[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 104 (Tuesday, July 22, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S7877]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             MFN FOR CHINA

 Mr. DORGAN. Mr President, I rise to comment briefly on an 
action taken by the Senate last week. We voted on an amendment offered 
by the Senator from Arkansas, Senator Hutchinson, expressing the sense 
of the Senate that China should not receive most-favored-nation tariff 
treatment.
  I voted against the Hutchinson amendment, but not because I 
necessarily support the further extension of most-favored-nation status 
to China. I opposed the amendment because I believe this kind of 
amendment should not have been offered to a must-pass appropriations 
bill, especially when the Senate had limited time to debate it.
  At the appropriate time, we do need to have an extensive debate 
concerning our trade relationship with China. That debate is long 
overdue and greatly needed, and that debate should cover a range of 
issues. One of the issues that we should debate is the geometric growth 
in our trade deficit with China. In the past dozen years, our 
merchandise trade deficit with China has grown from $10 million to the 
staggering total of $40 billion.
  Mr. President, trade is only beneficial if it is a two-way street. 
And right now there is no way that we can characterize our trading 
relationship with China in that way. We do not have reciprocal, free, 
and open access to China's markets.
  Yes, our exports to China may have grown threefold and more since 
1980, from $3.6 to $12 billion. However, Chinese exports to America 
during the same period grew almost fiftyfold, from $1.1 to $51.5 
billion.
  China is a critical part of the overall trade crisis that we face 
right now. We have the largest merchandise trade deficit in our 
history. Our second highest trade deficit is with China. China is 
rapidly working to build its manufacturing base and export trade. It is 
following in the footsteps of Japan, which has consistently been the 
country with which we have had our largest individual trade deficit.
  We need to be concerned because trade statistics released last week 
indicated that for the third time in history, our monthly trade deficit 
with China exceeded our monthly trade deficit with Japan. That should 
give us cause to take a second look in considering what the future may 
bring in our trade relationship with China.
  So I am very concerned about our trading relationship with China. But 
we ought to have a substantial debate on this issue. We ought not offer 
an MFN amendment to an unrelated appropriations bill, have a quick 
little debate, and then vote.
  At the proper time, let us have a real debate about our trade 
relationship with China. Let us talk about trade deficits, market 
access, and reciprocity. Let us talk about selling more American wheat, 
oilseeds, beef, pork, and other agricultural commodities to China. Let 
us talk about China's tariff and nontariff trade barriers, content 
rules, and labor systems. Let us debate most-favored-nation status for 
China and the MFN law itself. And, most certainly, let us debate the 
issues of religious freedom and human rights in China, since these 
should have a bearing too on whether we grant MFN status to China.
  These are important issues that deserve full and thoughtful 
consideration by this body and our entire Nation. I look forward to 
contributing to that debate, and hope that it can be done in a way that 
is productive and useful for the people of this country.

                          ____________________