Jerry Weller

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, we are having the traditional debate today, and that is, when spending is a little tight, do we raise taxes, or do we bring spending under control? Our friends on the other side of the aisle are using their traditional argument to raise taxes, and we are saying that we should keep spending under control. We are in a recession; world war. Clearly, we do have a deficit. We all admit to that. And every time we have been in a recession, we have had a deficit. Every time we have been at war, we have had a deficit. As the Congressional Budget Office has stated, 72 percent of the deficit is a result of the economy and the war against terrorism. Clearly, if we want to get this economy moving again, we need to bring spending under control and continue to lower taxes for American workers. And not one real-world economist has said that we should increase taxes during a recession. They all say, including Alan Greenspan, that we should lower taxes. I would note that if our friends are successful in stalling or repealing the Bush tax cut, this is what they will do: They will increase taxes on married couples. Our friends would increase taxes on the death tax for small-business people and family farmers. They would increase taxes on small-business people and entrepreneurs. They would also increase taxes on parents who have children, because they would stop the implementation of doubling the child tax credit. As Secretary O'Neill has said, ``Any delay or repeal of the Bush tax cut is clearly a tax increase.'' And he also said, and I can quote him from his testimony before the House Committee on Ways and Means, ``Raising taxes would stifle the process of getting Americans back to work. This is a bad idea as our recovery is struggling to take hold.'' My colleagues, over a million Americans are out of work. We do not need a tax increase. We need to get this economy moving again. Vote aye on the previous question, aye on the rule, and aye for the resolution to maintain the tax cut.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, today our House has an opportunity, an opportunity to go on the Record and speak clearly of whether or not we should continue lowering taxes for American workers. Today we are at war. The war on terrorism, our efforts to strengthen our homeland security, and the current recession have caused a fiscal deficit in our budget. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, they point out that the recession, combined with the war on terrorism and our efforts to protect our homeland security, account for 72 percent of our current deficit. So almost three-quarters of our deficit has been caused by the economy as well as the war. Some on the other side are saying we need to raise taxes in order to eliminate that deficit. And the way they want to raise taxes is they are calling for the repeal of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, something we commonly know as the Bush tax cut which will give them more money to spend here in Washington. Well, today we have a choice, a choice of higher taxes or getting this economy growing again. Let us remember that when President Bush became President he inherited a weakening economy. At that time the President proposed taking one-fifth, 20 percent of the budget surplus that resulted from the fiscal responsibilities of this good Congress, and giving it back to the American worker so the American worker can spend it at home for their families and get the economy moving again. And we succeeded with bipartisan support in passing the Bush tax cut, helping our economy. We lowered rates for small business and entrepreneurs. And we have to remember it is small business and entrepreneurs that are the engines of economic growths. In fact, 80 percent of those who filed taxes under the top two tax brackets are small business people and entrepreneurs who have shops and businesses on Liberty Street, the downtown in my home town of Morris, Illinois, as well as on Main Street all over America. We also passed efforts to wipe out the marriage tax penalty, to wipe out the death tax which helps small business and family farmers, to increase contributions and incentives for retirement savings and to double the child tax credit. If we repeal the Bush tax cut, that is all gone. It is a tax increase on the American worker. And there is no real-world economist today who says that in a time of war and recession that you should increase taxes. But if you repeal or stall the Bush tax cut, we know it is a tax increase. Well, the Bush tax cut was working. Economists were telling us that late August around Labor Day that the economy was beginning to grow again. Then the terrible tragedy of September 11 occurred, costing thousands of Americans their lives, terrible tragedy, put us into a war; and unfortunately the psychological blow of that terrorist attack also impacted the confidence of American consumers as well as American investors. And over a million Americans have since lost their jobs since the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, Pennsylvania, and here in Washington at the Pentagon. Today we are at work. We are strengthening our homeland security. And unfortunately we are also in an economic recession. Again, no real- world economists says that we should increase taxes during a recession. Tax increases hurt our economy, they hurt the confidence of our investors, and they take money out of the pocketbooks of American workers who can better spend that at home taking care of their families' needs. We must keep spending under control. True fiscal responsibility is keeping spending under control. Fiscal responsibility is not increasing taxes, as my friends on the other side of the aisle today will be advocating. Repealing the Bush tax cut is a tax increase. Simple. Today we will have the opportunity for the House to go on the record for every Member of this House, Republican and Democrat, to say they want to increase taxes or we protect the tax cut for the American worker and get this economy moving again. Let us remember, repealing the Bush tax cut is a tax increase. I ask this House to vote aye on this rule, and I urge Members of both parties to vote against a tax increase and vote aye in favor of maintaining the full implementation of the Bush tax cut, helping the American worker and let us get this economy moving again.