[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 102 (Monday, July 25, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H6417-H6423]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             PASS DR-CAFTA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) is recognized for 
60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, for the United States to remain the 
greatest economic power in the world, it is no longer enough to simply 
buy American, we have to sell American. We have to sell our American 
products throughout the world, our products and services created by the 
most productive workforce on this planet.
  But when our businesses and farmers try to compete, they discover 
that Europe and Asia have aggressively negotiated trade agreements with 
other countries that tilt much of the world in their direction, leaving 
the U.S. and our companies and businesses and farmers at a severe 
disadvantage.
  That is unfair to American farmers, it is unfair to American 
businesses, and it is especially unfair to American workers who can 
compete if given a level playing field and other countries are held 
accountable to the same trade rules.
  Rather than build economic rules around our Nation that only harm 
American jobs, restrict what we can buy, and raise prices on our 
families, we must use American muscle to secure favorable trade 
agreements that tear down the ``American need not apply'' signs that 
close off potential customers from our products.
  In the coming days, the House of Representatives will give final 
consideration to the Dominican Republic Central American Free Trade 
Agreement, the most significant trade agreement in a decade. It will 
open 44 million new customers to American products, help America win 
the textile war against China, and honor America's commitment to 
democracy, freedom and human rights in our hemisphere.
  With me tonight are a number of Members of Congress who have examined 
this trade agreement and feel strongly about it from the standpoint of 
national security and jobs and agriculture. Joining us tonight is the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Beauprez), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter), the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Conaway) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of the Committee on Ways and 
Means.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), who 
spent a decade with the Department of Justice, the last 4 years as the 
deputy attorney general in Texas, and understands the national security 
implications of this trade agreement.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Brady) for his leadership on this issue. He has been 
the point man on this in Congress, and he has done a great job. I am 
proud to work with him on this, and proud to call him my friend as 
well.
  Since September 11, we have made this Nation's security and 
prosperity our number one priority. Halfway around the world, we fight 
terrorism and promote freedom with the strength of our military. In our 
own hemisphere, we have several different weapons in the strength of 
our economy, our business and our trade that will help to guarantee our 
safety. We must utilize these tools to prevent tyranny and evil from 
gaining power in our own backyard.
  For years, our Central American neighbors were torn apart by civil 
wars that epitomized the global battle between good and evil. With our 
help they have created stable and free governments. However, that 
battle is far from won. There are those who would like to reverse the 
progress that we have made, and those who wish to use the fragile state 
of our friends' democracies to attack our very existence.
  In order to win the war on terror, we must continue to guarantee the 
stability of democracy in our own hemisphere. The citizens of this 
country have entrusted us with their safety and their well-being. They 
have asked us to represent their interests and to help increase their 
standard of living. Job creation should not fall prey to politics. We 
need to rise above partisan politics to work for the good of our 
country.
  That is why this week my colleagues and I in the United States 
Congress will vote for legislation that will strengthen our economy, 
our security, and our way of life. The Dominican Republic and Central 
American Free Trade Agreement will help reinforce freedom and democracy 
throughout our entire region.
  When considering the benefits of CAFTA, we must consider the pitfalls 
of not passing it. With the improvement of our economic relationship 
with Central America, we will see an improvement in our security 
relationship.
  Recently I met with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld at the 
Pentagon, and he made it clear to me that this trade agreement is 
crucial to our national security. We are currently engaged in a war on 
terror on the other side of the world, while there are already 
terrorists who are using Central America as a base of operations 
against the United States. This trade agreement is not only good for 
our economy, it is also vital to our national security by stabilizing 
Central American democracies.

                              {time}  2045

  In addition to international terrorism, we must also mind the rising

[[Page H6418]]

