[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 61 (Monday, April 28, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H3223-H3229]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IMPORTANCE OF TRADE
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Wenstrup). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, tonight Republicans from the Ways and
Means Committee, from the Agriculture Committee, and from the Rules
Committee intend to speak with the American people and to you, Mr.
Speaker, about the importance of trade and trade policies, the
implications of growing jobs in not just America, but also our world
role where we work with other Nations to ensure that the benefits and
the great things that we not only create here in the United States but
also use as trading elements around the world, that each of these
issues will be thoughtfully discussed and appropriately given an item
of what I believe is encouragement as this United States Congress moves
forward into its last few months of this second session.
We believe that trade is important. We believe that as the United
States continues to grow in its respect for others, that we share
intellectual property, but expect the same back from others. We trade
with our partners around the globe with an expectation of not only a
good product but also an even playing field as we deal with others
around the world.
General Leave
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on this important topic of this Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight because we want and need to
understand more about the implications of trade, a pro-trade growth
agenda, and the opportunities that lie before not just the American
people but the United States House of Representatives to further
understand this key and critical issue that is a part of job creation
for the American people.
Expanding trade throughout the globe creates economic growth and
good-paying jobs here at home. Trade works because it allows America to
be globally efficient and to compete all around the globe trading our
products for others. And when America competes, I believe America wins,
and the world is a better place. History shows that allowing greater
access to a global marketplace for American exports has always been a
powerful engine for economic growth and job creation.
{time} 1930
Trade provides new opportunities for businesses and spurs innovation
and entrepreneurs.
Opening our market to world imports also helps increase the
purchasing power of American consumers. I believe there is a balance
here, and it is part of this balance and the miracle of having a pro-
growth trade agreement which we Republicans wish to speak about
tonight.
Mr. Speaker, I would first like to welcome a young man who sits on
the Ways and Means Committee, a relatively new Member, a second term
Member, from Indiana.
Todd Young represents not only an opportunity for him to bring forth
ideas from the heartland of America, but also his expertise as a member
of the United States military, ideas about world affairs, and most of
all about jobs in America. I would defer to the gentleman at this time,
Mr. Young.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the
chairman from Texas, for his leadership on this and so many other
issues.
I am a passionate proponent of free trade because we have the most
productive workers in the world, the most productive businesses in the
world. Frankly, we need to open up new markets for our commodities, for
our manufactured items, for our services. That is what this initiative
is all about.
Trade promotion authority, or TPA as it is popularly known, reflects
decades of debate, cooperation, and compromise between Congress and the
executive branch in finding a pragmatic accommodation to the exercise
of each branch's respective constitutional authorities over trade
policy.
I applaud our Ways and Means Committee Chairman Camp, as well as
Chairman Sessions and Chairman Nunes, for all of their hard work
pushing renewal of trade promotion authority. In January, they together
introduced the bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act, which
updates and expands negotiation and consultation requirements.
For me, supporting trade is a no-brainer. It is important back home
in Indiana, where over 8,000 companies exported from locations within
the State in 2011. Eighty-five percent of these companies were small
and medium-sized enterprises with fewer than 500 employees.
Indiana's export shipments of merchandise in 2013 totaled a whopping
$34 billion. Fifty-four percent of Indiana's exports go to countries
with whom the U.S. currently has a free-trade agreement.
Trade is important for the strength of our entire country's economy.
Trade supports in total more than 38 million jobs across America. U.S.
exports accounted for 14 percent of America's gross domestic product in
2012 alone.
TPA is the only way we can successfully bring international trade
negotiations to a close and unlock job creating opportunities for these
U.S. exports.
The administration has laid out a bold 2014 trade agenda and is
currently negotiating a regional free-trade agreement, TPP, with 11
Asia-Pacific countries; another regional trade agreement, TTIP, with 28
member counties of the European Union; and TISA, a trade and services
agreement with 22 other countries.
Combined, U.S. negotiations related to the Asia-Pacific and EU
agreements would open markets with nearly 1 billion consumers, covering
nearly two-thirds of the global economy and 65 percent of global trade.
TISA covers about 50 percent of the global economy and over 70 percent
of global services trade.
As a cochair of the House TTIP Caucus, the ongoing U.S.-EU
negotiations
[[Page H3224]]
are a particular interest to me. The transatlantic economy is the
largest and most integrated in the world, comprising 50 percent of
global GDP and generating approximately $5 trillion in total commercial
sales each year.
The EU and U.S. account for 30 percent of world trade, and $2.7
billion of goods and services are traded bilaterally each day. There
are a lot of numbers, but all these things speak to the power of trade
and its importance, not just to my home State of Indiana, but the
United States of America.
I want to further emphasize that Europe is, by far, the largest
market for U.S.-outbound investment, so I continue to work hard there
in conjunction with my colleagues.