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, according to the Congressional Budget Office, repealing the Bush tax cut will increase tax revenue by about $360 billion. Now, when we increase tax revenue when people are already making plans based upon that tax cut, real-world economists call that a tax increase.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 312) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the scheduled tax relief provided for by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 passed by a bipartisan majority in Congress should not be suspended or repealed.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today our House of Representatives has the opportunity to speak very clearly on whether or not we should continue to lower taxes for American workers or to raise taxes on American workers. The war on terrorism, homeland security, and economic recession has caused a fiscal deficit in our budget. Some are now calling for repeal of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, something commonly know as the Bush tax cut, and they argue that higher taxes will give Washington more money to spend here in Washington. So today before us we have a choice: higher taxes or getting the economy moving again. Let us remember at the beginning of last year: when President Bush became President, he inherited a weakening economy. The President proposed taking 20 percent of the budget surplus resulting from our Congress' fiscal responsibility and giving it back to the American worker so they could spend it at home for their own families. We passed the President's tax cut in June, it was signed into law, and the President succeeded in lowering rates for small business and entrepreneurs, the engines of economic growth. We wiped out the marriage tax penalty, we wiped out the death tax, we increased opportunities for retirement savings, and we doubled the child tax credit. And our tax cut was working. Economists were telling us in late August and by Labor Day that the economy was beginning to recover. Then the tragedy of September 11 occurred, a terrorist attack that cost thousands of Americans their lives and caused a psychological blow to the confidence of business investors as well as consumers. Today we have seen as a result of that terrorist attack on our economy that over 1 million Americans have lost their jobs. Mr. Speaker, today we are at war against terrorism, we are building our homeland security, and we are in an economic recession. We must get this economy moving again. We must create jobs for those who lack work. Today, no real-world economists have called for a tax increase in time of recession. They point out that tax increases hurt our economy and that tax increases take money out of the pockets of America's workers and consumers, making it harder for them to meet the needs of their families. We must keep spending under control, and true fiscal responsibility is keeping spending under control. Fiscal responsibility is not increasing taxes. This House has the opportunity to go on the record for higher taxes, or to maintain the Bush plan to lower taxes, which will be implemented over the rest of this decade. Repealing the Bush tax cut is a tax increase. Vote ``aye'' to not impose higher taxes and to keep the Bush tax cut in place. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, before I yield some time here, I yield myself such time as I may consume to remind my good friends on the other side of the aisle that we are at war against terrorism, that we are in an economic recession, and that a ``no'' vote on this resolution is a vote for a tax increase during an economic recession. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson), a leader in the effort to help working families in her home State of New Mexico.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, we have additional speakers.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I would once again remind my colleagues on the other sides that today's vote is whether or not we maintain the Bush tax cut or increase taxes. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), an advocate of helping working families go back to work by getting this economy moving again.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), a real leader in helping bring jobs back to the great State of Alabama, as some of the American workers have been laid off by the terrorist attacks of September 11.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, the Bush tax cut is already law, so it is already in effect.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I will make my question quick. A few years ago my friends on the other side of the aisle said when we wanted to slow the rate of growth and increase some funding for Medicare, that was called a cut. So the same definition would apply. If the gentleman wants to repeal the Bush tax cut, that is a tax increase.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I will yield myself some time.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I will yield myself some time.