Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Well, here we go again, $622 billion added to the deficit, and when you include interest on the deficit, far more. No hard choices. We are making a bad choice. There has been lots of talk here about certainty. What is certain with this bill is that it will lead to further starving what the Republicans call the beast: adequate domestic spending for education, for health, for job training, for nutrition programs. What is also certain is that it is going to make it easier for Republicans to cut taxes for the very wealthy. That has always been one of the major purposes of all these bills making permanent unpaid-for tax cuts. It is also certain with this bill that we will keep loopholes that need to be closed. For all of these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I think the cost is much too high. There are some important provisions here, but their significance I think is really overwhelmed by the fact that we are going to add money to the deficit and have consequences for the long term. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), another distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. If the chairman does not mind, I would like to yield to the distinguished leader. Is that okay, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, it is now my privilege to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), our distinguished leader.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this conference report. I am disappointed that we have passed up an opportunity for a truly bipartisan action on Customs and trade legislation. The Senate took that opportunity over the summer. It passed a Customs bill by a vote of 78-20 that was truly about Customs and trade enforcement. It included a strong provision to address currency manipulation, the most significant trade enforcement failure over the past decade, and the Senate bill very importantly avoided including wrongful positions and provisions that had nothing to do whatsoever with Customs or trade enforcement. The House bill did just the opposite. It passed a bill that seeks to prevent our trade agreements from addressing climate change and weakens current law on human trafficking. It failed to include anything meaningful on currency manipulation, even though just a few years ago this House passed a currency bill very similar to what was in the Senate Customs bill by a vote of 348-79. Because of the partisan and flawed nature of the House Customs bill, just 12 Democrats voted for it. This conference report is far more like the fundamentally flawed House bill than the Senate bill. The conference committee rejected the Senate currency provision, as I said, one that had the support of 348 House Members just a few years ago. There is much talk about how this bill will create jobs and about economic growth. But make no mistake; over the past decade or so, currency manipulation has cost the U.S., our workers, and our industry between 2 and 5 million jobs. Instead, this conference bill includes a meaningless provision that simply calls for more talk, more deference to the Treasury Department, and no real action. The climate change language in the conference report sends just the wrong message as our diplomats are working in Paris with over 150 nations to find an agreement on this threat to our environment. The language in this conference report on climate change is far more than confusing, as some people like to say. It would prevent us, for example, from negotiating provisions like common fuel efficiency standards, a very real possibility in our negotiations with Europe. As reported today from Paris, the Republican Party of the United States may be the only political party anywhere in denial about climate change. That denial is why this provision on climate in this conference report is before us. Now, as to human trafficking, this provision weakens current law by allowing for a trade agreement with a tier 3 country to be fast-tracked so long as that country ``has taken concrete actions'' to implement recommended changes, no matter how egregious the conditions are still in place. Countries on tier 3 are the worst actors, countries that the State Department has concluded ``do not fully comply with the minimum standards under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.'' We need to get these countries to meet minimum standards on trafficking, certainly well before we enter into a trade investment relationship with them. Unfortunately, this conference report does not get us there. These and other fundamental flaws outweigh the enforcement provisions that were included in the conference report. Most of the enforcement provisions are weak, and I think they are being oversold. For example, the bill establishes an interagency enforcement center, but that has already existed for several years. It renews the Super 301, which requires the USTR to report regularly on its trade enforcement priorities, but this is something an administration can already do on its own, just as the Clinton administration did. The bill establishes, also, a new trade enforcement trust fund, but those funds still need to be appropriated and paid for, just as they did in the past. It requires the ITC to make information related to imports available on its Web site, information that already exists in other forms in the same Web site. All this is very disappointing because there are positive aspects of this bill, such as the ENFORCE Act that my colleague Linda Sanchez has spearheaded, which will help to address the circumvention of antidumping and countervailing duties to address unfair trade. All of the deep flaws in this conference report far overshadow this provision and the real Customs provisions that have long had bipartisan support. Going further, the bill includes an Internet tax provision added by the conferees that has absolutely no place in this Customs bill. It was neither in the House nor the Senate Customs bill. Not only is it not a Customs measure, it is not even a trade measure. Dropping this provision into a conference report at the last minute and with no warning is no way to legislate. It is the opposite of regular order. Indeed, this conference report does not tell it straight. As I said, it deletes the only provision that reflects meaningful legislation on currency, which has devastated U.S. jobs and economic growth, legislation that overwhelmingly passed the House previously. It keeps provisions inserted by the House to encourage Republicans who oppose action on climate change, as I said, at the same time the world is meeting in Paris, thwarting further possible action on climate change in trade negotiations, including with Europe. It tones down a provision which had teeth on human sex and labor trafficking. It sneaks in another provision totally unrelated to Customs, as I said, never being discussed at the only meeting of the conference committee, relating to taxation of Internet access. It leaves in the dust the issue of trying to even out the taxation of sales on the Internet with sales at hardworking brick-and-mortar stores. For all of these reasons, all of them, I strongly urge a ``no'' vote. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez), another member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains?

