U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

66–022—PDF 2009

S. HRG. 111–966 

EXPORTS’ PLACE ON THE PATH 

OF ECONOMIC RECOVERY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE, 

CUSTOMS, AND GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

DECEMBER 9, 2009 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

RUSSELL SULLIVAN, Staff Director 

KOLAN DAVIS, Republican Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE, CUSTOMS, AND GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS

RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

(II) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Wyden, Hon. Ron, a U.S. Senator from Oregon, chairman, Subcommittee 

on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness, Committee 

on Finance ............................................................................................................ 1 

Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, a U.S. Senator from Michigan ....................................... 12 

CONGRESSIONAL WITNESSES 

Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ........................................ 3 

LeMieux, Hon. George, a U.S. Senator from Florida ............................................ 5 

WITNESSES 

Lipsitz, Rochelle, Deputy Director General, Foreign Commercial Service, 

Washington, DC ................................................................................................... 6 

Mas, Dr. Alex, Chief Economist, Department of Labor, Washington, DC .......... 8 

Yager, Dr. Loren, Director, International Affairs and Trade, Government 

Accountability Office, Washington, DC .............................................................. 10 

Rosen, Howard, visiting fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, DC ............................................................................................. 13 

Beisner, Bob, vice president, SolarWorld Industries America, Hillsboro, OR .... 16 

Harney, Tamara, chief executive officer, HMI Worldwide, Grandville, MI ........ 18 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL 

Beisner, Bob: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 16 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 33 

Crapo, Hon. Mike: 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 35 

Grassley, Hon. Chuck: 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 37 

Harney, Tamara: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 40 

Kerry, Hon. John F.: 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51 

Klobuchar, Hon. Amy: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3 

LeMieux, Hon. George: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 53 

Lipsitz, Rochelle: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55 

Mas, Dr. Alex: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 65 

Rosen, Howard: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 72 

Snowe, Hon. Olympia J.: 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 97 

Page

IV 

Stabenow, Hon. Debbie: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 12 

Wyden, Hon. Ron: 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 99 

Yager, Dr. Loren: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 10 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 102 

COMMUNICATION

The U.S.-China Business Council (USCBC) .......................................................... 117 

(1) 

EXPORTS’ PLACE ON THE PATH 

OF ECONOMIC RECOVERY 

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE, CUSTOMS, AND GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS, COMMITTEE ON FINANCE, Washington, DC. 

The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in 

room SD–215, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Wyden 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator Stabenow. 

Also present: Democratic Staff: Jayme White, Staff Director; 

Darci Vetter, International Trade Advisor; Alan Treat, Trade Fellow; and John Carlson, Intern. Republican Staff: Staci Lancaster, 

Staff Director; and Rachel Johnson, International Trade Advisor. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM OREGON, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE, CUSTOMS, AND GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS, COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 

Senator WYDEN. The subcommittee will come to order. 

The way the United States engages economically in the world is 

a critical factor of our economic recovery. It is an American imperative to create jobs and, therefore, an American imperative to expand exports. An export strategy is a job strategy, and that is what 

this afternoon’s hearing is all about. 

A fresh focus on export promotion is one way to grow the economy without growing the Federal budget deficit. Our challenge is 

to make things, grow things, add value to things, and sell these 

goods to consumers all around the world. With so many Americans 

enduring economic hardships, the Congress is required to examine 

the policy and the regulatory framework that is supposed to enable 

the engines of the American economy—hard work and enterprise— 

to thrive. 

Instead of powering economic growth, this framework has taken 

the American economy in the wrong direction. Fortunately, the people of our Nation are resilient, and we can chart a new economic 

course out of the economic carnage. The Congress and the President can construct an economic structure that fully empowers 

workers and entrepreneurs to be successful in the global marketplace. 

Today, we are going to hear a number of witnesses from government agencies testify that exports have recently played a central 

2 

role in growing the economy and are critical to creating and sustaining good-paying jobs. 

I also want to extend an especially warm welcome to Mr. Bob 

Beisner from SolarWorld, who is going to add an Oregon perspective to this afternoon’s discussion. 

When, in the past, worker productivity and wages grew right 

along with the Gross Domestic Product, it was easy to make excuses for a burgeoning trade deficit. Today, there are no excuses. 

The U.S. trade deficit in recent years has exceeded $700 billion. 

Exports’ share of U.S. GDP is less than half what exports contribute to the economies of other developed countries. No public official can simply justify the status quo. 

Knowing all of this, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative 

and the Department of Commerce recognize that they simply cannot keep on keeping on. So, the question is: Are there not new approaches and opportunities to be seized that result in near- and 

long-term export and job creation opportunities? 

In Tokyo, last month, the President said that America ‘‘has to 

put a greater emphasis on exports that we can build, produce, and 

sell around the world.’’ For America, this is a job strategy. There 

are jobs making everything from wind turbines and solar panels to 

the technology that you use every day. I certainly agree with the 

President, and it is obvious that foreign markets are fertile ground 

to American-produced goods and services, especially markets that 

are rebounding more quickly and dramatically than our own. 

So, it is time to get to work and create an export expansion strategy. That strategy must include initiatives to eliminate trade barriers and unfair trade practices that dampen the demand for U.S. 

exports. It has to help American firms identify and exploit sales opportunities overseas, and that is one focus of today’s subcommittee 

hearing. 

Furthermore, an export strategy must establish clear targets and 

goals. My target: reduce our trade deficit in half by 2015. Right 

now, the most generous estimates show that only about 4 percent 

of American companies export and just 500 companies account for 

60 percent of all of our exports. My target: double by 2015 the percentage of U.S. companies that are exporters. 

In order to achieve targets like these, the Federal Government 

has to provide the resources necessary to adequately finance export 

promotion goals that it establishes. It also ought to make sure that 

these taxpayer-financed resources are used wisely in order to maximize their impact. There are bold opportunities to expand exports 

of manufactured goods, and they are produced by workers in our 

country who make good wages. 

As one example, the global market for products that reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions is expanding dramatically, literally doubling from 2004 through 2008. For U.S. producers of these environmental goods, this development has been a boon, enabling them to 

expand domestic and foreign sales and create good-paying jobs. 

Tapping overseas markets in this area is critical, because over 80 

percent of clean energy investments are going to take place outside 

of the United States. Furthermore, much of the U.S. trade deficit 

is a result of oil imports, so promoting the use and export of environmental goods serves a variety of useful purposes. 

3 

It is especially important that there is a level playing field for 

U.S. producers to be able to compete with foreign counterparts. 

Right now, India and China assign an average tariff of up to 15 

percent on solar technology components, and other developing 

countries impose tariffs that reach beyond 30 percent. U.S. tariffs, 

on the other hand, on environmental goods, are 1.75 percent, on 

the average. Nobody can say that that is a level playing field. So, 

it is my view that tackling the significant trade barriers that foreign governments impose on the environmental goods sector can 

make an immediate impact for U.S. job creators. 

The witnesses today are going to tell us that reducing tariffs is 

helpful, but alone, it is not a silver bullet to increasing production 

and exports of these goods, and many others. There are a variety 

of policies that need consideration, and this hearing is a start towards that discussion. 

Ultimately, renewed consumption of U.S. goods is the best way 

to re-ignite the American economy. We can find much of this consumption beyond our borders. If the Congress and the President 

discuss ways to jumpstart the economy to create jobs to get our 

economy moving forward again, there needs to be a new focus on 

export opportunities. 

I am looking forward to the testimony from today’s witnesses and 

to a productive discussion towards establishing a coherent and 

compelling export expansion strategy. 

I am particularly pleased that two colleagues who have taken a 

very focused and intense interest in this subject are here. It illustrates something I feel strongly about, and that is, if you want to 

do something important in Washington, DC, you had better build 

a bipartisan coalition. Senator Klobuchar and Senator LeMieux 

have certainly done that. 

Colleagues, we are glad you are here. We will make your prepared statements a part of the record in their entirety, and you all 

just proceed as you would like. 

Let us start with you, Senator Klobuchar. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Well, thank you very much, Senator 

Wyden, and thank you very much for your leadership so much in 

this area where we need to have strong leadership as we look at 

this difficult economy and, as you pointed out, a clear way to increase jobs in our country. 

I chair the Senate Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Competitiveness, Innovation, and Export Promotion, and I have gotten 

very interested in this subject. A part of it is the change that we 

are seeing in our own world here. Increasingly, we are seeing people in China, India, and other developing countries gain more purchasing power, so there is this world of opportunity out there when 

95 percent of the customers for the people, and businesses, and 

small businesses, mid-size businesses of this country, are actually 

outside of our borders. 

More exports will mean more business, more jobs, and more 

growth for the American economy. It is important, first of all, because exports allow a company to increase their sales and grow 

4 

their business. Second, a diversified base of customers outside of 

the borders of the United States helps businesses weather economic 

ups and downs. There is a nearly 8.5-percent bigger chance that a 

company stays in business when it exports than if it does not. 

Yet, what we see is fewer than 1 percent of all American businesses export and, if they do, nearly 60 percent of them just send 

their goods to one country, either to Mexico or to Canada. And 

what is most interesting is some people say to me, ‘‘Well, would 

small businesses and medium-sized businesses really want to export if they could?’’ Well, in fact, 30 percent of the businesses, in 

answer to a survey, said that they would like to export if they were 

given that opportunity. 

We really think of this, when you look at the help that they can 

be given by the Commerce Department, the Export-Import Bank, 

and some of the success stories we have seen in Senator LeMieux’s 

and in my State, and all across the country. This is really a business version of Match.com, trying to set up businesses with their 

opportunities for trading their goods and getting their goods to 

market in other countries. 

And, since you used an Oregon example, Senator Wyden, I have 

a great one in Minnesota, a little company in Karlstad, MN, which 

is known as the moose capital of our State, population 900, on the 

Canadian border. The company is called Mattracks. It makes 

tracks that go off and on the wheels of trucks. 

