[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 16 (Tuesday, February 6, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1042-S1054]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Grant Aldonas
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise for a very special purpose
relating to the work of the Senate Finance Committee and the aspect of
our work that deals with international trade and the high caliber of
staff who have been on the International Trade Subcommittee over a long
period of time. But I take special note of one of our staff people, our
chief trade counsel, Grant Aldonas. He is right here.
He is going to soon be leaving the position that he has with our
committee. It is going to be a loss for our committee, and particularly
for me as a new chairman. It is going to be a tremendous loss because
people of his caliber who are so successful in the private sector and
are willing to come back into public service are few and far between.
He is one who has done that. He has done it for 3\1/2\ years as the
Finance Committee's top trade lawyer. He served Senator Roth before me
with the greatest of professionalism and diligence; he has done a very
good job.
Grant has left his mark on some of the Senate's most significant
trade policy initiatives--the passage of the Trade and Development Act
of 2000, and the passage of the bill that has been on everybody's mind
over the last 3 or 4 years giving permanent normal trade relations
status to the great country of China. This was chief among all the work
that he did for that period of time on the Senate Finance Committee.
I think I can speak for members of the Senate Finance Committee on
both sides of the aisle. They have come to rely upon Grant's skill and
judgment. Even though he is very skillful, judgment is the greatest
asset that he has when dealing with the policies of international
trade, not only from the domestic standpoint but from the international
standpoint. Judgment with good common sense is very important.
I have already referred to his success in the private sector. That is
because he is a good lawyer. He is also a good public servant and just
a plain good person.
I wish you, Grant, and your wife Pam all the best in your new life
beyond the Hill. Thank you very much for your services.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. I yield myself such time as I consume.
I join in the remarks of our distinguished chairman to Grant Aldonas.
I am fond of saying I believe the most noble human endeavor is
service--service to church, to family, to the community, State and
Nation; whatever makes the most sense for each one of us graced to be
on the face of this Earth particularly public service--more
particularly, public service where
[[Page S1052]]
you don't get your name in the headlines or the evening news, public
servants who don't have huge egos but are working for the country in
the best interests of the United States of America and all Americans.
Grant certainly is in that category.
Grant is a guy who works behind the scenes to get results. Again, it
is not headlines. It is talking to all the Senators, the Senators'
staffs, the administration, whoever it is he must talk to in order to
get a result, legislation, something passed for the sake of the people.
He is a great bipartisan kind of a guy. He is particulary effective
because of his prior service, whether USTR, the State Department, or
private sector.
I do think his background as a lawyer helps. The understanding of the
law helps one be effective. There are very bright and fine ways to get
around that stuff, but generally I think a legal background is quite
helpful.
Whether it is China, PNTR, or trade bills of Africa, Caribbean, Grant
has been there--a true professional, calm, even tempered, smart,
creative thinking, diligent, hard working, focused on getting results.
I underline the point the chairman made; namely, of Grant's sense of
judgment and his common sense, a commodity which is probably one of the
most important a person can have. We will miss you, Grant. We know you
will go on to bigger and better things. We also know in the real sense
you will not have left. We will still be able to call you, seek your
advice, and wish you the very best.
In the remaining minutes, I thank the Senators who have spoken. They
make very good points on which I know the administration and Mr.
Zoellick will focus.
How we bring all the components together for coherent consensus in
developing a trade policy for America is extremely difficult. It
includes business interests of America, labor interests in America, and
environmental interests in America. It includes all the Americans who
think they are left out of trade and the benefits of trade agreements.
Companies do pretty well in some places and employees wonder where they
fit in to all of this. We have to work harder to develop that
consensus. I very much look forward with the chairman and people such
as Grant and others in the administration to develop that consensus.
Frankly, we have no other choice. We have to find that consensus to be
effective and serve our people.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I want to say a few things about the
nominee and about the larger issue of trade.
I commend my distinguished ranking member for his comments earlier
and those who have already expressed themselves. It goes without
saying, and it ought to be emphasized, that Robert Zoellick is going to
be an excellent Trade Representative. He has broad Government
experience and a record of achievement that is enviable. His experience
in the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the White House
is a clear demonstration of his commitment to public service and public
policy.
The USTR role is one that I think is an increasingly important role
in the Federal Government, particularly given the increasing importance
of trade and globalization generally.
I am concerned about reports that consideration was given to
downgrading the position from its Cabinet rank, and I am very pleased
that the Cabinet rank in this case will be retained.
As I look back over the 106th Congress, one could argue that some of
our greatest achievements were in the field of trade. We enacted the
Caribbean Basin and African trade bill. We met our obligation under the
WTO regarding FSC. We granted permanent normal trading relations to
China, paving the way for the most populous country in the world to
join the global rules-based trading system.
Now we have a chance to build upon the achievements and the record of
the 106th Congress by promoting the economic, national, and foreign
policy interests of the United States in a global economy.
The United States is uniquely positioned to benefit, in my view, from
increased globalization. First, we have the most productive economy in
the world. Second, we have a comparative advantage in an increasingly
information-based global economic framework.
