[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 28, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E654-E655]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      INTRODUCTION OF THE SPECIALTY CROP EXPORT OPPORTUNITIES ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. DEVIN NUNES

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, March 27, 2007

  Mr. NUNES. Madam Speaker, I rise today to announce the introduction 
of the U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act. As the 
Representative of our Nation's most diverse, productive, and highly 
valued crop base, this legislation is of great importance to my 
constituents. It is also of great national significance, as the United 
States seeks to increase competitiveness in the global marketplace.
  As many of my colleagues representing rural America know, our farmers 
are faced with enormous challenges. These challenges not only relate to 
the production of wholesome food and fiber, but are also a direct 
result of regulatory burdens, environmental laws, and, increasingly, 
global trade practices. For this reason, problems associated with 
foreign market access can be highly destructive to American farmers.
  I introduced the U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act today 
because I believe Congress needs to take a fresh look at how we fund 
and structure our efforts in support of American agriculture. As we 
examine U.S. farm policies, Congress should support changes that 
increase our Government's emphasis on foreign market access and 
development. In addition, we need to be certain that we have the 
resources in place to meet the heavy demands associated with fighting 
unfair trade practices. Absent such a commitment, our balance of 
agriculture trade will continue to erode and our Nation's farmers will 
suffer.
  Madam Speaker, we owe our farmers and rural communities the benefit 
of aggressive advocacy around the world. Unfortunately, our current 
governmental organization does not lend itself to this kind of 
advocacy. By way of example, there is no statutory responsibility on 
the part of the United States Department of Agriculture, USDA, 
concerning agricultural exports. Furthermore, current resource 
allocation suggests we have strayed from the focus needed to 
effectively promote U.S. agricultural interests around the world. The 
Foreign Agriculture Service employs 11 full-time equivalent analysts 
who are solely responsible for trade compliance monitoring. This is of 
great concern to me, given the number of agreements we have signed and 
the aggressive nature of our global trade agenda. As part of the U.S. 
Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act, we require the USDA to answer 
tough questions about resource allocation and the Agency's ability to 
do the job we all expect.

  Madam Speaker, unfortunately our World Trade Organization, WTO, 
agreements and numerous Free Trade Agreements are not guarantees of 
free and open trade. Each agreement requires a process of 
implementation and compliance monitoring. Absent these follow-up 
actions, our Nation fails to witness the full benefit of our trade 
policy.
  Since my election to Congress, I have received many complaints from 
frustrated exporters of perishable agricultural commodities. They 
believe that large commodities and other sectors of our economy are 
receiving the bulk of our national resources when it comes to trade 
dispute resolution. The U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act 
will help to alleviate this frustration. The bill establishes a 
statutory obligation on the part of USDA for exports. It also requires 
the Secretary to take a number of steps to improve the export process, 
including: coordination of market analysis between the private sector 
and FAS; Agency explanation of sanitary and phytosanitary issues 
associated with each pending export petition; and public availability 
of information concerning the import requirements of foreign countries. 
These changes will increase process transparency and provide American 
farmers information they need to fight trade barriers.
  In addition, the U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act 
establishes an export credit guarantee program for fruits and 
vegetables. These perishable commodities would greatly benefit from the 
cash flow management tool provided by a short-term export credit. The 
USDA operates export credit guarantee programs today, but their design 
is not based on the unique circumstances associated with trade in 
fruits and vegetables. Congress needs to address this shortcoming.
  Madam Speaker, in addition to giving our exporters more information 
and providing them with appropriate cash management tools, we need to 
examine options that will provide additional security against unfair 
trade practices. One possibility is the establishment of a perishable 
commodity export indemnification program. This would allow U.S. 
agriculture exporters to insure against the possibility of unforeseen 
trade barriers. The U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act takes 
the first step in the establishment of such a program.
  When our exporters experience unfair trade barriers, they need to 
know that the U.S. Government will provide the technical and diplomatic 
support necessary to eliminate those barriers. Indeed, for our farmers 
to enjoy the full benefits of any agreement, our Government must be in 
a position to provide agriculture exporters the help they need in a 
timely manner. Perishable commodities cannot wait in ports for an 
eventual resolution to unfair sanitary or phytosanitary barriers. Such 
delays make the risk of trade unacceptable and drive U.S. farmers out 
of the export business.
  Madam Speaker, there is clear evidence that we have already paid a 
significant price for what I believe are poorly coordinated efforts on 
behalf of American agriculture. Specifically, I am dismayed to report 
that we have witnessed a trade surplus in fruits and vegetables turn 
into a significant trade deficit. Over a period of 12 years and 
following the much heralded World Trade Organization (WTO) General 
Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, GATT, we have witnessed a transition 
from $608,442,000 in surplus trade of fruits and vegetables to a 
$2,295,426,000 deficit. In short, our farmers are not seeing the full 
benefits of trade liberalization resulting from the GATT.

[[Page E655]]

  In closing, I think it is important to point out that many of the 
farmers facing challenges with trade are conducting their business 
independent of Government support. Fruit and vegetable farmers are not 
subsidized. They compete on the global market based on quality and 
efficiency. For this reason, our Nation's position in WTO trade 
negotiations should be to eliminate the Peace Clause for Chapters 7 and 
8 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. This will allow the U.S. to 
initiate dispute resolution proceedings in the WTO when trading 
partners use distorting subsidies.
  Madam Speaker, when provided a level playing field, U.S. agricultural 
products are well received by consumers around the world. However, our 
farmers do not have the resources to fight unfair trade barriers alone. 
The U.S. Specialty Crop Export Opportunities Act is vital if we are to 
renew our commitment for free and fair trade on behalf of American 
agriculture.

                          ____________________