[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 22 (Thursday, March 3, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: March 3, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
TRADE
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me turn to trade just for a second.
President Clinton is also under attack for his position on trade issues
with Japan. Finally, I say, finally we have a President who is willing
to exhibit a bit of leadership in international trade. We have had,
year after year after year, trade actions by Japan and others that are
fundamentally unfair to American producers, drive up enormous trade
deficits in this country without anybody willing to stand up and say,
``That's unfair to us.''
Uncle Sam ought to stop getting kicked around in international
markets. We ought not expect any special favors at any time, but
neither should we accept unfair trade. When other countries decide they
want to accept the opportunity in our market to send all their goods to
us, then we ought to say one simple thing of them: We have a
requirement of you to open up your market to our producers just as
generously as we open up the American market to yours. That ought to be
the standard for trade: Reciprocal trade and fair trade.
Finally, we have a President who is willing to stand up to Japan and
others--good friends, allies, trading partners, yes--but to stand up
and say we expect more from you, we expect your markets to be open to
American businesses and American workers, and we expect to get our
goods into your markets just as you flood our markets with your goods.
That is a standard that every American should accept and every American
ought to applaud this President for taking that leadership.
Let me turn to one other point in trade that we are trying very hard
to get the White House to move on as well, and that is trade with
Canada. Canada shares with us the longest border up North. We are good
neighbors. We are good friends. But we have an enormously serious trade
problem with the Canadians, and that is they are flooding our market
with unfairly subsidized grain.
Most people do not know what durum is, unless you produce durum. The
people who eat macaroni and cheese tonight will not know they are
eating something produced from semolina flour. Semolina flour is the
ground product of durum wheat. Eighty percent of the durum wheat raised
in America is raised in North Dakota.
So if this evening you decide to have a pasta dinner, you are likely
to put something in your stomach that comes from a durum wheat field in
North Dakota.
When we had the United States-Canada Free-Trade Agreement before the
Congress, our farmers were literally sold out by then Trade Ambassador
Yeutter and by the administration. We had zero durum wheat shipped into
our country at that point from Canada. Do you know what it is now?
Twenty percent of domestic consumption--all of it--is coming in
unfairly subsidized. None of it is trade with which we can compete--50
cents a bushel subsidy just on the subsidized Canadian railroad alone.
We cannot compete with it.
It is fundamentally unfair trade. It has sucked hundreds of millions
of dollars out of the pockets of our farmers. It has cost us an extra
$600 million in added farm program payments, said the USDA, according
to their own testimony.
The question is, what is going to be done about it? This President
has taken the first steps to address it, but they are not steps
sufficient enough to resolve the problem. And we are asking--yes,
demanding--that this administration step up and say to the Canadians,
``No more.''
We want trade remedies called an emergency 22, emergency section 22,
which would impose immediately a significant tariff on that unfairly
subsidized grain. We are having a series of meetings with the
administration. But you almost fall asleep over all these meetings and
all these months when everybody says all these soothing things and
nothing really quite gets done to solve the problem.
I am of the opinion that we probably will not need to confirm any
additional trade folks, because we do not need more trade people
working in any agency downtown if we cannot solve the trade problems we
now have. We have some nominations coming up. I have talked to some
people in the administration suggesting that if that is the only point
of leverage, then we will have to use that.
We must resolve this issue with the Canadians and we must resolve it
now. Our farmers deserve no less than to have the administration and
Congress step up and say we will not accept unfair trade from our
neighbors.
The Presiding Officer, who very ably chairs the Agriculture
Committee, understands how arcane some of these disputes are and how
difficult some of the issues are with respect to grain.
Most of the people in this Chamber--I should say most of the people
in the other Chamber, in the House of Representatives--come from urban
areas. Many in this Chamber grew up in urban areas. They do not have to
live in a rural area in order to serve here. Those of us who come from
rural areas have to live in an urban area to serve here. That is part
of the requirement of serving in the U.S. Senate: You have to live at
least part of the year in Washington, DC. We understand urban problems
because we are forced to live here to serve here.
The reverse is not true. Urban Members of the House and Senate do not
always understand the problems we have in rural America. We have very
few people out there. They are important. Their livelihood is fragile,
depending on the weather, depending on the price. If they get a crop,
there might be a decent price from the harvest; more than that,
depending on the trade rules, because we must find a foreign home for
half of what we produce.
Trade rules are unfair to them. When you have trade rules that are as
unfair as the rules have been with Canada, our farmers understand and
are demonstrating in 30 degree below weather up on the northern border
that this Government take action.
I talked with President Clinton as recently as 2 days ago about this
subject. I implore him again that we need to take effective, immediate,
and decisive action to respond to this issue.
Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Shelby). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed
for an additional 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________