Donald Manzullo

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, government does not have to be as complicated as we here in Washington make it. In fact, the only thing that counts to the folks that we represent, and the district that I represent runs from the Mississippi River across the top of the State of Illinois to within one county of Lake Michigan, and the people there are just like the people in the rest of the United States. They get up early in the morning, go to work, pack their lunch bags. Then on Friday night, the husband and wife will sit down and say, you know, we do not understand it. We are both working and yet we are taking home less money and it cost more to live than ever before. What those people want is what most Americans want. They want a tax rate that is fair. They want a government that is efficient. They want to be able to use the fruits of their own labors. That is why this very productive Republican Congress is allowing the taxpayers of this country the ability to keep more of their hard-earned dollars, as opposed to sending it to Washington to be wasted on one of the 10,000 Federal programs that are here. I was at a luncheon for Scott Forge, a major forge back in our district in McHenry County, and talked to a great number of the work force. I asked, ``How many here have children under 17 years old?'' And about half of them raised their hands. And I said, ``Do you believe that you as parents can make a better decision as to how to spend money on those children than 535 Members of Congress 820 miles from here?'' And they all said yes. Then I said, ``For those of you who raised your hands, for every child you have, this year you will pay $400 less in income taxes and next year $500 less in income taxes.'' And they looked at each other and I said, ``Sir, how many children do you have?'' And he said, ``I have 4.'' I said, ``Next year you will pay $2,000 less in income tax,'' and the place started to cheer. I asked, ``How many here have kids in the first 2 years of college?'' Several people raised their hands. I said, ``Would you not be better off spending your money on your kids' college tuition as opposed to paying income tax?'' They said yes. And I said, ``That is exactly what this Republican Congress has done. They are called Hope scholarships. Up to $1,500 per year for the first 2 years that you can use towards your kid's college education as opposed to paying taxes.'' That really is the Republican message. A productive Congress is a Congress that does things for people, not for itself. Do my colleagues think it is productive just because a Congress meets more and more and more days and passes more and more and more laws? Mr. Speaker, more laws usually mean bigger government, more regulations, and higher taxes to pay for those new programs. So, while the Republicans are being assailed as a ``Do Nothing Congress,'' we do nothing liberal on the Republican side. But we are doing everything possible for the working people out there. The people that I represent, the ones who are working that Scott Forge who get up very early in the morning and go to work and work there doing all kinds of great things with their hands. I can look them in the eye and say, ``I am your United States Representative of Congress in Washington, and I helped craft and I voted for legislation that lowers your taxes and allows to you keep more of your hard-earned dollars.'' That is the message. That is the message that people in this country want to hear. It is a very simple message. I could talk about the President and all the new programs he wants to institute and this and that. But we have to ask, who is going to pay for it all? Do we really think that all the new things that he proposes are going to be free? Who is going to pay for it all? That is what matters to the people that get up in the morning and go to Scott Forge and work very hard. And I would suggest that these are the people who count. These are the people who have made America, and these are the people that are the beneficiaries of this Republican-led productive Congress.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I would just say, I put in 70, 80 hours a week and nobody has ever accused me of killing children because Republicans are withholding money from the FDA for E. coli. It is a shameful remark for the last speaker to say that. We gave the power to Secretary Glickman to use whatever resources are necessary to the Department of Agriculture to fight E. coli. To be accused of killing children. No wonder a constituent of mine Beatrice Mock wrote a letter to me, I picked it up this morning. She said: Dear Congressman, after listening to the pros and cons of the last few weeks, I decided to call your office and voice my objection to what is happening in Washington. Somehow this quotation came to mind and seems to sum up much of what should be said. If as it seems our Congressmen, Senators and President are only interested in the power their offices gives them and not what is best for the country, only in getting reelected time after time, then we are doomed. She went through and stated that the numerous members of her family that have fought in every war except World War I started with the Spanish-American war. She said, ``So you see, I have a vested interest in seeing our leaders held accountable for their actions.'' She enclosed a quotation from, I think a State Senator, William Boroh, found in an old Bible that belonged to her family. Here is the quotation: The salvation of our Republic depends on the people, the strength of might and clarity of purpose of the average voter. Democracies tend to make moral cowards of public men. Unless people rise to the task and demand high ideals and truly American standards, then