Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I shall consume. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, this action should have occurred 2 months ago. This House acted to extend unemployment insurance on May 28. For 6 weeks Republicans in the Senate blocked unemployment insurance. They stood not on the side but in the way of millions of Americans. During those 6 weeks, over 2.5 million unemployed Americans exhausted their benefits, and they struggled to stay afloat while continuing to look for work in this difficult economy. Americans like this person from Grand Rapids, Michigan, who wrote me, and I quote, ``I worked 22 years in automotive, 60 to 70 hours a week, supported my family, paid my taxes, and worked in my community. Every single day I send my resume out, to no avail. I have lost my home, one vehicle, and my sense of the ability to take care of my family.'' Or this individual from Madison Heights, Michigan. ``My family is not living large; we are surviving. Cutting unemployment insurance will take us out of survival mode and put us into homeless mode. After working 20-plus years, this is the first time that we have asked for unemployment.'' And to add insult to injury, after their filibuster was broken, Senate Republicans insisted on running out the clock and delaying the full 30 hours before they would let a final vote occur in the other body. Thirty hours for nothing. No excuse of theirs worked for working Americans out of work, out of work through no fault of their own and looking for work. We have acted to extend unemployment insurance in Republican Congresses under Republican Presidents. So today we put this sad chapter behind us, and now we move forward to continue our efforts to support job creation and to continue to dig out of the jobs ditch inherited by this administration and by this Congress. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1550, I call up the bill (H.R. 4213) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, and I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel). I also ask unanimous consent that Mr. McDermott, the subcommittee chair, be allowed to control the balance of the time.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on my motion.

Mr. LEVIN. It is now my very distinct pleasure and privilege to yield 1 minute to the most distinguished Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds. Rule XXI, clause 9, specifically defines congressional earmarks in one clause and limited tariff benefits in another. You lump them together, you are lumping hurt against manufacturing in the U.S. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman who chairs the Trade Subcommittee, my colleague from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner).

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4380) to amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to modify temporarily certain rates of duty, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support the U.S. Manufacturing Enhancement Act of 2010, also known as the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill, MTB. The MTB temporarily reduces or suspends tariffs on raw materials and components used in U.S. manufacturing. This bill is a shot in the arm for U.S. manufacturers and workers who need these products to keep making their goods and supporting American jobs. I want to underscore that point. This bill supports U.S. manufacturing jobs. Provisions in this bill reduce tariffs on inputs that are used for numerous industries, including chemical, pharmaceutical, automotive, agricultural, textiles, electronics, machinery and equipment. When the cost of these inputs is lowered, U.S. producers' overall costs are reduced, making their products more competitive in this market and globally, and that increased competitiveness translates into increased production and more jobs. All of these provisions have been extensively vetted to ensure that the inputs covered by any tariff suspensions are not made here. In the vetting process, there is review by the administration, by the independent ITC, and also there is an opportunity for public comment. So, as a result we have, for example, the two leading textile associations who represent an industry that has been hard hit by global competition view the MTB as key to their competitiveness. I quote NCTO, saying, MTB is ``a critical cost reduction measure for many U.S. manufacturers, supporting domestic production and employment.'' And that's why the bill is supported by U.S. manufacturing. The NAM has said this about MTB, ``one of the most important short- term actions Congress can take to preserve and expand good American jobs, cut the costs of doing business in the United States and boost American manufacturing exports,'' and the U.S. Chamber has said, alike, the same thing. We have been, in the past, considering duty suspension bills like this since the 97th Congress, and usually, indeed in every case, they have been noncontroversial and supported on a bipartisan basis. And I quote two documents recently put out by Ways and Means Republicans, my colleagues. I quote from that put out under the name of a ranking member, the distinguished Member from Michigan, Dave Camp. And I quote his description of the MTB. ``The bill helps U.S. manufacturers and their employees compete by temporarily reducing duties on foreign-made intermediate products or materials and some finished products that are not made domestically or where there is no domestic opposition. Such reductions or suspensions reduce the costs for U.S. employers. If there is any objection to including a specific provision, such as because a U.S. manufacturer is identified, the item is dropped from the bill.'' I also quote a recent statement by the ranking member, Mr. Brady, on the Subcommittee on Trade: ``This traditionally bipartisan legislation reduces unnecessary costs for American businesses and consumers and increases U.S. competitiveness. A model of transparency, the bill is carefully vetted during a long public process to ensure domestic producers are protected. As the ranking member of the Trade Subcommittee of Ways and Means, I have long been a strong advocate for it and have called for its passage for the past 3 years.'' So what's changed? What changed was that the Republican Conference decided recently to oppose all earmarks. The House rules distinguish between earmarks and limited tariff benefits; they are defined separately in the rules. So therefore there is really no basis for lumping them together; and when they are lumped together, manufacturers and their workers in this country will be taking their lumps. So I close with this: in terms of transparency, this process is thorough, rigorous, and transparent to ensure there is no domestic opposition. As indicated, the ITC has to vet this. And all of the information from this extensive review process can be found on the Ways and Means Committee Web site. As a result, the Sunlight Foundation, which has been in the lead in favor of transparency, has called this process ``transparency done right.'' In sum, a vote for H.R. 4380 is a vote for U.S. manufacturing and U.S. jobs. And so I hope my Republican colleagues, many of them who have businesses and workers in their districts which need this help and many of whom have introduced legislation incorporated in this bill, I hope they will join the Democrats and stand up for American businesses and workers and support this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman 10 additional seconds.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), another distinguished member of our committee.

