ICYMI: Huffington Post profiles foreign policy work of Senators Coons, Kaine, and Murphy

Washington – In case you missed it, below is an article from the Huffington Post authored by Erin McPike about leadership from Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on foreign policy issues: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/13/democrats-foreign-policy-leaders_n_7555224.html

The Democrats’ Old Leaders On Foreign Policy Are Gone Or Going. Meet The New Guard.

By Erin McPike

The Democratic foreign policy establishment is suffering from a major brain drain. Forget for a moment that Republicans took control of the Senate and displaced a handful of Democrats in January. Think instead about how rapidly the Democratic strain of the “Old Bull” species is becoming extinct.

Sen. Daniel Akaka of Hawaii retired, as did Michigan’s Carl Levin and Connecticut’s Joe Lieberman. Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey is still around for a roll call vote or a floor speech, but he’s no longer leading the Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee due to his ethics troubles. 

There’s a Democrat in the White House, and he sets the party’s foreign policy. But the sun is setting on his administration, which also pushes Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden toward some form of retirement. Sure, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might be elected president and control Democratic foreign policy for four or eight more years. But, then, what if she isn’t?

The combination of events threatens to leave the party without obvious senior or high-profile figures on foreign policy. When battles were raging over the fiscal cliff and Wall Street reform, this brain drain seemed to be no big deal. But as the economy recovered, the rapid rise of the Islamic State, the resurging Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Russia’s incursion into Ukraine brought some familiar faces back to TV screens — Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), John McCain (Ariz.) and Rand Paul (Ky.). Their feuding over intervention versus isolation became a hot, yet Democrat-free, fixation for the political media.

Democratic officials, operatives and strategists noticed their party’s absence from the debate. In February 2014, David Wade, a longtime Senate aide to Kerry who was then serving at the State Department, had a series of pie charts drawn up to show how few senators had been in office during previous debates over the use of military force. At the time, just 16 percent of the Senate had been there during the Bosnia intervention, and only 37 percent had been there for the start of the Iraq War. Those numbers have since fallen further. “It’s something we’ve seen/felt for a while,” Wade told The Huffington Post in an email.

But now Wade and the rest of the party can relax, because into the Democrats’ foreign policy void have stepped three younger senators: Chris Coons of Delaware, Tim Kaine of Virginia and Chris Murphy of Connecticut.

Coons, Kaine and Murphy are something of an unlikely trio to lead the Democrats on foreign policy, in part because they are so new to the Senate. Coons, 51 and first elected to the upper chamber in 2010, is the most senior of the three. But although their backgrounds are in state and local offices and legal jobs, they have gone to great lengths to educate themselves on foreign matters and have logged considerable time abroad, which makes them well suited to tackle global issues. 

Kaine, 57, practiced law with a focus on housing issues for nearly two decades before winning local office in 1994. By 2006, he was governor of Virginia. In that job, he also served as commander in chief of the Virginia National Guard during wartime, and he led a state with one of the heaviest concentrations of veterans and service members in the country. In fact, more active-duty service members live in Virginia than in any other state but California, according to the most recent data. So Kaine’s assignment to the Senate Armed Services Committee when he took office in 2013 made a lot of sense.

But it was a yearlong sabbatical in Honduras as a young Harvard student that Kaine said gave him the credential he needed to talk his way onto the Foreign Relations Committee: fluency in Spanish.

When Kaine first got to Capitol Hill, he begged for a Foreign Relations seat from then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who informed him that freshmen don’t get to sit on both the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees. Kaine pleaded that he should be the exception as one of the precious few senators who can speak Spanish and thus could communicate frequently on TV and radio with the 40 million Spanish-speaking Americans. Reid, convinced, granted his wish.

Kaine hadn’t been a regular voter before he ventured out of the United States for that Honduras mission, which he calls a pivotal point in his life. “But, man,” he said, “I’ve been a really regular voter ever since I got back.” 

Coons worked his way up in electoral politics first as New Castle County Council president in 2000 and county executive in 2004. Like Kaine, he benefited from some eye-opening time away from home — a semester studying abroad at the University of Nairobi in Kenya. That experience has helped make Coons the Senate’s go-to guy on Africa, no small thing at a time when northern Africa is facing increasing threats from multiple terrorist groups.

He studied chemistry, earned a law degree from Yale, and worked in a religion degree that comes in handy when meeting with foreign leaders. He’s also a onetime Truman Scholar, a prestigious designation awarded by President Harry Truman’s foundation that grants funding to college juniors to further their studies in advance of public service careers.

“I’ve been to the Truman Library nine times,” Coons told HuffPost. “I’ve spent a lot of time looking at his record in foreign policy.”

And Coons has traveled to 50 countries. Asked by this reporter for the list, he scribbled them all down on notebook paper and handed the names the next morning to his staff, who passed them along. Many of those trips have been so-called CODELs, government-sponsored travel that takes congressional delegations to foreign countries to view their issues and governments up close. He clearly digs the continuing education. 

“I can certify that none of these trips were to any nice places,” he said, adding that his friends joke he is “the one senator who will go anywhere as long as it’s really bad, really tough, really ugly. That’s how you learn the stuff.”

Coons’ first CODEL was a tour of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Georgia and Israel with the current Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), plus Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).

“I just want you to imagine, Bernie Sanders and Joe Manchin — the four of us in the back of a C-130, banging around from Bagram to Kandahar and getting out and asking questions and then taking a V-22,” Coons said, grinning as he recalled it. “There were great conversations.” (A C-130 is a military transport plane, and a V-22 is a tiltrotor aircraft.)

Yet it is Connecticut’s Murphy who deserves the most credit for identifying the Democrats’ predicament, which he first outlined in a Medium commentary urging progressives to lay out some foreign policy principles beyond simply opposing war.

