Home > Congressional Record > November 14, 2019 > House Section > Page H8845

November 14, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 182 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

UNITED STATES EXPORT FINANCE AGENCY ACT OF 2019; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 182
(House of Representatives - November 14, 2019)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Pages H8845-H8870]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

UNITED STATES EXPORT FINANCE AGENCY ACT OF 2019

General Leave

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on H.R. 4863 and to insert extraneous materials thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 695 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4863.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

{time} 1409

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4863) to promote the competitiveness of the United States, to
reform and reauthorize the United States Export Finance Agency, and for
other purposes, with Mr. Blumenauer in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of
the Committee on Financial Services.
The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. McHenry) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4863, the United
States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019.
H.R. 4863 reauthorizes and makes key improvements to the job-creating
Export-Import Bank. Let me begin by describing why the Ex-Im Bank is so
important.
The Ex-Im Bank was established 85 years ago and is the official
export credit agency of the United States. Its mission is to promote
the export of U.S. goods and services in order to help create and
sustain jobs in the United States.
Over the last 10 years, the Ex-Im Bank has supported more than 1.5
million American jobs at no cost to the taxpayer, financed more than
$255 billion in U.S. exports, and remitted more than $3.4 billion in
deficit-reducing receipts to the Treasury.
In my district, the Ex-Im Bank is currently financing $269 million
worth of exports from 13 different exporters, including 10 small
businesses.
Ex-Im does not compete with the private sector but, instead, fills in
gaps when the private sector lacks the capacity or willingness to
provide the financing required by U.S. exporters.
During the financial crisis, the Ex-Im Bank was an important source
of financing when private capital was simply unavailable to many
businesses. Ex-Im estimates that during fiscal year 2010, in the depths
of the financial crisis, it supported 227,000 jobs at more than 3,300
companies.
The Bank also plays a key role in leveling the international playing
field by offsetting the financing offered by foreign export credit
agencies. The Ex-Im Bank is one of more than 100 export credit agencies
around the world that help their home-country exporters compete in the
global markets.
If we fail to reauthorize the Bank, American businesses will be
harmed, and thousands of jobs will be lost.
Unfortunately, in 2015, the Republican leadership in the House
allowed the Bank's charter to expire for the first time in the Bank's
history. At that time, a number of countries, including China,
celebrated the Bank's closure because of the competitive advantage it
gave them over U.S. businesses and workers.
Later, Republicans in the Senate hobbled Ex-Im for 4 years by
refusing to confirm board directors, which prevented them from having a
quorum. Ex-Im reported that it was unable to approve $40 billion worth
of transactions during this period, which would

[[Page H8846]]

have supported an estimated 250,000 jobs.

{time} 1415

H.R. 4863 is intended to renew the confidence of U.S. exporters in
the Ex-Im Bank while also sending a message to the world that the U.S.
is ready and is prepared to aggressively compete in overseas export
markets.
H.R. 4863 reauthorizes the Ex-Im Bank for 10 years and increases the
Bank's lending authority from $135 billion to $175 billion. The bill
strengthens support for small businesses, which are the engine of
growth in our economy, and it creates an Office of Minority and Women
Inclusion as well as an Office of Territorial Exporting to support
exporters in Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other U.S.
territories.
The bill also focuses the Bank's attention on protecting the
environment by creating an office for renewable energy exports,
strengthening the Bank's environmental policies and procedures, and
encouraging greater accountability with respect to local communities
that could be negatively affected by Bank-supported projects.
Importantly, H.R. 4863 also includes procedures to avoid a lapse in
the Board's quorum so that the Bank can maintain its full operational
capacity even when the Senate is unable to confirm Board directors.
The bill includes a number of provisions to ensure that Ex-Im
financing does not inadvertently support bad actors. For example, the
bill prohibits financing for the Chinese military, the Chinese
intelligence services, and any other bad actors, including anyone who
has criminally violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or has
violated U.S. intellectual property laws.
Moreover, H.R. 4863 would require the parties to an Ex-Im transaction
to certify that neither they nor any of their subsidiaries engage in
activities in violation of U.S.-sanctioned laws.
So, Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that we reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank
so that our businesses, U.S. businesses large and small, will have the
financing support they need to compete in the global markets while
preserving and creating American jobs at home.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Today I rise in opposition to H.R. 4863. The bill we are debating
today encapsulates so much of what is wrong in Congress today.
This is a partisan bill to reauthorize what a bipartisan group
supports, and it is a failure of legislating. That is why we have a
partisan bill on the House floor to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank.
This bill passed the House Financial Services Committee by three
votes, with Republicans all in opposition and a few of my Democratic
colleagues in opposition, as well. To say this is disappointing,
though, is an understatement.
Earlier this year, Chairwoman Waters and I joined together to
introduce a bipartisan Ex-Im reauthorization bill, and it is here in
the House known as H.R. 3407. It included sensible reforms for Ex-Im
that both parties could support.
The chairwoman and I spent hours negotiating this package, but,
unfortunately, she didn't have the support from her fellow Democrats to
bring that to markup, and that is a sad thing. It is a sad thing
because, in that bill, we took on the generational challenge that is
incumbent upon us as American policymakers to be sensible about, which
is the threat and aggression of China, both the economic and military
aggressiveness of that regime.
The bill that we negotiated would have served as the most
comprehensive and the longest extension to an authorization of the Ex-
Im Bank, and it had a chance to get the President's signature and
actually be legislated in the Senate, as well.
Sadly, the Democrats walked away from that agreement because it
limited Ex-Im's subsidies to some businesses owned by the Chinese
Communist Party. The Democratic majority stripped out all the reforms
we had agreed to, and what we are left with in this bill text is a
restatement of current law and current practice by the Export-Import
Bank on this list of Chinese businesses that the Bank cannot do
business with. They don't do business with them, and that creates
another glaring hole for abuse.
The President has a Statement of Administration Policy just issued
from the White House, and it says the President would veto this bill,
so it is not going to get signed into law.
Moreover, the Senate majority leader said this morning: ``'We're not
going to pass the House bill,' McConnell said.'' We do not want that
bill. ``We do want to extend Ex-Im. A logical place to do that would be
on the CR,'' on the continuing resolution, which will happen. That is
what is going to happen.
So those watching, those listening here, this is all a show; and at
the end of the day, this won't make it into law. We are going to have a
clean extension of this Bank, which is an important economic tool for
us.
In our bipartisan agreement, though, the most important compromise we
had reached is that provision to limit Ex-Im's support for the Chinese
Communist Party.
As we all know, Beijing poses a strategic threat to our national
interest through its economic and military aggression. We know about
the Chinese Government's shocking abuse of human rights. We see this in
Hong Kong and the suppression of freedom there.
We know the Chinese Government's true motives for the Belt and Road
Initiative and the Made in China 2025 initiative, and that is to extend
China's global dominance.
They are not a strategic ally; they are a threat. And if we are savvy
to this, we will ensure that we don't take an important tool of our
government and subsidize Beijing. If we want to counter Beijing's
ambitions, we shouldn't use Ex-Im to provide cheap financing for the
Chinese Communist Party.
To compete with Beijing, we cannot subsidize Beijing. It is bad
policy for Americans, and we should agree on that. And, in fact, we did
in the bill that Chairwoman Waters and I filed.

To be clear, Republicans support selling American goods and services
around the globe and in China. That is why we support the reset of the
trade arrangement with China that the President is negotiating. It is a
very important thing.
We also know that the Chinese Communist Party sits on $3 trillion of
dollar-denominated reserves. This debate is not about commerce; it is
about financial assistance. Why use a mechanism of our government to
subsidize the Chinese economy? Why would we do that? That is not sound
policy. That is not good policy.
And when we marked up this bill, the Democrats raised two interesting
counterarguments to this view. The first one was--amazingly and, I
think, absurdly--that the Financial Services Committee should not weigh
in on any international matter, even though at Ex-Im's creation, the
focus was on Marxist-Leninist countries and Soviet aggression
internationally. We wanted more trading partners to us in selling
American goods. Well, I think, likewise, we have a similar challenge
with China this day.
Even though Ex-Im has been used as a tool of foreign policy from the
very beginning, this argument was made in committee.
We also have important work that we do with oversight of the World
Bank, the International Monetary Fund, a number of global institutions
coming out of the financial services arena. All of these things fall
under the Financial Services Committee's purview, and Democrats on this
committee shouldn't opine that Ex-Im can't get into this. Ex-Im, at its
creation, got into it and continues to get into it; and that is the
nature of Ex-Im financing: to have more allies with us in opposition to
other regimes around the globe.
The second argument the Democrats put forth is that their partisan
bill has limits on China anyway because it bars Ex-Im from financing
the People's Liberation Army, which current law prevents American
companies from doing that directly. So it is a restatement of policy,
existing law.
It says that companies on the Department of Commerce's entity list
are banned from financing. Well, the joke's on that argument because
those people on the entity list, we can't do commerce with them--not
even a question of who subsidizes it or not.

[[Page H8847]]

So it is all a complete kabuki dance. And it is of no surprise to
folks watching or listening to this debate that Ex-Im doesn't provide
financial products to the submarine force of the Chinese Navy. Nice
try, very cute, but we don't do that.
However, Ex-Im does provide financing for companies that the Chinese
military can control to achieve Beijing's strategic objectives. In the
language of this bill, we will have a handy-dandy chart that no one at
home can read. We have a massive chart. It doesn't matter. We have a
long list of entities that Ex-Im could still subsidize that this bill
doesn't affect, does not touch.
So the Democrats put in this bill meaningless language for political
cover rather than to do something right and real for the American
economy. They don't have a response for the deep questions of Chinese
aggression.
Ex-Im does provide financing to companies like AsiaSat, which is
controlled by the Chinese Government and has helped Chinese security
forces crack down on protesters in western China. Again, the Democrats'
bill would do nothing to stop any of that, as one example.
And, of course, the Democrat bill does nothing to stop Ex-Im from
financing government-controlled companies that are acting contrary to
our national interests but which may not happen to be on this entity
list of the Commerce Department.
Take Huawei, for example, which Ex-Im had authorized transactions for
before the company was put onto the entity list in May. This is a
recent example.
Under the Democrats' bill, Ex-Im subsidies for Huawei were perfectly
fine in April, but in May were unacceptable. That is ridiculous. And it
is bad policy for the American taxpayer to subsidize Chinese
aggression.
By the same token, under the Democrats' bill, Ex-Im would safely
finance Chinese Government-controlled ZTE Corporation up until April 15
of 2018, when it was put on the Commerce's Denied Persons List. At that
point, Ex-Im would no longer be able to finance ZTE, except that it
could finance ZTE just 3 months later when it was taken off the list.
Is anyone confused? Yes, you should be confused. This is the type of
incoherent nonsense that this partisan bill has in it. It is not good
for our national security. It is not smart policy. It is not good
policy.
So, as a reminder, ZTE is China's second largest producer of
telecommunications equipment, and it was involved in violations of our
export control and sanctions laws with respect to Iran and North Korea.
According to the Democrats' bill, taxpayer assistance should be flowing
through Ex-Im Bank to ZTE. I don't think that is really what they want,
but that is what their legislative text does.
These are just a few of the many examples of companies controlled by
the Chinese Communist Party that the Democrat majority wants the
Export-Import Bank to cater to under this bill.
Again, we can't let that happen. We should not let that happen. That
is not good policy. It is not commensurate with where we are as a
nation with this rising threat of China.
I want to reiterate my support of an extension of the Ex-Im Bank's
authorities to ensure that the Bank remains open to support U.S. jobs
and exports and job creation around the globe, but with a caveat that
we should not be doing it in China to fund their aggression.
So I urge a ``no'' vote on this bill. We will have an extension of
the Bank. It will happen. It will be a bipartisan vote.
This, though, is a bad bill that does not deserve to pass the House
of Representatives. And even if it does pass the House of
Representatives, it is going nowhere in the Senate. And even if it
passes the Senate, the President says he is going to veto it.

So let's think calmly and rationally about it. Let's not waste the
people's time here in the House of Representatives with a needless
debate on something that is going to go nowhere. Let's actually work on
something that could take us somewhere.
We had a bipartisan bill. Sadly, the majority walked away from it.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to remind this body that
Mr. McHenry is one of the ones responsible for the nonreauthorization
of the Ex-Im Bank before. He didn't support it then, and he doesn't
support it now, and he never will because he is opposed to Ex-Im Bank
reauthorization, period.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr.
Heck), a key sponsor of this legislation and a major supporter of Ex-
Im.
Mr. HECK. I thank Chair Waters for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I also am not going to spend much time rebutting the
arguments of the previous speaker, indeed, given that he has opposed
every single reauthorization of the Ex-Im since he began service in
this Chamber--especially since he supported every amendment that would
have been harmful in past reauthorization legislation; especially since
he had the audacity, frankly, to use Huawei as an example, which he
cannot cite a single line in the draft to which he refers that would
have prohibited export financing to Huawei, and the bill before you
does.

{time} 1430

No. I am going to use my time to do as I have in the past: to support
and defend the bank, one of the most important, least understood
elements of our national manufacturing strategy, the Export-Import
Bank.
It is vital to our national and local economies, especially
manufacturers, farmers, and small businesses, but it has suffered badly
under misguided attacks, such as that to which you were just treated. I
have seen this damage firsthand, despite our ongoing attempts to fight
them.
This year, I am pleased and proud that we finally have an opportunity
to reverse that damage and reinvigorate and expand the Ex-Im.
I support the Export-Import Bank because we want to see more U.S.
exports. The international market for goods and services is three times
as large as our domestic economy, and that gap, by the way, is
widening.
The American economy has not historically been export oriented, so
targeting foreign markets and increasing exports holds untapped promise
to raise living standards.
As I like to say, if we want to keep our middle class, we better sell
into the world's growing middle class.
Maximizing exports will require a strong Export-Import Bank. Over the
last many years, the committee has heard testimony and seen analysis
that the private market will not maximize exports if left to its own
devices.
Trade financing markets fail in predictable and repeated ways. The
scale is too large for new exporters to access; the timeframes are too
short for the largest, most expensive products; and there are some
countries that private lenders simply will not lend into.
So without a robust official export credit agency to fill these gaps,
we simply lose out on overseas sales, especially for small businesses
and capital equipment makers and farmers.
Every country recognizes this fact, but the U.S. alone among major
economies has failed to fully act on this knowledge.
If we want to maximize our exports, we need to stop the sabotage of
our credit agency, the Ex-Im Bank, and enhance it. This is what this
reauthorization bill does.
It does make several critical changes. It sets the bill up to succeed
by increasing the spending cap and expanding the ability to use
reinsurance to lay off risk, and setting up new authorities for the
bank to go out and search for foreign buyers who it can match with U.S.
suppliers, American jobs.
It attempts to move past some of the misinformation about the
agency's purpose that has dogged the reauthorization fight the last
many years by renaming it to focus on its sole purpose: financing and
expanding exports of U.S.-made goods.
It preserves the requirement that goods must be made in the United
States by U.S. workers in order to qualify for assistance from the
agency. This is the strongest domestic content requirement in the
world, and it reinforces that the core of Ex-Im's mission is supporting
U.S. manufacturing jobs.
It continues Ex-Im's historical role in leading export credit
agencies

[[Page H8848]]

around the world toward higher environmental standards, stricter
pollution controls, and more concern for the effects of infrastructure
projects in developing countries.
This is a legacy to be proud of and to build on, and I am glad to see
that our environmental advocates and our export sector have come
together to agree on the importance of this language.
It aligns Ex-Im more closely with U.S. foreign policy and
anticorruption efforts. Ex-Im financing will now be barred if a foreign
customer appears on any one of several bad actor lists maintained by
various agencies of the U.S. Government.
No, Mr. Chair, it is not a restatement of current policy. It is an
expansion of it, and they full well know it.
These targeted provisions allow Ex-Im to focus on maximizing U.S.
sales to good customers while also increasing the leverage that our
foreign policymakers have in encouraging foreign countries and
corporations to clean up their act.
Finally, it makes it much faster and easier for Ex-Im to match
financing terms with those foreign export credit agencies that
subsidize financing in their country's exporters.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman.
Mr. HECK. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters for yielding.
Mr. Chair, China, in particular, has used this tactic to crowd out
U.S. manufacturers, and Ex-Im will finally have the tool it needs to
counter this tactic.
I am proud of the work we have done on this bill. Building a stronger
Export-Import Bank, if I may be personal for just one second, is one of
the main reasons why I was asked and honored to become a member of the
Financial Services Committee 7 years ago.
This is a bill that would achieve that mission for a decade to come,
and I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, let me restate that, as I said in my opening statement, to
be clear, the bill that Chairwoman Waters and I filed, H.R. 3407, is a
7-year extension of the Export-Import Bank.
It is clear by my cosponsorship of that with Chairwoman Waters that I
support reauthorizing the Bank. And as I said in my opening statement,
I support the Bank staying open through the continuing resolution or
the appropriations vehicle, whatever it is that is going to become law.
So I will restate that to both my colleagues so they can hear.
Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Huizenga), the ranking member of the Investor Protection,
Entrepreneurship and Capital Markets Subcommittee.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I appreciate Mr. McHenry yielding to me, and
I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4863, the United States Export
Finance Agency Act.
According to its charter, the mission of the Export-Import Bank is to
``contribute to maintaining or increasing employment of United States
workers'' by subsidizing the export of U.S. goods and services to
foreign markets.
Over the years, Congress has amended Ex-Im's charter to reflect
numerous congressional interests regarding lending practices,
transparency, and foreign policy objectives, so much so, that the
Bank's charter has grown from four pages at its inception to more than
150 pages now, and with that expansion, we have seen the Bank expand
its portfolio to a staggering $135 billion.
Well, each reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank has afforded
Congress the opportunity to revisit the charter and to work for reform
and to modernize the Bank appropriately. However, this flawed partisan
proposal that we have before us today fails to make any meaningful
reforms to the Export-Import Bank.
Now, despite the claims that you are hearing across the aisle about
the company not being able to do business with China and Russia, this
simply isn't the fact.
In fact, I had an amendment, two amendments, that would have actually
not allowed the bank to deal with state-owned enterprises in China and
in Russia.
Now, why? Because of this: the human rights record in China is
deplorable. We are seeing it play out today in Hong Kong, literally,
right now.
We also know that we are battling the Belt and Road Initiative that
has been a Chinese initiative that has gone around the world, and it
has no business getting U.S. taxpayer dollars in support of it.
Well, this initiative allows the Bank to provide taxpayer financing
to entities owned and controlled by the Chinese Government, including
Chinese state-owned enterprises involved in military activities, human
rights abuses, and this Belt and Road Initiative.
At a time when China is diverting massive subsidies to state-owned
enterprises, specifically through the use of export subsidies, why
would Congress authorize the use of taxpayer dollars to make the
Chinese Communist Party's job easier? I am baffled by that.
Now, claims of the opposite can be repeated and they can be repeated
in louder and louder voices, but that still doesn't make it true.
The simple fact is my amendment that was rejected by the other side
of the aisle would have limited interaction with Chinese and Russian
state-owned actors.
Well, we all know that the primary goal of the Export-Import Bank is
to support American jobs through exports. However, any Ex-Im
reauthorization that doesn't address the strategic threat to our
national interests posed by China's economic and military efforts is
not in the best interests of American workers or jobs.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I will move quickly through this.
Yes, it is true, I have been a sharp critic of the Export-Import
Bank. I have been accused of wanting to do nothing more than shut it
down by the other side, as much was said to the ranking member.
However, I was also a part of a group trying to come up with a
bipartisan agreement in 2012 and 2015, and I was willing to support the
bipartisan bill that was introduced by the ranking member and the
chair.
I wasn't necessarily happy with all the provisions, but I felt that
there was sufficient and significant progress made in those much-needed
reforms.
Well, unfortunately, this bipartisan agreement was abandoned by the
other side. The bill that we have before us is a flawed bill, and I
urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I would like to remind the House that the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga) has 16 total exporters in his
district, would support a value of $52 million. I would hope that as he
opposes this bill, he is reminded that between 2014 and 2020, his
district received substantial support.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green),
a strong supporter of the Bank and the chair of the Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations of the Committee on Financial Services.
Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chair, I thank Madam Chair for yielding.
Indeed, I am a strong supporter of the Bank and I am also a strong
supporter of the chairwoman.
I support this legislation because the Export Bank is not a
traditional bank. Traditional banks take deposits. The Ex-Im Bank makes
deposits.
Over the last 10 years, it has deposited 1.5 million jobs, American
jobs; over the last 10 years, $3.4 billion in the U.S. Treasury; over
the last 10 years, $255 billion to those who are exporting by way of
financing these exports.
In the way of jobs, if we look at the State of Texas, we can see that
from 2014 to 2019, it has assisted 91 minority-owned businesses, 14
percent of which are in my district; 467 small business exporters; 55
women-owned exporters. A total of 810 businesses have benefited from
the Ex-Im Bank.
If you like diversity, you will love the Ex-Im Bank. It has within it
an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion. It will have an Office of
Territorial Exporting to help Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
territories.
I support the Ex-Im Bank because it not only makes good sense, it
makes good dollars and cents.
This is a bill that we should support. If we didn't have the Ex-Im
Bank, we

[[Page H8849]]

would invent it. Why reinvent the wheel when we have something that can
roll out right now?
Mr. Chair, I support this bill.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the ranking member of the Oversight and
Investigations Subcommittee.
Mr. BARR. Mr. Chair, I rise today in opposition to this bill, not
because I believe the Export-Import Bank should not exist under any
circumstances, but because I believe we can produce a better bill, a
bill that would actually help America compete while holding other
nations like China accountable in the global market.