threat of China's global influence. If the United States does not adopt 
CAFTA, we will see China take our place as Central America's biggest 
and most important trading partner. This would mean an increase in 
America's trade deficit with nations all over the world and make the 
United States a secondary economic power. Twenty years ago we helped 
Central America fight a war against Communist forces, and now China is 
trying to reassert its influence within our own hemisphere. We will not 
allow this to happen. This trade agreement keeps America ahead of China 
and will increase America's financial security. Through CAFTA, Central 
America should continue to see the U.S. as its main trading partner 
instead of Communist China.
  And on the issue of immigration, by passing CAFTA and helping people 
to create a better life in Central America, the citizens of those 
countries will be motivated to work, to prosper, and, most importantly, 
to stay in their own countries. Working with America, their standards 
of living will increase. Ultimately my home State of Texas and the rest 
of the Nation will spend less time and money combating the problem of 
illegal immigration. This is really, in my view, the long-term solution 
to our immigration problem.
  CAFTA will also level the playing field. CAFTA represents the 
completion of our trade relationship, not just the beginning of one. 
Through unilateral preference programs already approved by Congress, 
nearly 80 percent of CAFTA imports and 99 percent of CAFTA ag products 
already enter the United States duty free. CAFTA will make this one-way 
road a two-way superhighway by giving our agriculture and industrial 
goods and services access to their markets. We will level the playing 
field by eliminating high tariffs, tariff rate quotas and nontariff 
barriers. My home State of Texas will be one of the top three States to 
benefit by enacting this trade agreement.
  On the issue of new jobs, CAFTA countries, which include the 
Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and 
Nicaragua, are the United States' largest market for domestic apparel 
and yarn exports and the second largest market for U.S. fabric exports. 
Trade with these countries exceeds trade with countries like Australia 
and Russia. This deal is critical to sustain and expand existing 
partnerships to give CAFTA goods a competitive edge, particularly with 
the elimination of global quotas and increased competition from Asia. 
This trade agreement will help support approximately 400,000 jobs in 
Central America and the Dominican Republic and 700,000 workers in the 
United States in cotton, yarn, textile and other apparel sectors.
  On the issue of agriculture, America's farmers are also expected to 
see increases in the needs from Central America for their crops and 
livestock. Some of the most important U.S. exports to the region 
expected to gain significantly from CAFTA include feed grains, wheat, 
soybeans, poultry, pork and beef. That is why the American and the 
Texas Farm Bureau support CAFTA.
  On the issue of technology and business, this agreement creates huge 
potential profits for our technology industry. CAFTA holds the promise 
of new opportunities and expanded markets for a wide array of U.S. 
high-tech merchandise, exporters, manufacturers, service providers and 
their employees. Total U.S. high-tech exports to Central America in 
2003 totaled nearly $2.5 billion. From Dell to Samsung to Applied 
Materials to Hewlett Packard, the high-tech industry in Texas and the 
United States will benefit greatly from this trade agreement. And as 
the standard of living improves in these countries, the demand for more 
advanced technology will grow with it.
  In conclusion, it is essential that we pass CAFTA. Along with 
President Bush, I believe this trade agreement will mean increased 
safety and security for our Nation. With their own nations seeing 
prosperity, Central Americans will have less reason to illegally cross 
U.S. borders looking for better opportunities in our country. America's 
farmers and businesses will find new and easier ways to export their 
goods and services to the tune of billions of new dollars. For the 
average American, CAFTA will mean a cost savings at the grocery store. 
And for the entire Western Hemisphere, this trade agreement will spread 
and strengthen democracy, peace and freedom.
  CAFTA has support, wide and deep, from many groups, but it is 
important to note tonight those who oppose CAFTA. CAFTA is opposed by 
Marxist leftists and terrorist leaders such as Fidel Castro and Hugo 
Chavez. In addition, this vote is being watched carefully by Iran, 
North Korea and China, who all stand to gain by the failure of this 
vote, a vote we cannot afford to lose.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. If the gentleman would stay for just a moment. 
You have spent your whole life in law enforcement and a number of your 
recent years in protecting homeland security from threats. One of the 
key points you made is that while we are fighting a war against 
terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan with our men and women, the fact is 
we fought a war, as well, 20 years ago in Central America, moving those 
countries away from communism and socialism toward democracy. They have 
made real progress, but we still have leaders like Castro and Chavez 
and Daniel Ortega and FMLM, some of the most Socialist anti-American 
groups in this hemisphere opposing us because their point is democracy 
does not work, human rights does not work, the rule of law does not 
work. Communist does. Come, step backward in time.
  One of my colleague's points was the worst thing we could do would be 
to give that region back to the Communists and Socialists at a time 
when they have made so much progress.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. We cannot afford to turn the clock back, as the 
gentleman mentioned. We won that war 25 years ago, but now we see 
instability in the region. We see President Chavez down in Venezuela 
aligning himself with people like Fidel Castro, asking Iran for nuclear 
technology. We have a triborder region down in South America where al 
Qaeda and groups like Hezbollah meet and discuss their activities. The 
threat is very real. It is no surprise that Fidel Castro and President 
Chavez oppose CAFTA because they know that there is nothing better for 
us and for Central America in spreading democracy than for CAFTA to get 
passed. That is why President Hugo Chavez has actually sent money to 
legislators in Nicaragua to actually oppose CAFTA in their country.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. My understanding, too, is we are seeing letters 
from legislators down in Central America who are being financed by our 
Socialists down there who say they are opposing it on the merits, but 
in fact they are getting a nudge from the enemies of freedom to do so.
  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. I think if we fail to pass it, we will give the 
enemies of freedom a victory. That is a victory we cannot afford to 
turn over. This is the first of many trade agreements. If this does not 
pass, it takes away, in my view, a lot of credibility on the part of 
the administration when it goes to other countries and tries to broker 
agreements. In the defeat of communism, socialism, and the spread of 
freedom and democracy, that is why I am here tonight. That is why I ran 
for Congress, and that is why it is so important that this Congress 
pass this important piece of legislation.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Texas for his 
commitment to law enforcement and homeland security in our hemisphere.

