Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), chairman of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act. Over the last several years, many Members of this body have been working hard to improve America's relationship with Africa. We have done this because what happens in Africa matters. It matters to Africans, and it matters to our country. The United States has real interests in seeing that Africa begins to reach its considerable potential. Such an Africa would offer limitless cultural and economic opportunity to Americans. Already our exports to Africa are some $6.5 billion. This is greater than our exports to the former Soviet Union. It is greater than our exports to all of Eastern Europe. And the volume is growing. U.S. exports to Africa are growing by more than 8 percent per year. This is 130-some thousand American jobs. As this map shows, businesses in my home State of California have been part of this. California is one of the top States in the country when it comes to exports to Africa, as is Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas. We can see the result of the growing exports here to Africa. On the other hand, if Africa fails to meet its potential with the United States of America, then the United States will not escape the negative economic political and security implications. There would be lost economic opportunities, yes, but there would be more. The reality is that terrorism and environmental degradation know no bounds. Simply put, this legislation, which has broad bipartisan support, is critical to the United States' relationship with Africa. The Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs recently said, ``No other U.S.-Africa issue can be taken seriously until the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act is passed.'' As chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, I second that. But so do all the African ambassadors here in Washington, everyone who has unanimously supported this legislation. The African ambassadors understand the importance of this legislation, and they have rejected in no uncertain terms the efforts of critics to speak authoritatively for Africans. So I say to my colleagues, if they care about the future of the continent, if they care about the future of 700 million people, support this legislation. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) who serves on the Subcommittee on Africa.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), vice chairman of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo), a Member who is new to the Subcommittee on Africa and has shown a great interest in the continent.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this is a severe problem, as has been pointed out. This costs millions of lives. AIDS has cost millions of lives in Africa. It does threaten economic development of the continent. Members of the House, including the coauthors of this particular amendment, are working on this problem. I support this amendment. This amendment will bolster our efforts on AIDS in Africa. Let me also point out that the underlying bill will support sub- Saharan nations' efforts to strengthen their economies, to promote their strong growth, to promote job creation, and improve the standards of living there. In these ways, the bill will strengthen the ability of sub-Saharan countries to fight AIDS. Already growth and economic reforms have helped to generate resources for drug access programs. For example, Cote d'Ivoire has established a $1 million solidarity fund from corporate contributions and nonprofit insurance systems. But this amendment will help us do more. I thank the authors for offering this amendment, which we will support.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), a member of the Subcommittee on Africa.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by commending the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) and all those who have spent so much time moving this historic legislation. Let me also thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations, and commend him for the fine job he has done in doing that. Let me just try to answer some of the concerns. As trade has expanded, unemployment in the United States has gone down appreciably. We have the highest employment numbers we have had in decades, and part of this is because of the trade and engagement we have had. Our trade exports to Africa have been going up by 8 percent a year. And yet, the United States only has 4 percent of that market, only 4 percent of that market. This gives us an opportunity for win-win. It creates new jobs in the United States, and it will create new jobs in sub-Saharan Africa. And at the same time, it gives us tough language to combat illegal transshipment, the strongest language that we have seen to date. If there are violators, that country can be pulled out of the program and those who do so are severely punished under this act, with severe penalties. In terms of Africa's sovereignty, that issue has been raised. Let me reiterate that the African countries themselves, every one, supports this bill. This bill limits eligible countries to those who make progress with market-oriented economic reforms. There is a human rights abuse screen that we have put in this bill, and we took care of some of the labor concerns with the amendment offered by the ranking member of the Committee on International Relations. Now, when it comes to China, if anything, this bill has the potential of harming the Chinese textile industry, not helping it. Early this year, Karen Fedorko executive vice president of MAST Industries, testified to the Committee on Ways and Means that the bottom line is that, under this bill, Africa would become significantly more competitive and producers we currently work with in East Asia would shift their orders away from Asian vendors and towards some of our new contacts in Africa. Frankly, Africa's gain is China's loss under this bill. Let me reiterate. In many ways, Africa is in the balance. Without efforts today to bring Africa into the world economy, without efforts like the African Growth and Opportunity Act, Africa could become permanently marginalized, Africans would suffer, and the American people would not escape the consequences. To reject this legislation is to say we do not have any room on the economic map for Africa in the new century. I do not think my colleagues want to go that way. I ask for their support for this bipartisan legislation. (Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time in opposition to the amendment, although I support it.