[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 136 (Monday, September 26, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 26, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                 GATT: THE NEED FOR CARIBBEAN INCLUSION

                                 ______


                          HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 26, 1994

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to draw my colleague's attention 
to a statement made by Ambassador Richard Bernal of Jamaica regarding 
the importance of passing the Caribbean Interim Trade Program [ITP] in 
the GATT implementing bill this year. Ambassador Bernal made this 
statement at a workshop on U.S./Caribbean relations that I hosted 
during the recent 24th annual legislative conference for the 
Congressional Black Caucus Foundation.
  By working to expand mutually beneficial trade linkages between the 
United States and the Caribbean, the ITP will strengthen the framework 
for long-term economic growth and development in the Caribbean. This is 
of crucial importance, not only in sustaining economic growth in many 
communities throughout the United States, but in laying the economic 
foundations for peace and long-term political stability throughout the 
region.
  As my colleagues consider United States policy towards the Caribbean 
in the coming days, I would urge them to review this piece to gain 
insight on the importance--to both the United States and to the 
Caribbean nations--of a healthy and vigorous commercial partnership.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit Ambassador Bernal's statement for the Record.

   Remarks by H.E. Dr. Richard Bernal, Ambassador of Jamaica on the 
          Caribbean Interim Trade Program, September 15, 1994


            a. status of the Caribbean interim trade program

       The ITP was proposed for inclusion in the GATT bill by the 
     Clinton Administration in May, 1994. The GATT bill is now in 
     the Joint Conference to work out differences between Senate 
     and House versions of the bill. The Conference is scheduled 
     to be completed by next Wednesday, September 21, and the 
     Administration hopes to introduce a final bill to the 
     Congress by Monday, September 26.
       The ITP is contained in the House version of the GATT bill, 
     and is strongly supported by acting Chairman Gibbons and the 
     House Conferees. The ITP is not contained in the Senate 
     version of the GATT bill, although many Senate conferees 
     support the ITP and the expansion of the $25 billion U.S./
     Caribbean trade relationship.
       To guarantee enactment of the ITP as part of the GATT bill 
     this year, the Senate must recede to the House position on 
     the ITP.


         b. reasons why the cbi interim trade program is needed

                            Growth promotion

       The Interim Trade Program (ITP) will result in an expansion 
     of the CBI, a program that has promoted growth in the United 
     States and the Caribbean over the past decade. Over 50 
     percent of GDP growth in the United States since 1987 has 
     been generated by export growth, and the Caribbean Basin 
     represents the region where U.S. exports have grown most 
     rapidly. In 1993, the United States posted its eighth 
     consecutive trade surplus with the Caribbean with the U.S. 
     registering a 100 percent increase in exports to the CBI 
     since 1983. Combined bilateral trade now exceeds $22 billion 
     a year. Additionally, under the CBI Program Caribbean exports 
     to the United States have expanded by 40 percent stimulating 
     growth throughout the Caribbean region.

                          Employment creation

       The CBI program has provided 16,000 new jobs annually, a 
     total of nearly 250,000 jobs over the last 10 years. The 
     interim trade program will insulate those jobs from potential 
     erosion that will be caused as Mexico's preferential access 
     to the United States under NAFTA leads to trade and 
     investment diversion from the Caribbean.

                          U.S. competitiveness

       The interim trade program will enhance U.S. 
     competitiveness, especially in the textile and apparel 
     industry. Garments produced in Jamaica are 70 percent U.S. 
     origin and 30 percent Jamaican. Such complementarity of 
     production means that the U.S. garment industry can 
     manufacture price competitive garments to maintain an 
     internationally competitive position. In this way, the U.S. 
     garment industry will be able to compete effectively in the 
     global market place with low-wage, non-American manufacturers 
     who do not use American textiles, labour, or inputs.

                       Promote regional security

       The interim trade program will enhance regional security. 
     The U.S. border with the Caribbean and Central America, is 
     often breached by illegal immigrants and drug traffickers. 
     Poverty creates an environment which spawns such illegal 
     activities. The ITP will help to provide economic 
     alternatives to such activities and support regional peace, 
     stability, and democracy by stimulating sustained economic 
     growth.
       The interim trade program will serve as a cost effective 
     foreign and economic policy instrument. The predicted erosion 
     of fiscal revenues due to the lowering of tariffs will be 
     more than offset by the increased revenues yielded by U.S. 
     employment gains and export growth. Moreover, the ITP will 
     create the trade-based economic growth model and reinforce 
     economic reform that can support regional development as 
     foreign aid to the region is further reduced.

                         Improved market access

       The interim trade program improves U.S. market access to 
     the Caribbean by providing for the negotiation of bilateral 
     investment treaties (BITs), intellectual property rights 
     (IPR) agreements, special market access commitments, and 
     strengthened environmental and labour standards. Such 
     agreements will not only provide for a stable and predictable 
     framework for U.S./Caribbean relations, but it will also lead 
     to improved performance for U.S. investors and exporters in 
     the Caribbean.


       c. reasons why the cbi interim trade program is needed now

                          Consistent with GATT

       The GATT is a perfect legislative vehicle for the interim 
     trade program because the ITP is consistent with the 
     principles enumerated in the GATT bill. The ITP will lead to 
     expanded market access and trade liberalization--two 
     principles at the heart of the GATT deal. The interim trade 
     program will also help the U.S. and the Caribbean garment 
     industries meet the challenges presented by GATT's 10-year 
     phase-out of the multi-fiber arrangement which governs 
     textile and apparel quotas.

