[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 47 (Wednesday, March 18, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3331-S3335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                         Ending Stealth Bonuses

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I come to the floor to discuss taxpayer-
funded bonuses. These bonuses are paid every year, often without any 
public discussion or a recorded vote by those with the authority to 
approve or stop them. The people giving themselves these bonuses have 
made sure they get them regardless of their performance.
  I am referring to the annual bonuses given to Members of Congress.
  There is some good news to report on this issue today. Thanks to the 
leadership of majority leader Harry Reid, we took an important step 
yesterday. Senator Reid moved legislation through the Senate that will 
end these annual stealth bonuses. I have introduced legislation similar 
to Senator Reid's bill for the past six Congresses, and I am delighted, 
because of Senator Reid's leadership, this proposal has finally passed 
the Senate.
  Congress has the power to raise its own pay. While some corporate 
executives apparently have this power as well, it is something most of 
our constituents cannot do. Because this is such a singular power, I 
think Congress ought to exercise it openly and subject to regular 
procedures, including debate, amendment, and, of course, a vote on the 
record.
  But current law allows Congress to avoid that public debate and vote. 
All that is necessary for Congress to get a pay raise is that they do 
nothing, that nothing be done to stop it. The annual bonus takes effect 
unless Congress acts.
  As I noted in a statement yesterday, that stealth bonus mechanism 
began with a change Congress enacted in the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. 
In section 704 of that act, Members of Congress voted to make 
themselves entitled--entitled--to an annual raise equal to half a 
percentage point less than the employment cost index, which is one 
measure of inflation.
  On occasion, Congress has actually voted to deny itself a bonus, and 
the traditional vehicle for the pay raise vote is the Treasury 
appropriations bill. But that vehicle is not always made available to 
those who want a public debate and vote on the matter. As I have noted 
in the past, getting a vote on the annual congressional pay raise is a 
haphazard affair, at best, and it should not be that way. The burden 
should not be on those who seek a public debate and a recorded vote on 
the Member pay raise. On the contrary,

[[Page S3332]]

Congress should have to act if it decides to award itself a hike in 
pay. This process of congressional bonuses without accountability must 
end.
  I joined with the junior Senator from Louisiana in offering an 
amendment to the Omnibus appropriations bill recently. That amendment 
received strong support--support which was all the more remarkable 
because many of the amendment's potential supporters felt constrained 
to oppose it in order to keep the underlying legislation free of 
amendments. Now, thanks to our majority leader, we have a real chance 
to end this system in fact.
  This issue is not a new question. It was something our Founders 
considered from the beginning of our Nation. In August of 1789, as part 
of the package of 12 amendments advocated by James Madison that 
included what has become our Bill of Rights, the House of 
Representatives passed an amendment to the Constitution providing that 
Congress could not raise its pay without an intervening election. On 
September 9, 1789, the Senate passed that amendment. In late September 
of 1789, Congress submitted the amendments to the States.
  Although the amendment on pay raises languished for two centuries, in 
the 1980s, a campaign began to ratify it. While I was a member of the 
Wisconsin State Senate, I was pleased to help add Wisconsin to the 
States ratifying the amendment. Then its approval by the Michigan 
legislature on May 7, 1992, gave it the needed approval by three-
fourths of the States.
  So the 27th amendment to the Constitution now states:

       No law, varying the compensation for the services of the 
     senators and representatives, shall take effect, until an 
     election of representatives shall have intervened.