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, could the Chair tell us the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, by the way, I thank Chairman Brady for allowing the leader to go out of turn. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself the remaining time. Mr. Speaker, let me first address climate change. It is interesting that some of the people who speak in favor say how regrettable it is that this provision is even here. The gentleman from Iowa made clear why this provision is here. It was an effort to get votes for TPA. My feeling is, no matter how people voted on TPA, they should oppose this conference report. One of the reasons relates to global warming. It is really disgraceful this provision is here at the same time virtually everybody in the world is trying to address climate change. I just want to read the exact language. It says: to ensure that trade agreements do not establish obligations for the U.S. regarding greenhouse gas emission measures. That is the exact language. There is no way to fuzz it over. There is no way to fuzz it over. Let me just, then, say a word about currency. This conference report deletes a meaningful, very, very concrete way to address currency manipulation. The language here in this conference bill just essentially, in the end, says nothing that is meaningful. It says: If the President determines there is a problem with a country's currency--it won't even mention the words ``currency manipulation''--then the President shall do such-and-such--things he can already do--and there is a waiver for the President if he doesn't want to take any of the steps. The currency provision essentially takes away what was in the Senate bill, and we passed the same or a similar measure a number of years ago. So that is as to currency. This is very much in the wrong direction. The same is true in terms of human trafficking. Essentially what it says is: If a country is in tier 3--the worst in terms of human trafficking--and takes some concrete steps, they can still receive all the benefits of a trade negotiation, even if they still have the most egregious conditions in their country on human trafficking, both sex and labor human trafficking. That is really also, I think, worse than unwarranted. Let me just finish by saying a few words about enforcement. I guess no one has worked, if I might say, more than I have in terms of enforceability. The provisions that we have put in place--for example, those regarding worker rights, environment, and medicines--need to be enforced. The problem with this legislation is, in most of the cases, it really doesn't change anything much, if at all. As I said earlier, it establishes an enforcement center that is already existing. It renews Super 301. There is no need to do that. The administration has the ability to do that already. It does set up an enforcement trust fund, but there is no appropriation of the money. Enforcement is already underappropriated. So now we are setting up a new trust fund without any indication that it is going to be appropriated. This bill is very close in spirit and in language to the bill that almost all of us on the Democratic side voted against. I urge strong opposition to this conference report. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Rick Flynn, who is well known as an advocate for educators in Macomb County, Michigan. On December 10th, friends of Rick's from throughout Michigan will gather to celebrate his retirement from the Michigan Education Association and to pay tribute to him for his outstanding service. Rick's deep involvement in the MEA and his policy advocacy at the local, state and national levels has been rooted in his strong conviction that all students deserve a high quality education, and that educators must have the tools and resources they need to provide students with this education. It has been said that Rick has held nearly every conceivable leadership position in the MEA, which, when one reviews his career, seems possible. He served as president of the Fraser Education Association, as a founding member and then as president of MEA-NEA Local 1, as a member of the Board of Directors and the Executive Committee for the MEA, as an MEA Local 1 Executive Director, and as a member of the NEA's Board of Directors. Prior to representing teachers, Rick was a well-respected teacher himself. For 27 years he taught American Government in the Fraser Public Schools. As a lifelong advocate for building a stronger Macomb County, it was no surprise that after retiring from the classroom in 2000, Rick applied his knowledge of government to public service of his own. In 2008, he was elected to the Charter Commission for Macomb County, which reshaped government in Michigan's 3rd largest county. Also in 2008, he was appointed by then-Governor Jennifer Granholm to serve on the Oakland University Board of Trustees, where he continues to serve today. Mr. Speaker, Rick Flynn has served students in Michigan and his fellow education professionals with total commitment and distinction. I encourage my colleagues to join me in saluting him for his service, in thanking his wife Linda and his sons Andy and David for supporting him throughout his career, and in wishing him well in his retirement from the MEA.