Donald Manzullo

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, today we have a unique opportunity to lend a hand to American manufacturers. I'm proud to join my good friend and colleague from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) in being an original cosponsor of this legislation. And, in fact, when I chaired the Small Business Committee, we had field hearings in both his district and Mr. Davis' centered on the issue of manufacturing in America. As the cofounder and cochair of the House Manufacturing Caucus, I can't overstate the importance of manufacturing to America. One in six jobs in America is directly related to manufacturing, and one in four in the congressional district that I represent. Manufacturing drives innovation by conducting nearly half of all research and development and creating the bulk of technology in our Nation. Nearly 60 percent of exported goods are manufactured goods. Every $1 in final sales of manufactured goods supports $1.40 in output, which is higher than any other economic sector. If we don't make things in America, then even those service jobs, however, will disappear. I spent probably two-thirds of my time in Congress studying and working on manufacturing issues, from raw materials and minerals all the way through to export controls. In fact, within the past Congress, working with Congressmen Blumenauer, Crowley, and Sherman, all Democrats, we were able to amend section 17(c) of the Export Administration Act, which has resulted in the additional billions of dollars more of aircraft parts being exported. In fact, I'm probably the only Member of Congress who's ever gone to warehousing school to study the flow of manufactured items to the floor of sales. Every few years, the manufacturing sector in the U.S. experiences a crisis. The last report that was issued was in 2004. This chart right here represents probably 12 or 14 years of work in my office. We tried to identify the numerous Federal programs and agencies that support manufacturing. People will come to the office, we would add in hand exactly what those are. It's still difficult to have a central focus point to know who's manufacturing and who's doing research in a particular area. For example, if somebody wants to do research on machining titanium or Inconel, there's no central portal through which that person can go to determine exactly what programs or who's doing that research. That's one of the beauties of the bill that Congressman Lipinski has introduced. Why is it necessary to have a study? Because Americans need to know the importance of manufacturing. If we don't have manufacturing, agriculture, and mining in this country, we become a Third World nation. If we can't make things with our hands, then we become hindered in maintaining our status as a world leader. The whole purpose of having a comprehensive strategy in manufacturing is, as Mr. Lipinski said, to call the Nation's importance to the fact that young people need to go into manufacturing, need to go to our community colleges to learn how these sophisticated machines are made. I've probably been in 500 to 700 factories all over the world studying and analyzing exactly what America needs. This bill has, as its purpose, to show Americans, but more importantly to bring to the attention of fellow Members of Congress, the absolute importance of protecting manufacturing in this country. It is a great bill because what it will do is it will help identify those programs that exist, those that are working, and those that should be eliminated. If we pass the National Manufacturing Strategy Act into law, a new Manufacturing Strategy Board will help the President to conduct an in- depth analysis of the Nation's manufacturing sector and develop a comprehensive strategy for enhancing its competitiveness and promoting its success in the global economy. So I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4692. We have a unique opportunity today to boost the U.S. economy and lend a hand to American manufacturers. The bipartisan National Manufacturing Strategy Act (H.R. 4692) will help American manufacturing rebound from recent economic turmoil to ensure that both our workers and our factories are equipped to thrive in the 21st Century. The 16th District of Illinois, which I am so proud to represent, is one of the most heavily industrialized Congressional districts in the nation. Winnebago County, in the center of the district I represent, is second only to Wayne County, Michigan, in terms of per capita concentration of manufacturing as a percentage of the local economy. And Rockford, Illinois, is in the center of Winnebago County. There, we make everything from nuts and bolts to the advanced electrical system for the new Boeing 787, the Dreamliner. I simply cannot overstate the importance of manufacturing not only to northwest Illinois but to the America. The United States has the largest manufacturing economy in the world, producing $1.6 trillion in value annually--that's 11 percent of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP). One in six U.S. jobs is tied directly or indirectly to manufacturing, and strides in productivity have held down inflation and contributed to higher standards of living for hardworking Americans. Manufacturing drives innovation by conducting nearly half