[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 41 (Wednesday, April 5, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H1834-H1835]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           GRANTING PERMANENT NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TO CHINA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gary Miller of California). Under a 
previous order of the House, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of 
granting permanent normal trade relations to China, a vote that this 
House will face possibly as soon as next month.
  I consider this to be the most important vote that I will take as a 
Member of Congress and am strongly in support of it, not just for the 
economic advantages that it will bring to the U.S., but for the far 
more important reason of national security and global security, a 
peaceful world. I think both of these issues are critically at stake in 
this vote that we will take.
  What permanent normal trade relations for China means is that the 
U.S. has negotiated a trade agreement with China. In exchange for 
giving them permanent normal trade relations, we will get from them 
dramatic reductions in tariffs across the board on goods and services.
  This is tied into China's entry in the WTO. But it is important to 
point out that, regardless of what this body does in permanent normal 
trade relations, China will probably enter the WTO. The rest of the 
world has as much to say about that as we do.
  What we can decide in this House is whether or not we gain the 
benefits from the permanent normal trade relations treaty that was 
negotiated with China. In other words, will we begin the economic 
advantages of reduced tariffs on goods and service across the board to 
China.
  There was a lot of concern about the trade deficit with China. What 
better way to reduce that than to have a trade agreement that lowers 
China's barriers to our goods but does nothing to change the barriers 
to their goods coming to our country. It helps level the playing field 
and would be a tremendous economic advantage for this country. In 
agriculture, in my own region, in aerospace and software, name it, we 
would have an advantage of gaining access to the Chinese market and, 
therefore, help improve our economy.
  As I pointed out, this does not necessarily mean China will come into 
the WTO. The rest of the world will decide that issue. But the 
economics are only a tiny part of it.
  What is far more important to me is the national security 
implications, the long-term implications that that has for this country 
and the rest of the world. We need to peacefully coexist with China. I, 
for one, do not want another Cold War.
  I do not want a hostile relationship with China. We must engage with 
them to prevent that. I believe that we can. We have followed a policy 
of engagement and we must continue on that if we are to have a peaceful 
world. Another Cold War could lead to trade wars and can ultimately 
lead to military wars and World War III. I do not want that.

[[Page H1835]]

  China is a country of 1.2 billion people. It is an emerging power. 
Whether we are engaged with them or not, they will be an emerging 
power. I want them to be one that we can peacefully coexist with, and 
trading with them is a critical first start to that effort.
  Now, opponents of China typically start out their arguments by 
pointing out all of the bad things about China, and I will not disagree 
with any of those. On human rights, on labor rights, on protecting the 
environment, on their relationship with Taiwan, on basic Democratic 
freedoms, China has a long way to go. They have a horrible record 
across the board. And I will rise with all of my colleagues and say 
that as often as possible and urge China to improve.
  But it is not as simple as saying, if China has done anything bad, 
therefore, we should not trade with them. The question is, how are we 
going to pull them forward? What course of action is going to improve 
human rights, is going to improve labor rights, is going to improve how 
China treats Taiwan? Isolation?
  We tried isolation with Cuba for 40 years. Cuba is a tiny nation not 
90 miles off of our coast, and our efforts at isolating them has not 
done one little bit to improve any of their record on democracy, human 
rights, or anything.
  Do we really believe that we can isolate China and pull them forward, 
a nation of 1.2 billion people with its own power source? If we cut off 
China, we will be leaning towards a bipolar world that will do nothing 
to improve human rights.
  That is why many human right organizations have said that engagement 
with China and entry of China into the WTO is critical to us having a 
better relationship with them and critical to improving human rights in 
China. We must show them what a capitalist democracy can do. If we do, 
their people will demand the basic freedoms that the rest of us enjoy. 
To the cut them off and to isolate them is to empower the hardliners in 
China who want to maintain the brutal dictatorship forever. We must 
engage with them and pull them forward.
  Many also argue that because of China's attitude towards Taiwan we 
should not give them access to the WTO. Taiwan wants China in the WTO. 
They are the ones most affected by that. And they want it for a very 
logical reason. In essence, they would be trapped in a room with a 
bully with nobody around. They want as much company as possible. They 
want the bright light shined on China and their activities for their 
own protection.
  We have many concerns in this area, but giving China PNTR status is 
going to do more to pull forward those concerns than anything else.
  I strongly urge our body to support PNTR for China, not just because 
of the economic advantages, but because it is important to the future 
of the world.

                          ____________________