[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 86 (Thursday, June 30, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 30, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
            WAIVER OF BUDGET RULES FOR FREE-TRADE AGREEMENTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Bereuter] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen rightly 
refers to the impending results of the Uruguay round of GATT as a 
``huge global tax cut'' amounting to nearly $750 billion over the next 
decade. Second, Trade Representative Mickey Kantor says it is the most 
substantial elimination of trade barriers in the history of GATT.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member could not agree more. The Uruguay round 
trade agreement of GATT would accomplish both of these remarkable 
achievements.

  Unfortunately Mr. Speaker, the Clinton administration seems 
determined to jeopardize these two achievements by refusing to waive 
strict budget rules which cripple our ability to implement the recently 
negotiated GATT agreement.
  These budget rules require either more taxes or spending cuts to 
offset the estimated $11.5 billion in Federal Government revenue that 
is cut by the GATT agreement's proposed reductions in tariffs over 5 
years. The Federal Government collects these tariffs on a variety of 
goods imported to the United States. U.S. consumers ultimately pay 
these tariffs in the price of the imported goods.
  Mr. Speaker, economists almost unanimously agree that a direct waiver 
of the budget rules could be justified so that additional taxes or 
spending cuts are not required to make up the loss of Federal revenue 
from tariff reductions under GATT. These economists correctly argue 
that increased trade and economic activity resulting from GATT would 
immediately stimulate more corporate and individual Federal tax 
revenues. These increased Federal tax revenues would clearly exceed the 
Federal revenues lost from tariff reductions.
  Mr. Speaker, the Clinton administration is jeopardizing these two 
remarkable achievements by proposing to raise taxes on a variety of 
industries which have little nexus to the trade agreement. For example, 
the administration has proposed imposing taxes on broadcasters for 
their use of the electromagnetic spectrum. Clearly, these broadcasters 
have little to gain from increased trade among member nations of GATT. 
Therefore, forcing them to pay for GATT really makes no sense--it is 
just a search for revenue.
  Additionally Mr. Speaker, Mr. Leon Panetta has recently jeopardized 
agricultural support for the Uruguay round trade agreement by saying 
agriculture would only have to sacrifice approximately $1.7 billion of 
the agricultural budget to help pay for the cost of implementing the 
GATT accord.
  Mr. Speaker, during the Uruguay round of the GATT talks the United 
States negotiated with other grain subsidizing nations and agreed to 
reduce its agricultural export subsidies by approximately $1.7 
billion--the amount Mr. Panetta says agriculture owes; but, the United 
States agricultural industry did not agree during the negotiations to 
permit these funds to disappear from the agricultural budget. 
Unfortunately, the administration has wrongly linked these two 
different items out of misplaced convenience and is thereby using the 
GATT implementing legislation to do an ``end run'' around the House 
Agriculture and Appropriations Committees.
  Fortunately Mr. Speaker, at least 21 Members of Congress led by 
Representative Tom Ewing have the courage to advocate a straightforward 
budget waiver for the GATT agreement and do what makes sense. 
Representative Ewing's legislation, H.R. 4198, would permit us to avoid 
our current and future predicaments by waiving budget rules for the 
implementation of all free-trade agreements. Certainly it is 
appropriate at least for the revenue-positive GATT agreement from the 
Uruguay round.
  Mr. Speaker, the Journal of Commerce and the Wall Street Journal 
agree; a waiver of the budget rules is absolutely justified because 
increased Federal revenues from increased corporate and individual 
income tax proceeds springing from greater trade generated by GATT will 
greatly exceed the Federal revenues lost by tariff reductions. 
Therefore, this Member urges his colleagues to cosponsor the Ewing 
legislation to waive budget rules for free-trade agreements and support 
U.S. trade.

                          ____________________