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, some have advocated repealing, delaying, or killing the implementation of these tax cuts. That is bad news for the economy. If Members look at what is in the tax cuts that are before us today, what begins getting phased in in the tax cut, because we were unable to do it all in the same year, are some pretty important provisions. One is our efforts to eliminate the marriage tax penalty. I think Members agree that under our Tax Code, it is unfair that married working couples pay more in taxes than two single people living together. We essentially wipe out the marriage tax penalty in the President's cut. We help small business by eliminating the death tax, which takes away up to 55 percent of the family business when the founder passes on. The Bush tax cut also included additional retirement savings benefits which are phased in over the next few years. And, of course, we double the child tax credit, currently $500, raising that to $1,000. And for those in the top two tax brackets, the 39 percent and the 28 percent, we lower those tax brackets from 39 to 35 and from 28 to 25. Those are all in jeopardy if we go along with those who want to raise taxes by suspending those tax cuts. I have yet to find a real-world economist who tells us that it is a good idea to raise taxes during a recession. Some of those who have advocated suspending, killing, repealing, stopping the Bush tax cuts say it is really not a tax increase because those tax cuts have not gone into effect yet; but they were the same ones who a few years ago said that if you slow down the rate of growth on Medicare, that it is a Medicare cut, so we are using the same definition. The bottom line is suspending, stalling, repealing, delaying the Bush tax cut is a tax increase. I would note a couple of key things. The Secretary of the Treasury was before the House Committee on Ways and Means today. When asked what is the economic impact of a tax increase, of delaying, stalling, repealing or killing the Bush tax cut, he said it would be devastating to the economy. Over a million Americans have lost their jobs and more would lose their jobs with a tax increase. I would note on the rate reductions that 17 million small business owners and entrepreneurs pay taxes under the individual income tax rates, the two top brackets that are going to be phased in. Think about it. Who is it that is going to bring about the revival of this economy? It is not the major corporations, the big guys. It is the little guys and gals, the entrepreneurs, the small businesspeople. Eighty percent of those who pay taxes under the top two brackets, the two brackets being phased in, are small businesspeople and entrepreneurs. We know they generate the most jobs. We think as Members of this House about our neighbors, if every small business on Main Street or Liberty Street in my hometown of Morris, Illinois, hired one more worker, what that would mean. And, of course, raising taxes on those small businesspeople will make it much harder to provide those jobs. From a consumer's standpoint, if you raise taxes, you take money out of their pocket. When consumers have less money to meet the needs of their families, they are not able to spend it in our local stores, in our local businesses, buying products and services. When a consumer buys a pickup truck, there is an autoworker who makes it. When a consumer buys a PC, a personal computer or a laptop, there is a worker somewhere that produces that; and a tax increase will make it much more difficult. Mr. Speaker, we have the opportunity tomorrow to go on the record: Are you for continuing the tax cut, or are you for raising taxes? Tomorrow this House will have the opportunity to vote for keeping the tax cut or for raising taxes. It is a simple choice. Everyone will have the opportunity to go on the record. I urge and ask bipartisan support for preserving the tax cut and ensuring that we get this economy moving forward again and give hundreds of thousands of Americans the opportunity to go back to work.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, we have an important vote in this body tomorrow, an important vote that has a major economic impact. Our Nation is in a recession. When President Bush became President, he inherited a weakening economy. In fact, his White House housewarming was essentially a weakening economy, and it turned into a recession. Under the President's leadership, we passed a tax cut. We decided to take 20 percent of the budget surplus that resulted from our efforts to balance the budget and take that 20 cents on the dollar, the surplus, and give it back to the American people in tax relief. That tax cut was signed into law in June. By August, economists were noting that the economy was beginning to get better, and then the tragedy of the terrorist attack on September 11 occurred, the terrorist attack that cost thousands of lives, and since September 11 has cost over a million Americans their jobs. This House has responded, and of course we twice have passed an economic stimulus plan. I would note that on December 21 this House passed and sent to the Senate an economic stimulus plan to revive our economy. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to act. The bad news today is, and it was announced by the Senate majority leader, that the Senate was going to shelve any effort to revitalize this economy. That is bad news. Tomorrow we have another important vote that is going to have an impact on the economy, and that is regarding a proposed tax increase which Senator Kennedy, Senator Jeffords and others have begun advocating. Some have been advocating that we suspend, repeal, or delay. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, on January 24, 2002, I inadvertently missed a vote because of an electrical failure in my office which caused the buzzer system to malfunction. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on this important legislation which amends the Higher Education Act of 1965 to establish fixed interest rates for student and parent borrowers.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, my home State of Illinois had bad news this week. Like many communities across America, one of our Nation's largest employers, Motorola, headquartered in Illinois, announced they were going to lay off 8,900 workers yesterday; 8,900 men and women who had to come home to their families and tell their children they no longer had a job. Motorola is just one major employer who has already lost one-third of their employees through layoffs in the past year. Nationwide we have seen 800,000 workers who have lost their jobs, 8,000 a week, since the terrorist attack on September 11. That is why we are here tonight, because we want to help these American workers. I want to help these American workers. My Republican colleagues want to help these American workers. My hope is my Democratic colleagues will join with us in helping these American workers who have lost their jobs. Frankly, I think we all want these workers to have the opportunity to go back to work, because every good hard-working American deserves an opportunity to work. Let us remember one basic economic fact, and that is that investment creates jobs, investment grows the economy. Our bipartisan legislation that is before us rewards investment. The 30 percent expensing, the accelerated depreciation, rewards investment; investment in computers, investment in pickup trucks, investment in machinery and other equipment. Let us remember that when an employer purchases this type of equipment, there is an employee that makes this type of equipment, as well as is required to operate it. That creates jobs. We also have to recognize that there are American companies losing money this year, and they need investment capital. That is why the NOL carry-back, the 5-year opportunity to go back and recover from a profitable year some extra money that can be invested this year in creating jobs, again rewards investment. The bottom line is we want to reward investment, we want to create jobs. This is an opportunity for us to work together. Frankly, it is a bipartisan bill. My hope is our Democratic friends will set aside their rhetoric and work to help the American worker. Let us pass this bill. We need economic security. We need to help workers. Let us support this legislation. My hope is the other body will take it up.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me this time. As I listen here very patiently to some of the partisan political rhetoric and excuses of why not to do something, I would like to ask this House to come back to why we are here. And the question is, Do we want to save the jobs of working Americans? Do we want to give working Americans the opportunity to go back to work? I know I do. I know my Republican colleagues on the Republican side do. My hope is some of our Democratic colleagues will join with us in saving American jobs tonight. Let us remember when President Bush was sworn in, he inherited a weakening economy. The September 11 attack on America had a psychological impact on our Nation, causing consumers and business investors to step back from decisions to invest and decisions to buy. It has come at a terrible cost, a cost where we have now seen, on average, 8,000 Americans lose their jobs every week. Today in the Chicago area it was announced that Motorola was going to lay off 9,400 more employees. Think about that. 9,400 moms and dads are going home this week to tell their children that they no longer have a job. I want to do something about that. I want those citizens and constituents of mine in Illinois to get their jobs back. We have to remember that it was investment and creation of jobs that drove this economy in the past decade. The Economic Security and Recovery Act provides that opportunity to invest in the creation of new jobs. I would point to two provisions. Technology created one-third of the jobs in the economy in the last decade, according to the Federal Reserve, and it was investment in technology that created those jobs in companies like Motorola. I note that two provisions in this package can make a difference, a 30 percent expensing, rewarding investment in computers and pickup trucks or automobiles. Somebody has to make and operate them. The 30 percent expensing will reward investment and creation of those jobs, giving someone an opportunity to make that product; and, of course, the worker hired to operate that product. We also have to recognize there are companies losing money this year, particularly as a result of the consequences of September 11. While the net operating loss, the NOL carry-back allowing companies to go back 5 years against a profitable year, essentially get a little bit of a tax refund, which will free up capital so they can invest back in their company and protect current jobs. Mr. Speaker, let us remember what this is all about. I want to go home at the end of this year, before Christmas, having done something for the people that work and raise families in the district that I represent. There is always an excuse not to do something. We are hearing those excuses from the other side. Let us pass this legislation. It is bipartisan legislation with bipartisan support here in the House, as well as bipartisan support in the Senate. Our job here in the House of Representatives is to pass this legislation and get America working again.

