Providing that the House of Representatives Will Focus on Removing Barriers to Competitiveness of the United States Economy

PROVIDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WILL FOCUS ON REMOVING BARRIERS TO COMPETITIVENESS OF THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY -- (House of Representatives - July 12, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, none of us could be against removing barriers. However, the definition of barriers allows room for a lot of disagreement. It is very interesting that the thrust of this resolution is that regulations in the United States are barriers to competitiveness, and yet our economy is linked to a nation which has the maximum number of barriers in terms of regulatory procedures, the economy of China.

China is still a communist government. China is still an economy ruled by a communist government, which means they can set up regulations as they see fit and change the rules as they see fit, and yet we are linking our economic fate to China. Our industries have moved on a wholesale basis to China. Obviously, regulation is not ruining the situation in the Chinese economy, and our propensity for dealing with this communist/capitalist country, this mongrel, whatever economy we want to call it, our greedy manufacturing industry has gone there. Retail and wholesale industries are bringing back the consumer goods. We just love China. Wall Street loves China, and China is a very tightly regulated economy. The greatest barrier one can imagine is there, and yet they thrive.

I want to run through a few of the whereases in this very interesting resolution which covers a lot of territory. One cannot disagree with some of the whereases: Whereas our technology is driving economic growth around the world, as shown by the fact that the global market for high-technology goods is growing at a faster rate than the rate for other manufactured goods. I agree with that whereas.

Whereas more than 1 million American jobs are dependent upon research and development; whereas the cost of medical care in the United States regularly outpaces general inflation. How can I disagree with that? That is a fact.

Whereas 90 percent of Americans who are under age 65 and covered by health insurance currently obtain that insurance through employers. Maybe that is a barrier we want to remove by having a national health care plan which takes some of the burden off employers. I would be in favor of that, certainly.

Whereas 85 percent of the jobs are classified as skilled jobs, and in 1950, only 20 percent were so classified. That is a fact.

Whereas 80 percent of the 50 fastest-growing occupations require education beyond high school. Let us pause there. Is that fact going to lead to a recommendation that we expend more money to improve our education system, that we catch up with some of the nations in the world? Do Members know that the richest nation in Europe now is Ireland? Ireland. Ireland is the richest nation in Europe. In terms of per capita income, Ireland has the highest per capita income. Why, because the Irish decided a couple of decades ago to invest wholeheartedly into a state-of-the-art public school system. Now they have moved beyond that, and they are providing free higher education. So an Irish youngster can develop in the free system right up to the end of his higher education.

So that is a barrier that we would like to remove. So we agree that this is significant, that 80 percent of the 50 fastest-growing occupations require higher education beyond high school, and yet we are shortchanging our education. No Child Left Behind has been shortchanged by $20-some billion over the last few years.

Whereas, despite spending $60 billion per year on training, 60 percent of the United States companies are prevented from upgrading technologically by the low education and technical skills level of their workforce. That is a fact. We can agree with that. Our public school system ought to be doing a better job.

Whereas, in 2002, trial lawyers received approximately $40 billion from litigation, more than the annual revenues of Microsoft and Intel, and twice the revenue of Coca-Cola. What does that have to do with anything? Why did they take a swipe at the trial lawyers in the midst of the whereases? The money received by the trial lawyers was money used to defend ordinary Americans. How about the corporate lawyers? You do not have a whereas about the corporate lawyers, or a whereas about the tremendous amount of corruption in corporate America that the Republican Party refuses to even hold hearings about. Enron, WorldCom, a whole series of criminal activities that have been unveiled by the attorney general of New York State, nobody wants to deal with that corruption. That is a barrier to our success and our competitiveness.

I hope that you will address some of these whereases that I have just mentioned in terms of some answers as to why we do not pursue the obvious, commonsense solutions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I certainly look forward to working with the gentleman also.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to just cite a few examples of how Republican policies have shortchanged the initiatives which they talked about today. Instead of having an aggressive policy on math and science education, the Bush administration has underinvested in proven math and science instruction.

Today, China graduates four times as many engineers as the United States. And South Korea, which has one-sixth of the population of the United States, graduates the same number of engineers as the United States. Instead of keeping the Republican promise on education, President Bush has already underfunded No Child Left Behind, his own legislation, his own innovation, he has underfunded by more than $40 billion.

Instead of investing in research and development to keep the U.S. on the cutting edge of technological advancement, Republicans have cut $877 million in Federal science and technology funding. Instead of having a national broadband policy, the Bush administration has allowed access to broadband to lag.

Instead of passing the 21st century bill to increase energy independence through advances in cutting-edge technology, the Republicans have failed to enact any energy bill at all. This resolution before us is a mulligan stew that has been allowed to spoil; it is a spoiled mulligan stew. It is not serious. We have 40 minutes to discuss items which would require really 40 days.

If we were serious, we would have a long discussion of these items before we move on and prepare some real legislation to deal with the shortcomings.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov