[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 22, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H7231]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
U.S.-CHILE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of
January 7, 2003, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) is
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, on June 6, 2003, the United States and
Chile signed a historic and comprehensive free trade agreement designed
to reduce barriers and facilitate trade and investment between both
countries. Negotiations had begun back in December 2000, and 14
negotiating rounds were held. In the final round, 230 negotiators
worked 9 straight days to come up with an agreement that contains more
than 800 pages of text and annexes.
The result of all this hard work is a state-of-the-art trade pact
that includes groundbreaking provisions which have never been
negotiated as part of a free trade agreement. For example, the
agreement includes new anticorruption rules in government contracting,
and commitments to make end-user piracy of copyrighted works a criminal
offense. Also included are new customs procedures which will increase
transparency, efficiency, and timeliness of customs clearance
procedures while maintaining strong border security.
Chile has agreed to new regulatory transparency commitments that will
govern the interaction of service regulators with private parties,
increasing public access to rulemaking procedures. In addition, the
dispute settlement process will become more transparent with more
public hearings, access to legal submissions, and the rights of third
parties to submit views.
But beyond the precedent-setting features of the agreement, there is
a bottom-line reality. Right now most of Chile's products enter the
United States duty free under the GSP, or generalized system of
preferences. In contrast, our exports to Chile face a uniform tariff of
6 percent. Once the U.S.-Chile free trade agreement enters into force,
Chile's 6 percent tariff will be removed immediately from more than 85
percent of U.S. exports. Tariffs on the remaining products will be
phased out over 4 to 12 years.
This is a good agreement which covers a particularly wide range of
products and services. Not only does it address the liberalization of
merchandise trade; it also includes groundbreaking areas such as e-
commerce, express delivery services, strong copyright and trade
protections, and across-the-board liberalization of trade in services.
In short, there is something for everyone to like in this agreement.
But as with other trade agreements, there is also something for
everyone to question. The three areas that are often addressed by
Members who have not had an opportunity to focus on the agreement, and
we heard from a couple of them this morning, are: labor, the
environment, and immigration. For instance, some Members who are not
familiar with Chile and its labor laws question whether the labor
provisions in this agreement are strong enough. The facts are that
Chile has recently rewritten most of its Pinochet-era labor laws,
reaffirming its obligation as a member of the international labor
organization, and committed in this agreement to a key binding
obligation not to fail to effectively enforce its labor laws through a
sustained or recurring course of action or inaction. Labor protections
within Chile and within this agreement are strong and sound.
And because it is a free trade agreement, other Members question
whether it preserves environmental protections, but this free trade
agreement includes provisions requiring parties to establish high
levels of environmental protection and to not weaken or reduce
environmental laws to attract trade or investment. It provides for
dispute settlement and for environmental cooperation between the
parties.
And last, some Members have questioned the impact this agreement may
have on our immigration policy and whether it will open the door to a
new wave of immigrants. The answer is no. It is true that in order to
facilitate trade and services this agreement does allow for temporary
entry of business professionals into Chile and into the United States.
The number of professionals allowed entry into Chile is unlimited,
while the number of Chilean professionals in the United States is
1,400. But I want to point out that the implementing legislation
ensures that Chile professional category comes under the existing H-1B
umbrella as H-1B1.
Further, the legislation clarifies that the Chile H-1B professional
category is capped and these individuals will count under the overall
H-1B program cap. The same fees can be charged for entry, and the
agreement permits the U.S. to require attestations modeled after core
elements of the Labor Condition Application of the current H-1B visa
program.
Mr. Speaker, this is a good agreement with a good trading partner
that will be good for our businesses and workers. I plan to vote for
the U.S.-Chile trade agreement, and urge my colleagues to do the same.
____________________