Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

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

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4284. This bill extends two preference programs--the Generalized System of Preferences, known as GSP, and the Andean Trade Preference Act, known as ATPA--for 1 year. Without this extension, the two programs will expire in less than 3 weeks, on December 31. Preferences, including GSP and ATPA, are important tools in U.S. trade policy. They are a means by which the U.S. can work with developing nations to help them capture the opportunities and to meet the challenges of trade and globalization. Over many decades, the GSP and Andean programs have seen these results for developing nations: The GSP currently provides duty-free treatment to over 3,500 types of products coming into the U.S. from more than 130 developing countries. The program provides duty-free access to even more products from the 44 poorest, or least developed, countries. Last year, the GSP program facilitated $31.7 billion in imports from all beneficiary nations. ATPA provided additional benefits to the Andean nations to help address their special circumstances, in particular, their efforts to fight the trade in narcotics. Under ATPA, imports grew from $97 million in 1992, which was the first full year after enactment, to more than $17 billion in 2008, including $4 billion of nonfuel imports. The programs have been crafted carefully so that they mirror the complementarities of trade between the developing nations and the United States. The needs of developing nations have been matched to the needs here at home. As a result, both programs have provided significant benefits here in the United States as well: ATPA has developed an important market for U.S. textiles in the Andean region, and both ATPA and GSP have improved the sourcing options that many U.S. businesses, including many small and medium enterprises, use to remain competitive in the global marketplace. In recent years, for example, the majority of U.S. imports--75 percent--using GSP were imports used to sustain U.S. manufacturing, including raw materials, parts and components, and machinery and equipment. At the same time that they have been structured to foster increased trade, the preference programs have been shaped to encourage developing countries to implement the kinds of policies that are necessary for increased trade to achieve the goal of development. Specifically, the preference programs have incorporated key eligibility criteria, including conditions regarding respect of fundamental worker rights, the rule of law, basic rules protecting innovation and investment, and policies to fight corruption. The preference programs confirm what many of us have been saying for a long time--trade must be shaped so as to spread its benefits widely. That is true whether we talk about unilateral preference programs or bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. I do not mean to suggest, however, that our work is done when it comes to preference programs. Far from it. We need to ask whether the preference programs are working as well as they should. This requires taking a hard look at all aspects of the programs, including how present eligibility criteria are working. In addition to considering any improvements, we also need to look at whether there is a need to include additional eligibility criteria, including relating to the environment. This also means taking a careful look at those countries that are in an especially vulnerable situation. One example is Cambodia, which has been hard hit by the global economic recession. As many of my colleagues may recall, Cambodia and the U.S. were partners in a pioneering project called Better Factories Cambodia. That project, which grew out of the U.S.-Cambodia Textile Agreement in the late 1990s, sought to promote labor standards through a trade agreement at a time when many in the world were demonizing such efforts as protectionism. The effort bore fruit, significantly improving the rights of and conditions for workers, which, in turn, can help expand other freedoms. However, that industry is now under siege as a result of the global recession and of competition, including from China and Vietnam. According to testimony provided in a recent Ways and Means hearing, nearly 1 quarter--80 of 340--of all exporting factories have been shut down, and nearly 80,000 workers--most of them women--have lost their jobs in Cambodia. We need to know whether the preference programs are doing enough to help these enormous challenges. The extension we are voting on today gives us the time we need to look carefully at these important issues. The Ways and Means Committee and the Trade Subcommittee plan to hold hearings and to work with the administration next year in a comprehensive review of our preference programs. Today's bill also provides for a review, in the middle of next year, of the Andean Trade Preference Act and of all issues relating thereto with each of the countries covered by the act. I want to take a moment to thank my Republican colleagues for working on this extension with Chairman Rangel and me. I look forward to working with Ranking Members David Camp and Kevin Brady and with our other colleagues on both sides of the aisle to evaluate the preference programs over the course of next year as we together determine whether we can make them work better for all beneficiaries--for both the citizens of developing nations and for our citizens. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4284) to extend the Generalized System of Preferences and the Andean Trade Preference Act, and for other purposes.