This idea came from the guy’s son named Matt, when he drew 

a picture of it in second grade and his dad designed it. They had 

five employees in this little company. They called the Commerce 

Department, Federal Commerce Department out of Fargo, ND, 

which is closest to them. They went on their computers, figured out 

what countries might be interested in their product. They found 

Turkey, they found Kazakhstan. I would like to say they went from 

Karlstad to Kazakhstan, and they went from 5 employees to 50 employees in this little town of 900. And they attribute their success— 

they are entrepreneurs, they are free-market guys, but they attribute it—to the help that they got from the U.S. Commerce Department and the Foreign Commercial Service. 

So, that is what we are talking about here, and we want to make 

those opportunities, this world of opportunity, available to all of 

our small and medium-sized businesses across this country. 

Again, I appreciate being here with you, Senator Wyden, and 

your leadership, as well as Senator LeMieux. We have, in his short 

time here so far—he is the ranking member on our committee, and 

we have worked very well on this and would like to partner with 

you in the future on this very important topic. 

Senator WYDEN. Senator Klobuchar, thank you. 

It is an excellent statement, and it is always nice to talk about 

these kinds of issues in the abstract, but when you are talking 

about creating 50 good-paying jobs in a town of 900, you are making a difference for the American economy. So, you bet, we will be 

partnering on these issues, and I look forward to it. 

Senator WYDEN. Senator LeMieux, let us put your statement in 

the record, and feel free to make whatever comments you wish. 

[The prepared statement of Senator LeMieux appears in the appendix.] 

5 

STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE LeMIEUX, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator LEMIEUX. Thank you, Chairman Wyden. It is an honor 

for me to be here today with my colleague, Senator Klobuchar. 

Exports are so important to Florida. We are the gateway to Latin 

America, and we, as a stand-alone economy, are one of the 20 biggest economies in the world, largely due to our trade, more than 

$50 billion a year in trade, mostly to Latin American countries. But 

yet, we found—and in the hearings that Senator Klobuchar and I 

have had—there are a lot of small businesses who do not know of 

these opportunities, 1.9 million small businesses in Florida. We 

had some testimony from an Orlando company, a restaurant supply 

company that has been able to sell their goods and wares throughout the world. But yet, many of our small businesses do not know 

of these great opportunities. So, getting the Foreign Commercial 

Service to learn more about them has been a priority for Senator 

Klobuchar and myself. 

Given today’s economic realities, America’s businesses, in particular small business owners, are looking for a way to reach new 

customers, target new markets, and increase their exports. What 

many of these business owners do not know is that the Federal 

Government offers a host of programs designed to help them increase their participation in the global economy. I have had the opportunity to meet our Foreign Commercial Service folks in embassies in foreign countries, and they do a great job, but yet, if you 

are meeting the Foreign Commercial Service person in a foreign 

country, you have already taken that first step. The information 

needs to get to these small businesses in their communities now, 

so they can find a way to sell their goods and services overseas. 

These programs can provide a tremendous benefit to the many 

businesses in my State and throughout this country. We are home 

to 14 deep-water ports, and we have 33,000 companies that export 

in Florida. When you consider the fact that one out of nine of every 

manufacturing jobs is tied to trade, you can imagine how much this 

information on programs can help small businesses. 

In an effort to improve the way the Federal Government facilitates information on trade promotion, I have joined my colleague 

in urging a report in Fiscal Year 2010 for the Commerce Department to detail the resources available to small businesses. This 

would go a long way in helping our businesses increase exports and 

making these programs more efficient. 

We have also asked that the report include specific ways for 

small businesses to find new customers in emerging markets, such 

as India, Brazil, and China. If the United States is to take a more 

active role in the global economy, helping our businesses compete 

is essential. 

Beyond detailing existing opportunities, Congress ought to create 

opportunities for American businesses by quickly approving the 

pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and the Republic of Korea. According to the Latin American Trade Coalition, in 

2008, more than 6,000 small- and medium-sized American businesses exported to the country of Colombia. If Congress were to 

pass this trade agreement, more than 80 percent of U.S. consumer 

and manufacturing products and most U.S. farm goods would enter 

6 

Colombia duty-free: good for America and good for our great ally 

in that region. 

The agreement with Colombia, along with Panama and the Republic of Korea agreements, have been pending for too long, and I 

urge the Congress to take these agreements up quickly. This will 

certainly help exports and small businesses in America. 

Mr. Chairman, again, thank you for allowing us to be at this 

hearing today and for calling this important hearing, and we look 

forward to partnering with you and your committee, along with 

myself and Senator Klobuchar, to promote exports for our small 

businesses. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

You make a number of important points. Certainly Latin America is a huge market as it relates to America. We already have a 

significant share of the green goods market in that part of the 

world. It looks like it is upward of 25 percent, so we are anxious 

to work with you on that, and also on another matter—and, I note 

Senator Klobuchar feels strongly about this—and that is simplifying the process of getting the word out to small businesses. 

I think small businesses sometimes look at this as a sort of a 

welter of programs that exists as it relates to business and what 

Washington, DC does in terms of the actual machinery of export 

promotion, and we are going to be following up with both of you 

in terms of the task of getting the word out, simplifying it, and 

making sure that it actually reaches the small business people that 

we know. Small towns in Minnesota, Florida, and Oregon may 

have 800 or 900 people, and, if you do the right things, you are 

going to get 50 to 100 jobs, and that is huge. 

Is there anything else you two would like to add? 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I think that is it, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you. 

Senator WYDEN. We will excuse you. I look forward to working 

with both of you. 

Senator LEMIEUX. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

Our next panel: Ms. Rochelle Lipsitz, the Deputy Director General of the U.S. Foreign Commercial Service; Dr. Alex Mas, the 

Chief Economist to the U.S. Department of Labor; and Dr. Loren 

Yager, the Director of International Affairs and Trade at GAO. 

Ms. Lipsitz, welcome. We will make your prepared remarks part 

of our hearing record, and why don’t you go ahead and summarize 

your principal concerns today? 

STATEMENT OF ROCHELLE LIPSITZ, DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL, FOREIGN COMMERCIAL SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Thank you very much, Chairman Wyden, Ranking 

Member Crapo, and members of the subcommittee, and also I 

would like to thank Senators Klobuchar and LeMieux for the opportunity to speak before you today about the role of export promotion as a means to strengthen and support America’s economy. 

I welcome the subcommittee’s interest in this topic and look forward to outlining the Department of Commerce’s programs that 

promote U.S. exports. 

7 

As part of the Department of Commerce’s International Trade 

Administration, the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service helps 

American firms and workers navigate the often complicated and 

unpredictable waters of foreign trade. Our vision is that every U.S. 

business sees the world as its marketplace. By helping American 

companies increase their sales abroad, we help them create jobs 

here in the United States. 

The Commercial Service is a global network of trade professionals in 109 U.S. locations and 77 countries overseas. U.S. companies access our global network in a variety of ways, through our 

local U.S. Export Assistance Centers, or USEACs, through our 

international offices based in U.S. embassies and consulates 

abroad, through our Trade Information Center hotline at 1–800– 

USA–TRADE, and through the website, Export.gov. The Commercial Service works with U.S. companies to provide 

numerous services, ranging from counseling and market research 

to industry expertise and identification of international buyers and 

partners. We guide companies through every step of the export 

process, from learning how to export, to logistics and shipping 

issues. We are good at what we do. 

In 2009, the Commercial Service recorded over 12,000 export successes. Eighty-five percent of these successes were reported by 

small- and medium-sized businesses. The Commercial Service also 

engages in advocacy and commercial diplomacy on behalf of U.S. 

companies to help level the playing field when they are bidding for 

international procurements, and to resolve problems ranging from 

regulatory trade barriers to unfair trade practices. 

One of the firms assisted by the Commercial Service is ADI Mobile Health of Tualatin, OR, a manufacturer of mobile dental and 

medical clinics. Our Portland office provided counseling and due 

diligence for a potential project with the Malaysian Ministry of 

Health. Our efforts resulted in ADI Mobile Health winning the bid 

and completing a successful sale valued at approximately 400,000 

U.S. dollars. 

Trade events organized by the Commercial Service, including 

trade missions, international buyer shows, and trade fairs, are an 

excellent way for companies to get international exposure and 

make valuable contacts. We are able to reach even more companies 

interested in exporting through strategic partnerships, which leverage private sector organizations, State and local governments, and 

trade associations, to make sure their clients are aware of the 

range of the Federal export assistance programs available to them. 

We also work closely with our Federal Government colleagues in 

the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee, the TPCC, to provide seamless export promotion and financing assistance. In October, Commerce Secretary Locke convened a principals meeting of 

the TPCC, establishing priorities and an implementation plan for 

the administration’s trade promotion efforts. In that inaugural 

meeting, the member agencies identified several priorities, including clean energy. 

Just last month, Commerce officials led 15 U.S. manufacturers of 

energy efficiency products and technologies on a trade mission to 

India, where the clean energy sector is anticipated to grow by 20 

percent. The Commercial Service has identified additional sectors 

8 

that offer good prospects for U.S. exports, sectors such as health 

care technologies and medical devices, environmental products and 

services, and information and communication technologies. The potential to increase our Nation’s export capacity and to expand job 

creation is tremendous. Less than 1 percent of U.S. companies export. Increasing this number, even by a small percentage, could 

have significant impact on the U.S. economy. 

We also know that U.S. firms that export are less likely to go out 

of business, with sales abroad spreading risk when the domestic 

economy slows or contracts, and wages at exporting firms are typically higher than the national average. 

In these challenging economic times, the Department of Commerce is committed to restoring American jobs and strengthening 

our economy. Exports have an important role to play in this recovery, and the Commercial Service is working to help Americans realize the benefits of exporting, including greater stability for firms 

and higher wages for workers. 

Members of the committee, we look forward to working with you, 

and invite you to partner with us in supporting our efforts here in 

Washington, in your home States, and abroad. 

Many thanks for this opportunity. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. We will have some questions here 

in a few minutes. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lipsitz appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. Dr. Mas? 

STATEMENT OF DR. ALEX MAS, CHIEF ECONOMIST, 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, DC 

Dr. MAS. Thank you. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Wyden. I appreciate the opportunity 

to testify on behalf of the Department of Labor about the place of 

exports on the path of economic recovery. 

Before I begin my testimony, Mr. Chairman, I read your interesting report on U.S. exports of environmental goods, and I look 

forward to discussing this report with you and your staff in the 

near future. 

