[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 146 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6019-S6020]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATE OVERSIGHT REFORM ACT

  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, I actually am here to speak on another 
topic, but I was glad to hear the comments of the Senator from 
Illinois. I will say in general that I think consumers across our 
country are beginning to see the first of many consequences of Dodd-
Frank. Sometimes I think my friends on the other side of the aisle 
believe money comes from air. But the fact is when you price fix 
something such as the Senate did through Dodd-Frank, when you price fix 
something like this, obviously it is going to have the consequences 
that have been laid out and, unfortunately, consumers across our 
country are going to be paying the price. It is interesting that most 
of the major retailers my friend was alluding to are all talking about 
the profits, the benefits they are going to have from this. At the end 
of the day it is the consumers who are going to be paying the price, 
and we are already seeing that play out. While Bank of America--I am 
not here to defend them. This is just the first of many charges and 
lack of credit that is going to be part of our American society as a 
result of Dodd-Frank.
  But let me say, I came down today to talk about a bill we are getting 
ready to debate I understand this afternoon at 5:30. It is the Currency 
Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Act of 2011. I probably won't recite 
that again, but that is the bill we are going to be having a cloture 
vote on tonight at 5:30.
  I understand how people across this country are very frustrated about 
our

[[Page S6020]]

economic situation. I am very frustrated. I am frustrated for the 
people of Tennessee and the fact that our economy is not showing the 
kind of growth we would all wish to see. I understand how politicians 
like to respond to things back home by making it look as if they are 
doing something to benefit the folks back home during this tough 
economy. I plan to speak at length on this throughout the week that 
this bill is being debated.
  The bill that is going to be on the floor tonight is not the answer. 
I think most of you know that tonight we are going to begin debating a 
bill that would call China, in essence, a currency manipulator. And, by 
the way, they are a currency manipulator and I will agree to that. But 
the response that this bill wants to put in place is to put tariffs on 
Chinese imports, and what I believe will happen is it will begin a 
trade war.
  What I wish to say is this is the U.S. Senate. I understand that 
sometimes a hot bill will make it out of the House for lots of reasons, 
due to its makeup. I understand that a lot of times a bill such as this 
comes forth for messaging. What I would say is we are actually playing 
with fire here. This is something that is originating in the Senate. It 
is a place where typically things are to cool and we are to think 
through things.
  I am hopeful we will have a vigorous debate on this, and many 
amendments, because my concern is that at a time in our country when we 
have had a financial crisis which has led to the type of economy we 
have here where we wish to see many people in our country have greater 
and more full employment, at a time when we come off high energy prices 
a few years ago that sucked a lot of life out of this economy, at a 
time when the global economy is slowing much due to the financial 
crisis that is occurring right now in Europe, I think the response we 
want to put forth is not to create a trade war with China.
  I think most of us know China has been a currency manipulator. They 
have a managed float for their currency. We wish to see that rise much 
more quickly than it has. It has risen about 30 percent in the last 
several years.
  So the point is they are making changes. China has an antiquated 
financial system that has to be changed; it has to be liberated; it has 
to become more like what we have in this country. And those steps are 
happening. There is no doubt that importers--there is no doubt that the 
goods that come here from China come here at a lesser price than they 
otherwise would because of the currency float they put in place in 
China. I understand that. But that is changing. And the fact is that 
with a country of 1.3 billion and as their standard of living continues 
to grow, we have an opportunity to have even more trade with this 
country. Our exports to China have grown sixfold over the most recent 
time.
  So here we have an opportunity in this Chamber very soon to take up 
the three free-trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia, 
trade agreements we have wanted to have in place for a long time. Here 
we are, the Senate, a body that is supposed to act with cooler heads. 
And I understand the pressures back home. I have them too. Our State 
has tremendously high unemployment, much higher unemployment than I 
wish to see happen. I know when I go to townhall meetings, people talk 
about China, and I understand that. But I think people may be 
misreading what is in this bill. I think a lot of people think this 
bill is sort of a plaything because it actually gives the President a 
chance to waive tariffs on goods that happen to come here cheaper 
because of currency manipulation. But that is not the case. That is not 
what this bill says. A lot of people have misunderstood what this bill 
says. They think it is sort of a plaything and the President can make 
it all right. The President, if you will, can be the adult and not 
create a trade war. But that is not what the bill says. The bill says 
this country has to put in place tariffs on goods coming into this 
country, as long as they are not being dumped into this country. If 
they come in at a competitive advantage, we have to put in place 
tariffs.
  Is this what the Senate wants to do today? We have had a tremendous 
financial crisis. We have high unemployment in this country. We are 
tremendously overregulated. We are not doing the things within our own 
country we should be doing, that many of us have been arguing, to cause 
our economy to grow. We have a financial crisis that is taking hold and 
taking root and actually moving in parts to this country and hurting 
us. The markets are down.
  So the Senate, a body of 100 people who are elected for 6-year terms, 
wants to put in place tariffs on a major growing country that we have 
growing exports to, and create a trade war--a trade war between the two 
largest economies in the world? That is our response, instead of 
understanding the best thing we can do for this country right now is to 
deal with those long-term solutions in our own country and ask this 
deficit reduction committee to go big, to get $3 trillion, to do tax 
reform, to do entitlement reform. These are the kinds of things we 
ought to be doing in this country: passing a 6-year highway bill; 
producing American energy; reducing regulations that are impeding our 
economy and not helping the country. Those are the kinds of things we 
ought to do. That is the response from the Senate, from people with 6-
year terms who were elected to be the cooling of legislation, not to 
originate bills out of this body that we know, if passed, will likely 
create a trade war.

  It is as though this country has lost its ability to see the fact 
that we are an exceptional country. It is as though we are cowering 
down now. It is as though we know what to do but we won't do it, and, 
instead, now we have got to find a bogeyman.
  Do I like what China is doing with their currency? No. But is it 
changing? Yes. Is our country putting pressure on China to change? Yes. 
Is it occurring? Yes. It is going to have to. The middle class in China 
is going to want access to the kinds of goods our country produces. It 
is naturally happening. So why would we as a country tamper at this 
time of a global slowdown with creating a trade war?
  I understand and I know many of the Senators in this room hear the 
same things back home I hear back home. But the last thing we need to 
do at this point in world history, at this point with the global 
economy as it is today, is repeat the same mistakes that happened back 
in the 1930s with Smoot-Hawley. That is exactly the path we are going 
down. It is as if we don't learn from history. I urge all Senators to 
think about this.
  I understand we are probably going to move to this bill tonight. I do 
hope we have a vigorous debate. I hope we change this bill 
dramatically, if not kill it. But I think Senators need to understand, 
in my opinion, we are playing with fire. This is not the right thing 
for us to do. We need to be focusing on how we make this great Nation, 
the greatest Nation of all times, grow. We can do that by dealing with 
our own issues here internally. We know how to do it, and we can do 
this by courageously dealing with the long-term issues that confront 
this country. That will be the short-term stimulus this economy needs.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the 
quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask we move from morning business to 
the pending legislation.

                          ____________________