Mr. WELLER

Mr. WELLER. I want to thank the gentlewoman from New Mexico for yielding and also commend her for her leadership, particularly in technology and research, which is so important to the future of the economy of our country. Our country has a great challenge before us. Obviously, we are working to win this war against terrorism as a result of the terrorist attack, this horrible attack on our country on September 11; but also a key part of our effort in the war on terrorism is to address the economic impact of the terrorist act on September 11. President Bush inherited a weakening economy. Economists point out it was in the spring and summer of 2000 that the economy began to turn. When he was sworn in as President in January of this year, the economy was already starting to weaken. Unfortunately, there was a psychological impact of September 11, a terrible day when our Nation was attacked by terrorists on our own soil. Of course, as a result of that, many things happened. One of those is there was a psychological impact on our economy. Business decision- makers and consumers who had previously made decisions to move forward on investments and purchases stepped back from those investments and decisions to spend money. Of course, now we have seen the result. Thousands if not tens of thousands of residents of the State of Illinois where I live as well as New Mexico and all across our country have lost their jobs as a result of the downturn in our economy. In fact, today there are hundreds of steelworkers in the south suburbs that I represent that are here in town expressing their concern and calling on the Congress and the President to work together to find a way to get this economy moving again. I want to point out that the House has been doing its job. Seven weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed legislation to revitalize this economy, the Economic Security and Recovery Act, legislation designed to encourage investment by business decision- makers, to create capital for investment as well as to reward investment and the creation of jobs and also to put more money in the pocketbooks of consumers to spend. I would note that some of the key provisions of the legislation that we passed and sent to the Senate obtained strong bipartisan support here in the House. I have been very, very disappointed in the other body and particularly in the leadership of the other body and their failure to move forward on economic security and economic stimulus. I particularly want to point to one of the provisions in the legislation that the gentlewoman from New Mexico and I have been working together on, as have many other Members of this House. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. WELLER. I certainly will, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. WELLER. That is, legislation to draw attention to the expensing provision that is in the Economic Security and Recovery Act of 2001. When you think about it, we are looking for ways to encourage investment and the creation of jobs. If we can encourage an employer or a business to invest in a personal computer or hardware, a pickup truck, a car, we have to remember that there are American workers who produce those products. So if we encourage business to buy them, there is a worker who is at the other end where they are being produced who is going to keep their job. We also have to realize that when someone purchases that pickup truck or that car or that other piece of equipment, there is going to be a worker that is going to operate it as well. So really any incentive that is going to attract investment is going to help create jobs. I would note that the 30 percent expensing provision that is in this legislation which means that a business would buy a personal computer, for example, and they would be able to deduct 30 percent of the purchase price of that asset in the first year. Currently they have to, of course, depreciate a computer over 5 years. This is much more attractive. It will encourage business to purchase hardware. I would also note, as my colleague from New Mexico pointed out, in the Economic Security and Recovery Act that the House of Representatives passed that we also provided for an increase in expensing for small business, which means that small business would have the opportunity to deduct 100 percent of the purchase of capital assets. Currently it is $24,000. We increase that to $35,000, a significant increase, to help small business, allowing them to deduct more from their taxable income, freeing up capital that they can then turn right around and invest in the creation of jobs. When it comes to real estate, businesses are out there, they are working in real estate that employs the building trades, carpenters and plasterers and others. When they make improvements in their buildings, we call that buildout or tenant improvements, we change the depreciation schedule for that in this legislation as well. Currently it is 39 years, a ridiculous period of time. We reduce it to 15 years for inside buildout of a business. The bottom line is we have accelerated cost recovery and we have expensing as well as depreciation reform in this legislation, 30 percent expensing. We increase the small business allowance up to $35,000, and we reform how we depreciate inside improvements in buildings, providing jobs. That is the bottom line. I would particularly note from the technology sector's perspective that in our legislation that the House