As President Obama has emphasized, increasing our exports is 

an essential part of restoring balanced growth. The U.S. economy 

is beginning to climb out of the recession, but with 15.4 million 

people unemployed and a 10-percent unemployment rate, the 

United States must have a steady, strong economic growth to get 

people back to work. 

Expectations are that consumers will not be the motor of economic growth they once were, so exports must be a part of a 

growth strategy. In addition to their positive effect on economic 

growth, export jobs fit in with Secretary Solis’s vision for the Department of ‘‘good jobs for everyone.’’ An expansion of exports has 

the potential to create hundreds of thousands of new, good-paying 

jobs. Jobs in exporting firms are more likely to contribute to narrowing wage inequality and helping families get into and stay in 

the middle-class. 

Exporting firms largely employ people in higher-paying industries, and within specific industries, export-related firms pay more. 

9 

Research finds that manufacturing plants that export pay 10- to 

11-percent higher wages. 

An export promotion strategy that creates and sustains goodpaying jobs and supports economic recovery would require a range 

of policy initiatives across the government, including assistance to 

companies trying to expand to foreign markets and enhanced investment in R&D. 

The Department of Labor plays a pivotal role in the broader Federal strategy to promote exports and rebuild the manufacturing 

sector by providing workers with training in employment services 

and sectors where there is export potential. 

Despite the generalized employment declines throughout manufacturing and other industries during this recession, employment in 

a number of exporting sectors has been stable, and these are likely 

to be among the sectors with large export potential in the coming 

years. For example, employment has remained steady in electromedical apparatus manufacturing, as well as in scientific research 

and development services, both of which have ties to our Nation’s 

strong biotech industry, in which exports are growing. 

A recent Council of Economic Advisors report on ‘‘Preparing the 

Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow’’ notes that employment is projected to grow in aerospace and pharmaceuticals, along 

with similarly advanced manufacturing industries in which exports 

are critical. 

To provide a common framework to understand the skills required to work in the manufacturing sector, the Department’s Employment and Training Administration and its advanced manufacturing industry partners developed a dynamic, industry-driven 

model of the foundation and technical competencies that are necessary for workers to enter into and progress in careers in this industry. The model helps to identify employer needs and provides a 

framework for developing curriculum and training models. 

There is also potential to reduce our trade deficit by reducing oil 

imports if we make investments in clean and renewable energy 

sources. President Obama and Secretary Solis believe that the 

green economy will be a key driver behind America’s economic revitalization and economic stability as the public and private sectors 

continue to work to reduce energy consumption. 

We saw a great example of how the green economy provides the 

opportunity for workers to move from struggling industries to expanding ones in Fisker Automotive Company’s purchase of the 

General Motors Assembly plant in Wilmington, DE. The plant will 

soon reopen, with the help of a loan from the Department of Energy’s Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program. Fisker 

will introduce the world’s first plug-in hybrid vehicles. Recovery 

Act grants are also supporting a domestic battery industry that 

will allow Fisker to sell affordable plug-in hybrids. 

As a key Recovery Act investment, Secretary Solis announced 

grant competitions totaling $500 million directed to support green 

job initiatives. Recently, the Department announced the first round 

of these grants, nearly $55 million in green job grants, that will 

support job training and labor market information programs that 

will help workers find jobs in expanding green industries and related occupations. These are great examples of how the green econVerDate Nov 24 2008 20:16 May 12, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\66022.000 TIMD
10 

omy can create jobs, and they also highlight the value of publicprivate sector partnerships. 

I would like to close by emphasizing that preparing a workforce 

for jobs tied to exports and a green economy is critical to continuing our economic recovery and setting the stage for sustained 

economic growth. 

Thank you again for holding this important hearing this afternoon. I would be happy to answer any questions from members. 

Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Dr. Mas, thank you. Questions will be asked 

shortly. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Mas appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. Let us welcome now Dr. Loren Yager, and thank 

you for the good work that you all do at GAO. 

STATEMENT OF DR. LOREN YAGER, DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRADE, GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Dr. YAGER. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Trade Subcommittee to provide our perspective on the role of U.S. export promotion. 

As Congress considers policies to bolster the recovery of the U.S. 

economy, it must consider the full range of tools available to stimulate growth and create new jobs, including promoting exports. 

In my statement today, I will talk briefly about the rationale for 

export promotion and also provide some examples from my written 

statement regarding three key principles of export promotion that 

have been mentioned in the GAO work, as well as in some expert 

studies of other nations’ efforts. 

As was mentioned in your opening statement, exports and trade 

more broadly contribute to the U.S. economy in a variety of ways. 

Trade enables the United States to achieve a higher standard of 

living through exporting goods and services that are produced here 

relatively efficiently, and importing goods and services that are 

produced here less efficiently. 

In addition, the benefits of exports accrue in many U.S. States, 

with both Oregon and Idaho as major exporters of high-technology, 

as well as agricultural products. And, as I mentioned in my statement, exports can also serve as a counter-cyclical force. When the 

U.S. economy slowed in 2007 and much of 2008, economic growth 

was boosted by an improving U.S. trade balance. 

Several rationales exist for the use of government export promotion programs to support exporting firms and sectors. One of the 

key rationales for government export promotion is for government 

to step in when markets do not generate the most efficient outcome, which could occur in terms of the availability of financing for 

small businesses attempting to serve foreign markets. Rationales 

may also exist for export programs based on achieving broader 

trade policy objectives, such as helping U.S. exporters overcome foreign trade barriers that make it difficult to penetrate foreign markets. 

Mr. Chairman, in preparation for this hearing, you asked also 

that we look at other nations’ efforts, to provide some structure and 

11 

insights regarding their programs. Let me now provide three key 

themes from my written statement. 

First, many experts have identified the coordination of export 

promotion activities as an area of importance. Organizations, such 

as the Australian Trade Commission, have recommended coordination, and some, such as the World Bank, have suggested centralization of these activities into a single structure. These comments mirror the GAO findings on U.S. export promotion activities. U.S. 

agencies have improved coordination through the Trade Promotion 

Coordinating Committee, but have not addressed issues such as the 

allocation of resources to the highest value efforts. 

A second theme of the expert studies is the importance of measuring performance. Although the experts recognize the challenge of 

measuring performance, many emphasized its importance and suggested a range of quantitative and qualitative measures. In addition, authors like the Nathan Associates suggested that unbiased 

feedback from clients could be particularly valuable. 

This theme also underlies a number of GAO recommendations. 

For a number of years we have noted that the TPCC agencies do 

not identify or measure agencies’ progress towards mutual goals as 

part of their annual national export strategy. More recently, we 

have reported a better evaluation by the Commerce Department of 

its fee-based programs, and customers could improve program continuity, help managers target their resources, and help the Congress make more informed funding decisions. 

A final theme from the expert studies regards the targeting of 

government export promotion efforts. The expert studies and other 

export promotion agencies provide a wide range of views in this 

area. Countries, such as the United Kingdom, stress the importance of targeting new exporters, while the World Bank suggested 

firms that are not yet exporting offer the best opportunities. Furthermore, some of the experts, such as the Boston Consulting 

Group, caution that having too many targets could undermine the 

agencies’ chances of success. 

The U.S. Congress has long included directives that U.S. agencies should target their efforts on small and medium-sized enterprises, and more recently has focused on areas such as trade and 

environmental goods. GAO has provided a number of recommendations to agencies to improve their targeting efforts for small business and is currently undertaking a study of the efforts of the 

Export-Import Bank to assist in environmental exports, which will 

cover many of the same issues as the report that was issued today 

by this committee. 

Mr. Chairman, this is an opportune time for Congress to review 

the role that exports can play in the U.S. recovery, and we appreciate the congressional interest in GAO oversight of the export promotion programs, as well as specific areas, such as environmental 

goods and services. 

I look forward to future opportunities to assist the subcommittee 

on this and other questions related to the portfolio of international 

trade issues. I would be happy to answer any questions that you 

may have, or other members. 

Thank you. 

12 

Senator WYDEN. Dr. Yager, thank you, and we appreciate GAO’s 

good work. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Yager appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. At this point, I think what I would like to do 

is bring up our next three panelists, then we will have questions 

for all of you together. But as they are coming forward—and that 

will be Mr. Howard Rosen, a visiting fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics; Mr. Bob Beisner, the vice president of SolarWorld Industries in Hillsboro, OR; and Ms. Tamara 

Harney, chief executive officer of HMI Worldwide. 

As you three come up, I want to recognize my friend and colleague, the Senator from Michigan, who is a very strong advocate 

of promoting more American exports. And, Ms. Harney, let me say 

that Senator Stabenow felt very strongly about making sure that 

there was a witness who represented a part of the country where 

there was a real economic presence, where there was a company 

that related to exports and doing good work. So let us have Senator 

Stabenow’s opening statement, and we will hear from our additional three witnesses and have some questions. 

Senator Stabenow? 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, 

A U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN 

Senator STABENOW. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 

very much, Chairman Wyden. 

First of all, it is always a great pleasure to work with you, and 

I know that we share a desire to make sure that America is exporting our products, not our jobs. That is very much where I am and 

very much where we are in Michigan. We want to expand our ability to export our products. We make things in America, we grow 

things in America. We need to be exporting those things, and we 

want to make more, and we want to grow more. But coming from 

Michigan, it is also very important to me that we are focused on 

a level playing field. So it is jobs here, exports going overseas. 

And I do want to particularly welcome Tammy Harney and 

thank her for being here and providing a perspective that is very 

important. This is a worldwide organization, HMI Worldwide, 

which is headquartered in Grandville, MI. They are a real success 

story in Grandville, and it is my understanding that Ms. Harney’s 

vision is really the key reason for that, so I want to thank you very 

much for being here today. 

Mr. Chairman, I share your strong feeling about strengthening 

our capacity to export, because I do believe this is about jobs. Exporting is about jobs. In Michigan, it is no secret that we have the 

highest unemployment rate in the country, with over 15 percent. 

I am actively reviewing every way we can create jobs, reviewing 

our trade policies, making sure that we are doing everything we 

can to create jobs, looking at our investment policies, what we can 

do to make sure that we have jobs here in America. 

