On the recordMay 25, 2011
I will make three quick points in response. First, the amendment does not require that contractor to be debarred. It just simply allows for the possibility of debarment if they have significantly undersold or oversold, frankly, the amount of jobs that are going to be created. It is just an ability, frankly, that would exist under current law as to permissive debarment. Second, I think my constituents are reflective of most people's constituents here. I think they expect that when they send their taxpayer dollars to Washington that there will be a preference for U.S. jobs. Most people I talk to are surprised that it's not a factor. And third, we have to look at the holistic cost about sourcing to the Federal Government. It may be so that a particular part for a jet engine is 10 percent cheaper to buy it from a Chinese shop than an American shop. But when that American shop goes out of business, it costs the U.S. Government more money, not less, because we then have to pay unemployment compensation. We lose all of the tax revenue. We likely have to pay other social safety net costs. So we have to start being smart about how we use taxpayer dollars and recognize that when we buy something overseas, the contract price may be 10 percent less, but the overall cost to the U.S. Government is much more. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
