. This was an all-time record. It is frightening to imagine how much money will be spent during a presidential election year if public financing is stripped. Four billion dollars--a record-breaking amount of money--was spent at a time when our country's unemployment hovers near 10 percent. That gross amount of cash came from big business and Wall Street. To claim the Citizens United made no difference in the billions spent is absurd. A few justices on the Supreme Court curiously decided that giant banks--which have already taken so much from the American people--are deserving of the same protection under the First Amendment of the Constitution as the very people they hurt. Wall Street has stripped the average American of their retirement funds, their homes, and drown our society in debt; now the Supreme Court has stripped them clean of their Constitutional right to a free democracy. This is unacceptable. Those who benefit from the big money that is injected into elections by big business and Wall Street banks have tried to stop legislative fixes. The Supreme Court has shown its willingness to overturn a century's worth of legislation designed to protect our electoral system. Now this Congress is about to vote to remove the voluntary public financing system put in place in the wake of the Watergate Scandal. My friends in the new majority say that the system is broken, and I agree. That is why I have introduced, year after year, a Constitutional amendment, H.J. Res. 6, to ensure that no corporation, no Wall Street bank, no big oil company, no deep pocket interest will be able to buy elections. I believe, the only long-term solution is to amend the United States Constitution. America's founders had the wisdom to know that as our young Republic matured, changes would need to be made. That is why they wrote Article V of the United States Constitution, which allows for amendments to the Constitution. The time has come to exercise this Constitutional right and fundamentally protect American liberty. Additonally, H.J. Res. 8, another amendment I have introduced, will amend the Constitution to give Congress the authority to set limits on the amount of contributions that may be accepted by a candidate. Congress cannot allow a tidal wave of big money to drown the integrity of our electoral system. Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission was not a question of First Amendment rights; instead, it was an opportunity to protect the voices of average Americans who have been silenced by hugh corporate bank accounts. One year ago this free Republic suffered a staggering blow. Today, we must be firm and resolute in our response. I urge my colleagues to protect public funding, to vote in favor of the Polis amendment, and to vote NO on H.R. 359. The freedom and liberty our founders envisioned truly is at stake.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, before all of the pomp and circumstance of tonight's State dinner honoring Chinese President Hu Jintao, a closed- door meeting took place between President Obama, the Chinese President, and the power brokers from some of the largest global corporations that seem to create more jobs outside this country than inside it: Steve Ballmer of Microsoft; Jeffrey Immelt of General Electric; Jim McNerney of Boeing; David Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group; Ellenn Kullman, the CEO of DuPont. And many greedy Wall Street bankers showed up: John Thornton, the chairman of HSBC Holdings; and Lloyd Blankfein, my gosh, the chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs--where have we heard about them before?--whose imprudent firms are responsible for the economic meltdown that the rest of America is trying to dig out of as we speak tonight. Too often, these international corporations and megabanks have taken America's ingenuity and hard work that were built with so much effort and shipped them overseas, destroying American jobs and ballooning our half trillion dollar trade deficit. China remains a communist country, and it is a command-and-control economy described as ``Market Leninism''--not free enterprise. Yes, China's people should be able to develop their land and their economy and improve their lives. They surely need it. But their growth should not come at the expense of American jobs and our businesses and our workers. The moment has arrived to deal with China as the great economic power that it is and proceed on the basis of reciprocity. If a treaty affects our companies one way, we'll treat them the same way. If they exclude our investments and our imports, we will exclude their investments and their imports. We should give them the exact same deal as they give us. That is the Golden Rule of trade. While we wish China well, we must defend the interests of jobs in our country, and even more, the highest political ideals to which we aspire. And our highest calling is freedom. It is not a coincidence that America's trade deficit with Communist China has ballooned since China entered the World Trade Organization in 2001. The trade deficit for 2010 with China and the United States alone stood at $253 billion--a quarter of a trillion dollars. Since 2001, jobs in our country in manufacturing decreased by 25 percent. And according to the U.S. Department of Commerce, for every billion dollars of trade deficit we maintain, 5,405 American jobs are lost. This means in 2010 alone, over 1,400,000 more jobs were lost in our country attributable just to our trade deficit with China. This is a major factor in the weakness that our economy is suffering. China consistently disregards international trade laws. She manipulates her currency, and she does nothing to protect American intellectual property. In fact, of all of the products seized at the U.S. border for infringement of intellectual property rights in 2009, 79 percent were from China. Communist China's illegal subsidies and no-interest loans to Chinese companies have put American firms at a serious competitive disadvantage. In fact, there's a new 15-year tax holiday for solar companies. And a major firm in Massachusetts just announced it's closing its doors and going to China. Dumping of products like steel pipes cripple the American steel industry. And earlier today, the White House announced China will purchase 200 Boeing aircraft. Isn't that convenient. A few airplanes. It's great to hear, but positive press releases for one-time purchases will do nothing to erase the $253 billion deficit that grows with China every year. Holding China accountable and creating an environment where Communist China's best interest is to follow international trade laws, to protect intellectual property rights, to stop illegal subsidies and no-interest loans to Chinese companies, and to further work to create a level playing field for all is in the hands of the Obama administration, the new majority in this House, and our colleagues in the Senate. Congress and the administration must stand up most importantly for freedom and the rule of law. For American businesses and our workers and our economy to prosper, we have to hold Communist China accountable to the Golden Rule. And that means reciprocity, not Market Leninism.