I am particularly interested in finding ways for our manufacturers to be able to export and compete abroad, such as Grandville, 

MI’s HMI Worldwide. I am concerned the Federal Government has 

not done enough, frankly, to assist and promote manufacturers’ exports. 

13 

For example, the annual funding for the Manufacturing and 

Services Unit within the Department of Commerce has remained 

at almost the same level for the past 5 years, approximately $49 

million, with the one exception where it dropped in 2008 to $42 

million. We need to be doing more than that. We are in a global 

economy, and we need to understand that we have a very important role to support our businesses and to create more opportunities. 

By improving export capacity, we will make sure that we are not 

only selling more abroad, but also identifying trade barriers that, 

frankly, need to get fixed. I will not take the time today—because 

I could take a long time today—going through places where we 

allow imports but cannot export, and in a global economy it is our 

job to make sure that that changes. That is why I have introduced 

the Currency Manipulation Act, the Trade Prosecutor Bill that I 

have, and the Super 301 Trade Enforcement Priorities Act, to make 

sure that there are resources and focus on a level playing field so 

that we, in fact, can export to other countries that have full and 

open access to American markets. 

The White House’s recent job summit discussed what we in 

Michigan, frankly, are already doing by exporting, and creating 

jobs through exports. We, in fact, exported $45 billion a year ago, 

our latest numbers, placing us eighth in the country. So, we care 

very much about this, and I am very anxious to work with you. 

Nearly one-quarter of all manufacturing workers in Michigan depend on exports for their jobs. 

So I very much appreciate all of our witnesses, and again I will 

end where I started, Mr. Chairman, which is, my focus is to make 

sure we are exporting our products, not our jobs. 

Senator WYDEN. Senator Stabenow, that is well said. 

Ms. Harney, we are very glad that you are here. You have a 

strong advocate in your corner. Mr. Beisner, we will be trying to 

do the same thing for SolarWorld. You all have made a tremendous 

difference in our State. Senator Stabenow points out that they have 

the highest unemployment. We have consistently been in the top 

three or four, and that is an honor we wish to give up, and one of 

the ways to do it is to address this very issue. 

So, let us go to our next round of testimony. Let us hear from 

you, Mr. Rosen, first, then Mr. Beisner, and Ms. Harney. We welcome all of you. We will put your prepared remarks into the hearing record, and if you could summarize your views, that will leave 

us more time for questions. 

Mr. Rosen? 

STATEMENT OF HOWARD ROSEN, VISITING FELLOW, PETERSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. ROSEN. Thank you very much, Chairman Wyden. 

First of all, it is an honor coming today to testify before you at 

this first hearing that you are chairing, and I wish you a lot of success with this subcommittee. It is a very important subcommittee, 

and I am prepared to do anything I can to help you in your work. 

We are here today, as you have heard, to talk about probably one 

of the most important issues confronting the U.S. economy right 

14 

now. Listening to all of the other witnesses, I really think we have 

to ask ourselves, if exports are so good, why do we do so little? 

As you already said, only 4 percent of U.S. companies export. 

Five hundred companies account for 60 percent of U.S. exports. 

Large companies—that is companies with more than 500 employees—account for 70 percent of U.S. exports. Less than one-half of 

1 percent of U.S. companies operate in more than one country. We 

could go around this room today and probably identify most of 

those companies. And here we hear a lot about multi-national corporations. Fifty-eight percent of our exporting companies export 

with only one country. Exporting, as you have said, is no longer 

just an option for the U.S. economy, it is an imperative. Exporting 

is the only way that we can get ourselves out of the economic mess 

we currently find ourselves in without sacrificing our standards of 

living. In fact, exports can raise standards of living. 

So what I would like to do today is talk about three questions. 

Why should we export? What should we export? And how should 

we export? 

Number one, as has already been said, for years we have been 

consuming more than we produce. The result is that we owe money 

to everyone. We now owe money to foreigners, and we owe money 

to ourselves. Our current outstanding debt to ourselves here in the 

United States—consumer debt—equals the GDP of the country. It 

is about $116,000 per household. 

Our net debt to foreigners is about 25 percent of our GDP. It is 

growing at a rate of 5 percent of GDP a year. At this point, keeping 

policies constant, our net debt position to foreign countries could 

double just within the next couple of years. This really is not sustainable. 

We need to start producing more than we consume. Increasing 

production and exports is the only way we can reduce our internal 

and our external net debt positions without causing any havoc to 

the U.S. economy. 

So what should we export? Well, contrary to all the naysayers, 

the United States does have a comparative advantage in producing 

many goods and services. The problem is that our hyper-anxiety 

over industrial policy has caused us to ignore looking at the 

strengths of our industries. We do not need to pick winners and 

losers; we need to identify the winners, and we have not been doing 

that. By looking at the winners, we can then figure out, as has 

been said, where we need to allocate our resources to help exports. 

I have included a detailed list in my written statement and presented a methodology for how we might start identifying those winners. Let me just say, though, that the report that you have released today is one example of how analyzing our strengths or analyzing our priorities is the way that we should be allocating our resources. 

But let me just say here that those 43 products that we are focusing on as environmental goods comprise only 2.5 percent of our 

exports and only 1 percent of our imports, so, while this is an admirable thing to promote these, we have to keep in mind that they 

are not going to solve our problems. 

So what should we do to help exports? First we need to replace 

our culture of consumerism with a culture of production and a culVerDate Nov 24 2008 20:16 May 12, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\66022.000 TIMD
15 

ture of exporting. At this season of the year, you do not have to 

look very far; you hear constantly about consumers. I mean, all you 

need to do is look at the paper and listen to the radio, and almost 

every other story is about consumption. We need to replace all of 

those stories, and we need to look at production and exports as a 

measure of our economic health, not consuming. 

As you have suggested, we should set some targets. One of them 

could be doubling the amount of exports, another could be to double 

the percent of U.S. companies that export. But let me just say here, 

what is important is not necessarily the targets that we set, but 

we then must look and ask, what resources do we need in order 

to meet those targets? That is, I think, even more important than 

the actual targets themselves. We have to get the right economic 

environment at home. 

As Senator Stabenow has said—and I really applaud her comment, I think people really do not understand this in the United 

States—we do not invest in this country. We do not invest in productive activities. Investment in non-residential plant and equipment, after falling to 10 percent of GDP, has been stagnant over 

the last couple of years. This is about one-quarter of what other 

countries do on investment in plant and equipment. What we 

should be doing is, every time there is an economic proposal, we 

should ask ourselves, what impact is this proposal going to have 

on promoting non-residential plant and equipment, private productive investment in the United States? 

We need to increase the saving rate in the United States so that 

we can finance more of this investment here at home. Private investment is the key variable to creating jobs in the United States. 

Number two, we must get our exchange rates right. Again, as 

Senator Stabenow mentioned, the exchange rate is the single most 

important factor in influencing how much we import and export. 

Currently, the dollar is pretty much in line with some of our major 

currencies, but against the Asian countries we are significantly outof-whack, and that is a growing share of our exports. 

We need to continue negotiating for market access on behalf of 

our exporters. I am sure the next sentence will be quite provocative 

to some people, but let me just say very clearly that this is the 

wrong time to take a time out from trade policy. 

We may all disagree with the outcome of those negotiations, but 

we have to continue to be engaged. Other countries, while we are 

speaking today, are negotiating bilateral and regional agreements 

without us. We are going to be left out. 

We need to build a 21st-century export-oriented infrastructure. 

Our ports and our transportation system must be linked so that 

goods can go seamlessly from point of production to the ports. 

We need to provide export financing, which we do much less than 

other countries. 

Export promotion activities declined by 8 percent a year over the 

last decade, and most of it went towards agriculture products. We 

really need to go back and rethink this. 

And finally, I believe that what we need to do is not just have 

programs in place that U.S. exporters can take advantage of, but 

we must do outreach, like we did with the Agriculture Extension 

Service and the Manufacturing Extension Program, which are both 

16 

very successful programs. We need an export extension program 

where we go out and identify potential exporters who may not be 

thinking about exports and bring this to their attention and give 

them the resources and the technical assistance that they need. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Rosen. 

Do not feel badly about being provocative. Senator Stabenow and 

I like provocateurs. We will have some questions for you in a moment. I am very much pro-exports and production and investment. 

I noted you are concerned about consumption this time of year. I 

also want to be pro-Christmas, and Oregon is the biggest producer 

of Christmas trees. So kidding aside, we thank you for your excellent testimony. 

We will have some questions in a moment. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rosen appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Beisner? Welcome. It is great to have 

SolarWorld in Oregon. We are as happy to have you as Senator 

Stabenow is to have Ms. Harney, and we will make your prepared 

remarks part of the record. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF BOB BEISNER, VICE PRESIDENT, 

SOLARWORLD INDUSTRIES AMERICA, HILLSBORO, OR 

Mr. BEISNER. Mr. Chairman and Senator Stabenow, thank you so 

much for allowing me to appear before you today and talk about 

some of the successes we have had at SolarWorld and some of the 

problems that we foresee, some of the recommendations that we 

hope to make on this. 

SolarWorld has a 30-year history here in the United States, 

though we really started back in the first energy crisis, back in the 

1970s. We have seen the tremendous growth in the solar industry. 

In fact, in the mid-1990s, the United States produced about 45 percent of the world’s solar products. That has now fallen to 10 percent. It is less than 10 percent. 

Senator WYDEN. Just repeat that so that we can make sure that, 

at a time when the President and everyone in the Congress on the 

Democratic side of the aisle, Republican side of the aisle, are trying 

to focus on the green economy, I want to have that statistic just 

embedded in everybody’s head. So, repeat that again. 

Mr. BEISNER. Mr. Chairman, it comes from the NREL, National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory website. In 1995, it was, 45 percent 

of the world’s production came from the United States. It is now 

less than 10 percent. 

Senator WYDEN. Message sent. 

Mr. BEISNER. Thank you. 

The thing that has happened with SolarWorld is, we have undergone a number of changes over the years, and so we have been 

through a number of owners, and right now we are owned by a 

German company. That company has invested extremely heavily in 

the United States. 

