On the recordNovember 4, 2015
But I will tell you that I disagree with the gentleman's basic premise. He talks about the rule. The rule is not the issue. I am against this rule. Its substance, that is what the gentleman from Oregon was talking about. He was talking about investing and making America grow, creating jobs. That is what we ought to be debating, not some rule for you to have a lot of amendments. You can have a zillion amendments. If they are all awful, it won't be a good rule. I rise in opposition to this rule. I rise in opposition because it would make in order several amendments that undermine the will of a majority of both parties in this House, that the Export-Import Bank should be reopened immediately. I said for a year and a half the majority of this House was for it; and for a year and a half, it was bottled up by a committee chairman in a closed process. Since some Republicans blocked an extension of the Export-Import Bank's charter authority and let it shut down in July, hundreds of American jobs have been shipped overseas, and exporters and their workers have been unable to compete on a level playing field in foreign markets. Last month, in a historic effort, virtually all Democrats and a majority of Republicans came together to end the gridlock and take steps to allow the House to work its will and hold a vote on reopening the Export-Import Bank. This rule seeks to reverse that process. When that vote was finally held, Mr.…