By one estimate, approximately 15 million workers are employed as a
result of transatlantic trade. As for my home State of Indiana, in
2012, the EU purchased goods worth $9.1 billion or 25 percent of our
overall Indiana exports.
In 2011, Hoosier services worth $2.4 billion went to the EU. That is
32 percent of Hoosier services exports. So successful implementation of
TTIP is estimated to increase Indiana exports to the EU by roughly 33
percent and could boost net employment by up to 13,780 Hoosier jobs.
Currently, major Indiana exports to the EU include pharmaceuticals,
aerospace products and parts, and medical equipment and supplies.
Again, I am a strong advocate of free trade, free markets. I think
that trade agreements have the opportunity to strengthen our economy by
creating new global markets and supporting existing ones.
I encourage all of my colleagues to support the bipartisan
Congressional Trade Priorities Act, so we can further and hopefully
finalize many of these ongoing negotiations and bring final trade
agreements before Congress for approval.
I once again thank the chairman.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for discussing not
only the impact in Indiana, but with the knowledge that Indiana, in
fact, is really a microcosm of what this country really looks like,
where you come from a strong manufacturing base, you come from a strong
base of agriculture, you come from a strong base of the heartland of
this country that wants and needs to be economically viable; and by
growing jobs, which means that you can continue to pay for your
schools, you can continue to pay for your roads and bridges, but more
importantly, I believe, an innovative opportunity where you are allowed
to compete around the globe with your ideas, your products, and your
services.
I applaud the gentleman not only for his service to the United States
military, but I applaud you for your service to the people of Indiana,
as you have served us so ably during your tenure here in Congress, and
a hearty congratulations. I thank the gentleman very much.
Mr. Speaker, we continue to have Republicans who have not only a
background in agriculture, in understanding the United States military,
which is the world, the world we live in, how America has neighbors and
partners all around the world; but also, we continue to have people who
come, once again, from the heartland of this country who see firsthand
how important trade is.
They come from agricultural areas, they come from areas that have
strong natural resources and reserves that are, I am sure, God-given,
but an opportunity for us as Americans to benefit by virtue of living
in the greatest Nation in the world.
One of those people that sits on our trade team and is perhaps one of
the most active and thoughtful members is a young woman from South
Dakota.
Congresswoman Kristi Noem has just returned from a trip that she took
representing the United States Congress. I would defer to the
gentlewoman now for her discussion on not only TPP Japan, but also
agriculture and the things which she represents so well.
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding, and I want
to thank him for the honor of being a part of this group today that is
talking about TPP and the importance of trade in the region.
I did have a chance to get back this morning from a weeklong trip in
Asia discussing trade and the importance of the TPP--Trans-Pacific
Partnership--the European Union trade negotiations, and the ways that
we can expand trade that would benefit our economy.
The first step to seeing these benefits in these agreements is
renewing trade promotion authority, and then we set our goals and our
priorities in these agreements. This was a big topic of conversation
throughout the week as we met with leaders from Japan--including Prime
Minister Abe--South Korea, and then also with the leaders in China and
the People's Congress.
Time and time again, America has reaped the benefits of completed
trade agreements in our country. For me, the profound impacts that we
have seen in agriculture are particularly interesting.
We have seen an 18 percent increase in ag exports since we have
signed the agreement with Panama. There has been a 68 percent increase
in agriculture exports to Colombia since passing trade agreements with
those countries.
We have also generated new business in other sectors of the economy,
like manufacturing and the service industry. We have created jobs here
at home, while benefiting those people across our country and economies
abroad and built relationships with them that we certainly reap the
benefits for when it comes to foreign policy and security issues as
well.
In my home State of South Dakota, we have seen export support and
create jobs and higher wages for our economy, including our State's
number one industry: agriculture.
Currently, South Dakota agriculture exports total more than $3
billion annually, and they support over 20,000 jobs on and off the
farm. It is estimated that more than one in five jobs in South Dakota
depend on international trade.
Those plants that do export goods pay higher wages, they hire more
people, and they do it a lot faster than those who don't. Soybeans,
corn, wheat, feed grains, and livestock grown in South Dakota are
already shipped to countries around the world. We can increase that by
growing our access to markets through free-trade agreements.
As we are working towards trade promotion authority and negotiating
the trade agreements, I think of the enormous benefits that it can have
for our country. Especially as our economy struggles to recover,
increasing exports in trade and markets across the Asia-Pacific and
Europe is essential.
Japan is one of those countries that is included in the Trans-Pacific
Partnership talks and is already one of the largest purchasers of U.S.
corn and soybeans. With a good TPP agreement, we could see an increase
in grain and livestock exports to Japan and the entire region. That
would spark economic activity throughout our country as well.
