Joe Knollenberg

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill, through page 19, line 19 be considered as read, printed in the Record and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure for me to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to present to the House H.R. 2559, the fiscal year 2004 military construction appropriations bill. This legislation provides funds for all types of construction projects on military installations here in the U.S. and abroad. Projects range from barracks and housing to training ranges and runways. I would like to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), for his advice and support and cooperation in producing this recommendation. He has been a good partner, and I appreciate having the gentleman there to work together on this bill. I would also like to express my appreciation to all members of the subcommittee for their help in putting together this year's bill. I commend the good work done by the subcommittee staff, Tom Forhan, Brian Potts, Mary Arnold, Kim Reath, and Valerie Baldwin. This has made my transition to chairman an easy one. I want to thank my personal staff, Jeff Onizuk and Lieutenant Commander Scott Gray. I appreciate the long hours they have put in making this the best bill possible. The bill presented today totals $9.196 billion, which complies with the 302(b) allocation for both budget authority and outlays. This recommendation is, however, $41 million below the President's request, a reduction of less than \1/2\ of 1 percent. Excluding funds provided in response to the global war on terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom, the bill is $605 million or 6 percent below fiscal year 2003 enacted levels. For the first time in recent memory, this subcommittee has produced a recommendation that is below the President's request. This is the hand that we were dealt under current budgetary constraints, and we have tried to deal with it in as fair a manner as possible. I assure Members the committee did due diligence to find as much savings as possible for the bill, and I believe we left no stone unturned in this process. This bill continues the subcommittee's bipartisan tradition of quality of life first for our service men and women. This is our paramount goal, and I believe we have reached it. As many Members are aware, the Department of Defense is undertaking a privatization effort for military housing. For those of us who have seen the results thus far, this is an exciting development. What it means for the family housing account of this bill is that less money does not mean less housing. It means that we are getting more bang for our buck. For example, take the Residential Communities Initiative at the Presidio of Monterey. Using only the basic allowance for housing, the BAH, 2,168 new homes will be built and 41 historic units will be renovated. In addition, the private contractor will build wider roads, playgrounds, amenities such as community centers and swimming pools, and so on. What had been substandard housing will become an enviable community for our military families, and it will come at no cost, no cost to the family housing account in this bill. The bottom line is that the funding in this bill does not slow down the effort to revitalize our military family housing. In fact, that effort is accelerating because of this privatization initiative. I would like to take a moment to highlight some key areas in the bill. First, $1.24 billion is provided for troop barracks. This is a $62 million increase from last year's level. This sends a positive message to our unaccompanied personnel stationed all around the world that their quality of life is a priority. The bill includes $194 million for hospital and medical facilities, an increase of $25 million above last year's level. This is another positive quality-of-life message, one intended for all service members as well as their families. $274 million is provided for community facilities, an increase of $45 million above the President's request. These facilities include child development centers, fire stations, schools, and physical fitness centers. $465 million is provided for the Guard and Reserve components, an increase of $95 million above the President's request. The bill fully funds the President's request of $1.2 billion for new family housing units and improvements to existing units, and $2.7 billion is provided for the operation and maintenance of existing family housing units. I would like to highlight the overseas military construction program for just one moment. In support of a global repositioning effort, the President's amended budget submission and the recommendation before Members today rescinds and/or reduces overseas construction requirements by $327 million. Of these reductions, $279 million has been applied to construction requirements in the United States. It is my opinion additional cuts will adversely impact the quality of life and mission readiness of our troops living overseas, including those who are fighting the war against terrorism and also in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Therefore, I cannot recommend additional cuts in this area to my colleagues. We have worked closely with the authorization committee in producing this legislation. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) and his staff for their assistance. In conclusion, we have focused our efforts on programs that directly support the men and women in our Armed Forces. We would like to do more. We always have and always will. But in my opinion, the recommendations in this bill are solid and fully fund projects that are vital to the security of the United States. The bottom line is this: with this bill, we meet the military's mission critical infrastructure needs and enable its efforts to improve the quality of life for our men and women in the Armed Forces. This is a fair bill. I encourage all my colleagues to support it. Mr. Chairman, I include the following tabular material for the Record: [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN03.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26JN03.002 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. KNOLLENBERG asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the motion to recommit because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill, and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states, in pertinent part, ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment proposes to alter the application of existing law.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I do. I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI, which states in part ``An amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' At this time I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks, and that I be permitted to include tabular and extraneous material on the bill, H.R. 2559.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today we have an opportunity to provide our seniors with a new prescription drug benefit and improved access to health care. It is a long overdue step in updating and improving Medicare. Today's legislation will provide help for those who need it most. Our 6.5 million low-income seniors will receive a fully covered premium and a cost sharing benefit when their drug benefit switches from Medicaid to Medicare, paying no more than $2 per generic prescription, and no more than $5 for name brand drugs. This will also save states about $6.8 billion a year in Medicaid costs. It is imperative that Medicare advance with technology. Prescription drugs are an increasingly important part of modern medicine, helping to relieve pain, cure disease, and enhance the lives of millions of Americans. Adding a drug benefit and updating how existing benefits are provided will be a very significant accomplishment. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote for this legislation that helps our seniors by providing a prescription drug benefit that they deserve.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I speak in opposition to the amendment which I believe is nothing more than a blatant attempt to use the legislative process to give one American company an unfair competitive advantage over another American company. It is wrong and should be defeated. The amendment seems innocent enough. No funds should be used to procure Coast Guard vessels in the National Security Cutter Class or Offshore Patrol Cutter Class unless the main propulsion diesel engines are manufactured in the U.S. by a domestically operated entity. Now, that sounds just like a restatement of the Buy American Act, but it is not. The Buy American Act does not consider the nationality of the contractor when determining if a product is of domestic origin. Manufactured articles are considered domestic if they have been manufactured in the U.S. from components ``substantially all,'' quote, of which have been mined, produced or manufactured in the U.S. ``Substantially all'' means that the cost of foreign components does not exceed 50 percent of the cost of components. Now, when the Coast Guard wants to purchase diesel engines for its ships, it has two options, Detroit Diesel in Michigan, Utah, Kansas and I believe Ohio, and Fairbanks Morse Engine in Wisconsin. Both are fine companies that manufacture their engines in the U.S. with components, substantially all of which come from the U.S. as well. They both comply with the Buy American Act, creating a healthy competition for the Coast Guard's contracts, which I think we would all agree is a good thing; but it seems that some people do not want competition. Detroit Diesel is a subsidiary of that German company Daimler Chrysler, which is based in Germany, while Fairbanks Morse Engine is based in the U.S. and notably I believe only in Wisconsin. The current procurement program for the Coast Guard Deepwater program, for which these engines will be built, is already under way. If this amendment were to be signed into law, Detroit Diesel will no longer be eligible for Coast Guard contracts because it is not a domestically operated entity. Fairbanks Morse Engine will corner the market, not because it builds better diesel engines than Detroit Diesel, but because it found a way to shut out the competition; and it will have done so by changing the rules in the middle of the game. There are 5,000 Americans working in those four States for Detroit Diesel. They build diesel engines that the current law says are American products. These Americans should not be penalized because their parent company is based in another country. Congress should not even be involved in this issue. This amendment is frankly outrageous. It is not our job to give one American company a competitive advantage over another, and I obviously implore my colleagues to not be fooled by what seems to be an innocuous amendment, but there are 5,000 Americans who work for Detroit Diesel who are waiting and depending on us and the Members of this body.