“When I got here, the most interesting foreign policy conversation that was happening in the Senate was between John McCain and Rand Paul,” Murphy told HuffPost. “And there was just a deafening silence from Democrats when it came to proactively articulating a foreign policy vision on the floor of the Senate.”

He worried that the problem went deeper — that Democrats were not only staying mum, but weren’t thinking deeply about developing a robust foreign policy for the party. 

“A lot of the stars on the Democratic side were, you know, much more focused on domestic policy than on foreign policy,” he said. “And I’ve seen the absence of our voice affect the debate.” 

As any self-respecting politician would, Murphy appointed himself the fixer. In recent months he’s been working casually with other young Democratic senators who are not on the Foreign Relations Committee, including New Mexico’s Martin Heinrich and Hawaii’s Brian Schatz, to come up with a set of progressive principles that could be used to combat the resurgence of neoconservatives on the right. Murphy, Heinrich and Schatz described those principles on June 8 in a Foreign Affairs article.

All three senators on that article are still in their early 40s, comparative youngsters in the U.S. Senate. That’s by design.

Asked to identify his role models on foreign relations, Murphy gave a thoroughly forward-looking answer:

I think it’s impossible to say because the world has changed, right, and I think that’s what we’re struggling with. We’re still stuck in a paradigm where we’re trying to apply old tools to new problems. And so in some ways it’s the perfect moment for this transition to happen in the Senate on the Foreign Relations Committee. Not to say that Secretary Kerry and the vice president don’t understand these transitions, but the world is fundamentally different. The tools that America needs to exercise are fundamentally changed, and so it’s an appropriate moment for a new group of leaders in the Senate to start speaking their minds.

Contrast that with, say, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R), who recently tapped Paul Wolfowitz, a high-ranking Defense Department official under both presidents Bush, to develop his foreign policy strategy. Bush has endured much mocking from all corners of the political world for reaching to the maligned past.

The 41-year-old Murphy is a real estate lawyer. Like Coons and Kaine, he came up through local office, starting at 25 in the Connecticut General Assembly. He spent most of his 30s as a congressman and dabbled in foreign affairs in the U.S. House. He may be seeking to blaze his own path, but remember, Biden developed his foreign policy chops as a young man in the Senate, too.

Though Murphy, Coons and Kaine are not in lockstep on how to pursue their foreign policy goals, they — and basically the rest of the Senate — are agreed on the pressing need to vote on new language that would specifically authorize President Barack Obama to use military force in the war against the Islamic State. The fight over this vote alone has gone a long way toward bringing the upper chamber back to prominence on global issues.

The war powers clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to declare war. Yet ever since the Korean War, presidents have found ways to circumvent it.

Right now, making sure Congress directly authorizes current and future armed conflicts is Kaine’s main objective. When he spoke to HuffPost, he used the word “obsessed” at least four times to describe his commitment to ensure Congress plays its intended constitutional role in matters of war and peace. “The way the vote happened in October 2002 authorizing the use of force in Iraq just before the midterms … got me obsessed with what Congress is going to do,” Kaine said. Now he’s making the rounds on national TV pressing the point repeatedly.

“We should not be in the 10th month in a war against ISIL without Congress saying a dang thing about it,” he told HuffPost in May, using another term for the Islamic State.

All three senators say Democrats must start thinking beyond the Obama administration and consider how to incorporate lessons learned from its mistakes. 

As Murphy put it, “I think the Obama administration has been long on rhetoric when it comes to America’s role as a beacon for human rights and civil rights, but we haven’t been as strong on action, and so I think it’s tough for us to tell the rest of the world that they should respect human rights when we’re listening in on our own citizens.”

Despite Obama’s best intentions to wind down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Coons said, the Islamic State “is a brutal reminder that that’s not going to happen at our choosing and on our timeline.” He added, “We have done things in response to the Arab Spring or the Arab Awakening that have confused our allies and emboldened our enemies.” 

Coons thinks the tilt toward isolationism that more Americans embraced during the 2012 election should be seen as an overreaction to the costs and losses from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Nor can we afford a posture that says we’re the only indispensable nation and we’re going to go it alone and we’re going to go charging in with our chin,” he said. “It’s time to find a new multilateralism for the 21st century.”  

Coons and Kaine have both indicated they believe there’s a genuine opening for Democrats and Republicans to work together on foreign policy. In a recent issue of Foreign Policy magazine, Kaine and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) outlined a broad vision for bipartisan cooperation on international issues, and stressed the importance of better teamwork between the president and Congress.

For his part, Coons is working with Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) on a bill to improve the National Guard State Partnership Program. With Corker, the Senate Foreign Relations chairman, he’s working on global food aid reform, which had been a pet project of now-retired Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.). He’s joined with Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) on free trade matters involving sub-Saharan Africa, and he’s actively seeking out more Republicans for a series of legislative efforts.

Murphy is taking an alternate tack, because he sees a subtle difference in the way the parties want to do business, which he’s discussed in floor speeches at the height of the U.S. nuclear negotiations with Iran. The Republican congressional effort to micromanage the nuclear talks pushed for too much oversight of the president when he’s negotiating peace, Murphy argued. But the same Congress’ failure to pass language authorizing the president to use force against the Islamic State meant not enough oversight during war, he said. On the other hand, Murphy suggested some Democrats call for too little oversight of diplomacy and too much of the battlefield. He also believes the Senate’s failure to weigh in on the use of force has made it less influential.

Republicans undoubtedly will brand him as another big-spending New England liberal, but Murphy argues that the United States should be spending a whole lot more money on the ground in unstable countries to assist local governments — with much greater flexibility given to the State Department.