  Mr. McCAUL of Texas. I thank the gentleman as well.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn now to a 
gentleman from Colorado who has a wonderful background. He is a farmer. 
He is a rancher. He is a community banker. In recent years he has 
served as an outstanding member of the Ways and Means Committee. I 
yield to a good friend, a good colleague from the great State of 
Colorado, Bob Beauprez.
  Mr. BEAUPREZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding. He likewise is a 
very good friend.
  I want to applaud, first of all, your leadership. I know many of us 
in the House have worked on the passage of CAFTA, but I do not know 
that anybody has worked harder, longer, more diligently and more 
successfully than the gentleman from Texas. I am confident later this 
week we will not only take up CAFTA, but we are going to pass CAFTA. We 
will pass it, I think, in a bipartisan fashion. I fully believe

[[Page H6419]]

and hope and expect that a number of our colleagues from the Democrat 
side of the aisle of this great Chamber will join with us.
  I want to stay on the point that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
McCaul) and you were just dialoguing about just a moment ago, this 
issue of national security. I think you will recall that we had the 
opportunity, we in our Ways and Means Committee, to sit with the six 
economic ministers of these member nations. All of them just 
volunteered to us that they have got a long way to go. They are not the 
United States of America yet. These are developing, fledgling 
democracies. But you were just making the point that 20 years ago, what 
was in the news day after day? El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua were 
hotbeds of communism. Today we would be calling it terrorism; anti-
American hatred right on our southern border. Who would think that less 
than a generation later, economic ministers from these now developing 
democratic nations would be sitting with us, Members of the United 
States Congress, saying, please help us.
  Someone is going to be the political and economic mentors of these 
developing nations that are our next-door neighbors. I think that 
someone ought to be the United States of America, not people like Hugo 
Chavez, not Fidel Castro, not the anti-American freedom haters around 
the globe who would love to have a foothold on our southern border.
  This is a critical agreement for us in the United States of America. 
I think sometimes that we get up in the morning, and often it is easier 
to find a reason to not do something; everything from the simple not 
getting out of bed on time or not getting out of bed at all, not going 
to work in the morning, not rolling up your sleeves and putting in a 
good, hard day's work, or maybe not taking on a real significant 
challenge. Certainly anybody in this great Chamber can look through 
this document if they want to go looking for some reason to say no.
  But I am saying yes. I join the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) in 
saying yes because this is the right thing to do. It is the right thing 
to do because neighbors help neighbors, and it is not just one way. It 
is not about us just helping these six developing nations. It is about 
the United States of America and American workers.
  I used to be, as the gentleman pointed out, in the cattle business. 
We exported cattle all around the world. Nothing would make me happier 
to wake up some morning and suddenly find out that the United States 
Congress and our President had just adopted an agreement with some 
foreign nations that immediately, immediately made my product, my 
cattle, more competitive to these nations. That is what happens in this 
agreement. The day it is signed, $1 billion a year of tariff goes away 
on our goods, our services, the products we send down there. From my 
State, just like your State of Texas, a lot of that is agricultural 
products. A lot of it, too, is manufactured goods, in the high-tech 
sector, plastic molds. We are sending a lot of stuff down there. These 
are developing nations, meaning that in future years it will be more 
that we will be sending them. It only makes sense that somebody around 
this globe is going to meet the needs of those people. I want that 
somebody to be American farmers and ranchers and laborers and small 
businesspeople.
  I was a community banker. A lot of my bank customers were in the 
business of making stuff, all kinds of stuff, stuff you could not even 
imagine that somebody is really out there making that. But they are all 
anxious for a bigger market. We have got a bigger market right on our 
southern border. They are begging us to give them a chance to do 
business with the United States of America. Why? Because they know that 
by doing business with us, that is the quickest way to emulate us, to 
be like us, to be a free, open society. That is what they want to 
become, both politically and economically. How can we as the United 
States of America, the greatest Nation ever on God's green Earth, deny 
that kind of hope, that kind of opportunity to our neighbors and 
friends and at the same time help our own citizens, the workers right 
here in the United States?
  I will just close and yield back to the gentleman here in a moment by 
saying that when I get up in the morning, I like to be about building 
up, not tearing down. I think the CAFTA agreement is very much one that 
builds up. It builds up opportunity for the United States of America 
and United States workers, but it also does the right thing that we as 
Americans, compassionate people, know we have an obligation to do 
around the globe, and that is help people that are reaching out a hand 
to us.
  With that, I will say, let us pass CAFTA later this week. I applaud 
you for your leadership. Thank you for letting me be part of your 
Special Order tonight.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from 
Colorado's leadership. The key point, many of them that he made, was 
that America's agricultural community is so strongly behind this trade 
agreement. There are nearly 70 ag associations around America who are 
supporting this. In fact, the American Farm Bureau Federation believes 
that we will sell almost $1.5 billion more ag products each year to 
Central America. That is our beef, that is our chicken, that is our 
pork, our corn, our milk, our potatoes, you name it, at a time when a 
lot of the world is closed to America's ag products.