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today we have a key vote in front of this House on one of the most unfair and unjustifiable taxes in our Nation today. Today we can permanently repeal the estate tax otherwise known as the death tax, to save millions of hard-working Americans from the ordeal of losing a family business at the same time as a family member. Unfortunately this is a prospect that is all too real for many small businesses. Americans for Tax Reform says that 70 percent of small businesses do not survive the second generation as a result of the death tax. With our current economic uncertainty, we need to make it easier for our small businesses to survive, not harder. We can take a big step toward that end here today by passing a permanent repeal of the death tax. I urge the House to vote this most unfair and unreasonable of taxes out of existence permanently.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding Army Officer, Lieutenant Colonel Lisa Leonard, who has served with distinction and dedication for almost 2 years for the Secretary of the Army, as the Congressional Liaison Officer for Military Construction Appropriations, Congressional Budget Liaison Office under the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Financial Management and Comptroller. It is a privilege for me to recognize her many outstanding achievements and commend her for the superb service she has provided to the Department of the Army, the Congress, and our great Nation as a whole. During her tenure in the Congressional Budget Liaison Office, which began in July of 2001, Lieutenant Colonel Leonard has provided members of the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Military Construction as well as our professional and personal staffs with timely and accurate support regarding Department of Army plans, programs and budget decisions. Her valuable contributions have enabled the Subcommittee on Military Construction and the Department of the Army to strengthen its close working relationship and to ensure the most modern, well trained and well equipped soldiers attainable for the defense of our great Nation. Mr. Speaker, Lisa Leonard and her husband, Lieutenant Colonel Mark Leonard, have made many sacrifices during their careers in the Army. Her distinguished service has exemplified honor, courage and commitment. As she departs the Congressional Budget Liaison Office to embark on yet another great Army tour in the service of a grateful Nation, I call upon my colleagues to wish them both every success.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to Pontiac Northern High School's ``Huskie Brigade'' for their victory at the U.S. FIRST Robotics National Championship in Houston, Texas last month. The twenty-four students, four teachers, and several engineers should be proud of this accomplishment. Science and technology are the keystones to our economic prosperity. The quality education of America's youth is more critical now than ever as our society becomes more wired and globalized. Our students must be interested in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology to continue our success. The For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) competition instills an appreciation of science and technology in students and teaches them how mastering these institutes can enrich our society. Corporations provide economic and professional support to FIRST and teams. General Motors Powertrain sponsored Pontiac Northern High School's team. Many Fortune 500 companies have significantly contributed to FIRST's growth and government organizations such as NASA are key partners. FIRST represents a cooperative team effort by students, teachers, communities, corporations, and our government. The Huskie Brigade competed in two regional events leading up to the National Competition. At the Great Lakes Regional, they were awarded the prestigious 2003 Regional Chairman's Award. At the Mid-West Regional, the Huskie Brigade finished as a finalist and won the Johnson and Johnson's Sportsmanship Award. I congratulate the Huskie Brigade on their fine achievements and awards and wish nothing but the best for all the members in their future endeavors.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding Naval Officer, Commander Jeff Voltz, who has served with distinction and dedication for almost two years for the Secretary of the Navy, as the Congressional Liaison Officer for Civil Engineering, Appropriations Matters Office under the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Financial Management and Comptroller). It is a privilege for me to recognize his many outstanding achievements and commend him for the superb service he has provided to the Department of the Navy, the Congress, and our great Nation as a whole. During his tenure in the Appropriations Matters Office, which began in July of 2001, Commander Voltz has provided members of the House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Military Construction as well as our professional and personal staffs with timely and accurate support regarding Department of Navy plans, programs and budget decisions. His valuable contributions have enabled the Subcommittee on Military Construction and the Department of the Navy to strengthen its close working relationship and to ensure the most modern, well trained and well equipped naval forces attainable for the defense of our great nation. Mr. Speaker, Jeff Voltz and his wife Teri have made many sacrifices during his career in the Navy. His distinguished service has exemplified honor, courage and commitment. As they depart the Appropriations Matters Office to embark on yet another Navy assignment in the service of a grateful nation, I call upon my colleagues to wish them both every success and the traditional Navy send-off ``fair winds and following seas.''

