[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 29 (Thursday, February 28, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1029-S1030]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 432. A bill to extend certain trade preferences to certain least-
developed countries in Asia and the South Pacific, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Asia-
South Pacific Trade Preferences Act of 2013, a bill to promote economic 
growth, democracy, and political stability in some of the world's 
poorest countries.
  This legislation will provide duty-free and quota-free benefits for 
garments and other products similar to those afforded to beneficiary 
countries under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, AGOA.
  The countries covered by this legislation are 13 Least Developed 
Countries, LDCs, as defined by the United Nations and the U.S. State 
Department, which are not covered by any current U.S. trade preference 
program: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Kiribati, Laos, 
Maldives, Nepal, Samoa, Solomon Islands, East Timor, Tuvalu, and 
Vanuatu.
  These countries are among the poorest in the world with the bulk of 
their citizens living on less than $1 a day.
  Despite this widespread poverty, their exports are subject to some of 
the highest U.S. tariffs, averaging around 16 percent.
  In fact, these developing countries pay a disproportionate share of 
U.S. tariffs.
  Bangladesh, for example, is the 9th largest contributor of U.S. 
tariffs even though it is the 46th largest source of U.S. imports.
  Cambodia is the 12th largest contributor of U.S. tariffs but ranks as 
the 60th largest source of U.S. imports.
  So, in essence, these two developing countries pay more in U.S. 
tariffs than many European countries. How is that fair or consistent 
with our values?
  Unfortunately, the United States is the only developed nation that 
has not provided an enhanced trade preference program to the 
beneficiary countries in this bill.
  Indeed, we maintain duty preference programs for Haiti, the countries 
of sub-Saharan African and other developing countries and rightly so. 
These programs are critical components of our efforts to provide hope 
for millions of people struggling with poverty.
  But it makes no sense to exclude other countries at the same level of 
economic development. We should not hesitate to correct this inequity.
  This is not about pitting one developing country against the other. 
Rather, it is a simple matter of fairness and

[[Page S1030]]

ensuring that we help all of those in need.
  In fact, this effort goes hand in hand with my long-standing support 
for a strong and effective foreign aid budget for the United States as 
an essential tool in helping lift these countries out of poverty and 
put them on the path to economic prosperity and political stability.
  Especially in these difficult fiscal times, however, humanitarian and 
development assistance should not be the sum total of our efforts.
  Make no mistake: these programs help stabilize poor and war-torn 
countries, save lives, and lay the foundation for future prosperity.
  Yet, the key for sustained growth, jobs, and rising standards of 
living will be the ability of each of these countries to create vital 
export industries to compete in a free and open global marketplace.
  It is clear that the textile and apparel industries in many of the 
Asia-South Pacific countries in this bill are those industries that 
hold out the best hope for export growth.
  We should help these countries help themselves by opening the U.S. 
market to their exports as we have done for other developing countries 
in the past.
  By doing so, we will demonstrate the best of American values: 
reaching out to neighbors in need and helping them to stand on their 
own two feet.
  We will also help ourselves.
  First, as these countries become more prosperous, we will see new 
opportunities for our own exports in their growing markets.
  This, in turn, will create jobs and economic growth in our own 
country.
  But if we maintain high tariffs on imports from the Asia-South 
Pacific countries, those opportunities will likely go to the European 
Union and other developed countries that already have trade preference 
programs for these countries.
  We should not put ourselves at such a disadvantage.
  Second, as the Asia-South Pacific countries become more stable 
politically, we will help protect U.S. national security interests by 
preventing failed states which could become breeding grounds for 
terror.
  There is no doubt in my mind that the cost of lowering tariffs on the 
imports of textile and apparel products from the Asia-South Pacific 
countries is far less than any military intervention.
  We will also help ourselves by securing partners in the fight against 
global threats such as terrorism, climate change, the HIV/AIDS 
pandemic, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
  U.S. leadership is essential in those efforts. But they require a 
global, multilateral response. As these countries grow, they can assume 
a larger role and contribute more effectively.
  When it comes to our national security, every bit of assistance 
helps.
  Finally, at a time of economic uncertainty, by eliminating tariffs on 
imports from the Asia-South Pacific countries, this bill will help 
lower prices for the American consumers and provide them with more 
options.
  It will also help the 3 million American workers whose jobs depend on 
apparel imports.
  There is no doubt in my mind that the Asia-South Pacific Trade 
Preferences Act is a win-win for the U.S. and the Asia-South Pacific 
countries.
  Now, let me address some of the concerns that may be raised about 
this bill.
  First, many of the Asia-South Pacific countries have struggled in the 
past with corruption, a lack of democracy, human rights abuses, and the 
absence of rule of law.
  Some may ask: why reward these countries with a trade preference 
program?
  Make no mistake. These countries will not automatically receive the 
trade benefits provided by this legislation.
  This legislation has been drafted to ensure that the benefits are 
granted on a performance-driven basis.
  That is, to be eligible, a beneficiary country must demonstrate that 
it is making continual progress toward establishing rule of law, 
political pluralism, the right to due process, and a market-based 
economy that protects private property rights.
  So, this legislation would help promote democracy, human rights, and 
the rule of law while sustaining vital export industries and creating 
employment opportunities.
  The beneficiary countries have a clear incentive to stay on the right 
path or they will lose the benefits of this bill.
  If we ignore any problems, we will sustain the status quo and our 
efforts will fail.
  Finally, whenever we discuss the creation of a new trade preference 
program, understandable concerns are raised about the impact on 
domestic manufacturers.
  If this bill becomes law, however, the impact on U.S. jobs will be 
minimal.
  Currently, the beneficiary countries under this legislation account 
for only 4 percent of U.S. textile and apparel imports, compared to 24 
percent for China, and 72 percent for the rest of the world.
  These countries will continue to be small players in the U.S. market, 
but the benefits of this legislation will have a major impact on their 
export economies.
  By passing this legislation we will have an opportunity to change 
lives, protect our national security interests, and help the American 
consumer. We should seize this opportunity.
  I respectfully ask for the support of all my colleagues for this 
important initiative.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.

                          ____________________