  I honor that limitation. Throughout my 6-year term, I accept only the 
rate of pay Senators receive on the date on which I was sworn in as a 
Senator. I return to the Treasury any cost-of-living adjustments or 
bonuses during my term. I do not take a raise until my bosses, the 
people of Wisconsin, give me one at the ballot box. That is the spirit 
of the 27th amendment, and, at the very least, the stealth pay raises 
permitted under the current system certainly violate that spirit.
  This practice must end. I am so delighted to express my thanks to 
Majority Leader Reid. Because of him, we have a real chance of ending 
it.
  Today I am sending a letter to Speaker Pelosi asking that the other 
body take up and pass the Reid legislation to end the automatic 
congressional bonuses. Doing so would assure the American people that 
we are not only serious about going after the abusive bonuses paid to 
the executives of firms bailed out with taxpayer dollars, but we are 
also serious about ending a system that was devised to provide Members 
of Congress with bonuses without any accountability.
  Mr. President, I yield back whatever time I have remaining.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I might ask, what is the pending business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Kirk nomination is before the Senate.
  Mr. BAUCUS. I thank the Chair.
  I would like to speak on the Kirk nomination.
  Mr. President, Ralph Waldo Emerson said:

       [T]he most advanced nations are always those who navigate 
     the most.

  Today, the Senate considers the nomination of Mayor Ron Kirk to be 
U.S. Trade Representative. As we consider the nomination, America is 
navigating a shifting economic landscape. And so are our trading 
partners.
  As financial systems weaken, protectionist sentiments strengthen. As 
markets crumble, import barriers rise. And as jobs disappear, trade 
violations emerge.
  Ron Kirk has been asked to navigate U.S. trade policy through these 
difficult waters. To ensure that America keeps moving forward, he must 
navigate the right course.
  Many feel our trade policy has veered off course. They argue the 
Government has not safeguarded our workers. They argue the Government 
has not enforced our trade agreements. They argue the Government has 
not dismantled barriers to our exports.
  I believe Mayor Kirk will chart the right course. He understands he 
must steady the tilting ship of public opinion. He will do so by 
rebuilding America's faith in the benefits of international trade. He 
will remain constantly on the lookout for America's workers. He will 
shine a spotlight on trade violations. He will vigilantly enforce our 
international agreements. He will speed our economic recovery by 
opening markets for American exports.
  Let us chart the right course on international trade. Let us rebuild 
America's faith in our trade policy. Let us confirm Ron Kirk to be the 
U.S. Trade Representative.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the nomination before the Senate is 
critically important in this time of economic upheaval.
  We need a U.S. Trade Representative to assert our rights, defend our 
interests, and negotiate new market opportunities for our exporters.
  Trade can and should play an important role in our economic recovery. 
President Obama recently acknowledged this in his trade policy agenda.
  If Mayor Kirk is confirmed today, I look forward to working with him 
to advance a progrowth trade agenda for the benefit of U.S. consumers 
and producers.
  We have a lot of work to do, some of which is left over from the last 
Congress. By that I am referring to our three pending trade agreements 
with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea.
  We also need to find a way to reinvigorate the Doha Development Round 
negotiations in the World Trade Organization.
  I appreciate Mayor Kirk's engagement and enthusiasm to assume the 
responsibilities of the U.S. Trade Representative.
  Based on his responses to my questions during the vetting process in 
the Finance Committee, there appear to be some policy areas in which 
our views converge.
  There are some other areas in which I continue to have concerns, 
particularly where his responses provided insufficient detail to 
determine whether we can have a convergence of views.
  But that said, if Mayor Kirk is confirmed, I believe that we will 
able to work together on a positive trade agenda.
  During the committee vetting process, several issues arose with 
respect to the nominee's tax returns.
  I am grateful for Mayor Kirk's cooperation with me, Chairman Baucus, 
and the Finance Committee staff.
  In the true spirit of transparency and cooperation, he responded to 
all questions about his taxes directly and honestly.
  He also agreed in communications with the staff to release 
information about his tax issues, and that information was put into the 
record of the committee proceedings.
  I believe that all nominees should be held to the same standard when 
it comes to compliance with the tax laws.
  Mayor Kirk was required to amend his returns and pay additional tax 
as a result of the vetting process.
  Each of the issues for which he amended his returns was considered by 
him and his preparer at the time the returns were prepared. However, 
upon further review of some of the calculations, he agreed that some of 
them needed to be changed. Those issues are now resolved.
  In closing, Mayor Kirk is a strong nominee for the position of U.S. 
Trade Representative.
  He brings enthusiasm and energy to the table, as well as first-hand 
experience and understanding of the benefits of liberalized trade.
  I urge my colleagues to support his nomination.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about Ron Kirk, 
the nominee for whom we will vote in the next few minutes for U.S. 
Trade Representative. I wish to speak in strong support of Ron Kirk to 
serve as U.S. Trade Representative. I would have been here sooner, but 
as ranking member of the Committee on Commerce, I was holding a hearing 
with the chairman, Jay Rockefeller, on Governor Locke to be Secretary 
of Commerce, and that was my responsibility that I certainly had to 
meet.