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, although I support the amendment, I will claim the time in opposition.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment. It will encourage the development of small business in Africa. It reiterates what this bill is trying to accomplish by promoting trade and investment. I have had the opportunity to travel to Africa with the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). We together had the opportunity to see small businesses across the continent at work. Small businesses in Africa are thriving. And we are building partnerships with small businesses in the United States. And this bill, improved with this amendment, will advance these goals. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) and ask unanimous consent that she be permitted to control that time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo), chairman of the Small Business Subcommittee on Tax, Finance, and Exports.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, African textile and apparel exports to the United States last year were $570 million. This is .86 percent of the total U.S. textile and apparel imports, less than 1 percent. The U.S. International Trade Committee reports that this volume would increase maybe 25, 50 percent, to just over 1 percent if this bill passes. Is that any kind of threat to the most powerful economy in the history of the world? No, it is not. Opponents also miss the point that today all but two African countries have no textile quotas. That is 46 sub-Saharan countries. So why have we not seen the transshipment problem we have heard about today in these 46 countries? This bill has safeguards against transshipment. One is that it provides for a review of its textile provisions by requiring the executive to report to us in Congress on the growth of textile and apparel imports from Africa, and if there is a transshipment problem discovered, and there is no reason to believe there would be one, today there is none, we checked with Customs, there is none, but if there is, we can simply pull that country out of the program and this bill establishes a way to do that. Let me say that most everyone in this body, Democrat and Republican, have been working to promote U.S. trade and investment in Africa. Why? It increases the standard of living of Africans, it increases the standard of living of people in the United States. One hundred thirty- three thousand jobs right now are dependent upon exports to Africa that will increase under this bill. This bill is bipartisan. It has been years in the making. We have held hearings on this bill. We have built this huge bipartisan support of Republicans and Democrats for this bill. I have heard some comments about the environment. For us on the committee, we have been holding hearings on the environment in Africa. We have programs like the Campfire Program in Zimbabwe, like the Ndeki Forest Program in the Congo, that we are supporting. We will continue to do that. But this bill need to be passed today, this Trade and Investment Opportunity Act for America and for Africa.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, Mr. Speaker, and the rule under which this bill will be considered is so important because it would fundamentally alter U.S. relations with many nations of Africa. Africa should and deserves to be treated as a trade partner, not a perpetual-aid partner. This bill treats Africa as a trade partner. That is why this bill had such strong bipartisan support in the Subcommittee on Africa and our full Committee on International Relations, strong bipartisan support, as a matter of fact unanimous support, in the Committee on Ways and Means of this House. What this bill does is to identify those African nations that are committed to reform and it identifies these as the countries the United States will develop a special economic relationship with. These countries, countries that are giving themselves the best chance to develop through a partnership with American businesses, will take part in annual trade forums with the United States, just as we hold with nations of Asia. They will also have greater opportunities to sell their goods to American consumers, who will also benefit. These are real benefits that should be incentives to African countries to continue their reform path allowing their citizens to reach their potential. In debating this legislation, we should appreciate that this is a critical juncture for Africa. There has been real political and economic progress on the continent over the last several years. Nigeria, the most populous nation in Africa, long suffering from military dictatorships, recently held Democratic elections, which I and other Members of this body had the privilege to observe. And, hopefully, Nigeria is turning itself around with its new reforms, with its new democracy. Other African nations are making similar progress. Mozambique, recently war torn, is moving toward democracy; and with it they have had a set of economic reforms, the very reforms encouraged by this legislation. As a result, what has happened in Mozambique? They have seen their economy grow at better than 12 percent a year over the last few years. Yet we need to be realistic. In many ways Africa is in the balance. Without efforts today to bring Africa into the world economy, without efforts like the African Growth and Opportunity Act, Africa could become permanently marginalized. Africans would suffer. And the American people would not escape the consequences. This legislation is not a fix-all. Its rejection, though, would be a complete disregard of our interest in economically engaging with Africa at this critical time. To reject this legislation is to say we do not have any room on the economic map for Africa in this new century. I do not think we will go that way.