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution and join my dear colleagues and on behalf of the people of northern Ohio, who join citizens across our Nation in pouring out compassion and healing to the families and citizens of Arizona who have been so harmed and wounded at liberty's doorstep, the U.S. House of Representatives. Let our prayers and comfort flow to the victims, to the healers, to those who must carry forward with full memory and understanding of what has transpired and why. Let us strive to do and to be so much better as a people. Our collective feeling of brotherly and sisterly love and the unity that flows from it holds the power to heal. We all feel that desire. Our constituents feel that desire. Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, our beloved colleague, is fighting to show us the way forward. We pray for her and her family. We pray for all victims and their families. We pray for all those who are taking this difficult journey with them. What a remarkable young woman Gabby is. She represents the highest aspirations of America. She is kind, talented, highly motivated, effervescent and so in love with her husband, Mark. We know Gabby is a fighter and so very enjoyable to be with. We embrace her, her family, her staff with the same affection as would she. And if Gabby were able at this moment, we know she would be embracing the victims of the fallen and their loved ones. This is a moment for America to take stock of itself. No one should have to endure what these citizens have had to endure. Frankly, no one should have had to endure the mean-spirited and inciteful political campaigns Gabby did. In the sweep of history, this attack was an attack on liberty. It desecrates our worth as a people. We must all search our souls. How could such a heinous act transpire?

Ms. KAPTUR. If the evidence shows that unaddressed mental illness, coupled with guns and disturbing Internet postings were contributing factors, as when two Capitol Police officers were gunned down just a decade ago outside this Chamber, then Congress must finally, finally engage that which to date it has been unwilling to fully embrace and understand. When human tragedy falls at your knees, do you look away, or do you stoop to pick up the pieces and ask why? Why? May God bless America. May the campaigns of 2012 be conducted in a manner that brings credit to our Nation's highest aspirations, mindful of the suffering that has occurred. And may God give America and her leaders and her people great wisdom in the days ahead.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, campaign fundraising and spending is way out of control. We need a constitutional amendment to fix it. The American people have to help this Congress, because it will not do it by itself. Many years ago, Will Rogers, whose statue sits just outside the doors to this Chamber, joked, ``We have the best Congress money can buy.'' Unfortunately, that joke has not grown old. After witnessing this past election cycle, the campaign money expended to elect this Congress, both Chambers, is way out of bounds. The Center for Responsive Politics estimates that a record-breaking $4 billion was spent in the 2010 midterm elections. Now, $4 billion equals 4,000 millions. So 4,000 millions was spent to elect the current sitting Congress. The number of Members being elected didn't change. The amount of money being raised changed. It skyrocketed. The opportunity for people of ordinary means with great talent to gain election to office in our country is disappearing election after election. It's very hard for talented people of ordinary means to raise 4,000 millions. To put that number in perspective, 4 billion, or 4,000 millions, divides up to about $8.5 million spent on each of the 435 seats in this Chamber and those who are up for election in the other; $8,500,000 having to be raised every 2 years. Yes, an average of $8.5 million per Member was expended in each of the races. That is 50 times more than the amount of money the job pays. We would be better off to say to the American people, ``We're going to get rid of all of this campaign donation stuff and just beg our salaries from the public.'' It would be a lot cheaper, and we wouldn't have to spend it on all those ridiculous ads. Imagine the outrageous amount of fundraising that sits on the head of every single Member in this Chamber. This past congressional election, in fact, was more expensive than even the last Presidential cycle in which $2 billion was spent. And they said that that was the most expensive race in U.S. history, and Wall Street financiers were the major contributor in that Presidential race. How is it that as our country is fighting to recover from near economic collapse and the average American is struggling to make ends meet, with national unemployment still at 9.4 percent, somehow billions and billions of dollars were able to be thrown by big interests to affect the election? It is because, unlike the average American, big financial players, big business, multinational corporations, all kinds of well-funded ideological groups have deep pockets, and they do try to buy access and influence what happens. And this situation makes it much more difficult for ordinary Americans to have their voices heard here. The American people know this. They are frustrated. These big interests should not outweigh the American people's voice nor vote. The American people should have the primary access and influence here, not deep-pocketed interests. Truly the American campaign finance system is out of control. We all know it, and we all know it needs to be fixed, and that ought to be a priority of this new Congress. Real campaign finance reform thus far has been unattainable because neither party wants to stop the money chase because they both think that next time out they might be the ones to really grab all those gold rings. Too much of that money is playing insider politics, and that is why the American people feel that they are being forced to the sidelines rather than the front lines in our elections. They feel like they are pushing a big boulder up the hill, and every time they cast their vote, that somehow that boulder comes right back down on them. Reform is being thwarted again and again by outside interest groups and deep-pocket interests. The Congress is unwilling and seemingly unable to act on its own, along with Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United v. FEC and Buckley v. Valeo. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced H.R. 8, a new constitutional amendment that I put in every session to bring this system under control. There could be no more important priority to our country than giving our politics back to the American people again.