Globalization improves productivity as countries specialize in areas
of comparative advantage and puts downward pressure on prices consumers
face. We have seen examples of that over and over.
The promotion of international understanding and the reduction of
international conflict is critical if this is going to happen in the
months and years ahead.
The freer flow of goods, capital, people, and ideas around the world
creates interdependence and understanding that both can help lower the
probability of conflict and raise the cost of conflict.
There is an economic cost to a nation being ostracized from the
global economy. Economic liberalization advances key foreign policy
goals such as increased economic freedom and reduced poverty. So the
stakes could not be much higher for us or for the world as we create
this global framework and recognize the advantages of participating in
it.
We also have to recognize that participation in and of itself is not
all necessarily positive. There is a lack of domestic consensus on
expanded trade and globalization, and as we consider all of the public
policy choices we will face in the 107th Congress, I hope we work to
try to build a better consensus, one we did not have in all occasions
last year.
We start building that better consensus by recognizing
that globalization can inflict costs on certain groups, and those costs
need to be addressed.
Workers in import-competing countries may face downward wage pressure
and job loss. In a recent study, ``Americans on Globalization'' the
author, Steven Kull, found that people would be much more supportive of
increased globalization if the government did more to help people who
lose out through trade. I believe that is true. I do not think there is
any question that if we could find ways with which to address that
concern, a consensus could be more the reality than it is today.
Fully 66 percent of respondents agreed with the following statements:
I favor free trade, and I believe it is necessary for the government to
have programs to help workers who lose their jobs.
That is all they seem to be asking: the realization that there are
people who get hurt as this new infrastructure gets established.
Another 18 percent favored free trade in the absence of such help,
while 14 percent opposed it with or without the help. We have 66
percent of the people who say they favor free trade so long as we
address the problems of free trade. We need to work together to do that
to address those problems.
Our challenge is to build that consensus on trade policy in a global
economy, not only in this country but around the world.
I look forward to working with Bob Zoellick and my colleagues on the
challenge we face in doing that constructively and successfully.
There are some key elements, in my view, for building that consensus.
First, I believe one of the key and perhaps one of the fundamental
approaches that will be required is a realization that expanded worker
adjustment assistance is one way with which to ease the pain and
address the problem. A more broad-based, flexible, and effective
adjustment assistance program is clearly needed, and I hope we all can
accept that realization.
A smooth transition from displacement back into the workforce is
important for communities and the overall economy, and such assistance
is critical to building consensus on moving forward on greater trade
liberalization.
Bob Zoellick was a key member of the Trade Deficit Commission. The
Commission did not agree on the underlying cause of the trade deficit
or how to remedy it. The only area of broad bipartisan agreement was
for expanded worker adjustment assistance. I look forward to working
with Mr.
[[Page S1053]]
Zoellick in this area. I look forward to recognizing the possibility
for bipartisan consensus on expanded worker adjustment assistance. I
hope it will be an integral part of anything we do in the longer term
with regard to trade policy.
A second element is increased support and emphasis on lifetime
learning. A policy that waits until someone loses a job is doomed to
failure. Over time, the goal has to be to embed the culture with an
appreciation of learning and upgrading skills throughout one's life,
and that by doing so, economically and educationally, this new
construction of lifelong learning can be an integrally important and
extremely essential part of anything we do to advance the cause of
world trade.
Let's recognize that building those learning skills and upgrading
them throughout life must not be viewed simply as an education issue
but as a trade issue.
Third, we must advance labor and environmental standards around the
world. I believe this has to be done on a bilateral and multilateral
basis. Recent bilateral trade pacts, such as the one with Jordan, have
begun to make progress in this critical area. But there is so much more
that needs to be done. We recognized it in the bilateral arrangement
with Jordan. We ought to recognize it in any new bilateral arrangement.
But, clearly, we have to recognize it in multilateral efforts as well.
We recognize how difficult it is. We recognize how challenging. We
recognize how divisive. We recognize how much debate, and in some ways
confrontation, has occurred over issues relating to labor and
environmental standards. But we also must recognize that if we are
going to address increased consensus, we must address this issue.
We also must make sure that our trade laws work and are perceived as
fair. Fair trade laws help create an environment that maintains
consensus for the openness we all seek in the first place. We have to
maintain vigilance to ensure that laws are perceived as fair both
inside and outside the country. Frankly, we have not always done a good
job at that.
The steel industry is one such industry. Despite substantial
investment and modernization, steel has faced repeated pressure from
dumped steel all over the world. We have to do a better job.
We have to also understand the importance of making the WTO work
better. Greater transparency and avenues for participation are needed.
In the United States, we must advance those reforms.
We have to help poor countries. Greater globalization holds great
promise for further reducing poverty in poor areas. But the United
States and other rich countries need to continue to help poor countries
participate in the WTO, and the trading system generally, and be
mindful that poor countries often seem to believe that globalization is
being imposed on them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.
So I look forward to working, on a bipartisan basis, on all of these
challenges. I look forward to working with the soon-to-be-confirmed
USTR and with my colleagues. As I talked a moment ago about steel and
dumping, there is an array of dumping and serious imbalances in trade
with our European and Canadian allies with regard to agriculture that
also must be addressed--whether it is meat or agriculture in a number
of ways, or whether it is the New Softwood Lumber Agreement with
Canada.