“What we need to reconcile is that we’re spending this money one way or the other,” Murphy said. “The question is whether you want to spend this money on the military side when the country blows up, or whether you want to spend it on the front end to try to stop the instability before it grows and festers.”

Although polls suggest Democrats have lost ground with the voters on national security, one expert thinks that the rise of Coons, Kaine and Murphy may help them regain their edge. 

“After a decade of war, Americans are looking for a third option rather than the debate of ‘should we bomb or not bomb,’” said Michael Breen, executive director of the Truman National Security Project. “People want to see an actual strategy.”

Senator Coons boosts funding for law enforcement programs in annual spending bill

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and co-chair of the Senate Law Enforcement caucus, successfully pushed increased funding for critical law enforcement programs in the annual spending bill for the Department of Justice.  The spending bill, which Senator Coons helped pass through the Appropriations Committee yesterday, will now go before the full Senate.

“Supporting Delaware law enforcement and keeping our communities safe is one of my top priorities, but to do that, the federal government needs to provide strong federal funding in the annual spending bills,” said Senator Coons.  “The Appropriations process is far from over, but I’m very glad that we were able to boost funding for critical law enforcement programs in the Appropriations Committee.”

Below are the FY 2016 funding levels passed yesterday by Senator Coons and the Appropriations Committee for select law enforcement programs:

Bulletproof Vest Partnership: $22.5 million

According to the Government Accountability Office, bulletproof vests have saved the lives of more than 3,000 law enforcement officers since 1987, including two Delaware Capitol Police Officers at the NCC Courthouse. The Bulletproof Vest Partnership has helped law enforcement officers in 13,000 jurisdictions purchase over one million lifesaving vests that their departments would not have been able to afford otherwise.  In recent years, demand for bulletproof vests has been outpacing funding for the program.

COPS hiring program: $187 million ($6.5 million increase from 2015 bill)

The COPS Hiring Program is a competitive grant that provides funding directly to state and local law enforcement agencies to hire or re-hire additional officers in support of community policing and crime prevention efforts.  Awardees may receive up to 75 percent of the approved entry-level salaries and fringe benefits of each newly hired and/or rehired full-time officer, up to $125,000 per officer position, over a three-year grant period. 

STOP Violence Against Women grants: $215 million ($20 million above 2015 bill)

The STOP (Services Training Officers and Prosecutors) Violence Against Women Formula Grant program promotes a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach to enhancing advocacy and improving the criminal justice system’s response to violent crimes against women. It encourages the development and improvement of effective law enforcement and prosecution strategies to address violent crimes against women and the development and improvement of advocacy and services in cases involving violent crimes against women. The STOP Violence Against Women Formula Grant program is a subgrant provided by the Criminal Justice Council which provides funding to operate a victim services program in New Castle and Kent counties in Delaware.

Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance grants: $382 million ($8 million above 2015 bill)

The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program supports all components of the criminal justice system from multijurisdictional drug and gang task forces to crime prevention and domestic violence programs, courts, corrections, treatment and justice information sharing initiatives.  In Delaware, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program provides funding to reduce gang violence and prevent/limit the recruitment of new gangs through intelligence-based policing.  The grant also supports an increased awareness for local law enforcement of gangs and related criminal activity and provides assistance, where needed, to standardize training across each of the participating states and cities in gang recognition and prevention. 

Victims of Child Abuse Act: $20 million ($9 million above the President’s budget request)

The Victims of Child Abuse Act provides funding to local Children’s Advocacy Centers across the country, the four Regional Children’s Advocacy Center programs, the National Children’s Alliance, the National Children’s Advocacy Center, and other essential programs serving child abuse victims.  Continued funding for this program ensures that Delaware’s three CACs and those across the country continue to help victims of child abuse.

Child Abuse Training Programs: $3 million (Double the 2015 amount)

These funds are used to support specialized training for judges to oversee family violence, foster care and child welfare matters and ensure the protection of vulnerable children and families. These training programs help ensure that courts in Delaware and across the U.S. are effectively serving victims of abuse, their children, and their families. 

###

ICYMI: Senators Coons and Moran op-ed: “Bringing Congress Together to Make America More Competitive in the 21st Century”

WASHINGTON – In case you missed it, below is an oped from Roll Call authored by U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.):

Bringing Congress Together to Make America More Competitive in the 21st Century

By Sens. Chris Coons and Jerry Moran, with Sam Allen and Deborah Wince-Smith

The hallmark of our nation’s economy has long been the ability of anyone with creativity, ambition and a good work ethic to realize their dreams and move America forward. From the light bulb to the iPhone, the legacy of American invention has shone brightly throughout the world. Yet while our culture of innovation and entrepreneurial spirit remain strong, the policy framework that empowers that spirit to flourish is losing its competitive edge.

For years, enabling our nation’s innovative drive was an economic system unparalleled around the world — from competitive tax laws to public investments in research, infrastructure and education. We’ve long understood something many other countries haven’t: For innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit to thrive, we need a strong, competitive economic ecosystem. There simply is no single “silver bullet” for economic growth.

While other nations catch up, our system is deteriorating in a number of ways. Federal investments in basic research and development are not keeping up with inflation and our tax code remains riddled with complexity, unable to spur growth and provide the certainty our businesses need. We also have to address the tough questions about how to fund our infrastructure, transportation and education systems. In our dynamic market economy, the natural churn of businesses opening and closing keeps our nation competitive, as long as we’re creating more businesses than we’re closing, of course.

According to the Census Bureau, however, U.S. businesses are now failing faster than they are being created for the first time in 35 years — since the data was first recorded. Meanwhile, the 2014 Global Innovation Index saw the U.S. innovation ecosystem fall to sixth place, while ranking 39th in ease of starting a business. These declines are coupled to a global R&D forecast that projects leading competitors — such as China — will surpass the United States in total R&D investment by 2022. 

