[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 161 (Monday, December 15, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2409]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                          FAST TRACK AUTHORITY

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. TONY P. HALL

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 13, 1997

  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2621, the 
Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act of 1997, which would provide 
fast-track authority to the President. While I believe free trade is 
important, I do not believe Congress should just turn over our 
constitutional authority on trade to the President whenever he asks. 
The current version of H.R. 2621 is more restrictive than the past 
legislation which enabled Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton to 
negotiate GATT and NAFTA.
  Congress must ensure that labor and environmental standards can be 
raised in the context of trade issues. With increased globalization, 
these issues are becoming interrelated. Unfortunately, there has been a 
trend within the executive branch of the United States to delink trade 
policy with other important foreign policy goals like promotion of fair 
labor standards, elimination of child labor, improvement in 
environmental conditions, and the promotion of human rights.
  Trade policy has in some cases become the No. 1 priority, with other 
important issues being put on the back burner and receiving less 
attention. One such example was the United States willingness to impose 
trade sanctions against the Chinese for their violation of 
international standards on intellectual property rights. However, the 
administration was unwilling to impose sanctions because of 
restrictions on religious freedom in China which also violated 
international law. This is not consistent policy.
  Mr. Speaker, I review trade agreements on a case by case basis and 
how they will affect jobs in my district. I supported the Uruguay round 
of the GATT because I thought it was a good deal for the United States. 
I opposed NAFTA because I did not think it was the best deal we could 
have gotten. I argued then that we needed to have high standards for 
NAFTA because it would be expanded to include Latin and South America. 
If we pass this version of fast track, the administration could easily 
expand some of the flawed provisions of NAFTA.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would vote for the President to have 
expedited trade negotiating authority only if it includes authority to 
improve labor, environmental, and human rights standards. If fast track 
fails, the administration still has authority to negotiate trade 
agreements. The United States-Israel Free Trade Agreement was 
negotiated without fast track and the Uruguay round of the GATT 
proceeded for several years without fast track. The United States must 
take its time to negotiate good trade agreements which will benefit our 
businesses, our workers, and represent our values.

                          ____________________