of all research and development and creating the bulk of technology in our nation. Nearly 60 percent of all exported goods from the U.S. originate from the manufacturing sector. In the United States, every $1.00 in final sales of manufactured goods supports $1.40 in output from other sectors of the economy. That multiplier effect on our investment dollars is higher than any other economic sector. Manufacturing is the lifeblood of the American economy and its continued strength is key to putting Americans back to work. For too long, manufacturing has received second-class treatment from our government. While Washington hesitates to act, American industries are withering under intense global competition and jobs have gone overseas. It's time for the federal government to get serious and implement an agenda to strengthen American manufacturing and restore American jobs, and that's exactly what this legislation will require. There are numerous existing federal programs to support American manufacturing, but our national manufacturing policy is disjointed and reactionary. Other nations proactively support their industrial base through programs and policies. If we pass the National Manufacturing Strategy Act into law, a new Manufacturing Strategy Board will help the President to conduct an in-depth analysis of the nation's manufacturing sector and develop a comprehensive strategy for enhancing its competitiveness and promoting its success in the global economy. The aim of the strategy and the quadrennial review is to harmonize manufacturing policy across the government and ensure that it is unified, innovative, and results-oriented. As noted in recent committee testimony from AAM president Scott Paul, Alexander Hamilton himself constructed America's first industrial policy in 1791. Our founding fathers recognized that a robust industrial base is vital to both our national security and a flourishing economy. Instead of wallowing in anxiety over the fate of our economy, Congress needs to demand action that will produce results. America's manufacturers are among the most innovative and productive in the world, but they aren't getting the support they need from their government. By developing a long-term plan with input from a wide range of stakeholders and experts, the National Manufacturing Strategy Act will ensure that we are doing absolutely all that we can to help this vital industry.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, we on the Financial Services Committee have spent nearly 2 years holding hearings to determine the appropriate course of action for financial reform. In September, the committee began marking up legislation to try to address failures in the financial market and plug the holes. The problem is that the two big culprits here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, now taken over by the government, could cost the American taxpayers $1 trillion. Those two entities simply are not even--nothing happens to them in this new bill, the guys that caused the problem. Maybe you could take this 2,000-page bill and gel it into one sentence: you can't buy a home unless you can afford it. That's what caused the problem in the first place. No credit standards, so-called ``liar loans'' where people were allowed to buy homes when others sat at the closing table knowing full well the new buyers couldn't even make the first payment. So it took the Fed I think 2 years to come up with a rule that says, oh, by the way, if you buy a house, you have to have written proof of your earnings. I mean, why did we need 2,000 pages of a bill--and none of it's addressed to the GSEs--simply saying Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae won't take the assignment of the mortgage unless the mortgage is sound. That won't solve the problem. We wouldn't have had the complete collapse of the system that we have today. But instead we just created an agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. What are these guys going to do besides adding hundreds of more bureaucrats, maybe build a new building somewhere, and they're going to impose regulations in nearly every sector of the economy. What are they going to say? All they have to say is, ``If you can't afford to buy a house, you can't have it.'' That should be the extent of the regulations. Yet what do we have now? Instead of one sentence, we have 2,000 pages.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, as the senior Republican on the Asia Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and as the co-chair of the Friends of Thailand Caucus, I rise in favor of H. Res. 1321, which expresses support for resolving the political situation in Thailand through non-violent, democratic means. The relationship between the United States and Thailand goes back over 175 years to when the U.S. signed its first agreement with an Asian nation as part of the Treaty of Amity and Commerce with Siam. Thailand is one of America's closest friends and dependable ally. In fact, the King of Thailand generously offered President Abraham Lincoln a supply of elephants to help Union forces win the Civil War. Thailand has also contributed troops and supplies for U.S. military engagements in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq for which we are forever grateful. After several