Yet even with these challenges, we do retain a competitive edge. Americans’ entrepreneurial drive still spurs our economy; manufacturing output continues to increase; our colleges and universities remain the envy of the world; innovations in the American energy industry have reduced our trade deficit and improved our energy security; and private sector R&D has rebounded after several years of stagnation.

We now find ourselves at a competitive inflection point. We can either do more to nurture and take advantage of our strengths — only some of which we’ve mentioned — or we can fall behind in the 21st century. In order to support our competitive strengths, we’re launching the bipartisan Senate Competitiveness Caucus, a forum to bring together Democrats and Republicans to address the most pressing issues facing our economy. We’ve worked together before on important bills such as the STARTUP Act and MLP Parity Act, which would make it easier for innovative small companies and clean-energy projects to access financing and grow quickly. The Council on Competitiveness, a nonpartisan organization that brings together leaders from every corner of our economy — from industry to academia, to labor to government — will be a key partner in the effort to advance the caucus and find solutions to America’s biggest competitiveness challenges.

Rather than focus on just one issue or one bill, we’ve formed the caucus with the understanding that it will take a whole range of policies working in concert to sustain our innovation ecosystem.

We’ll pursue ways to invest in our roads, bridges, ports and highways so they meet the needs of a 21st century economy. We’ll work to make our tax code more competitive so the United States will remain the best country in which to do business and raise a family. We’ll seek to streamline regulations to protect consumers and make it easier to start and grow a business. We’ll look at our federal budget and focus federal resources on pro-growth policies that will create an environment for job creation now and into the future. We’ll work together to boost manufacturing because no country can support a strong middle class without a thriving manufacturing sector. That’s just a start.

If the past century has taught us anything, it’s that other countries will not slow down when it comes to chasing America’s economic success. That means even though the United States remains a world leader in innovation and competitiveness, it will only become more difficult to retain that position in the coming years. Members of the Competitiveness Caucus understand that we are now competing with every country, every government, every worker and every business on the planet. Congress must come together to turn our economic challenges into opportunities for growth.

Sens. Chris Coons, D-Del., and Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, are co-chairmen of the bipartisan Senate Competitiveness Caucus. Sam Allen is chairman and CEO of Deere & Co. and has served as chairman of the Council on Competitiveness since 2010. Deborah Wince-Smith is president and CEO of the Council on Competitiveness.

Senator Coons seeks applicants for Senate Page Program

WILMINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) is now accepting applications from qualified high school juniors for the Senate Page Program’s fall 2015 session.

“The Senate Page Program is a tremendous opportunity for juniors in high school to learn about the inner workings of the legislative branch first-hand,” Senator Coons said. “The Senate Page Program is steeped in history and helps encourage young people to be engaged, lifelong participants in America’s civic and political systems.”

The spring session runs from September 2015 to January 2016.  The deadline for submitting applications is June 22, 2015. To be considered for the program, an applicant must be a United States citizen or subject to agreements of the Department of State and must have a Social Security number. Applicants must be a junior in high school who will be 16 years old on or before January 28, 2015. Applicants must verify a minimum grade point average of 3.0 or a home school transcript and a certification of immunization to qualify for attendance at page school. Applicants are required to be covered by health insurance.

Pages have served in the United States Congress for more than 175 years. Thirty pages – all of them high school juniors at least 16 years old — serve in the upper chamber at any one time and are selected by sitting Senators. Their duties consist primarily of delivering correspondence and legislative material within the Capitol complex, as well as taking messages for Members, preparing the chamber for Senate sessions, and carrying bills and amendments to the Senate desk.

The Senate enrolls its pages in the Senate Page School, which is accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools and convenes classes in the early morning before the Senate convenes. The pages are paid a salary, from which automatic deductions are made for taxes, Social Security, and a fee for housing and meals.

Students interested in applying should contact Senator Coons’ Wilmington office at 302-573-6345 or email Latisha Bracy at latisha_bracy@coons.senate.gov to obtain an application and for additional information about the Senate Page Program.

Senator Coons urges colleagues to reauthorize Ex-Im Bank

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) on Wednesday spoke on the Senate floor about the need to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank that has helped Delaware and American businesses sell their goods around the world and compete in the global economy for over 80 years.

Excerpts from Senator Coons’ speech:

“The Bank has helped to ensure that American companies and their workers can compete anywhere in the world – and at no cost to the American taxpayer.”

“The Export-Import Bank isn’t doing something the private sector should be doing – it’s picking up where the market leaves off and in doing so, helps to level the global playing field on which American companies compete.”

“The bottom line is that American jobs are at stake in this debate, and if we fail to keep the doors open to the Export-Import Bank, we’d fail a lot of American workers. Every year, Ex-Im supports hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country, and shuttering it would put them at risk.” 

“The Export-Import Bank is central to our competitiveness and our continued strength at home and abroad.”

Senator Coons’ full remarks below:

“I’ve come to the floor today following on the speech just delivered by Senator Boxer. She highlighted her concern about a manufactured crisis, about the impending expiration of the Highway bill, which must be reauthorized by July 31. I come to speak to another manufactured crisis. We have to reauthorize the Export-Import bank by June 30 or face the loss of its support for vital jobs in our economy that will happen with its expiration.

“I’m a big advocate for manufacturing here in the Senate and in my home state of Delaware, but I’m not a big fan of manufactured crises.  And both of these are unneeded, self-inflicted wounds that are going to create further drag on our economic recovery. I think we can and should find ways to work together across the aisle to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank.

“For more than 80 years, the Export-Import Bank – or commonly known as Ex-Im – has served as a vital tool to help American companies sell their goods around the world by making loan guarantees, providing risk insurance and other financial products to American firms at market prices. The Bank has helped to ensure that American companies and their workers can compete anywhere in the world – and at no cost to the American taxpayer.