Mr. LEVIN. I now yield 3 minutes to my very distinguished colleague and friend, Mr. Doggett of Texas.

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. LEVIN. I urge passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 60th anniversary of Voice of America's service to Ukraine. Created in the early days of the Cold War, Voice of America provides comprehensive, uncensored information to Ukrainians about world events and reinforces the importance of free speech, expression, and a free press. As the Soviet Union fell and Ukraine struggled to shake off the reins of communism, Voice of America continued to serve as a trustworthy, pro-democratic source of news. Its commentary and analysis were highly valued during the Orange Revolution of 2004, and remain so as the country prepares for its first presidential election since ushering in a new era of democratic governance. Today, Voice of America reaches almost five million viewers across Ukraine each week with its television programming and maintains a Ukrainian-language website with up-to-date news reports. Ukrainians continue to rely on these services for accurate information about national and international events, as well as to learn more about American politics and culture. Madam Speaker, Voice of America will celebrate its many contributions to Ukraine on December 11, 2009. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Voice of America, and its dedicated staff, for its six decades of service to Ukraine.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. What we are suggesting here is fiscal responsibility. Don't dig the hole deeper and deeper. Step up and pay for it, and pay for it by making the Tax Code equitable for all of the citizens of the United States of America.

Mr. LEVIN. I think it's important that we look at the facts here. The gentleman from Texas and others have raised issues regarding real estate. These are the figures that have been compiled by our staff based on IRS data. That less than 10 percent of all of the income earned in real estate construction and development is earned by partnerships that might be involved here, that less than 5 percent of all wages earned by employees in real estate construction and real estate development are earned by employees of partnerships. Ninety percent of the income earned in real estate construction and real estate development is earned by C corporations or S corporations. Let me just say, in terms of corporations that are involved in real estate, when they give stock options, when those are exercised, and these are the vast majority of cases, the people who exercised the stock option pay ordinary income tax. Essentially, you have here an argument undercutting the basic proposition. That is that those who invest their own money get capital gains treatment and those who provide services, in whatever circumstances, they pay ordinary income tax. Also let me just mention that the President has suggested some specific provisions that will encourage investment. There is a basic structure in question here, a basic structure. When people invest their own money, they should pay capital gains tax on the profits. When they perform services managing other people's money, like everybody else who performs services, should they not pay ordinary income tax as does the waitress, no money except a small amount of minimum wage, and not even that, perhaps, if there are no tips; and the author, if the books aren't sold, then they don't get anything. What is being proposed here, as I said earlier, is what has been suggested by economists, whether they are conservative, moderate, liberal, whatever you want to call them, and by various other sources. That there is a basic issue here. This legislation is an effort to address that basic issue and to pay for the tax extenders. In previous years, in so many cases, you have passed legislation without paying for it and the debt goes up and up.

Mr. LEVIN. Let's be clear what's involved in the pay-fors: tax-haven legislation, also the issue of fairness. Those who invest their own money will continue to receive capital gains tax treatment, period. Those who manage other people's money will have to pay ordinary income tax like everybody else who performs services. There is widespread support for this. Gregory Mankiw, who was on President Bush's Council of Economic Advisors, said this: ``Deferred compensation, even risky compensation, is still compensation, and it should be taxed as such . . . When I wrote my book, that was sweat equity . . . I oppose different levels of taxation on different types of compensation.'' This from a former member of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisors, William Niskanen: ``The share of investment profits are basically fees for managing other people's money.'' Also, another person who was deputy undersecretary under George H.W. Bush, Professor Michael Graetz: ``I think it's odd that people making that much money off of essentially labor income should be paying lower rates than, than the average . . . than their secretaries are, to put it baldly.'' And then from the New York Times: ``They're actively managing assets, and should be taxed accordingly as managers earning compensation . . . Congress will achieve a significant victory, for fairness and for fiscal responsibility, if it ends the breaks that are skewing the Tax Code in favor of the most advantaged Americans.'' And likewise, the Washington Post: ``But these fund managers, for the most part, are not risking their own money.'' And I insert to the extent they are, they get capital gains treatment. ``Besides, plenty of risky industries don't enjoy comparable tax benefits. Income earned from managing an investment partnership fund should be treated just like the income earned for providing any other service.'' And I could quote this from William Stanfill, who's a manager of venture capital. He says, ``Many Americans invest sweat equity in their jobs and their businesses, take risks, contribute to the economy, and may have to wait a long time before their hard work pays off. But they still pay ordinary income tax rates on their compensation. To the extent we take risk, we take it with other people's money.'' And that's why the statement of administration policy is very clear from the President. ``The legislation would fulfill the administration's commitment to crack down on overseas tax havens and put a stop to billions of dollars' worth of tax abuse and would end the special preferential treatment for carried interest income.''