                         Complementary to NAFTA

       The interim trade program will serve as an urgent and 
     needed transitional arrangement that can help restore a level 
     playing field between Mexico and the Caribbean Basin 
     countries vis-a-vis the U.S. market. If the interim trade 
     program is not enacted soon, the Caribbean countries and US-
     CBI trade will suffer serious trade and investment diversion.

                               GATT bill

       The 1994 GATT Implementing Bill is the only trade bill that 
     Congress will consider during 1994. It is imperative that the 
     interim trade program be passed as part of the GATT bill. If 
     GATT is delayed, or if the interim trade program is left off 
     the GATT bill, there will be no other opportunity to pass 
     trade legislation. This will place in jeopardy the U.S./
     Caribbean trade partnership.

                        Presidential commitment

       The Interim Trade Program represents a fulfillment of the 
     commitment, made by President Clinton to the Prime Ministers 
     and Presidents of the Caribbean and Central America, to 
     ensure that countries of the CBI region would not be 
     adversely affected by the implementation of the NAFTA. It is 
     important that Congress and the Administration follow through 
     on this commitment to the region.

                                U.S. EXPORTS TO CBI COUNTRIES BY STATE, 1987-1993                               
                             [In thousands of U.S. dollars, unless otherwise noted]                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       Percent  
                       State                          1987 Exports    1993 Exports   Dollar change      change  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama............................................       111,485.6       199,386.8        87,901.2         78.8
Alaska.............................................         4,200.9         4,305.4           104.5          2.5
Arizona............................................         9,167.7        14,556.4         5,388.7         58.8
Arkansas...........................................        19,624.3        53,349.7        33,725.4        171.9
California.........................................       331,242.2       379,055.9        47,813.7         14.4
Colorado...........................................        40,036.4        21,458.2       -18,578.2        -46.4
Connecticut........................................        47,811.0       114,874 2        67,063.2        140.3
Delaware...........................................        14,113.7        20,282.2         6,168.5         43.7
Florida............................................     2,622,685.8     4,305,116.5     1,682,430.7         64.1
Georgia............................................       322,980.0       619,108.4       296,128.4         91.7
Hawaii.............................................         1,043.1         1,775 3           732.2         70.2
Idaho..............................................           668.6         2,794.4         2,125.8        317.9
Illinois...........................................       118,247.9       222,718.8       104,470.9         88.3
Indiana............................................        33,278.6        54,156.6        20,878.0         62.7
Iowa...............................................        22,357.4        37,167.9        14,810.5         66.2
Kansas.............................................        16,584.1        45,455.0        28,870.9        174.1
Kentucky...........................................        20,833.9        57,929.9        37,096.0        178.1
Louisiana..........................................       776,725.6       937,730.4       161,004.8         20.7
Maine..............................................         5,168.4        25,555.2        20,386.8        394.5
Maryland...........................................        30,607.7        43,609.6        13,001.9         42.5
Massachusetts......................................        65,572.7        84,460.3        18,887.6         28.8
Michigan...........................................        44,588.1        74,014.3        29,426.2         66.0
Minnesota..........................................        51,721.4        65,827.6        14,106.2         27.3
Mississippi........................................       100,205.6       200,205.8       100,000.2         99.8
Missouri...........................................        49,240.7        82,085.2        32,844.5         66.7
Montana............................................           136.3           649.6           513.3        376.6
Nebraska...........................................         6,273.8        11,245.6         4,971.8         79.2
Nevada.............................................         3,674.5         3,772.3            97.8          2.7
New Hampshire......................................        34,694.3        43,878.5         9,184.2         26.5
New Jersey.........................................       184,790.0       253,648.9        68,858.9         37.3
New Mexico.........................................        13,447.4         5,916.5        -7,530.9        -56.0
New York...........................................       362,855.2       584,627.2       221,772.0         61.1
No. Carolina.......................................       148,783.4       571,660.4       422,877.0        284.2
No. Dakota.........................................         1,001.1         1,206.5           205.4         20.5
Ohio...............................................        96,324.6       183,525.4        87,200.8         90.5
Oklahoma...........................................        16,824.3        36,775.2        19,950.9        118.6
Oregon.............................................         5,144.4        13,807.8         8,663.4        168.4
Pennsylvania.......................................       142,292.8       204,439.4        62,146.6         43.7
Rhode Island.......................................         8,152.6        10,652.3         2,499.7         30.7
So. Carolina.......................................       104,379.6       172,625.0        68,245.4         65.4
So. Dakota.........................................           525.9         1,139.1           613.2        116.6
Tennessee..........................................        77,462.3       172,855.8        95,393.5        123.1
Texas..............................................       888,078.9     1,330,982.6       442,903.7         49.9
Utah...............................................         3,901.7         5,243.5         1,341.8         34.4
Vermont............................................         1,334.7         6,809.3         5,474.6        410.2
Virginia...........................................       121,251.4       213,593.7        92,342.3         76.2
Wash. DC...........................................         2,106.1         4,746.0         2,639.9        125.3
Washington.........................................        40,796.4       143,141.1       102,344.7        250.9
West Virginia......................................         3,588.7         8,887.3         5,298.6        147.6
Wisconsin..........................................        56,485.9        93,341.9        36,856.0         65.2
Wyoming............................................             8.0         6,186.6         6,178.6    77,232.5 
                                                    ------------------------------------------------------------
      Total........................................     7,184,505.7    11,752,337.5     4,567,831.8         63.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Adjustments to Data from U.S. Census Bureau, Foreign Trade Division by Massachusetts Institute of Social
  and Economic Research; University of Massachusetts                                                            

  

                          ____________________