[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 65 (Thursday, April 30, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H5044-H5045]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE IMPORTANCE OF FAIR TRADE POLICY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. TONKO. Madam Speaker, these undoubtedly are tough economic times, 
not only for our country but for many across the world. So as we 
recognize that we co-exist in this global community, it is important 
for us to go forward thoughtfully and fairly with a sense of justice as 
we approach the issues of trade, making certain that there be this 
balance, that there be this fairness in the trade options that are 
available to this Nation and others, and that we move forward in a way 
that most progressively responds to the needs of this global community 
in which we share our opportunities.
  I grew up in and now represent New York's 21st Congressional 
District,

[[Page H5045]]

which was once home to dozens of thriving mill towns. Now if you drive 
across that district, my district, from Troy to Cohoes, to Schenectady, 
to Amsterdam, to Gloversville, you can see the glaring hole that the 
loss of industry has created. This is a story that resonates all too 
frequently throughout the United States, from New England to the 
Midwest, and now even into the South.
  My hometown of Amsterdam, New York, was once home to thriving carpet 
mills that employed thousands of workers. Decades ago General Electric 
employed more than 40,000 workers in Schenectady, and American 
Locomotive employed 12,000-plus. But for a few thousand GE employees, 
manufacturing in Schenectady has disappeared. The glove-making industry 
once employed 80 percent of the residents of Gloversville, New York, 
and that industry has also almost completely disappeared.
  The decline of manufacturing in Upstate New York occurred before the 
free trade agreements that were negotiated in the 1990s. But since 
those agreements have been signed, the decline of manufacturing has 
accelerated dramatically.
  Trade policy, when done right, can benefit countries around the 
world. My objection, Madam Speaker, is that our current trade 
agreements place a disproportionate burden on American workers and 
leave our United States at a significant competitive disadvantage 
compared to the rest of the world. By negotiating trade agreements that 
do not have adequate labor standards or environmental provisions, we 
simply export pollution and poor working standards to other nations. It 
is indeed hard for a glove-manufacturing company based in my 
congressional district to compete with another manufacturer located in 
one of the so-called ``free trade zones'' in Central America, for 
instance, where employees make cents on the dollar, are offered no 
benefits, and work in factories that do not have those safety 
provisions so guaranteed for our American workers.
  By inserting basic labor standards into our trade agreements that 
address worker pay, worker safety, worker benefits, and the length of 
that workday, American workers will be more competitive. In addition, 
by strengthening labor provisions in our trade agreements, we can help 
guarantee that better standard of living for workers in the countries 
with which we are trading.
  Environmental standards are often another significant area that have 
not been sufficiently addressed by NAFTA, and this oversight is 
continuing under these NAFTA-like trade agreements coming before us. In 
the 1970s we collectively agreed that preserving the environment is 
essential, is necessary to our health and our way of life. The 
legislation that came out of that period helped to preserve our air and 
our water by limiting the pollutants that companies could emit into the 
environment, our environment. By agreeing to free trade agreements that 
do not include similar provisions to protect the environment, we not 
only make American manufacturers less competitive, but we export our 
pollution to developing countries.
  Again, the solution to this problem is simple: by including 
environmental provisions into our trade agreements, we can even the 
playing field for American workers and reduce the environmental impact 
of manufacturing in other countries.
  I honestly believe that trade can help the American economy. It can 
help our manufacturers and can help our workers. However, this trade 
has got to be done right. We cannot keep agreeing to those lopsided 
trade agreements that leave American workers without jobs because 
American companies cannot compete with firms located overseas that can 
pay their workers sweatshop wages and operate in ways that devastate 
our shared, our shared, environment.
  When this body is asked to consider the past administration's NAFTA-
style trade agreements in the coming months, I will be forced to add my 
voice to the millions of American workers who have had enough: enough 
of exporting American jobs overseas, enough of competing with workers 
that pay cents on the dollar. And the American people have had enough 
of free trade and demand a trade model, a fair trade model, that will 
help our economy recover.

                          ____________________