Mr. LEVIN. In terms of sparking economic growth, we need to have measures that target investment, not give a special break for those who perform services. For example, I have introduced a bill to eliminate capital gains on investments in certain small business stock for 2010. On investments. That's the issue here, that nobody blur it. Those who work with other people's money will pay ordinary income tax; those who invest their own money will continue to receive capital gains tax treatment.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, most Americans--and I emphasize that--most Americans want to keep the insurance they have and do not want to lose it because of skyrocketing costs; to be sure they are not denied coverage because of preexisting conditions; and to be sure if they have major illnesses, they are not bankrupted by unaffordable costs. Most Americans also want other citizens to have their health care needs covered by insurance. Democratic health care reform responds to these concerns, and like Social Security and Medicare, it is as American as apple pie. Consider this letter from a constituent of mine from Fraser, Michigan: ``I am ashamed to let my family and friends know that I have no health insurance. I have refused hospital treatment I know I needed because I could not afford to pay for any type of medical procedure.'' She closes her letter with this simple message: ``Please don't let anything or anyone stop you from reforming health care. I hope you will think of me. I need you to do the right thing. Health care for all Americans now.'' That's what we are doing: health care for all Americans now.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize my friend and colleague in public service, Janice Wilson of Fraser, Michigan, as she retires after 26 years of devoted and talented service on the City Council. I deeply enjoy working with Jan as she is a warm and passionate advocate for many important causes. Jan Wilson earned a bachelor's degree from Ball State University and received a master's degree from Wayne State University, where she later went on to become an instructor. In 1958, Jan Wilson began working on behalf of children with disabilities and their families at the Macomb Intermediate School District and she continued in this capacity until 2000. In 1962, Jan and her husband Bob moved to the City of Fraser, where they have become an important part of this wonderful community. She has served her community in many capacities including as a member of the Recreation Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals. She was elected to the Fraser City Council in 1983, and during her tenure, served 4 terms as Mayor Pro-tem. Advocacy and devotion to helping people are the cornerstones of Jan Wilson's career. She is involved in many local organizations, never hesitating to take on another responsibility or to wear another hat if she thought it would help. She is a founding member of the Macomb County Child Abuse and Neglect Information Council. She was asked to serve on the Community Mental Health Board, the advisory boards of the Community Assessment Referral Education (CARE) Agency and the Retired Senior Volunteer Program. She is also the past president of the Fraser Goodfellows. Protecting the environment is one Jan Wilson's many civic passions. Governor Jennifer Granholm appointed her to Michigan's Air Pollution Control Commission and she also served on the Southeast Michigan Council of Government's (SEMCOG) Council on Environmental Quality. Governor Granholm also appointed her to the Michigan Commission on Services to the Aging. All of Jan Wilson's achievements have been recognized over the years as she has been recognized as the WWJ Citizen of the Week, the Handicapped Professional Woman of the Year, and Volunteer of the Year. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the dedicated public service of Jan Wilson and her numerous achievements on behalf of children, families and her community. I am so pleased to join with the entire community in paying tribute to her achievements, thanking her for years of talented service and for being such a good friend to so many of us. I am confident she will continue to play an important role in the community where she is highly thought of, in addition to enjoying a bit of retirement with her husband and their four grandchildren.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, this year marks the 76th anniversary of the famine that was deliberately and systematically inflicted upon the Ukrainian people by Josef Stalin's brutal regime. I rise today in solemn memory of the Ukrainians who were killed between 1932 and 1933. The Ukrainian famine, referred to as Holodomor or ``Death by Starvation,'' remains one of the least known human tragedies. An estimated 7 to 10 million Ukrainians perished when the Soviet government, using food as a weapon to suppress the nationalism and identity of the Ukrainian people, seized the country's 1932 grain crop and executed thousands who resisted. The country's borders were sealed to prevent starving Ukrainians from fleeing and to prevent any outside relief efforts from reaching the people. In