I am concerned that the bill in its current form would actually
enable China's malign activities to the detriment of U.S. national
security.
Now, let me be clear. I supported the compromise bill that Chairwoman
Waters and Ranking Member McHenry negotiated in June, and I compliment
my friend, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry) for his
leadership on this. I recognize the value a reformed Ex-Im Bank can
provide to U.S. businesses.
The new Ex-Im president and chairman, Kimberly Reed, has impressed
me. She visited my district and made clear her commitment to helping
U.S. exporters, including small businesses in Kentucky, compete in the
global market. She also, importantly, committed to reforming the Bank
to abandon Obama-era policies that discriminated against Ex-Im support
of traditional fossil energy and related exports.
But the bill we are debating today cannot be fixed by a strong leader
like Kimberly Reed. It is flawed, it is not the right answer, and we
can and should do better.
Specifically, this bill does not go far enough to combat malign
Chinese influence and China's aspirations to replace the United States
as the preeminent global economic power.

{time} 1445

The Communists in Beijing continue to steal our intellectual property
and place their thumb on the scale of global economic competitiveness
by propping up its economy through state-owned enterprises.
Additionally, we see rampant human rights abuses and violent quashing
of freedom seekers in Hong Kong. Over the last 5 months, we have
observed protestors in Hong Kong being shot, beaten, gassed, and
arrested.
My amendment to this bill, which the Rules Committee did not make in
order, would have made Ex-Im assistance to Chinese state-owned
enterprises contingent on their commitment to upholding the Sino-
British declaration, which established the ``one country, two systems''
principle that would allow Hong Kong to retain its capitalist system.
In his book ``The Hundred-Year Marathon,'' former senior Defense
Department official Michael Pillsbury details China's strategy to
supplant the United States as the world's dominant power by 2049, the
100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic. He said,
``Only recently have there been disturbing signs that a more
militaristic China may be ascendant, which has caused some to question
the wishful thinking that has prevailed for more than 40 years.''
Unless we take a hard stand and a hard line against China, including
through more powerful restrictions on the Ex-Im Bank's interactions
with Chinese SOEs, we risk ceding our preeminence in a fair and free
global market.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, which will allow
U.S. taxpayer funds to subsidize Chinese ascendency and its Communist
state-owned enterprises and enable China's theft of our intellectual
property, its forced transfer of technology, and its blatant violation
of human rights.
This bill could be better. The Export-Import Bank could help us
combat Chinese growing imports. This bill doesn't do it.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I would like to again remind Mr. Barr that
between 2014 and 2020, his State received $10 million in total export
value.
I would also like to remind this body that he did not support
reauthorization in the past. He does not do it now. I don't know if
there will ever be a good enough bill to have him and the ranking
member support Export-Import.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Garcia).
Ms. GARCIA of Texas. Mr. Chair, first, I thank the gentlewoman from
California, and my chairwoman, for her leadership in bringing this
incredibly important bill to the floor.
Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of the Ex-Im Bank.
Mr. Chair, the Bank provides targeted credit and export support to
our small businesses that need it most to stay competitive. We know
that the Bank's programs work, and we should not abandon them.
I fully support the reauthorization. The Ex-Im Bank plays an
irreplaceable role in promoting American exports and keeping small
businesses competitive on the international market and helps in
creating jobs for America, some 352,000 jobs.
Since 2014, the Bank has provided over $450 million worth of export
support value in my district alone in the Houston area. Among the 53
total exporters supported in my district, 39--well over half--are small
businesses. In Texas, the Bank has supported $12 billion in exports and
815 exporters, including 470 small businesses.
Along with the reauthorization of this bill, it also includes an
Office of Women and Minority Inclusion. This is important because, in
my district alone, seven out of the 53 businesses are minority-owned
and four are female-owned.
Additionally, this bill includes commonsense environmental and
community engagement standards that seek to make sure the Bank is
helping meet our Paris climate accord commitments.
While these improvements to the Bank contained in the bill are
important, I don't want to take away from the bottom-line fact, and
that is it creates jobs.
This bill supports American manufacturers. This bill supports our
exporting sector. This bill helps reduce our trade deficit. That is why
I am calling on all of my colleagues to join me in passing this
critical legislation.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Hill), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on National
Security, International Development and Monetary Policy.
Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Chair, I thank my friend from North
Carolina for yielding. I congratulate the ranking member and the
chairwoman for trying to work together to produce a bipartisan bill
that we can all support and demonstrate our keen interest in a long-
term, bipartisan reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank, an important
foreign policy tool for this Nation, not just in the situation with
China, but generally.
To my friend from Washington who talked about Huawei a few minutes
ago, it is not just state-owned enterprises that we are concerned
about. It is not public companies in China we are concerned about, or
private companies in China. We are concerned with anyone who has
engaged in something that is going to challenge the national security
of this country.
I would remind my friends on the other side that China's laws say:
Any organization or citizen shall support, assist, and cooperate with
the People's Republic of China intelligence effort. They shall provide
all efforts truthfully and may not refuse.
So it is not just small companies or state-owned enterprises; it is
all companies in China that we have that risk.
I offered an amendment that was turned down by the Rules Committee,
ruled out of order by the majority, to try to tackle the issue of
intellectual property, something we have dealt with in this country for
30 years. That was going to be an effort, I think, in this compromise
bill that would have been so helpful, had we been able to successfully
get it done.

I have been a longtime advocate for proceeding with care as it
relates to foreign policy with China. There is no doubt that
intellectual property is at the heart of that challenge, and the Bank
has a role to play as it reviews financing activities in China for our
businesses.
Nothing has been more pirated than computer software, music CDs, and
Hollywood videos. All that has been taken by the People's Republic of
China to the detriment of business in

[[Page H8850]]

America. It plagued President Clinton; it plagued President Bush 43;
and it plagued President Obama.
Mr. Chair, let's work together on a bipartisan bill that we can all
support.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, this is another Member on the opposite side of
the aisle, the gentleman from Arkansas, who, when we were trying to get
the Bank up and running, he voted against reauthorization. He is voting
against it again today. I don't know what it would take to make these
Members who have consistently opposed reauthorization to ever support
Ex-Im.
I would like to remind him there are 10 exporters in his district for
a total of $43 million--that is a total value of export--between 2014
and 2020.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Stanton).
Mr. STANTON. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 4863, the United States
Export Finance Agency Act, which will reauthorize the Export-Import
Bank for 10 years.
I am proud to cosponsor and support this bill for one simple reason:
Businesses across Arizona looking to create great jobs and export their
products across our international borders need certainty to succeed.
Main Street is still the backbone of my State's economy, and the
Export-Import Bank is an essential tool to ensure they remain
competitive in an increasingly competitive global market.
I want to highlight one business headquartered in Tempe in my
district. First Solar focuses on securing the energy of the future by
developing next-generation PV technology.
The company exports solar panel technology around the world and has
benefited from nearly $4 million in export financing from the Bank.
First Solar is just one of the many environmentally friendly companies
that benefits from the Export-Import Bank.
In Arizona, four out of five exporters supported by the Bank are
small businesses. In the last 5 years alone, it has supported upward of
$2 billion in exports in my State.
Congress has a duty to reassert its role in U.S. trade policies as
exporters continue to face challenges on all fronts. If we can't find
common ground and reauthorize the Bank, we will be removing one of the
most essential tools American companies have.
Mr. Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this important
bill in order to provide certainty and to level the playing field for
American businesses across the country.
Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters for leading this important
effort.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, if I may inquire of the Chair how much time
remains on both sides.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 9\1/2\ minutes
remaining. The gentlewoman from California has 11\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I am pleased that the gentleman from Arizona
just talked about the kind of support he has in his district. Let me
remind the House that we have support from the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce, Aerospace Industries Association, International Association
of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, International Federation
of Professional and Technical Engineers, National Association of
Manufacturers, Boeing, and Air Tractor, Inc. What you have here is
business and labor have come together to support this most important
bill.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record letters of support.
Chamber of Commerce

of the United States of America,

Washington, DC, October 28, 2019.
Hon. Maxine Waters,
Chairwoman, Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Patrick McHenry,
Ranking Member, Committee on Financial Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry: The U.S.
Chamber of Commerce thanks the committee for considering
legislation to provide for long-term reauthorizations of the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (``TRIA'') program and the
Export-Import Bank of the United States (``Ex-Im''). The
Chamber strongly supports the substitute amendment to H.R.
4634, the ``Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization
Act of 2019.'' The Chamber also strongly supports the
``United States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019,'' and
opposes all amendments that are intended to serve as ``poison
pills'' which would prevent this legislation from viable
consideration on the House floor or in the Senate.

H.R. 4634, the ``Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act
of 2019''

Since its initial enactment in 2002, TRlA has served as a
vital public-private risk sharing mechanism, ensuring that
private terrorism risk insurance coverage remains
commercially available and that the U.S. economy would more
swiftly recover in the event of a terrorist attack.
The Chamber strongly supports the substitute amendment to
H.R. 4634, the ``Terrorism Risk Insurance Program
Reauthorization Act of 2019,'' and applauds the leadership of
Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry in reaching this
bipartisan deal which would provide a seven-year
reauthorization of this important program while providing for
a study on the evolving risks in cyberterrorism and the
affordability and availability of TRIA coverage for places of
worship.

The ``United States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019''

As the official U.S. export credit agency (``ECA''), Ex-
lm's mission is to support domestic jobs by facilitating the
export of goods or services when private sector lenders are
unable or unwilling to provide financing. Foreign governments
have established 113 ECAs of their own around the world. In
2018, China's two ECAs alone provided 130 times as much
medium- and long-term export credit support as the Ex-Im
Bank. Due to the extensive competition in this space, it is
vital that Ex-Im be reauthorized to ensure that U.S.
businesses and workers are not deprived of a basic tool
enjoyed by their competitors in every other country.
The Chamber strongly supports the ``United States Export
Finance Agency Act of 2019.'' This legislation builds off of
S. 2293, the ``Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act of
2019,'' which was introduced earlier this year with the
bipartisan support of Senators Kevin Cramer and Kyrsten
Sinema, and cosponsored by Senators Thom Tillis, Maria
Cantwell, Roy Blunt, Patty Murray, Lindsey Graham, Chris
Coons, Susan Collins and Maggie Hassan. This legislation
would provide exporters with 10 years of much-needed
certainty.
In May, the Senate confirmed three of Ex-Im's board
members, establishing a quorum for the first time since 2015
and finally making the Bank fully functional after several
years of being limited to only supporting transactions less
than $10 million. This bill would also establish an
alternative procedure during any future lapses in the board's
quorum to ensure that Ex-Im can continue to serve its vital
role in supporting U.S. jobs.
U.S. exporters and the hundreds of thousands of jobs that
they support need long-term certainty--simply extending the
life of Ex-Im through short-term continuing resolutions is
not enough. The Chamber strongly urges members of the
Committee to vote in support of this long-term legislation
and urges members to oppose the adoption of any ``poison
pill'' amendments that are intended to prevent this
legislation from viable consideration on the House floor or
in the U.S. Senate.
The Chamber thanks you for your attention on these
important issues and looks forward to working with you to
ensure long-term reauthorizations of both of these important
programs.
Sincerely,
Neil L. Bradley,
Executive Vice President & Chief Policy Officer.
____

U.S. Chamber of Commerce,

Congressional & Public Affairs,

Washington, DC, November 11, 2019.
To the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The
U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly supports H.R. 4863, the
``United States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019,'' which
would provide for a long-term reauthorization of the Export-
Import Bank (``Ex-Im''). The Chamber will consider including
votes on this legislation--including votes on amendments--in
our annual How They Voted scorecard.
As the official U.S. export credit agency (``ECA''), Ex-
Im's mission is to support domestic jobs by facilitating the
export of goods or services when private sector lenders are
unable or unwilling to provide financing. Foreign governments
have established 113 ECAs of their own around the world. In
2018, China's two ECAs alone provided 130 times as much
medium- and long-term export credit support as the Ex-Im
Bank. Due to the extensive competition in this space, it is
vital that Ex-Im be reauthorized to ensure that U.S.
businesses and workers are not deprived of a basic tool
enjoyed by their competitors in every other country.
H.R. 4863 builds off of S. 2293, the ``Export-Import Bank
Reauthorization Act of 2019,'' which was introduced earlier
this year with the bipartisan support of Senators Kevin
Cramer and Kyrsten Sinema, and cosponsored by Senators Thom
Tillis, Maria Cantwell, Roy Blunt, Patty Murray, Lindsey
Graham, Chris Coons, Susan Collins and Maggie Hassan. Both of
these pieces of legislation would provide 10 years of much
needed certainty, establish an alternative procedure during
any future lapses in the board's

[[Page H8851]]

quorum, and raise Ex-Im's lending authority to ensure that it
can compete globally.
H.R. 4863 includes several additional provisions, including
restrictions that would ensure that Ex-Im financing follows
strict new rules to prevent financing for the Chinese army
and intelligence services, sanctioned entities, and known
violators of anti-bribery and intellectual property laws.
U.S. exporters and the hundreds of thousands of jobs that
they support need long-term certainty--simply extending the
life of Ex-Im through short-term continuing resolutions is
not enough. The Chamber urges you to support H.R. 4863.
Sincerely,
Jack Howard.
____

Aerospace Industries Association,

Arlington, VA, October 29, 2019.
Hon. Maxine Waters,
Chairwoman, House Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Patrick McHenry,
Ranking Member, House Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry: On
behalf of the nearly 340 member companies of the Aerospace
Industries Association (AIA), we urge you to reauthorize the
Export-Import (Ex-Im) Bank before the November 21 deadline. A
fully functioning Ex-Im Bank is vital to aerospace and other
industries.
The U.S. aerospace and defense industry supports more than
2.5 million American jobs, thousands of which have been
supported by Ex-Im Bank financing solutions that facilitate
the export of American goods and services. Moreover, the Bank
is essential for businesses of all sizes, as more than 90
percent of the Bank's transactions in FY2019 directly
supported American small businesses. This is done at no cost
to the U.S. taxpayer. In fact, in 2014 (the last entire year
the Bank was fully operational), the Bank paid $1 billion
into the U.S. Treasury, generated from the interest paid on
loans and the fees from the Bank's foreign customers.
Ultimately, the Ex-Im Bank levels the playing field against
foreign competitors in increasingly competitive international
markets. Key competing nations view aerospace as critical for
their economic growth and security interests and are
increasing investments in their respective domestic aerospace
industries. These countries are using their export credit
agencies (ECAs) to increase foreign sales and thus gain
advantage in the market. U.S. industries are up against more
than 110 foreign ECAs in an increasingly competitive export
market. Without the Bank, we're giving foreign powers the
advantage--the Bank is a necessary equalizer.
We overwhelmingly support moving forward with Ex-Im
legislation that will pass both the House and Senate. This
legislation must include key principles, including long-term
reauthorization, an increase in the authorization ceiling,
and a quorum fix.
We look forward to working with you on Ex-Im
reauthorization and ensuring that our industry remains
economically competitive globally.
Sincerely,
Tim McClees,
Vice President, Legislative Affairs, Aerospace Industries
Association.
____

International Association

of Machinists and Aerospace Workers,

Upper Marlboro, MD, October 28, 2019.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the International
Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), the
largest aerospace manufacturing union in North America, I
strongly urge you as a member of the House Financial Services
Committee to support this vital legislation and vote ``Yes''
to advance the United States Export Finance Agency Act of
2019. This legislation would create and sustain U.S. jobs in
manufacturing and other strategic industries and improve the
balance of trade between the U.S. and high export nations by
reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank for the next ten years.
The Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank) is one of the few U.S.
institutions that actually supports U.S. exports and jobs by
providing vital loan guarantees for the sale of U.S. goods
and services to international markets. This legislation would
rename the Ex-IM Bank to the United States Export Finance
Agency, but its mission would remain the same, ``to assist in
financing the export of U.S. goods and services'', enabling
``large and small companies to turn export opportunities into
real sales that help to maintain and create U.S. jobs and
contribute to a stronger national economy.'' With the banks
authorizing charter set to expire in November 2019, it is
imperative that Congress work expeditiously to pass this Ex-
IM Bank reauthorization legislation before the bank's charter
lapses.
American jobs depend upon a fully functioning Ex-Im Bank
with a fully staffed board of directors to provide vital
financing for the export of U.S. made products. Under the
Bank's current charter projects which require more than $10
million in financing must be approved by the Ex-IM Bank board
of directors. However, the lack of a quorum on the board in
recent years has crippled the Ex-Im Bank's ability to support
U.S. manufacturers and workers, particularly in the aerospace
industry, one of the last sectors in which the U.S. enjoys a
positive balance of trade with the rest of the world.
According to the bank's most recent annual report, the Ex-Im
Bank authorized only $3.3 billion in export credit in FY
2018. This is down from $20 billion in authorized export
credit in FY 2014, which was the last year the bank was fully
operational with a fully staffed board. Consequently, the
bank estimates that it supported a mere 33,000 U.S. jobs in
FY 2018, a fraction of the 164,000 American jobs that the
bank supported in FY 2014 when it operated with a full
quorum. Meanwhile, job producing export projects are being
taken by foreign competitors. Our international competitors
continue to support their companies through comprehensive
industrial policies in addition to robust export financing
agencies. China alone has three export credit agencies that
dwarf what our Ex-Im Bank provides.
The proposed legislation not only reauthorizes the Ex-IM
bank over the next ten years, but it includes important
provisions to reform the bank's quorum rules which have
severely limited the banks effectiveness in recent years. The
bill provides for a process to seat a temporary board if a
quorum cannot be reached over a 90 day period. In addition to
these needed reforms to the quorum rules, this legislation
would gradually increase the Ex-Im Bank's lending authority
from $135 billion to $175 billion, allowing the bank to
expand its portfolio of projects, increase U.S. exports,
create additional U.S. jobs, and drive economic growth.
For all of these reasons, I urge all members of the House
Financial Services Committee to support this vitally
important legislation and vote ``Yes'' in favor of passage of
The United States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019.
For more information, please contact IAM Legislative
Director.
Thank you,
Robert Martinez, Jr.,
International President.
____