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues a tribute to Mr. Paul Zaleski who passed from this life on November 24 at the age of 95. This tribute was written by noted author and historian, Allen Paul, whose books include ``Katyn: Stalin's Massacre and the Triumph of Truth.'' As Mr. Paul points out, Mr. Zaleski epitomized the courage of his generation of extraordinary Poles who came to the U.S. after the terror and broken dreams unleashed by World War II. I, too, had the privilege of meeting him on May 5 of this year at a 70th anniversary observance of the Katyn Forest Massacre, at the Library of Congress. Paul Zaleski may well have been the last link here in the U.S. to the Polish Government in Exile. May his family and friends be comforted in the knowledge he lived to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, Solidarity whose 30th anniversary we commemorate this year, and Poland admitted to NATO. A Tribute to Paul Zaleski Paul Zaleski led the most interesting life of anyone I have ever known. Such a quiet unassuming man, imbued with old world grace and dignity, never bitter despite the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune--who could have guessed his escape in a hail of bullets, how he and others returned that fire by pinging the American conscience, how we eventually came to see that Poland, the land he loved and lost, must be reborn independent and free. He laid no claim to great deeds, but the memorable title of Dean Acheson's autobiography-- ``Present at the Creation''--almost perfectly fits his life. Paul and I were close friends for twenty years. His death on November 24 leaves a notable void: a direct link is lost-- perhaps the last--to the Poles' ill-fated Government in Exile and to the heroic gamble after the end of the war to save Poland from Stalin. Paul was longtime secretary to Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, prime minister of the Government in Exile in London. In 1945 Mikolajczyk decided to go back to Poland to join a communist-controlled coalition government and Paul went with him. Both men were gambling with their lives but took the chance to achieve two main objectives: first, to keep the communists from stealing the ``free and unfettered'' elections promised at Yalta; and second, to prevent Stalin from liquidating and/or deporting nearly 400,000 partisans who were still in the forests of Poland waiting to fight. The elections were stolen through blatant fraud; but aim two was achieved: Mikolajczyk ``bought'' safe passage for the partisans and averted a bloodbath. Along the way thugs from the infamous UB (security service) made two attempts on Paul's life; and soon it became clear that Mikolajczyk, himself, would be tried as a traitor or liquidated. Both men escaped in 1947 and returned to the west where they launched a high-profile campaign to warn the west about the fate of Poland. Archbishop Francis Spellman arranged for rooms at the Waldorf Astoria where Mikolajczyk wrote his bestseller--``The Rape of Poland.'' The famous sports writer, Bob Considine, helped as did Paul. The book and the heavy speaking schedule Mikolajczyk kept up were influential in getting Congress to investigate the Katyn Forest Massacre in 1951-52. That probe established a record and body of evidence that stands even today. It concluded that the Russians had brutally murdered thousands of Polish officers in the spring of 1940. Paul's symbiotic relationship with Mikolajczyk heavily influenced his life. Not long before the war Paul earned a law degree from Jan Kazimierz University in Lwow and became an organizer with the Peasant Party (Stronnictwo Ludowe) then headed by Mikolajczyk. After his escape from Poland, Paul went to France where Mikolajczyk was serving in the leadership of the Government in Exile. He sent Paul as an emissary to Bucharest and later to Istanbul. When the Germans invaded Russia in 1941, the Poles and Russians reestablished diplomatic relations; and Paul was sent to help open the new embassy in Kuybyshev. Two years later the relationship fell apart over the Katyn crisis and Paul helped get the embassy staff out of the U.S.S.R. They took the southern route which meant the convoy had to cross ``The Roof of the World''--the Pamir Mountains--to get to Persia. Paul then crossed the Middle East and rejoined Mikolajczyk where the Government in Exile moved after Dunkirk. He was at Mikolajczyk's side-- often when he met Churchill and other world leaders--and remained there until Mikolajczyk died in 1966. His exploits notwithstanding, Paul still had to earn a living after immigrating to the United States. His Polish law degree gave him no standing here, so he went to law school for the second time at George Washington University and later became an attorney with the U.S. Maritime Commission. After he retired he practiced law on his own specializing in estate work. He was executor for many members of the expatriate community and seldom if ever charged for his services. I saw in Paul many qualities that epitomized the Poles who got stranded in the west when Stalin swallowed their country whole. They found the courage to rebuild shattered lives, became intensely proud and loyal Americans and remained unswerving in their commitment to Polish freedom and independence. I talked to Paul often and we spoke only a few days before he died. I know it gave him great satisfaction-- much comfort in fact--that the torch was passed, that the ideals of his generation survived the long dark years of communism, that they are strongly embraced today by a new generation of leaders who have guided Poland to a remarkable position in which it has one of the strongest economies and most stable democracies in all of Europe. From their near-miraculous escape in 1947 to their messianic campaign to win the minds and hearts of Americans, Paul and his mentor, Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, came to represent one of the aspects of Polish character I admire most: the concept of ``Victory in Defeat.'' The very idea may strike most Americans as peculiar, but from 1795 to 1989--when Poles were ruled from abroad except for the brief interwar period--it meant that honor came first, that the Poles would never give up, that they would persevere without fail to win back their independence. When I think of Paul I think of this first; and it gives me great satisfaction to know that he lived to see freedom restored and a vibrant Poland reborn. When I last talked to Paul he told me, as he often did, that: ``I am so thankful that I am able to live in my own home.'' His courage could be measured in matters great and small. Despite crippling conditions he managed to take care of himself until the last four days of his life. To say that he will be missed feels like a gross understatement to me. He was the product of an unusual place and time; he never shrank from the difficulties that came his way. And he would certainly chide me for praising him even to this extent.