its effort to suppress the Ukrainian nation, the Soviet Union perpetrated a famine so brutal that it ranks as one of the starkest examples of inhumanity in modern history. For generations, the Soviet Union tried to ban discussion of the famine, deceptively portraying the millions of deaths as the result of drought, food shortages, or unavoidable circumstances. We know this is false. The recently opened Soviet archives show the premeditated, political nature of the famine. The commendable work of Ukrainian scholars and the Ukrainian-American community is helping to bring these horrors to light and to ensure our collective memory of this terrible act. I am proud that Congress has supported efforts to recognize the Holodomor, particularly legislation allowing Ukraine to donate a memorial in the District of Columbia honoring the famine's victims. The Ukrainian Government, the Ukrainian-American Community, and the Department of the Interior have identified a site for this memorial and the Ukrainian Government is now working toward a design. This memorial is deeply significant to the 1.5 million Ukrainian-Americans, indeed to all of us, and will serve as a tangible reminder of the horror tyranny can inflict. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in remembering the victims of the Ukrainian Holodomor on its 76th anniversary and in renewing our commitment to ensure events such as this are never repeated.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of Michael Chupa, an educator, public servant, community leader, businessman, avid hunter and proud family man in Michigan, who passed away on October 5, 2009. Mr. Chupa was born December 31, 1943, in the city of Detroit. He graduated from Lawrence Technological University and was a grade school teacher at Immaculate Conception. He owned and operated the North American Adjustment Bureau providing property damage adjustment, appraisal and estimation service for southeast Michigan. A leader within the Ukrainian American community he worked to create the St. Josaphat Parish in 1961 where he served as church council president. St. Josaphat continues to be a strong center of activity for the Ukrainian American community in southeast Michigan. Mr. Chupa served on the Warren City Council for 16 years. His colleagues describe him as ``fair and good-hearted'' and even those who may have disagreed with him on a certain policy issue describe him as a ``gentleman.'' Mr. Chupa cared about his community; he always made it a priority to help people and to advocate on behalf of local charities. I appreciated his friendship and always enjoyed working with him and attending alongside him numerous community events. Mike Chupa was a proud and supportive parent. He and his wife Margaret have four children (Michael, Joseph, Jennifer and Jannen) who continue the tradition of involvement in their church and community. I am pleased to rise today and pay tribute to the lifetime of service of Michael Chupa, and ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing his achievements. I extend my condolences to his wife and family and join with the entire community in celebrating his life.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a true American hero, an exemplary human being, find yet another wonderful example of the ``Greatest Generation'' and the story of our Nation. The life of Leonard Haggerty is filled with heroic moments, major milestones, compelling stories and noteworthy achievements. Leonard Haggerty was a friend and colleague in public service and I am honored to pay tribute to him on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. Leonard Haggerty was born June 23, 1920, in Quebec, Canada. As a young man with two children and another on the way, Leonard Haggerty was called into the service of his country during World War II. Throughout his life, Leonard was modestly quiet about his military accomplishments during World War II. When presented with a resolution of accomplishment upon his retirement in December 2008 at the age of 88, Leonard's co-workers on the county board were in awe to learn of his distinguished military career. Leonard Haggerty earned two Battle Stars in the European Theater as an Army infantryman; participated in intense fighting during the Battle of the Bulge; served with a detachment that liberated Dachau; and spent time as a personal bodyguard for General George S. Patton. Leonard Haggerty began his long and successful career in public service in 1958, when he was appointed village commissioner of Roseville. Once Roseville became a city later that same year, he became a councilman. He served in that capacity until 1975, when he was elected mayor, a position he held until his retirement in 1981. In 1998, Mr. Haggerty came out of retirement in Florida and returned to Michigan to represent District 21 on the Macomb County Board of Commissioners, where he served until last year. Leonard Haggerty was the heart and soul of the city of Roseville. He served his community with such active devotion and became a mentor to numerous individuals who followed in his footsteps. So many have come forward to highlight the impact Leonard had