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and accomplishments of Ted B. Wahby, who passed away on Saturday, December 5, 2015. He was a warm friend who leaves a legacy of superb public service in its best sense. He will be deeply, personally missed by so many of us privileged to work hand-in-hand, and I am honored to pay tribute to his remarkable life accomplishments. Ted Wahby was a pillar in the City of St. Clair Shores, Macomb County and the greater region for over 50 years. He and his wife Yvonne moved to St. Clair Shores in 1964 and raised six children there. The Wahby family planted strong roots in the city as faithful members of St. Margaret of Scotland Catholic Church and the Shorewood Kiwanis. During this time Ted embarked upon a successful career working at Comerica Bank, serving in numerous high-level capacities for 31 years, including Vice President. In addition to Ted Wahby's love of family and pride in his successful business career, he held a deep belief of the importance of giving back to the community. He first sought public office in 1979 and was elected to Lake Shore School Board. Two years later he was elected to the St. Clair Shores City Council, and two years after that as Mayor, where he provided strong, forward thinking leadership from 1983 to 1995. Ted then decided to take his local experience to the next level by serving as Treasurer of Macomb County from 1995 until his passing. Over this twenty year period Ted devoted his immense talents to serving residents in a way that focused on the human element, while using his profound management skills to place the county in a strong fiscal position. Whatever public office he held, for him the test always was how his actions would improve the lives of others, and in our many discussions, he was most proud how as county Treasurer, he helped keep thousands of families who experienced financial stress from losing their homes to foreclosure. His community and civic involvement was rivaled by few. The leadership he provided on so many boards locally and throughout the region is yet another testament to his strong desire to serve the public. Ted was not one to seek credit for his work, yet he was the recipient of numerous prestigious awards and recognitions from charitable and philanthropic organizations, far too many to list. If there is one legacy of Ted Wahby's service that will be remembered and valued above all else, it is his premier leadership and advocacy for better health care. As a member of McLaren Macomb Hospital's Board of Trustees since 2000 and in the role of Chairman since 2002, Ted strategically leveraged his business and political skills to make critical advances in the health care field. Ted's mission of opening the Ted B. Wahby Cancer Center in 2004 was very personal for him and Yvonne, who both lost family members to cancer. He saw the need for compassionate, high quality care close to home, since at the time nearly 70% of Macomb cancer patients had to drive a far distance for care. He was a tireless supporter and fund-raiser from the very beginning, and worked for many years to influence local leaders to invest in the capital campaign. For his dedicated efforts, Ted earned many accolades, including the 2005 Health Care Leadership Award from the Michigan Health & Hospital Association, and the 2005 Thanks for Giving Award, presented for extraordinary volunteer service to hospitals in the Metro Detroit area. Over these last few days since Ted's passing, there have been countless heartwarming statements made by so many, but the one that sums it up for me is that above all, Ted Wahby was a family man, as stated by his children. His love for his wife, children, nine grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren defined who he was and he set an example for these generations to follow. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I am profoundly honored to have called Ted Wahby my friend, and thankful for the opportunity to work side-by-side during his career and witness first-hand his effective leadership and compassion. I am humbled to join with his family, friends and the community at-large in mourning his loss, while celebrating his life and honoring his accomplishments.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.