passed 6 weeks ago, we also recognize there are companies losing money this year. These companies losing money are looking for capital so they can reinvest and, of course, create jobs and preserve the jobs of their workers today. Under our legislation, we allow a company that is losing money this year to carry back for 5 years. What that means is they can take this year's loss and credit against a previous profitable year sometime in the last 5 years, essentially get a tax refund, and they can use that money to reinvest in the creation of jobs. The accelerated cost recovery, the expensing and depreciation reform, helping companies that are losing money this year, is going to create jobs. I would also note in the Economic Security and Recovery Act that we also help the middle class. We have to remember, the vast majority of Americans are middle class. In the legislation we passed out of the House, the middle class tax rate is the 28 percent tax rate. That affects folks who make $60,000 a year. That is average middle class in the district that I represent in the south suburbs and South Side of Chicago. We lower their tax rate, which is currently 28 percent, effective immediately of January of 2002 we lower it to 25 percent that is going to lower taxes, giving more spending money to middle-class taxpayers. We also want to help low income and working families too, those who probably never pay income taxes today and may not have benefitted directly and received a tax rebate this year from the President's tax cut that we all worked together to pass earlier this year. I would note that 24 million Americans will receive a $300 dollar stimulus payment under the legislation we passed, extra spending money. I am one of those who believes that low income families when they receive that stimulus payment check, they are going to tax it and they are going to spend it. That is going to help the economy, creating jobs and demand for goods and services. Now, one thing I noted as we discussed this economy, unfortunately, hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost their jobs, tens of thousands in the Chicago area that I represent. I would note that in the Economic Security and Recovery Act, legislation we passed 6 weeks ago in the House, that we provide help for those who are unemployed, and we provide help for those who may have lost their health insurance coverage. In fact, we provide $12 billion in assistance for the unemployment benefits, as well as covering the cost of health care. So we put together a pretty good package. I would note the Economic Security and Recovery Act, legislation that passed this House of Representatives with a bipartisan support, was passed by the House of Representatives 6 weeks ago. When you think about it, when Americans are in jeopardy of losing their jobs, I am one who believes that Congress needs to act very, very quickly and put on President Bush's desk legislation to get this economy moving again. One of the most important reasons is not only to provide incentives to invest and give consumers more money to spend, but also to give the psychological confidence to business investors and consumers that it is okay to invest again, that it is okay to spend money on their family's needs, and that their job is not going to be in jeopardy. So my hope is we can work things out with the Senate quickly and get on President Bush's desk as soon as possible legislation to revitalize and stimulate this economy. The bottom line is we want to provide economic security for all Americans. We want to protect those who have jobs, and those who recently lost their jobs, we want to give them the opportunity to go back to work and provide a safety net while they are out of work.

Mr. WELLER. If the gentlewoman will yield, I absolutely agree with you. If you think about it, the globe's population, billions of people, 96 percent of the consumers on the Earth today live outside the boarders of the United States. So if we want to increase the opportunity to find new markets for American farm products, for technology, for manufactured goods, for entertainment, we have to increase our access to international markets. Ninety six percent of the globe's population. Trade Promotion Authority, it is kind of a funny name, but the bottom line is all it means is that we give President Bush the full negotiating power he needs to break down trade barriers. Without the full negotiating power, our trading partners and competitors and those who are trying to open up markets into their markets are not going to take us seriously, unless the Congress gives President Bush the full negotiating power that he needs. I was so very, very pleased that we passed out of the House this past week with bipartisan support legislation giving President Bush what he needs. I think it is a shame there is almost 130 bilateral trade agreements, and bilateral means a trade agreement between two different countries; but out of 130 bilateral trade agreements, only about three involve the United States. Something is wrong when the globe's greatest economy, our country, is unable to negotiate the kind of trade agreements we need to break down barriers and reduce tariff barriers and other barriers that stand in the way of markets for American manufactured goods, for farm products, for technology. That is why it is so very, very important to give the President what he needs, and that is the full negotiating power that Trade Promotion Authority gives to the President.