                              {time}  2100

  We have got the most productive ag community in the world; but if we 
keep making things cheaper and faster and better but do not have anyone 
to sell it to, the price just goes down. We want those ``American need 
not apply'' signs to be torn up all throughout this world, give our ag 
community a chance to compete. Watch what we will sell around the 
world.
  And we ought to start with Central America, a neighbor, a proven 
neighbor, who cannot only buy our goods and services but is easy to 
ship to and in the process we are going to continue to help those six 
countries into stronger democracies, a stronger rule of law. It is 
truly a win-win situation.
  I appreciate the gentleman's leadership. As a business person, the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez) knows what small businesses and 
small farmers and small communities have to go through to compete, and 
giving them a level playing field is good for Colorado and good for 
America as well.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Carter), who served, before coming to Congress, as a 
district judge for more than 2 decades. And his background is just 
filled with decades of common sense. He did a great job on the bench in 
Texas. Here in Washington he has been intent not only on national 
security, supporting our troops, but also in serving on his committee, 
finding ways to help our American economy grow.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter).
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Brady), who clearly has been in the lead and is outspoken for the 
CAFTA-Dominican Republic project, for yielding to me.
  This is critical not only to the Central America region but to the 
United States of America. We are opening up trade so that our products 
get sold in Central America without duties on our products.
  The Central American countries have the opportunity to sell in our 
country, and they do not have a burden on their products up here. And, 
in fact, we are their number one trading partner. The expansion, the 
benefit that we see is what is going to happen to our folks.
  Whenever I look at one of these things that are coming up in 
Congress, I try to take a look at my district and see who is in my 
district and try to learn and study and figure out who is going to get 
helped by these things. And it was easy to see how the high-tech 
industry with Dell Computer, one of our great neighbors in Williamson 
County, it was easy to see what is going to happen there. But I look 
further down to that dairy farmer in Stephenville, Texas, in Erath 
County. This is not a little dairy farm operation in Erath County. We 
are talking about one of the most important parts of the agriculture 
industry in Texas. The area in my district produces over $40 million to 
the Texas economy every year in milk and dairy product production. And 
under the CAFTA agreement, doors are going to open to them that

[[Page H6420]]

are going to allow them to sell their dairy products in Central 
America.
  Right now they face duties of between 60 percent and the World Trade 
Organization allows up to 100 percent of tariffs that can be assessed 
against our products. With the opening of CAFTA, we are going to be 
able to open up tariff rate quotas the first year starting at 10,000 
metric tons across the six countries, and this will expand as the CAFTA 
agreement goes forward. The TRQs will grow by 5 percent a year for 
Central American countries and 10 percent a year for the Dominican 
Republic until we have got a good access to the market, and it is going 
to be an outstanding source of sales for our milk and milk-related 
products that come right from my district.
  When I look at that, I see the benefit there. I have had, 
fortunately, in the recent past, within the last 3 months, the good 
fortune of going down with the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, 
and Related Programs Subcommittee to Nicaragua and Honduras. And we 
went down there not on the issue of CAFTA. We went down there on other 
issues, to look at areas where our foreign aid is being used very 
productively in those countries. And I was able to talk one on one with 
folks like farmers and small businessmen and politicians that are down 
there in Nicaragua and Honduras.
  First, let me tell the Members that when we see that country and see 
what really great potential there is in Nicaragua and Honduras, what 
resources are available, there are plenty of cattlemen who would love 
to have about half of Nicaragua to run cattle on in Texas. With 
underground water less than four meters under the ground, I know a lot 
of cowmen from my part of the State that would love to be able to have 
some irrigated grass farms down there in Nicaragua. Beautiful cattle 
country.
  Cheap sources of power are available in that area because they have 
the ability to create geothermal electricity. They have a lot of 
potential in Central America. But when we talked to those folks, they 
said, Look, it is all about CAFTA. The future of our country is all 
about CAFTA.