there is no hope from State legislators, from spineless Congresses or listening to officials. She concluded, This quotation should be spoken again and again. Much of your tasks are or may be unpleasant. However, your constituents are expecting you to find your voice and to speak your conscience. Mr. Speaker, that letter says it all. Values and character do not depend on polls. Let me quote something. Harry Truman once commented on the importance of polls to leadership, with the following insight. I wonder how far Moses would have gone if he had taken a poll in Egypt. What would Jesus Christ have preached if he had taken a poll in Israel? Where would the Reformation have gone if Martin Luther had taken a poll? It is not the polls or the public opinion of the moment that counts. It is right and wrong, and leadership, men with fortitude, honesty and a belief in right that makes epics in the history of the world. Some things are right, and some things are wrong, and these do not depend upon the philosophy of the day. There was an article that appeared in the Washington Times about 4 years ago about Daimion Osby, Fort Worth teenager by the name of Daimion Osby. He was 18 years old, was charged with shooting and killing two other young men, Willie Brooks and Marcus Brooks. They were his cousins. Mr. Osby's lawyers came up with a pathetically cynical defense. The youth committed fratricide because he suffered from, quote, ``urban survival syndrome,'' they argued. In other words, he blew away his unarmed cousins because he thought they were out to get him. This is not accepting responsibility for one's actions, and irony of all ironies, as I came into the office this morning and saw this letter from my constituent, I picked up Dic DeVos' book on rediscovering American values at home, and it fell open to the chapter on accountability. It is exactly what my client was calling for in her letter when she said: ``So you see I have a vested interest in seeing our leaders held accountable for their actions.'' And Dick DeVos says: Some like to blame others for what goes wrong in their lives. Others blame God. When we hold ourselves accountable, we accept the blame for wrong choices. Accountability is part of my faith. I believe that we are all accountable to God for the choices we make. Thankfully God is forgiving, but we must acknowledge our mistakes before him. Accountability depends on honesty and humility as well as fairness and courage. This means simply recognizing and accepting responsibility and the consequences for past mistakes and for the state in which we find ourselves. Individuals can receive rewards for accomplishments and victories. Mr. Speaker, it is accountability for one's actions for which my client has written this letter and which I am glad to share with this body today.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues know, the fact that Congress does not pass a lot of laws does not mean it is a do-nothing Congress. Did my colleagues ever stop to realize that a Congress that passes a lot of laws is the same one that passes a lot of regulations? Creates more programs? More bureaucrats? Evidently to some people on the other side, they think that that is a productive Congress. But, as my colleagues know, for every family in the United States beginning this year that has a child under 17 year old the parents will be able to keep $400 more of their taxes, and after that, $500 more of their taxes, a $500 child credit. We Republicans believe the American people know how to spend their hard-earned dollars a lot better than the United States Congress. With a $500 per child tax credit, they can keep that as opposed to paying taxes. That is a do-something Congress.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, we are finally taking a much-needed step to advance the cause of religious freedom and liberty around the world. I am proud to support this legislation here before us today. Initially, I had several reservations about the original version of this bill, but supported passage last May in order to help move along the process. I am glad to see that the other body has voted it out of theirs, 98-to-zero. This legislation is very well crafted. It focuses on all aspects of religious persecution, not just threats to life and limb. The bill gives the executive branch a great deal of flexibility on how to implement this congressional mandate. What is appropriate for one situation may not apply in another context. Yet, for more severe violations of religious freedom, the President has a list from which to choose of the economic sanction options. Most importantly, the legislation brings daylight to a problem that has long been ignored by our government officials. Thanks to the tenacity of my good friend from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), we are finally seeing religious freedom issues taking their rightful place in the fight for human rights around the world.