AFL-CIO,

Washington, DC, November 13, 2019.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the AFL-CIO, I write to
express our strong support for the ``United States Export
Finance Agency Act of 2019'' (H.R. 4863) scheduled for floor
consideration this week.
A healthy Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank) is pivotal to the
creation and sustainability of U.S. jobs in manufacturing, as
well as increasing U.S. exports, thereby improving the
balance of trade between the U.S. and high export countries.
H.R. 4863 reauthorizes the Ex-Im Bank for the next ten
years and would gradually increase the bank's lending
authority by $40 billion, resulting in an expansion of
projects. Although the bill would rename the Ex-Im Bank as
the ``United States Export Finance Agency,'' its intended
mission ``to assist in financing the export of U.S. goods and
services'' would remain unchanged. The legislation also
includes provisions that reform the Bank's quorum rules that
have severely limited the Bank's viability in recent years.
The creation of U.S. jobs is essential to a strong economy,
and with the Bank's authorizing charter set to expire in
later this month, now is the time to pass this important
piece of legislation. For the reasons stated above, we urge
you to vote for the immediate passage of H.R. 4863.
Sincerely,
William Samuel,
Director,
Government Affairs.
____

International Federation of Professional & Technical
Engineers,
Washington, DC, November 12, 2019.
Dear Representative: As the executive officers of the
International Federation of Professional & Technical
Engineers (IFPTE), representing upwards of 90,000 workers, we
urge you to vote to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank by
passing H.R. 4863. ``United States Export Finance Agency Act
of 2019.'' This legislation supports American jobs in
strategic industries and sectors of the U.S. economy, helps
domestic manufacturing compete with manufacturers in high
export nations. and takes steps to maintain the Export-Import
Bank's (EXIM) operations over the next ten years.
EXIM is a critical tool that promotes U.S. manufacturing
exports, from the primary exporter down through the domestic
supply chain and requires at least 85% domestic content for
full financing support. Among the U.S. workers that have
benefited from EXIM are IFPTE members working at Boeing.
Spirit AeroSystems. and Triumph Composite Systems. EXIM's
financing for commercial airplane exports not only supports
high-paying jobs and strategic sectors of the economy but
also helps reduce the U.S. trade deficit. and provides
financing for diverse industries, including small- and
medium-sized business. consumable and durable goods
exporters, and services exporters. The ExportImport Bank also
results in a reduction of our national debt. as it has proven
itself to be a federal agency that added $9.6 billion in
revenue to our national budget since 1992.
Emerging national economies have aggressively expanded
their export financing agencies and Organization for Economic
Cooperation & Development (OECD) nations continue their
export credit support, making it critically important for
Congress to respond by reauthorizing EXIM before its current
authorization expires after November 21. China's two export
credit agencies totaled $39 billion in new medium- to long-
term export credits in 2018, an amount greater than the next
three countries' (Italy, German, and

[[Page H8852]]

South Korea) combined authorizations. By comparison, EXIM
committed just $300 million in medium- to long-term export
credits for 2018 with all financial authorizations for the
year totaling $3.3 billion. EXIM's financial authorizations
have ranked near the bottom of OECD nations and emerging
national economies over the last three years due to EXIM
lacking a quorum for its Board from mid-2015 to May 2019,
leaving it unable to approve transactions exceeding $10
million during that time. The three-year backlog of
transactions in the EXIM pipeline totals $40 billion and is
estimated by EXIM to support 240,000 jobs.
IFPTE supports this legislation as well as the Senate bill
sponsored by Senator Kevin Cramer, S. 2293, because it
includes straightforward measures to reform EXIM's quorum
rules so that EXIM's ability to support American exports and
jobs cannot be limited by political gridlock, reauthorizes
EXIM for ten years. and gradually increases EXIM's exposure
cap from $135 billion to $175 billion over seven years. These
provisions will create stability and room for EXIM's
financing ability to grow its portfolio of projects, support
U.S. exports and jobs. and drive economic growth.
For these reasons, we urge you to vote for the ``United
States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019.'' Thank you for
your consideration. Should you have any questions. please
feel free to contact either of us or IFPTE legislative
representative.
Sincerely.
Paul Shearon,
President.
Matthew Biggs,
Secretary-Treasurer/Legislative Director.
____

National Association of Manufacturers,
November 14, 2019.
Dear Representative: Following strong growth and job
creation over the past several years, manufacturers in
America are now facing global economic headwinds and
grappling with uncertainty in trade policy. If this
uncertainty is allowed to persist, America will feel the
consequences of reduced demand, production and employment in
the manufacturing industry. That is why the National
Association of Manufacturers urges you to act now to help
reverse this trend by supporting H.R. 4863, the United States
Export Finance Agency Act, which provides a long-term
reauthorization of the U.S. Export-Import Bank that will
enable manufacturers to export more of our products, invest
more in our communities and hire more American workers.
H.R. 4863 will provide the tools that manufacturers need to
compete in the global economy. More than 100 foreign export
credit agencies around the world are actively helping their
manufacturers win sales and jobs. Failing to reauthorize the
bank is akin to unilateral disarmament. The Ex-Im Bank fills
the gaps when the private sector is unable or unwilling to
finance or provide other tools needed to participate in
foreign projects or make export sales. Since 2000, the Ex-Im
Bank has facilitated nearly $450 billion in exports from
thousands of U.S. companies-with more than 90% of its
transactions directly supporting small businesses-and
supported more than 2.5 million American jobs.
In the decade following the Great Recession, countries have
prioritized exports, leading to a substantial increase in
global export credit financing. China is the most aggressive
nation, using export credit to expand its influence around
the globe. Chinese programs are opaque and unregulated, with
estimates that China provided more than $500 billion in
export credit in 2018, more support than all G7 export credit
agencies combined.
To counter China and remain competitive, manufacturers in
the United States need H.R. 4863. It includes a 10-year
reauthorization, an increase in the authorization ceiling and
measures to ensure that the agency's board of directors will
remain fully functioning for the length of the
reauthorization. The USEFAA also includes important reforms
to prevent the misuse of Ex-Im Bank financing by entities
connected to the Chinese People's Liberation Army or other
sanctioned entities involved in corruption, intellectual
property theft and other activities that threaten U.S.
security. At the same time, this legislation will enable
manufacturers in the United States to compete with China
everywhere, outside and inside China.
The USEFAA is a win for American manufacturing workers. It
will level the playing field, help manufacturers win sales
and set an example of the values we are proud to represent on
the global stage. Manufacturers urge your support for H.R.
4863 and ask that you reject amendments that would undermine
this robust reauthorization and the ability of the agency to
enable manufacturers to compete effectively around the world.
Sincerely,
Jay Timmons.
____

The Boeing Company,

Arlington, VA, October 28, 2019.
Hon. Maxine Waters,
Chairwoman, House Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairwoman Waters, The Boeing Company values your
commitment to American manufacturing and job growth. As you
know well, American workers create some of the best products
and services in the world. When we are able to compete on a
level playing field, we are able to create good-paying jobs
by selling those products around the globe.
We write today to express our strong support for your
legislation, the United States Export Finance Agency Act of
2019, which would provide a long-term reauthorization for the
Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im).
A full, long-term reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank is
critical to stabilizing and strengthening America's economic
capability in this current, unstable global market.
Manufacturers and businesses that invest in equipment and
other building materials would be greatly empowered by the
stability brought by your legislation's 10 year
reauthorization of the Ex-Im charter.
We also strongly support the permanent fix to the quorum
requirements for larger deals. as well as the increase in cap
thresholds, bringing the policies of Ex-Im in line with the
modern challenges our American workers and businesses face in
the global marketplace today.
During the last eight years, Ex-Im has supported more than
1.4 million U.S. jobs. In 2018 alone, the Ex-Im Bank helped
more than 2,100 small businesses export their products. These
impressive data points don't include the countless other
supply chain companies who do business with larger U.S.
exporters who also use Ex-Im financing.
Ex-Im is a tremendous asset to American businesses. We
support your leadership in authoring the United States Export
Finance Agency Act and urge all members of the House
Financial Services Committee to vote in favor of its passage.
Sincerely,
Tim Keating,
Executive Vice President, Government Operations, The Boeing
Company.
____

Air Tractor Inc.,

Olney, TX, October 28, 2019.
Hon. Maxine Waters, Chair,
Hon. Patrick McHenry, Ranking Minority Member,
House Committee on Financial Services,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry: It is my
understanding that your committee will consider mark up
tomorrow of which one consideration is reauthorization of the
Export-Import Bank (United States Export Finance Agency of
2019). I have communicated to you before on how important the
Export-Import Bank (``Ex-Im'') is to Air Tractor, a small
business manufacturer and exporter. Ex-Im allows us to create
and sustain jobs in rural north Texas. There is no substitute
for Ex-Im and its products. Ex-Im is very important to small
business and in my opinion, to all exporters large and small.
Ex-Im means U.S. jobs.
I would urge swift and bipartisan action tomorrow to
advance this legislation as currently proposed. The U.S.
needs a robust and long-term reauthorization of Ex-Im.
If you have any questions of me, please contact me.
Sincerely,
David Ickert,
Treasurer and CFO.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean).
Ms. DEAN. Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters and Representative
Heck for this important legislation.
I am excited to stand here in support of the Export-Import Bank. It
is critically important to my home State of Pennsylvania and, in
particular, my home district of Montgomery County and Berks County.
With over 200 total exporters in Pennsylvania, which have contributed
over $4 billion in total export value from 2014 to 2019, the Export-
Import Bank has helped businesses across the Commonwealth gain access
to new markets, create jobs, and compete globally.
That is why I am pleased to be among the original cosponsors and
supporters of H.R. 4863, the United States Export Finance Agency Act,
which reauthorizes the Bank for 10 years and makes critical reforms to
help businesses across our Nation.
In particular, this reauthorization bill increases the Bank's lending
authority to $175 billion, includes a quorum fix, and enhances the
Bank's environmental practices. Importantly, it also establishes an
Office of Minority and Women Inclusion and an Office of Territorial
Exporting, two important provisions that will help diversify the Bank's
activities and our global activities.
Finally, the bill has key endorsements, as the chairwoman has so
eloquently listed, from various industry stakeholders, including labor
and the business community.
Mr. Chair, I thank Chairwoman Waters and Representative Heck for
introducing this reauthorization bill, and I urge adoption of the bill.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H8853]]

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, it is my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader
and a longtime supporter of Ex-Im.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
And I thank Mr. McHenry for his work on the committee. Mr. Chair, I
say to Mr. McHenry: There is still time to get well.
Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of this legislation. I have been
the majority leader in years past, the minority whip in years past, and
now again the majority leader. During all of those years, I have been a
strong supporter of the Ex-Im Bank.
Mr. Cantor, who was the majority leader, and I worked together the
last time we brought this bill to the floor for reauthorization. There
were 42 Republicans, many of whom served on the Financial Services
Committee, who signed a discharge petition, a Republican discharge
petition, because the chairman of the committee refused to bring this
bill to the floor.

{time} 1500

Mr. Chair, this bill enjoys the support of the United States Chamber
of Commerce, wide support among the business community throughout
America, support of the labor movement--the AFL-CIO and labor unions--
all over America, and the support of millions of workers who are
producing products here in America.
I have an agenda. I call it Make It In America. This is critical to
that because all of our competitors around the world have an agency
similar to the Export-Import Bank that facilitates their products being
sold in competition with ours.
If we fail to reauthorize this piece of legislation, and if we fail
to effect the reforms that have been included in not only dealing with
the amount of money that they are authorized to lend but also the fact
that we will not be locked into the inability of either a President or
a Senate to confirm members of the Ex-Im board, but we will be able to
act.
This legislation, therefore, is better than we have done before.
I thank Maxine Waters for her untiring leadership on this issue, and
I also congratulate my friend Denny Heck, a member of the committee
from Washington State who has been as tenacious and faithful in his
support of ensuring the reauthorization when we had the discharge
petition, and this time, as anybody in this House. I thank the
gentleman, Mr. Heck, for his leadership on this issue.
When that bill was discharged, some of you may remember, even though
the Republican leadership would not bring it to the floor, it had to be
discharged. Forty-two Republicans signed the discharge petition, led by
Mr. Lucas and Mr. Fincher from Tennessee.
Mr. Lucas is still here. I hope Mr. Lucas will vote for this bill
when he has the opportunity to do so one more time.
I had made the point with Mr. Cantor that I believed that the
majority of Republicans would support the reauthorization. And, in
fact, they did. The majority of Republicans, when the vote came, voted
for the bill that had been refused by Mr. Hensarling to bring it to the
floor.
So this is not as if it is some partisan piece of legislation. I
would hope the Republicans would have the courage--although I see them
too often marching in lockstep to their party principle rather than
their own principle. I am disappointed with that, Mr. Chair, because
this is a piece of legislation that will protect and create hundreds of
thousands of jobs and because it will make us more competitive.
We make some of the best products in the world, period. But we need
to be price competitive because people will be inclined to buy,
perhaps, a less quality product because it is cheaper.
That is why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is overwhelmingly in support
of this. That is why the administration is in favor of reauthorizing
the Ex-Im Bank.
They say they want it clean. The President was initially, during the
course of his campaign, opposed to the Ex-Im Bank. Then he talked,
frankly, to some people in manufacturing who said: Mr. President, if we
don't have an Export-Import Bank, you said you want to create jobs, but
you are going to lose jobs.
So he changed his mind. Then, unfortunately, he appointed somebody to
head up the Ex-Im Bank who was totally against it, a guy named Scott
Garrett from New Jersey. The good news is the Senate said, because it
supports the Ex-Im Bank, they are not going to take Garrett, so his
name was withdrawn.
Mr. Chair, I appreciate Chairwoman Waters for bringing this to the
floor. I urge every Member of this body to support it. Don't snatch
partisanship from the jaws of bipartisanship every time you get the
opportunity.
Let's try to reflect to the American people that business and labor
are together, and, yes, even Democrats and Republicans, conservatives
and liberals, are together because this is good for American jobs. It
is good for people who want to make it in America.
That is what Ms. Waters, the chair of the committee, has been
arguing, and Mr. Heck, and Gwen Moore, who chaired the subcommittee
when we took it out last time, and others who have fought so hard for
this bill.
Our economy depends on strong export growth, not just for large
businesses, but small and medium-sized businesses in communities across
the country. It is not just the exporter. It is all the secondary small
businesses that provide products for those large exporters.
For this reason, the Export-Import Bank has traditionally had strong,
bipartisan support. A majority of Republicans just a few years ago
supported this bill. Not this exact bill. This bill should have that
kind of support, too.
There is not a single provision in this bill that those on the other
side of the aisle can legitimately label a poison pill. That doesn't
mean it is exactly like they want it. We don't always get everything we
want. But the central part of this bill ought to be supported by every
one of us.
The last time this came up, one Democrat voted against it. He is no
longer with us--not because of his vote on this bill. But I point out
to you that we are overwhelmingly for this bill. Business wants this
bill.
Usually, you don't see the Democrats saying yes to business groups.
This is for jobs for working Americans. That is why this bill has the
strong and unified support of the business community.
I am disappointed, frankly, that Republicans have decided to make
this bill partisan. Frankly, Mr. McCarthy was for this bill before he
was against this bill--not this bill. He was for the Export-Import Bank
before he was against it, if you look at the Record. He is going to
vote against it this time.
Mr. Scalise voted against it last time, as did Mr. McCarthy on the
reauthorization that I just mentioned that was discharged out of
committee, as did Mr. McHenry. All three of them opposed this bill in
the past.
So it is not a question of these amendments. For whatever reasons,
they are opposed to this bill. That is a shame. There is no reason for
supporters of American exports on both sides of the aisle not to come
together and support the Ex-Im Bank's reauthorization.
My hope is that what this House will do today is send a strong
message of support for the Export-Import Bank. Tell the rest of the
world we are going to compete. Tell the rest of the world we are going
to compete on an even playing field. Tell the rest of the world we are
going to support our exporting community.
Indeed, according to the National Association of Manufacturers,
during the 4-year period from 2015 to 2019 when the Ex-Im Bank lacked a
quorum needed to do its job properly, our country gained 80,000 fewer
manufacturing jobs and lost $119 billion in manufacturing output, all
because we didn't fix the quorum, which is now fixed in this bill. Let
me repeat that: 80,000 fewer manufacturing jobs and $119 billion in
lost output.
This fixes that. If you vote against this bill, you may be voting
against $119 billion--probably more because of inflation, maybe $150
billion--to the good. Not government spending, increased output,
increased economic activity, and increased jobs of 80,000, probably
more.
Countries all around the world have export credit agencies, as I have
said. In fact, China has three export credit agencies that provided
more support in just 1 year than the Export-Import Bank has provided in
its entire history.

[[Page H8854]]

What do you say by a ``no'' vote? We are going to retreat from that
competition. We are not going to play. Who does that advantage? China.
Who does that advantage? Every one of our other competitors. Who does
that disadvantage? American workers.
Mr. Chair, we need to give our exporters a fair, fighting chance by
providing export financing to American business. That is what this bill
does.
It is not a partisan bill. It is not a Republican bill or a
Democratic bill. Those of you who say you are probusiness and proworker
and want to build jobs, that is why the President of the United States
decided he is for reauthorization. He may not like a provision or two
in this bill, but the administration says they are for reauthorizing
this.
This gives you the opportunity to do that. Take it. This is not going
to be a partisan bill for any of us. Take this opportunity to stand up
as the majority of your colleagues did the last time this
reauthorization came to the floor, and as they have done every time it
has come to the floor.
Join me, my colleagues, in voting for American workers, American
manufacturers, suppliers, subcontractors, little businesses, small
businesses, and medium businesses. This is good for America. Vote
``yes.''
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would assure my colleagues that when the President says that he is
going to veto the bill, as he put out with a Statement of
Administration Policy, he intends to veto this bill if it hits his
desk. That is number one.
Two, the Senate majority leader says: ``We are not going to pass the
House bill.''
They also say they are going to take this up as a part of the CR, and
I think that is important. We don't want this Bank to lapse.
I would also commend for my colleagues that--it is a bit rich, a bit
thick, because people voted for Ex-Im and against Ex-Im in the past,
including Chairwoman Waters, who voted against reauthorization in 2002.
So times change, issues change, and our votes reflect those changes in
time.
I would say that the majority leader, in his speech, does outline
that he is a strong advocate for the Bank. He absolutely is. That is
why I have great assurance when this bill passes or doesn't pass that
we will have an extension of the Bank, and we are going to have a
functioning bank. It is important.
Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Stivers), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on National Security,
International Development and Monetary Policy, a great advocate for the
Ex-Im Bank, to talk through his position on Ex-Im.
Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.
I don't want to fall into revisionist history. I was one of the
Republicans who signed the discharge petition against my own chairman
and against my own leadership in 2014 and supported the Ex-Im Bank.
I would love to be here this afternoon to be supporting a bipartisan
bill on reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank. We had a bipartisan bill in June,
and it wasn't the Republicans who walked away from it. It was the
Democratic majority that walked away from it. The bill was marked up on
a party-line vote in the Financial Services Committee.
I think it is really important to note that we will reauthorize the
Export-Import Bank in the appropriations process, and many of us
support that. We do not want a lapse. But this bill is going to the
Senate where it goes nowhere. And the administration has said they
would veto it.
Let's not pursue a partisan vehicle here. The Rules Committee had an
opportunity to allow for some amendments that would have addressed some
very important issues, including one from my colleague from Arkansas
(Mr. Hill) that would have stopped China from stealing intellectual
property. They chose to block consideration of those amendments.
Ex-Im reauthorization is now, unfortunately, tied to the
appropriations process, and I think we all know that.
I want to reiterate that my fear is that we are needlessly moving
forward with a party-line vote, or a mostly party-line vote, on
something that has and should be bipartisan.