“I’ll say that again – at no cost to the taxpayer. The bank not only pays for itself, it actually often runs a surplus. Last year alone it returned nearly $700 million to the U.S. Treasury.

“Today, the Ex-Im Bank helps American businesses sell nearly $30 billion dollars in goods every single year and supports more than 150,000 American jobs. 

“The Bank is a government agency, however, and even though it costs taxpayers nothing and has an undeniable positive impact on our economy and on job creation, it remains unclear if this Congress will be able to come together to reauthorize it by June 30^th and keep it running. 

“Unfortunately, some of my colleagues would like to close the Bank and are using arguments I think are unfounded and misguided to do so.

“First, I’ve heard that the Ex-Im Bank is somehow a government giveaway to large, politically connected corporations; but the truth is that the Bank helps companies of many different sizes, large and small.

“In my home state of Delaware, for instance, Ex-Im Bank helped a company I know well, Voigt and Schweitzer. A hot-dip zinc galvanizing company. It’s helped them to sell their products abroad. Voigt and Schweitzer has a few facilities around the United States in addition to its location in New Castle, Delaware, but at its Delaware station, it provides galvanizing services for a range of steel products for export.

“V&S isn’t a huge corporation. It has just a few dozen employees in Delaware. It is because of Ex-Im’s support that it’s able to compete with other companies around the globe. In fact, Ex-Im’s support helped the firm’s Delaware location earn the business to galvanize literally hundreds of bridges that were manufactured in Pennsylvania and are being exported and sold to Africa. Business that would have likely gone to competitors overseas without Ex-Im’s help.

“Now, Ex-Im does also help large companies export their goods to countries around the world, but that support also benefits small- and medium-sized businesses. For example, Boeing often receives significant support from the Ex-Im Bank, which helps it compete with international airplane manufacturers like Airbus, and I’ve heard Senators criticize this support. But the reality is it isn’t just Boeing that benefits. This is an important point about how modern manufacturing in the integration of a supply chain works. 

“When Boeing manufactures a finished airplane, it doesn’t make all of that plane’s parts from its own factories and its own workforce. It, in fact, buys the vast majority of the component parts from much smaller manufacturers spread throughout the United States. From the brakes on the landing gear to the in-flight entertainment system, other companies make those parts and sell them to the Boeing finished product.

“So when the Export-Import Bank helps Boeing export a 747, it helps sustain tens of thousands of American workers at other, smaller companies.

“I’ve seen this myself in Delaware. Although Boeing directly employs in Delaware just 16 people, the company supports 1,300 jobs with 52 different Delaware companies. I’ll give you one example — a smallish company, Polymer Technologies, which manufactures and sells thermal and acoustic insulation to Boeing for inclusion in their planes, which are then exported through the help of Ex-Im.

“So when Ex-Im’s opponents in this Chamber argue that this is all about a few big companies, this just isn’t true. It also is vital to sustaining and supporting smaller manufactures who are vital to our community.  

“The next misplaced argument I’ve heard is that government shouldn’t be supporting private companies, period. It should not be, as it were, picking winners and losers. But even to the support of the free market, the point of government is to step in where the private market fails to do so, and that’s exactly what Ex-Im does. When the Bank makes a loan to a business, it isn’t replacing capital that would otherwise come from a private bank. It supplements private capital or makes a private bank more inclined to put at risk its own capital through a provision of political risk insurance, and much of the time, Ex-Im serves as a lender of last resort and provides a loan where a private bank can’t or won’t.

“So the Export-Import Bank isn’t doing something the private sector should be doing – it’s picking up where the market leaves off and in doing so, helps to level the global playing field on which American companies compete. The reality is every single one of our trading partners provides the same type of support for their exports as the Ex-Im bank does for ours. So they are picking winners; they are picking American winners on the global playing field. For example, as Ex-Im’s Chairman, Fred Hochberg, has written, “Ex-Im has given $590 billion in loans, in guarantees, and insurance over its entire history, but Chinese institutions, Chinese export financing institutions have provided an estimated $670 billion in just the past two years.”

“In other words, Mr. President, China has done more in just two years to support the financing of their exporters than our Export-Import Bank has done in its entire 80-year history and at no cost to the taxpayer.

“The bottom line is that American jobs are at stake in this debate, and if we fail to keep the doors open to the Export-Import Bank, we’d fail a lot of American workers. Every year Ex-Im supports hundreds of thousands of jobs in this country, and shuttering it would put them at risk.

“In fact, as the Wall Street Journal reported just this morning, American companies worry that competition is, quote “so cutthroat,” that they’d “be forced to move manufacturing overseas” and ship American manufacturing jobs out of the United States if the Ex-Im Bank does not remain open.

“At a time when our economy is gaining steam and Americans are going back to work – at a clip of 280,000 new jobs announced just last month – we need to continue to help American companies compete in markets around the world. The Ex-Im Bank is central to our competitiveness and our continued strength at home and abroad.

“It is critical that we act together to reauthorize it before the end of June, so I urge my colleagues to join this effort to help support American jobs, American manufacturing, and the American middle class.”

Senator Coons’ statement on tying cyber security legislation to defense bill

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) released the following statement on Republican leadership’s decision to tie cyber security legislation to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

“Cyber security is a critical issue for our country, and any legislation to protect the United States from cyber threats requires a full, open debate on the Senate floor.  The issue of cyber security is simply too important to be used as a political chit and tucked away in separate legislation. I urge Leader McConnell and Senator Burr to consider cyber security legislation separately from the NDAA.”

“To be clear, I have real concerns with privacy-related issues in the cybersecurity bill currently under consideration, and that only reinforces my belief that this issue must be addressed on its own, through a fair, transparent process.”