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow this House will consider an economic growth and jobs creation initiative that will provide a much needed short-term stimulus while setting the groundwork for long-term growth. I strongly urge Members to support it. The Jobs and Growth Tax Act will generate nearly 1 million jobs by the end of next year by putting more money in the hands of consumers and giving businesses incentives to hire and invest. The naysayers ask how can we afford a tax relief plan at a time when our country faces so many challenges. The real question ought to be how can we expect to meet those challenges while our economy is growing too slowly. As Rick Wagoner, the chairman of General Motors, said when he endorsed the President's plan, ``Growth goes a long way toward addressing what ails you.'' Let us take that advice and create economic growth by passing the Jobs and Growth Tax Act. Vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment that will do little more than punish the auto industry for the sin of building cars that people want to buy. This amendment will force Americans to drive smaller cars that are less safe than what we drive now. Smaller cars mean more traffic fatalities, as noted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and confirmed by the National Academy of Sciences. Safety should not be sacrificed. The auto industry is already moving on its own to increase fuel economy through the development and use of advance technologies such as hybrids and fuel cells. But they are doing so in a way that will produce cars that are safe and that people will actually want to buy. That is what we should be supporting. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and support the American people's right to drive safer cars and the ability of the auto industry to finish the job it is already doing.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of this Emergency Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act which, as has been mentioned, passed on a unanimous vote of 59 to 0 in the committee. I wanted to extend a strong salute to the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), to the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and also to the staff who worked, with barely a week, on the very extensive bill, and they worked to produce a bill that I believe deserves our thanks, and this also is one that is good and necessary and it protects the House priorities. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Construction of the Committee on Appropriations, providing what our military personnel need to protect their lives and ensure their success is my top priority, and I believe this bill does that, we have made sure that our military personnel have all the tools necessary to ensure success. I would like to bring the attention of the House to two important provisions in this wartime supplemental bill. The first is the additional funding for the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, which will receive some 428 million. The bill sets asides 80 million of that amount for new inspectors and Border Patrol agents at the northern border ports of entry. For those whose districts and States lie on the northern border, this funding is critical not only to the safety of our constituents but also to the economic safety of our country. I am pleased that the administration and the House continue to place such an emphasis on filling the needs we have at the northern border. I would also like to bring to the House's attention the foreign assistance portion of the bill. Foreign assistance is critical to our overall foreign policy and the President needs these funds immediately. This money is necessary to support the stabilization of Iraq and also support our key partners in the war with Iraq and the global war on terrorism. I also support strongly the Middle East partnership initiative, or MEPI. This initiative is critical to our country's policy toward the Middle East because it strengthens our policy on economic, political, and educational reforms in that part of the world. The administration should be commended for initiating and funding this program to work with our Arab and Muslim allies on these issues. Mr. Chairman, it is clear that our men and women in the Armed Forces, along with our allies, will prevail in Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. This supplemental will ensure that they have the resources they need to finish that job. I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, as the attention of the country is focused on the men and women of our armed forces who are fighting to liberate Iraq, we must not forget about those who are serving elsewhere around the world. That's why I am introducing today the ``United States Forces Korea Quality of Life Act.'' I, as well as my original co- sponsors, believe this bill is essential in providing much needed relief to our military personnel in Korea. As Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, improving the quality of life for our military is one of my foremost goals. No place needs improvement more than our facilities in Korea. Simply put, the conditions our troops in Korea must currently endure are unacceptable. But you don't have to take my word for it. In recent testimony before Congress, Admiral Thomas Fargo, Commander, United States Pacific Command and General Leon LaPorte, Commander United States Forces Korea, testified that conditions on the Korean Peninsula for U.S. service personnel are ``the worst in the Department of Defense.'' My bill provides members of the U.S. armed forces, the benefit of a tax exclusion to help offset the high cost of living and the poor quality of life while serving in South Korea and applies to personnel who execute