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, it is very hard to find an honest man in life, and I would like to place on the record that David Obey is an honest man and that he served the people of his district admirably all these years. Some have wondered about his contentious nature on occasion, but you'd really have to understand what a ``Badger'' is to know where that all comes from. He has been a phenomenal husband, as I know his wife agrees, and has been a very, very good father. He has been a friend to all the Members who have served. He has treated us fairly, and his brilliance reflected in his books and in the laws and in the efforts that he has made here over decades and decades simply cannot be replaced. We from the Midwest know what we are losing as he chooses to leave this institution. I want to thank him for all he has done for the Great Lakes Region, for the people of Ohio, for our country, and for setting a standard, for those who follow, that will be very, very hard to meet and that will probably never be fully met. I want to thank this great Badger for his years of service to America and helping move liberty forward. God bless you and your family, Dave.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the committee, my friend, Howard Berman, for yielding me this minute to use this resolution in recognition of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke as a moment to extend the deepest condolences from the people of Ohio to Kati and to his family, to all those whose lives he touched and tried to heal. I can remember one time in Cleveland, Ambassador Holbrooke during one large gathering walking through meetings with his garrulous nature, and full of life, and keeping Ohio in a very special corner of his heart. I remember how proud he was of his own heritage, of his wife's heritage, and how hard he worked for our country. One can only imagine all those flights from capital to capital to capital trying to piece together the Dayton Peace Accord and his absolutely indefatigable efforts on behalf of peace around the world. He will truly, truly be missed by the people of Ohio. I am just very fortunate to be a Representative from that State who had the privilege of knowing him and working with him over the years. And America is better, the world is better, because of his life. I thank the gentleman for yielding and allowing me this time on the floor today.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Thank you very much to my dear colleague, Congressman Capuano of Massachusetts, for yielding me this time in support of moving today H.R. 5510, the Aiding Those Facing Foreclosure Act, which merely allows technical clarification language to existing legislation. No authorization of funding or any expansion of existing funding is included in this bill. I would like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their support and for bringing this forth today. In particular, I would like to thank Chairman Frank and Congressman Steve LaTourette for their ongoing efforts on behalf of homeowners facing foreclosure. Ohio is among those States labeled as the hardest hit in our Nation by the foreclosure and economic crisis, along with 18 other States. These states receive what is called ``hardest hit'' assistance funds. Ohio, among other States, wants the discretion to use a small amount of its existing funds under existing authorities to support legal advice through not-for-profit legal organizations to individual families facing foreclosure. However, Treasury interpreted that existing law didn't allow that. That is why we are here today--to clarify that, in fact, citizens of our Nation who are single-family homeowners do have the right to proper legal advice in such critical mortgage workout proceedings that affect their equity, that affect their family's home and their future. Millions of people have faced foreclosure across our Nation. Far too many are losing their homes without proper, necessary legal representation. Many even have no idea that they have legal standing in such property proceedings. At such a critical and emotional moment in a family's life, legal advice can help a family find the outcome that works best for them in a foreclosure proceeding. In today's very complex mortgage proceedings, it becomes daunting for affected homeowners to gain the legal advice necessary to navigate the increasingly complex world of distant banks and courts, which often are much more easily navigated by the mortgagor. And certainly the mortgagee should have similar legal rights as well. We appreciate the fact that the Treasury is sending a letter of support in furtherance of our efforts. Thus, I introduce this legislation as a legislative fix, H.R. 5510. For those States already receiving hardest hit funds, H.R. 5510 increases the State's ability to serve only single-family owner-occupied units that are facing default, delinquency, foreclosure, deed in lieu, or short sale by permitting, if the State so chooses, to use hardest hit funds to support legal services offered by not-for-profit legal aid organizations. In sum, the bill does not require States to use funds to support legal aid or services. So there's no requirement. This language is only permissive. The bill does not permit funds to be used for class action lawsuits. It only applies to single-family owner-occupied units. The bill does not permit any organizations like ACORN or others that are not not-for-profit legal assistance groups to receive funding. Further, the bill does not take money away from any State that is already administering its funds. And the bill actually will help relieve pressure on the States that are not hardest hit as other funding becomes available in related housing programs in the future. So, let me be clear. There's no new money involved here. This is only giving the hardest hit States a new tool, if they so choose to use it, to fight foreclosures in their States and give proper legal standing to all parties involved. Nothing could be more important than allowing families facing foreclosure to be afforded proper legal assistance to rework their loan where that is possible. Please support passage of H.R. 5510, the Aiding Those Facing Foreclosure Act.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentlelady for yielding to me, and I regretfully oppose the rule and will oppose the bill. And the most important reason is that this bill will not translate into job creation in the United States of America. All it does is put our taxpayers on the hook for another trillion dollars of borrowed debt that will be from places like China, and from Saudi Arabia, in order to give more tax cuts to the rich over the next 10 years. There is no guarantee that that money will even be invested in the United States of America. You know, the Dow is up 42 percent. NASDAQ is up 78 percent. Wall Street is on track to see its second-highest profitable year on record with a projected $144 billion in bonuses going out the door. Couldn't they take some of that and make sure this goes to those who are unemployed and still seeking to earn their way forward in this economy? This bill will not be a real stimulus. In fact, it will only yield 33 cents of economic impact for every dollar that is borrowed to pay for it. It will not create real robust growth and jobs in this country. There is not even a ``Buy America'' provision in the bill. I'm so sad for our Nation that we can't do better and help put America's unemployed back to work.