[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 12, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E446]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             PNTR TO RUSSIA

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. SANDER M. LEVIN

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 12, 2003

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today Mr. Rangel, Mr. Pitts, Mr. Cardin and 
myself introduced a bill that would grant permanent normal trade 
relations (PNTR) to Russia and ``graduate'' Russia from the application 
of the so-called Jackson-Vanik amendment. The legislation would provide 
a historic update in U.S.-Russia trade relations. It would strengthen 
U.S.-Russian relations and reinforce progress Russia has made in many 
areas. Additionally, the legislation would ensure that Congress 
continues to play an active role--with the Administration and with 
Russia--in confronting trade disputes and negotiating the terms of 
Russia's WTO accession.
  It is useful to recall at the outset that the Jackson-Vanik amendment 
was itself an amendment to Title IV of the Trade Act of 1974, a trade 
statute. In particular, Title IV created a framework for conducting 
trade relations with non-market economies. The Jackson-Vanik amendment, 
which has been an effective tool for raising freedom of emigration and 
human rights concerns, is a key element of Title IV; however, the 
underlying purpose and function of the statute were and remain the 
conduct of trade relations.
  Accordingly, PNTR legislation must address fundamental trade issues. 
Consistent congressional practice is to grant PNTR to a country that is 
subject to Jackson-Vanik only at the time of the country's WTO 
accession, or when negotiations on accession were effectively 
completed. In this way, Congress' vote on PNTR has served as a way to 
signal approval for the country's WTO accession agreement. Under this 
approach, Congress was able to exercise its constitutional prerogative 
to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and the American people 
benefitted from the Administration negotiating the strongest possible 
agreement.
  This precedent has led to an important series of successful 
accessions to the WTO, including most notably for China, on terms that 
reinforced the WTO rules-based system, and brought great benefits to 
the people of the United States as well as other WTO countries.
  In the case of Russia, WTO accession terms are still being 
negotiated. I believe it is appropriate to depart from that precedent 
and grant Russia PNTR now, so long as Congress retains a strong and 
effective tool to ensure that U.S. interests are fully addressed in 
those negotiations. And, there are many critical issues that still need 
to be addressed--Russian commitments to open its auto market, 
commitments in the services and other sectors, ongoing problems with 
pricing in the industrial energy sector, intellectual property 
protection, to name just a few. Moreover, several recent actions by 
Russia--including last year's poultry ban and potential new 
restrictions on beef and pork--have renewed concerns in Congress about 
Russia's commitment to opening its market to U.S. exports and service 
providers and to adopting market-oriented reforms.

  This legislation ensures that Congress will continue to play an 
active role in addressing trade problems as they emerge and in 
obtaining a strong WTO accession agreement from Russia. While giving up 
the precedent of using the PNTR vote as a proxy for approval of WTO 
accession, the legislation allows Congress to consider a resolution 
directly addressing the terms of agreement between the U.S. and Russia 
on Russia's WTO accession. While in its form, this resolution would be 
non-binding on the Executive, it would provide Congress with an 
important tool to assure itself of a continuing role in the formation 
of the terms of Russia's WTO accession and thereby implement Congress' 
constitutional responsibility of oversight over trade matters.
  There are two sides to the PNTR coin--the trade issues and the 
``Jackson-Vanik'' issues. The Jackson-Vanik amendment was an historic 
piece of legislation, aimed at addressing a serious problem in the 
former Soviet Union. It set forth important criteria related to freedom 
of emigration necessary for certain countries to obtain normal trade 
relations with the United States. Even from its inception, however, the 
Jackson-Vanik amendment was not only concerned with freedom of 
emigration, but also reflected the American commitment to human rights 
and freedom of religion. This fact is evident not only in the preamble 
of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, but also in the operation of U.S. 
relations with the former Soviet countries for nearly thirty years.
  I think it is appropriate, then, that as we consider graduating 
Russia from the Jackson-Vanik amendment, that we place a strong 
emphasis on freedom of emigration, religious freedom, and human rights 
issues. These were the issues at the core of the Jackson-Vanik 
amendment, and continue to be relevant when considering ``graduation,'' 
particularly for Russia, which was and is in many ways the primary 
focus of the Jackson-Vanik amendment.
  I am glad that we were able to craft a bill that addresses these 
vital issues in a responsible way, rather than giving them ``check-the-
box'' cursory treatment. The presence of Members of the Helsinki 
Commission on the bill, who have a long history of dealing with human 
rights and religious freedoms, demonstrates that we have given these 
issues the careful treatment they deserve.
  Earlier this week, Senator Lugar, the distinguished Senator from 
Indiana and a key participant in consideration of our relations with 
other nations, introduced a Russia PNTR bill. This bill did not address 
the issue of assuring a continuing congressional role in the resolution 
of vital elements of an agreement on Russia's WTO accession. I believe 
that Congress has a substantial role to play in overseeing negotiations 
of Russia WTO accession agreement to ensure that it provides the 
strongest benefits for U.S. workers, farmers and businesses, and 
therefore we are introducing this legislation today.

                          ____________________