  Let us take Nicaragua. We had a whole bunch of trouble with the 
Sandinistas in Nicaragua. And as has been said before here, about 20 
years ago we had a pretty good fight down there. And for a while the 
Sandinistas ran the country and ran it absolutely into the ground. And 
people who opposed the Sandinistas, it is not like political parties 
here where we will bicker with our opponents and we will talk, but then 
we all go back and let somebody re-elect us. If one loses to the 
Sandinistas, they had better get out of the country because these 
people who were against the Sandinistas had to flee or die.
  Today in Nicaragua, underlying like a cancer lying beneath the 
surface, is the Sandinista Party; and Daniel Ortega still walks the 
streets down there. But what is he walking the streets with now? He is 
walking the streets with an offer from Hugo Chavez of up to an 
unbelievable number, $1 billion, to turn Central America back to the 
Marxist cause he and Fidel Castro believe in so firmly. He is one of 
the great threats to the world right now. He is a communist with money, 
and he is spreading it around. He takes his oil money from Venezuela 
and is threatening to spread it around because he wants to make sure 
that the Marxist communist government dominates Central America.
  And their only hope is to show how capitalist free trade works. And 
that is what CAFTA is all about, and that is what they said. They said, 
This is going to get great support down here. These people, if they can 
get their markets open, they can get the capital investment they need 
to grow.
  One of the merchants down there I was talking to said, You know what? 
I do not know why you think you have got to ship your cloth to China 
and make your shirts and pants and stuff in China. We have a history of 
making that stuff for you. Let us break down these barriers between our 
countries. Let us make those things, and you will not have to put it in 
big containers and ship it across the Pacific Ocean. We can make it 
just as economically and just as profitably for American companies as 
they can in China, and we can put it on a train and ship it up into 
Texas and spread it across the Nation.
  That just makes sense to me. That is just good common sense, and 
CAFTA is good common sense when we get down to it. It meets many 
requirements that we have.
  First and foremost, we help our neighbors. And where the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Brady) and I come from, and as for most of the folks in 
this country, but certainly in Texas, number one is taking care of our 
neighbors because we are kind of out in big spaces and, sometimes if we 
will not take care of our neighbors, they might be the only people we 
will get a chance to visit with.
  So we need to take care of those neighbors. We need to prevent an 
enemy, a cancer, from growing in Central America that we will wake up 
one day and find it is growing right across the Rio Grande. And this 
agreement is part of stopping that cancer. And those people down there 
say without CAFTA, without a chance for a level playing field in 
Central America, what is going to happen to us is the Marxists will 
rise up and we will either be killed or run out of the country. Those 
countries will never survive with this type of quality people leaving 
the country.
  And then, finally, it is a benefit to our industry and to our people. 
It is a win-win-win, and for that reason I think Republicans and 
Democrats are going to join together this week in this House and pass 
the CAFTA agreement, pass the free trade agreement. It is important to 
America.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman 
made excellent points tonight in that we need the customers in Central 
America for our American Texas ag and small business communities. And 
for national security, this is exactly the wrong time to turn our backs 
on Central America.
  One of the other points he made is deals with China, and the fact of 
the matter is he talked to that gentleman who said we can survive 
China.
  Since January 1 around the world, of course, all the quotas went off; 
so anyone can import any of the apparel, the clothes we wear, the 
towels we use, and China has just swamped the world, including the U.S. 
And some people say, well, let us just give up; China is just going to 
win. But that gentleman's point is exactly right. If America partners 
up with Central America, we grow the cotton in Texas, which is why the 
Texas Cotton Council supports this. How we can do the fabric and yarn 
in American textile plants with American workers, send it down to 
Central America. They cut it, sew it, put it together, and send it 
back.
  So today what is interesting is that if the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Carter) and I go to a store down here and buy a shirt that says ``Made 
in Honduras,'' about 70 to 80 percent of that shirt is made right here 
in America. But if at the same store we pick up one that says ``Made in 
China,'' there may be, may be 1 percent of American content there.
  And the fact of the matter is if we partner up with American 
agriculture, with American workers in textiles, which is why so many of 
the textile industry is supporting this, partner up with Central 
America, we can survive. We can beat China in the textile areas. We can 
save jobs in America and save jobs in Central America.
  And my understanding is just since January 1, Central America has 
already lost 28,000 textile jobs to the Chinese. We know where some of 
those folks might be headed to find jobs. And the fact of the matter 
is, I think, from an immigration standpoint, Central America wants to 
keep its best and brightest and hard-working at home. If we partner up, 
not only do we save American jobs, we save Central American jobs and 
help preserve our immigration and borders in the process. I think the 
gentleman made a wonderful point to that extent.
  Mr. CARTER. Absolutely, Mr. Speaker. And if the gentleman will 
continue to yield, these are our neighbors. These are the people in the 
Americas. They are part of America. They are Central American. And they 
know the Chinese are breathing down their necks too, and they are very 
concerned about that, just as the gentleman pointed out.
  This is a win for the United States. It is a benefit to a neighbor 
that needs to be boosted up politically because when Chavez gets in 
there and spreads his

[[Page H6421]]

money around, it could be disastrous. So the gentleman is right. It is 
a win for us. It is a win for our farmers, our textile manufacturers, 
and others. They can do assembly work. They have got a lot of skilled 
labor available in Nicaragua and Honduras. They are wonderful people, 
just as gentle and kind a bunch of people as I have ever been around. 
They will be good folks to work with. We need what they have to offer, 
and they need what we have to offer. It is a good trade. And we always 
say when we walk away from the day having made a good trade, we feel 
like it has been a pretty good day. Well, I think we can walk away from 
this day and feel like we made a pretty good trade.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the 
leadership of the gentleman from Texas on national security and on our 
Armed Forces and today in support of our American Texas farmers and 
businesses as we partner up with Central America, and I appreciate the 
gentleman very much.
  Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we have another gentleman from 
Texas, who, like the previous one, has experience that relates directly 
to creating jobs. He has been a small business person for more than 32 
years, is an accountant and a small business owner in west Texas. He 
understands that America needs to be able to sell its products around 
the world, that Central America can sell them to the United States 
today and they have for 20 years. Now it is our turn to sell into that 
growing market.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Conaway).
  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Houston, Texas 
for yielding to me and for hosting this hour tonight. And in addition 
to all of his other great attributes, he is one of the all-time best 
second basemen to play for the Republicans in the annual baseball game.