The Softwood Lumber Agreement with Canada expires in a few short
months. There is a major risk of a flood of imports entering our market
at a time when low timber prices already have led to mill shutdowns and
closures. This will be one of the first issues that Mr. Zoellick will
have to face. I share Senator Baucus' concern, as he has taken a
leadership role in addressing this matter.
We need a new agreement with all stakeholders at the table. We need
to address agriculture with all producers, processors, and traders at
the table.
We need to understand the implications of the imbalances, the
dumping, and the serious problems that we face in agriculture today as
a result of unfair trading practices in agriculture. That has to be
addressed and put on the table.
We have to work towards a consensus, as I said a moment ago, on labor
and the environment. I hope we can find common ground on those issues
as well.
The President has made a strong nomination. I know my colleagues will
be as supportive of this nominee as I am. I hope and expect it will be
an overwhelming vote. But I also hope and expect that this is not the
end but the beginning of the creation of an even more balanced trade
policy with more consensus on international trade and globalization,
and a realization that that consensus depends on how effectively we
address myriad challenges that we have not addressed successfully to
date. I look forward to working with our nominee and with my colleagues
in that regard.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Thomas). The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I intend to vote for Mr. Robert Zoellick
for U.S. Trade Representative. I believe he brings excellent
credentials to this position. I do believe the new President, President
George W. Bush, is entitled to discretion but, in any event, this is a
qualified man. I would like to take a moment or two to talk about the
enforcement of U.S. trade laws, especially as they relate to a very
serious situation in my State with respect to the steel industry.
Steel has been victimized in the United States by illegal trade
practices, trade practices which violate U.S. law and trade practices
which violate international law.
We have had a surge of dumping in the United States which has cost
the steel workers, in the past two decades, a reduction in employment
from close to half a million steel workers to now less than 160,000
workers, and a situation where many steel corporations today are on the
verge of bankruptcy.
We need to see to it that dumping is not permitted in this country.
Simply stated: Dumping is where steel, for example, is sold in the
United States at a lower price than it is sold in the country from
which it is exported.
I have introduced legislation in the past and intend to reintroduce
it this year which would provide for a private right of action, which
would enable the corporation or the injured workers and the union to go
to Federal court and to get injunctive relief. That relief can be
obtained very promptly.
It is possible, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to get a
temporary restraining order on an ex parte basis on the filing of
affidavits--there has to be a hearing within 5 days, evidence can be
put into the record, equity actions can be tried very promptly, and
that is an effective way to see to it that U.S. trade laws are enforced
and that they are consistent with international trade laws.
Last year we legislated on a matter on a bill introduced by Senator
DeWine of Ohio and backed by quite a number of us in the Senate steel
caucus, a caucus which I chair, with the cochair being Senator Jay
Rockefeller of West Virginia. Then through the leadership of Senator
Robert Byrd of West Virginia, with my concurrence in the Appropriations
Committee, we put that bill into effect last year which provides that
where duties are imposed for violations of U.S. trade laws, that those
duties are paid to the injured parties instead of going into the U.S.
Treasury.
Obviously, it is desirable to have funds go into the Treasury, but
where it can be ascertained that the illegal foreign trade practices
resulted from a violation of U.S. trade law and can be traceable to
damages to specific companies and individuals, that is where those
duties ought to be paid.
A question has arisen as to whether the United States will fight to
retain that legislation against complaints by some of the foreign
countries where infractions have been found. I do hope our new Trade
Representative will enforce that legislation which was passed by the
Congress and was signed by the
[[Page S1054]]
President under an appropriations bill last year.
I make these comments because U.S. jobs, U.S. industrial interests
ought not to be sacrificed for foreign policy or for defense policy.
Not too long ago, when we were anxious to back up the Russian economy,
we permitted tremendous dumping of steel by Russia in the United
States. While I am concerned about the stability of the Russian
economy, I am candidly more concerned about the stability of the
Pennsylvania economy and the U.S. economy. But fair is fair. When the
laws are on the books, they ought to be enforced and they ought not to
be sacrificed for collateral U.S. interests on foreign policy or on
defense policy.
I make these comments with the hope that our new Trade Representative
will be a vigorous enforcer of U.S. trade laws and that my colleagues
will consider the legislation, which I will introduce later in this
session, which will provide for that private right of action.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination
of Robert B. Zoellick to be United States Trade Representative?
The yeas and nays are ordered and the clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Breaux) and
the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 9 Ex.]
YEAS--98
Akaka
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Cantwell
Carnahan
Carper
Chafee, L.
Cleland
Clinton
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Corzine
Craig
Crapo
Daschle
Dayton
DeWine
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Edwards
Ensign
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Fitzgerald
Frist
Graham
Gramm
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Helms
Hollings
Hutchinson
Hutchison
Inhofe
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Miller
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Nickles
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith (NH)
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Torricelli
Voinovich
Warner
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--2
Breaux
Inouye
The nomination was confirmed.
____________________