As the head of the Export-Import Bank during the Obama administration, I knew we were leveling the playing field for U.S. businesses competing globally, even as we were attacked by Freedom Caucus members for providing what they erroneously said was corporate welfare to big companies.

I was disappointed that Charles Lane suggested, in his Feb. 5 op-ed, “Do we need the Export-Import Bank?,” eliminating Ex-Im. Ninety percent of the customers Ex-Im supports are small businesses, not counting the tens of thousands of companies in the supply chains of larger exporters. Two-thirds of Ex-Im financing during the Obama administration went to projects in emerging markets, where it is often much harder to get private-sector financing.

In countries around the world, there are some 100 export credit agencies working to ensure their respective companies have a level playing field against foreign competition. It baffles me that some want to eliminate Ex-Im and put our exporters at a disadvantage to companies in China, Japan and the European Union.

Ex-Im is a rare government entity that supports U.S. jobs, spends no taxpayer dollars, provides no subsidies or tax breaks, and actually makes money for the U.S. treasury. Instead of eliminating it, leaders in both parties should support its mission in full and confirm its board now.

Fred P. Hochberg, Miami Beach

The writer was chairman and president of the Export-Import Bank of the United States
from 2009 to 2017 and deputy and acting
administrator of the U.S. Small Business
Administration from 1998 to 2001.