###

Bipartisan Bill from Senators Coons, Ayotte would boost manufacturing skills training

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) introduced bipartisan legislation to help cities and states build 21^st century manufacturing training programs. The Manufacturing Skills Act would create an annual $100 million competitive grant to support initiatives that strengthen the manufacturing workforce and address regional skills challenges. 

“Manufacturing plays a critical role in keeping our economy competitive globally and strengthening the middle class,” said Senator Coons. “Manufacturing is rapidly evolving and spreading across sectors, creating more than half a million manufacturing jobs in the last three years. Yet hundreds of jobs remain unfilled because our training programs haven’t evolved to meet the growing demand for high-skilled workers. This bipartisan bill will address that gap by helping cities and states craft effective, relevant workforce training programs that will equip students with the appropriate skills for the 21^st century and ensure American manufacturing is primed for growth in the decades to come.” 

“As I visit manufacturers throughout New Hampshire, I hear frequently about the challenges they’re facing in finding high-skilled workers to fill good-paying jobs,” said Senator Ayotte. “Job training needs to be customized to a city or state’s local economy – there’s no one-size-fits-all model. Rather than dictate job training standards from the top, our bill allows local officials, educational institutions, and business leaders to partner together and build job training plans that best fit their unique needs – helping ensure New Hampshire has the right workforce.”

According to a study by the Boston Consulting Group, the number of unfilled skilled manufacturing jobs in the U.S. will reach approximately 875,000 by 2020. While many of these jobs require highly trained workers, the most in-demand skills vary considerably by region and industry. The Manufacturing Skills Act will give state and local leaders the resources and flexibility to design workforce-training programs that fit their regions’ specific needs. 

Applicants will establish a local task force, consisting of leaders from the public, nonprofit, and manufacturing sector, as well as labor and education representatives, to apply for and carry out the three-year grant. A federal inter-agency partnership will review applications and award grants to the five states and five metropolitan areas with the strongest proposals. 

“DuPont believes a skilled manufacturing workforce helps us remain competitive in a global marketplace,” said Matt Koenings, Vice President of Global Manufacturing at DuPont. “Operating today’s manufacturing sites requires competence in advanced technologies such as robotics, operation control systems, and general STEM education to prepare workers for careers in innovation. The Manufacturing Skills Act of 2015 will strengthen the pipeline of talented workers DuPont relies on — from technicians who operate our plants to engineers who participate in the discovery process, provide technical expertise, and execute our capital projects.” 

“The University of Delaware supports the goals of the Manufacturing Skills Act proposed by Sen. Coons and Sen. Ayotte,” said Charles G. Riordan, Deputy Provost for Research and Scholarship at the University of Delaware. “With a strong commitment to advanced manufacturing research and education, UD is well positioned to work collaboratively with partners, including those from the private sector, to revitalize U.S. manufacturing in the 21st century.”

“As demand for manufacturing grows, it is vitally important that U.S. manufacturers have access to the skilled workforce they need to grow their businesses and compete in the global economy,” said Angela Hanks, Federal Policy Analyst at the National Skills Coalition. “The Manufacturing Skills Act would help strengthen the U.S. manufacturing workforce by supporting efforts within states and metropolitan areas to close manufacturing skills gaps and build talent pipelines to meet the manufacturing sector’s current and future workforce needs. National Skills Coalition applauds Senator Coons’ and Senator Ayotte’s efforts to strengthen America’s economy by making critical investments in our nation’s manufacturing sector.”

The bill has been endorsed by the AFL-CIO, Association for Career & Technical Education, Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire, Delaware Manufacturing Association, Delaware State Chamber of Commerce, DuPont, National Skills Coalition, New Hampshire Division of Resources and Economic Development, New Hampshire Manufacturing Extension Partnership, Third Way, United Autoworkers, University of Delaware, and the University of New Hampshire.

South Africa agrees to end tariffs on Delaware poultry

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) and U.S. Representative John Carney (D-Del.) applauded American and South African negotiators who reached an agreement to end South Africa’s tariffs on U.S. poultry over the weekend.

In Delaware, the poultry industry supports 13,000 jobs.  American poultry products are expected to enter the South African market before the end of 2015.  The negotiations were led by the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Department of State, U.S. Ambassador to South Africa Patrick Gaspard, and trade experts from industry. 

“This is great news for farmers across America and especially in Delaware, where we have 300 chickens for every person in our state,” Senator Carper said. “Unfortunately our poultry farmers in the First State, who create more than $4.6 billion in economic activity each year, face trade barriers in countries all over the world. In South Africa – the largest potential poultry market on the African continent – unfair trade practices have kept our chicken farmers out of that market to this point. Thanks to the good work of our negotiators and the persistence of some of my colleagues, like Sens. Coons and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), it looks we’re going to change that and open the South African market to our farmers.  I will continue to work on tearing down barriers like these all over the world so Delaware chickens, and all kinds of other products made in our state and across our country, can be sold around the world.”

“American poultry farmers, especially those in Delaware, should be able to compete on a level playing field in markets around the world, but for too long, that hasn’t been the case in South Africa,” said Senator Coons.  “This is a significant win for Delaware’s poultry farmers and an important day for American agriculture.”

“Expanding our ability to export chicken is crucial to the continued success of Delaware farmers,” said Rep. Carney. “I’m happy to hear we have come to this agreement with South Africa, and I hope the South African government will continue to move forward on implementation as soon as possible.”

Senators Coons and Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), both members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have pressured the South African government for nearly a year to end the tariffs. Most recently, the Senators secured language in the reauthorization of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) requiring the USTR to conduct reviews of South Africa’s trade practices, specifically anti-dumping duties on U.S. poultry.  Senators Isakson and Coons are the co-chairs of the Senate Chicken Caucus.

