[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 121 (Tuesday, October 3, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9690-S9691]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ORGANIZED LABOR AND PNTR--NOT A MONOLITHIC APPROACH
Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, a week ago I met with a national
workforce coalition of unions that came out in support of establishing
Permanent Normal Trading Relations with China. I had encountered some
of the labor leaders who belong to this coalition on several other
occasions, including at the Republican National Convention in
Philadelphia in August. I simply rise today to note for my colleagues
that organized labor in this country is not monolithic in their views
on such matters as trade and protectionism.
The members of the coalition I met with last week came primarily from
the aerospace industry in the Pacific Northwest, building the jet
airplanes, engines, and other aerospace subsystems that are competing
globally with the likes of Europe's Airbus. However, I have previously
met members of this coalition that extend beyond the aerospace industry
and the Pacific Northwest. They represent such traditional
manufacturing industries as steel, aluminum, diesel engines, farm
equipment, and rail locomotives. They
[[Page S9691]]
repesent a diverse array of the American workforce--everything from
production workers on the line to engineers and scientists. And they
are from across this great nation.
The message these union officials had was that they understood that
China was a burgeoning market for U.S. exports. They understood that if
the U.S. did not approve PNTR for China that we would not only lose the
trade concessions they have made to us under this agreement, but we
would also lose our ability to gain greater market access and share.
And they understood that the largest beneficiary of such an outcome
would be our trade competitors in the European Community, in the rest
of Asia, and in South America. They understood that one of the best
ways to guarantee that American firms remain in the United States--
employing American workers and bolstering our economic growth--was to
eliminate the existing trade barriers that have served to up until now
to freeze out our products or force U.S. companies to move facilities
over to China.
Without removing these barriers and liberalizing trade between the
U.S. and China, American firms seeking to compete with their foreign
competitors would have every incentive to move their factories and
operations over to China. With PNTR and China's entry into the World
Trading Organization we increase the likelihood that American companies
will continue to remain located in the United States. And that is good
news for the union workers and households in the state of Michigan
which will continue to produce a wide array of goods that will be
exported to China.
As I pointed out in a statement I made on the floor supporting PNTR,
exports from Michigan to China increased 25 percent between 1993 and
1998, and they have undoubtedly grown significantly greater since 1998.
Exports to China from businesses located in the Flint and Lansing areas
grew by 84 percent during that period. Meanwhile, exports to China from
Kalamazoo and Battle Creek grew by an extraordinary 353 percent! Not
all of that business is going to union shops, but certainly a
significant portion of it is, and that sort of expansion in trade with
China is going to benefit all workers and businesses in Michigan--union
and non-union.
Clearly the majority of unions and union members in this country
opposed PNTR for China. I heard from and spoke with many, many such
workers from Michigan--both back in Michigan and when the unions have
come out to Washington, DC, to meet with their representatives in
Congress. I come from a union background and grew up in a union
household. I took their concerns very seriously in weighing the many
issues that went into my ultimate decision to vote for PNTR. And I have
pledged to hold China accountable for their future behavior and to
fulfill their trade obligations under the WTO's rules and the agreement
we have negotiated with them.
But there are indeed unions--rank-and-file members and leadership
alike--who see the opportunity presented by PNTR and allowing China
into the WTO as a tremendous opportunity for the United States to
continue to lead the world in productivity and in our economic
strength. They are prepared to answer the challenge posed by the global
economy and the opening of China's markets, and they recognize the
benefits which will result if we are leading the way into opening China
to greater trade instead of sitting on the sidelines allowing our trade
competitors to reap all the benefits.
We should not forget that the U.S. is a very diverse country and that
no institution--including organized labor--is a monolithic force. There
are folks on both sides of the issue, each feeling very strongly and
very sincerely that they are doing what is best for them and their
brethren.
Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Senator
Hatch's resolution commemorating our Olympic athletes for the spirit,
enthusiasm and patriotism they displayed in Sydney at the XXVII Summer
Games. I am proud to represent a state that sent to Sydney two of the
nation's most recognizable athletes, Marion Jones and Mia Hamm, as well
as numerous other athletes who valiantly competed in these Olympic
games.
The nation's eyes were on Marion Jones as she set out to win an
unprecedented five gold medals in Sydney. While Marion didn't win five
golds, she made us all proud with her commanding performance. She set a
track and field record by winning more medals in a single Olympics than
any other woman in history. Her three gold and two bronze medals have
put Marion atop the track and field world. More important than winning
her events, Marion accepted each of her medals with grace and style,
epitomizing what Olympic competition is all about.
Mia Hamm has captivated children and adults alike with her charisma
and passion for the game of soccer. Thousands of girls across North
Carolina take to the soccer fields in hopes of being the next Mia Hamm.
Watching Mia play in Sydney, I understand why. In the women's soccer
semifinals against Brazil, Mia was pushed, shoved and thrown to the
ground time and time again. She did not once complain, letting her
actions speak louder than words by scoring the only goal of the match.
The United States Women's Soccer team went on to claim the silver
medal, led by other Tar Heels such as goal keeper Siri Mullinix of
Greensboro and Carla Overbeck of Chapel Hill.
I am also extremely proud of other North Carolinians who competed in
Sydney. While these athletes haven't received the attention Mia Hamm
and Marion Jones have, they are equally important and should be
commended for their accomplishments. Robert Costello of Southern Pines
competed in equestrian events. Tim Montgomery and Jerome Young, both of
Raleigh, Lynda Blutreich of Chapel Hill and Melissa Morrison of
Kannapolis competed in track and field. Charlie Ogletree of Columbia
competed in sailing. Rich DeSelm of Charlotte swam in Sydney. Calvin
Brock of Charlotte represented the United States in boxing. George
Hincapie and Fred Rodriguez both of Charlotte competed in cycling.
Hunter Kemper of Charlotte competed in the triathlon and Henry Nuzum of
Chapel Hill competed in rowing.
The United States should be proud of every athlete who competed in
the Olympics. I am especially proud of the North Carolinians who
represented the United States in Sydney, and I am pleased to support
this resolution with them in mind.
____________________