decades of mostly military dictatorships, by the early 1990s, Thailand established democratic rule, furthering bolstering its status as a partner of the United States. As a result, in 2003, the U.S. designated Thailand as a major non-NATO ally. Thailand has also grown to be a significant trading partner of the United States. In fact, exports from Illinois to Thailand were one of the few bright spots during this recession--increasing 8.1 percent between 2008 and 2009. Thailand is one of the top 25 export markets for Illinois products. I was pleased and honored when the Ambassador from Thailand came to visit northern Illinois last April to learn more about what America has to offer. However, ever since 2006, the political situation inside Thailand has been a state of turmoil. We have all been pained to see the media images of violence and burned-out buildings. Obviously, only the Thai people can resolve their own internal conflicts. I hope that this resolution can play a constructive role in helping to encourage all sides to resolve their differences peacefully. I trust that the 5-point national reconciliation plan proposed by the Prime Minister of Thailand and highlighted by this resolution is fully implemented. This resolution is important to reaffirm our support for democracy, non-violence, and the people of Thailand. I urge the government of Thailand to follow through on its commitments as outlined in their 5- point plan. I also urge all parties in Thailand to join in this effort and settle their differences peacefully. Therefore, I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of H. Res. 1321.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, as the senior Republican on the Asia Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, I rise in support of recognizing the 60th anniversary of the Korean War and reaffirming the U.S.-Korea alliance. During this time of anxiety on the Korean peninsula, it is critical that Congress sends a bipartisan message of solidarity with our friends in South Korea. The Korean War started on June 25, 1950, when communist North Korean forces crossed the infamous 38th Parallel in the attempt to force South Korea to submit to their regime. The U.S. and other allied nations successfully stopped and reversed the invasion by pro-communist forces but at a high cost--over 54,000 American deaths. It led to a divided peninsula that is still with us today. However, the 1953 Armistice agreement allowed a pocket of freedom to bloom. South Korea is now a fully-fledged democracy, with competitive, freely held elections. In addition, South Korea is now the world's 14th largest economy. Three years ago, I had the honor of hosting the South Korean Ambassador in northern Illinois. I was impressed with his quest to personally thank and honor as many Korean War veterans as possible for their service and sacrifice. Unfortunately, South Korea is once again threatened with war from the North if the United Nations reprimands North Korea for sinking a South Korean warship. This is outrageous. The U.N. should not be intimated by such bellicose rhetoric. That is why this resolution is so important to reaffirm our commitment to the alliance with the Republic of Korea for the betterment of peace and prosperity in the Korean peninsula. I urge my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 32.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of recognizing the 50th anniversary of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security. This agreement laid the cornerstone for reintegrating Japan into the community of free nations and helped insure Japan's long-term security and prosperity. It also resulted in formerly establishing an alliance that facilitates the forward deployment of about 36,000 U.S. troops and other U.S. military assets in the Asia-Pacific to undergird U.S. national security strategy in the region. Too many times, we take our friends for granted. It wasn't obvious 50 years ago that this agreement would pass the Japanese Diet. But on June 19, 1960, this agreement became operational after much boisterous opposition. Thus, it is appropriate that the House recognize and thank our Japanese friends for the role this agreement has played in advancing peace, prosperity, and security in the Pacific Rim. It allowed a country devastated by war to eventually become the fourth largest economy in the world and the fourth largest export market for U.S. products. I deeply appreciate and value our strategic and economic relationship with Japan. Despite the change in the Japanese government, this agreement still remains as a cornerstone of our relationship. I was greatly honored that the Japanese Ambassador paid a visit to northern Illinois last April where we saw first-hand the role that Japanese foreign investment played in saving many jobs in this region, such as the Nissan forklift manufacturing facility in Marengo. We also examined possible new opportunities for trade and investment. I want to commend my ranking Member, Representative Ros-Lehtinen, for bringing this resolution to the floor today. I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 1464.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, on Thursday, June 10, 2010, I inadvertently missed this vote. I would have recorded a ``no'' vote on rollcall No. 349. Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Turner