Senator Coons, colleagues call on Burundi’s President to diffuse political crisis, not seek disputed third term

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-IL), John Boozman (R-AR), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Marco Rubio (R-FL) today called on President Pierre Nkurunziza to not seek a third term as president of Burundi. President Nkurunziza has announced his bid for a third term in violation of Burundi’s constitution and the Arusha Accords, a peace agreement that ended the country’s ethnic civil war in 2000. 

“Your troubling insistence on running for a disputed third term has already caused considerable turmoil for Burundi,” wrote the senators. “We hope you will use your political talents in the concluding days of your second term to work with opposition leaders to heal the wounds that have reopened in your nation.  The people of Burundi, particularly its next generation, deserve a future of opportunity free from political violence.”   

Full text of the senators’ letter:

Dear President Nkurunziza,

We write with mounting concern about the political situation in Burundi and urge you to show the statesmanship needed to diffuse this brewing crisis.   A most immediate step would be to announce that you will not seek a third term as prohibited in your nation’s constitution and the Arusha peace agreement reached in 2000.  Doing so would be an important gesture in the best national interests and future of your country.

Your troubling insistence on running for a disputed third term has already caused considerable turmoil for Burundi – problems that are likely to only become worse.  Thousands have fled into neighboring Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo – neither of which is equipped to handle such an influx.  Political tensions have been stoked, raising the real possibility of greater violence ahead of the presidential elections.  A further destabilizing attempt to forcibly overthrow the government has already occurred, placing fear in the hearts of the people that Burundi is turning away from its goal of a democratic society.  Your work after the devastating civil war to bring together different ethnic groups was admirable and your tenure should be remembered for those efforts and not these current events.  Moreover, you have a responsibility not to rekindle the passions and instability that contributed to that troubling period.

It is no coincidence that leaders from around the world, including many from your immediate region, have urged you to focus on Burundi’s future stability and to conclude your second term as president in an honorable way.  Both the African Union, whose first peacekeeping operation was in Burundi, and the East Africa Community have emphasized the importance of respecting the principles of the Arusha agreement as necessary for lasting peace and democratic governance.  U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry also called for you to listen to the public concern and warned that the current unrest was the result of your unconstitutional decision.  These appeals are done with great concern and out of friendship for the future of the Burundi people and post-civil war political institutions.  They should not be ignored.

We hope you will use your political talents in the concluding days of your second term to work with opposition leaders to heal the wounds that have reopened in your nation.  The people of Burundi, particularly its next generation, deserve a future of opportunity free from political violence.   

 

Sincerely,

 

RICHARD J. DURBIN

United States Senator

 

JOHN BOOZMAN

United States Senator

 

CHRISTOPHER COONS

United States Senator

 

JOHNNY ISAKSON

United States Senator

 

EDWARD MARKEY

United States Senator

 

PATRICK LEAHY

United States Senator

 

MARCO RUBIO

United States Senator

Senator Coons at markup of the PATENT Act: “There are many voices saying this bill is not done. It is still controversial. It is not yet baked.”

WASHINGTON – Below is U.S. Senator Chris Coons’ (D-Del.) opening statement from this morning’s Senate Judiciary Committee markup of the PATENT Act.  Senator Coons is the author of the bipartisan STRONG Patents Act, which is cosponsored by Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), David Vitter (R-La.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.).

Excerpts from Senator Coons’ remarks:

“What makes a patent worthwhile is if you can successfully defend it against infringers, whether domestic or foreign, and whether in the early stages of a startup company as you try to scale and develop and deploy and market your invention, whether you can attract and retain the investors who make it possible to grow that invention.”

“My core concern is that much of the negotiations have occurred between exactly those interests that are best represented and that most represent stable, mature, and dominant industries in different sectors.  The voices from which we have heard the least are those who are most important both in the history of patents and in the history of innovation in this country.”

“In the eyes of this bill, every inventor, every startup, and every small business that relies on patent protection so they can invest and grow jobs and defend their legitimate invention against foreign or domestic infringers is also considered a ‘troll.’ There is no clear line.”

“This is largely a story about unintended consequences.  Many of the sponsors have referenced the fact that just a few years ago, broad and comprehensive reforms to our intellectual property system spawned a new process that has raised new questions and issues.  We should first be concerned about the likely unintended consequences of complex and controversial legislation such as this.” 

“This Congress should not be choosing sides between powerful interests that rely on intellectual property without a thorough and searching examination of its likely impact on the entire system of innovation in this country.”

“Why would we legislate in haste in a way that might take away hope from a family with a loved one struggling with Alzheimer’s, living with Muscular Dystrophy, concerned about Sickle Cell Anemia, wondering when or how a device or treatment or pharmaceutical might be invented and developed that could help them relieve their suffering? Why would we focus solely on one segment and ignore a whole other?”

Senator Coons’ full remarks are below:

“As a number of the Senators who have spoken today recognize, innovation is really at the very heart of what makes America America, and patents are really one of the most important of the constitutionally created and protected property rights that our founders imagined.  And it’s no surprise, because a number of our founders included the ‘curious tinkerers’ as Senator Schumer put it, who are at the very foundation America’s unique innovation system.  In fact, President Lincoln was himself an inventor and patent holder, and the range and reach of small inventors who’ve gone on to be contributors in other fields is really remarkable and in some ways characteristic of what makes America special. 

“But what makes a patent worthwhile is if you can successfully defend it against infringers, whether domestic or foreign, and whether in the early stages of a startup company as you try to scale and develop and deploy and market your invention, whether you can attract and retain the investors who make it possible to grow that invention.