[[Page S3333]]

  I will say that Governor Locke did a very good job before our 
Commerce Committee. We just, within the last hour, concluded that 
hearing. But I wanted to make sure that I am able to speak about Ron 
Kirk because, certainly, I know him. I have known him for many years. 
We both live in Dallas, and he and I enjoy a great relationship. I was 
in the Senate when Ron Kirk was the mayor of Dallas, and he did a 
wonderful job as mayor of our city. I worked with him as a Senator. I 
know he can get things done. He is very bright, very affable, really 
funny. He is the kind of person you want to sit next to in a very dull 
speech because he can make you laugh no matter how bad the summit or 
the speech or whatever the business of the day. He is a very rare, 
wonderful person.
  During his time in office, Mayor Kirk expanded Dallas's reach to the 
world through a range of trade missions, trying to show that Dallas was 
open for business, and he traveled on trade missions to assure that 
would happen. While he was mayor he sponsored a competition every year 
for small businesses to highlight those competing in foreign markets 
and invited the winner to go on his trade mission trips. I think it is 
important as a former small business owner myself that we show how you 
can export to foreign countries, no matter how small your business is, 
if you just know how to pursue it. Mayor Kirk tried to ensure that 
small businesses in Dallas, as well as our big businesses, were able to 
have a place at the table when he was on trade missions, showing what 
could be done with trade.
  Before becoming mayor of Dallas, Ron Kirk was secretary of state of 
Texas. He was an appointee of Gov. Ann Richards. He attended Austin 
College, graduating with a degree in political science and sociology in 
1976 and then went to the University of Texas Law School, which is also 
my alma mater. Upon receiving his J.D. in 1979, he practiced law until 
1981 when he went to work in the office of then Texas Senator Lloyd 
Bentsen who was my immediate predecessor in this Senate seat.
  On a personal note, Ron is married to Matrice Ellis Kirk. She, in her 
own right, is a professional woman, a leader in Dallas, another very 
bright, affable person who has made her own impression in Dallas as 
well. They have two daughters, Elizabeth Alexandria and Catherine 
Victoria.
  I know that Mayor Kirk's leadership and experience will make him a 
strong ambassador for U.S. trade policy. Last week in his testimony 
before the Senate Finance Committee, Mayor Kirk pledged that as U.S. 
Trade Representative, ``I will work to increase opportunities for 
American entrepreneurs in the global marketplace.''
  These economic opportunities are critical to America's prosperity. In 
2007, exports accounted for 40 percent of our economic growth.
  The next U.S. Trade Representative will face a series of challenges, 
including revitalizing the stalled WTO talks and managing the Doha 
Round, which is preoccupied with topics such as export subsidies, 
tariffs, copyright issues, and keeping markets open to U.S. goods. 
Equally important, the next U.S. Trade Representative will face the 
worst economic downturn in decades in America and in the world.
  As we face economic hardships, trade presents a tremendous 
opportunity to sustain and create jobs, expand economies, and stimulate 
growth. We must resist the temptation to close our borders and engage 
in protectionism, which always ends up harming our economy.
  History is not kind to those who raise trade barriers during a 
recession. In 1930, President Hoover made the mistake of signing the 
Smoot-Hawley tariff, which dramatically increased the cost of imports 
and turned a serious recession into the Great Depression. We can't 
allow that to happen again. My heavens, if we know anything, it is that 
we should learn from history. The past is prologue.
  I believe trade policy can play a leading role in getting the U.S. 
economy and the global economy back on track.
  Currently, the United States has free-trade agreements in effect with 
14 countries: Canada, Mexico, Israel, Jordan, Chile, Singapore, 
Australia, Morocco, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, 
Honduras, Nicaragua, and Bahrain. However, we still have free-trade 
agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea that await 
congressional approval.
  The next U.S. Trade Representative must work with Congress to 
implement those trade agreements and ensure that American exports enter 
the global market on a level playing field. I am pleased that in his 
testimony before the Senate Finance Committee, Mayor Kirk committed to 
work with Congress to develop ``benchmarks'' that will allow these 
accords to move forward.
  The Colombian Free Trade Agreement in particular will be tremendously 
beneficial to the United States, both economically and diplomatically. 
This accord would remove tariffs on the $8.6 billion of U.S. 
agricultural exports to Colombia every year.
  While America's economic growth is a primary objective of free-trade 
agreements, they also serve the broader purpose of bolstering our 
foreign policy.
  At a time when Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez is trying to undermine 
U.S. security interests in Latin America, we must seek trade 
partnerships with allies such as Colombia.
  As the Washington Post said in an editorial: ``A vote for the 
Colombia deal would show Latin America that a staunch U.S. ally will be 
rewarded for improving its human rights record and resisting the anti-
American populism of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.''
  By helping Colombia and other countries thrive under the free market, 
we will help them become less vulnerable to Chavez's petrodollars.
  I am hopeful that Mayor Kirk will take the necessary steps to ensure 
that the Colombian Free Trade Agreement is approved.
  Let me say that I think probably the first issue the U.S. Trade 
Representative will have to focus on and solve is with Mexico. This 
week Mexico threw up tariffs on 90 products that are imported to Mexico 
from the United States. Most of these are agricultural products. It 
will hurt our agriculture businesses if we have a trade war with 
Mexico; if we have tariffs that increase the price of American goods 
into Mexico. We all know this must be solved.
  I will say that the person who understands this best is Ron Kirk. Ron 
Kirk, obviously, lives in Texas. He knows how important free trade is 
with Mexico. Mexico is Texas's largest trading partner. We export to 
Mexico, and he has been there. So he understands that this is a high 
priority for all of our States exporting into Mexico and that we must 
solve the trucking issue so that Mexico understands that there will be 
parity across the border and that Mexican trucks, like American trucks, 
will have the same safety standards and that they will have an ability 
to be inspected. He can solve this if we will confirm him today and let 
him start on this very important problem.
  Throughout his career, Mayor Kirk has shown the character and 
leadership skills to bring people together on behalf of a good cause. 
For that reason, I am very confident he will make a great U.S. Trade 
Representative. He will seek exports of American goods all over the 
world. He will seek free and fair trade. That is very important--we 
don't want other countries to throw up barriers to our entry into their 
country--and he will do the right thing. I know he is a good 
negotiator. I know he will be a good representative of the United 
States in this very important position.
  I urge my colleagues to support his nomination. I am pleased we are 
voting on him soon so that he can hit the ground running on the Doha 
Round and the many issues that are facing our country in this time of 
economic stress--when the last thing we should be doing is throwing up 
barriers to trade and exports from our country into other countries, 
where good trade makes good neighbors and partners.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I support the nomination of Ron Kirk to 
be our trade representative, despite my concerns with his position on 
trade policy. The tax matters that came to light during Mr. Kirk's 
vetting are not disqualifying, and because I am inclined to defer to 
any President on the choice of his closest advisers, I decided to 
support this nomination.
  Having said that, I very much hope the President and his new trade 
representative will carefully review our current trade policies, and 
the impact