{time} 1515

Finally, I want to address some comments made earlier by one of my
colleagues expressing skepticism about the ranking member, Mr.
McHenry's willingness to back the reauthorization effort.
We all know that the ranking member reached a deal with the
chairwoman in June on reauthorization, and, again, it was the
Democratic majority that walked away from it, not the ranking member. I
just want to make sure everybody understood that that was what
happened.
Furthermore, the deal actually increased Ex-Im's lending cap up to
$175 billion, something that I know our former chairman would have
never done. So I think our ranking member has dealt in good faith
through this whole process. I also think it is completely inaccurate
that they didn't deal in good faith.
Regardless of what happens today, I am hopeful that we will find a
way to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, and I now know it is
definitely tied to the appropriations process.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the majority leader, to respond to anything he
would like to respond to.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, by the way, Mr. McHenry is my friend. He and I have a good
working relationship, and I appreciate that friendship. I regret that
he is opposing this bill. I know there was an attempt to reach a
bipartisan agreement.
In candor, I think everybody on this floor needs to know there were
outside business concerns about that agreement, so it was not simply a
partisan act. It was that those who see this as a job creator thought
that some of the provisions that were put in the so-called compromise
would be harmful to job creation and to the sale of exports across the
sea.
But the reason I really rose--and I thank Madam Chairwoman for
yielding--is to say, yes, the President said he was going to veto this;
yes, the majority leader in the Senate said he is not going to bring
things up. That is unfortunate, but the statement I made is accurate.
The President of the United States says he is for the reauthorization
of the Export-Import Bank. That is a change in his position during the
course of his campaign in 2016. It is a change because he was convinced
that the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank is good for America,
good for jobs, good for business, good for working men and women in
this country. And so he has repaired, also, to partisanship.
There are no poison pills in here. There may be some things you
wanted that are not in this bill; there may be some things in this bill
that I would have liked that are not in this bill. But the central
point of this is this reauthorizes the Bank.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the majority
leader.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman.
It takes care of the challenge that we had when there was no quorum,
and the fact that we had no quorum was all about politics.
Don't make this about politics as well. An estimate of 80,000 jobs,
$150 billion lost because we didn't have a quorum. Let's not twist in
the wind.
This bill has 95 percent agreement. The gentleman who spoke before me
said he voted for this last time. There is no change that, in my
opinion, warrants a change in heart.
I know that there is some upset that the bipartisan bill that was
agreed to didn't fly, but it didn't fly mostly because the outside came
in and said: This will not help us; this will not affect the end that
we want. That record ought to be clear, Mr. Chairman.
So the chairwoman worked on bringing a bill to the floor that will
help. She has done that. I hope my colleagues will put their
partisanship behind them, put protecting, frankly, their positioning in
terms of negotiation behind them and vote for this bill.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I have
remaining.

[[Page H8855]]

The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 6 minutes remaining.
The gentlewoman from California has 5 minutes remaining.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I would commend for the House that, yes,
there is an opportunity for bipartisanship. I think that will be on the
CR to extend the Export-Import Bank. It is an important institution. At
its height, it supported almost 2 percent of American exports. It is a
small amount of global trade, but it is important. We want to make sure
the Bank continues to function, but this is not the bill to do that. We
will take care of that in another vehicle, and I am hopeful we can have
a bipartisan vote there.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr.
Tipton), my colleague.
Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Chairman, we hear the President is for the extension,
the Senate is for the extension. The problem is, they are not for this
piece of legislation.
I think it is important to be able to note that the ranking member,
once again, on the Committee on Financial Services had a deal in
principle with the chair to be able to reauthorize the Bank, to be able
to add strong protections against China's global interest.
Unfortunately, that deal was pulled, and we are left with the bill that
does not address these issues head-on.
In the committee's process, I offered an amendment to be able to
combat China's Belt and Road Initiative that would prohibit Ex-Im's
assistance to the Government of China unless otherwise authorized by
the President of the United States.
China's envisioned the Belt and Road as an economic tool to be able
to expand their influence and, in some cases, force countries to become
overly reliant on financing from China.
The Belt and Road projects also raise a specter of infrastructure
that could be used by China's military, even as China promotes
international reach with the yuan and the potential displacement of the
dollar.
With more than 60 countries potentially hosting Belt and Road
projects and estimated total financing exceeding $1 trillion, the
Chinese Government's ambitions are massive and serious--and should be
taken so.
The Obama administration actively attempted to be able to keep
foreign countries from joining China in their Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank over concerns that the resources would support
Beijing's geopolitical ambitions.
The bill on the floor today does nothing to be able to address these
issues. If anything, the Belt and Road Initiative is even more
worrying, and we ought to take a strong stance against it.
Further, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, China's Belt
and Road Initiative is one of the main planks of China's statecraft
under the current regime, and it is a key component of the Made in
China 2025 economic development strategy.
And yet, my amendment, in process, was rejected in committee, and
there is no trace of proactive restraint against the Belt and Road
investments in the bill on the floor today.
It is completely nonsensical to have the Export-Import Bank offer
U.S. taxpayer-backed subsidies to companies implementing projects that
further Beijing's geopolitical ambitions.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Heck).
Mr. HECK. Mr. Chair, consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, and
nobody is ever going to accuse the other side of having a small mind,
because I have been here just long enough to remember when they railed
with righteous indignation to pass legislation even though the Obama
administration had issued an SAP. Evidently, that is not a standard
that applies today, but it applied then.
Listen, I have heard no objections to the content of the proposed
legislation. What mostly I have heard is that we had a deal that fell
apart and it is all our fault. That is pretty good revisionist history.
It fell apart because it didn't have the votes.
And it wasn't just a question of what happened on the majority side.
They know full well there were minority party Members who were not
going to vote for it. There was bipartisan opposition, frankly, because
of all the external stakeholder opposition, because it does not work.
What are the differences, the major differences? Basically, that
other deal would have prohibited sale into countries--China, in
particular--with state-owned enterprises.
What are those? All railroads, all utilities, all airlines. That is
not the way we engage other countries and change their behavior.
Materially, factually wrong that we would subsidize the Chinese
Communist Party. In fact, in the last 30 years, the Export-Import Bank
has transferred up to $10 billion into the U.S. Treasury.
Listen, I just wish people would have the courage of their
convictions. The argument seems to be made, and I think it is a debate
worth having, is should we kick China out of the World Trade
Organization. That is really what is being said here. Let's have that
debate.
Looking back, I think it is questionable that they were admitted
without stronger accountability, and I think we need stronger
accountability.
Mr. Chair, great irony, the bill before you has incredible advance
progress over current law in terms of accountability with China. So, at
the end of the day, here it is: revenue generating, job generating,
American jobs. Vote ``yes.''
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, this is what we are trying to not fund for
American taxpayers. We are having American taxpayer dollars go to
subsidize Chinese companies to perpetrate the violence that is
happening in repression of the Chinese people and the folks in Hong
Kong. This is what we are trying to stop, and their bill does nothing
to stop this type of subsidization of our goods, our American tax
dollars going into the harm that is perpetrated there.
So you can make a nice political case that you have done something,
but in reality, in terms of legislative text, you don't do squat. And
that is a huge problem. That is the reason why there is opposition over
here.
I would also commend to my colleagues that every Republican voted for
the bipartisan bill that I negotiated with Chairwoman Waters in
committee.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Gonzalez).
Mr. GONZALEZ of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I thank Ranking Member McHenry for
his leadership on this issue.
Let me start by saying that I fully support the Export-Import Bank
and recognize the important role that the Bank plays in supporting
businesses and jobs across my district and State.
This is my first time having the opportunity to vote on this and
state that, and I want to state it emphatically.
I appreciate that the majority leader and Mr. Heck have articulated
what specifically is at issue here. And what is at issue here is that
outside groups have captured this bill and objected to every single
provision, no matter how small, dealing with the People's Republic of
China.
They objected, in particular, to an amendment that I offered that
would require exporters receiving Ex-Im assistance to certify that they
do not punish their employees for private communications on issues that
China is so sensitive to, specifically, freedom in Hong Kong and human
rights in Xinjiang and Tibet--not throwing China out of the WTO, though
I am very, very happy to have a debate on that.
But that is not what this was about. This was about preventing our
companies from censoring their own employees, domestic employees, on
their own time, in the comfort of their own home.
Nothing in this amendment would have affected a company's policies in
the workplace or its ability to manage business communications. But
when employees are expressing themselves on their own time and if they
want to stand by victims of oppression, an Ex-Im beneficiary wouldn't
have been able to retaliate against them.

I was disheartened that the majority would not allow this body to
debate and vote on this commonsense amendment that would have protected
the free speech of American workers.
And a final point, because I have a feeling that somebody is about to
read back to me what they believe they know about my district.
We have a wonderful system, and in our system of government, we
represent our own districts. Okay? We

[[Page H8856]]

know our districts better than anybody else. That is why we are here.
On behalf of northeast Ohio, let me tell you, China has absolutely
decimated our manufacturing sector, and I am proud to vote ``no'' on
this bill.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentlewoman from California has 3 minutes remaining.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close. May I inquire if
there are further speakers on the other side.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, this is a failure of bipartisan policymaking, and this is
a sad day.
I am not angry. I appreciate Chairwoman Waters attempting to strike a
bipartisan deal. In fact, we had a deal, and we filed that bill. It is
H.R. 3407 that encouraged Members to sign the discharge petition so we
can actually support something that was a bipartisan negotiation, not
this bill before us today that doesn't take on the important work of
banning Chinese state-owned enterprises from accessing our export
credit agency. That is what this is about.
So I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this very important measure
of international export activities, and I yield back the balance of my
time.

{time} 1530

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Earlier this year when the Ex-Im reauthorization was still in
committee, we entered into good-faith negotiations with Ranking Member
McHenry. Unfortunately, the China state-owned enterprise provision
insisted on by the ranking member came up short and prevented us from
reaching broad bipartisan support for the bill.
In fact, his China provision was roundly rejected in seven different
votes in committee. This provision was voted down during markup because
my colleagues realized that it would do more to harm U.S. exporters and
U.S. jobs than help to counter against the very real problems faced by
U.S. exporters competing with China.
There are a number of other provisions in Mr. McHenry's bill that are
unnecessary, even burdensome, and aimed at diminishing the bank's
ability to function. In fact, in many ways, rather than seeking to
strengthen and improve the flexibility of the bank to meet the
challenges faced by U.S. industry today, the provisions in this bill
put forward by the ranking member consistently sought to further
constrain the bank with unnecessary and, in many cases, new limits and
restrictions.
What the Republicans don't say is that a bipartisan bill in the
Senate was introduced that had none of Mr. McHenry's problematic
provisions. Then, last week, the President similarly said that he also
supported a 10-year clean reauthorization, which is odd since the
Republicans claimed he supported Mr. McHenry's hurdles for the Ex-Im
Bank.
I continue to believe that this provision will hamper Ex-Im's ability
to support U.S. exporters and American jobs.
Let me just wrap this up by saying that this is a significant bill
that we have before this House. This is a bill that will correct the
harm that has been done to our export agency. This is a bill that will
create more jobs.
This is a bill that has the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
GE, Boeing, the AFL-CIO, the International Association of Machinists
and Aerospace Workers, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers,
the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the International
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, the Business
Roundtable, and North America's Building Trades Unions.
So, here we have a bill where we have people who oppose each other
all the time and have come together because they know that it is in the
best interests of our country. They know that they have put us in a
position--those who have been voting against reauthorization--of being
noncompetitive with China and other countries who like to see us in
that weakened position.
This bill is going to bring us out of that weakened position. This is
a bill that improves upon our ability to provide export financing. This
is a bill that will create jobs.
This is a bill that recognizes that we are not manufacturing at the
rate that we should be in this country. And we are not going to be in
that position any more.
This is a bill that creates jobs in all of our districts. This is a
bill that I would ask my Members to please support, and let's keep
America moving forward with the export-import bill.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Financial Services, printed in the bill, an amendment
in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee
Print 116-36 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended,
shall be considered as an original bill for purpose of further
amendment under the 5-minute rule and shall be considered as read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 4863

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``United States Export Finance
Agency Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The table of contents of this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. Renaming of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
Sec. 4. Authorization period.
Sec. 5. Aggregate loan, guarantee, and insurance authority.
Sec. 6. Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.
Sec. 7. Support for United States territories.
Sec. 8. Alternative procedures during quorum lapse.
Sec. 9. Strengthening support for U.S. small businesses.
Sec. 10. Enhancing flexibility to respond to predatory export financing
by China.
Sec. 11. Restriction on financing for certain entities.
Sec. 12. Prohibitions on financing for certain persons involved in
sanctionable activities.
Sec. 13. Promoting renewable energy exports, environmental and social
standards, and accountability.
Sec. 14. Reinsurance program.
Sec. 15. Information technology systems.
Sec. 16. Administratively determined pay.

SEC. 3. RENAMING OF THE EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED
STATES.

(a) In General.--The Export-Import Bank of the United
States is hereby redesignated as the United States Export
Finance Agency.
(b) References.--Any reference to the Export-Import Bank of
the United States in any law, rule, regulation, certificate,
directive, instruction, or other official paper in force on
the date of the enactment of this Act is deemed a reference
to the United States Export Finance Agency.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION PERIOD.

Section 7 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635f) is amended by striking ``2019'' and inserting ``2029''.

SEC. 5. AGGREGATE LOAN, GUARANTEE, AND INSURANCE AUTHORITY.

Section 6(a)(2) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12
U.S.C. 635e(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
``(2) Applicable amount defined.--In this subsection, the
term `applicable amount' means--
``(A) $145,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2020;
``(B) $150,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2021;
``(C) $155,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2022;
``(D) $160,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2023;
``(E) $165,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2024;
``(F) $170,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2025; and
``(G) $175,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026
through 2029.''.

SEC. 6. OFFICE OF MINORITY AND WOMEN INCLUSION.

(a) In General.--Section 3(i) of the Export-Import Bank Act
of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635a(i)) is amended to read as follows:
``(i) Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.--
``(1) Establishment.--The Agency shall establish an Office
of Minority and Women Inclusion which shall be responsible
for carrying out this subsection and all matters relating to
diversity in management, employment, and business activities
in accordance with such standards and requirements as the
Director of the Office shall establish.
``(2) Transfer of responsibilities.--The Agency shall
ensure that, to the extent that the responsibilities
described in paragraph (1) (or comparable responsibilities)
were, as of the date of the enactment of this subsection,
performed by another office of the Agency, the
responsibilities shall be transferred to the Office.

[[Page H8857]]

``(3) Duties with respect to civil rights laws.--The
responsibilities described in paragraph (1) shall not include
enforcement of statutes, regulations, or executive orders
pertaining to civil rights, except that the Director of the
Office shall coordinate with the President of the Agency, or
the designee of the President of the Agency, regarding the
design and implementation of any remedies resulting from
violations of the statutes, regulations, or executive orders.
``(4) Director.--
``(A) In general.--The Director of the Office shall be
appointed by, and shall report directly to, the President of
the Agency. The position of Director of the Office shall be a
career reserved position in the Senior Executive Service, as
that position is defined in section 3132 of title 5, United
States Code, or an equivalent designation.
``(B) Duties.--The Director shall--
``(i) develop standards for equal employment opportunity
and the racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of the workforce
and senior management of the Agency;
``(ii) develop standards for increased participation of
minority-owned and women-owned businesses in the programs and
contracts of the Agency, including standards for coordinating
technical assistance to the businesses; and
``(iii) enhance the outreach activities of the Agency with
respect to, and increase the total amount of loans,
guarantees, and insurance provided by the Agency to support
exports by socially and economically disadvantaged small
business concerns (as defined in section 8(a)(4) of the Small
Business Act) and small business concerns owned by women.
``(C) Other duties.--The Director shall advise the
President of the Agency on the impact of the policies of the
Agency on minority-owned and women-owned businesses.
``(5) Inclusion in all levels of business activities.--
``(A) Contracts.--The Director of the Office shall develop
and implement standards and procedures to ensure, to the
maximum extent possible, the inclusion and utilization of
minorities (as defined in section 1204(c) of the Financial
Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989
(12 U.S.C. 1811 note)) and women, and minority- and women-
owned businesses (as such terms are defined in section
21A(r)(4) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (12 U.S.C.
1441a(r)(4)) in all business and activities of the Agency at
all levels, including in procurement, insurance, and all
types of contracts. The processes established by the Agency
for review and evaluation for contract proposals and to hire
service providers shall include a component that gives
consideration to the diversity of the applicant.
``(B) Applicability.--This paragraph shall apply to all
contracts for services of any kind, including all contracts
for all business and activities of the Agency, at all levels.
``(C) Outreach.--The Agency shall establish a minority
outreach program to ensure the inclusion (to the maximum
extent practicable) of contracts entered into with the
enterprises of minorities and women and businesses owned by
minorities and women, including financial institutions,
investment banking firms, underwriters, accountants, brokers,
and providers of legal services.
``(6) Diversity in agency workforce.--The Agency shall take
affirmative steps to seek diversity in its workforce at all
levels of the Agency consistent with the demographic
diversity of the United States, in a manner consistent with
applicable law, including--
``(A) to the extent the Agency engages in recruitment
efforts to fill vacancies--
``(i) recruiting at historically Black colleges and
universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, Tribal colleges
and universities, women's colleges, and colleges that
typically serve majority minority populations; and
``(ii) recruiting at job fairs in urban communities, and
placing employment advertisements in print and digital media
oriented toward women and people of color;
``(B) partnering with organizations that are focused on
developing opportunities for minorities and women to place
talented young minorities and women in industry internships,
summer employment, and full-time positions; and
``(C) by use of any other mass media communications that
the Director of the Office determines necessary.''.
(b) Inclusion in Annual Report.--Section 8 of such Act (12
U.S.C. 635g) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(l) Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.--
``(1) In general.--The Agency shall include in its annual
report to the Congress under subsection (a) a report from the
Office of Minority and Women Inclusion regarding the actions
taken by the Agency and the Office pursuant to section 3(i),
which shall include--
``(A) a statement of the total amounts paid by the Agency
to contractors since the most recent report under this
subsection;
``(B) the percentage of the amounts described in
subparagraph (A) that were paid to contractors as described
in section 3(i)(5)(A);
``(C) the successes achieved and challenges faced by the
Agency in operating minority and women outreach programs;
``(D) a description of the progress made by the Agency in
supporting exports by minority-owned small business concerns
and the progress made by the Agency in supporting small
business concerns owned by women, including estimates of the
amounts made available to finance exports directly by both
categories of small business concerns, a comparison of these
amounts with the amounts made available to all small business
concerns, and a comparison of such amounts with the amounts
so made available during the 2 preceding years;
``(E) the challenges the Agency may face in hiring
qualified minority and women employees and contracting with
qualified minority-owned and women-owned businesses; and
``(F) any other information, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations for legislative or Agency action, as the
Director of the Office deems appropriate.
``(2) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Minority-owned small business concern.--The term
`minority-owned small business concern' has the meaning given
the term `socially and economically disadvantaged small
business concern' under section 8(a)(4) of the Small Business
Act.
``(B) Small business concern.--The term `small business
concern' has the meaning given that term under section 3(a)
of the Small Business Act.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 8(f) of the Export-
Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635g(f)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (4); and
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (5) through (8) as
paragraphs (4) through (7), respectively.

