[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 4, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 4, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                GATT IS IMPORTANT TO U.S. ECONOMIC GROWTH

                                 ______


                         HON. PHILIP M., CRANE

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, October 4, 1994

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, later this week my colleagues and I will have 
the opportunity to vote on H.R. 5110, legislation implementing the 
Uruguay round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade [GATT]. In 
the last 5 years, international trade has been the driving force behind 
U.S. economic growth, accounting for 50 percent of economic expansion 
during that period. For this reason, passage of H.R. 5110 is important 
to ensure that American companies will have access to foreign markets, 
thereby facilitating future U.S. economic growth and job creation. As 
my colleagues prepare for the upcoming debate on H.R. 5110, I commend 
to their attention the following editorial from the September 25, 1995 
issue of the Chicago Tribune by the United States Ambassador to France, 
Pamela Harriman. I urge my colleagues to consider Ambassador Harriman's 
conclusions on the importance of the GATT agreement to our country and 
to support the passage of H.R. 5110 later this week.

                   Our Economy Needs Global Attention

                          (By Pamela Harriman)

       Within the next two weeks, Congress will vote on a matter 
     of great importance, one which will shape the economy of the 
     United States and the world far into the future. Yet the 
     issue--approval of the global trade agreement known as the 
     Uruguay Round--has received relatively little attention in 
     these tumultuous months in Washington.
       It took seven years of negotiations to bring the Round to a 
     close. During long, hard bargaining, particularly during the 
     concluding weeks, our national interests were pressed 
     strongly and successfully. From my vantage point, 
     representing the United States in France--a crucial player in 
     the world trading system--the very difficulty of the last 
     months of negotiations demonstrates how finely wrought the 
     agreement is, in order to advance both our own economic 
     interests and the interests we share with our trading 
     partners. In the end, we were able to forge an accord because 
     they came to agree with us on three fundamental points.
       Growth in international trade is essential for national 
     economic health.
       The trading system needs rules for areas such as 
     agriculture, services and intellectual property.
       And disagreements over trade will not disappear, even in 
     free trade areas; it is better to have in place a set of 
     principles and a mechanism to resolve disputes.
       Any agreement negotiated among 128 nations involves 
     compromise; each of the parties can find things in the 
     package to criticize. But the benefits of the Uruguay Round 
     far outweigh any problems. Congressional approval is critical 
     for two reasons: our economy needs it for future growth and 
     our leadership in the world demands it.
       The accord provides a stronger, more reliable trading 
     system that plays to American strengths. It cuts foreign 
     tariffs on manufactured products more than one third, the 
     largest reduction in history. It greatly expands export 
     opportunities for our farmers by eliminating all non-tariff 
     barriers, including quotas, and significantly reducing 
     tariffs. Firms and workers who make pharmaceutical, 
     entertainment, software and other products gain new 
     protection for their intellectual property. American 
     exporters of services, such as accounting, advertising, 
     computer services, tourism, engineering and construction are 
     guaranteed more open foreign markets as well. Finally, the 
     agreement streamlines the process for dealing with trade 
     disputes, ensuring that all countries live by the same 
     rules--a major objective set for U.S. negotiators by the 
     Congress.
       The U.S. recently emerged from a deep recession. Our 
     companies and workers went through a painful restructuring, 
     but they are now the most efficient and competitive in the 
     world.
       Predictably, much has been made of the possibility that the 
     World Trade Organization might decide against us in a trade 
     dispute. Some claim will diminish our sovereignty. That is 
     a caricature, that membership in the World Trade 
     Organization raised every so often against international 
     advances from the League of Nations to the International 
     Monetary Fund to the U.N. In fact, the World Trade 
     Organization rulings will set guidelines for our 
     practices, but will not dictate specific action on our 
     part.
       Even more important, a loss of nerve now--whether a defeat 
     this year or a delay until next year while the rest of the 
     world moves ahead--would deal a body blow to markets 
     worldwide. Negative repercussions would be felt across the 
     American economy and, indeed, around the world.
       Such failure or hesitation would also be read as a retreat 
     from our historical commitment to free trade. The current 
     global trading system arose from the trade liberalization 
     treaties that the United States began negotiating even before 
     World War II, as we recovered from the isolationist disaster 
     of the Smoot-Hawley tariff. We have been at the center of 
     every round of trade negotiations since then because it has 
     been in our nation's interest--and in the world's interest--
     that we lead.
       The trading system of the past was not up to the challenges 
     of an expanding global economy. In the Uruguay Round, sectors 
     that caused the most difficulty, including trade in 
     agriculture, textiles, services and investment, will be dealt 
     with realistically for the first time. We are committed to 
     deal with the remaining challenges, such as aircraft, 
     financial services, steel and audiovisual products.
       Many of these are issues of particular difficulty here in 
     France, where some fear their economic system may not have 
     the flexibility necessary to compete on an equal footing in 
     the kind of global market that is emerging. But France has 
     accepted the Uruguay Round accord. It would be much more 
     difficult, if not impossible, to make progress on these and 
     other important issues with the French--and with our other 
     trading partners--if Congress were to reject it, or treat it 
     as partisan issue. Other great accomplishments--winning WWII, 
     rebuilding Western Europe, staying the course in the Cold 
     War, even NAFTA--were accomplished by Democrats and 
     Republicans working together. History will judge harshly 
     those who would turn our nation's place in the global economy 
     into a political football.
       In France this summer, we celebrated the 50th anniversary 
     of a liberation largely won by the blood and sweat of a 
     generation of Americans convinced that their country needed 
     to play a positive role in global affairs, and optimistic 
     that they could make a real difference. They were right then, 
     and the same principles are true today. The future of the 
     international economy will be molded by our decisions now. 
     Our industry and our agriculture are the world's most 
     efficient. We will prosper in the world, or fall behind. But 
     we cannot opt out. It is time for decision, not delay.

                          ____________________