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, on Monday, May 24, 2010, and Tuesday, May 25, 2010, I missed a series of votes because I was recovering from an illness. If I had been here, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 291, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 292, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 293, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 294, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 295, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 296, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 297, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 298, ``yes'' on rollcall No. 299, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 300, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 301.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, May 18, 2010, I missed a series of votes because I was not feeling well. If I had been here, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 273, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 274, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 275.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 25, 2010, I missed a series of votes because of a health emergency. If I was here, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 190, ``no'' on rollcall No. 191, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 192.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, you can't tell the people in Rockford, Illinois, whose unemployment is at 20 percent that all these stimulus bills are working. In fact, even before the President was sworn in, because he mentioned a carbon tax, near the city of East Dubuque over on the Mississippi River in the congressional district that I represent, Rentech, which makes anhydrous ammonia and urea, was all set to make an $800 million investment to substitute coal for natural gas in the Fischer-Tropsches process resulting in the production of aircraft fuel. So 1,000 manufacturing jobs, an $800 million investment, was wiped out because even the threat of cap-and-trade had the investors pull the plug on it. And now we come up with still another bill, still another government program, this one to tax foreign direct investment, many of those people involved in the manufacturing sector. There are 240,000 jobs in Illinois that directly depend upon foreign direct investment.

Mr. MANZULLO. We just passed the health care bill, the cap-and-trade. Every time we pass these bills, the people in the congressional district that I represent lose more jobs. We don't need help from Congress. We need Congress to leave the people alone.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this flawed health bill.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, the President's $1 trillion health care bill is a job-killing disaster that will slap Americans with massive tax increases and Medicare cuts immediately while delaying the bulk of the health care benefits until 2014. This is not health care reform; this is an unprecedented and unnecessary government takeover employing some of the highest and cruelest tax increases and perhaps the broadest expansion of the power of the federal government in history. It didn't have to be this way. I do support health care reform. Bipartisan alternatives exist that would make health care more affordable and accessible for the uninsured without having to wait four years for benefits. Here are just a few of the most egregious policies within the President's massive government takeover of health care. H.R. 3590 would increase taxes on Americans by $569 billion, including a new $210 billion 2.9 percent ``Medicare'' tax on investment income; cut Medicare benefits for seniors by $530 billion; increase Americans' health insurance premiums $2,100 by 2014, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office; put another 3 to 5 million Americans on the unemployment lines due to the heavy mandates that require employers to provide health care coverage to their employees and families whether they can afford it or not; require the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to hire up to 16,500 additional workers to enforce all the new tax penalties on Americans who can not afford to purchase health insurance; and puts another 16 million Americans on Medicaid, a struggling program that pays such low reimbursement rates that 121 Walgreens stores in Washington announced last week they would no longer accept Medicaid for prescriptions. This bill will burden states with additional Medicaid share costs. The State of Illinois, already facing a $12 billion budget deficit with plans to cut $1.3 billion from local school funding, would have to pay at least $1.8 billion in additional Medicaid sharing costs to cover the additional enrollments. To add insult to injury, this bill makes Americans wait until 2014 to receive the bulk of the benefits. In fact, the ban on preexisting conditions does not kick in until 2014 for adults. This bill implements tax increases and Medicare cuts immediately, but delays most of the benefit provisions for four years. However, when you look at the first 10 years of benefits, the estimated true cost will be $2.6 trillion. And that does not even include