SEC. 7. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES TERRITORIES.

(a) Creation of the Office of Territorial Exporting.--
Section 3 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635a) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(n) Office of Territorial Exporting.--
``(1) In general.--The President of the Agency shall
establish an Office of Territorial Exporting, the functions
of which shall be to--
``(A) promote the export of goods and services from the
territories;
``(B) conduct outreach, education, and disseminate
information concerning export opportunities and the
availability of Agency support for such activities; and
``(C) increase the total amount of loans, guarantees, and
insurance provided by the Agency benefitting the territories.
``(2) Staff.--The President of the Agency shall hire such
staff as may be necessary to perform the functions of the
Office, including--
``(A) at least 1 staffer responsible for liaising with
Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands; and
``(B) at least 1 staffer responsible for liaising with the
United States territories of Guam, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa.
``(3) Definition of territory.--In this Act, the term
`territory' means the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United
States Virgin Islands, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and American Samoa.''.
(b) Annual Report.--Section 8 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635g),
as amended by section 6(b) of this Act, is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(m) Report on Activities in the Territories.--The Agency
shall include in its annual report to Congress under
subsection (a) a report on the steps taken by the Agency in
the period covered by the report to increase--
``(1) awareness of the Agency and its services in the
territories; and
``(2) the provision of Agency support to export businesses
in the territories.''.

SEC. 8. ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES DURING QUORUM LAPSE.

(a) In General.--Section 3(c)(6) of the Export-Import Bank
Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635a(c)(6)) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(A)'' after ``(6)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(B)(i) If there is an insufficient number of directors to
constitute a quorum under subparagraph (A) for 90 consecutive
days during the term of a President of the United States, a
temporary Board, consisting of the following members, shall
act in the stead of the Board of Directors:
``(I) The United States Trade Representative,
``(II) The Secretary of the Treasury,
``(III) The Secretary of Commerce, and
``(IV) The members of the Board of Directors.
``(ii) If, at a meeting of the temporary Board--
``(I) a member referred to in clause (i)(IV) is present,
the meeting shall be chaired by such a member, consistent
with Agency bylaws; or
``(II) no such member is present, the meeting shall be
chaired by the United States Trade Representative.
``(iii) A member described in subclause (I), (II), or (III)
of clause (i) may delegate the authority of the member to
vote on whether to authorize a transaction, whose value does
not exceed $100,000,000, to--
``(I) if the member is the United States Trade
Representative, the Deputy United States Trade
Representative; or
``(II) if the member is referred to in such subclause (II)
or (III), the Deputy Secretary of the department referred to
in the subclause.
``(iv) If the temporary Board consists of members of only 1
political party, the President of the United States shall, to
the extent practicable, appoint to the temporary Board a
qualified member of a different political party who occupies
a position requiring nomination by the President, by and with
the consent of the Senate.
``(v) The temporary board may not change or amend Agency
policies, procedures, bylaws, or guidelines.
``(vi) The temporary Board shall expire at the end of the
term of the President of the United States in office at the
time the temporary Board was constituted or upon restoration
of a quorum of the Board of Directors as defined in
subparagraph (A).
``(vii) With respect to a transaction that equals or
exceeds $100,000,000, the Chairperson of the temporary Board
shall ensure that the Agency complies with section
2(b)(3).''.
(b) Termination.--The amendments made by subsection (a)
shall have no force or effect after the 10-year period that
begins with the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 9. STRENGTHENING SUPPORT FOR U.S. SMALL BUSINESSES.

(a) Small Business Policy.--Section 2(b)(1) of the Export-
Import Bank Act of 1945 (12

[[Page H8858]]

U.S.C. 635(b)(1)) is amended by striking subparagraph
(E)(i)(I) and inserting the following:
``(E)(i)(I) It is further the policy of the United States
to encourage the participation of small business (including
women-owned businesses, minority-owned businesses, veteran-
owned businesses, businesses owned by persons with
disabilities, and businesses in rural areas) and start-up
businesses in international commerce, and to educate such
businesses about how to export goods using the United States
Export Finance Agency.''.
(b) Outreach.--
(1) Plan.--Within 120 days after the date of the enactment
of this Act, the United States Export Finance Agency shall
prepare and submit to the Committee on Financial Services of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate a comprehensive
outreach plan to ensure that small business owners are aware
of the financing options available to them through the
Agency. The plan shall include--
(A) input from the Small Business Administration and
statewide small business coalitions with operations in rural,
urban, and suburban regions;
(B) an emphasis on outreach to businesses owned by women,
minorities, veterans, and persons with disabilities; and
(C) a proposed budget for carrying out the plan during
fiscal years 2020 through 2029, that provides for the
spending of at least $1,000,000 annually for outreach to
small businesses.
(2) Implementation.--Section 2(b)(1)(E) of such Act (12
U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(E)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(xi) After consultation with the Committee on Financial
Services of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate, the Agency
shall implement the outreach plan referred to in section
9(b)(1) of the United States Export Finance Agency Act of
2019.''.
(c) Exclusion of Unutilized Insurance Authority in
Calculating Small Business Threshold.--Section 2(b)(1)(E)(v)
of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(E)(v)) is amended by adding
at the end the following: ``For the purpose of calculating
the amounts of authority required under this clause, the
Agency shall, with respect to insurance, exclude unutilized
authorizations that terminated during the fiscal year.''.
(d) Increase in Small Business Threshold.--
(1) In general.--Section 2(b)(1)(E)(v) of such Act (12
U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(E)(v)) is amended by striking ``25'' and
inserting ``30''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on October 1, 2028.

SEC. 10. ENHANCING FLEXIBILITY TO RESPOND TO PREDATORY EXPORT
FINANCING BY CHINA.

(a) Deeming Rule Under Tied Aid Credit Program.--Section
10(b)(5)(B)(i)(III) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12
U.S.C. 635i-3(b)(5)(B)(i)(III)) is amended by adding at the
end the following new sentence: ``The requirement that there
be credible evidence of a history of a foreign export credit
agency making offers not subject to the Arrangement is deemed
met in the case of exports likely to be supported by official
financing from the People's Republic of China, unless the
Secretary of the Treasury has reported to the Committee on
Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the
Senate that China is in substantial compliance with the
Arrangement.''.
(b) Collaboration With USDA on Export Financing Programs.--
Section 13(1)(A) of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635i-7(1)(A)) is
amended by inserting ``, the Department of Agriculture,''
before ``and other Federal agencies''.

SEC. 11. RESTRICTION ON FINANCING FOR CERTAIN ENTITIES.

Section 2 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(l) Restriction on Financing for Certain Entities.--
``(1) In general.--Beginning on the date that is 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Board
of Directors may not approve a transaction that is subject to
approval by the Board with respect to the provision by the
Agency of any guarantee, insurance, or extension of credit,
or the participation by the Agency in any extension of credit
for which the end user, obligor, or lender is described in
paragraph (2).
``(2) Prohibited end user, obligor, or lender.--An end
user, obligor, or lender is described in this paragraph if
the end user, obligor, or lender is known to the Agency to
be:
``(A) The People's Liberation Army of the People's Republic
of China.
``(B) The Ministry of State Security of the People's
Republic of China.
``(C) Included on the Denied Persons List or the Entity
List maintained by the Bureau of Industry and Security of the
Department of Commerce.
``(D) Included on the Arms Export Control Act debarred list
maintained by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls of
the Department of State.
``(E) Any person who has paid a criminal fine or penalty
pursuant to a conviction or resolution or settlement
agreement with the Department of Justice for a violation of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in the preceding 3 years.
``(F) A person who, in the preceding 3 years, appeared on
the Annual Intellectual Property Report to Congress by the
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator in the
Executive Office of the President, if the person was
convicted in any court
``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Person.--The term `person' means an individual or
entity.
``(B) Entity.--The term `entity' means a partnership,
association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group,
subgroup, or other organization.''.

SEC. 12. PROHIBITIONS ON FINANCING FOR CERTAIN PERSONS
INVOLVED IN SANCTIONABLE ACTIVITIES.

Section 2 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635), as amended by section 11 of this Act, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(m) Prohibitions on Financing for Certain Persons
Involved in Sanctionable Activities.--
``(1) In general.--Beginning on the date that is 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Board
of Directors of the Agency may not approve any transaction
that is subject to approval by the Board with respect to the
provision by the Agency of any guarantee, insurance, or
extension of credit, or the participation by the Agency in
any extension of credit, to a person in connection with the
exportation of any good or service unless the person provides
the certification described in paragraph (2).
``(2) Certification described.--The certification described
in this paragraph is a certification by a person who is an
end user, obligor, or lender that neither the person nor any
other person owned or controlled by the person engages in any
activity in contravention of any United States law,
regulation, or order applicable to the person concerning--
``(A) trade and economic sanctions, including an embargo;
``(B) the freezing or blocking of assets of designated
persons; or
``(C) other restrictions on exports, imports, investment,
payments, or other transactions targeted at particular
persons or countries.
``(3) Certification requirements.--The certification
described in paragraph (2) shall be made after reasonable due
diligence and based on best knowledge and belief.''.

SEC. 13. PROMOTING RENEWABLE ENERGY EXPORTS, ENVIRONMENTAL
AND SOCIAL STANDARDS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

(a) Office of Financing for Renewable Energy, Energy
Efficiency and Energy Storage Exports.--Section 2(b)(1)(C) of
the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(C))
is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Office of Financing for Renewable Energy, Energy
Efficiency and Energy Storage.--The President of the Agency
shall establish an office whose functions shall be to promote
the export of goods and services to be used in the
development, production, and distribution of renewable energy
resources, and energy efficiency and energy storage
technologies, and disseminate information concerning export
opportunities and the availability of Agency support for such
activities, to increase the total amount of loans,
guarantees, and insurance provided by the Agency to support
exports related to renewable energy, energy efficiency, and
energy storage.''.
(b) Environmental Policy and Procedures.--Section 11(a) of
such Act (12 U.S.C. 635i-5(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the 2nd sentence, by inserting ``, including to
potentially impacted communities in the country in which the
activity will be carried out, at least 60 days before the
date of the vote,'' before ``and supplemental'';
(B) by inserting after the 2nd sentence the following:
``The procedures shall include a requirement for an analysis
of the environmental and social impacts, including worker
impacts and anticipated health impacts and costs, of the
proposed activity and of alternatives to the proposed
activity, including mitigation measures, where
appropriate.''; and
(C) in the 3rd sentence, by striking ``The preceding
sentence'' and inserting ``This paragraph'';
(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (7) and
inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Consultations with potentially impacted
communities.--In any credit or common terms agreements to
which the Agency is a party relating to a transaction
described in paragraph (1), the Agency shall include a
provision to ensure that robust consultations with
potentially impacted communities in the country in which the
activity will be carried out have been and will continue to
be carried out throughout the project cycle.
``(3) Environmental and social due diligence procedures and
guidelines review.--By the end of 2020 and once at the end of
each subsequent 3-year period, the Board of Directors of the
Agency shall complete a review of the Environmental and
Social Due Diligence Procedures and Guidelines ensuring that
the procedures and guidelines incorporate requirements for
project consideration that are consistent to limit greenhouse
gas emissions and, to the maximum extent possible, to affirm
that the Board operates consistently with the multilateral
environmental agreements to which the United States is a
party that are directly related to transactions in which the
Agency is involved.
``(4) The Agency shall operate consistently with Annex VI
of the Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits, as
adopted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development as of January 2019.
``(5) The Agency shall make publicly available the
estimated amounts of CO2 emissions expected to be
produced from pending projects that the Agency has designated
as Category A and B projects and work with other export
credit agencies to encourage them to do the same.
``(A) The Agency shall report CO2 emissions
associated with projects that the Agency has

[[Page H8859]]

designated as Category A and B fossil fuel projects in its
annual report by product categories.
``(B) The Agency shall advocate within the OECD and other
multilateral fora for the full reporting of CO2
emissions associated with appropriate energy and non-energy
projects including manufacturing and agriculture.
``(C) The Agency shall undertake periodic reviews with
stakeholders to ensure that the Agency employs the most
appropriate methodology of estimating and tracking the
CO2 emissions from Category A and B projects the
Agency supports.
``(6) The Agency shall develop and maintain measures to
provide increased financing support for evolving technologies
that reduce CO2 emissions.
``(A) The Agency shall develop and maintain measures to
encourage foreign buyers to seek available, commercially
viable technology to reduce the CO2 footprint of
projects.
``(B) The Agency shall develop and maintain initiatives to
finance aspects of project development that reduce or
mitigate CO2 emissions, such as effective carbon
capture and sequestration technology, while maintaining the
competitiveness of United States exporters.
``(C) In coordination with the Department of the Treasury,
the Agency shall advocate in international fora for the
availability of financing incentives for low to net zero
CO2-emitting projects, a common methodology for
evaluating and taking into account the social cost of carbon.
``(D) The Agency shall encourage export credit agencies and
other relevant lending institutions to adopt similar
CO2 policies, including encouraging transparency
and the involvement of stakeholders.''; and
(3) in paragraph (7) (as so redesignated by paragraph (2)
of this subsection), by striking ``paragraph (1)'' and
inserting ``this subsection''.
(c) Annual Report to Congress.--Section 11(c) of such Act
(12 U.S.C. 635i-5(c)) is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Inclusion in Annual Report to Congress.--The Agency
shall include in its annual report to Congress under section
8 a summary of its activities under subsections (a) and (b).
The Board of Directors shall submit to the Congress a report,
which shall be made publicly available on the Internet at the
time of delivery--
``(1) that provides a detailed accounting of the
methodology used to make greenhouse gas emissions project
determinations; and
``(2) details the steps taken to ensure that the
Environmental and Social Due Diligence Procedures and
Guidelines of the Agency are consistent with--
``(A) reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and
``(B) operating consistently with the multilateral
environmental agreements to which the United States is a
party that are directly related to transactions in which the
Agency is involved.''.
(d) Financing for Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency, and
Energy Storage Technologies.--Section 2(b)(1)(K) of such Act
(12 U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(K)) is amended by inserting ``, energy
efficiency, and energy storage. It shall be a goal of the
Bank to ensure that not less than 5 percent of the applicable
amount (as defined in section 6(a)(2)) is made available each
fiscal year for the financing of renewable energy, energy
efficiency, and energy storage technology exports'' before
the period.
(e) Sense of the Congress Regarding Agency
Accountability.--It is the sense of the Congress that--
(1) the Board of Directors of the United States Export
Finance Agency (in this section referred to as the
``Agency'') should, after a public consultation process,
establish a formal, transparent, and independent
accountability mechanism to review, investigate, offer
independent dispute resolution to resolve, and publicly
report on allegations by affected parties of any failure of
the Agency to follow its own policies and procedures with
regard to the environmental and social impacts of projects,
and on situations where the Agency is alleged to have failed
in ensuring the borrower is fulfilling its obligations in
financing agreements with respect to the policies and
procedures;
(2) the accountability mechanism should be able to provide
advice to management on policies, procedures, guidelines,
resources, and systems established to ensure adequate review
and monitoring of the environmental and social impacts of
projects;
(3) in carrying out its mandate, the confidentiality of
sensitive business information should be respected, as
appropriate, and, in consultation with potentially impacted
communities, project sponsors, Agency management, and other
relevant parties, a flexible process should be followed aimed
primarily at correcting project failures and achieving better
results on the ground;
(4) the accountability mechanism should be independent of
the line operations of management, and report its findings
and recommendations directly to the Board of Directors of the
Agency and annually to the Congress;
(5) the annual report of the Agency should include a
detailed accounting of the activities of the accountability
mechanism for the year covered by the report and the remedial
actions taken by the Agency in response to the findings of
the accountability mechanism;
(6) in coordination with the accountability mechanism, the
Agency and relevant parties should engage in proactive
outreach to communities impacted or potentially impacted by
Agency financing and activities to provide information on the
existence and availability of the accountability mechanism;
(7) the President of the Agency should, subject to the
approval of the Board of Directors of the Agency, and
consistent with applicable law, through an open and
competitive process, including solicitation of input from
relevant stakeholders, appoint a director of the
accountability mechanism, who would be responsible for the
day-to-day operations of the mechanism, and a panel of not
less than 3 experts, including the director, who would also
serve as chair of the panel; and
(8) The accountability mechanism director and members of
the panel should not have been employed by the Agency within
the 5 years preceding their appointment, and should be
ineligible from future employment at the Agency.

SEC. 14. REINSURANCE PROGRAM.

Section 51008 of the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation Act (12 U.S.C. 635 note) is amended--
(1) in the section heading, by striking ``pilot'';
(2) in subsection (a), by striking ``pilot'';
(3) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``$1,000,000,000''
and inserting ``$2,000,000,000''; and
(4) by striking subsections (c) through (e) and inserting
the following:
``(c) Factors for Consideration in Reinsurance Pools.--In
implementing this section, the Agency shall, with respect to
a reinsurance pool, pursue appropriate objectives to reduce
risk and costs to the Agency, including by the following, to
the extent practicable:
``(1) Ensuring a reasonable diversification of risks.
``(2) Including larger exposures where the possibility of
default raises overall portfolio risk for the Agency.
``(3) Excluding transactions from the pool that are covered
by first-loss protection.
``(4) Excluding transactions from the pool that are
collateralized at a rate greater than standard market
practice.
``(5) Diversifying reinsurance pools by industry and other
appropriate factors.
``(6) Exploring different time periods of coverage.
``(7) Exploring both excess of loss structures on a per-
borrower as well as an aggregate basis.
``(d) Biennial Reports.--Not later than 1 year after the
date of the enactment of this subsection, and every 2 years
thereafter through 2029, the Agency shall submit to the
Committee on Financial Services of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs of the Senate a written report that contains an
assessment of the use of the program carried out under
subsection (a) since the most recent report under this
subsection.
``(e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to limit any authority of the Agency described
in section 2(a)(1) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945.''.

SEC. 15. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.

Section 3(j) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12
U.S.C. 635a(j)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking all that precedes
subparagraph (A) and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the
Agency may use an amount equal to 1.25 percent of the surplus
of the Agency during fiscal years 2020 through 2029 to--'';
and
(2) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) Limitation.--The aggregate of the amounts used in
accordance with paragraph (1) for fiscal years 2020 through
2029 shall not exceed $40,000,000.''.

SEC. 16. ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINED PAY.