on their lives over the years, remembering his service, his graciousness to everyone around him and crediting him with getting them involved in public service or civic activity. Leonard Haggerty was joyful, and anyone that has ever met him would comment about his smile, his dapper dress, and his truly kind and caring nature. He could tell a story and truly enjoyed the playful moments that made up his persona. For example, in 2003, he famously came to the assistance of an elderly constituent who called him saying that she was snowed in. Leonard, who described himself at the time as ``83\1/2\ years old,'' arrived alone with a snow shovel in hand and cleared the 82-year-old woman's sidewalk and driveway, including a 2- foot snow drift, in about an hour. In 2004, Leonard made national news when he faced a Republican challenger in the fall election who was 92 years old. Leonard, jokingly ran on the slogan, ``Vote for the kid.'' These stories and so many other warm and inspirational memories were captured by family members, friends and the Homily of Father Michael Donovan. Leonard Haggerty was the beloved husband of Jan, whom each and every one of us also calls a dear friend. Leonard and Jan were true partners in every sense of the word through their family, their community and their careers in public service. Leonard was the loving father of Patricia (Joseph) Boris, Shirlee (Robert) Kipp, James (Kathy) Haggerty, Kelly (Roger) Gaines and the late Michael Haggerty and grandfather of eight grandchildren and 11 great-grandchildren. The awards have been numerous over the course of Leonard's career and in recent years his colleagues have joined together to enshrine his name on major achievements like the Leonard Haggerty Beautification Awards. It will be his personal charisma and the way in which he took time to make those around him feel good that will be remembered by most. He will serve in the personal Hall of Fame of so many of us. For this institution of Congress, it is important to recognize the achievements of a true American hero that fought for his country, served his community and made Roseville, Macomb County, the State of Michigan and the world a better place. I am honored to have walked with Leonard during part of his incredible journey, and I ask my colleagues to join me in paying to tribute to the truly remarkable life of Leonard Haggerty.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. This bill combines equity and growth. Equity for the unemployed, people who are looking for work. The estimate is that 1.3 million will exhaust their benefits by the end of the year. This is a response. There are six people looking for every job. The Michigan Unemployment Office has been swamped with phone calls. Today, one of the staff there told my office: These are the unemployed. They call asking, When is Congress going to pass this extension? What are they waiting for? Don't they understand we are desperate? As to growth, there are two provisions here. I am surprised that the previous speaker says nothing is being done to create jobs when we have two provisions here that are aimed to do that. The homeowners' tax credit is extended and is also expanded, and the net operating loss provision is inserted here to create jobs. This is a bill that combines equity and, hopefully--and I think it will--create jobs. So let's vote for it without equivocation and, if I might say, without debating other issues like health care. We'll debate those tomorrow and Saturday.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the bill before the House, the Solar Technology Roadmap Act. The solar industry is one of the fastest growing energy industries in the United States. Solar companies, including United Solar Ovonic in Michigan, have been making cutting-edge advancements in both solar technology and manufacturing. The solar industry is already creating jobs in Michigan and across the country, and this energy resource has the potential to create thousands more jobs if we make the right investments. You can't begin a journey without knowing where you're going. If we want to expand solar energy and renewable energy jobs here in the United States, then we need to have a plan to guide solar energy research, development and demonstration. This legislation directs the Department of Energy to assemble a group of experts from industry, academia, and government labs to create a roadmap of short-, medium-, and long-term goals to guide and accelerate the development and deployment of solar energy in America. A plan will only get us so far. In order for solar technology to reach its full potential, the federal government has to create a partnership with private industry, just as it has in other energy areas. In a word, working with the private sector, we need to invest wisely in this technology using the guidance provided by the research roadmap. The legislation calls for the Department of Energy to invest $2 billion on research, development and deployment of solar energy technologies over the next five years. It will be important for Congress to follow through and actually provide the funds to allow this to happen. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the Solar Technology Roadmap Act.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, it is with joy that I rise today in tribute to Mr. Frank Stella, an icon of Metropolitan Detroit, who will celebrate his 90th birthday on October 30, 2009. A successful entrepreneur and eternal philanthropist, Mr. Stella embodies the American Dream. The son of Italian immigrants, he bravely served in the U.S. Army Air Forces during the Second World War and founded the F.D. Stella Products Company, a food service distributor, in 1946. His company is today a preeminent national supplier and designer of restaurant equipment. Over the past six decades, Mr. Stella has not just built a business in Detroit: he has built a legacy in service to the community. His involvement spans prominent educational and medical institutions, civic and business organizations, and charitable and political causes. He has served as a Board Member to the University of Detroit--Mercy for more than two decades, in addition to the Board of Directors for the Detroit Medical Center, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Economic Club of Detroit, the Detroit Symphony Orchestra Hall, and the National Italian American Foundation of Washington, D.C., among many, many others. The impact of his philanthropy was recognized by five of our country's presidents and three of our state's governors. Frank Stella has received many awards, though none can fully capture his contributions to the public and private arenas. His catalogue of honors only begins to highlight the gratitude of those he has served: Mr. Stella was awarded the decoration of `Grande Ufficiale,' the Government of Italy's highest honor; named `Michigander of the Year' by the Detroit News and `Executive of the Year' by the Detroit Executive Association; received the George Romney Award for Lifetime Achievement in Volunteerism, the Urban League Warrior Award, and the Bnai Brith Award, to name just a very few; and was granted three honorary doctorates. As he turns 90, and is joined by his family, friends, and colleagues in celebration, Mr. Stella is unsurprisingly choosing to honor this landmark occasion with a fundraiser for four of his favorite charities--the National Italian American Foundation Scholarship Fund, Orders of the Sons of Italy in America, Italian Language Inter-cultural Alliance, and Boys Town of Italy. These charities proudly celebrate Italian-American culture while inspiring new generations of civic involvement and generosity, fitting tributes to Mr. Stella's continued work. Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Frank Stella for his lifetime of service and dedication. I wish Mr. Stella a joyous 90th year full of health and happiness.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I think this debate has framed the issues very well. I very much share the concern of our majority leader about entitlement reform. I think part of that will have to be consideration of this issue. But let's look at what the impact of a failure to act will mean. For the States, they will carry a large bulk of this because of the dual- eligibles. So, essentially, by doing nothing, we would say to the States, When you're in unusual circumstances, we're doing nothing. And for the many new-eligibles, they would, regardless of income, bear the weight here in times of real stress for them. These are unusual circumstances for the States and for those who are receiving the benefits, and I think we have no choice now but to vote for this bill and tackle the issues of reform of our entitlements in the future. So I urge support of this legislation.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. It is vital this bill be before us, and I congratulate our chairman and our ranking member for bringing it here. They and our leader have outlined the facts: almost 125 million unemployed, the highest since 1939, and about one-third have been long-term unemployed 6 months or more. In August, 27 States saw their unemployment rates increase, and 42 States saw losses in jobs. So I urge we have three alternatives. We can say to the millions who are unemployed: get looking; get lost; or you're getting some help. Get looking. They're looking. They're looking. It's a requirement of unemployment comp. I want to read something that was said over the phone to us this morning. A gentleman by the name of Larry Szpanelewski from Madison Heights, Michigan, out of work since May of 2008. He has 10 weeks of benefits left, and if we don't extend it, he'll exhaust those benefits before the end of the year. This was taken down by my office: ``You know, I never thought this would happen to me. I have never been unemployed before. This economy is unlike anything I could ever imagine. I am very grateful for each extension of benefits. But I really want to get back to work. There is this misconception that people like me are sitting back and waiting for the next unemployment check. I really, really want to get back to work. I want to get back to doing my part and earning a paycheck. This unemployment is agony; it really is. I'm just waiting for the right phone call, Come to work.''

