[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 9 (Tuesday, February 10, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S587-S588]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 73--RELATIVE TO THE EUROPEAN UNION
Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself and Mr. Grassley) submitted the following
concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Finance:
S. Con. Res. 73
Whereas on a level playing field, United States producers
are the most competitive suppliers of agricultural products
in the world;
Whereas increased United States agricultural exports are
critical to the future of the farm, rural, and overall
economy of the United States;
Whereas the opportunities for increased agricultural
exports are undermined by the unfair subsidies provided by
trading partners of the United States, and by various tariff
and nontariff trade barriers imposed on highly-competitive
United States agricultural products;
Whereas United States agricultural exports reached a
record-level $60,000,000,000 in 1996 compared to a total
United States merchandise trade deficit of $170,000,000,000;
Whereas the United States is currently engaged in a number
of outstanding trade disputes with the European Union
regarding agriculture matters and the disputes involve the
most intractable issues between the United States and the
European Union;
Whereas the outstanding trade disputes include the failure
to finalize a veterinary equivalency program, which
jeopardizes an estimated $3,000,000,000 in trade in livestock
products between the United States and the European Union;
Whereas the World Trade Organization has ruled that the
European Union must allow the importation of beef with growth
hormones produced in the United States;
Whereas the European Union has yet to fulfill its
commitment under the Agreement on Application of Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures reached as part of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade;
Whereas the European Union has promulgated regulations
regarding the use of ``specified risk materials'' for
livestock products which have a disputed scientific basis and
which serve to impede the importation of United States
livestock products despite the fact that no cases of bovine
spongisorm encephalopathy (mad cow disease) have been
documented in the United States;
Whereas the European Union has hindered trade in products
grown with the benefit of biogenetics based on claims that
also have a disputed scientific basis;
Whereas these barriers to biogenetic trade could have a
profound negative impact on agricultural trade in the long
run; and
Whereas there are also continuing disputes regarding
European Union subsidies for dairy, wheat gluten, and canned
fruits: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the European Union unfairly restricts the importation
of United States agricultural products;
(2) the restrictions imposed on United States agricultural
exports to the European Union are the most vexing problems
facing United States exporters in Europe;
(3) the elimination of restrictions imposed on United
States agricultural exports should be a top priority of any
current or future trade negotiations between the United
States and the European Union; and
(4) the United States Trade Representative should not
engage in any trade negotiations with the European Union to
achieve sectoral liberalization unless an initiative to
achieve the elimination of unfair restrictions on United
States agricultural products is advanced on the same time
frame as the sectoral negotiations.
Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, many of the lessons that we have
learned regarding agricultural trade strategy, to change the subject to
one that we have been not necessary been talking recently, have taken a
lot of time for us to learn. I used to work in this field, the trade
field. I worked for the Secretary of Agriculture, and I have been
around some of these negotiations.
It took the United States forty years of multilateral negotiations,
but in the Uruguay Round, we finally got it right: in order to achieve
meaningful agricultural market liberalization, we must link progress in
agricultural liberalization to progress in other sectors critical to
our trading partners.
Throughout the world, agriculture is one of the most highly protected
industries. It is also represents one of the strongest comparative
advantages that the United States enjoys. Additionally, the U.S.
agriculture industry is a critical building block of this economy,
employing 22.7 million people. That is about 17 percent of the total
domestic labor force. Agriculture also contributed $997.7 billion
dollars to our economy in 1996. In other words, 13.1 percent of our
country's GDP is agriculture-based. Furthermore, a large portion of
what we produce in the U.S.--roughly 40 percent--is consumed overseas.
Because agriculture is so critical to the U.S. economy and so reliant
on exports, I find it exceedingly troubling, along with Senator
Grassley, to hear the recent news reports that the office of the United
States Trade Representative plans to pursue a trans-Atlantic trade pact
that would not address agricultural issues. The barriers to U.S.
agricultural exports represent some of the most significant market
access problems that the United States currently faces in Europe.
Furthermore, the U.S. is currently engaged in a number of outstanding
trade disputes with the EU regarding agricultural matters, and these
are among the most intractable issues between our two continents. It is
incomprehensible to me that the U.S. would consider entering
negotiations that would overlook these crucial issues.
Today I am joining with Senator Grassley in submitting a Senate
Concurrent Resolution, which expresses
[[Page S588]]
the sense of the Congress that the EU is unfairly restricting the
importation of United States agriculture products and that the
elimination of such restrictions should be a top priority in trade
negotiations with the European Union.
Mr. President, quite simply, it would be foolhardy for the United
States to proceed with negotiations that avoid some of the issues that
it has been seeking most desperately to advance. Without the leverage
that is gained by simultaneously negotiating access in areas where the
U.S. seeks greater access with the areas in which the EU would like
greater access, the U.S. is positioning itself to hand over the keys to
the bank. While leaving out the touchy issues in agriculture may allow
the U.S. to quickly conclude an agreement, it is a strategy that would
undermine the long-run economic interests of this country.
I hope my colleagues will join with me in sending a message to this
Administration that the agriculture industry is not willing to be sold
out for the sake of an chance to culminate a quick trade deal. We will
not support any new trade negotiations unless agriculture issues are
advanced on the same time frame as issues involving other sectors of
the economy.
____________________