[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 165 (Tuesday, November 1, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6997-S6999]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I wish to speak about the
recent trade votes that the U.S. Senate had over the last several
weeks. I believe that bilateral trade agreements should
[[Page S6998]]
be based on the premise that by growing economic ties with foreign
trading partners our nation levels the playing field on which our
companies and workers compete. Trade agreements should also be a means
to growing a relationship with established allies that share our
commitment to democratic values in an effort to work toward achieving
common goals. Over the past several weeks, the U.S. Congress has
weighed in on several pieces of legislation that--on balance--keep
faith with these goals.
Before I speak to each of the free trade agreements, I would like to
reflect on the currency exchange rate oversight reform bill that the
U.S. Senate considered just before the pending free trade agreements.
It is important to note that playing by the rules is an important
element of fair and free trade, and it is a theme I will address
several times today in my remarks. The concerns of many Coloradans who
both supported and opposed this currency legislation were fundamentally
based on fairness. Both sides understand that intentionally undervalued
foreign currencies hurt the competitiveness of American exports. I
supported currency reform legislation because any country that is
intentionally undercutting American companies and workers through the
manipulation of its currency, especially if it had agreed to play by
specific rules, must be held accountable. That is common sense--and a
matter of fairness. This legislation will allow the United States to
clearly identify fundamentally misaligned currencies and initiate
purposeful efforts to work bilaterally and multilaterally to seek
corrective action. We must work in the interest of American
manufacturers--and American workers--that rely on a level playing field
to succeed, while also engaging our trade partners to work
collaboratively to resolve these important concerns. I believe that
this currency-related legislation, which passed the U.S. Senate in a
bipartisan manner, will send the appropriate signal that we expect our
trade partners to live up to our shared commitment to compete fairly in
the global marketplace.
More recently, the U.S. Congress considered free trade agreements
with Korea, Panama, and Colombia. We enjoy good diplomatic
relationships with each of these countries and the United States has a
particular interest in maintaining strong diplomatic and economic ties
to these countries given our shared values on the international stage.
More importantly, the Obama administration, in consultation with
Congress, has been able to incorporate pragmatic and responsible ways
to address the outstanding concerns raised with each agreement. While
these free trade agreements are not perfect, I supported the passage of
all three after studying each one carefully, and hearing from a wide
range of Coloradans.
Regarding the Korea free trade agreement, the new concessions that
protect America's auto industry in addition to reductions in tariffs
for U.S. products and strong protections for intellectual property and
labor rights solidified my support for the agreement.
Over the last several months the Obama administration worked with the
Korean government to gain concessions that will help American
manufacturers compete in the Korean market, Asia's fourth largest
economy. For example, the Koreans have committed to immediately reduce
their eigh percent tariff on U.S.-built passenger cars, including
electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids, to four percent and immediately
reduce their ten percent tariff on trucks to zero. After 5 years,
tariffs on U.S.-made motor vehicles, including electric cars and plug-
in hybrids, will be reduced to zero. In addition, we have strengthened
safeguards that will prevent any large influx of Korean cars into the
U.S. market to protect against unintended effects of the removal of
trade barriers. These new concessions won the support of both the U.S.
auto industry and the United Auto Workers.
With regard to agricultural products, Colorado producers will benefit
from increased market access in Korea through the reduction of existing
tariffs on wheat and corn. Existing 40 percent tariffs on certain beef
products will be phased out over 15 years and the United States will
engage continuously with Korea to plan the removal of other tariff
barriers. When I hosted the Korean Ambassador, Han Duk Soo, in Colorado
in April of this year, I made it clear that Colorado agricultural
producers expect a reasoned approach to removing restrictions and other
trade barriers that are in conflict with international sanitary
standards and sound science. I am very hopeful that this agreement will
help Colorado producers build a relationship of trust with Korean
consumers so that they come to understand the high quality of Colorado
beef and the well-justified pride that our State feels about its beef.
Autos and agricultural products are just a few areas where American
producers will gain better access to the Korean market. Overall, the
U.S. International Trade Commission estimated that tariff cuts alone to
a variety of U.S. goods could amount to an increase of $10 billion to
$11 billion of U.S. goods exports alone. This will help produce a much-
needed boost to the U.S. economy. This agreement also includes
provisions related to labor and the environment that are the strongest
standards to enforce domestic environmental and labor laws included in
any trade agreement. It also includes robust protections for
intellectual property rights that will set a new benchmark to protect
American-made ideas.
In addition to supporting opportunities for American exports, the
agreement will enhance America's relationship with a strong partner
that is committed to democratic values on the Korean Peninsula. More
than 60 years after the Korean war, this trade agreement will serve to
further strengthen bilateral ties in a region of growing strategic
value to the United States. As a member of the U.S. Senate Armed
Services and Intelligence Committees, this was another important factor
in my support of the Korea free trade agreement.
Similarly, the Panama free trade agreement, like its Korean
counterpart, is aimed to help grow the U.S. economy. In the Panama
agreement, we have also included enforceable mechanisms to protect the
environment and the rights of Panamanian workers. To address financial
and tax concerns and further support labor protections, the United
States worked bilaterally with Panama to institute robust legal reforms
that protect against the country being used as a tax haven while
further enhancing labor protections in Panama. The United States and
Panama have worked collaboratively to strengthen tax transparency in
support of curbing illicit financial transactions associated with money
laundering activities. Notably, due to its positive actions, Panama was
removed from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
``Gray List'' of countries that have agreed to, but not yet adopted an
international tax transparency standard.
