[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 102 (Friday, July 29, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 29, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                   THE GATT IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, the administration is preparing 
legislation to implement the Uruguay round agreement of the General 
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. This week, the Finance Committee is 
reviewing provisions and offering its advice. Other committees have 
undertaken to do the same.
  I rise today to express my firm belief that the administration should 
submit a Congress a clean bill. The implementing legislation should 
contain no provisions except those necessary to implement the Uruguay 
round agreements.
  Congress has agreed to consider the Uruguay round implementing 
legislation under special fast track rules, which require an up-or-down 
vote without amendment. We agreed to this procedure in recognition that 
delicate balances would be struck by our negotiators as they pursued 
our national interests in this complex, multilateral negotiation.
  Fast track is a powerful tool, and its limits must be narrowly drawn. 
I am concerned about proposals to include extraneous provisions in the 
implementing legislation. There has been discussion, for example, of 
including new fast track negotiating authority and of establishing 
labor or environmental criteria for future negotiations.
  Provisions such as these may have merit, but that is not the point. 
They are extraneous and unnecessary to implement the Uruguay round 
agreement. They should stand on their own; they do not belong in the 
implementing legislation.
  There is much good in the Uruguay round agreements, which extend the 
longstanding American commitment to pry open foreign markets. After 7 
long years, our negotiators secured agreements that will bind 
additional countries to the rules of fair trade by which we long have 
abided. They will for the first time protect the rights of important 
American industries trading in services or reliant upon intellectual 
property. And, they will give all of our exporters unprecedented access 
to the world's fastest growing markets, particularly in Asia and Latin 
America.
  At the same time, many questions about the Uruguay round agreements 
must be addressed as the implementing legislation is developed and the 
congressional debate unfolds. For example, how will this agreement 
affect the delicate balance of our Federal system when State laws 
conflict with our trading obligations? How will if affect the Federal 
budget? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the new structures put 
in place to administer these trade agreements?
  These agreements are important, and Congress should meet them head 
on. We should debate their benefits and shortcomings and address the 
sincere concerns raised in Washington and throughout the country. And, 
in the end, Congress must meet its constitutional duty to decide 
whether these agreements are an appropriate means of regulating our 
Nation's foreign commerce.
  But I strongly believe that the Uruguay round agreements must rise or 
fall solely on their own merits. It would be unfortunate indeed, if the 
important issues of the Uruguay round were cluttered--or overshadowed--
by unnecessary and extraneous matters.

                          ____________________