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, any lasting resolution to modify the Fastener Quality Act (FQA) must address the concerns raised by the small manufacturers within the fastener industry. If their concerns are not addressed, I believe most small firms would favor repeal of the Act. I am privileged to represent the ``fastener capital of the United States,'' Rockford, Illinois. There are more fastener manufacturers per capita in Rockford than in any other city in the nation. Implementation of the FQA and any recommended changes to it are of key importance to northern Illinois and the industry overall. Fasteners are the sinews of a modern manufacturing nation. Disruption in the supply of fasteners would be the equivalent of a nationwide trucking or rail strike. Amidst an increasingly volatile national economy this would have devastating consequences for the country, with reverberations throughout industries dependent on supplies of fasteners. When the National Institute of Standards and Technology released the latest set of regulations last April, I surveyed the fastener manufacturers in northern Illinois for their input. A third of these answered my survey--a very high response rate. Let me review for my colleagues on the panel the results of the survey: (1) 54 percent of the fastener manufacturers still do not know which fasteners are covered by the FQA; (2) 46 percent of the fastener manufacturers are so small that they cannot afford to adopt the expensive Quality Assurance System (QAS) though they have their own system of testing and insuring quality. Thus, the April regulations permitting larger companies who use QAS to become FQA-certified means nothing to these small fastener firms; and (3) 92 percent--almost every one of the fastener manufacturers in northern Illinois--do not know what they have to do to fully comply with the FQA regulations. I have met with or been contacted by numerous fastener companies in my district, all of which express concerns reflective of the findings in the survey. For example, there's Pearson Fastener, a 35-employee family enterprise in Rockford. For years Pearson has been manufacturing fasteners. For the last eight years they have been wrestling with the FQA, wondering why existing independent accredited laboratories cannot continue to test their fasteners instead of the company having to switch to as yet unidentified and unaccredited labs. Aside from the added costs involved, newly accredited labs may not offer every testing service needed by the diversity of fastener manufacturers in Rockford. For instance, Pearson could not get one accredited lab to give them a price quote for a salt spraying test on fasteners they make for outboard engines on motor boats. Camcar, a division of Textron Fastening Systems of Rockford that has manufactured fasteners since 1943, complained that they could not get an approved signatory to sign test reports, as the regulations require. Since no one can observe all the test results, nobody is willing to sign off on the reports. Elco, also of Textron Fastening Systems and a major fastener manufacturer in Rockford declares the FQA ``a showsstopper to our industry . . . [It] penalizes every U.S. fastener company with hundreds of millions of dollars of extra costs in testing and paperwork when the original intent of the Act was to keep out foreign, fraudulent bolts. This particularly affects smaller companies within our industry.'' The problems with the FQA from the perspective of small fastener firms are manifold: ambiguity about which fasteners the Act covers; availability and proximity of accredited labs; confusion about the definition of certification, prohibitive compliance costs; over- regulation of the industry; loss of market share to foreign competitors because the FQA exempts fasteners imported as components of larger parts; and lack of information about requried tests of a specialized product are all major concerns of fastener manufacturers in my district. Resolution of these matters needs to be a part of any final modification of the FQA. It has been eight years since the FQA was enacted. During that time, technological advances within the fastener industry have greatly improved testing techniques so that the failure rate for fasteners has been practically eliminated. Obviously, this necessitates a re- examination of the Act to see that it is applicable to the industry in light of these advances. If some basic, common sense changes are not made to the FQA, I believe most small fastener manufacturers would like to see a total repeal because it is currently unworkable. This is the problem with the FQA as it is currently written. I hope Congress, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the fastener industry, and others can work together to fix it, or else resolve to abolish it. We all want to make a genuine effort to work out the problems with the FQA. I submit that the approach we ought to take should address the concerns of all fastener manufacturers. At the same time, we should avoid a course that seeks a solution through exemptions for specific industries. A solution that fails to resolve the issues raised by both large and small fastener firms is no solution at all. Otherwise, down the road we again will find ourselves wrestling with the same problems that threaten the viability of the fastener industry and, consequently, the very health of our economy. Even at this early juncture, we already know that any future workable regulatory document must include the following: (1) A clear delineation of what fasteners are covered; (2) a settlement on the issue of certifying in-house testing processes, and short of this an agreement on the number, type, and location of accredited laboratories; (3) a clear definition of what constitutes certification; (4) a regime that minimizes compliance and regulatory costs so as not to put small manufacturers of fasteners out of business, nor U.S. fastener manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign manufacturers; and (5) a thorough dissemination of information that answers the many questions fastener manufacturers will have when any new agreement is reached. If a revamped FQA can accomplish these things, then I think we have the basis for a document that can work for the fastener industry and ensure safety for the consumer. On the other hand, if the FQA remains difficult to interpret, costly with which to comply, and threatens the existence of small fastener companies, then it must be repealed.