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, please allow me to explain what happens when flawed free trade agreements are implemented and outsource more U.S. jobs. Our Nation has not had balanced trade accounts for over 25 years. In fact, every time we sign one of these so-called free trade agreements, we lose more and more jobs in our country. In its attempt to move forward the George W. Bush-negotiated U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, it appears the Obama negotiators may have forgotten the real costs of so-called free trade. With Korea, it has been more than a dozen years already since the United States held a trade surplus with Korea. We're already in the red. In 1997, America actually held a small trade surplus with Korea of a little over $1 billion. Since then, we've accumulated $161 billion worth of trade debt, and that is in the red. That translates into lost jobs, lost opportunity in our country. Using the Department of Commerce's estimate that each billion dollars of trade deficit costs us 14,000 jobs, our trade deficit already accumulated with Korea has cost us over 2 million American jobs. And everybody knows we're short over 20 million jobs in our country. The proposed new Korea Free Trade Agreement will make our markets more open to Korean industries but does not do enough to open Korean markets to our products. Every time the United States imports more than we export, it leaves us with higher trade deficits and more lost jobs. This NAFTA-inspired Korean free trade agreement will lead to just that, even higher trade deficits and lost jobs here with Korea. Since NAFTA passed in 1994, more than 3 million American manufacturing jobs have been lost to Mexico and Canada. In fact, the Economic Policy Institute estimates that a trade deficit between NAFTA countries alone could have led to 1 million additional manufacturing jobs here in our country. Why would a NAFTA-inspired free trade agreement like the Korean deal yield different results? It won't. The Economic Policy Institute projects 159,000 more jobs will be lost if this deal is put forward, and the International Trade Commission projects increases to our trade deficit with Korea. How can this be a pathway to economic growth in our country? Just in the automotive sector in 2009, Korea sold 700,000 of their cars in the American market, compared to sales of U.S. cars there of 7,000. Just a smidgeon. Acknowledging that Korea's population is about one-sixth of the population of the United States, a proportional fair trade equivalent would be a total of 113,000 cars from our country sold in Korea--not 7,000, 113,000. That would require a 1,514 percent increase in the number of American vehicles sold in Korea. Why wouldn't we wait for them to open their market to our goods before we give away the store again? Instead, the proposed solution in the auto sector--and this is written in the agreement--says, our three auto companies can expect to export 25,000 vehicles each, so it's 75,000 total, into their market--which is certainly better than the current 7,000--but it accepts no limits on the amount of Korean cars that can be sold into our market. But there are limits imposed on U.S. vehicle sales to Korea. How is that balanced? How is that fair? This is neither fair trade, nor is it reciprocal. It is a managed trade arrangement that accepts an inferior position for U.S. producers. And why do we do that when our economy is hurting so very much? And it's not just in autos. It's in beef. It's in electronics and every single category. In order for the United States to have a square deal with Korea, this is what should be in the agreement: We should eliminate tariffs in both countries. We should make certain that discriminatory nontariff barriers are immediately eliminated by both nations, not gradually implemented over time. We should include provisions to redress Korea's discriminatory value-added tax. We should contain mechanisms that will prevent an offset currency manipulation and, as well, eliminate provisions that weaken trade remedy laws. This deal does none of that. The United States can ill afford to continue job-killing trade policies. We should embrace the old adage that, in fact, George Bush once used, ``Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.'' Well, Congress cannot allow the American people to be fooled again by the false promise of the so-called free trade agreements. When have we heard that before? The U.S.-Korea free trade agreement should not be ratified until changes are made to make it truly free, truly fair, and truly reciprocal based on results, not dreams. Then we would hold promise to create jobs again in our Nation as well as in South Korea and Asia in general. But why should the United States keep coming up with these agreements that make us second class and that hollows out our middle class? Let me say in closing this evening, as did Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, the people of our region in northern Ohio--in fact, our whole Buckeye State--wish to offer deepest condolences in the death of Elizabeth Edwards. Her passing truly takes from the horizon one of the bright stars in our country. I met many people in my political life. And I can tell you, her intelligence, her humility, her kindness are values that I know her children and her family will long cherish. And we send our deepest sympathy to them, to the people of her State, and all those who had the great privilege of knowing her.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I rise in support of S. 1421, the Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act. For the last 2 decades the Federal Government has sat still. We have allowed numerous Asian Carp species to expand their range further and further North and today, Asian Carp are on the doorstep of the Great Lakes. With sustainable populations in Indiana and Illinois and the $7 billion recreational fishery at stake, immediate action is needed. This legislation takes an important step in restricting the transportation of the Big Head Asian Carp by listing it as an injurious species under the Lacey Act, prohibiting this fish from being shipped or imported into the United States. Should the Asian Carp successfully invade the Great Lakes, they would likely breed and prosper in the shallow and warm waters along the 90 miles of Lake Erie coastline in the Ninth Congressional District. In areas that the Asian Carp have already invaded, Asian Carp have outcompeted local species, destroying habitat for many species. With 328,000 anglers and an $800 million economic impact from Lake Erie's recreational fishing industry, aggressive action is needed. My hope is that S. 1421 is just the start in a series of actions the House will take in the coming year. Congress must fund the protection efforts, ecologically separate the ecosystem and light a fire under the Federal and State agencies to protect one of our regions greatest economic resources. On behalf of 20 percent of the worlds freshwater, the millions of great lakes anglers and towns both big and small that are dependent on the ecological resources of the Great Lakes, I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I believe in free and fair trade among free peoples conducted under a rule of law. Our nation boasts the most open markets in the world. But not all the world's markets are open house; consequently, since 1975 our nation has amassed an enormous trade deficit that will top \1/2\ billion dollars this year. This trade gap has resulted in: 35 years of outsourced jobs by the millions to penny wage environments. 