[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 77 (Thursday, May 22, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6991-S6994]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. 
        Daschle, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Lieberman, 
        Mrs. Lincoln, and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 1110. A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to provide trade 
adjustment assistance for communities, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Communities Act of 2003. This legislation is 
co-sponsored by Senators Baucus, Rockefeller, Daschle, Murray, 
Cantwell, Dayton, Lieberman, Lincoln, and Feinstein.

[[Page S6992]]

Companion legislation will be introduced in the House by Congressman 
Sander Levin tomorrow.
  I first introduced Trade Adjustment Assistance legislation in the 
last Congress, and I was very pleased when that legislation--the 
provisions relating to both individuals and communities--passed the 
Senate as part of the Trade Act of 2002. I would like to take this 
opportunity to thank all of my colleagues for their efforts in making 
this happen. But I would like to thank Senator Baucus in particular for 
making Trade Adjustment Assistance one of his priorities last session 
and pushing on it to the very end. And I would also like to thank 
Senator Grassley for understanding the importance of Trade Adjustment 
Assistance to the ongoing trade debate, and his decision to make it 
part of the trade package that went through Congress.
  But I also have to express my disappointment with the way the process 
ended. In spite of the bi-partisan consensus that formed around Trade 
Adjustment Assistance during the negotiations last year and the efforts 
of my colleagues, I regret to say that the provisions related to 
communities did not make it out of conference. I can not tell you why 
this happened. However, I can tell you that it is incredibly naive to 
ignore the problems that are occurring right now across the country and 
not understand what it means for our country's long-term economic 
interests. Look at the newspaper and you will see that in many 
communities, people are pretty much out of work for good, at least when 
you look at the jobs they had and the wages they were making. And as 
the lay-offs have expanded, the impact the lay-offs have had on entire 
communities have become more pronounced. Now it is not just the 
individuals who are struggling, but the communities in which hundreds 
or thousands of people live, all because a company or a group of 
companies have closed their doors for good.
  From what I can tell from statements some of my colleagues have made 
in committee or on the floor of the Senate, this is really nothing more 
than tough luck. This is the way markets work and you simply make do 
with what you have. I disagree completely. From where I sit you can't 
just let individuals who have worked their whole life at a company, who 
have played by the rules for their entire life, who have committed 
their entire life to keeping their communities intact, be reduced to 
little more than hope that something will change for the better. They 
deserve more than that. You also can't let the communities where these 
people live just die, because they form the foundation of what we are 
as a society. These are the networks that have lasted generations, that 
connect us, and define who we are. I firmly believe we need to do 
everything we can for these folks and the communities where they live, 
simply because we owe them something for what they have given us and 
our country. I believe we have a responsibility to give these 
communities a shot at a new future. The legislation I am introducing 
today does just that.
  Let me make it clear that writing this legislation is not an abstract 
exercise. For me, this is about my friends and neighbors that I have 
known for years. Right now, in my hometown of Silver City, NM, I have 
folks that I grew up with, wondering what they are going to do next.
  Over the last few years the copper mines closed, and then the 
businesses that supported the copper mines closed, and then the tax 
base began to disappear, and then services started to be cut, and it 
seems to everyone like the whole community has been caught in a 
downward spiral. In spite of what some of my colleagues might claim, 
this is not because of lack of effort on the part of the people of 
Silver City. These people are not content with the way things are. On 
the contrary, they are trying desperately to change direction. They 
have ideas about where they want to go and what they need to do to make 
things better. They have acted on these ideas to the best of their 
ability. And I want to commend them for that. But right now they are 
stuck because there is no money available to get things started, to 
take the first step so other steps can be taken afterward.
  And this is the way it is across the country in a good many 
communities just like Silver City. I strongly believe this has to 
change. We have let things stand just the way they are for far too 
long. The status quo is not acceptable, and it is time for Congress to 
make a serious effort to change how we manage these kinds of problems.
  My interest in Trade Adjustment Assistance actually began in 
November, 1997 when Levi-Strauss announced its decision to close most 
of its plants in the United States and transfer production to other 
countries. Levi-Strauss decided to close two plants in New Mexico one 
in Albuquerque and one in Roswell--with the Roswell facility alone 
losing close to 600 workers. This number didn't even include the 
contract workers and other folks that relied on Levi Strauss for their 
living. They lost their jobs as well. 600 plus individuals would be a 
significant blow in any town, but in a town of 50,000 people--which is 
what Roswell--is with a workforce of only 25,000 people, this lay-off 
was truly devastating. What exactly were these people going to do? 
Where could they go to get work so they could pay their mortgage, pay 
for health care, pay for their kids' education? Sure, some of them 
could be re-trained through Trade Adjustment Assistance, but the 
question that was on everyone's mind was: retrained for what? What do 
you re-train 600 people for when there are no other jobs available in 
town, and no new companies coming into town?
  The questions surrounding what happened in Roswell--actually, what 
should have happened in Roswell if we had more effective Trade 
Adjustment Assistance policies in place--combined with other plant 
closures across the country in towns just like Roswell, made me ask 
what actually could be done to help individuals and communities adapt 
to this kind of collective crisis. In cooperation with Senators Roth 
and Moynihan, who were the Chair and Ranking Member of the Finance 
Committee at the time, I requested studies from the General Accounting 
Office on the over-all efficacy of Trade Adjustment Assistance program. 
I also asked them to study how communities across the country had 
responded to the changes that derive from international trade 
agreements and globalization.
  I have to say that the answers we got back from the General 
Accounting Office were not very encouraging. To begin with, the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for individuals program suffered from 
inconsistencies, incoherence, and a general lack of accountability. 
Some states managed their programs well, but others--my home State of 
New Mexico being one--did not. There was no Trade Adjustment Assistance 
for Communities program at the time, but in analyzing how particular 
communities responded to economic crises, the General Accounting Office 
report clearly stated that government funds available for economic 
recovery efforts were limited and the road to real recovery was 
difficult even when funds were available. There were no ``best 
practices'', no obvious answers, to refer to because success had been 
so limited. In most cases, there was no way out of the downward spiral 
at all.

