Personal Responsibility and Individual Development for Everyone Act

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT FOR EVERYONE ACT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I rise to make a few comments about what I believe to be a better way than we have heard today, which has so far been a proposal for greater Government regulation and intervention, more of a straitjacket on those who create jobs and create those livable wages about which the Senator from Connecticut has spoken.

I also want to say a few words in response to the breathless negative comments we have heard in recent weeks about our economy and about job creation in this country, and in the process the attacks that are made repeatedly on this floor and elsewhere against President Bush.

Of course, in every election year, we all understand there will be a rise in political sniping, but no one should ever cross the line and mislead the American people about the fundamental strength of our economy or champion this negative view just because they view it to be in their own political self-interest to undermine public confidence in the economy.

Sadly, it seems there are some interested in playing on fear and anxiety. Some who talk about job loss and unemployment provoke, rather than actually working, as we have the opportunity to do on this floor, to actually fix some of the problems and some of the conditions that would give rise to job creation and more job security in this country.

The truth is we ought to be able to agree on the facts. The public policies we argue based on those facts are something else. We are going to have policy differences. We are going to have differences of position, and that is to be expected, and that is fine. But we should agree on the facts.

Fact No. 1: Home ownership is at an all-time high in the United States of America, and that is an enormously good and positive thing. More people in this country are achieving part of the American dream.

Interest rates we know are at a historic low. Productivity is booming which, in turn, increases the ability of employers to invest in their business and to create even more jobs. And indeed, the gross domestic product in this country is growing by leaps and bounds.

One fact we should and I think we can agree on is the unemployment rate is standing at about 5.6 percent. The interesting thing about that is the story we heard in 1996 from the distinguished minority leader from South Dakota, back at a time when we had a 5.6 percent unemployment rate. Senator Daschle said:

The economy is doing extraordinarily well. . . . We have the lowest rate of inflation and unemployment we've had in 27 years.

What was the unemployment rate then, and what is the unemployment rate now? It is identical.

Today I read the comments of the junior Senator from New York who said with a 5.6 percent unemployment rate, it is obvious the economy is not creating any jobs. But indeed it was another Clinton back in 1996 who said:

I was gratified to hear our partners praise the strength of our economy . . . Lower interest rates have helped us slash unemployment-

To what? That is right, to 5.6 percent.

It seems for many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, a 5.6 percent unemployment rate under a President named Bush is a travesty, but a 5.6 percent employment rate under a President named Clinton is just fine and dandy.

We have more than 138 million Americans working today, a figure we should be very proud of, the highest in our Nation's history. But you would not know that from listening to those who try to talk down the economy.

Something we can all agree on, I am sure, is any person out of work who wants to work is one person too many. Indeed, I would hope the one thing we would all be able to agree on is we ought to pursue policies which encourage full employment and we ought to provide everybody in this country who wants a job the ability to provide for themselves and their families.

Sometimes you get the idea our colleagues on the other side of the aisle really want to have it both ways. They want to have low unemployment, which is what we all want, but they also want to oppose policies which are designed to reduce unemployment and to encourage full employment. For example, I read this morning the reaction of some in this body to the comments made by Treasury Secretary John Snow who pointed out that outsourcing, a subject of frequent commentary in this body, is an important aspect and, indeed, an inevitable aspect of free trade that ultimately produces jobs in this economy.

The Senator from Massachusetts, who happens to be a candidate for President of the United States, said he wants to crack down on "Benedict Arnold CEOs and corporations" who engage in outsourcing as a way to maintain their competitiveness in this global economy. As the junior Senator from New York said, when it comes to outsourcing:

I really don't know what reality the Bush administration is living in . . . [outsourcing] isn't good for America.

I suggest those who say outsourcing is something that we actually have the capacity to stop or they think is bad to job creation in global competitiveness sit down and have a conversation with Robert Reich, President Clinton's former Secretary of Labor, who claimed in a Washington Post op-ed on November 2, 2003, that "High-Tech Jobs Are Going Abroad, But That's Okay."

Getting a meeting with Professor Reich should be convenient, as Mr. Reich is candidate Kerry's top labor adviser and a member of his steering committee.

I think Mr. Snow, the Treasury Secretary, knows an awful lot about economics, but I also agree that so does Mr. Reich. They both agree outsourcing is an inevitable result of free trade that ultimately benefits America and America's competitiveness in the world economy.

As Mr. Reich wrote:

It makes no sense for us to try to block efforts by American companies to outsource.

Just this month, Mr. Reich was interviewed in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and asked: What do you think about the move in Congress to bar Federal contracts from being outsourced to other lower cost countries? Mr. Reich's response:

A silly political ploy.

Yet even as outsourcing continues to be a subject of discussion and even as some of my colleagues in this body throw it out as something that is bad and hurtful to America and America's competitiveness, we all seem to have forgotten it also goes the other way. Indeed, my State of Texas is one of the leading beneficiaries of what I will call insourcing; that is, foreign investments in America.