the nearly $1 trillion of additional spending that was either pulled out of the bill to be dealt with later or the result of correcting double counting cuts in unrelated programs. Plus, H.R. 3590 would not have a true firewall of protection to prevent federal tax dollars from paying for abortions. According to a Quinnipiac University survey released on December 22, 2009, 72 percent of Americans said they oppose allowing abortions to be paid for with public funds under any new health care system created by the government. Thus, because a ``reconciliation'' bill cannot solve this particular issue due to the fact that it is not directly a budget issue, the President has promised to issue an executive order to ban federal funding of abortion. However, an Executive Order cannot trump the language in this bill that would become law, if passed. In 1952, the Supreme Court struck down President Truman's executive order during the Korean War that assumed federal control of certain domestic steel mills due to labor unrest because it was an unconstitutional exercise of lawmaking authority reserved to Congress. In 1996, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals struck down an executive order issued by President Clinton which authorized sanctions on federal contractors that permanently replaced workers who went on strike because it superseded existing law guaranteeing the right of employers the right to hire permanent replacement workers. Finally, the Supreme Court struck down an executive order issued by President G.W. Bush because Congress, in enacting a statutory military commissions system, had impliedly prohibited the President's invocation of military commission jurisdiction over a terrorist detainee. I also want to expand upon what I believe to be one of the cruelest elements of this bill. As if raising taxes on struggling families and their employers, cutting benefits for seniors, growing the IRS enforcement police by thousands, and further jeopardizing the budgets of all states in the union was not cruel enough, this bill creates a new 2.9 percent tax on life-saving medical devices like the titanium brace that was inserted into the spine of my wife after a cancerous tumor shattered one of her vertebrae. That medical device saved my wife from the wheelchair. The authors of this bill believe that life-saving medical devices should be nearly three percent more expensive. I fail to understand how we make health care more affordable by pursuing policies that intentionally make health care more expensive. As the former Chairman of the House Small Business Committee, I have long supported legislation that would help small employers purchase health insurance for their employees and their families. Of the 47 million uninsured Americans, 57 percent work for small employers who cannot afford to offer them health insurance. I support two bipartisan solutions that would go a long way to reduce the number of uninsured in America. First, Congress should pass H.R. 2360, the Small Business Health Options Program Act of 2009 (SHOP Act) as a stand-alone bill. H.R. 2360 would allow small employers to purchase health insurance at reduced group rates through national associations while still following state rules. I am one of 60 bipartisan cosponsors of H.R. 2360, which also enjoys support from the liberal Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the AARP, and the conservative National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). A companion bill in the Senate was authored by my fellow Illinoisan, Senator Dick Durbin, and enjoys similar bipartisan support. Second, Congress should also pass H.R. 1470, the Equity for Our Nation's Self-Employed Act of 2009. This bill would let small employers pay for their health insurance before they pay their Social Security and Medicare tax liabilities, giving them the same deduction as large employers. The self-employed pay on average $12,106 annually for family health care coverage, and H.R. 1470 would save them $1,852 a year, according to the Kaiser Foundation. I am one of 48 bipartisan co- sponsors of H.R. 1470. These bills would dramatically reduce the costs of health insurance for small employers so they can better afford to provide coverage for their employees and their families. And they will reduce the rolls of the uninsured without increasing taxes, killing jobs, forcing Americans into a government-run program, and burdening our children and grandchildren with even more debt. Mr. Speaker, I also support making the following four changes to America's health care system. First, we need to reform our out-of- control medical liability system. Medical malpractice insurance continues to surge, skyrocketing health care costs and forcing doctors and other medical professionals to practice ``defensive medicine,'' which entails ordering costly and often unnecessary tests to cover all the bases from lawsuits. I am a cosponsor of the HEALTH Act (H.R. 1086) that would fully compensate victims for medical injuries but place reasonable caps on punitive and non-economic damages that often inflate the awards and contribute to out-of-control liability and health care costs. Second, we need to expand tax-free availability to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). HSAs allow small business owners to offer