[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 35 (Friday, February 24, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H2217-H2218]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                UNITED STATES-CHINA SATELLITE AGREEMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California [Mrs. Seastrand] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mrs. SEASTRAND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to raise questions about 
the Clinton administration's recent initialing of a trade agreement 
with the Government of China regarding commercial space launch 
services.
  Commercial space is a growing industry right here in the United 
States of America. It is an industry with tremendous potential for 
creating jobs and stimulating local economies. It is also an industry 
where America is in danger of falling further behind our international 
competitors.
  The original 5-year agreement between the United States and China 
expired on December 31, 1994. The new agreement expands the number of 
Chinese launches for international customers to geosynchronous Earth 
orbit [GEO] through 2001 and requires that Chinese launch prices be on 
a par with Western launch providers. According to an official with the 
U.S. Trade Representatives's Office, on a par essentially means that 
the Chinese can offer a price up to 15 percent lower than the going 
international rate.
  In the initialed agreement, the administration has also established 
disciplines for satellite launches into low Earth orbit and detailed 
conditions under which increases in quantitative limit may occur to 
address shortages in the supply of launch services for U.S. satellite 
services and users.
  The agreement was also initialed 1 week after the explosion of a 
Chinese March 2E rocket that destroyed a $160 million Apstar-2 
satellite.
  What does all this mean? As I'm sure the administration knows, the 
United States has a burgeoning commercial space market that holds 
tremendous potential for the U.S. economy. As I indicated on the floor 
February 3, the French already control roughly 60 percent of the 
commercial space market. Others, most notably the Chinese and the 
Russians are closing in fast.
  Where the United States has its best opportunity to take the lead in 
commercial space is in the newly emerging low Earth orbit satellite 
market. I am concerned by the administration's seeming desire to turn 
this market over to the Chinese. Ambassador Kantor believes that this 
agreement carefully balances the interests of the U.S. space launch, 
satellite, and telecommunications industries.
  Mr. Speaker, I disagree with Mr. Kantor's assessment.
  [[Page H2218]] Nobody can blame U.S. companies for wanting to launch 
satellites at reasonable prices. On the other hand, I'm sure United 
States companies have some degree of concern about the explosions which 
have hampered the Chinese Long March program. Aside from these factors, 
the Clinton administration seems to discount the fact that the United 
States is uniquely positioned to be a leader in the low Earth orbit 
market.
  On the central coast of California we are building the first polar 
orbit commercial spaceport in America. The spaceport expects to open 
its doors in 1996 and will provide a unique service--the ability to 
launch in polar orbit and launch for less money. It is the goal of the 
California spaceport to the one of the world's primary facilities for 
moving surface infrastructure into space. In addition, the California 
spaceport intends to do it safely, efficiently, and for less money--
roughly $5,000 per pound as opposed to the current scale of $10,000 per 
pound.
  As I mentioned a few weeks ago, I will soon be introducing national 
spaceport legislation. My intent is to create an environment that 
allows the U.S. commercial space industry to evolve, mature, and 
flourish.
                              {time}  1500

  This is an industry that is already on the move in California, but it 
is much more than just California. The United States has many potential 
launch bases--including Alaska and Hawaii--plus the two existing ones 
in California and Florida. The question we must ask is, with existing 
spaceport facilities--plus all of the potential launch bases--and a 
healthy market for boosters and satellites, why isn't the United States 
in a better position to compete with our international competitors for 
a bigger share of the commercial launch market?
  The administration, by continuing to parcel out this market, is not 
only putting the United States at a competitive disadvantage, it is 
taking jobs away from Americans and it is discouraging what could be a 
hugely successful market for the country.
  Mr. Speaker, I'm frankly a little puzzled by the administration's 
entire approach to the trade with the Chinese. As a Presidential 
candidate, Bill Clinton stated that as President, he would not renew 
most-favored-nation [MFN] trading status. Typically, the President 
changed his mind and opted for a policy of engagement.
  A few weeks ago the Clinton administration announced its intention to 
impose a billion dollars' worth of punitive tariffs on Chinese imports 
over intellectual property rights. And just yesterday, while the No. 2 
official from U.S. trade representative's office was in China 
negotiating copyrights, Energy Secretary O'Leary was there announcing 
$6 billion in energy deals.
  Hovering over this is the enormous trade deficit with the Chinese. 
When the figures were announced last week. Ambassador Kantor tried to 
paint a positive picture of this deficit--a picture that Democrat 
Senator Dorgan of North Dakota described as: ``the most bizarre 
interpretation that I have ever heard'' of bad economic news.
  Our trade policy with the Chinese seems to be going in several 
different directions. I would respectfully submit that the 
administration rethink the commercial launch agreement, particularly as 
it relates to low Earth orbit satellite launches. If the Clinton 
administration is interested in contributing to the success of a 
commercial space market, perhaps they would consider doing it in the 
United States.
  Mr. Speaker, I would ask for the Clinton administration to take a 
look at this and support the American commercial space industry.


                          ____________________