In 2006, we had made the decision that we were going to ramp 

up our production here in the United States, we were going to increase it almost 8-fold from where we were at. And what that has 

done, it has gone from employing a few hundred people to now 850 

people. We are going to be the largest producer of solar products 

17 

here in the United States. We are putting half a billion dollars to 

work in our Hillsboro facility in Oregon, and we are going to hire 

another 500 people by the end of 2010. 

So, this is the kind of investment that we have been talking 

about. These are the types of visions that people have to adhere to. 

The key is, how do we have a level playing field for us, and what 

could help us get to the level of production that we need to get to 

so that, that way, our costs come down and we intersect with grid 

parity so that, that way, it does not make any difference where you 

are getting your electricity, if you are getting it off the grid that 

is supplied by your local utility company or if you are going to go 

ahead and provide it on your own. So these types of programs are 

extremely important. 

So, what we would like to do is, we would say, ‘‘What the heck 

happened? Why did we go from almost 50 percent to 5 percent?’’ 

And it is because other countries took the lead. In the 1990s, Japan 

started a residential program where they would go ahead and provide incentives to residents who put solar on their roof. We saw the 

same thing happen in Europe, Germany being the outstanding example of that. They went ahead and put into place a program to 

pay people to go ahead and put solar up and then pump the electricity back into the grid, and this led to the take-off and the burgeoning of the solar industry really worldwide. These two countries 

led the solar revolution that we have seen in the 1990s, and also 

in this past decade. 

So, what we now see is a rising tiger in China. They are going 

to have a capacity in their production of 1,800 megawatts. By the 

same token, the United States, in 2008, we only had a mere 375 

megawatts, so a dramatic difference. Obviously, we need to increase our local production to bring the cost down to make us competitive on a worldwide basis. 

I would also like to say that, of our products, we are exporting 

about 50 percent of them right now, so we are trying to help that 

trade deficit. In the year ended in 2008, the United States imported 

about the same amount of solar products that it exported, about 

$1.2 billion in imports, versus $1.1 billion in exports. 

What are some of the programs that could help? Obviously, these 

types of programs that we saw in Japan, the type of programs that 

we saw in Europe, these kinds of stimulus programs where ordinary citizens are going to go ahead and make these investments. 

The other thing is we are extremely grateful for the changes that 

have been made to the tax code, to the provisions of the Recovery 

Act that are allowing us to address not only investment tax credits, 

but also grants. 

We are also extremely appreciative of the $2.3 billion that was 

allocated for advanced energy manufacturing. We might have a few 

suggestions on how that might be made a little bit more attractive. 

But, let us also get after the fact that we need greater transparency with our global trading partners, and we have to look at 

the business practices of some of the governments to subsidize 

these practices. We feel we can compete with any company anywhere. We just need to make sure that we are not competing with 

countries as well as companies. 

18 

Some of the other things that we would like to talk about: can 

we go ahead and put in some sort of matching mechanism, are 

there going to be additional manufacturing incentives available, 

and, can we look at assuming some domestic source requirements 

on Federal projects, as well as the ones that are funded by the 

Stimulus Program? 

So, with that, I will try to close my remarks, and I will look forward to answering any questions that you might have. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Beisner, thank you very much for coming. 

It is a long trek, coming from home to the Nation’s Capital, and 

you have done it, and you have delivered a real wake-up call, in 

my view, to the Congress with respect to that reduction in market 

share in a critical area of the green economy. So, I really appreciate your coming, and especially for getting paychecks to hundreds 

and hundreds of Oregon workers. We will have some questions for 

you in a moment. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Beisner appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. Ms. Harney, welcome. We will make your prepared statement a part of the record, and you may proceed with 

your remarks. 

STATEMENT OF TAMARA HARNEY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE 

OFFICER, HMI WORLDWIDE, GRANDVILLE, MI 

Ms. HARNEY. Thank you, Chairman Wyden, Ranking Member 

Crapo, Senator Stabenow, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness. 

My name is Tamara Harney, and I am the CEO of HMI, Hamilton Manufacturing, Inc. We always call our company now HMI 

Worldwide, and we are based in Grandville, MI. 

We are the global arm of Hamilton Manufacturing, which is 

headquartered in Twin Falls, ID. There is a good story here to go 

with this. [Laughter.] 

I am testifying today on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is the world’s largest business federation, representing more than 3 million businesses and organizations of 

every size, sector, and region. I am pleased to be before you today 

to discuss exports’ place on the path of economic recovery. 

Hamilton Manufacturing has provided insulation, hydroseeding 

mulch, and erosion control products for more than 45 years. My 

parents, Gene and Gloria Hamilton, started Hamilton Manufacturing in Idaho in 1962. This is one of the very first companies to 

begin manufacturing insulation and mulch from recycled newspapers. My husband Herb and I purchased Hamilton Manufacturing from my parents in 1987 and started expanding our business. Thanks to the FCS and the Boise Export Assistance Center, 

we started exporting our products in 1998. 

The first trade mission that Hamilton participated in was organized by the Idaho Department of Commerce, and it was for businesses that were interested in selling their construction materials 

into China, my first trade mission. Wow, what an adventure! I 

spent a lot of time talking to the FCS office in Beijing about doing 

business in China, and they were wonderful. 

19 

While large companies still account for the majority of the American exports, small companies like HMI Worldwide, nonetheless, 

play a very critical supporting role in trade. Over the years, HMI 

Worldwide has grown its business, created jobs, and exports now 

to more than 40 countries. And now, amidst a global recession, it 

continues to export to existing and new markets, bringing environmentally-friendly products and technologies to customers all over 

the world. 

Despite the sharp decline in international trade during the final 

4 months of the year, the United States set new records for export 

in 2008. For HMI Worldwide, those final 4 months of 2008 were 

very difficult for us. Our sales to key markets, like Korea, Russia, 

and Japan, dropped off dramatically. This year, HMI Worldwide 

has been fortunate to have an exceptional year because of our 

international customer base, which continues to grow. 

For example, we have had a lot of success in Australia due to an 

insulation energy rebate. I know firsthand that exporting can be 

challenging and overwhelming at times, especially for small businesses. Each country is different, each culture is unique. Introducing U.S. products is always time-consuming and expensive. To 

succeed, small businesses must be helped to export. 

Whenever HMI is interested in breaking into a new market, we 

always contact the local FCS office. However, each office takes a 

slightly different approach. Some FCS offices will do everything 

they possibly can to help us out, but others will not talk to us unless we are willing to purchase their Gold Key Service. Small businesses cannot justify or afford to pay for a service if we cannot sell 

our product into the market. We need the FCS to take time to discuss the opportunities or barriers that that specific product would 

face. The FCS is a valuable asset; however, without proper funding, 

these professionals will not be able to assist companies like mine. 

To address this need, the U.S. Chamber has proposed a doubling 

in Federal expenditures on export promotion, with a focus on small 

companies. Given the limited resources dedicated by the Federal 

Government to support small- and medium-sized exporters, some 

States, and even private companies, have created innovative and 

effective programs. 

For instance, the Evergreen Building Products Association, or 

the EBPA, is a non-profit which relies in part on funding from the 

Market Development Cooperator Plan (MDCP) and the Foreign Agricultural Services and has been a huge help to our company. 

EBPA has a number of market research assistance and trade promoting programs, including trade missions, trade shows, and foreign language directories. If the FCS could provide a similar service, many companies just like mine could benefit tremendously. 

There are many successful State programs that I believe could 

also be replicated at a Federal level. The Idaho Department of 

Commerce is very aggressively helping Idaho companies export. 

Without their help over the years, we would not be where we are 

today. 

Finally, another way to help increase U.S. exports would be for 

Congress to act on the pending free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea. Investing in the export potential of 

20 

America’s small- and medium-sized businesses could bring a dramatic gain and stimulus to the economy. 

Once again, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to testify today 

on behalf of the U.S. Chamber. 

Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

Excellent testimony. It is great to see an all-American success 

story, a family business expanded. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Harney appears in the appendix.] 

Senator WYDEN. I think what we will do, Senator Stabenow and 

I will just sort of ping pong back and forth. I have some questions. 

Why don’t we start with you, Mr. Rosen? You raised the question 

of exports, and particularly in the context of imports as well. If you 

walk down the Main Streets of this country, certainly in some 

sense there is a perspective exports are good and imports are bad. 

I have always come to this to say, what I am interested in is expanding the winner’s circle. I want more middle-class people able 

to have a higher quality of life; I want businesses to grow. You 

have heard Senator Stabenow and I say that the objective is really 

to make things and grow them and add value to them and generate 

just as much economic benefit as we possibly can, and ship them 

somewhere. 

But when you said that expanding export opportunities can also 

ameliorate the dislocation costs associated with import competition, 

it struck me that you were also talking about expanding the winner’s circle, and there are a lot of ways to do this. I have often 

thought, when you get a trade agreement and a company gets a 

tariff reduction, there is no reason why a company could not give 

part of the tariff reduction to their workers. I mean, literally, put 

it in their pockets. Say, we are interested, because we are all in 

this together—companies and workers and everybody from the 

highest-paid executive to people working on the shop floor—that we 

all win. So, tell me a little bit, by way of starting our first hearing 

in the trade subcommittee, what you meant when you said ‘‘expanding export opportunities can ameliorate the dislocation costs 

associated with imports.’’ 

Mr. ROSEN. Well, thank you very much for that question. 

As you may know, I spend almost all of my day worrying about 

people who are hurt by imports, so I look forward to answering 

that question. 

I just want to make one quick comment that I hope that we can 

get into the conversation, which is—to be quite honest, nothing 

that we have said here today is new. 

About 20 years ago, I was involved in a congressionally mandated commission called the Competitiveness Policy Council, and 

that council put out annual recommendations. They are all pretty 

much the same thing that we talked about today. 

The question I have to ask is not, what do we have to do, but 

why do we not do it? That is the real question, and I hope that we 

can come to that. But let me answer directly your question. 

I want to make it very clear today that I am not suggesting that 

we just export and do not import. It has to be a 2-way street; it 

has to be reciprocal. And let me also add that imports bring a lot 

21 

of benefits to the U.S. economy, let us not forget that. Not only do 

they help us in exporting our goods to other countries, but they 

allow us access to better, cheaper, higher-quality products. In fact, 

a colleague of mine has estimated that imports help this economy 

by about $1 trillion a year, which is quite significant. 