According to the Texas Department of Economic Development, Texas has more than $110 billion in foreign investment, direct investment in our State, and that is approximately $5,000 in foreign investment for every Texan-$5,000 for each of 22 million Texans in direct foreign investment because of free trade.

There are 430,000 jobs in Texas thanks to outsourcing by these foreign corporations. People who would otherwise be out of work if we did as some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle suggested. Members who are appealing to the anxieties and fears of the American people rather than giving them the information they need to understand and that we all need to embrace in terms of maintaining our global competitiveness.

I ask my colleagues to tell me why creating jobs for the hard-working citizens of my State by encouraging this foreign investment in our country is a bad idea. If we are to cave in to fear mongering by those who want to erect a protectionist wall around our country, do my colleagues think other countries might choose to retaliate against the United States? You bet.

This is a two-way street, and there is a natural flux. New jobs are created and old jobs fade away. That is what being part of a market economy is all about. In the end, the net increase is a good one.

This week in my State, a study found we will lose 3,000 technology jobs over the next 5 years due to outsourcing. That is the bad news. The good news is we are going to gain 24,000 jobs over the same period.

I reassure my colleague from New York, according to this report, her State will have a net gain of more than 18,000 jobs over the same period thanks to outsourcing, which she has said is a bad idea and out of touch with reality.

When companies that provide employment save money and maintain their competitiveness in a global economy because of outsourcing, they can afford to hire more U.S. employees. As a matter of fact, if we were somehow trying to find a way to prohibit this phenomenon, the only choice some of these employers would have would be to pack up their American company and simply move it overseas. What good would that do? That would obviously cause more harm than good.

We are dealing with a simple economic truth, and one that far too many ignore or choose to distort for partisan political purposes in this election year. We have to recognize that in the 21st century, we are competing in a true global economy, and our job in Government ought to be to try to find ways to enhance America's competitiveness in the economy, not the other way around. That is why I believe education, job training, and the President's community college initiative he talked about during his State of the Union address are so important, steps also endorsed by Chairman Alan Greenspan. These programs, which I have seen in operation in communities across my State, from Amarillo to Houston to Austin, have created opportunities for young men and women to train and retrain, to hold better paying jobs in an ever-changing economy. I have seen the positive results of these partnerships between businesses and community colleges when it comes to training and retraining the workforce for these good, high-paying jobs.

High taxes, overregulation, and rising health care costs, in an environment that encourages people to sue first and ask questions later, are damaging our global competitiveness. Those on the other side who seem to persistently favor higher taxes and more regulation are at the same time complaining about America's inability to compete and to keep these jobs in America. Those who still honestly believe we can sue, tax, and regulate our way to economic growth and prosperity are just flat wrong.

In this body, we have had many opportunities to address some of these competitiveness issues. We had the opportunity earlier this year to pass class action reform and medical liability reform which would lower health care costs so more employers could provide health care coverage at a more reasonable cost to more employees. We have had a chance to reform our broken asbestos liability system. Yet, there are those who consistently vote against these reforms that would make America more competitive in this global economy and would increase the opportunity to create jobs. Members who now are prescribing the wrong medicine for what ails the American economy. This is even at a time when our economy is roaring back, thanks to the leadership of our President and the actions of this Congress in reducing the tax burden on hard-working Americans.

I hope our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, when they talk about their desire to increase competitiveness of American job creators in this global economy, will join us in reconsidering the position they have taken so far in opposing the JOBS bill, medical liability reform, a rational national energy policy, class action reform, asbestos litigation reform, and many other measures that would enhance America's competitiveness in this global economy. They need to allow us to vote.

I believe a bipartisan majority stands ready to pass many of these reforms which would create more jobs and improve the economy. Time and time again, when we have had the chance to fix these problems, when we have had a chance to address these issues, there are those on the other side whose only answer is, no, no vote, no closing off of debate, no improving of the competitiveness of America in the global economy.

In closing, I want to reinforce what I have tried to say throughout. There is a lot of good news I do not think is breaking through the clutter on the 24-hour cable news cycle in this highly politicized election year. There are those who want to bad-mouth the economy, increase the anxiety of people who are working, and compound the misery of those who are out of work by saying there is no hope; America cannot compete; the only way we can protect American workers is to build a wall around our country and to stop free markets.

I think that is absolutely the wrong medicine for what ails this country. What we need is to be true to our principles. Americans have always and will always be able to compete given a level playing field. This is not a time for us to lose confidence in America's ability to compete and to create jobs in a way that has made us the envy of the world. This is not the time to tell the American people that America cannot compete and our only hope is to retreat into our shell and to build the walls of protectionism around our country.

Indeed, we have been preaching to the entire free world, including the new democracies that have just joined NATO and will soon join the European Union, that free markets and free trade are the answer. America must stick by that answer because it is the last best hope for improved quality of life and freedom for people all across this planet.

I yield the floor.