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, as the clocks move forward on December 31, there is a strong likelihood that some computers will fail to recognize the year 2000, instead rolling back to January 1, 1900. A Y2K-initiated computer crash could have disastrous impacts on many aspects of daily life, ranging from transportation and aviation, data processing, health care and financial services. Indeed, American society could be confronted by an extended period of technological and economic duress. Instead of taking a proactive approach to solving the Y2K problem, many businesses, large and small, find themselves expending time and energy on liability issues. This bipartisan legislation, of which I am an original cosponsor, addresses this concern and creates incentives for businesses to address the impending Y2K problem by creating a legal framework by which Y2K-related results will be resolved. We must not permit a climate to foster in which businesses, paralyzed by fear of unrestrained lawsuits, fail to take action that would adequately address this problem.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Madam Chairman, we can create a financial structure that provides lower costs, increased access, better services, and greater convenience to consumers. Every consumer in this country is connected in some way to the financial services industry. Nearly every economic transaction involves the exchange of money or the promise of a future exchange of money, meaning that every day every consumer feels the weight of an outdated and overburdened system of regulation in the form of higher costs. The legislation we are voting on today provides consumers with significant relief from these costs. Indeed, with the efficiencies that could be realized from increased competition among banking, securities and insurance providers under this legislation, the Treasury Department tells us that consumers will ultimately save as much as 5 percent, or $15 billion per year in the aggregate. As a member of the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Madam Chairman, we have the opportunity here today to accomplish what no other Congress of the last 20 years has been able to, and that is to modernize the depression era laws governing our financial services sector. In doing so, we will create a structure that provides lower costs, increased access, better services, and greater convenience to consumers. Every consumer is connected in some way to the financial services industry. Nearly every economic transaction involves the exchange of money or the promise of a future exchange of money--meaning that every day, every consumer in this country feels the weight of an outdated and overburdened system of regulation, in the form of higher costs. The legislation we are voting on today provides consumers with significant relief from these costs. Indeed, with the efficiencies that could be realized from increased competition among banking, securities, and insurance providers under this legislation, the Treasury Department has estimated that consumers may ultimately save as much as 5 percent-- or $15 billion per year in the aggregate. This monumental legislation is good for consumers and it is good for America. At this time, I would like to commend Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier for his work on the compromise language for Title IV, and take a few moments to clarify this language. The Title IV of the Dreier substitute amendment to H.R. 10 requires that certain companies with nonfinancial activities that propose to acquire control of a savings association must notify the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve in the same manner as a notice of nonbanking activities is filed with the Board under section 4(j) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. This notice would be in addition to the application that is already filed with the Office of Thrift Supervision. The Federal Reserve would have the opportunity to review and take action on the notice prior to the applicable time periods under section 4(j). The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of Thrift Supervision have testified that affiliations between commercial companies and thrift institutions have not been a cause for regulatory concern. Thus, we do not intend or anticipate that the Federal Reserve Board will treat the affiliation of commercial companies and savings associations as giving rise, per se, to undue concentration of resources, anti-competitive effects, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices. Rather, it is intended that the Federal Reserve Board will examine proposed transactions for unusual or extraordinary circumstances that would have an adverse effect on a subsidiary savings association that outweighs the public benefits of the transaction. Again, as a member of the House Banking Committee, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.