These improvements to the Panama free trade agreement will be
incorporated along with reductions in tariff barriers that will improve
access to the Panamanian market for U.S. goods and services. Again,
this should give a boost to American business at a time when our
government should be doing everything it can to help grow our economy.
Currently, U.S. industrial goods face an average tariff of seven
percent in Panama and U.S. agricultural goods face an average tariff of
15 percent, while most of Panama's products enter the United States
duty-free. After implementation of this agreement, more than 87 percent
of U.S. exports of consumer and industrial products to Panama will
become duty-free immediately, with remaining tariffs phased out over
ten years. Almost half of U.S. agricultural exports will also benefit
from immediate duty-free treatment, with most of the remaining tariffs
to be eliminated within 15 years. Of particular importance for Colorado
is beef, which will see an immediate removal of a 30 percent tariff for
prime and choice cut beef, and wheat, which will lock in its already
tariff-free treatment.
As Panama embarks on a historic $5 billion infrastructure project to
revamp and expand the Panama Canal, American businesses will be better
situated to compete for opportunities in the Panamanian market as a
result of this free trade agreement. Additionally, this agreement will
enhance our strong relationship with Panama, which serves as a major
international
[[Page S6999]]
trade thoroughfare for the United States and the world.
And finally, the Colombia free trade agreement, which was a vote that
took even greater deliberation.
Colombia is a strong U.S. ally in Latin America and is a critical
regional and global partner. Colombia's market is the third largest for
the United States in Latin America and U.S. producers have been losing
market share quickly as the Colombians strengthen economic ties with
Canada, the European Union and the Mercosur countries of Argentina,
Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. As other countries facilitate trade with
Colombia, American producers have faced continued tariffs on goods
exported to Colombia, while Colombian goods face few tariffs into the
United States. Currently, the average U.S. tariff on the few Colombian
goods subject to a tariff is 3 percent. Colombia's average tariff on
U.S. exported goods is 12.5 percent. This agreement will increase
market access for U.S. goods and services in Colombia by immediately
eliminating duties on 80 percent of U.S. exports to Colombia, with all
remaining tariffs eliminated within 10 years.
These numbers show why American businesses have been eager to level
the playing field with foreign competitors that have benefited from
preferential tariff treatment in Colombia. Still, there have been long-
standing concerns with Colombia's history of violence and its human
rights record, issues that deeply concern not only me, but many
Coloradans. I have looked to Colombia and supporters of this agreement
to make the case that adequate progress has been made to determine if
the United States should move forward with a trade agreement at this
time.
The Colombian and U.S. governments, as well as organizations that
have opposed and supported the agreement, acknowledge the problematic
record Colombia has had on human rights and labor protections. Most
agree that progress has been made, though many disagree to what extent
that progress has improved labor conditions and lessened human rights
violations. After meeting with groups on both sides of this debate, I
concluded that maintaining the status quo was not the best answer.
Leaving things as they are now would not create any more incentives for
Colombia to maintain or further cultivate its commitment to resolving
issues of violence. Nor do I believe that the status quo would
strengthen the ties with this key ally in South America. I ultimately
believe that the recent labor and legal reforms in Colombia represent
concrete steps in the right direction. The commitment of Colombia's
political leadership to improving its record is also an indication that
Colombia can move beyond its past. The primary objective is for our two
countries not only to maintain the shared goal of reducing violence and
protecting workers' rights, but also to become stronger economic
partners, enabling American business to compete in Colombia's market on
a level playing field with our international competitors. Both of these
goals help justify moving beyond the status quo.
Let me be clear: we must continue to work collaboratively with the
Colombian government to ensure that the appropriate steps are taken
toward responsible and meaningful reforms. A meaningful step in this
direction is President Obama's commitment to allow the agreement to
enter into force only when Colombia has sufficiently met predetermined
benchmarks. These benchmarks include efforts to increase protection of
labor activists, enforce core labor rights and reduce impunity for
perpetrators of violence against union members. Additionally, the
underlying agreement includes strong labor provisions that protect the
right to organize, the right to bargain collectively, and to provide
protections against forced labor, child labor, and employment
discrimination.
These changes may not all happen overnight, but we can ensure that
what remains to be fixed will be supported by our strengthened economic
relationship and the social and economic incentives for Colombia to
maintain a positive trajectory in reducing violence. Does the passage
of this agreement mean that all of the ills facing Colombia will be
cured? I make no such assumption, and I know it will take work and
diligent oversight. The burden will be on the Colombian government to
follow through on promised reforms and ensure they have the intended
effect. It will also be up to this administration to ensure that the
benchmarks laid out in its labor action plan are met to the greatest
extent possible and that Colombia continues to meet these goals.
Finally, it will be up to Congress to provide ongoing oversight to
ensure everyone is meeting their responsibilities. I, for one, will be
watching.
In addition to these agreements, I note briefly that Congress came
together in a bipartisan manner to reauthorize a robust Trade
Adjustment Assistance Program that will assist workers, firms and
farmers to retrain and retool so they can better compete in the global
economy. This was a necessary precursor to my support of these three
free trade agreements.
In sum, the free trade agreements with Korea, Panama, and Colombia,
while not perfect, present strong opportunities for Colorado and U.S.
businesses while also including some of the most robust labor and
environmental provisions that we have ever had in a trade agreement
with any country. Trade issues are never clear cut, but simply put,
trading with our neighbors and partners can help our economy when we
set the terms fairly and find balance. By helping to ensure that our
trading partners play by fair rules, and by opening foreign markets for
U.S. products, the United States is better positioned to win the global
economic race.
____________________