  But over time some individual lessons appeared, and interestingly 
enough, those lessons were very similar to the ones we learned in 
Roswell. Among other things, technical assistance is needed early on in 
the process to ensure that a community-wide recovery strategy can be 
developed. Funding needs to be made available to assist in strategic 
planning. Individual and institutional differences need to be bridged 
in the community so there is a tangible collective interest in the 
strategic plan. Short-term, medium-term, and long-term funding needs to 
be available for communities to use as they pursue their economic 
strategy. U.S. government agencies need to cooperate to ensure that 
their efforts are not duplicative or contradictory. State governments 
need to be involved in the recovery process to encourage cooperation 
where there has been none before.
  I admit that it is very difficult to make sure all these things 
happen, especially in communities that are struggling to stay on an 
even keel. Clearly much of the burden for the activities fall on 
communities, because they are the ones that have to decide what is best 
for them. And that is the way it should be. But Congress can play a 
role in helping communities attain the

[[Page S6993]]

goals they have set for themselves, and I believe the bill I am 
introducing today offers a very good start. The key components of the 
legislation are as follows: First, the legislation establishes a Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Communities Program at the Department of 
Commerce, signaling that communities that are negatively impacted by 
trade are deserving of a separate stream of funds to help them through 
their economic crisis. Ideally this program will be located at the 
Economic Development Administration, which has the expertise and 
experience to manage a program of this type.
  Second, the legislation establishes a U.S. government inter-agency 
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Communities working group, the goal 
being to ensure that agencies work in cooperation to assist communities 
negatively impacted by trade, integrating personnel, activities, and 
resources as they respond to existing or anticipated problems.
  Third, the legislation provides funding for strategic planning and 
development grants for communities negatively impacted by trade. As 
written, there is no limit on the funds that a community can receive. 
Instead, the level of funding is determined by the individual needs of 
each community, the coherence of their strategic plan, and the 
cooperation that exists among the stakeholders applying for the grant.
  Fourth, the legislation allows funding from programs at other 
agencies to be used in concurrence with Trade Adjustment Assistance for 
Communities funding, and, furthermore, allows Federal funding to be 
used to fulfill most non-Federal matching requirements that exist. In 
the past, some economic development efforts have been stopped in their 
tracks because communities don't have the matching funds necessary to 
get grants. This legislation would give communities that are now 
suffering under serious financial constraints some initial flexibility 
in their effort to get funding.
  Fifth, the legislation gives preference to rural communities in 
funding guidelines, since these are the communities that have the 
fewest options available to them as they attempt to respond to trade 
related problems.
  Sixth, the legislation authorizes $350 million per year for the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Communities program, essentially doubling the 
funds that are currently available for economic adjustment in the 
United States. I believe this amount is consistent with the needs that 
we see of communities across the United States.
  Seventh, the legislation establishes a lookback to January 1998, 
allowing communities that were negatively impacted by trade and have 
yet to overcome their problems an opportunity to obtain funds and begin 
their recovery.
  Finally, the legislation establishes a set of new triggers for 
eligibility that are designed to help not only communities that have 
been negatively impacted by trade, but also communities that have 
experienced some negative impacts but want to set a new course so any 
future impacts will be limited. This approach is far different than 
anything that has been done before in Trade Adjustment Assistance 
legislation--far different even than the legislation that my colleagues 
and I introduced last year--and is designed specifically to avoid the 
criticism that Trade Adjustment Assistance is really nothing but 
``death insurance''.
  The inclusion of the category of ``affected domestic producers'' as a 
trigger, for example, would allow certain companies to work with their 
communities to create a coherent strategic plan to renovate or 
construct basic or advanced infrastructure, diversify the local 
economy, attract new investment, and encourage long-term economic 
stability and global competitiveness--all this before a company is 
closed and the entire community is affected. The inclusion of TAA for 
firms as a trigger would allow restructuring at a firm to occur in 
tandem with restructuring in a community. The inclusion of TAA for 
workers as a trigger would allow funds to be directed into a community 