But, as you note, those imports come with a very high price tag. 

And, again, let me not take too much time. I would encourage you, 

Mr. Chairman, to have another hearing just on imports, and I 

would be honored to come back and talk about this at length. 

But let me just say one thing so that you get to other people, 

which is, the problem in this country is not that we import, the 

problem in this country is that we do not invest enough. Because, 

if we invested more, we would create more jobs, and so those people who lose their jobs because of imports, usually low-wage, lowskilled jobs, could then move up the ladder to high-wage, highskilled jobs. We did not for many years, but we now have the data 

that look at not the net change in employment, which is this number we constantly hear, but the actual number of jobs created and 

jobs terminated. 

Over the last decade, almost the entire improvement in employment in this country was due to the fact that we laid-off less people, not because we hired more people. We do not create jobs in this 

country. If we can create jobs through added production and exports, we can help reabsorb those people who are hurt because of 

imports into the economy. 

It is a very expensive adjustment. I have written about it myself. 

People experience wage losses, there is a lost period of time when 

they do not have jobs. I am not at all trying to minimize that. But 

let me just repeat one more time: the problem is not imports. The 

problem is our inability to create jobs in order to re-employ those 

people who lose their jobs. People do not just lose their jobs because of imports, they lose their jobs because of technological 

change, changes in consumer tastes, so all of these people are affected because we are not creating enough jobs. 

Senator WYDEN. That is being logical. Heaven forbid that all of 

this logic should break out in Washington, DC. 

Mr. ROSEN. But it is in the numbers, Mr. Chairman. Our investment in plant and equipment is flat, while our investment in residential is going up. Housing is nice, but it does not increase the 

productivity of this country. 

Senator WYDEN. Let me ask one question of you, Ms. Lipsitz, just 

for the first round, then go to Senator Stabenow. 

I offered up two goals, reducing our trade deficit in half by 2015 

and doubling by 2015 the percentage of companies that export. In 

your view, are those realistic goals? 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Senator, thank you for that question. 

We at the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service—let me just provide a clarifying point, too. We go by many names: U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service, or FCS overseas for Foreign Commercial 

Service, USEACs for our U.S. Export Assistant Centers, or CS for 

Commercial Service. So, I want to thank the panelists here for recognizing the USEACs and the FCS. We want to move the dial on 

exports, and, if the goal is to double them, then I think that would 

be an attainable goal in a couple of years. 

22 

We have our own goal, and that is to change the slope of trade. 

So, if trade is going up, exports are going down, with our help, we 

want them both to go up. 

Senator WYDEN. All right. 

Senator Stabenow? 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Again, thank you to all of you for your comments. Let me just 

first start by saying that, Mr. Rosen, I could not agree more that 

it is a matter of investments. I think unfortunately, though, we 

have had some very short-term thinking over the years, where instead of investments, it has been about importing things we could 

build here, and we should be building here. And, in fact, when we 

get into another discussion that we need to have, what used to be 

a small tariffs bill that allowed a few products to come in because 

they were not made here is now huge, and it is because we have 

not taken a broad view of what we should be making here, as opposed to lessening tariffs to bring things in when we could make 

them here. So, I think we have, Mr. Chairman, a really important 

discussion to have about how we invest here in America. 

To that point, Mr. Beisner, you piqued my interest on something, 

because first of all, on solar, I have to say that we have Dow Corning in Michigan that makes 30 percent of the world’s polycrystalline silicone—which I have learned to say since I have been 

working with them—and they have, over and over again, talked to 

me about what is being done in other countries, not all low-wage. 

We speak to Germany. That is not a low-wage country, not a lowcost country. But one of the reasons that, frankly, we have the 30- 

percent manufacturing tax credit, which Senator Bingaman was a 

champion of and I was a champion of on the Finance Committee, 

is because of the conversations I had with Dow Corning about the 

fact that they have a strategy in Germany around tax credits and 

the ability to support capital investment and financing and so on, 

and that we need to do the same. 

So, we do have, in fact, this tax credit in place and, as you know, 

many, many more people are interested in it. We have a cap on it. 

I am very pleased that the President has included—one of his proposals on jobs would be to lift that cap, which I strongly urged the 

White House to do, and I am hopeful that will be in our jobs plan 

as well. But you said that you had some ideas about how to make 

that more attractive, so, I wonder if you might just take a moment 

on that. 

Mr. BEISNER. Sure, Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much. 

I would also like to say, Dow Corning has been an excellent provider of goods and services to us over the years. So we, in fact, 

have participated in some lobbying efforts with Dow Corning in the 

past, so a good colleague to work with. 

Well, the things that we would recommend related to the tax 

credits: could we, in fact, go ahead and have it similar to the grant 

program? 

Senator STABENOW. Yes. That is the credit, yes. 

Mr. BEISNER. Yes, the grant program. 

Senator STABENOW. Yes. 

Mr. BEISNER. We would ask, though, that let us put some teeth 

with that, because, as you mentioned, in Europe we are used to 

23 

dealing with some of those teeth from the European community. So 

if, in fact, a certain number of jobs are created, if, in fact, they had 

the right kind of wages, the right kind of benefits, if, in fact, we 

put enough capital into the country, then we think that instead of 

a tax credit, perhaps a grant would be in order. We also think that 

a grant might be able to assist some of the States in dealing with 

some of their problems, because then we might be stimulated to go 

ahead and put more investment into that local area or to move to 

another area because it makes sense from a supply chain model for 

us. So we think that this type of program where we have proven 

our worth, we have met our commitments, then we get rewarded 

for it, that leads to further investment. 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you very much. Oh, by the way, I 

should also mention that Senator Menendez and I, and others, 

have introduced a specific 30-percent credit for solar manufacturing, so we would like very much to see that happening as well. 

Mr. Chairman, if I might ask just a couple other questions, then 

unfortunately I have to excuse myself. I have to preside on the 

floor. Again, we are so proud of Ms. Harney, who is here. But I 

want to ask Ms. Lipsitz—first of all, thank you for the innovative 

Commerce Connects Pilot Project that you have in Plymouth, MI. 

We have heard from our local chambers and economic development 

folks it is being very well received, and I want to thank you for 

that, and the help in the Upper Peninsula with Instron and the Exports Live! seminar that our office will be a part of next week in 

Detroit. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Tomorrow. 

Senator STABENOW. Oh, it is tomorrow? 

Ms. LIPSITZ. It is tomorrow. 

Senator STABENOW. Oh. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. We have over 200 attendees participating. 

Senator STABENOW. I think all of our days blur together. [Laughter.] 

I am not sure what day it is or what week it is. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. I am sorry. It is Friday, not tomorrow. [Laughter.] 

Senator STABENOW. All right. Good. Good. 

But my concern is this. Despite your efforts at this point, the majority of businesses, the majority of small manufacturers, do not 

know. They are still unaware of the export help that Ms. Harney 

is talking about, that you really have to hunt for to find. So, I am 

wondering what kind of outreach you are planning in the future. 

We have so much more we need to be doing. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Certainly. One of our biggest challenges is trying to 

get the word out about the services that we provide. We do our outreach through multiple channels. We use private sector companies 

with whom we have partnerships, State and local authorities with 

whom we also work, with our District Export Counsels, who are 

about 1,200 individuals who help get the word out, and hearings 

such as this help us get exporting on the front page of the paper. 

Senator STABENOW. Well, I would encourage you, and I think Mr. 

Rosen spoke about the Manufacturing Extension Partnerships, 

which are great, and the idea of setting up something like that 

would be terrific. Or I would say for manufacturers, if you are not 

already working with the Manufacturing Extension Partnerships, I 

24 

would strongly urge you to be doing that. They have been very effective, certainly in Michigan, very effective, and it is a very important network that we need to expand upon. 

But let me ask just one other question before I have to excuse 

myself. I know that TPCC has introduced six new working groups 

geared towards creating jobs. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Correct. 

Senator STABENOW. Which one of those will focus on manufacturing? 

Ms. LIPSITZ. The one that is geared towards small- and mediumsized companies. We are co-chairing that with the Small Business 

Administration, and we will be working with them mostly from 

manufacturing companies, but all of them will deal with manufacturing companies. 

Senator STABENOW. Terrific. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. I 

just, for another time, want to say that it does matter what our 

trade agreements are in the sense that it matters that we have access, as well as other countries having access to us. As Mr. Beisner 

said as well, we want you to be competing with companies, not 

countries. Right now, in too many cases, our businesses are competing with countries. And so I am so grateful for your leadership 

and look forward to working with you to be able to do more than 

just talk about this, but to actually move the ball forward. 

Senator WYDEN. We will be teaming up. I have told our witnesses that, with health care essentially sucking all of the oxygen 

out of the room, it is great to be able to have you here. We are also 

going to have colleagues submitting some questions in writing. So, 

I look forward to working closely with you. 

Mr. Beisner, let me ask a question with respect to green goods 

that I think picks up on what Senator Stabenow was talking about, 

and that is the unlevel playing field. 

The fact is that, as companies like yours that have made this 

huge investment put great stakes down for the future in Oregon, 

in my home State, you ought to have a government that gets you 

a level playing field, a field where you can go out and, every day, 

know that, when your workers in Oregon are making quality goods, 

that they are going to be able to compete in these global markets. 

And yet, there has not been that level playing field. One of the examples is the high tariffs that our competitors apply to goods like 

solar panels. 

The U.S. tariffs, as I pointed out in my opening statement, are 

small, almost, in some respects, non-existent. Why do you not outline, for example, the toll that this unlevel playing field takes on 

a company like yours? We talked in the office about some of the 

examples of countries and companies taking advantage of this 

unlevel playing field, and I think it would be helpful to have on the 

record your description of the toll that this unlevel playing field 

takes on an American manufacturer. 

Mr. BEISNER. Sure. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for the 

question. 

Well, again we compete on an international basis. Of course, out 

of Germany, we compete in the European markets. We also compete in Asia. We have a sales office in Singapore. We have a manufacturing office in Korea, and we also have a sales office in South 

25 

Africa. The toll is really, what kind of government supports and 

government subsidies exist in some of these other countries, because it creates a barrier for us to be able to produce at a specific 

level when some of those costs are already borne by the government and through the subsidies that they are going to give to the 

companies that are domiciled in their country. 

