[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 156 (Monday, November 8, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14240-S14241]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       JAPAN'S MARKET OPERATIONS

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, a long list of issues must be addressed in 
the next round of the multilateral trade negotiations that kick off in 
Seattle in 4 weeks. Agricultural trade is at the very top. Other issues 
include further reducing tariffs, repairing the WTO dispute settlement 
process, removing restrictions on trade and services, increasing 
opportunities to sell to governments, avoiding measures that restrict 
the growth of electronic commerce and figuring out how to put a human 
face on trade law consideration of the relationship between trade and 
labor and between trade and the environment.
  There is another issue that has received virtually no attention at 
all. Yet it is of critical importance to the United States, to most 
other nations, and to the world trading system itself. I refer to the 
problem of Japan, the second largest economy in the world. A country 
where the markets for our goods and services remain far more closed 
than they should be.

  The sense-of-the-Senate resolution I am introducing today, along with 
Senator Grassley, urges the administration to pay much more attention 
to Japan in the next trade round than was the case in the past.
  I want the administration to work overtime to ensure that Japan makes 
commitments that will genuinely open its markets. And the 
administration must then ensure that Japan meets those commitments. 
Paper agreements will not suffice. Agreeing to broad principles is 
unacceptable. Negotiations in the next trade round must lead to clear 
results in Japan. There must be meaningful, measurable change in the 
way Japan's markets operate.
  Historically, the relationship between multilateral and bilateral 
trade commitments made by Japan, and then whether there is actual 
change in Japan's markets, has been tenuous, at best. The American 
Chamber of Commerce in Japan, in its report ``Making Trade Talks 
Work'', documented this problem of implementation and results.
  In the Uruguay round, Japan did not have to make the kind of 
significant changes that were required of many other major trading 
countries. Including the United States. Even where Japan agreed to open 
its market, such as the rice market, the out-of-quota tariff rate is 
still in the range of 500 percent. That is not a misquote. It is Five 
Zero Zero, 500 percent tariff on rice coming into Japan from the United 
States. I am worried that in the next round, the Japanese Government 
will be able to minimize the commitments they make. And then, in a 
uniquely Japanese way, they will be able to minimize the implementation 
of those commitments and obligations. In earlier trade rounds, Japan 
agreed to the GATT Government Procurement Code. But the United States 
found that we had to negotiate special bilateral agreements with Japan 
in order to get genuine access to their government market. We 
negotiated multiple arrangements on computers, supercomputers, 
telecommunications equipment, medical equipment, and satellites. Even 
with these arrangements, access to Japan's market has still been a 
major problem in many of these areas. The GATT system has not worked 
well here. In the Uruguay round, we were so focused on other problems, 
especially in Europe, that we missed a lot of opportunities with Japan. 
I am concerned that the same thing may happen again. I certainly do not 
want to take away from the focus on agriculture and other priorities we 
have for the next round. But I want to be sure that we do not let Japan 
off again.
  Japan seems now to be working overtime to protect its trade-
distorting policies in agriculture, forestry, and fishing. The Advanced 
Tariff Liberalization efforts would have been further along but for 
Japanese opposition at APEC. Now, Japan is trying to hide its 
protectionist policies behind the banner of the ``multifunctionality'' 
of agriculture. That is, they claim that farming plays an important 
role in a country's social and cultural fabric, trade liberalization 
cannot interfere. Of course, farming is integral to the social fabric 
of many nations, including our own. But that is not an excuse for trade 
protection and making other countries pay those domestic social costs.
  At the same time, Japan is playing a leading role in criticizing 
United States trade laws and in working with other countries to 
challenge our anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws in the next 
round. Some speculate that this is just another attempt to undercut 
American initiatives in the new round. Japan could, and more important 
Japan should, take a leadership role in a number of areas. After all, 
few countries in the world have benefited more than Japan over the past 
half century from an open world trading system.

[[Page S14241]]

  Japan could take significant steps to make its regulatory system more 
transparent and less burdensome. They could table a broad based 
services liberalization proposal that would encourage others to follow. 
Japan could lead the effort to put more transparency into the 
government procurement agreement. It could lead on electronic commerce. 
And, of course, it could deal with those agriculture policies that are 
at the top of the agenda.
  This resolution calls on the administration to focus on Japan in the 
next round, to set out specific expectations for the changes desired in 
Japan, to ensure that Japanese commitments made in the round will truly 
lead to change in the Japanese market, to work with other major nations 
to ensure that these changes occur, and to consult closely with 
Congress and the private sector, including manufacturers, agriculture, 
service providers, and NGOs, throughout the negotiations.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in helping ensure full 
participation by Japan in the round and in ensuring that we will 
benefit from Japan's commitments.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Under the previous order, the Senator from North Dakota is recognized 
for 15 minutes.

                          ____________________