permanent change of station orders or orders for temporary duty exceeding 30 days. Service members will be provided with an immediate boost in their quality of life as they keep more of the money they earn. Why should we provide this benefit to our soldiers in Korea? An unusual hardship of family separation for more than a year is borne by 94 percent of the 37,000 plus personnel who serve in Korea. Conditions are so poor for personnel that one third of those authorized to bring family members choose voluntary family separation before subjecting their families to the conditions on the peninsula. Seoul is the third most expensive city in the world to live according to a recent United Nations survey. Despite this, our service men and women receive no cost of living allowance, COLA, for being stationed there. That means they receive no additional compensation to help offset higher costs in Korea. Working and living facilities in Korea, as well as living conditions for our service personnel are sub-standard by any measure. Even the living quarters on post are smaller than typical military installations, and all our soldiers must live in an environmentally degraded region. Beyond cost and comfort, let's not forget that these soldiers live under the threat from an unpredictable North Korea. It's no wonder then that those who are allowed to bring their families to Korea rarely do so and that those who are given the opportunity to command forces in Korea decline at a rate five times the normal Army wide rate. There are many uncertainties about the future of our forces abroad as we re-examine our overseas basing and force structure. Unfortunately, discussion of overseas re-alignment may lead to further neglect of the critical quality of life and infrastructure requirements of our forces in Korea. As we work to rectify the inequities in pay/benefits for those stationed in Korea, I believe it is so important to give our soldiers there an extra boost now. The United States Forces Korea Quality of Life Act won't fix all the hardships that our service members face in Korea, but it will give them a chance to make their life there a little better and their time there more agreeable. I encourage all my colleagues to join me in giving our soldiers in Korea the additional assistance they need and deserve.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to provide permanent normal trade relations to our ally Armenia. I hope colleagues will join me in passing this bill at the earliest opportunity. Since declaring its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Armenia has made great strides in developing a stable democratic and open society. This includes an adherence to the fundamental principle free emigration. I am pleased that Armenia has been found to be in full compliance with the Jackson-Vanik requirements regarding free emigration under title IV of the Trade Act of 1974. The time has now come for Armenia to be graduated from this annual review. In 2002, despite the dual blockades by Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia was ranked 44th on the Heritage Foundation and Wall Street Journal's Index of Economic Freedom. According to this study, Armenia remains the most economically free country in the region, including all countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Armenia is poised to play a pivotal role as a commercial hub and has established a positive legal, regulatory and tax climate for foreign investment, reflecting the country's commitment to open and free trade. Armenia's strategic location at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, democratic stability, entrepreneurial spirit and western value system make Armenia an increasingly important partner for the United States in the Caucasus region. Total United States-Armenia bilateral trade for 2002 amounted to more than $134,200,000. An indication of the progress Armenia has made is its success in pursuing membership in the World Trade Organization. On December 10, 2002, the World Trade Organization's General Assembly unanimously voted to approve Armenia's full accession to the Organization. Armenia's accession to the WTO is a momentous event for this proud country that has worked hard to enact free-market reforms within a stable democratic framework. However, the full benefits of accession will not be realized unless Permanent Normal Trade Relations is granted to Armenia. Passing this bill will result in tangible benefits for Armenia and the United States and an even stronger relationship between our two countries. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill into law.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a resolution regarding the Steel Safeguard Program that was initiated on March 5, 2002. This resolution asks for little, but could mean everything to steel-consuming manufacturers in this country. By introducing this resolution I, along with 51 of my colleagues, are merely asking that the President direct the International Trade Commission (ITC) to include in its mid-term review of the Steel Safeguard Program an assessment of the Program's impact on steel consumers. Currently the ITC is under no obligation to report on these effects. By affirmatively accepting our request, the President will have a complete picture of the economic effects of the Program when he considers in September of this year whether or not to extend the tariffs for another eighteen months. Last March, the Bush Administration imposed tariffs on imported steel, some as high as 30 percent, in an attempt to limit low-price imports in order to give our domestic steel industry time to reorganize and become more competitive. At