[[Page S3334]]

they have had on the lives of millions of Americans. The trade policies 
handed over to this administration are as fundamentally flawed and 
damaging to our economy as the fiscal disaster and financial market 
crisis they inherited.
  The trade policies of the last two decades, under both Republican and 
Democratic administrations, and supported by both Republican and 
Democratic controlled Congresses, have undermined environmental 
protections, food safety and public health protections, subverted our 
democratic institutions, and helped ship millions of family-supporting 
decent paying jobs overseas. They have greatly disadvantaged thousands 
of small businesses in my home State of Wisconsin, exposed consumers to 
health risks, and decimated communities. They have accelerated the very 
worst aspects of globalization, and have not done nearly enough to 
advance its potential benefits.
  Mr. President, I wish Mr. Kirk all the best in his new position, and 
hope he and the President will take a fresh look at our trade policy. 
As I noted earlier, the mess they have inherited is as big a problem as 
any presented to the new administration, and it deserves our full 
attention.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate Mayor Ron 
Kirk on his nomination to serve as President Obama's U.S. trade 
representative. I am proud to support the confirmation of my fellow 
Texan.
  Following World War II, the United States recognized a need to engage 
foreign nations and harmonize global economic trade. President Kennedy 
recognized the value in placing a single chief U.S. trade negotiator in 
charge of these responsibilities. Later, President Ford elevated this 
important position to Cabinet rank. Since then, Congress has worked 
with many administrations to strengthen the ability of the U.S. trade 
representative to enforce existing trade agreements and open new 
markets for American workers, farmers, and consumers.
  Mayor Kirk would lead the office of U.S. trade representative during 
the most challenging global financial crisis in history. The World Bank 
predicts that the global economy will shrink this year for the first 
time in more than six decades. People in many nations are suffering, 
and calls for new trade barriers grow louder. However, the U.S. trade 
representative must speak clearly and calmly against protectionism. He 
must show how open markets can renew global prosperity and lift 
millions in the developing world out of poverty.
  I believe President Obama chose the right man for this job. As mayor 
of Dallas, Ron Kirk saw how open markets create new opportunities for 
our people. His trade missions to other nations encouraged new export 
growth. He engaged and recruited foreign investors thereby attracting 
new jobs into the city. And he recognized that the North American Free 
Trade Agreement would bring additional export-related jobs to the 
region. While many roundly criticized that accord, Mayor Kirk put it to 
work for the residents of Dallas. His leadership in the late 1990s 
helped reenergize the local economy. By 2007, the Dallas-Fort Worth 
area was exporting more than $22 billion of goods and services to 
foreign markets.
  Mayor Kirk's confirmation will fill an important void in President 
Obama's Cabinet. Mayor Kirk has demonstrated that he will warn against 
protectionism. This voice is needed in the Cabinet.
  Congress recently voted to suspend the cross-border transportation 
pilot program occurring at the southern border of my State of Texas. 
This shortsighted cancellation was met immediately with news that the 
government of Mexico will retaliate by levying new tariffs on U.S. made 
products.
  This unfortunate situation was avoidable had my colleagues heeded 
warnings of the retaliation that this policy change would incur upon 
our economy. These tariffs amount to a $2.4 billion tax increase on 
American made products, and one economist estimates a loss of 
approximately 40,000 jobs.
  At a time when Congress should be working to expand markets for our 
goods and create jobs in the United States, Congress is instead 
provoking the ire of the customers who buy American products and 
services. Our workers and our consumers deserve a trade ambassador that 
will ensure economic policy is rooted in the best interest of the 
economy rather than political payback.
  The President has three economic remedies available immediately. The 
pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and Korea will create 
jobs in the United States. Consumers in these countries have a 
voracious appetite for American goods and services. My State of Texas 