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. Speaker, many of the points have been made tonight, and I would 
like to continue with some of those, one of which is labor standards. 
We have an awful lot of criticism of the CAFTA agreement based on labor 
standards. The other side seems to take the position that a trade 
agreement can be used to cure labor issues and labor ills in a country 
that would, in effect, bring their labor standards and their labor 
conduct up to that of the United States. I think that is really 
misplaced. In addition, the argument seems to be that if the labor 
standards or the labor conditions or the pay wages or whatever is going 
on, it seems that if a fellow is out of a job, he is in a better 
position to, in effect, change or make improvements to those conditions 
than if he has a job.
  Well, I think that is really wrong-headed. I think that no matter how 
bad the standards are, no matter how bad the pay or the working 
conditions, if I have a job, I will take that job and take whatever 
money is available to me, and I will feed my family as best I can, and 
then I will work to try to improve those conditions. But while that is 
going on, I at least have a job that I can make some money at; maybe 
not as much money as some would like me to make or I would like to 
make, but I will be able to continue to work and feed my family while 
those conditions are being addressed.
  Under CAFTA, we have negotiated the strongest labor protection and 
labor improvement agreements of any of our trade agreements, and going 
forward. The signatories to this agreement have agreed that if we sign 
this CAFTA agreement, that they are committed to enforce those 
standards; which has always been one of the issues with trade 
agreements is that we will put these agreements in place. But, the 
other side, the leadership of those countries will not enforce those 
agreements the way they are supposed to. Those commitments in enforcing 
labor standards, improving labor conditions and wages in those 
countries, those commitments simply evaporate if we do not sign this 
CAFTA agreement.
  In addition to that, the administration has pledged $610 million over 
the next 4 years to improve enforcement, to improve economic assistance 
to the rural areas, and most of these countries would qualify as rural, 
to help build that capacity, and to help these countries put in place 
the enforcement processes that will raise labor standards, that will 
raise wages, and enforce this agreement, and that has to be a better 
circumstance than those folks being unemployed.
  We have had in place what is called the Caribbean Basin Initiative; 
it dates back to the 1980s. With that agreement we created basically a 
symbiotic relationship between agriculture interests in this country 
and jobs in Central America. What happens is, as my colleague already 
mentioned, when you buy a shirt that says it is made in Honduras or 
made in Costa Rica or Nicaragua, 60 percent of the inputs into those 
shirts, those garments, come from the United States. Well, in west 
Texas that input is another word for cotton, because we grow and 
harvest a lot of cotton. It is far better for our cotton farmers to be 
able to sell that cotton into Central America and have it spun into 
thread and woven into clothes, garments, and cut and sewn and brought 
back to this country and sold to consumers in America than it is if we 
have to try to figure out a way to sell that cotton to China. Because 
if that shirt that you are wearing, and I would challenge my colleagues 
when they get home tonight to take their shirts off, take their clothes 
off and look for that label. It says, made someplace, and find out 
where it was made. If that label says ``Made in China,'' less than 1 
percent of the input into that cloth that came from the United States. 
It does not take a rocket scientist to know that is not real good for 
Texas cotton farmers.
  So this idea of creating this agreement, it does improve labor 
standards, it enforces labor standards, but it also helps keep in place 
this Caribbean Basin Initiative which creates a symbiotic relationship 
with these countries in Central America. My colleague has already said 
that there is clear evidence that if these jobs do not stay in Central 
America, they are not coming back to America. As harsh as that is for 
our good colleagues in North Carolina and Virginia and other places to 
talk about, having lost those jobs, those jobs, cutting and sewing and 
weaving and looming jobs, they are not coming back to America. We 
cannot compete in that arena anymore. Those jobs are going to China, 
those jobs are going to Thailand or the Philippines. If they go there, 
they are not going to be using American input as that work is done on 
those clothes that are shipped back to Americans to purchase.
  Let me give an example. I heard recently, earlier today, about the 
impact that tariffs have on American consumers, or actually American 
manufacturers. All of us would agree that the manufacture of airplanes 
is a manufacturing job that we want to keep in America. Now, we can 
argue about some of the lower-end manufacturing jobs may go places, but 
no one would argue about outsourcing the manufacture of an airplane. 
Last year, Cessna, based out of Kansas, lost $43 million in a 
competitive bid to Embraer, which is based out of Brazil, for sales 
into these countries. Now, the reason they lost it, one of the reasons 
they lost it, there is a 15 percent tariff on Cessna airplanes that are 
made in America and sold into these countries. Embraer does not have 
that same tariff. Brazil has already initiated or already negotiated a 
bilateral agreement that dropped that tariff. So head-to-head 
competition, if it is just on price, and I have a 15 percent 
competitive advantage against anybody else, I want to use some of that 
15 percent to make sure I win the bid. And that is $43 million worth of 
airplanes that would have been manufactured in Kansas or in America 
that instead were manufactured in Brazil; somewhere else.
  Our colleagues on the other side talk about the 44 million customers 
in these countries not being able to afford our high-end merchandise. 
Well, it probably makes for good rhetoric and sound bites, but if you 
really think about that, it really does not have much of a place in 
this argument. Quite frankly, I cannot afford all of the high-end 
merchandise that is manufactured in the United States, so to say that 
somebody in Central America cannot afford a Cadillac or something like 
that, and that is a reason to not pass CAFTA, is certainly misplaced in 
the extreme.
  We have also talked about immigration and that impact. Let me say it 
the