Mr. LEVIN. Thank you. And I will repeat what he said to conclude, I am just waiting for the right phone call, Come to work. So I don't think this first alternative, ``get looking,'' applies. He, like millions of others, are looking. Six for every job. I don't think we can say to Larry Szpanelewski or the millions of others, ``Get lost.'' That is not this country. So what we're saying today is, You're going to be getting some help. You've worked for it. He worked 20 years, a steelworker, and I think never unemployed before. I'm glad this is bipartisan. This needs a bipartisan response in the best traditions of this House and in the best traditions of our beloved country.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Advanced Vehicle Technology Act. I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of this important bill introduced by my colleague from Michigan, Mr. Peters. This legislation builds on the success of the Department of Energy's vehicle technology programs in collaborating with industry to develop the cars and trucks of the future. Hybrids, plug-in hybrids, pure electric cars, fuel cell vehicles, alternative fuel vehicles: these technologies all require enormous and sustained investments in R&D. Through vehicle technology programs like FutureCar and the 21st Century Truck Partnership, DOE is partnering with industry to make this R&D more feasible and more fruitful. The bill before us would rationalize the authorization for DOE's varied vehicle technology programs and substantially increase the authorized funding levels. In total this bill authorizes $2.9 billion over the next 5 years to invest in vehicle technology. It will be essential for Congress to follow through and fully fund this authorization in the annual appropriations process. I am particularly pleased that this bill recognizes the enormous fuel savings potential in the medium and heavy duty market and specifies that up to $200 million per year be devoted to developing advanced technology medium and heavy duty trucks. This complements legislation I've introduced to extend the tax credits for the purchase of medium and heavy duty trucks for 5 years and double the amount of the credits. These vehicles move 80 percent of the goods transported in the U.S., serve as utility maintenance vehicles, and perform refuse collection services in our communities. It is estimated that the fuel consumption of the 90,000 refuse collection trucks in the U.S. is equivalent to 2.5 million passenger vehicles. Putting as few as 10,000 hybrid electric trucks on the road would reduce diesel fuel use by 7.2 million gallons per year and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 83,000 tons. In a word Mr. Chair, this bill is vital. It is a vital step toward a full partnership between the Federal Government and the domestic auto industry in developing the cars and trucks of the future and building them here in the United States. I urge all my colleagues to support it.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. The public has spoken. Consumers have been going to dealerships. The White House is now active, and the issue is whether this House will respond. As I see it, and I think the public will see it, this is a test of whether Congress can shed its disagreements on other issues and respond to what the public, indeed, wants. The rush to use this program shows its need. I say to the gentleman from California and anybody else, what else do we need to see? This program is working. The White House has made clear that the dealers can go forward. This program is open until further notice, and dealers are urged not to rush too much but to do it right in the first place and get in line. So it's open until further notice. The question is whether this institution will shut it down or whether it will continue to open up the valves. It will be good for everybody. It will be good for the national economy. This isn't just an issue for Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana and Illinois but for the whole Nation. This is an issue of our national economic recovery, and anyone who votes ``no'' on this is saying ``no'' to an important boost to our economy at a critical time.