at the initial onset of problems at a company--at the moment when lay-
offs are first occurring--not when the problems are so far down the 
line that there is very little that can be done about it.
  Let me say straight out that this legislation cannot be considered a 
substitute for a strong trade or manufacturing policy. But I do believe 
this legislation is complementary to those policies. From where I sit, 
there will always be individuals and communities negatively impacted by 
trade, and it is incumbent upon Congress to ensure that these 
individuals and communities are treated with the respect they deserve 
and with the strategic economic interests of our country in mind. The 
economic ideology that suggests we just let things take their course 
and things will work out the way they are supposed to is, from my 
perspective, wrongheaded and misguided. The fact is we must look very 
carefully at the changes that are occurring to our national economy as 
a result of globalization and position ourselves to do better than we 
are now.
  This legislation carves out an area of real need and addresses it in 
a coherent, comprehensive, and innovative fashion. If enacted, it will 
have an immediate, concrete, and important impact on communities across 
the country. Every State in the country would benefit from the 
legislation. It will allow communities to take charge of the future and 
contribute to the economic welfare of the Nation. It is a practical 
approach that is designed to keep our communities intact and our 
country competitive and strong. I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Communities Act of 2003.
  I want to commend Senator Bingaman for introducing this bill today. 
He has been a strong advocate of Trade Adjustment Assistance and a 
strong voice for communities that need a helping hand facing the 
challenges of the global economy.
  Trade and trade-opening policies create benefits for our country. But 
that fact should not keep us from acknowledging that the benefits of 
trade are seldom evenly distributed. In fact, there can be losers from 
trade, even when the economy as a whole is better off.
  In 1962, President Kennedy said that ``those injured by . . . trade 
competition should not be required to bear the full brunt of the 
impact.'' ``There is an obligation,'' he said, for the Federal 
Government ``to render assistance to those who suffer as a result of 
national trade policy.''
  That year, President Kennedy and a bipartisan majority of Congress 
created Trade Adjustment Assistance--a program designed to help those 
who are displaced by trade policy to retrain and get back on their 
feet.
  Last year, with help of another bipartisan majority of Congress, we 
passed the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of 2002--a historic 
expansion of the TAA program.
  The Trade Adjustment Assistance for Communities Act continues to 
build on this important tradition by creating a new TAA program for 
communities.
  In a recent study, the General Accounting Office found that, even 
with TAA benefits available to displaced workers, the loss of a major 
employer can have ripple effects on the local economy.
  In addition to the direct job losses, local economies can experience 
reduced tax revenues, reduced sales by the closed plant's supplier 
firms and by local retailers, and rising social services costs. Until 
they can attract well-paying new jobs, these communities can face 
extended periods of economic distress.
  This is especially true in smaller and rural communities, such as we 
have in Montana. These communities may not have a lot of job 
opportunities for displaced workers, even with TAA retraining. Indeed, 
one of the main criticisms of the current TAS program has been that it 
does nothing to make sure there are jobs for workers at the end of the 
retraining process.
  There are a number of Federal programs out there that might offer 
some help. They are all over the map--in Commerce, Treasury, Labor, 
Agriculture, HUD and the SBA, just to name a few. But these communities 
have no way to start, no go-to person or resource to guide them through 
this maze of potential help. And the Federal Government doesn't make it 
any easier. There is very little coordination of response among the 
various agencies. Finally, even if communities can find

[[Page S6994]]

these Federal resources, most existing programs are not tailored to the 
special needs of trade-impacted communities.
  This bill tries to make Federal economic assistance work better for 
trade-impacted distressed communities in a few simple ways.
  It creates a single office responsible for coordinating the Federal 
response.
  It creates a simple trigger process to identify potentially eligible 
communities and bring appropriate resources to their attention.
  It gives communities the technical assistance they need to develop a 
strategic plan--basically a roadmap for economic recovery. That helps 
ensure that Federal resources are being used in the most coordinated 
and cost-effective way possible.
  Finally, it makes sure that there are expertise and resources 
tailored to the special needs of trade-impacted communities.
  I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this bill. I hope we will be able 
to consider it in the Finance Committee this year.
                                 ______