[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 146 (Wednesday, October 14, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12543-S12545]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              CHILD LABOR

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I turn my attention to another issue that 
is closely akin to education, an issue I have been working on for a 
long time, one which has come to the front now because of all the 
negotiations going on. That is the issue of child labor.
  In January of this year, my staff, Rosemary Gutierrez, and I traveled 
to Nepal, Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan to look at the issue of child 
labor. While we were in Nepal, the exotic city of Katmandu, I met with 
a young man who had been a former child laborer. He told me about the 
awful conditions that were in some of these countries, yet the official 
government line is, there is no child labor; it is prohibited.
  On a Sunday evening, right after it got dark, about dusk, we got into 
an unmarked car--the former child laborer, a driver, my staff person, 
and I--and drove to the outskirts of Katmandu to a carpet factory. It 
was thought by my host, this young man who had been a former child 
laborer, that the owner of the factory was not going to be there. He 
kind of knew the guard at the gate and said we could get through. So we 
drove out to the outskirts. Sure enough, there was a gate, there was a 
wire fence. The guard let us through. We went up, and the young man 
talked to him in Nepalese, since I don't speak Nepalese, and we were 
let through.
  What was on the outside of the gate before we entered? This sign 
right here, in Nepalese and in English. This is the sign; I took this 
picture with my camera. The brick wall states:

       Child labor [sic] under the age of 14 is strictly 
     prohibited.

  Right on the gate it says this. I took the picture. We went through a 
gate,

[[Page S12544]]

down a long hallway, turned left; there were doors; we opened the doors 
and walked in.
  Remember:

       Child labor under the age of 14 is strictly prohibited.

  Here are some more pictures I took. These are kids working at the 
looms. We asked our host to ask them their ages. We have a boy here who 
is 9 and a girl about 12. That is just two of them. This place was 
loaded with kids that age, working on a Sunday at 7 o'clock in the 
evening; it was getting dark. They are still working full-time in 
dirty, dusty conditions, making these carpets.
  Here is another picture I took. Again, don't tell me these are phony 
pictures. I took them with my camera. I was there. More kids are 
working at their looms--kids, 11, 12, 13, 10, 9 years old. And I have 
other pictures. I had my staff take a photo with me included with the 
kids to show that I was there. Again, there are other kids--not the 
same kids--other kids in the same place, all of whom basically are 
under the age of 14--there were some older, I admit, but a lot of them 
under the age of 14, working.
  What we are trying to do is do something about the issue of child 
labor. What can we do? In 1930, Congress passed what was infamously 
known as the Smoot-Hawley bill. Aside from the bad things Smoot-Hawley 
did in terms of restricting trade, there was section 307, which is part 
of the law today, which has been in existence since 1930. I will read 
the first sentence:

       All goods, wares, articles, and merchandise, mined, 
     produced or manufactured, wholly or in part, in any foreign 
     country by convict labor or/and forced labor, or/and 
     indentured labor, under penal sanctions, shall not be 
     entitled to entry at any of the ports of the United States, 
     and the importation thereof is hereby prohibited, and the 
     Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to 
     prescribe such regulations as may be necessary for the 
     enforcement of this provision.