more affordable high-deductible health insurance plans to their employees and make tax-deductible contributions to employee savings accounts to allow their employees to build equity and assume personal control of their health care needs. Congress should increase the tax deductibility for these insurance plans. Third, we need to preserve high-quality health care through America's community health centers. I am a strong supporter of continued funding of our community health center system, which provides high-quality health care to America's low-income families. The district I am privileged to represent has one of the model community health centers in America, the Crusader Clinic in Rockford, which serves more than 40,000 needy patients in northern Illinois each year. Finally, we need to create refundable tax credits to help low-income Americans purchase health insurance. Low-income children are already covered through the federal State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), and I support refundable tax credits to help low-income adults purchase health insurance. Mr. Speaker, this bill today will increase taxes, cut Medicare, raise health care premiums, and put millions more Americans on the unemployment lines. And amazingly, most of the benefits--including the ban on pre-existing conditions for adults--will not be available for another four years. We should instead be pursuing the bipartisan reforms that would make health care more affordable and accessible to Americans now, and not make them wait four years for assistance. This bill is certainly not the type of health care reform Americans deserve.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, we are engaged in what is called an historic debate over the issue of health care reform, and there are a couple of issues that need to be addressed. The area that I represent in northern Illinois, the biggest city is at 19.7 percent unemployment. Add 7 percentage points to that, it's nearly 27 percent unemployment. It's incredible. The State of Illinois is laying off teachers, social workers, people involved in all types of social services. Students at a nearby high school went out and picketed because they're concerned over the loss of their advanced placement classes. Yet, under the Senate bill, many more across the country would be added to the Medicaid roles. The State of Illinois, already bankrupt, billions of dollars in debt, would have to take on paying an additional $400 million a year in Federal mandates and unreimbursed increased Medicaid expenses. This doesn't make sense. On top of it, there's a 2\1/2\ percent--we think that's the amount-- excise tax on medical equipment, medical devices, the very equipment that was used to save the life of my wife who came down with cancer 4 years ago: the titanium brace that replaces one of her vertebrae, the radiation machine, all the latest equipment. A tax on the very equipment that's used to help people get excellent health care in this country? We're not quite sure which equipment would be taxed or which would be free of tax, but once the tax starts--and we all know what happens with the tax. It's passed on to the consumers. So here's this monstrous bill from the Senate that the House is supposed to adopt by some type of unique process that's going to tax lifesaving equipment. It just defies logic as to why this is being done; $500 billion in tax increases. Now Social Security would apply to dividends, interest, capital gains taxes. Tax after tax after tax hurting the American people. I never thought that it would happen in America when lifesaving devices would be taxed to increase the cost to the people who use them. This isn't what the American people want; it certainly isn't what they deserve. There are many ways to bring down the high cost of health care: through association health plans, through meaningful medical liability reform, through increasing the number of community health centers, by allowing small employers the ability to have the same tax breaks that corporations do when using their money to buy health insurance premiums. America watches and looks and wonders and asks this question: Why are the leaders in Congress doing this to us?

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. I thank the gentleman from Missouri. If the purpose of any health care bill is to bring down the cost of health care, that is, to break the curve, so instead of health care costs going up, they'll at least be stable, if not retreat, then it really defies logic as to why the Senate bill, which the House will take up and vote on in a very interesting manner, sort of a backdoor approach to approving what happened in the Senate, when that bill imposes an excise tax on medical equipment--

Mr. MANZULLO. Well, it is. And then when my wife came down with cancer, and the neurosurgeon implanted into her spine this marvelous titanium brace, to think that that is a medical device and could be subject to a tax. Now--

Mr. MANZULLO. Well, yeah. I mean, the radiology machine that was used to kill the cancer cells around that particular level that was in her back that had the cancer. And, yet, by increasing the cost of lifesaving devices, has it ever occurred to people who are trying to ram through this bill that that will increase the cost of health care?