that time, it was obvious that steel-consuming manufacturers were going to feel pain, but we didn't know how bad the pain would be. Nobody knew how bad it would be. Mr. Speaker, the pain is real and it is deep. Since last year, I have been hearing stories of skyrocketing steel prices, broken contracts, and supply disruptions. Now, we have layoffs. Now, we have companies buying more steel from foreign countries exempt from the tariffs. And, now, more and more manufacturers, both large and small, are being forced to move production overseas. And once those jobs go, they aren't coming back. Two days ago, I was joined by representatives from six automotive parts supply companies to discuss the effects of the tariffs. Let me give you just a taste of what these companies are doing to cope with the tariffs. Arvin-Meritor, which is based Troy, Michigan, in my district, bought one million tons of steel globally last year. They recently closed down a Tennessee plant that employed 317 people in part because of higher steel prices and are now exploring options for buying cheaper steel from non-U.S. suppliers who are exempt from the tariffs. Dura Automotive Systems, Inc., which is based in Rochester Hills, also in my district, cut 60 jobs after the tariffs were imposed and business was lost. Metaldyne, which is based in Plymouth, Michigan, is expecting to source 30-40 percent of its steel from abroad within the next few years because of rising prices and supply shortages. They currently buy 98 percent of their steel domestically. Dana Corp., which is based in Toledo, Ohio, is considering not only buying more steel from abroad, but buying components and finished parts from abroad as well because they can be made cheaper in foreign plants that don't have to pay inflated prices for steel. All of these companies, and others throughout the steel consuming manufacturing industry, are forced to respond to this pain in order to remain globally competitive. Many of these companies will expand their purchases of finished steel products from overseas, because finished products are not covered by the tariffs. Sourcing parts from overseas causes more pain for companies up the manufacturing stream. Companies are being forced to make these decisions because of the steel tariffs. Let's be clear. Right now, the unintended consequences of the steel tariffs are killing American jobs in steel consuming companies. This clearly was not the intent of the Steel Safeguard Program. This is the collateral damage. But we can't ignore the fact that the tariffs are costing jobs. And I have to ask this question: what good will the tariffs have achieved if there are no customers left to buy steel from U.S. steel companies? I am not here to criticize the President. In fact, I don't think the President would've supported these tariffs if he could've seen in a crystal ball the full damage they're causing. These effects have come about more rapidly and more severely than anyone predicted. And let me emphasize that I fully support a healthy domestic steel industry. These are good American companies that employ good Americans. But companies in my district and across the country are hurting. They are good American companies that employ good Americans. They deserve the consideration along with the steel industry when the steel tariff regime is reviewed. This resolution is not anti-steel or pro-steel consumer. It is simply an attempt to ensure that when the President decides whether to extend the Steel Safeguard Program for another 18 months, he has all the information he needs to make the best choice for our nation's economy. This is a modest request. We are not asking that the tariffs be lifted immediately and we're not attempting to change trade law. I urge all my colleagues to cosponsor this moderate, bipartisan resolution to simply consider the impact the steel tariffs have had on steel consumers.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced the Job Creation Act of 2003. The country is now in its second year of economic growth, but we are not growing fast enough. We must continue to look for ways to continue and quicken our economic recovery. President George W. Bush recently announced his economic growth and jobs plan to strengthen the American economy by providing accelerated tax relief to every American paying income tax, encouraging job creation by giving small businesses incentives to grow, and helping displaced workers. This is a step in the right direction, but we must also address the numerous benefits that an elimination of capital gains taxes would have on our economy. The Job Creation Act would eliminate capital gains taxes for individuals. By cutting the capital gains tax, we create greater incentives to invest and start new businesses, which means more jobs available. In addition, a cut in the capital gains tax will almost certainly generate more revenue, as was the case when the tax was reduced in the early 1960s and late 1970s. Furthermore, it is estimated that trillions of dollars are being held in investments such as stocks, bonds, and market funds to avoid the tax. Relief from the capital gains tax would induce people to profit from their investments, leading to the potential of ``unlocking'' hundreds of billions of dollars of stored up wealth. The elimination of the capital gain tax would also eliminate a complex and confusing portion of our tax code. Relief would enable people to better plan for retirement by knowing the true value of their investments without worrying about federal taxes. I am pleased to have introduced the Jobs Creation Act and look forward to working with my colleagues on this important issue.