35 years of imports dwarfing our exports. 35 years of buying from countries who will not buy as much from us. 35 years of trying to penetrate the markets of countries who contort the trade and currency rules in their favor, not ours. As our nation climbs out of its deepest recession since the 1930s, we must rebalance our trade policies and take action to dig us out of this deep hole. Take the case of China. The massive hemorrhage of U.S. jobs and wealth to China is staggering--in 1990 America's trade deficit with China was $10.4 billion, and by 2000 it was up to $83.8 billion. As of July of this year we are already $145.4 billion in the red to Communist China. These deficits mean lost jobs in America, a shrinking middle class as production and wealth get shifted offshore. The evidence is all around us: Americans working harder each year, plants closing down despite increasing worker productivity. Now people's health and retirement benefits are cut, or they face unemployment, as their jobs are outsourced or destroyed This is not a recipe for a healthy economy nor a strong nation. How did this happen? The Chinese are gaining a mercantilist advantage in their economic practices, which some experts call ``market Leninism.'' They manipulate trade through several devices, the most potent of which is currency manipulation. We must take the necessary steps to create a level playing field for American workers and companies by holding China accountable for unfair devaluation by 40 percent or more of its currency. By making the Yuan cheaper than it should be, their goods are 40 percent cheaper here and in global markets than American-made products, simply because of that government's actions. China manipulates its currency by making massive purchases of dollars, Euros, and Yen in the global exchange markets, intervening with tens of billions of purchases of other currencies weekly. The result: the U.S. GDP drops by 1.4 percentage points annually just because of China's currency manipulation. Jobs are lost, factories closed, and America's competitiveness weakens. The U.S. has the following four options: 1. Negotiate with the Chinese to end their currency manipulation. The U.S. has been in such negotiations for 6 years. The talks have failed. That is why the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act is so important. 2. Intervene in the global currency market by selling massive amounts of dollars. Intervention would result in massive inflation and if the Chinese countered, it would not work. 3. Seek WTO approval of global sanctions. This would take 3-5 years and there is no certainty that Europe or Japan would be supportive. 4. Impose an Adjustable Currency Tariff (ACT). An ACT would be set at exactly the amount that the Yuan is undervalued. Under this proposal, the amount of the undervaluation would be set by some neutral international financial organization such as the IMF. The value of the ACT would be adjusted quarterly. As China changed the value of the Yuan, the value of the ACT tariff would be altered correspondingly. When China ended their manipulation, the ACT would be zero. This is not old-fashioned protectionism, but rather a remedy against such protectionism directed towards American-based production and jobs. The crisis is huge and we must act now. These corrections, including passage of H.R. 2378, if taken immediately, could create an estimated 500,000 manufacturing jobs here in the United States, helping to put Americans back to work and strengthening our economy. The Chinese government's currency policy is an impediment to this great Republic of ours. It kills American jobs and weakens our nation in the global markets. It is time that we take action to fix this broken policy and stand up for our nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting yes for this bill.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank Chairman Brady for his leadership and the expeditious manner in which his committee dealt with this bill. I thank him for his leadership on jobs in America all the time. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 2039 when it comes to a vote later today, the Made in America Promise Act, which applies the provisions of the Buy America Act that already apply to the executive branch to the legislative branch, the Congress. It is apparent to all America that we are facing a daunting job deficit. Over 14.9 million people still are out of work. Moreover, in 2009, our Nation racked up a trade deficit of $375 billion, and this year it's likely to be double that, with more imports coming into our Nation than exports going out. For every billion dollars of trade deficit, we lose a minimum of 10,000 more jobs. Without this mammoth trade deficit, our economy this year would have grown 5 percent. Instead, growth was readjusted downward to 1.5 percent, a huge 3-point drop, and the worst growth rate since 1947, because trade deficits matter. For America to address this job gap, our unconscious Nation must develop a consciousness to make it in America again, because production here equals jobs in America. That consciousness must begin here in Congress in the highest law-making branch of our Nation. This bill applies the Buy America provisions to the legislative branch. To illustrate, just in perusing the gift shops that tourists come through in the House and Senate--and even the new congressional visitors center--look what we found, Chinese calculators, it says here on the lower United States Senate, but then look where it's made-- China. There are umbrellas from China, a children's briefcase, even with a symbolic seal from the Philippines, and an elephant piggy bank from Indonesia. We couldn't buy everything they displayed, but let me tell you, there was no consciousness that Congress should be supporting goods made in America, here at the highest lawmaking branch of our country. How can Congress expect to strengthen American industry and create American jobs if it itself is not buying American-made goods? If there is one place in our