[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.

                          ____________________