is the top exporter to both Colombia and Panama and the second leading 
exporter to Korea. These destinations represented a $9.5 billion market 
for Texas-made goods and services in 2008.
  The hard work is over; these agreements have been negotiated and 
signed. I urge the administration to work with Congress and pass these 
beneficial accords.
  Mayor Kirk is not the first choice of those who fail to recognize the 
benefits of free trade, but he's the first choice of the President--and 
a good choice for American exporters and consumers. The continuing 
global financial crisis demands a strong leader at USTR--and Mayor Kirk 
will fill this role well.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I will vote today to confirm Ronald Kirk to 
be U.S. Trade Representative. Although I have had serious concerns 
about our trade policies in the past, I am hopeful this administration 
will deal differently with trade.
  I am reassured by some of the things that Mr. Kirk said at his 
confirmation hearing. For instance, Mr. Kirk said he will put an 
emphasis on workers and the environment, something that his 
predecessors failed to do. He also has acknowledged that the pending 
U.S.-South Korea trade deal negotiated by the Bush administration ``. . 
. just simply isn't fair.'' This acknowledgement is important because 
the U.S.-South Korea trade agreement as currently written is harmful to 
the U.S. auto industry and its workers and should not be pursued in its 
present form.
  When it comes to automotive trade between the United States and 
Korea, the numbers speak for themselves. While Americans buy more than 
770,000 Korean vehicles each year, fewer than 6,300 American autos are 
sold in Korea. Despite two bilateral memoranda of understanding in 1995 
and 1998, Korea continues to use ever-changing standards to restrict 
auto imports. There is nothing in the pending agreement that guarantees 
Korea will open its market to U.S. automobiles even though it commits 
the U.S. to further opening its already open market to Korean vehicles. 
We should open our auto market further only after U.S. autos have 
gained measurable access to the Korean market but that is not how the 
agreement is currently written.
  At his confirmation hearing Mr. Kirk agreed the U.S.-South Korea free 
trade agreement wasn't fair and said, ``if we don't get that right 
we'll be prepared to step away from that.'' He also said, ``I do not 
come to this job with `deal fever.' We will not do trade deals just for 
the sake of doing deals.''
  I am pleased to hear these remarks because frankly some of the trade 
agreements the U.S. has entered into have not been in the best 
interests of the United States. The North American Free Trade 
Agreement, NAFTA, is a good example. NAFTA contained a number of unfair 
provisions that are discriminatory to Michigan workers and companies. 
For example, it restricted U.S.-made auto parts from entering Mexico 
for a decade and American used car exports for 25 years. Furthermore, 
the U.S. maintained small but stable trade deficits with Canada and 
Mexico in the 1980s and early 1990s. After NAFTA took effect in 1994, 
the U.S. developed large and rapidly growing deficits with Canada and 
Mexico. Since jobs are created by exports but displaced by imports, job 
losses occurred. The Economic Policy Institute found that total U.S. 
job displacement from NAFTA over 12 years was 1 million jobs.
  Our trade policy should focus on opening markets in nations such as 
China, Japan, the European Union, and South Korea, where the most 
egregious trade barriers block the sale of U.S. goods and services and 
where we have the potential to export a larger quantity of goods and 
services. Mr. Kirk has promised to pry open foreign markets and enforce 
existing trade rules. I support his confirmation in the hope that he 
will.

[[Page S3335]]

  I have not been satisfied with America's trade policy over the past 
30 years. I believe in free trade, but I believe that with free trade 
we must have fair trade. The U.S. market is the most open in the world, 
but our policy has failed to insist that foreign markets be equally 
open to American products. We sorely need a new and just approach to 
trade.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Casey). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask 
unanimous consent that the time be charged equally against both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be 
rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Thank you, Mr. President. I understand that we are on 
the Kirk nomination; however, I ask unanimous consent to speak on the 
lands bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.