country that should showcase items made in the U.S.A., it is right here in the Congress. How can the American people trust Congress to be responsible if it is selling goods that create jobs in other places, not here in America? That is why H.R. 2039 was introduced in the first place, because we must employ at this time of high unemployment every opportunity to help turn our economic ship of state in a positive direction. This bill creates a clear standard. It says we must change our practices. It says we must restore manufacturing in America. It begins to do this by raising the consciousness of our Nation that the legislative branch of our Federal Government steps forward to say it is time to make goods in America again. That is where new jobs will come from. Under the Buy America Act, current law states that the Federal Government, but not the legislative branch, must buy American-made products. But when this bill passes, the Congressional Made in America Promise Act will apply the Buy America Act to Congress. In addition, when dealing with any product bearing an official insignia of the House, the Senate and the Congress, H.R. 2039 will prohibit the exceptions of not purchasing American goods if they are inconsistent with the public interest, not made in sufficiently available commercial quantities, or under the price of $2,500. This means the only exceptions will be if the goods produced here are unreasonable in cost or not used in the United States. This Congress has taken steps to close tax loopholes that reward large corporations that outsource business and jobs overseas. We are providing tax credits to help small businesses hire new employees and sell their products and innovation overseas, but we need to do more. Congress must lead by example. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 2039, help create jobs in America, help rebuild American industry by building in America once again. Vote for the Made in America Promise Act.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, this week, Kraft Foods announced plans to significantly increase the whole grain content in its leading Nabisco cracker brands, more than doubling the amount of whole grain currently used. I am privileged to share this announcement which has been made possible through thousands of hours of research and testing, investment in innovation and capital at the company's Toledo Mill. The tireless work of the Toledo Mill employees who make the quality whole grain flours that will be important ingredients in many of these products. As the largest flour mill in east of the Mississippi and the largest soft wheat mill in North America, the Toledo Mill employs nearly 100 workers who labor tirelessly to produce 3.1 million pounds of flour daily. Kraft Foods has spent four years and invested millions of dollars in its flour milling technology, recipe development and testing to find ways to add more, whole grain to its popular cracker brands which culminated in a multimillion dollar investment at the Toledo Mill. The whole grain flours produced in Toledo will double the amount of whole grain in Original Wheat Thins from 11g to 22g per serving; more than triple the amount in Wheat Thins Toasted Chips from 5g to 17g per serving; and quadruple the amount in Honey Maid Original Graham Crackers from 5g to 20g per serving. Whole grain will also be added to Premium and Ritz crackers. This week's announcement by Kraft highlights a commitment to ensure that by 2013, the company expects Nabisco crackers will contribute more than 9 billion servings of whole grain to American diets each year. Kraft's commitment comes at a time when the American people and Congress are examining our diets and attempting to address an alarming increase in obesity rates. The Institute of Medicine has recommended that at least half of the grains we consume should be rich in whole grains and, based on today's announcement, the Toledo mill will serve as a cornerstone in our regions effort to remain the center of a national network feeding our people. The nutrition benefits of whole grains include fiber, B vitamins, and minerals. Eating whole grains at recommended levels as part of a healthy diet can also help reduce risk of heart disease, may help with weight maintenance and may lower risk for other chronic diseases. Today, most Americans only get about one serving (16g) of whole grain a day, compared with the recommended minimum three servings (at least 48g) per day. Americans are increasingly conscious of the quality of their diet. They want and deserve healthful products that taste good and are good for them. The men and women who work at the Toledo Mill are proud of this important contribution to increasing the range of healthful products available to all of us. I offer my heartiest congratulations to Kraft Foods, and my appreciation to Kraft's Toledo Mill employees. Kraft Foods Announces Plans to Double the Amount of Whole Grain in Nabisco Crackers 9 Billion Servings of Whole Grain Expected Annually by 2013 Northfield, IL (July 26, 2010).--Kraft Foods announced plans today to significantly increase the whole grain content in its leading Nabisco cracker brands, more than doubling the amount of whole grain currently used across the Nabisco portfolio. Over the next three years, some of America's favorite cracker brands, including Wheat Thins, Honey Maid, Premium and Ritz will include more whole grain. By 2013, the company expects Nabisco crackers will contribute more than 9 billion servings of whole grain to American diets each year. ``Nine out of ten Americans eat less than the recommended daily amount of whole grains,'' said Rhonda Jordan, President, Global Health & Wellness, Kraft Foods. ``And a growing number of consumers are trying to increase their consumption of whole grains. By significantly increasing the amount of whole grain in our crackers, we're giving them an easy, delicious way to get the whole grain they need in the foods they already enjoy.'' Kraft Foods began to transform its cracker portfolio in August 2009 when it increased the whole grain content of Original and Reduced-Fat Wheat Thins from 5g to 11g per 31g serving. In continuing this effort, the company plans to increase whole grain in more than 100 products over the next three years, including: Doubling the amount of whole grain in Original Wheat Thins from llg to 22g per serving; More than tripling the amount in Wheat Thins Toasted Chips from 5g to 17g per serving; Quadrupling the amount in Honey Maid Original Graham Crackers from 5g to 20g per serving; and Adding whole grain to Premium and Ritz crackers. With these improvements, a number of products, including Original Wheat Thins and Honey Maid Original Graham Crackers, will be made with 100% whole grain. Most Americans only get about one serving (16g) of whole grain a day, compared with the recommended minimum three servings (at least 48g) per day, which means they could be missing the important nutrition benefits that whole grain offers. Eating a variety of foods to