[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 132 (Monday, September 28, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1833-E1834]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           RECIPROCAL TRADE AGREEMENT AUTHORITIES ACT OF 1997

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. LOUIS STOKES

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 25, 1998

  Mr. STOKES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 2621, 
the Reciprocal Trade Agreement Authorities Act, more commonly known as 
``Fast Track.'' The measure was pulled last year when it appeared that 
it would be defeated. Fast Track was a bad bill for hard-working 
families then, and it is a bad bill for them now.
  The ``Fast Track'' debate is not simply a matter of whether we want 
to expand trade, more importantly, the question regarding free trade 
agreements is ``how we go about pursuing negotiations and effectively 
addressing the subsequent effects of these pacts.''
  If the Congress delegates its negotiating authority to the President 
through Fast Track, this action would remove directly-elected 
Representatives from having any meaningful input

[[Page E1834]]

into the negotiations of an agreement. This action could potentially 
have a profound impact, and negative implications on the economic 
future of all Americans, and all countries involved. What we need is 
``fair trade.''
  Mr. Speaker, we were sent here to represent the people of our 
respective districts--and--to delegate our authority, accountability, 
and responsibility for trade agreements would be blatantly negligent. 
The cost of this degree of irresponsibility is too great for companies 
and hard-working families to bear. The long-term cost is too high, the 
burden is too great, and the provisions are too unfair. Our country has 
paid too high a price already for free trade--what we need is ``fair 
trade.''
  I have remained concerned for some time about the nature of the 
international trade agreements that our Government negotiates. They 
have not been fair to, nor appropriate for the American people.
  It is for these reasons that I, in fact, opposed both the North 
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The lack of attention to fundamental labor 
rights, and environmental protections is blatantly irresponsible.
  We should be passing trade measures that effectively strengthen the 
U.S. economy, and well-being of the American people, not those that 
jeopardize it. There are serious economic, social, environmental and 
political consequences that must be addressed in any trade agreement. 
Individual workers' rights, decent standards of living, and 
environmentally safe working and living conditions are fundamental to 
any workable trade agreement.
  Mr. Speaker, the continuing pattern of de-emphasizing the importance 
of internationally recognized labor rights in free trade treaties is 
dooming American workers to constant, unending pressure--to lower wages 
and benefits--under the disguise of improving our Nation's economic 
competitiveness internationally.
  Ignoring environmental protections in trade agreements further leads 
to a diminished standard of living for generations to come.
  Mr. Speaker, ``Fast Track'' is not a right, and the American people 
must not be held hostage to this ``unfair trade agreement process.'' I 
strongly urge my colleagues to join me in voting no to ``Fast Track.'' 
Vote ``no'' to H.R. 2621.

                          ____________________