Mr. MANZULLO. It is. And there's another aspect to tax on the medical devices. I was talking to a small businessman who runs a manufacturing facility, and he showed me the medical device that he makes. It's a marvelously crafted piece of aluminum that he did with a vertical mill, just unbelievably beautiful. And he said, I've been told by the people who order this device from me that if we have this tax on medical devices, even though this ostensibly would apply to imports, that they're just going to take it and go to China to have this made because they can come in cheaper than anything else, and that would really be the straw that breaks the camel's back. And so now here we are in the district I represent, with official unemployment in Rockford, Illinois, at 19.7 percent, add 7 percentage points to that, almost 27 percent unemployment, and now I'm looking a manufacturer in the eye who says, Not only will this bill impose this harsh mandate and force taxes upon me that I cannot afford, and increase the cost of health care insurance, but I could end up losing jobs because of people offshoring the manufacturing of these medical devices. And I wanted to share that with the gentleman from Missouri because it's just----

Mr. MANZULLO. Well, they may have to pay the tax on the import, but no one knows. If we just throw the tax out and say, well, the tax may apply, even if the tax applies, I say to my good friend from Missouri, the supplier will look at that and say, or the people who order the equipment would say, what's going to be the next shoe to drop? How much more expensive is it going to be? And I've just had it with the increasing cost of American manufacturing, so I'm going to go offshore, and then that's that.

Mr. MANZULLO. Not 500 million jobs. Five million jobs.

Mr. MANZULLO. And in Illinois, which is already bankrupt. Illinois is the State where five of the past eight Governors have been indicted. It's a great State. They have a lot of ethical problems, you might say. The State's broken. Public employees have been laid off. A local school, the kids were out picketing because their AP classes may be eliminated because of a tremendous hit in the budget. And now Illinois would inherit a $400 million per year unfunded Federal mandate because of the increase in Medicaid recipients.

Mr. MANZULLO. I thank the gentleman for letting me share.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 1009. One of those individuals honored today in this resolution spent her formative years in the northern Illinois Congressional district that I am proud to represent. Miss Elizabeth C. Hanson of Rockford, Illinois deployed to Afghanistan as part of America's war against terrorist extremists. On December 30, 2009, Elizabeth, along with six colleagues from the Central Intelligence Agency and a Jordanian liaison officer, was killed when a suicide bomber attacked the base where they were stationed. Elizabeth Hanson was born in February 1979 and graduated from Keith Country Day School in 1997. She attended Colby College during the time of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Elizabeth joined the CIA as a specialist tasked with collecting information on terrorists, and she was part of a team dedicated to defeating America's worst enemies. Elizabeth Hanson served her country with passion, dedication, and conviction. Elizabeth will be sorely missed by her family, friends, and all who had the privilege of knowing her. I am enclosing for the Record a copy of a recent local newspaper editorial that honored her service. [From the RRStar.com Editorial, Jan. 17, 2010] Brave, Remarkable Woman Went From Keith to the CIA In the weeks since CIA employee Elizabeth Hanson died in a suicide bombing in Afghanistan, her college placement adviser at Keith Country Day School has reflected on what the loss meant. Sally Hoff's words should shed new light on the heroism that Hanson exhibited in the dark corners of Afghanistan. Hanson, 30, was among seven CIA employees who died Dec. 30 when a double agent detonated an explosive device at a remote base near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Hoff worked closely with Hanson for two years at Keith, a private college preparatory school, before Hanson graduated in 1997. At first, the former counselor's deep sadness was paired with shock that Hanson worked for the CIA. Then it seemed to fit. She recalled Hanson's courage, energy and resolve--traits unusual for most teenagers. ``Although she was involved in many activities and had a lot of friends, I was aware of a strong sense of independence and self-reliance in her,'' Hoff wrote in an e-mail to the Editorial Board. ``As we moved through the college selection process, she was clearly the captain of her destiny; she made her own decisions without seeking much input from family and friends. ``There's a marked amount of bravery in that for a 17-year- old,'' Hoff wrote. Hanson went on to attend Colby College in Maine, a highly selective liberal arts school where she majored in economics. She graduated in 2001. A professor at Colby told The Associated Press that Hanson didn't study economics as a path to a lucrative job in the financial world. Her concern wasn't so much the raw data, Michael Donihue said, but the behaviors behind it. ``There are some who come into economics because they're interested in making money,'' he said. ``Others want to look at the world in a different way.'' At Keith, Hanson was known as Bitsy. She was a vivacious, generous, friendly young woman who seemed to enjoy challenging herself in academics and extracurriculars, according to Hoff. ``I feel honored to have known this remarkable young woman!'' Hoff wrote. This community is honored that Hanson gave her life trying to unlock the secrets of al-Qaida and its terrorist network. Our condolences to her family and friends. May the pride that her hometown feels in her sacrifice be some comfort.