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, in the case in Illinois, under Illinois law, the 13-year-old did receive abstinence counseling.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, the reason for the Istook-Barcia-Manzullo amendment is simple. In McHenry County, Illinois, which I represent, a 37-year-old teacher was raping a 13-year-old student of his over and over and over again. He took her to the Title X-funded McHenry Tri- County Health Clinic. She was injected on 3 different occasions with Depo-Provera, which is a harsh chemical. In fact, the chemical of choice for chemical castration by convicts. Her parents had no idea that she was getting these shots. In America today, children as young as 12 years old are being injected, implanted, and given prescriptive medication without their parents even knowing. Our bill does something very simple. It adopts the language of the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) that Title X health care providers are required to counsel all minors regarding abstinence. It adopts the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey's) problem with this bill that says that children are getting STDs because our bill still allows them to get STDs. In fact, the clinic is still open. Kids can get all the information they want. What we are simply saying here is this: Allow the parents in this Nation to be put in charge of the sexuality of their children. It is just that simple. We talk about 17 year olds, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) talks about. I wonder at what age he would allow young women to get these injections. In Winnebago County, we understand it is 12 years old. Winnebago County, Illinois. So vote for the Istook-Barcia amendment that does 3 things. Parents are given actual notice that their children are about to receive prescriptive drugs. It provides for judicial bypass. The amendment does not require parental notification for a minor to receive information, counseling and treatment of STDs. A very modest request. JAMA, Journal of American Medical Association, in a study done in September of 1997 would agree with this position.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the rule. It is important we pass this rule because we will have on the floor a very interesting story of a 37-year-old schoolteacher who repeatedly statutorily raped his 13-year-old student, brought her to a title 10 clinic, which gave her birth control devices, a shot of Depo-Provera in the arm which led to very serious medical consequences on her part. This will be an opportunity for Members of Congress to keep language that allows parents the right to be notified whenever their little girls are being given contraceptive devices. The language that we will be asking people to support is the Istook- Barcia-Manzullo language, which is a perfecting amendment to the Castle-Greenwood amendment that will be offered on the floor.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, they get up at the crack of dawn and they work 18 hours a day. They take care of their animals. They cultivate their crops. They repair the roofs of their barns that have been torn off by savage winds. They are preparing to go into the field, to cultivate the corn, to harvest it, to sell it. Harvest time is the time to pass fast track. Because without fast track, American farmers have lost 78 million bushels of corn in sales to Chile and three other Latin American countries to the Argentinians. Because Argentina has an agreement with those four Latin American countries and we do not. Let us talk about the people. Let us talk about the farmers who are directly suffering as a result of the President's failure to lead the Nation in adopting fast track. They are the ones that are suffering. Them. The ones who work all those hours. And to the men and women at the Neon plant in Chrysler, they could not sell 4000 Neons to Chile. Mexico sold those Neons to Chile because Mexico has a free trade agreement with Chile and the United States does not. Four thousand automobiles could have been manufactured in this country, and they were not because we do not have fast track. Mr. Speaker, it is the people that count.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, can you imagine State and local governments saying we really do not like these international postal agreements, so we are going to enact a community postal agreement, or perhaps a statewide one; or we think there is an infringement on our sovereignty with the international air space agreements because those airplanes fly over our State, and therefore we think that State and local governments should have the right to enact their own type of agreements dealing with these subjects? Well, we are not under the Articles of Confederation, we are under the United States Constitution, and it was the Constitution that specifically gave exclusive power to the United States Government, the national government, to deal with issues of foreign policy and especially international trade. What we have going on in this country, for example, Berkeley City Council added two more oil companies to its boycott list. The council will no longer buy gas from Shell and Chevron because it does business in Nigeria. Since Berkeley has already banned ARCO, Unocal, Mobil and Texaco for doing business in Burma and considered Exxon stained by the Valdez spill, the town is running out of options. So the issue is not WTO, but simply does the Federal Government or the State and local governments have jurisdiction over international trade policy? We cannot have an international trade policy promulgated by this Congress and then be preempted by 50 States and hundreds of local communities. It simply would not make sense. That is the issue here. One of the reasons our Founding Fathers moved to adopt the U.S. Constitution in 1779 was that even the States among themselves had their own tariffs and their own foreign policies. So I would urge Members this evening to vote against this amendment and to say, look, if we want to have a focused international policy, Congress is the place where the issue of Burma should be debated, and it is; Congress is the place where the issue of Nazi gold should be debated, and it is, in the Committee on International Relations, and the sanctions were requested here in this body. All these issues deal with the United States Congress and the authority that we have here. We cannot be preempted by 50 states going their own way.