Section 3 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635a), as amended by section 7(a) of this Act, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(o) Compensation of Employees.--
``(1) Rates of pay.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Board of
Directors of the Agency, consistent with standards
established by the Director of the Office of Minority and
Women Inclusion, may set and adjust rates of basic pay for
employees and new hires of the Agency without regard to the
provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of
title 5, United States Code, except that no employee of the
Agency may receive a rate of basic pay that exceeds the rate
for level III of the Executive Schedule under section 5313 of
such title.
``(2) Limitations.--The Board of Directors of the Agency
may not apply paragraph (1) to more than 35 employees at any
point in time. Nothing in paragraph (1) may be construed to
apply to any position of a confidential or policy-determining
character that is excepted from the competitive service under
section 3302 of title 5, United States Code, (pursuant to
schedule C of subpart C of part 213 of title 5 of the Code of
Federal Regulations) or to any position that would otherwise
be subject to section 5311 or 5376 of title 5, United States
Code.''.

The CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in
order except those printed in House Report 116-289.
Each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed
in the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be
considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the
report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent,
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand
for division of the question.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mrs. Torres of California

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in
House Report 116-289.

[[Page H8860]]

Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 16, line 3, strike ``and''.
Page 16, after line 3, insert the following:
(C) an emphasis on outreach to businesses that export goods
and services that are produced by Indian tribes and that are
made, assembled, or otherwise derived on or from an Indian
tribe's Indian land (as defined in section 2601(2) of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 (25 U.S.C. 2501(2));
Page 16, line 4, strike ``(C)'' and insert ``(D)''.
Page 17, after line 7, insert the following:
(e) Report on Activities Supporting Indian Tribes.--Section
8 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635g), as amended by the preceding
provisions of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(n) Report on Activities Supporting Indian Tribes.--The
Agency shall include in its annual report to Congress under
subsection (a) a report on the steps taken by the Agency in
the period covered by the report to increase--
``(1) awareness of the Agency and its services available to
Indian tribes; and
``(2) the provision of Agency support to tribal export
businesses.''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Torres) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
My amendment would add language directing the U.S. Export Finance
Agency to emphasize outreach to Tribal businesses, including Alaskan
Native corporations, that export goods and services.
There is a long history of successful Federal economic development
programs leaving--leaving--Indian Country behind.
Ensuring that Tribal businesses are aware of the services and
resources that the agency provides is absolutely critical. Companies
that increase their exports are able to raise wages, take on additional
employees, and further invest in their communities.
Increased economic development in Indian Country means increased
economic opportunity, which, in turn, means more self-determination for
Tribes and a greater ability to take care of their people as sovereign
nations.
The U.S. Export Finance Agency has proven to be an important tool in
expanding U.S. exports and creating American jobs, but we need to
ensure that it is a tool that benefits all Americans, including Native
Americans. And that is exactly what this amendment does.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition, though I am not
opposed to the amendment.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North Carolina is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, Republicans unanimously voted to support the
Waters-McHenry bipartisan bill to strengthen the bank and combat
Chinese aggression but will not support this partisan bill.
And, while I am not opposed to the Torres amendment, I would simply
note that there is a point where additional reporting requirements and
other mandates can burden agencies to the point of diminishing returns.
I think it is important, though, that Ex-Im be focused on American
businesses, especially those in need and that have great capacity like
Tribal businesses do.
So, it is a good amendment. I support it.
What I would also mention to this body is that the negotiation on the
Waters-McHenry bill took the small business mandate for the bank and
raised it so that Ex-Im would make small businesses more of a priority
for this reauthorization than it previously had been; and, instead, we
have a bill before us today that delays that raise for 10 years, until
the last year of the authorization of the bill before us.
I think this is a missed opportunity. It is bad for small business,
bad for Tribal export businesses, which would qualify as a small
business, most of them--almost all of them, in fact--under the purview
of the Ex-Im Bank and the designation of Ex-Im Bank.
So that small business mandate shows that that was not a priority for
the Democrats who wrote this bill. And that is a sad thing. It is a bad
thing. It is not helpful to American business and not helpful to the
bank.
Mr. Chair, I support the Torres amendment, the Torres-Cole amendment,
commend the gentlewoman for offering it, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member
for his support. There has been a lot of talk around China and zero
talk around Indian Country.
All this amendment does is require the agency to conduct outreach--
outreach--to Indian Country to ensure that Tribal export businesses
benefit from the same services and resources we offer every other
American business.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Torres of California

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in
House Report 116-289.
Mrs. TORRES of California. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 21, line 9, strike ``or''.
Page 21, after line 9, insert the following:
``(C) sanctions relating to serious violations of human
rights or free speech, including any sanctions--
``(i) imposed under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights
Accountability Act;
``(ii) related to the efforts to the Chinese government to
limit or punish demonstrations in Hong Kong;
``(iii) related to the political repression or detention of
religious and ethnic minorities in China or Burma; or
``(iv) related to the gross violation of internationally
recognized human rights (as defined in section 502B of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961) in China; or''.
Page 21, line 10, strike ``(C)'' and insert ``(D)''.

[[Page H8861]]

existing law. You cannot do business with sanctioned individuals.
American businesses cannot do business with sanctioned individuals or
entities. It is American law.
So, if American businesses can't do business with sanctioned
entities, what this amendment says is they also cannot get subsidized
by the Ex-Im Bank to do that business that they can't do.
So, fine. I don't oppose the amendment, but what this looks like to
me is cover to Democrats for gutting important national security
provisions in the Waters-McHenry bipartisan Ex-Im reauthorization bill.
In that legislation, Republicans sought to restrict Ex-Im assistance
for Chinese government-controlled entities in light of Beijing's
suppression of freedom of speech, freedom in Hong Kong, its political
repression of religious and ethnic minorities, and other actions
inconsistent with our national interests.
Rather than support those provisions, Democrats have decided to
parrot China, this China language, and, well, quite frankly, take
Republicans' intellectual property here and talking points, if you
will, and try to cover it. And that is what this amendment is.
So, American businesses cannot do business with sanctioned entities.
What this says is that they also can't get Ex-Im financing for the
business that they can't do.
Fine. Great. Fine. We will let it go. It is fine. But, news flash to
anyone: You can't finance something that doesn't actually happen.
So this amendment, it is fine. It checks the box, covers a little
political cover. I got it. It is fine. So we will just let it go, but
that is really what this does. It is a political cover vote rather than
actually anything of substance. So I will let it go. I will let it go
by a voice vote.
But I think what will happen is that the Democrat majority will call
a rollcall vote so their Members can show they have a vote to do
something that gives them political cover. It is good. It is great. It
is fine. But I am not going to participate in that charade.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. TORRES of California. I take issue with the ranking member
questioning my hard work. I have spent every year since I came to
Congress in 2015 working to address the issues of public corruption in
Central America and throughout Latin America. So for this to come up
now is, frankly, very disappointing.
My amendment, yes, does build on important provisions that are
already in the bill, which prohibit extending credit to individuals who
are subject to U.S. sanctions.
These provisions will protect the new agency, uphold American values,
and protect our national security.
I urge my colleagues to find a way to see through this fog and
understand that this is the right way to go about it. I hope they will
support the bill and support my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 1545

Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Again, let me state this: If you are a sanctioned individual or
entity, under American law, American businesses cannot do business with
them.
We have an amendment here that says they also can't get subsidized
financing from Ex-Im to do that business that they are prevented from
doing.
Okay, fine. I get this. It has language about human rights, but we
already have that limitation in law, in fact. If we wanted to do
something real and substantive when it comes to sanctioned individuals,
we would have gone a step further, including the China provisions in
the bipartisan Waters-McHenry bill.
All this does is restate existing law. It is not a good amendment. It
is not a bad amendment. It is a political cover amendment. It is a sad
thing that, instead of doing things of substance and having real
impact, we are doing this.
So, fine. Vote for it. Add it to the bill. It doesn't matter. The
bill is not going to become law.
We are restating existing policy here, existing law. American
businesses cannot do business with sanctioned entities. If they do,
they become potentially sanctioned under American law. We have a
provision of law already for this. Now you are saying Ex-Im can't
finance something that can't happen. Okay, fine.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California will be
postponed.

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Flores

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in
House Report 116-289.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment as the designee of Mr.
Burgess.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 21, strike line 17 and all that follows through page
30, line 9, and insert the following:

SEC. 13. PROMOTING AFFORDABLE ENERGY, ENERGY EFFICIENCY, AND
CLEAN ENERGY EXPORTS.

(a) Office of Energy Efficiency and Clean Energy Exports.--
Section 2(b)(1)(C) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12
U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(C)) is amended to read as follows:
``(C) Office of Energy Efficiency and Clean Energy
Exports.--The President of the Agency shall establish an
office whose functions shall be to--
``(i) advise the Board of Directions on ways of promoting
the export of goods and services to be used in the
development, production, and distribution of energy
efficiency and clean energy resources;
``(ii) disseminate information concerning export
opportunities and the availability of Agency support for such
activities; and
``(iii) act as a liaison between the Agency and the
Department of Commerce and other appropriate departments and
agencies of the Federal Government.''.
(b) Affordable Energy.--Section 11(a) of such Act (12
U.S.C. 635i-5(a)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3) and
inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Affordability of energy consideration.--The Agency
shall establish procedures to consider, concurrently with
compliance with the procedures established under paragraph
(1), potential increases to energy prices resulting from the
export of any good or service supported by the Agency.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated)--
(A) by striking ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``this
subsection'';
(B) by inserting ``or energy affordability'' after
``environmental'' the 1st place it appears; and
(C) by inserting ``and energy affordability'' after
``environmental'' the 2nd place it appears.
(c) Annual Report to Congress.--Section 11(c) of such Act
(12 U.S.C. 635i-5(c)) is amended to read as follows:
``(c) Inclusion in Annual Report to Congress.--The Agency
shall include in its annual report to Congress under section
8 a report on the following:
``(1) Whether the provision by the Agency of financing for
the goods and services described in section 2(b)(1)(C)(i)
have increased energy affordability in the countries to which
the goods and services have been exported.
``(2) An estimate of any reductions in emissions (including
emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, greenhouse
gases, particulates, and lead) resulting from the provision
by the Agency of financing for the goods and services
referred to in paragraph (1) of this subsection.''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Flores) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, again, I am offering this amendment on
behalf of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
This amendment requires the Export-Import Bank to take into
consideration energy affordability, in addition to environmental
impact, before approving transactions. It further requires the Export-
Import Bank to report on how transactions impact the cost of energy in
the importing country and the estimated emissions reductions caused by
Bank-financed exports.
Clean energy sources from nonrenewable sources, such as hydrogen,
nuclear, and natural gas, are just as important to lowering emissions
as renewable energy. The bill, as written, only focuses on renewable
energy sources, but we should also promote nonrenewable clean energy
sources such as nuclear, hydrogen, and natural gas.

[[Page H8862]]

If emissions reductions are the goal, Federal policies must focus on
total performance and not favor one technology over the other. In the
developing world, affordable, clean energy will give people more
opportunity for a better life when expensive alternatives are
unaffordable.
I urge passage of this amendment to ensure that energy affordability,
energy efficiency, and clean energy remain an important component of
our export policy.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CASTEN of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I seek to claim the time in
opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CASTEN of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strongly oppose the
Burgess amendment and in support of the underlying bill, the United
States Export Finance Agency Act of 2019.
The science is really clear. The climate crisis is here, and we are
already seeing its devastating impact. Despite the best efforts of the
current administration to the contrary, the United States must be a
global leader in acting to combat the climate crisis.
Leading in climate action will not only protect our future from the
worst impacts of climate change but will make our Nation more
competitive and enable U.S. companies and workers to own the clean
energy technologies and jobs of tomorrow.
I was proud to work with all of my colleagues on the Financial
Services Committee to introduce an amendment in markup that added
strong environmental protections to this reauthorization.
Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4863 provides important reforms to the Ex-Im Bank
to ensure it is able to support America's exporters in the 21st
century. Let me describe precisely what this amendment would eliminate.
It would eliminate a new office focused on supporting renewable
energy-related exports so that we can make these products here in the
United States and sell them around the world.
It would eliminate a new target that 5 percent of Ex-Im's financing
goes to support renewable energy-related exports.
It would eliminate a requirement that the Ex-Im Bank consult with
local communities to ensure that U.S.-financed projects are not causing
harm.
It would eliminate a direction from Congress that the Ex-Im Bank
establish an accountability mechanism to provide persons who may have
been negatively affected by an Ex-Im project to find resolution.
And it would eliminate required disclosures of the estimated
CO2 emissions expected to be produced from Ex-Im supported
projects.
Mr. Chairman, these provisions were carefully crafted by the
committee to protect the environment and support American workers.
However, all of those environmental reforms would be eliminated by the
Burgess amendment, harming our efforts to compete with China on new
environmental technologies and undermining Ex-Im's efforts to
responsibly finance projects around the world.
Why? Because of this theory about economics. Let me be very clear.
Coal is dying right now for the same reason that clean energy is
rising, because of economics.
Does it cost money to build new projects? You bet it does. Where I
come from, that is called an investment, especially when you replace a
1950s technology with a high marginal operating cost with a new, modern
technology that doesn't cost anything to operate.
Claiming economics in defense of blocking clean energy is foolish. It
is irresponsible. It ain't leadership. It is cowardice. It is
irresponsible.
This is the time we have to stand up and lead, and I urge all of my
colleagues to oppose this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to my colleague, I
don't think he understands my amendment.
Nuclear energy has zero emissions. Hydrogen has zero emissions.
Natural gas has much-reduced emissions compared to coal.
The advantage of nuclear energy is it is always on. Renewable is not
always on.
This is a chance to give the importing companies a chance to have
clean energy, affordable energy, and to be able to advance their
economies using U.S. know-how and technology, which leads in several of
these areas.
I urge a ``yea'' vote for my amendment because it is the right thing
to do if we really care about emissions reduction, affordability around
the world, and being able to export the United States' leading
technology and clean energy.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CASTEN of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the chairwoman of the
committee.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I strongly oppose this amendment. This amendment undermines a
carefully crafted compromise on environmental reforms, both in the
underlying bill and developed by my good friend from Illinois.

It undermines U.S. leadership on growing more jobs in renewable
energy, eliminates accountability at Ex-Im, and ends efforts to have
Ex-Im consult with local communities on projects it supports.
I urge all of my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
Mr. CASTEN of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, has the gentleman from Texas
closed?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has relinquished his time.
Mr. CASTEN of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of
my time.
Mr. Chairman, the amendment under consideration has nothing to do
with moving the Ex-Im forward. Instead, it eliminates needed reforms in
the underlying bill to modernize the Bank and bring it into the 21st
century. It takes this bill back toward the past rather than looking
toward the future.
I urge all my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this misguided amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Flores).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. FLORES. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will be postponed.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. McAdams

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4 printed in
House Report 116-289.
Mr. McADAMS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 21, line 9, strike ``or''.
Page 21, after line 9, insert the following:
``(C) sanctions relating to the illegal trafficking of
synthetic opioids, including any sanctions imposed pursuant
to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act; or''.
Page 21, line 10, strike ``(C)'' and insert ``(D)''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentleman from Utah
(Mr. McAdams) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
Mr. McADAMS. Mr. Chair, my amendment builds on the work of the
underlying bill, which has strong and smart prohibitions on financing
to bad actors known to the U.S. Government, such as those violating
U.S. laws related to trade and economic sanctions.
Specifically, my amendment ensures that the Export-Import Bank,
renamed as the U.S. Export Finance Agency under the bill, prohibits any
transaction to people involved in sanctionable activities related to
the illegal trafficking of synthetic opioids, including any sanctions
imposed pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act.
We know synthetic opioid trafficking is a problem, specifically
coming from China, where they are the leading producer of fentanyl. We
have taken bipartisan action in this Congress to put more pressure on
China to stop opioid trafficking, which is fueling so many deaths and
so much tragedy across our communities.
Earlier this year, we passed legislation introduced by my colleague
from New York (Mr. Rose), who is a cosponsor of this amendment, the
Fentanyl Sanctions Act. That act would apply

[[Page H8863]]

pressure to the Chinese Government to honor their commitment to make
all fentanyl illegal and to provide the United States with more tools
and resources to go after illicit traffickers in China, Mexico, and
other countries.
This amendment builds on that effort by ensuring those bad actors are
not seeing the benefit of our export finance agency and that U.S.
companies are not engaged in business with criminal enterprises abroad.
Mr. Chair, this is a commonsense amendment. We should not be doing
business with bad actors, especially those that are poisoning our
communities with synthetic opioids.
I urge adoption of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition, but I am
not opposed to the amendment.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio is recognized
for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chair, first, let me say Republicans
unanimously voted to support the Waters-McHenry bipartisan deal to
strengthen the Export-Import Bank and combat Chinese aggression, but we
will not support this partisan bill.
This is yet another do-nothing amendment offered by the Democrats so
they can send out a press release claiming they care about national
security or, in this case, the opioid crisis. In fact, it is a poison
pill meant to counter an amendment that will be offered shortly.
``Amend and pretend'' is going to be a running theme during this
debate. Like another measure offered today by Mrs. Torres, Mr. McAdams'
amendment would simply require Ex-Im users to self-certify that they
are not breaking the law by violating opioid trafficking sanctions.
This way, Democrats can claim that they don't like opioids.
See how it works? They push this bill. It means nothing. Criminals,
of course, are going to say: No. Who, me? I wouldn't violate the law.
The real opioid measure that we have before us today is being offered
by me shortly. Mr. McAdams' amendment would actually prevent Ex-Im
assistance from going to foreign governments that significantly
contribute to opioid trafficking if those governments fail to cooperate
with U.S. antinarcotics efforts. That is a serious amendment. It
prevents taxpayer-backed financing from going to governments that help
to poison taxpayers. It is logical.
Unfortunately, my opioid trafficking amendment was so logical that
Democrats opposed it in committee and have pledged to oppose it here on
the floor shortly.
Again, this McAdams amendment is about a press release for Democrats,
so amend and pretend it is today with the McAdams amendment.

{time} 1600

I want to be clear that I do not oppose the amendment, but I am
opposed and disappointed that my Democratic colleagues have offered
another amendment that is another stunt provision for this dead-end
bill.
We had a bipartisan path forward, and Democrats are wasting floor
time with this bill that will never be enacted to law.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McADAMS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Waters), the chair of the House Financial Services
Committee.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
thank him for offering this important amendment.
This amendment builds on the important work of the gentleman from New
York on combating illegal opioids in this country. It ensures that
those who are sanctioned because of their involvement in the illegal
trade of opioids do not get access to Ex-Im assistance, including any
sanctions imposed pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation
Act.
I strongly support the gentleman's amendment to strengthen this bill
with respect to preventing the illegal trafficking of synthetic opioids
and urge all my colleagues to do so.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, as we will see shortly, to
highlight the fact that this isn't about getting the provision into
law, I am confident a recorded vote will be requested because it is all
theater. It is not meant to change the law in a substantive way; it is
meant to provide cover.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McADAMS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, the bill before us is a strong measure to support
economic development and to support job creation throughout our
country. The legislation improves the agency's ability to support
exports, and it supports small businesses in my home State of Utah. It
is supported by businesses and labor, and it does this all at no
expense to the taxpayer.
Miles Hansen, who is the president and CEO of the World Trade Center
Utah, said that the Export-Import Bank plays an important role in
supporting Utah's economic growth and Utah's companies' ability to
compete with countries such as China, Brazil, the U.K., and Germany:
``Direct access to the Export Finance Agency's finance and risk
management programs provide Utah's small businesses with critical tools
for international growth.''
I agree with Mr. Hansen, and I am a strong supporter of the agency
and the underlying bill, which strengthens and reauthorizes Ex-Im for
10 years.
My amendment is a commonsense addition to the bill to ensure that we
are not doing business with opioid traffickers overseas. I urge
adoption of the amendment, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on final passage.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Utah (Mr. McAdams).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. McADAMS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Utah will be postponed.

Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Davidson of Ohio

The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5 printed in
House Report 116-289.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 33, after line 22, insert the following:

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT THAT FAILS
TO COOPERATE ON PREVENTING ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING
OF SYNTHETIC OPIOIDS.

Section 2 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635), as amended by the preceding provisions of this Act, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(n) Prohibition on Assistance to Government That Fails to
Cooperate on Preventing Illegal Trafficking of Synthetic
Opioids.--
``(1) In general.--The Agency may not authorize the
provision of financial assistance for a lender, obligor, or
end user that--
``(A) is a covered government; and
``(B) in the determination of the President of the United
States, does not closely cooperate with the United States to
prevent opioid trafficking.
``(2) Waiver authorities.--
``(A) President of the agency.--The President of the Agency
may waive paragraph (1) on reporting to the Committee on
Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the
Senate that the financial assistance--
``(i) would enable exports directly by United States small
business concerns; or
``(ii) is required for the export of humanitarian goods or
services.
``(B) President of the united states.--The President of the
United States may waive paragraph (1) for not more than 1
year at a time on reporting to the committees specified in
subparagraph (A) that the waiver is essential to the national
interest of the United States, with a detailed explanation of
the reasons therefor.
``(3) Close cooperation.--For purposes of this subsection,
a government shall be considered to be closely cooperating
with the United States to prevent opioid trafficking if the
government is doing 2 or more of the following:
``(A) Implementing substantial improvements in regulations
involving the chemical and pharmaceutical production and
export of illicit opioids.
``(B) Implementing substantial improve ments in judicial
regulations to combat transnational criminal organizations
that traffic opioids.
``(C) Increasing efforts to prosecute foreign opioid
traffickers.
``(D) Increasing intelligence sharing and law enforcement
cooperation with the

[[Page H8864]]

United States with respect to opioid trafficking.
``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Covered government.--The term `covered government'
means--
``(i) the state and the government of China, the state and
the government of Mexico, and the state and the government of
any other country that, in the determination of the President
of the United States, is a significant contributor to opioid
trafficking, as well as any political subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality of any of the foregoing;
``(ii) any entity owned or controlled, directly or
indirectly, by any of the foregoing, including any
corporation, partnership, association, or other entity in
which any of the foregoing owns a 50 percent or greater
interest or a controlling interest, and any entity which is
otherwise controlled by any of the foregoing;
``(iii) any person that is or has been acting or purporting
to act, directly or indirectly, for or on behalf of any of
the foregoing; and
``(iv) any other person which the Secretary of the Treasury
determines is included in any of the foregoing.
``(B) Opioid trafficking.--The term `opioid trafficking'
means any illicit activity--
``(i) to produce, manufacture, distribute, sell, or
knowingly finance or transport--

``(I) synthetic opioids, including controlled substances
that are synthetic opioids and listed chemicals that are
synthetic opioids; or
``(II) active pharmaceutical ingredients or chemicals that
are used in the production of controlled substances that are
synthetic opioids;

``(ii) to attempt to carry out an activity described in
paragraph (1); or
``(iii) to assist, abet, conspire, or collude with other
persons to carry out such an activity.
``(5) Report required.--If the Agency authorizes financial
assistance for a lender, obligor, or end user that is a
covered government and the authorization is not made pursuant
to waiver authorities provide in paragraph (2), the President
of the United States shall certify to the Committee on
Financial Services of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the
Senate that the covered government is closely cooperating
with the United States, within the meaning of paragraph (3),
with a description of the cooperation.''.

The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Davidson) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to start off by saying that I
wholeheartedly support reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank. It is
an important tool to help ensure American companies can stay
competitive in foreign markets and can be used as an important national
security tool in countering countries such as China.
Unfortunately, there are several commonsense reforms that I think
could dramatically improve the agency but which are not being
considered under this bill, which is why I am offering my amendment.
My amendment is modeled after the bipartisan Fentanyl Sanctions Act,
introduced in the House by Max Rose and cosponsored by our colleague
from Arkansas, French Hill. In the Senate, the Senate minority leader,
Democrat Chuck Schumer, is the lead sponsor, joined by Republican
Senator Pat Toomey and others.
Under the House and Senate fentanyl bills, the President could waive
sanctions against foreign state-owned banks if a foreign government is
closely cooperating with our efforts to prevent opioid trafficking.
This amendment's approach is similar. It simply says that the United
States will oppose Ex-Im Bank assistance to a government and the
entities it controls if the President determines that the government
isn't cooperating with us to stop the flood of opioids into our
country. China and Mexico, in particular, have been identified by the
U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency as primary producers of these opioids.
This amendment is not targeting those who need assistance from the
United States most; in fact, my amendment would provide a waiver where
exports are needed to the government in question for the export of
humanitarian goods or services. We want to help those who need
assistance, but we must be doing all that we can do to confront the
opioid epidemic that is wreaking havoc in the United States.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, opioids are the main
driver of opioid deaths in America, with deaths linked to synthetic
opioids, especially fentanyl, rising exponentially. Areas in southwest
Ohio, where I represent, have some of the highest per capita opioid
overdose deaths in the Nation.
And this is an epidemic impacting all our Nation's communities. In
2017 alone, 28,000 deaths in the United States involved synthetic
opioids, and deaths have risen all across demographic groups in nearly
half of U.S. States.
In short, this is a problem that touches all of us, and close
cooperation with countries receiving Ex-Im assistance from the United
States is essential.
If we care about stopping this epidemic, my amendment is a small but
important step that we should all be able to agree on. I urge my
colleagues to support its adoption.
I want to clarify that countries that have problems, like China or
Mexico, don't need to completely eliminate their problem; what they do
need to do is cooperate with the United States, and when they do, the
Export-Import Bank can continue to function well where it was designed
to function well.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Ruiz). The gentlewoman from California is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment demonstrates a fundamental
misunderstanding about what Ex-Im does and whom it benefits.
The beneficiaries of Ex-Im's assistance are U.S. exporters and the
American workers they employ. It is in America's interest to have a
fully functioning Ex-Im because it allows U.S. companies to compete in
the global markets.
Mr. Davidson's amendment would effectively ban using the Ex-Im Bank
in China or Mexico to try to put pressure on Governments of Mexico and
China to cooperate with the U.S. to stop the trafficking of synthetic
opioids.
No one wants to support the trafficking of opioids, but Ex-Im is
precisely the wrong agency to use to achieve foreign policy outcomes.
If Mexico or China do not cooperate, those countries will not be harmed
by this amendment; American companies and workers will be. The Mexican
or Chinese Governments will simply buy products from another country
that is more than willing to sell them exports.
If the goal is to fight the opioid crisis, we need to support
programs like Ex-Im that are going to be creating good, well-paying
jobs in every district all over the country and support small
businesses that are the drivers of community investment and
development.
And if we really want to put pressure on foreign governments to
cooperate with the U.S. in preventing the trafficking of opioids, then
we need to bolster our sanctions program, which can deny the bad actor
to the largest economy in the world.
I understand Mr. Davidson's strongly held desire to do something to
address this opioid epidemic and to protect Ex-Im from being improperly
accessed by criminal networks trafficking in synthetic opioids. That is
why I strongly support Mr. McAdams' and Mr. Rose's amendment to
directly cut off Ex-Im financing from those criminal entities that
violate sanctions dealing with illegal opioids, including violations of
the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act. Mr. Rose also has
legislation pending that would further broaden those who are sanctioned
under U.S. law for illegal opioids.
Mr. Davidson's concerns are understandable, but in practice, this
amendment would limit the ability of Ex-Im to support U.S. jobs and
small businesses, further exacerbating the conditions that have
contributed to this opioid epidemic.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Ohio has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
I would like to make the point that this amendment that I have
offered has substance because it expects something for America's
assistance.
At least some of my colleagues are consistent: They don't want the
President of the United States, whoever

[[Page H8865]]

that is, to expect anything from a foreign power in exchange for
American participation. They want nothing in return for our dollars, no
condition on their behavior.
In fact, rather than trusting the United States of America to
determine whether a country is cooperating with us on our efforts to
stop synthetic opioids, they want to trust the people who may very well
be using the system to create that market for their own benefit, self-
certification.
I am sure the Sinaloa Cartel would certify that they don't
participate in trafficking drugs, as well.
That is what the McAdams approach does. That is the version that our
chairwoman has, unfortunately, chosen to support, and I believe it is
the wrong path.
I encourage people to support this amendment if they are serious
about trying to stop opioids and if they are serious about using the
foreign policy tools, including trade, that the United States has to
offer.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Heck)
Mr. HECK. Mr. Chairman, I understand the temptation to dabble in
foreign affairs when it comes to Ex-Im reauthorization. We have seen a
lot of that here today. But there is a reason why we have separate
committees in the House: so that Members can develop expertise and
apply that expertise. Financial services, simply put, is not the main
repository of that kind of expertise, and it shows in this approach.
But let me be clear: No one here wants to support the trafficking of
synthetic opioids, of course not. There is a right way and a wrong way
to do it. This is the wrong way to do it.
And, in fact, if my friend, the author of this amendment, and I do
consider him a friend--if you want to ensure that those who are
sanctioned for dealing illegal opioids cannot use this Bank, vote in
support; indeed, vote in support of the McAdams amendment. It is not
theater. It is not cover. It is a strong amendment that is targeted and
substantive and, in fact, is going to get at the very underlying
problem without costing American jobs and without hurting American
businesses.
So I urge you to join the Foreign Affairs Committee or support the
efforts of the McAdams amendment.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, this misguided amendment is going to hurt American
workers and American businesspersons. This is not the way to get at the
issue the gentleman from Ohio is concerned about. He should be
supporting the McAdams-Rose amendment if he wants to do that.
I urge all my colleagues to vote against this amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be
postponed.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Ms. Tlaib

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in House Report 116-289.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 16, after line 8, insert the following:
(2) Report on activities in economically disadvantaged
regions.--Section 8 of such Act (12 U.S.C. 635g), as amended
by sections 6(b) and 7(b) of this Act, is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(n) Report on Activities in Economically Disadvantaged
Regions.--
``(1) In general.--The Agency shall include in its annual
report to Congress under subsection (a) a report on the steps
taken by the Agency in the period covered by the report to
increase--
``(A) awareness of the Agency and its services in
economically disadvantaged regions; and
``(B) the provision of Agency support to export businesses
in economically disadvantaged regions.
``(2) Definition.--In paragraph (1), the term `economically
disadvantaged region' means a county or equivalent division
of local government of a State in which, according to the
most recently available data from the Bureau of the Census,
20 percent or more of the residents have an annual income
that is at or below the poverty level.''.
Page 16, line 9, strike ``(2)'' and insert ``(3)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentlewoman
from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would require that Ex-Im
provide an annual report to the United States Congress on the agency's
activity in economically disadvantaged areas and efforts that they are
taking to support those areas.
Government must be about people first, so when we talk about economic
opportunity, Mr. Chair, we must ensure that we are using every tool
possible to uplift communities that are struggling like my district.

{time} 1615

After the Great Recession of 2008, the country experienced an
economic recovery from 2011 to 2015, but already vulnerable communities
missed out on most of that growth and opportunity. There is no question
that some communities suffer more and take longer to recover, and
sometimes it takes decades longer, but it shouldn't be this way.
There is evidence that adequate reporting and proper investment may
be able to speed that pace of recovery for these kinds of communities.
According to the Economic Innovation Group, 52.3 million people, or
17 percent of the American population, experienced an average 6 percent
drop in the number of adults working and a 6.3 percent average drop in
the number of business establishments.
Specifically, Mr. Chair, workers and their families living in
especially hard-hit communities face challenges such as unemployment
that often arises from mass layoffs associated with declines in
specific industries and businesses.
For communities like mine, 13 districts strong, the impact on
employment and income can be extremely persistent.
Currently, Detroit is one of the five cities with the greatest number
of people in distressed ZIP codes and it ranks number ten as the most
distressed city in the United States of the country's 100 largest
cities. Wayne County, Michigan, which I represent, ranks second in the
Nation for inequality with job creation.
Addressing the economic and social costs associated with persistent
localized economic distresses requires adequate reporting, as it is
essential to addressing the causes and the costs of long-term economic
distress for workers, their families, and the communities.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to help
ensure that we have the tools to uplift every community across the
country like mine.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, let me say first that Republicans unanimously
voted to support the Waters-McHenry bipartisan deal to strengthen the
Bank and combat Chinese aggression, but we are not going to support
this partisan bill here on the floor today.
This amendment is a fine one. This amendment, as with some other
amendments that the Democrats are offering today that the Rules
Committee made in order--as I understand it, they made in order 19
Democrat amendments and two Republican amendments, so that is quite a
ratio, but I think there is a point where additional reporting
requirements, as I said earlier, and other mandates can burden an
agency to the point of diminishing returns.
If you want the Export-Import Bank to be effective, it is often
better to advocate for initiatives within the Bank,

[[Page H8866]]

like the Waters-McHenry bill, and make the Bank focus on priorities.
This is one area, with opportunity zones, that we support in a
bipartisan way to get investment in disadvantaged communities across
the country. Those opportunity zones are a part of now tax law.
That standalone bill was a bipartisan one last Congress and the
Congress before that had great consensus. So what the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) is advocating here matches up quite nicely with
that to ensure that the Bank is focused on those same areas that have
been historically disadvantaged or economically left behind.
Some of those areas are in my district, some are in her district, but
they are throughout the country.
So, as I said, I do not oppose the amendment, I support the
amendment, and I think it is important for the Bank to focus on
important communities across the country, but especially those that are
economically disadvantaged.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chair, I think it is really important, and I am glad
the ranking member did mention the opportunity zones. One of the key
controversies around opportunity zones right now is that out of the
hundreds of opportunity zone census tracks that were chosen, five did
not qualify under the poverty guidelines requirements for opportunity
zones.
Reporting like this creates transparency and accountability, Mr.
Chair, and that is why it is critically important that we don't make
the mistake again to support these kinds of tax breaks and loans and
opportunities through the Federal Government without any accountability
and follow-through with the United States Congress annually. That is
why it is critically important.
We are talking about five communities that should not have gotten the
opportunity zone designation, including two in the city of Detroit that
were promoted by billionaire Dan Gilbert. It should never have been
designated. They didn't qualify, Mr. Chair.
That is why it is important that we have these kinds of amendments
and requirements that the United States Congress can then proceed to
create transparency.
I fully support, obviously, opportunities for development in
communities that deserve it, especially representing the third poorest
congressional district in the country. However, we cannot allow those
political donors, like the billionaire Dan Gilbert, to pick and choose
where those opportunity zones are designated.
However, we are talking about Ex-Im today, and let's do this right by
supporting this kind of annual reporting to make sure that we are
helping economically disadvantaged communities like ours to be able to,
again, have accountability for the American people.
Again, I rise in support, as I hope my colleagues support me in
rising in support of this amendment, again, to make sure that we do our
due diligence as Members of Congress in making sure there are no other
kind of scandalous controversies that we see now with the opportunity
zones in our country.

Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would say, Mr. Chair, to my colleague from Michigan, under the
opportunity zones provision of the tax bill we passed last year,
governors designate those census tracks. So if the gentlewoman has a
problem with the census tracks designated in Michigan, that is a
problem with the Governor of Michigan, not the underlying important tax
law.
Mr. Chair, I would also commend my colleague, this is her first term
in Congress, two Congresses ago this was a bipartisan bill, it had wide
bipartisan support, and we had a similar number of Republicans and
Democrats support the opportunity zone legislation. And I think it is
really important, powerful legislation, important law now that is going
to have a strong impact on those economically disadvantaged
communities, many in my district and those across the country. I think
it is going to have a very positive effect over the long-term.
Mr. Chair, I would say again, I support this amendment, will not
oppose, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chair, again, I completely agree that that is the
process. However, it is our responsibility, since we are the ones who
created the bipartisan support of opportunity zones. However, it
doesn't make it exempt from corruption, Mr. Chair, and that is exactly
what is happening.
So then-Governor Snyder may have given his friend an advantage by not
complying with the opportunity zone requirement that it be a poverty-
stricken census track, that it is within those guidelines. That did not
happen.
So it is our due diligence, because we allowed the pathway for
opportunity zones, to have accountability. And this amendment basically
allows us to check in, Mr. Chair, and make sure that they are following
those guidelines, and that is exactly what didn't happen with the
opportunity zones. Just because they were bipartisan does not mean they
were exempt from corruption, it is exempt from accountability.
Mr. Chair, I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will
join me in having transparency and accountability. It is our
responsibility. They are our tax dollars. They are our programs that we
have to, again, hold accountable for those that take advantage by using
the system and tainting the process.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Case

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in House Report 116-289.
Mr. CASE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 6, line 8, after the 1st close parenthesis, insert ``,
which definition is deemed, for purposes of this
subparagraph, to include American Indians, Native Hawaiians
(as defined in section 103 of the Native American Languages
Act (25 U.S.C. 2902)), and Alaska Natives (defined as a
member of any Indian tribe (as defined in section 4 of the
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25
U.S.C. 5304)) that is based in the State of Alaska)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentleman
from Hawaii (Mr. Case) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Hawaii.
Mr. CASE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to
confirm that Native Hawaiians and Alaska Natives are included for the
purposes and considerations of the U.S. Export Finance Agency's new
Office of Minority and Women Inclusion.
I am very proud to be joined in offering this amendment by my friend
and colleague, the dean of this House, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr.
Young).
In reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank of the United States, H.R. 4863 would
create an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion for the new U.S.
Export Finance Agency. This office would be responsible for engaging
with minority-owned and women-owned businesses in the program,
contracts and activities of the agency. This includes outreach to those
businesses to ensure their awareness of the export assistance provided
by the agency.
The laudable policy goal of this office is to increase access to
export assistance and foster overall business for underrepresented
communities.
However, H.R. 4863 currently uses references to section 1204(c) of
the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of
1989, which defines ``minority'' as ``any Black American, Native
American, Hispanic American, or Asian American.''
Because of the unique statuses that Native Hawaiians and Alaska
Natives have and the complexities of Federal law, the term ``Native
American'' is not always understood to include Native Hawaiians and
Alaska Natives.
My amendment is a simple clarification that for the purposes of the
agency and its Office of Minority and Women Inclusion, those groups are
included, as they are for many other comparable Federal programs.
Adopting this amendment ensures that Native Hawaiian-owned and Alaska
Native-owned businesses will be

