[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 65 (Tuesday, May 23, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H3529-H3530]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHINA TRADE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 19, 1999, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell) is
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, this morning I would like to address
something we started to talk about last evening, and that is the vote
we will be taking probably tomorrow on China and our trade relations
with China.
The minority leader wrote a book last year, An Even Better Place,
America in the 21st Century, where he dismissed as ludicrous the
contention that expanded trade fosters democracy in China. ``America
has to stand for something more than money,'' the Minority Leader said,
and I agree with him wholeheartedly.
It seems to sum up what we have been saying, we opponents. We are not
or do not wish to cut off relationships with China and the Chinese
people. In fact, our argument is not with the Chinese people, our
argument is with the authoritarian government which has tortured, which
has beaten down any dissidents, any opposition.
Strictly on the issue of security, the proponents of permanent trade
relations with China, normal relationships, whatever we wish to call
them, they have been talking first about the jobs that would be
created, and then when they could not win that battle, they switched to
the issue of national security.
Three points.
My main thrust is jobs this morning. We know that in these past 10
years, China has targeted up to 18 intercontinental ballistic missiles
at the United States.
Two, during this same period of time, we signed an export control
waiver which allowed the top campaign fundraisers in aerospace
companies to transfer sensitive missile guidance technology to China.
Number three, during the same period we shifted the prime satellite
export responsibility from the State Department to the Commerce
Department. In the sequel to ``sleeping with the enemy,'' I would
imagine this is pretty consistent. This in no way is going to
strengthen the security of the United States. This deal is a bad deal.
The worst part of the deal is for the American workers. As China
seeks entry to the World Trade Organization, and as our trade deficit
with China soars to record heights, $70 billion by the end of this
year, at least, our manufacturing jobs are being sucked from our shores
away from our workers.
This is critical to understand, because if we are not going to help
produce more jobs in America and sustain the economy, the robust
economy that we have, then where will jobs be created, if not in
America? These jobs are going to places like China, where there is no
regard for labor, where there is no regard for human safety, and where
there is no regard for environmental or health standards.
I find that it is best to take a step back and look at exactly what
is happening. Granting PNTR to China would strip America's ability to
keep check on the Communist regime. Granting PNTR to China says that
China has gained our trust and approval, and I would be saying that I
believe this trade deal is the best thing for the people of my
district.
But as I mentioned last night, I did have a nightmare on Thursday
evening, after standing with the 60 dissidents east of the Capitol
here. I dreamt with horror that there was an uprising in China, as
there are many dissidents who are afraid to speak up at this moment,
and that this great country, this pillar of democracy in the world, the
greatest democracy that the world has ever known, stood alongside of
the authoritarian, totalitarian Chinese government to put this
insurrection down. That is a horror show.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by thanking my colleague from
Oregon, Mr. DeFazio, for his tremendous leadership, in standing up for
working people worldwide. I am pleased to join him here today.
There is a reason that the proponents of this flawed deal have been
touting the national security and ``theoretical'' reform benefits they
see in this package. Because they know that the argument that this bill
is good for our working families is just plain wrong!
As China seeks entry to the World Trade Organization, and as our
trade deficit with China soars to record heights, our manufacturing
jobs are being sucked from our shores, away from our workers.
Those jobs are going to places like China where there is no regard
for labor, safety, environmental or health standards.
When dealing with issues such as this, I find that it is best to take
a step back and look at exactly what we are doing. What does this vote
mean?
Day after day I try to work with firms, be they manufacturing, or
textile, or other small businesses, to see what I can do to assist the
business in reaching its fullest potential.
How can I vote on Wednesday to send these businesses and jobs
overseas?
Normal Trade Relations? This does not seem normal to me!
I cannot stress enough, the mistake we will make by passing this bill
later this week. I understand that unemployment is at its lowest, and
that the economy is soaring.
But workers are making less money than ever. After NAFTA, we saw tens
of thousands of good jobs, with benefits, and security go South to
Mexico. What has increased has been the number of temporary workers.
Companies have been hiring people to work full time jobs, without
health plans, without protections, not on salary.
The bottom line is that this is not a government in China that we
have been able to trust. It has broken every commitment it has made
with the United States of America.
It has broken every trade agreement it has signed with the United
States over the past 10 years.
Supporters of PNTR claim that China will buy our imports. But I do
not see the infrastructure or the wealth in China to accept any
substantial amount of American merchandise. Business does not want to
sell cars to China, they want to build cars in China.
Over the past ten years, our trade deficit with China has ballooned
from 7 billion dollars to 70 billion dollars! There is currently a 6-
to-1 ratio of imports to exports.
Supporters of this flawed bill claim that we need PNTR to see our
economy grow. That fact is however, that China has had NTR over the
past twenty years, and things continue to get worse. We are taking a
bad deal and making it permanent.
In the United States, we have seen a dangerous shift from a
production to service based economy. This deal threatens the tremendous
creative spirit of our nation with the prospect of exploitation
overseas.
I will not vote for a proposal that is downright dangerous to our
society at large.
We can and will not surrender our manufacturing base, our production,
our jobs.
Manufacturing is tremendously important to my district. There are
1,114 manufacturing firms who employ 57,000 workers in the Eighth
District, and these firms are critical to our infrastructure.
Granting PNTR to China would strip America's ability to keep check on
the communist regime in China. Granting PNTR to China
[[Page H3530]]
says that China has gained our trust and approval, and I would be
saying that I believe this trade deal is the best thing for the people
of my district.
I will not do that, because this is a bad deal for our workers.
The numbers do not lie. If PNTR is granted, New Jersey will see
22,276 jobs lost over the next ten years. The United States as a whole
will suffer a net job loss of 872,000 jobs over the same ten years.
Proponents like to talk about job creation, but they do not like
publicizing the job loss on our side.
The real job creation will be in China, where U.S. businesses will
flock with their factories.
They will go there to pay thirty-three, thirteen, even three-cents
per hour in sweatshops that are basically workshops from a maximum-
security penitentiary.
Big business in America wants to exploit a labor force that cannot go
on strike for higher wages, or for better conditions. It wants to take
advantage of a labor force that is oppressed by its government. In
fact, China has prison labor camps listed among its manufacturing
companies!
Why is this year any different? Why is this trade deal any different?
What has China done to gain our trust, besides stealing of our nuclear
secrets?
China is not all of a sudden going to play by the rules. They will
not limit their imports. China will not be a good trading partner,
because there is no enforcement or reason to be.
With permanent NTR, we will have thrown in our last chip on keeping
China in check.
This deal is bad for my district, New Jersey, and the country. I
stand with environmentalists, veterans, human rights activists, and
most importantly, working families, to oppose this legislation.
The timing is wrong, and the deal is wrong.
Now is not the time we should not vote to rubber-stamp a failed
trading arrangement into infinity.
Trade rights should be a privilege to be earned, not a right merely
handed out!
____________________