reach the recommended amount of three or more servings of whole grains can help consumers get fiber, B vitamins, and minerals like iron and magnesium. Combining the Goodness of Whole Grain with the Taste Consumers Love Kraft Foods has spent four years and invested significant resources in its flour milling technology, recipe development and testing to find ways to add more whole grain to its popular cracker brands. The company will be using whole grain wheat flour to increase the whole grain content of these products. Whole grain wheat flour is milled using the entire wheat kernel (bran, endosperm and germ) to offer the benefits of whole grain. ``It was critical for us to get the recipe right to deliver the benefits of whole grain without sacrificing the taste consumers expect from their favorite crackers,'' said Carlos Abrams Rivera, Vice President for Nabisco crackers. ``Just adding whole grain can change a product's flavor and, in the case of crackers, can make them denser and grittier. But the combination of the right recipe and ingredients can help us maintain delicious taste and texture while adding significant levels of whole grain.'' Accelerating Health and Wellness Efforts Today's announcement is a continuing demonstration of Kraft Foods' commitment to health and wellness. Earlier this year, the company announced plans to reduce sodium by an average of 10% across its North American portfolio of products, including crackers. And over the past five years, Kraft Foods has reformulated about one in four products in the United States to make them better for consumers. ``We're accelerating our efforts in health and wellness because it's good for consumers and good for business,'' said Jordan. ``Whether it's adding more whole grain, reducing sodium or removing calories from our products, we're making the foods consumers love even better.'' About Kraft Foods With annual revenues of approximately $48 billion, Kraft Foods is a global powerhouse in snacks, confectionery and quick meals. The company is the world's second largest food company, making delicious products for billions of consumers in more than 160 countries. The portfolio includes 11 iconic brands with revenues exceeding $1 billion--Oreo, Nabisco and LU biscuits; Milka and Cadbury chocolates; Trident gum; Jacobs and Maxwell House coffees; Philadelphia cream cheeses; Kraft cheeses, dinners and dressings; and Oscar Mayer meats. Approximately 70 brands generate annual revenues of more than $100 million. Kraft Foods (www.kraftfoodscompany.com; NYSE: KFT) is a member of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Standard & Poor's 500, Dow Jones Sustainability Index and Ethibel Sustainability Index.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the chairman very much for his very helpful offer. I would inquire of the Chair how much time I have remaining.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I want to state for the Record that Congressman Dennis Cardoza, the main author of this amendment, will be speaking as well as Congressman Jerry McNerney of California and Congressman Jim Costa of California. I yield the remaining 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) to use and then to share with our other two colleagues.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, please.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself and other Members, including Mr. Dennis Cardoza of California and Mr. Jim Costa of California, as a way to awaken HUD from its cavalier slumber. Essentially what we do is we take away HUD's travel budget. The idea is that we want HUD to be aggressive in doing mortgage workouts, not traveling all around the world at taxpayer expense. Our Nation must aggressively confront the continuing hemorrhage of mortgage foreclosures and dead real estate markets across this country. We have not hit bottom in that market yet as the crisis spreads from toxic subprime mortgages to solid mortgages held by the middle class. But where is HUD? Housing workouts are impossible without them. We know that Wall Street committed the perfect crime, executing the largest transfer of wealth from Main Street to Wall Street by washing out our middle class--over 7.5 million families are scheduled to lose their homes--and then putting their bills, any losses that the Big Six had up there on Wall Street, right back on our taxpayers, and then being reimbursed by our taxpayers 100 cents on the dollar. Wall Street's six megabanks, and we all know the names--Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, HSBC--control two-thirds of the wealth in our country now, including mortgages twisted up in the moral hazard of securitization. Wall Street continues to be rewarded as we stand here today and our citizens are disgorged from their homes . Rather than let HUD staff use our public dollars to travel to places like Rio de Janeiro, when people in our country are working so hard to try to work out these mortgages and the banks aren't answering the telephones, let HUD use all of its power and authority to bring the worst offenders and their buddies to focus their staff on doing mortgage workouts in places like Toledo, Ohio, Cleveland, Boise, Idaho, Las Vegas, Sacramento. We ought to be doing mortgage workouts, not taking what look like vacations to Rio de Janeiro. So I think our amendment is very straightforward. It basically sends a strong volley over to HUD. It asks them to do their job, to be aggressive, and to really help us, as the American people, to resolve this tremendous housing foreclosure crisis that is eating away at communities from coast to coast and spreading as we stand here today. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Costa has offered his 30 additional seconds to Congressman Cardoza.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the remaining time. Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank Congressman Cardoza, who really has lived this mortgage foreclosure hell with the people of his region. I also thank Congressman McNerney, Congressman Costa, and all of these Members from California who have stood up here today to try to put the brake on over there at HUD and say, ``Hey, wait a minute. Pay attention to what is happening across California,'' and I must say across Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Idaho--all of these States where the middle class is being washed out and where our money and our equity from our homes is being transferred to Wall Street, which now controls two-thirds--six banks--of the wealth of this country. Something is fundamentally wrong. HUD has to stand up and do its job. We offer our amendment in all good faith, and we just say to Secretary Geithner over at Treasury: Wait until the Treasury bill comes on the floor. There is more to come. I want to thank the chairman of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee for his graciousness and willingness to work with us as we stand up for Americans who are facing foreclosure. I yield back the balance of my time.