[[Page H8867]]

part of the agency's outreach efforts and have greater opportunity to
benefit from the agency's export assistance.
In my home State of Hawaii, Native Hawaiian-owned businesses are an
essential part of our economy, but this is also true in countless other
communities throughout our country.
According to the 2012 Survey of Business Owners, there are almost
26,000 Native Hawaiian-owned businesses in the United States, employing
over 20,000 people.
Improving outreach to Native Hawaiian-owned businesses by the agency
provides these businesses the chance to grow and expand opportunities
for the families and communities they support, not just in Hawaii, but
across the country.
Native Hawaiian-owned businesses contribute to the economies of every
single State and the District of Columbia. Nearly half of those
businesses operate outside of Hawaii.
These statistics demonstrate the involvement of Native Hawaiian
businesses in our business communities, but they also do not adequately
give voice to the extent to which their businesses contribute to the
overall empowerment of Native Hawaiian communities, nor do such numbers
tell the story of the countless lives that have been improved and the
communities strengthened as a result of their innovation and
entrepreneurship.
Everything that I have said here today applies equally to Alaska
Natives, as I am sure Mr. Young would be quick to point out.
This amendment will ensure that the reauthorized agency will help
Native Hawaiian-owned and Alaska Native-owned businesses pursue new
business opportunities, support American jobs across the country, and
sustain and enrich the communities they support, as will be the case
for other minority- and women-owned businesses.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, let me say first, Republicans unanimously
voted for the Waters-McHenry bipartisan deal to strengthen the Bank and
combat Chinese aggression, but we are not going to support this
partisan bill.
I would note that the amendment offered here clarifies the definition
of minorities under the section of the bill that was a priority for the
chair of our committee, Chairwoman Waters, which is the Office of
Minority and Women Inclusion, which is referred to as OMWI.
I would just note that in this bill, the Democrats have prioritized
OMWIs over the global economic and national security threats posed by
China and even Russia.
OMWIs are important. That is fine. We included that in the bipartisan
bill, and that was part of the tradeoff of a bipartisan bill, including
something that was a priority for Chairwoman Waters, but also in that
agreement were provisions that were tough on China. I thought it was a
fair trade in order to get a bipartisan bill.
OMWIs and being tough on China are not mutually exclusive ideas, but
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle felt that they needed to
prioritize, and so they chose OMWIs as opposed to a rational stance
against Chinese aggression or even Russian actions.
To the extent that Mr. Case's amendment clarifies language that will
have no impact and will not be enacted anyway, I don't oppose it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1630

Mr. CASE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate very much that, in the middle of
the remarks of my colleague, I certainly heard and detected support for
this amendment.
I appreciate my colleague in the minority recognizing the importance
of minority- and women-owned businesses throughout our country and
their contributions to our export community.
This is certainly consistent with my colleagues' earlier comments
that they fully support the provisions of this bill that do, in fact,
recognize that disadvantaged communities throughout our country often
need extra assistance. As I said earlier, this is consistent very much
with other Federal programs.
I would certainly, to the gentleman's comments about China, Russia,
and other countries, emphasize that, in this particular area, the more
American businesses that can participate in export-related activities
throughout the world, the better we will all be in this country with
respect to our relations with these other countries.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I would say to my colleague, yes, it is important that
we have robust global trade. Ex-Im, at its height, at its strongest
year, supported just shy of 2 percent of American exports.
I don't want to diminish a little less than 2 percent, but most
export is done through the private sector without a government program
like Ex-Im.
I would also say that, as a matter of our national interest, we
shouldn't be subsidizing Chinese foreign policy with One Belt, One
Road. We shouldn't be subsidizing their island-building in the Pacific.
We shouldn't be subsidizing their actions in Hong Kong. That is what we
negotiated with the Waters-McHenry bipartisan bill.
I am disappointed that we are not dealing with that policy. Instead,
the majority decided to go the partisan route, which the Republican
majority leader of the Senate has already said is dead on arrival. The
President said he is going to veto this bill.
We could have gone a bipartisan route with a bipartisan outcome, but
they chose a different route.
Look, the majority is the majority. They have the votes to go do what
they want to do. But that means I don't need to vote for bad policy
just to get along. That is why I tried to negotiate a good bill, and
that is why we had a good bill.
Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rouda). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Case).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 8 Offered by Ms. Speier

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8
printed in House Report 116-289.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 22, line 7, after ``efficiency'' insert ``(including
battery electric vehicles, batteries for electric vehicles,
and electric vehicle charging infrastructure)''.
Page 22, line 12, after ``energy efficiency'' insert
``(including battery electric vehicles, batteries for
electric vehicles, and electric vehicle charging
infrastructure)''.
Page 27, line 17, after ``energy efficiency'' insert
``(including battery electric vehicles, batteries for
electric vehicles, and electric vehicle charging
infrastructure)''.
Page 27, line 21, after ``energy efficiency'' insert
``(including battery electric vehicles, batteries for
electric vehicles, and electric vehicle charging
infrastructure)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Speier) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I commend the chairwoman of the Financial
Services Committee and the committee's efforts to support exports in
renewable energy and energy-efficiency technology.
My amendment makes clear that when it comes to supporting domestic
businesses exporting green energy technology, electric vehicles need to
be near the top of that list. It quite simply states that ``energy
efficiency'' includes electric vehicles as well as the batteries and
the charging infrastructure needed to make them move.
Electric vehicles are good for the environment; they are good for the
economy; and they are good for our national security. Zero-emission
electric vehicles will help combat the climate crisis. Since
transportation accounts

[[Page H8868]]

for 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, electric vehicles
are critical for the future of clean energy.
Electric vehicles also present a huge opportunity for the U.S.
economy. We now know that 4 million jobs in the auto industry are
reliant on us continuing to build new innovation. We will lose hundreds
of thousands of jobs if we don't recognize the importance of building
more electric vehicles. The global market will be a strong growth
sector, and letting the rest of the world beat us out will cost us
mightily in economic prosperity and domestic manufacturing.
Though the United States was home to the first highway-ready all-
electric car, the Tesla Roadster, Chinese competitors have outpaced us
and are poised to dominate the market. China sells half of all electric
vehicles in the world, while the United States sells a mere 10 percent.
The figures for domestic battery production are even more stark.
China controls a whopping 75 percent of global battery capacity, 15
times more than our 5 percent. Because batteries will be the backbone
of the 21st century economy, they are essential to our national
security.
For a future of clean energy and a thriving automotive industry, I
ask you to support this amendment. And I am proud to be soon
introducing comprehensive legislation to incentivize electric vehicle
use and production and stimulate American jobs.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Kildee).
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank Congresswoman Speier for her
leadership on climate issues in general and specifically on electric
vehicles.
Mr. Chairman, we are suffering the climate crisis right now. In my
home State of Michigan, climate change is changing our environment
impacting the Great Lakes: record lake levels, algal blooms, and
invasive species like Asian carp.
As Members of Congress, we have a duty to act on commonsense policies
that support climate solutions, and this amendment is a good example of
that.
I support this amendment because it will make explicit the Export-
Import Bank's role in supporting clean energy in our domestic exports,
especially electric vehicles, their components, and vehicle charging
infrastructure.
As Congresswoman Speier said, China makes more electric vehicles than
anybody else in the world. That doesn't have to be the case. We have to
invest in policy that supports electric vehicles so that the U.S. can
lead the future in transportation. This amendment would help to do
that.
I come from Flint, Michigan, a community with a great auto history.
But I have seen automotive jobs sent overseas over the years, and the
livelihood of families I represent go right along with those jobs,
because we have failed to see the future. We have failed to see around
the corner. We have failed to invest in the future and claim that
future for ourselves.
This amendment will ensure one additional piece that makes sure that
we have a claim on the future and that we can be the leader in electric
vehicles. It is the right thing to do. I support the amendment, and I
support the underlying legislation.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, though I
am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from North
Carolina is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, let me say first that Republicans
unanimously voted in the Financial Services Committee to support the
bipartisan bill that Chairwoman Waters and I negotiated to strengthen
the Bank and combat Chinese aggression, but we are not going to support
this partisan bill on the floor today.
It does seem strange that the sponsor needs to spell out that energy
storage, which already appears in the text, refers to batteries. I
think it is a good thing, a fine thing, but energy storage is the
broader terminology that we had discussed, in terms of the negotiations
between Chairwoman Waters and I.
We both share, as I do with the amendment sponsor, the need for more
options in the marketplace, including better batteries for cars and for
mobility purposes, for sure. So I would commend the sponsor's interest
in electric vehicles and related infrastructure. I think it is a good
thing. I think we have nice bipartisan support, actually growing
support among Republicans, for some sensible policies that would have a
positive impact on our environment and, at the same time, have more
options in the marketplace for consumers so they can choose how they
seek to power their homes, their cars, and their lives.
What Chairwoman Waters and I negotiated is in H.R. 3407. That bill
pushed Ex-Im to devote no less than 20 percent of its authority to
technologies of tomorrow. This was a priority of mine, and that was in
that bill that is not in the bill before us today. That is a huge
missed opportunity. That included energy storage and energy-efficient
technologies.

Those provisions, I think, would have had a really strong impact. I
am saddened that Chairwoman Waters rejected that, in terms of the bill
that she filed and brought before us today.
The energy sources and technologies of tomorrow are going to have the
most powerful impact on reducing carbon emissions, making sure that the
globe is safe and sustainable for generations to come. It is those
technological breakthroughs that we should prioritize, not just for
carbon reduction, but for powering our economy.
I think there is opportunity for us to legislate in a bipartisan way.
I commend Ms. Speier's amendment. Unfortunately, I don't think this
bill is going to become law, so I don't think it is going to have the
impact that we need. But I think, on separate legislation, I would like
to work with the sponsor of this amendment on those technological
breakthroughs that we have to have for our environment, for my children
and the children and grandchildren of current Americans so they can
have a safe and sustainable environment and have jobs at the same time.
It is the technological breakthroughs that are going to take us there
that I am so passionate about and that are so impactful.
Mr. Chairman, I commend the amendment sponsor, and I support its
adoption.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, I like the fact that we are speaking the
same language. It is wonderful to have that opportunity. I look forward
to working with the gentleman on the other side of the aisle on the
legislation that I am about to introduce. We might see some bipartisan
work here.
This is about green jobs. That is what this amendment is all about.
We have to secure the jobs for the rest of this century in the auto
industry, and we are not going to do it unless we move into electric
vehicles.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Ruiz

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 116-289.
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 33, after line 22, insert the following:

SEC. __. AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES EXPORT FINANCE AGENCY
TO USE 3 PERCENT OF ITS PROFITS FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

Section 3 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (12 U.S.C.
635a), as amended by the preceding provisions of this Act, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(p) Authority to Use Portion of Agency Surplus for
Administrative Expenses.--
``(1) Authority.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), in addition to
any other amounts that the Agency may use to cover
administrative expenses of the Agency, the Agency may use not
more than 3 percent of the surplus (as defined in subsection
(j)(2), without regard to subparagraph (B)(ii) of such
subsection) of the Agency, for each fiscal year in the 5-year
period beginning with the date of the enactment of this
paragraph, to cover administrative expenses of the Agency.
``(B) Use for regional offices.--Of the amount of the
surplus which may be used as

[[Page H8869]]

provided in subparagraph (A), the Agency shall use at least
\1/3\ to expand or establish regional offices of the Agency.
``(2) Subject to appropriations.--The authority provided by
paragraph (1) may be exercised only to such extent and in
such amounts as are provided in advance in appropriations
Acts.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 695, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Ruiz) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, I am offering my bill, the Increasing
American Jobs and Exports Act, as an amendment to H.R. 4863.
Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple. It will allow the Export-Import
Bank to use up to 3 percent of its surplus profits per year for 5 years
to open new regional offices. These additional offices will grow small
businesses by assisting with their capital needs to increase their
exporting capacity and job growth ability.
This bill will grow American jobs, increase exports of American
goods, and strengthen our local and regional economies around the
country.
The Export-Import Bank is important for our Nation. Over the last 10
years, it has supported more than 1.5 million jobs at absolutely no
cost to the American taxpayer. The Bank has helped grow American jobs
at no cost. It has even returned more than $3.4 billion to the United
States Treasury. The Export-Import Bank helps grow American jobs, grow
small businesses, and grow our economy.
Trade and exports are important to my district and, specifically, to
the Coachella Valley in the Inland Empire. The Inland Empire is one of
the fastest growing economic regions in the United States and is a hub
for international trade. The Riverside-San Bernardino region is 38th
nationally in total export value and sixth in California in total
export value. Let me remind everybody, California has the fifth-largest
economy in the world.

{time} 1645

The Riverside-San Bernardino Counties region is home to 6,200
exporters, as well as $10 billion worth of exported products.
More specifically, exports are important to my district; and within
Coachella Valley agriculture, there are $500 million worth of fruits,
nuts, vegetables, and melons, and all are top California exports. They
are exported to more than 50 countries.
I want this success repeated across my district and the entire
Nation. The problem, however, is that the closest Export-Import
regional finance office is more than a 2-hour drive away, in San Diego.
That office serves businesses in four California counties and even
three States: Montana, Wyoming, and Arizona.
Small business owners who have the product, the vision, and the
ability to expand their businesses deserve to have local and regional
access to export financing services.
The potential for more American jobs and more American exports is
there. We just have to unlock it. Regional finance offices help small
businesses and small farms succeed where private capital cannot.
Most of the farm businesses in my district are small. Seventy-five
percent are fewer than 50 acres in size. Last year, the Export-Import
Bank financed $1.1 billion worth of agricultural products, and 81
percent of those were small businesses.
With more regional offices, we can continue to grow American exports
and jobs and help small businesses compete. I urge support of my
amendment and the Increasing American Jobs and Exports Act, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, and I am
opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment not
because its goals are necessarily objectionable. The gentleman is right
to focus on exports, especially given the economy of his district and
his State, and his State's and district's importance to the Nation and
the national economy.
The reason why I am opposed to it is because it doesn't appear based
on any empirical study of Ex-Im resource needs and may hinder the Bank
from working effectively.
To start, the amendment would allow up to 3 percent of Ex-Im's
surplus to be used for administrative expenses, on top of the resources
that it already has. I am unaware of any concerns by Ex-Im that it is
unable to cover its administrative expenses, currently.
Traditionally, excess funds from the Bank's surplus are supposed to
go back to the Treasury, where it can reduce the deficit, something
that both Republicans and Democrats have long supported and, I hope,
will continue to support.
In addition, the amendment seems to only provide for this during half
of the reauthorization period. So what happens in the second half of
Ex-Im Bank's reauthorization under the bill, and would it leave Ex-Im
without recourse to the funds? We need to consider this carefully.
Finally, the amendment would require that at least one-third of the
new surplus funds devoted to administrative expenses be used to expand
regional finance centers. Regional finance centers are fine, but what
is the budgetary need?
Mr. Chair, I think a little more work needs to be done. We didn't
have this discussion during the markup or in the single hearing we had
about Ex-Im, and since the one-third requirement in the amendment would
fluctuate from year to year, it is divorced from Ex-Im's actual
assessment of needs for its regional operations.
There are a couple of technical issues here. I appreciate the
gentleman for offering the amendment and his interest in serving his
constituents, but for these reasons I have outlined, I am opposed to
the amendment.
Since I am in opposition, I do believe I have the right to close and
am willing to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RUIZ. Mr. Chairman, I just want to clarify something, that the
$3.4 billion surplus goes to the U.S. Treasury. My bill will not take
one-third of that, only up to the 3 percent that would be available for
regions that would like to have a regional finance office near them.
For example, in North Carolina, which my esteemed colleague is from,
his constituents have to drive all the way to south Florida, to Miami,
to get services from the Export-Import Bank. So it is in my
constituents' interest, and it is the interest of my colleague's that a
regional office is financed closer to his State so that his businesses
can acquire the capital necessary to increase jobs and increase
exports.
In fact, there is data to show that the cluster of businesses that
benefit, by far, are those that are near the surrounding regional
offices. So it is common sense to assume that, if you open an office
near the region, more businesses will benefit and you will have created
more jobs with more exports.
I want to thank Chairwoman Waters for her work on this important
legislation and for her support for my amendment. The Export-Import
Bank has been a success story and can continue to grow. Today's
legislation will further that success.
The Bank supports American jobs, while also returning money to
taxpayers year after year. My amendment would not cost the taxpayer a
single dime. My amendment would grow jobs and businesses by exporting
American goods.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment, the Increasing American
Jobs and Exports Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
On this amendment, in 1 year, this would be hundreds of millions of
dollars, and, in other years, it would be zero. So to finance these
regional finance centers, you probably want to have more stable funding
than that fluctuation.

That is the technical problem, in my view, on this, not that these
regional finance centers are a bad idea. They are not a bad idea. In
fact, I think it is important that Ex-Im focuses on small businesses
and does more outreach with small businesses.
The bill that I negotiated with Chairwoman Waters actually raises the
small business mandate. This bill fails to do it until the 10th year.
That focus

[[Page H8870]]

on small businesses would require Ex-Im to deploy their resources more
effectively across the country. That is something Chairwoman Waters and
I agreed to, on that need for greater outreach from just a couple of
urban centers where they are currently planted, as has been said.
So while I support the laudatory goal of this, the functionality of
it is not workable. I would like the Bank to actually work. Of course,
that is not part of the debate that I would actually have that view,
but I actually do want the Bank to work and be effective for American
businesses. It is really just the technical problem of how the
gentleman allocates the resources here, and that is why I oppose it.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz).
The amendment was agreed to.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Veasey) having assumed the chair, Mr. Rouda, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4863) to
promote the competitiveness of the United States, to reform and
reauthorize the United States Export Finance Agency, and for other
purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

____________________

All in House sectionPrev46 of 92Next

All Congresses 93-116 (1973-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)

Any Version of Legislation
AS - Amendment Ordered to be Printed
ASH - Additional Sponsors House
ATH - Agreed to House
ATS - Agreed to Senate
CDH - Committee Discharged House
CDS - Committee Discharged Senate
CPH - Considered and Passed House
CPS - Considered and Passed Senate
EAH - Engrossed Amendment House
EAS - Engrossed Amendment Senate
EH - Engrossed in House
ENR - Enrolled
ES - Engrossed in Senate
FPH - Failed Passage House
HDS - Held at Desk Senate
IH - Introduced in House
IPS - Indefinitely Postponed Senate
IS - Introduced in Senate
LTH - Laid on Table in House
LTS - Laid on Table in Senate
PAP - Printed as Passed
PCS - Placed on Calendar Senate
PP - Public Print
Private Law
Public Law
RCH - Reference Change House
RCS - Reference Change Senate
RDS - Received in Senate
RFH - Referred in House
RFS - Referred in Senate
RH - Reported in House
RIH - Referral Instructions House
RS - Reported to Senate
RTH - Referred to Committee House
RTS - Referred to Committee Senate
SC - Sponsor Change

All Congresses 97-116 (1981-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)

Any State or Territory
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Any State
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

All Congresses 96-116 (1979-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)

All Congresses 81-116 (1949-2020)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)
92 (1971-1972)
91 (1969-1970)
90 (1967-1968)
89 (1965-1966)
88 (1963-1964)
87 (1961-1962)
86 (1959-1960)
85 (1957-1958)
84 (1955-1956)
83 (1953-1954)
82 (1951-1952)
81 (1949-1950)

Any Topic
Agriculture
Arms Control
Aviation
Commercial
Consular
Dispute Settlement and Arbitration
Drugs/Illegal Substances
Environment
Extradition
Extradition and Criminal Assistance
Fisheries and Wildlife
Human Rights
Intellectual Property/Copyrights
International Law
International Law and Organization
Investment
Labor
Maritime Boundaries and Claims
Mutual Legal Assistance
Shipping and Marine Pollution
Taxation
Telecommunications
Terrorism
Trademarks/Patents
United Nations

November 14, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 182 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

UNITED STATES EXPORT FINANCE AGENCY ACT OF 2019; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 182 (House of Representatives - November 14, 2019)

Text available as:

UNITED STATES EXPORT FINANCE AGENCY ACT OF 2019; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 182
(House of Representatives - November 14, 2019)