“I thank the cosponsors and the leaders today for their diligent and disciplined bipartisan work to try and reach a balance point – one of the sponsors referred to this as a ‘high wire act’ – and I know it is difficult to reach consensus.  But my core concern is that much of the negotiations have occurred between exactly those interests that are best represented and that most represent stable, mature, and dominant industries in different sectors.  The voices from which we have heard the least are those who are most important both in the history of patents and in the history of innovation in this country. 

“As we’ve heard from a number of Senators, there is no clear definition of what a ‘troll’ is.  There are a lot of statements decrying ‘trolling’ behavior, but this bill still does not make a specific enough definition of what is a ‘patent troll.’  We’ve heard a great deal of invective about scum-sucking, bottom-feeding, invasive species and tapeworms on the body politic, and I too, have heard from very small companies, from those who are in the commercial field who are very concerned about demand letters and baseless cases and patent trolls. But in the eyes of this bill, every inventor, every startup, and every small business that relies on patent protection so they can invest and grow jobs and defend their legitimate invention against foreign or domestic infringers is also considered a ‘troll.’ There is no clear line.

“And as such I’m disappointed that this bill doesn’t make that distinction. We can pretend otherwise and avoid listening to the legitimate voices of real small inventors and those who invest in them but we will miss the most important voice in the whole discussion about invention and innovation because it’s exactly those inventors who come forward with disruptive inventions, who change whole categories, and it’s exactly those inventors who are most at risk of being closed out of our marketplace by the big, established players.  And it is those inventors who are most intended to be protected by the framers of our Constitution. 

“One colleague said that when he meets with and listens to startups, they have two concerns.  One is access to skilled labor, to engineers, and those who can help them grow, and the other is protection from patent trolls.

“Well, I’ve met with dozens and dozens of small inventors who’ve grown their companies to be large, and he must not be listening very well, because uniformly, they have one other key concern. Capital, access to capital, support from investors.

“So as I urge you to think about the impact on small business and reflect on what the Chair of the Small Business Committee said earlier in this markup, I’d also urge you to read the letter from the National Venture Capital Association, which best represents that community of investors who are most engaged in helping the small, early-stage startups grow.  They say ‘because the unintended consequences that will result from provisions in this bill will make it harder to invest in patent-reliant startups, we have no choice but to oppose the bill in its current form and hope that improvements can be made as we work through the legislative process.’  A similar letter form the Medical Device Manufacturers Association lays out the many ways in which this bill is overbroad, and makes hopefully unintended, negative impacts on our system of innovation and of patent litigation. And a similar letter from the USIJ lays out how a coalition of venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, and inventors similarly feels this bill goes too far.  

“Let me also suggest that we should be listening not just to investors and inventors who might be at the center of the discussion about patents, but we should also listen to expert practitioners.  We have on the record letters from the American Bar Association, which represents virtually every practicing attorney in America, from the American Intellectual Property Law Association, which represents 15,000 IP lawyers, from every place along the spectrum, and the New York IP Law Association, all three of which in their letters to this committee on this bill make clear provisions in this current bill will cause broad and unfair harm to all companies trying to enforce a valid patent against an infringing competitor.

“Whether we listen to Dr. Fogarty, the inventor of the balloon catheter cited by Senator Durbin, or we listen to the investors, who would help grow a small company, or we listen to practitioners who are at the very center of patent litigation at all places along the spectrum, there are many voices saying this bill is not done.  It is still controversial. It is not yet baked.  There are still likely unintended harms caused by this bill.  As a result, I will try in this markup to make this bill less harmful to those who rely on the patent system to continue to lead our economy forward.

“I will offer amendments to restore balance and fairness to post grant proceedings, where we’ve seen some of the unforeseen consequences already of our most significant recent patent reform efforts.

“I will offer amendments that will minimize the harm to the small business and real job creators that our economy needs so that we can reduce the broad harm many have recognized that may lie in these litigation reform provisions. And I invite my colleagues to listen to a real debate about these amendments and to join me in making these small, modest, but necessary improvements to deal with these legitimate concerns about this bill. 

“This is largely a story about unintended consequences.  Many of the sponsors have referenced the fact that just a few years ago, broad and comprehensive reforms to our intellectual property system spawned a new process that has raised new questions and issues.  We should first be concerned about the likely unintended consequences of complex and controversial legislation such as this.

“This Congress should not be choosing sides between powerful interests that rely on intellectual property without a thorough and searching examination of its likely impact on the entire system of innovation in this country.

“Of the letters I have urged my colleagues to take up and read and think about, I will last urge you to think through a letter from 93 different patient advocacy groups, led by the Epilepsy Association of the United States, but that represents a very wide range of citizens deeply concerned about the likely harmful impact of this bill on innovation, and biologics and pharmaceuticals and devices and treatments. 

“Why would we legislate in haste in a way that might take away hope from a family with a loved one struggling with Alzheimer’s, living with Muscular Dystrophy, concerned about Sickle Cell anemia, wondering when or how a device or treatment or pharmaceutical might be invented and developed that could help them relieve their suffering? Why would we focus solely on one segment and ignore a whole other?”

“In my view, the narrow and targeted bill that the Chairman of the Small Business Committee, Senator Vitter, and I have introduced, the STRONG Patents Act, is a way to target our actions against exactly the patent trolls that other Senators have spoken about without broader, unintended negative consequences to every legitimate investor, inventor, and patent holder in our entire system.  I’m grateful for the support of Senator Durbin and his advocacy on this issue, as well as Senators Hirono and Cotton and others. 

“This is a difficult and important issue, and Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that we will take up, debate, and move through the many amendments that I have filed, that other Senators have filed, and that we will not move this bill for floor consideration until the different and competing issues that have been raised, by sponsors and members of the committee alike have actually been seriously and thoroughly discussed and resolved.”