  It covers forced and indentured labor. We have prohibited that ever 
since.
  A couple of years ago, I made an inquiry of the Department of the 
Treasury. I asked if any items made with forced or indentured child 
labor had been prohibited from entering the United States under this 
section on forced labor. To my surprise, the answer was no. 
Furthermore, the Department of Treasury was not sure whether or not 
forced or indentured child labor was included in the definition of 
``forced or indentured labor.''
  This is outrageous. The law says ``forced or indentured labor,'' but 
we don't know if it covers kids.
  Last year, during consideration of the fiscal year 1998 Treasury-
Postal appropriations bill, I inserted a provision which instructed the 
U.S. Customs Service to block from entry into the United States any 
imports made by forced or indentured child labor as they are inherently 
imports made with forced and indentured labor.
  However, this was only a 1-year provision. It was on an 
appropriations bill. But it passed. It was supported by the House and 
Senate. But it only lasted 1 year. That year is now up. That provision 
no longer is valid because it was only good for 1 year.
  In order to ensure that goods made with forced and indentured child 
labor are treated the same as goods made with forced or indentured 
adult labor, we need to change the law permanently. Well, this summer, 
the Senate approved my amendment to reflect the intent of Congress to 
include forced and indentured child labor under this umbrella. My 
amendment was quite simple. The Tariff Act already says that goods made 
with forced or indentured labor are prohibited from entering the U.S. 
market. I included the words ``forced and indentured child labor,'' so 
there is no ambiguity in the statute's interpretation.
  Unfortunately, my amendment was struck from the bill during 
conference because Members did not feel a tariff measure belonged on 
the defense authorization bill. I was told to find a more relevant 
measure. Well, I have it. Congress is considering a tariff measure, 
H.R. 4342, the Miscellaneous Tariff and Technical Corrections Act of 
1998, which passed the House on August 4. It has a lot of provisions in 
it. There is page after page after page of technical corrections to the 
tariff laws. Examples: Over 100 provisions that would suspend or reduce 
the tariff applicable to certain specified products, most of these 
being a wide variety of chemicals and organic pigments, including a 
temporary suspension on the duties for a variety of HIV medications and 
anticancer drugs and other trade-related provisions--hundreds of 
provisions.
  Here is the report. As you go through it, there is page after page, 
including things like pigment yellow No. 151, pigment yellow No. 175, 
chloroacetone, benzenepropanal. Section 2143, textile machinery. 
Section 2144. Here are some things and chemicals I can't even pronounce 
that are being changed here. A lot of chemicals. Here is 4-
hexylresorcinol. I don't even know what it is.
  My point is this: There are hundreds of tariff changes in this bill. 
This is a tariff bill. My amendment on child labor amends the Tariff 
Act of 1930--a tariff measure. So we have the right vehicle. But, Mr. 
President, because the House passed it on suspension, it came over here 
and it was never brought out on the floor for debate so that I could 
offer this amendment--an amendment which is noncontroversial. It passed 
the Senate twice, and passed the House once. It has been in effect for 
one year because it was on an appropriations bill. I just want to get 
an amendment to the tariff bill to indicate that forced and indentured 
labor includes forced and indentured ``child'' labor.
  Well, I don't know why we can't include it. I did have a conversation 
on the telephone with the chairman of the Finance Committee last week. 
I asked why this noncontroversial provision couldn't be put in. I don't 
know that anyone would come to the floor and object to taking the 
Tariff Law of 1930, which forbids the importation of goods made by 
forced and indentured labor, and adding the words ``child labor,'' so 
that forced and indentured labor would cover forced and indentured 
child labor. Would someone come to the floor and say, OK, we have to 
keep everything out of this country made with forced and indentured 
adult labor, but if you have forced and indentured child labor, that's 
OK, we will bring it in. Does anybody want to come to the floor and 
make that argument? I doubt it. I don't think anybody would want to 
make that argument, because it doesn't make sense. I think we are all 
fairly reasonable people around here.
  So I would like to get my amendment on the tariff bill--an amendment 
that, as I said, passed both Houses--it passed this body twice--and has 
been in effect for one year. I didn't hear any hue and cry from anyone. 
As far as I know, I never had one corporation, one business, one 
importer yell about it or say that ``this is awful that we are keeping 
goods out made with forced and indentured child labor.'' My amendment 
gives our Treasury Department, our Customs people, is a permanent law 
whereby it would say, in unambiguous terms, forced and indentured labor 
means forced and indentured child labor, also.
  Now, could there be an objection that costs money? Well, I have an 
opinion here from CBO, from back on July 16 of this year.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator has expired.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for another 10 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I hope not to even take that long. Here is 
the analysis from CBO on my amendment: ``This proposal would not affect 
direct spending or receipts, so there would be no pay-as-you-go scoring 
under section 252 of the Balanced Budget Act.''
  There you are. It doesn't cost any money. It has no effect on the 
budget. It has been passed. All I want to do is get it added to this 
bill and, since I didn't have a chance to offer it as an amendment, I 
only have one recourse. I put a hold on the tariff bill. I don't want 
it to pass by unanimous consent. Am I opposed to the tariff bill? No. I 
assume everything in it is fine. It has all been cleared. The chairman 
of the Finance Committee assured me that it has been cleared by 
everybody. I don't know every section and title, but I assume it's all 
right. I want the opportunity to put this into permanent law on a 
tariff bill. I don't know when the next tariff bill will come across 
the

[[Page S12545]]

Senate floor. I don't believe this language can be held hostage simply 
because the Senate didn't do its work. The House passed this on August 
4. We had plenty of time to take it up here, but we never brought it 
up. So I am left in the position of having to do something that I don't 
like to do, which is to put a hold on the bill and not give my consent 
to pass the bill by unanimous consent, unless we can get this amendment 
added. An amendment, which I swear, I would like to know one person 
that could come over here and argue against it. I don't think you could 
find such a person.
  So I see no reason why it can't be added. It's time that we say about 
kids what we said in 1930--in 1930--what we said about adults. This 
Congress said that no goods, no merchandise, or anything that is mined 
by forced or indentured labor can come into this country. Here we are, 
68 years later, and we can't add the words ``forced and indentured 
child labor.''
  Nonsense. I hope that those who are working on the tariff bill would 
be so kind as to include this amendment so that we can take away any 
ambiguity, clean it up once and for all, and prohibit the importation 
of goods made with child labor.

                          ____________________