[[Page H6422]]

way I typically say it, some of the other colleagues have already 
talked about it, is that everywhere I go in District 11 and talk to 
folks, they are concerned about border security. In my mind, you cannot 
separate border security and immigration reform. We have to protect our 
borders; we need to know who is coming into this country.
  One of the long-term best interests of the United States is for 
opportunities in Mexico and, as this phrase is used, OTMs, other than 
Mexicans, for countries, for opportunities to be created in those 
countries, because that is who is coming to America. It is not just 
Mexicans, but it is OTMs, other than Mexicans, percolating up through 
Mexico and coming into this country. CAFTA will help keep jobs in 
Central America. If somebody has a job in Central America, they are 
going to be less likely to want to try to percolate up through Mexico 
and come into the United States.
  So I thank my good friend who has hosted this hour tonight. I am 
supporting CAFTA, I am voting for CAFTA. There are a lot of reasons; we 
have heard them on national security and immigration and trade. All of 
these are good reasons why we should support CAFTA, and I would 
encourage my colleagues across the aisle and on our side of the aisle 
to vote for CAFTA. Let us put this trade agreement in place. Let us 
take advantage of the opportunities for dropping the tariffs that our 
manufacturers currently face like Cessna in selling and trying to 
operate in these Central American countries.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leadership of the 
gentleman from Texas. Several of the points he made, such as the fact 
that Central America already sells in the United States, and now is the 
chance for us to sell our products to those 44 million new customers, 
and that is critical.
  Mr. Speaker, I see people who make fun of Central America and say 
they are too poor and too backward, not worthy, I guess, of trading 
with the United States, and they could not be more wrong. Economically, 
I think, those critics are pretty unwise. Central America is already 
our tenth largest trading partner, and growing. I do not know very many 
successful businesses that have made it very long by only selling to 
one or two customers. It does not happen very often. The fact of the 
matter is they have the potential to grow even larger. They are not 
large by American standards, but they are large by world standards, and 
those 44 million customers already buy more from the United States than 
Italy, which is a world power. They buy more from us than Australia. 
They buy more from us than Russia, India, and Indonesia combined. In 
fact, if you took the total economies of Central America together, it 
is larger than 33 sizes of the United States, those economies in total, 
and they have not even begun yet.
  It makes great economic sense, at a time when America needs more 
customers, to strengthen the ties with the customer in our backyard 
that is the tenth largest, and growing every day. My colleagues know 
how important it is. There is a reason why Europe and Asia and China 
are trying to get trade agreements with Central America, because they 
want to sell their products there. But it is time for us, it is our 
turn to sell there, and I appreciate the leadership of the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Conaway) on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, let me conclude myself, but before we do that, I want to 
turn to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight in the House 
Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Herger). He has been looking for ways to strengthen democracy around 
the world for many years. He is a big supporter of finding new 
customers for California's products. In fact, California is the largest 
agriculture State in America. And he has also here in America helped to 
rewrite our welfare laws, so he understands what it means to get people 
back to work.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) 
for his leadership on this incredibly crucial issue of trade.
  As the gentleman mentioned, California is the richest agricultural 
State in the Nation; actually, the richest agricultural area in the 
world. The Imperial Valley, the San Joaquin Valley, the Sacramento 
Valley, which is part of what I represent, north of Sacramento, and 
more than 250 different major commodities come from California. Again, 
I thank the gentleman for his active role in getting the facts out, the 
truth out about trade.
  We are the largest trading Nation in the world, bar none other. And 
in the United States we have very low, and many times almost 
nonexistent, barriers for other countries to be able to trade to the 
United States. Yet we see very major trading barriers to other 
countries. So it is really win-win when we have an agreement such as 
CAFTA that can help bring down their barriers.
  I would like to reemphasize the importance of CAFTA to farmers and 
ranchers, both in my home State of California and in the greater United 
States. Especially now, as we fast approach a vote in the House on 
CAFTA-ratifying legislation, it is important to note a few points on 
this agreement in general.
  First, CAFTA was negotiated by all countries in the agreement, and 
already three have ratified it. Secondly, CAFTA is the only legislation 
of its kind that will come before the Congress. If it fails, the 
prospects of approving any similar agreement for the Central American 
countries and the Dominican Republic fail as well.
  Finally, CAFTA has to be considered with some degree of historical 
context. In May 2000, I joined 308 of our 435 colleagues in the House 
to lower or eliminate tariffs on products entering the U.S. from CAFTA 
nations. At the time there was no reciprocal treatment. In other words, 
the U.S. products would continue to face high tariffs and other 
barriers to entry in CAFTA nation markets. The CAFTA-ratifying 
agreement soon to come before us will immediately zero out tariffs on 
50 percent of U.S. agricultural products exported to the region, with 
the remaining schedule to be eliminated in 10 years. The American Farm 
Bureau estimates that this could mean an increase in U.S. agricultural 
exports of $1.5 billion per year.
  In California, exports of farm products help boost both farm prices 
and income generated in the agricultural sector. Taken together with 
jobs, both on and off the farm, agriculture employs in California alone 
129,560 workers, including food processing, storage, and 
transportation. Agriculture exports account for roughly $8.2 billion, 
or about 30 percent of the total export product of California.