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to help express my thoughts to the families of slain Capitol police officers John Gibson and Jacob Chestnut. I say ``help express'' because there is no total way to thank these men for laying down their lives for others. I would defer to the words of my wife, Freda, for these remarks, in the joint letter she sent to the Gibson and Chestnut families. To the families of Officer John Gibson and Officer Jacob Chestnut: My heart today is filled with a tremendous sense of debt and gratitude to your fathers and husbands and the sacrifice they have made. Scripture tells us in John 15:13, ``Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friend.'' Indeed, we consider each officer at the Capitol a friend. Daily we give thanks for their constant careful watch of the members of congress and the millions of visiting tourists. Last night as we welcomed my husband, Congressman Donald Manzullo, home we breathed a prayer of thanksgiving for his safe return. But also your families and great loss were uppermost in our thoughts. Our heartfelt thanks pour out to you. Our sorrow at your loss is overwhelming. Another scripture comes to mind, one that I believe the Lord said as he received your loved ones into this eternal kingdom, ``Well done, good and faithful servants; you were faithful with a few things; enter into the joy of your master,'' Matthew 25:23. With love and gratitude, Freda Manzullo.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, the Jackson-Vanik amendment to the 1974 Trade Act focuses on using various U.S. trade inducements to pressure non-market countries to allow freedom of emigration. It is not supposed to be a total referendum on that nation's internal policies, and it has nothing to do with MFN, and it has nothing to do with other human rights violations, other than the freedom to emigrate. That is what we are talking about today. The practical effect of this waiver simply allows U.S. exporters to operate more efficiently in Vietnam. Our exporters face an uneven playing field when trying to sell to Vietnam. Foreign competitors have long had the support of their home governments, equivalents of the Eximbank, OPIC, TDA, and the USDA. Foreign countries have taken export opportunities away from Americans, simply because our foreign competitors obtained a government-subsidized rate for an export loan, or dangled a foreign aid incentive before certain Vietnamese government officials. Japan alone has an $850 million developmental assistance package to induce countries like Vietnam to buy Japanese exports. Finally, we got the message, and the President's waiver is making a difference, particularly on infrastructure projects. U.S. workers are now making products to sell to Vietnam. Vietnam prefers buying American products. The waiver does not lower any U.S. import duties on Vietnamese products. It is totally one-sided in our favor in terms of our balance of trade. If this resolution passes, only U.S. workers will be hurt. Larger American companies may still win export deals in Vietnam, but they will use foreign subsidiaries and foreign workers to complete the contracts. That is, U.S. companies will use their foreign subsidiaries to sell to Vietnam, thus displacing American jobs.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I will take my 5 minutes and then withdraw the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Treasury appropriations bill that would simply delay for 1 year the implementation of the reporting requirements related to the HOPE Scholarship and lifetime learning credits. There is a strong need to pass this amendment. As part of last year's Taxpayers Relief Act, Congress rightfully included the HOPE Scholarship and lifetime learning tax credits. These credits represent an opportunity to expand much needed access to higher education. By helping make college more affordable for eligible students, the tax credits lower the burden on families sending children to school. But while students apply to receive this tuition assistance, the new law unfortunately imposes costly reporting requirements on colleges and universities. What do these reporting requirements entail? Colleges and universities and trade schools, 7,000 in number across this country, must collect the name, address, Social Security number of the student. However, under the new reporting requirements colleges and universities must now collect and report to the IRS for each student, regardless of whether the student takes advantage of the credit, the name, address and Social Security numbers of anyone claiming the student as a dependent for tax purposes; the name, address and employer identification number of the educational institution; contact name and phone number; whether the student was in attendance at least half the time for any academic period beginning in 1998; the gross amount of tuition the student is expected to cover in a calendar year from any other source except tuition remission; and whether the student has completed 2 years of schooling prior to January 1 of 1998. This