The next thing that would happen would be that some of the tariffs may be there in the form of a value-added tax, not an outright 

tariff. You had mentioned several countries that were in the teens 

as far as those type of tariffs. Well, this just creates a barrier for 

us to have to overcome. 

Senator WYDEN. Is it not, in effect, like spotting some of these 

countries and our competitors, on day one, a huge sum of money? 

Mr. BEISNER. Senator Wyden, I know your basketball background, so we might be down by three or four field goals by the 

time we get ready to start, or maybe a trip to the free-throw line 

every time. 

We think that what we need to do is just ask for some scrutiny 

or some additional investigations into the type of supports that 

may be given by some other countries and see if there might be 

something that we could do to level that playing field. 

Senator WYDEN. All right. Well, that is going to be front and center, I know, for this subcommittee. I know Chairman Baucus feels 

very strongly about these issues, so that will be certainly an area 

that we follow up on. 

Ms. Harney, you talked about State programs, and you mentioned it in your testimony, and I gather right at the outset you 

felt that State programs made a big difference. What is the potential for a connection between State export promotions and what the 

Federal Government does? 

Ms. HARNEY. Thank you for that question, and I can give you a 

couple of really good examples. 

The nice thing is, when I first started in doing international 

business in Idaho, I did have the resources to call the local Chamber of Commerce and ask who I would contact in Boise if I wanted 

to export, and I was very fortunate because the Boise Export Center had somebody who could tell me about what a freight forwarder 

was, how to ship a container, all of that stuff I had no idea what 

I was doing. So they started me on the path of export. 

Of course, it takes a lot more than that, too, and the State of 

Idaho has always been very good about providing a lot of support 

to small businesses by having trade offices in Mexico, in Taiwan, 

in China. They have had some in other regions also, but those are 

the primary ones that we have used. They have been able to be like 

an office or sales team for us to introduce our products, to say, hey, 

listen, here is an opportunity. We think that this particular company we can match up with you, and you will be able to probably 

introduce your products and sell them, so they have been almost 

like a little sales staff in some respects, but also looking at our 

products and saying, yes, this is a good idea, that we can probably 

introduce your product into this area, or they are going to say, no, 

this is not a good idea. 

But then taking it another step, I did learn about the Foreign 

Commercial Service when I started going overseas, because every 

26 

time I went overseas I contacted them, and I asked them, what do 

I need to be aware of? My first experience was in China, and they 

sat down and spent hours with me, talking about the good things 

and the bad things about China, how to do business, and it was 

a very complicated market for us to enter because that was the 

very first market that we decided we were going to export to. 

Also, today, for instance, we just got through going to Dubai to 

do a Dubai Trade Show, and we teamed up with the Evergreen 

Building Products Association, and they were great because they 

actually paid for the trade show booth. But our company, we sent 

two of us over there, and it still cost us an additional $10,000 just 

to be able to go introduce our products, without knowing if we 

would have a success or not. I did contact the Foreign Commercial 

Service, and they were great. They came over to the trade show, 

introduced themselves to us, and were able to say, you know, if you 

need anything, we are here. But they are also understaffed. They 

do not have the resources to maybe go back and try to help us even 

further. 

So, I think that there are a lot of good programs that are out 

there, but they could be replicated on a Federal level. I just think 

that there are a lot of opportunities to export for small businesses, 

but a lot of them just need help, or financially it is a big burden, 

or they are just very uncomfortable trying to export. It is a learning experience. 

Senator WYDEN. Let me go to some of our other panel members. 

We are especially glad that you have been here, Ms. Harney and 

Mr. Beisner, because I think it is fine to talk about these issues, 

as I would categorize, as either in the abstract or reading from 

complicated reports and these voluminous materials that come out 

of Washington, DC. It is quite another to hear exactly how you 

navigate these challenging waters in global markets. So, both of 

you have been very, very helpful, and we appreciate it. 

Dr. Mas, a question for you, and it goes to the changing nature 

of the American economy. 

It is obvious now, with people changing their jobs 11 times by the 

time they are 40, you are not planning for an economy where somebody goes to work somewhere and stays put for 20 years until you 

give them a gold watch and you have the 20,000-calorie retirement 

dinner. I mean, people are going to have to upgrade their skills 

constantly. 

What is the department doing to forecast opportunities for workers in the export and trade field? In other words, I know you are 

doing a lot of forecasting in a variety of areas, but one of the opportunities, it seems to me, to get at some of these issues Mr. Rosen 

and others are talking about, is we ought to have the best possible 

forecasting for opportunities in the export area, and what are you 

all doing in that regard? 

Dr. MAS. Thank you for your question, Mr. Chairman. 

I would first like to just reinforce the point that my colleague, 

Ms. Lipsitz, made, that we do have to move the dial, and I also 

agree with Mr. Rosen that that does take making investments, and 

these investments include investments in the workforce and in the 

youth, and that is what we are doing. We provide training for 

adults and youth through the Workforce Investment Act and other 

27 

programs, and the critical part of what we do is to forecast, what 

are the skills necessary for the jobs of today and tomorrow, and 

manufacturing and export sector jobs are, we understand, a critical 

part of that. 

So, let me just explain a few of the things that we are doing. 

So, first of all, at the State level, State workforce labor market 

information shops, which we provide about $32 million annually to 

through the Employment and Training Administration, are responsible for the development of State and local labor market information, and that information is meant to be actionable by workforce 

boards in their decision-making. 

The second timely example is, tomorrow, the BLS will release 

their 2008 to 2018 employment projections. These are 10-year projections that are widely used in career guidance, in education, and 

training program planning, and are critical for studying long-range 

employment trends. These projections are updated every 2 years. 

The Employment and Training Administration requires State 

workforce agencies to make 2-year projections based on this and 

other information. 

As for manufacturing specifically, the Employment and Training 

Administration has worked extensively on competency models specifically for manufacturing, and they have worked with stakeholders, including industry stakeholders, employers, on these models. We have a number of success stories about how they have been 

used. For example, in the biotech area, we have stories from North 

Carolina where they have implemented these models, and they 

have been replicated and expanded with successful results, and I 

would be happy to follow up with you and your staff about what 

we have done in that respect. 

Senator WYDEN. I would like to see that, because my sense has 

long been, not just in the export area but as it relates to worker 

forecasting, it very often seems like we are fighting the last battle. 

I mean we are debating health care. You know, today, one of the 

big challenges is going to be to find enough workers to be able to 

take those new positions as we expand American health care. So, 

we are going to have to find more workers in areas that relate to 

health care to make sure we can implement this bill, and we are 

going to have to find those workers for the export opportunities 

that this table and others are going to be pushing hard to offer. So, 

it is an important part of this debate, and one I am going to make 

sure we do not forget. 

Dr. Yager, a question for you, because it is helpful to have an 

agency like yours that really takes a multi-year kind of approach 

in analyzing where we are in trying to make recommendations. 

You have looked at this export area for some time with respect to 

how American policies look at specific industries, the challenge of 

helping businesses of different sizes, small- and medium-sized businesses, and a host of perspectives. 

At this point, is there currently a coherent export promotion 

strategy at the Federal Government, or say at the Department of 

Commerce? Is there a coherent strategy that people will walk away 

and say, this is understandable, it is straightforward, and we can 

pick up on it? What is your assessment of that? 

28 

Dr. YAGER. Mr. Chairman, let me make a couple of comments in 

response to that question. 

I think one thing that is pretty clear from our review of export 

promotion—as you said, for many years, I think before the TPCC, 

we did some work on this. One thing is clear, and the Congress has 

written mandates to the various export promotion agencies to direct them to focus on small and medium enterprises. So, if there 

were one thing that was central to the export promotion focus, it 

is the required focus and the expectation of the Congress that the 

primary target of these efforts be small and medium business. And 

that comes through in terms of the Export-Import Bank, it comes 

through in the way that the Department of Commerce charges 

large companies differently than it does small companies, and there 

are a number of other ways in which that single theme does come 

through fairly consistently. 

In terms of the National Export Strategies that are published by 

the TPCC, we did find that there was a lack of continuity in those 

different strategies. We found that there were numerous changes 

from one year to the next in terms of which countries were going 

to be the focus of efforts, and we found that it was difficult for 

stakeholders, the Congress, and others to determine what those 

priorities were and whether the TPCC actually achieved the goals 

that they set out in each of those annual reports. So, we do think 

there is room for improvement in the TPCC’s annual strategies, 

and I think they also do need some guidance from the Congress, 

as they have gotten on small and medium enterprises, on what to 

focus on. 

Senator WYDEN. Well, that is a fair comment. I am going to give 

each of you the last word, but just wanted to give you my sense 

of where we are. 

Congress and the country are going to have a big debate now 

about a jobs program, and you are going to hear discussion about 

vast sums being spent in a variety of different areas. I think the 

challenge, as you go down each one of these programs, is to wring 

the maximum value out of what the government is going to do in 

these areas that is going to translate into good-paying employment 

for our people. And as I indicated at the outset, growing the export 

market is one way to grow our economy without growing the Federal deficit. I mean, when you look at it, the opportunities here 

make sense all around. 

In my home State, one out of six jobs depends on international 

trade. Very often the trade jobs pay better than the non-trade jobs, 

and it literally creates employment all across the State of Oregon, 

literally from the wheat fields of eastern Oregon, all the way 

through to the metropolitan areas where we have the port of Portland. As Mr. Beisner knows, we have made a big, big bet in our 

home State on the green economy. We would like to make Oregon 

the green energy capital of the world, and I think we are capable 

of doing it, but the Federal Government and the export field is 

going to have to be a better and smarter partner. 

Each one of you six has given very valuable suggestions and constructive testimony. It is my intent that at this point we can literally start with you, Ms. Lipsitz. You are not required to offer 

29 

anything else, but I want to give the last word to a very fine panel, 

should you choose to do so. 

So, Ms. Lipsitz, let us start with you. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Yes, I will not turn down that invitation. 

Senator WYDEN. All right. [Laughter.] 