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

Mr. LEVIN. I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott). (Mr. SCOTT of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 10 seconds. The rule has separate provisions on congressional earmarks and limited tariff benefits. You are using an excuse that does not exist. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a distinguished member of our committee.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself 10 seconds. Mr. Brady, it is your choice. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Veterans', Seniors', and Children's Health Technical Corrections Act of 2010. This bill contains many time-sensitive provisions that affect our nation's veterans, seniors, and children and that have already been considered by the House as part of H.R. 4213, the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act of 2010, which passed the House before the Memorial Day recess. I understand that the Senate is renewing their consideration of this jobs legislation. I encourage them to do so--and to do so quickly--as it contains critical provisions to create jobs, cut taxes, and support American workers. Should the Senate face delays in passing that larger legislation, this bill guarantees the consideration of necessary, time-sensitive, and non-controversial health care provisions. This legislation contains clarifications and extensions under Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program. For veterans, this legislation clarifies a special enrollment period to ensure that they can properly enroll in Medicare Part B and retain their TRICARE eligibility. For children, this legislation clarifies that eligible children's hospitals retain access to discounts for expensive orphan drugs. Children will also benefit from technical corrections in this bill that relate to Medicaid and CHIP. For teaching hospitals that train our newest physicians, this legislation makes a technical correction to clarify that residency positions currently shared between teaching hospitals will not be redistributed. In 36 states, this will affect more than 300 hospitals with affiliation agreements in place that are currently using these residency slots. For Medicare beneficiaries receiving care at a skilled nursing facility, this legislation guarantees that they will be covered under the most current refined payment system. We pay for this bill largely with funds from the Medicare Improvement Fund. CBO estimates that this bill results in small savings to the federal government. So colleagues, I ask you to join me in supporting this time-sensitive and noncontroversial legislation pertaining to veterans, Medicare providers including skilled nursing facilities, teaching hospitals, and children's hospitals.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. It is now my privilege to yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, during the rule, a Member of the minority came here regarding the plight of millions of unemployed who were losing their unemployment insurance, saying that he came to the floor with a heavy heart. I think the unemployed and all of America welcome heavy hearts, but if there isn't a helping hand, a heavy heart doesn't work. So, within this framework, I want to list very briefly the basic facts for everyone to consider and for all of our country to hear. The 1.7 million unemployed workers, unemployed through no fault of their own and who are looking for work, will have lost their benefits by the end of this week--1.7 million. By the end of next week, if there is not action, 2.1 million. By the middle of July, when Congress can address this issue again, 2.5 million. The average unemployment insurance in this country is about $300 a week. That is about half of the previous wage on average, and for a family of four, that average check is only 74 percent of the poverty level. That should refute the notion that those who are unemployed, who have no benefits, who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own, are not looking for work. Indeed, the figure is very clear. For every job available, there are five unemployed workers. There is one other fact because this has been raised. It is the notion that this is unfunded. By the way, that is provided as an emergency under statutory PAYGO. Under both Democratic and Republican Congresses, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, UI has been extended on an emergency basis. It is hard to understand how anybody can come to this floor and say for 1.7 million people and their families this is not an emergency. There is no excuse for voting ``no.'' It is said that the Senate is out of session. We must send this so that it is the first item of business they take up when they return. I will finish with this: it did not pass the Senate last night. The only reason was that there could not be found more than two Republicans to vote for this extension. That is a shame, and it is shameful. We need to, within our ranks in this House, lift that shame off the shoulders of everybody in this institution. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I move to table the appeal of the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.