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Chair, I have great concerns about this bill, especially title IV of the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Agency. It creates yet another czar, and look at the groups that will be impacted by this bill: Financial advisers, anybody providing financial advice, educational courses or instructional materials to customers, credit counselors, debt management services, anybody acting as a custodian of money, trust accounts, tax planning services, private pools of capital, municipalities who issue bills on utilities, water, sewer, electricity, waste collection, et cetera, courts dealing with fees, fines, taxes paid on an installment basis for counties and municipalities, schools, tuition installment, room and board, third-party agencies handling fee processing, banks, credits, unions, thrifts merchants, layaway plans, any installment plan, financing option, real estate activities, brokers, appraisers, title companies, title insurers, auctioneers, inspectors, surveyors of real estate settlement, cockroach inspectors for homes are covered under this bill. What's financial about that unless you are counting cockroaches? Doctors, issuance of credit, rarely do people pay a bill at the ``point of sale'' in a doctor's office, lawyers, disbursing money through a trust account, the closing of a real estate transaction. Madam Chair, this bill is so pervasive that the term ``anybody involved in a financial action'' literally covers somebody writing checks on behalf of his mother who is in a nursing home. That's why this bill is dangerous. We can't proceed on a bill like this and have all these different groups that are impacted. Most of these groups will have no idea that they will be governed by the so-called financial czar. We don't need another czar. We need a lot more freedom in this country.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the Administration's plan to link economic development in the district that I have the honor to represent to the transfer of dangerous terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The hardworking people of northern Illinois have waited too long for the promise of economic stimulus and are looking for good paying employment opportunities. It is absolutely unnecessary to condition job creation with the wholesale importation of over 200 battle-hardened terrorists that could dampen long-term economic growth in that region. Today, I am introducing legislation to authorize the federal government to purchase the maximum security correctional facility located in Thomson, Illinois for the purpose of alleviating an already overcrowded federal penal system while prohibiting the transfer of terrorist detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. If passed, my legislation would bring good jobs to northern Illinois while keeping our communities safe. Thomson and the surrounding rural areas of Carroll County suffer from chronic high unemployment and population loss. Currently, Carroll County has an unemployment rate of 10.5 percent. Thomson has an unemployment rate of 11.8 percent and has unfortunately experienced a negative population growth rate of 4.5 percent since 2000. Fulfilling the promise of the Thomas Correctional Center will bring eagerly anticipated economic activity to the region. For years, I have been encouraging the State of Illinois to utilize this prison after so much was invested to build the facility. Unfortunately, my requests went unheeded. Now, we have a unique opportunity to help both the federal government with its need to reduce prison overcapacity and the local community with its need for economic development. The Federal Bureau of Prisons estimates that purchasing the facility near Thomson will cost approximately $120 million. My legislation provides sufficient flexibility in funding to purchase and transfer federal prisoners to this facility. However, the legislation specifically prohibits the federal government from housing any terrorist detainees currently at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, at this site or any other federal, state, or local facility in Illinois. Madam Speaker, the good people of Thomson and the rest of Illinois' 16th Congressional District have waited too long for this government to fulfill its promise to ``save or create'' jobs. Given the overcrowding in America's prison system, let's use the Thomson correctional facility to house non-terrorist prisoners and create the jobs so vital for our families. Now is the time to stop linking job creation to the transfer of terrorist detainees and work towards a sensible compromise on this issue. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.