Ms. LIPSITZ. First of all, I want to thank all of the panelists here 

again. You assembled a great group, and, as I said before, it is 

wonderful to have the opportunity to get the word out about exports. I think the case has been made that exports do equal jobs, 

and that is our goal. 

We help companies through every stage of the export process, 

and the first stage is to get the word out about exporting. As was 

mentioned, I think, by one of the Senators, either you or Senator 

Klobuchar, 30 percent of the companies that do not export say they 

would be interested in exporting if they had more information. So, 

help us get the word out. 

Then we help companies that have never exported before. Those 

companies, they need more handholding, they need more guidance, 

and we try to get them hooked on exporting and interested in the 

opportunities overseas. We also help companies that are exporting 

to just one market to increase their sales in that market, and also 

get them to export to two, three, or four markets. And then it is 

our dream to graduate those small companies from the commercial 

service, like HMI. We consider that, once you were in 45 markets—— 

Senator WYDEN. Graduate with honors. 

Ms. LIPSITZ. Graduate with honors. So, that is our goal. We target our marketing, we help companies overseas with obstacles they 

may have, with Customs issues they may have, and, if you can help 

us get the word out, we would greatly appreciate it. 

Senator WYDEN. Very good. 

Dr. Mas? 

Dr. MAS. Thank you all. I will keep it brief. 

A competitive workforce is a necessary condition for industry 

competitiveness. We are committed to training a skilled workforce 

at all levels. We must, and are doing more. We are committed to 

reducing as many supply-side barriers as possible through training 

to maximize export potential in advanced manufacturing and green 

jobs. The green job training grants which we have already begun 

rolling out are a good example of that. Those are, in many areas, 

touching on these sectors, and we hope to continue to do more in 

that area. 

Senator WYDEN. Dr. Yager? 

Dr. YAGER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Let me make three really quick 

points. 

One, we just did a study that came out earlier this summer for 

the Finance Committee on the work that the States do on export 

promotion, and I think it is a very important point that some of 

the States do invest considerable resources in export promotion; 

Pennsylvania, for example, and some others, have a fairly sizeable 

effort. There is a great deal of variance, however. Some States have 

very little funding available for firms, and also I think the budget 

situation in the States makes that funding somewhat less consistent than it might be at the Federal level. 

30 

A second point that I can make is that we certainly agree in trying to get the very best value for the programs. That is something 

I have in my written statement that I think we certainly agree 

with. One of the ways I think to achieve this is to look for performance measures, and I think the unbiased input from some of the 

members that are receiving those services, or possibly companies 

that have looked into the services and chosen not to take advantage of them, I think there is a lot that could be learned from those 

firms. 

And, finally, I will just mention quickly that we are actually undertaking right now a study of the Foreign Commercial Service for 

the Congress, and we do have also a significant interest in the operations of the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee. We 

would be happy to come back and talk to you about those when 

those studies are finalized. 

Senator WYDEN. Good. 

Mr. Rosen? 

Mr. ROSEN. Yes. The first thing is that setting targets is not 

picking winners and losers, and I think we are missing that. We 

need to start doing that, but setting targets is also too easy. It is 

not the end of the problem. 

First of all, I think the target should be set not by just the government, but in a public-private partnership. We need to bring in 

the private sector in setting those targets. And most importantly, 

more important than the target itself, is using those targets to figure out what resources we need to meet those targets. I think one 

of the reasons that you might be frustrated in terms of our projections on employment needs and things like that is because it is not 

an inter-related process. What we need to do is bring the Labor Department together with the Commerce Department, together with 

the other agencies, come up with these overarching targets, and 

then fit these things in, as opposed to just going out there and 

doing modeling on what the economy is going to need. 

It should be a 3-stage process, bringing the public and the private sectors together to set those targets. Setting targets is not 

picking winners and losers, but using the targets to figure out what 

kind of resources we need to meet those targets. 

The next thing, which has been hinted at by the people in the 

field, is that there is a lack of continuity in the United States on 

these things. It is kind of like the whim of the day. These tax credits that we are talking about, by the time that businesses are able 

to start changing their production to take advantage of those tax 

credits, they are gone. Our R&D tax credit has to be renewed every 

2 to 3 years. Businesses cannot rely on these things if they are 

going to become constantly there one day and not the other. Our 

programs to promote exports, they cannot be just a thing that one 

administration likes and funds and the next administration does 

not fund. If we are going to make a commitment to these things, 

it has to be a permanent commitment, and that is another thing 

that handicaps our producers and our exporters. 

The last thing I would encourage you to do, please, Mr. Chairman, as you and your colleagues look at this new jobs bill coming 

up, or all of these efforts towards promoting jobs, please ask yourselves, ask experts, what impact will these programs have on proVerDate Nov 24 2008 20:16 May 12, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 R:\DOCS\66022.000 TIMD
31 

moting investment? There are lots of ways to promote investment. 

We could hire more people here in the government. We could pay 

the private sector to hire people. The question is, if we want longterm jobs at high wages, we have to promote investment, and I 

think that should be the criteria by which we measure. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Beisner? 

Mr. BEISNER. Senator Wyden, our thought is let us coordinate 

some things, as Mr. Rosen had mentioned. The ups and downs of 

the investment tax credit over the past years have just driven the 

solar industry, the renewable industry, crazy, then finally we have 

an 8-year window that we can now work within. Unfortunately, the 

financial crisis hit. These are the type of long-term planning horizons that we need, and when you are considering the energy bills 

that will be there at the same time that these jobs bills will be 

there, that we are spending a tremendous amount of money exporting and importing foreign oil, foreign products, let us have that 

done locally. 

We have the technology to do it. Our colleagues at the Department of Energy and the Department of Commerce, they want to get 

this done. We know from our experience, with the tremendous investment that was already made in the semi-conductor industry, 

how you are able to take a semi-conductor-related job and turn that 

into a solar-related job. And so, we have some success stories that 

we can point to. 

Senator WYDEN. I am smiling because you are being very diplomatic when you say ‘‘the government should coordinate.’’ My wife 

owns a book store, and she often characterizes the role of government in much less diplomatic kind of ways, like, do you people ever 

talk to each other? [Laughter.] 

Things like that. Well said. And particularly to have a role model 

for being able to show, just as you have said, the transition where 

folks were laid off in an area of high technology that has made a 

huge contribution in our State, continues to do it into the green 

economy. The fact that you all made that bet on our future as the 

green energy capital of the world, speaks volumes. We are going to 

look to make the government a better partner in the days ahead. 

Last word to you, Ms. Harney? 

Ms. HARNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

There are three things that really come to my mind as a summary. One, for small businesses to succeed in export, it has to be 

affordable. The help that we receive has to be affordable. We also 

have to know where to get the help, and so I really encourage the 

funding for FCS because they have been a help to us. But I think 

that there are a lot of people who are not familiar with them and 

their services, and once again, a lot of times when we talk to them 

they are always having to survive in their countries that they are 

servicing, and we need to make sure that the services that they 

offer are not always a paid service, but a promotion service. 

And also, a level playing field. If we can have a level playing 

field for our company, that would make a huge difference with having the FTAs. So, especially, like right now, we are really working 

hard on the Panama Canal, and that is a huge project for us that 

will be a huge project for years to come, and we are competing 

32 

against countries that do not have to have all the import taxes and 

everything. 

Thank you so much. 

Senator WYDEN. Well, thank you, Ms. Harney. 

It is interesting that you bring up that question of Panama and 

the Panama Canal and related issues. That has great ramifications 

for us in the Pacific Northwest, and we are going to be following 

that up with some future work in the ports area, in particular. So, 

we look forward to working with all of you in the days ahead. 

I also want to tell you that Senator Crapo, who has a great interest in these issues, actually has an amendment on the floor, so he 

could not be here. Senator Grassley, our ranking minority member, 

a long-time advocate of improved opportunities for exports, as well 

as Senator Kerry and Senator Snowe, you have four U.S. Senators 

who very much wanted to be here. All sent statements. We may 

have other colleagues who want to ask questions of you all in writing. But this has been a very helpful way to jump-start the whole 

debate about how trade, and exports in particular, can help us 

grow our economy at a crucial time. 

We will be following up with all of you. 

With that, the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[The prepared statements of Senators Crapo, Grassley, Kerry, 

and Snowe appear in the appendix.] 

[Whereupon, at 4:17 p.m., the hearing was concluded.] 

(33) 

A P P E N D I X 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD


66022001.eps
34 


66022.002
35 


66022.003
36 


66022.004
37 


66022.005
38 


66022.006
39 


66022.007
40 


66022.008
41 


66022.009
42 


66022.010
43 


66022.011
44 


66022.012
45 


66022.013
46 


66022.014
47 


66022.015
48 


66022.016
49 


66022.017
50 


66022.018
51 


66022019.eps
52 


66022020.eps
53 


66022.021
54 


66022.022
55 


66022.023
56 


66022.024
57 


66022.025
58 


66022.026
59 


66022.027
60 


66022.028
61 


66022.029
62 


66022.030
63 


66022.031
64 


66022.032
65 


66022.033
66 


66022.034
67 


66022.035
68 


66022.036
69 


66022.037
70 


66022.038
71 


66022.039
72 


66022.040
73 


66022.041
74 


66022.042
75 


66022.043
76 


66022.044
77 


66022.045
78 


66022.046
79 


66022.047
80 


66022.048
81 


66022.049
82 


66022.050
83 


66022.051
84 


66022.052
85 


66022.053
86 


66022.054
87 


66022.055
88 


66022056.eps
89 


66022.057
90 


66022.058
91 


66022.059
92 


66022.060
93 


66022.061
94 


66022.062
95 


66022.063
96 


66022.064
97 


66022.065
98 


66022.066
99 


66022.067
100 


66022.068
101 


66022.069
102 


66022.070
103 


66022.071
104 


66022.072
105 


66022.073
106 


66022.074
107 


66022.075
108 


66022.076
109 


66022.077
110 


66022.078
111 


66022.079
112 


66022.080
113 


66022.081
114 


66022.082
115 


66022.083
116 


66022.084
(117) 

COMMUNICATION


66022085.eps
118 

Æ 


66022086.eps