                              {time}  2130

  CAFTA implementation would increase those exports. As the Nation's 
largest producer and exporter of dairy products, with cash receipts of 
over $4 billion, California dairy producers would benefit greatly from 
reductions of the current duties imposed in CAFTA countries, which can 
be as high as 60 percent.
  As our Nation's leading exporter of fruits, California fruit 
producers too would benefit from CAFTA passage. Grapes, for example, 
are the State's third largest source of farm cash receipts. Current 
duties on grapes can reach 20 percent in some CAFTA countries and could 
grow as high as 135 percent under WTO rules.
  Producers and processors would benefit from the immediate elimination 
of duties on grapes and raisins in all CAFTA nations. California 
peaches grown in my district, a nearly $250 million industry, would 
benefit from elimination of duties on both fresh and canned peaches 
immediately.
  Pears would also gain immediate duty-free access under CAFTA. Mr. 
Speaker, California is the leading producer of tree nuts in the United 
States, accounting for over $2 billion in farm cash receipts. 
California almonds, walnuts, pistachio producers would benefit from the 
immediate duty-free access in all CAFTA countries.
  Current duties on those products can reach 20 percent. With over $1.7 
billion in cash receipts, California lettuce producers would benefit 
from immediate duty elimination in Costa Rica and duty phase-out in 
most other Central American countries within 5 years.
  The California tomato and broccoli industries would see similar 
tariff elimination. Another crop, California rice, which is a major 
commodity in my district, currently faces duties of

[[Page H6423]]

up to 60 percent. As the Nation's second largest rice exporter, 
California rice producers would benefit from the immediate market 
access of 400,000 metric tons of U.S. rice in CAFTA countries.
  As the Nation's second largest cotton exporter, California cotton 
would benefit from immediate market access worth up to $73.1 million.
  For beef, too, CAFTA passage brings with it positive economic 
prospects. With cash receipts of nearly $1.6 billion, California would 
see tariffs reduced from as high as 30 percent to zero. Tariffs on some 
cuts of meat will be eliminated immediately in Central American 
countries.
  Mr. Speaker, as stated in a letter from the California Ag Coalition 
for Free and Fair Trade, California producers of beef, fruit, nuts, 
vegetables, cotton, poultry, dairy products, wheat and rice stand to 
gain in a major way under CAFTA.
  I support this agreement for passage, and I urge my friends on both 
sides of the aisle to do likewise. CAFTA would help level the playing 
field for America's agriculture, increasing export opportunities for 
our growers and producers. It would be truly tragic for our Nation's 
agriculture and all of our economy if we let this opportunity escape 
us.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Herger) speaking about this issue, because opponents to 
CAFTA say that does not matter. It would help our trade deficit if we 
just ignored selling all of our products to Central America. I do not 
understand how it helps our trade deficit to turn down 44 million new 
customers, in all of the ag, in technology and small business and 
manufacturing trade that we have and want to sell to.
  I would ask the gentleman, how does that help our trade deficit to 
turn down a growing country and all of those new customers?
  Mr. HERGER. Well, obviously, it does not help our trade deficit; it 
makes it worse. As the gentleman is pointing out, if we lose that, and 
the gentleman has pointed this out, there are other countries that are 
seeking to take these markets. China is working very diligently to take 
these markets, and we cannot allow this to happen.
  So it is imperative that we move, and we look to be having a vote 
this week, that we win and we have a big win in this very important 
area of trade.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I notice, too, the gentleman serving on Ways and 
Means, all we hear about is NAFTA; but what the critics do not tell you 
is that there is one huge difference between the two agreements, 
ignoring for a minute that during NAFTA years Texas grew by 1.7 million 
jobs. Our economy grew by 75 percent, we doubled our sales to Mexico, 
ignore all of that.
  But the big difference is, Central America already sells most of its 
products in the United States today; they have for 20 years. If a 
company wanted to move away, they had 2 decades to do it. Now it is our 
turn to sell into Central America. Those are the ag sales and 
manufacturing sales and financial and insurance and telecommunications 
and chemicals from the Gulf Coast and forest products from east Texas, 
and ag from west Texas, and a number of products that we are looking 
for the new jobs and the new customers that this agreement provides us.
  Mr. HERGER. Again I thank the gentleman. You brought up the agreement 
of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, with Canada and with 
Mexico. And again, it was so tongue-in-cheek, it was so detrimental 
that we more than doubled our trade to both of these countries who are 
our major trading partners now, and we see our unemployment rate at one 
of the lowest levels in our Nation's history, right at 5 percent.
  So if these trade agreements are so bad for our country, why are we 
seeing such incredibly dramatic positive results because of them?
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Well, I appreciate the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Herger) for coming tonight and being part of this key debate.
  Let me just conclude with a question. In recent years, a bipartisan 
Congress has extended its trade hand to the Muslim people of Morocco, 
the sub-Saharan nations of South Africa, our Asian allies in Singapore, 
and our Arab allies in Jordan. Why would Congress balk now at extending 
the same hand of trade to our Hispanic neighbors in Central America?
  This is good for America and our workers, this is good for Central 
America, and this will help us defeat China in the war in textiles; and 
later this week I look forward to the House of Representatives joining 
the Senate in engagement, in jobs, rather than isolationism and turning 
our back on a region so close to us.

                          ____________________