is very disheartening. This is a very costly unfunded mandate that has been placed upon our 7,000 trade colleges, community colleges and universities in this country. We have stipulated that schools must collect all sorts of very personal information, not only for students that want the credit, but on all students. We have been working with six national organizations that represent these 7,000 higher learning institutions, and it is expected that this unfunded mandate by Congress will cost these higher institutions upwards of $150 million to implement alone. Public and private higher education institution in Illinois will have to spend $18 million. Northern Illinois University will pay 200,000. The college community system of California has 107 schools and 2\1/2\ million students, and their unfunded mandate share is $20 million a year. Now the Senate passed a form of relief, holding back many of the reporting requirements for at least a year. However, Mr. Chairman, the reporting requirements are still going to require a tremendous amount of money to be spend by the universities in this country. These institutions enroll 23 million students with expenditures that exceed $200 billion a year. Mr. Chairman, what we are trying to do here is to simply make available to the IRS a form similar to the child dependent care expense form for 1040 filers. It is called Schedule 2 that is formed on 1040 A, and what this does, it says the taxpayer that claims the credit has the onus of responsibility to fill in the documentation necessary as opposed to this horrible mandate that is placed upon our 7,000 schools. I have a letter here from the Eastern Connecticut State University talking about how much it is going to cost; from the Allegany College of Maryland; and the letter I have also, Northern Arizona University; McHenry County College; and a letter from John LaTourette of Northern Illinois University where he says, ``Let the schools be in the business of educating students as opposed to being in the business of furnishing IRS different types of information.''

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I spoke out of order. I intended to speak on the last amendment, to strike the last word. I would withdraw my comments.

Mr. MANZULLO. It is the Republican side.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation. This bill makes sense. Tomorrow Pakistan will purchase 350,000 metric tons of wheat for $37 million. The only question remains which country will sell them this wheat. Only U.S. wheat growers bear this heavy sanctions burden, while farmers in other countries eagerly await to seize this market from us. Did we not learn anything from the failed Carter grain embargo against the Soviet Union? The Soviets simply bought wheat from Argentina, Canada, and Australia, and it took years for U.S. farmers to regain a foothold in the Russian market. What is good for the farm community should also be good for our manufacturing sector. Because of nuclear testing by India and Pakistan, Eximbank halted support for $4 billion in U.S. exports to those countries. That is placing 48,000 high-paying U.S. manufacturing jobs at risk, including those who work at Sundstrand and Woodward Governor in Rockford, which companies supply aviation parts to Boeing. What kind of punishment is that to those countries that detonate? Ingersoll Milling Machine Company is trying to determine if it can still sell an $8 million four-axis machine center to a state-owned electric utility company in India. Two Italian machine tool manufacturers not encumbered by these sanctions are standing by waiting to seize that market from the Americans. If Ingersoll does not receive an answer from the Commerce Department by July 20, we could lose that $8 million contract. Motorola has already lost $15 million worth of two-way radio sales to India, and could lose hundreds of millions in more export opportunities to upgrade India's communication system because of the Eximbank sanctions. Three thousand employees work at the Harvard, Illinois plant making telecommunications equipment for Motorola. That is why we need to rethink our whole philosophy towards sanctions. Why would we try to punish a country for doing something wrong, and we end up punishing our own workers, when that country in fact can end up buying the same materials from other countries?

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. I would like whoever set the price to furnish that.

Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I share the concern of my committee chairman. What we are doing is selling 48 ships for only $13 million apiece. About 3 years ago in a hearing in the Committee on International Relations, which has original jurisdiction over the sale of surplus ships, there was a move to give away 10 ships, to which I objected, and Senator Brownback from Kansas and I passed legislation, subsequently called the Manzullo amendment. Those 10 ships were then sold for $495 million. Subsequent to that, every year that amendment has come up, and that money is kept back in the coffers in IR towards that bill. But this takes jurisdiction away from the Committee on International Relations. I do not know if this is a bargain sale or not, but I would like some type of assurance from whoever set this price at $637 million that the United States is not giving away billions of dollars worth of ships for which we should be fully compensated.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, if I can reclaim my time, the gentleman may be very well correct and probably is as to the reason these ships were thrown in; but at the minimum, the Committee on International Relations deserve notice and opportunity to have, at the minimum, a joint hearing on this issue.