Of course, we need to ensure that we get it right. I have asked for
assurances from our U.S. trade representative that we won't close the
TPP negotiations with Japan unless they agree to eliminate trade
barriers to agriculture.
I appreciate that the bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act
outlines trade negotiation objectives. It includes prioritizing
agriculture. We need to ensure that food safety and animal and plant
health measures are restrictions justified based on sound science.
Ultimately, we need to ensure that we have an agreement that is fair to
our agriculture producers.
When I had the opportunity to travel to Asia last week and discuss
some of the ways that our country and Japan and China and others in the
region can mutually benefit from trade agreements, I made it very clear
how important the ag industry is in finalizing any final trade deal and
some of my concerns that we already had with existing barriers.
We are making progress. We need to give those who are negotiating
some of the agreements in the region the tools that they need to get
this job done. This is one of the main topics I heard from leaders
involved in these discussions. It is something these leaders see as key
to coming to an agreement on these free-trade agreements, and it is key
to agreeing on how a final deal will impact the agriculture sector.
I think a lot of folks don't realize that Japan has the number three
economy in the world, behind the United
[[Page H3225]]
States and China. If we can finalize an agreement with them, it will
set the table for TPP and also for the region on how our discussions go
forward with China as well.
It will open up new opportunities in China where 1.3 billion people
call home. There is no way that China can continue to feed its own
people and will rely on outside sources for their proteins, for their
grains, to make sure their people are well fed into the future.
In fact, some of the discussions I had with businesses and government
officials was the difference between USDA beef and United States beef
and South Dakota beef than what they are currently enjoying today.
As incomes have risen in China and people are making more money, they
have a desire for more proteins in their diet. Today, their main source
from that protein is from Australian beef; but yet, every day, they
ask: When can we get USDA beef?
That is what these agreements would bring, not only open markets for
us and increase our exports, but bring the Chinese people the kind of
goods, food, and services that they want to enjoy as well. Fifty
percent of the people in this world live in that region. It is a market
that we can't ignore and that we need to prioritize into the future.
We need to take this first step, so that we can continue reaping the
benefits of trade in South Dakota, in the United States, and across the
world. It is imperative for job growth here at home and for prosperity
for all of the countries involved.
Historically, when you have looked at free-trade agreements with
other countries, the prosperity of all the countries involved have
risen after those agreements have come forward and been done and
completed.
I believe that as we focus on this issue, as we approve TPP, as we
negotiate agreements that work for all of our countries involved and we
finalize with TPA authority, we will certainly get an agreement that is
good for all of our countries and beneficial to create jobs here in the
United States.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this discussion tonight.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Noem very much for
not only taking time to come here and speak with us, but in particular
the references that you make to your home State, a State which you
represent so proudly and which you not only carry the flag of South
Dakota with you, but really on behalf of all Americans that live not
just in rural areas, but who, every single day, get up and go to work
to make this country stronger, to take our products and services and
goods overseas to make sure that the agriculture products are clean and
the very best products available.
I think one of the most interesting things that you said was really
the point which we do understand, and that is the world thirsts for
American-made products.
The world understands firsthand how important your industry--your
agricultural industry is in South Dakota and throughout the Midwest,
the very best of not only beef--I did include Texas in there, I hope--
but the very best of agricultural products that go around the world and
then, as you travel to see people, thirst for those products.
{time} 1945
Mrs. NOEM. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would just like to expand on
that a little bit because a lot of our discussions that we had with the
Prime Minister of Japan and also with the leadership in China was the
fact that, not only as we negotiate these trade agreements our
economies are linked in creating jobs and prosperity for both of us,
but then it helps our foreign policy as well. We recognize how much we
need our allies in the region to come alongside us. We recognize that
it sets the table for agreements that we have with China and for
keeping peace throughout a region that, right now, the United States is
very focused on, where we have had to be a leader of strength in order
to keep peace and to keep presence. By having trade and interactions
with their leadership and their people dependent upon us for their food
and their protein sources, it certainly is going to be beneficial for
us today, tomorrow, and long into the future if we can continue to do
that and to make these trade agreements finalized.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentlewoman.
Perhaps more important than that is that you build a friendship
between groups of people who really not only share cities, where we
have sister cities that grow up and are born of each other, but it is a
merging together of America to make us closer with the rest of the
world and then our values of not only the rule of law, of intellectual
property, but also, I think, of the thing of which we know most--trade
policies. A tariff is a tax, and we are reducing taxes, or tariffs, and
taxes--costs--on people for products, goods and services and food. That
is where I believe agricultural products from America will be king
around the world.
Mrs. NOEM. Very true. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SESSIONS. I want to thank the gentlewoman for taking the time to
join us tonight.
We are also joined by a young man who, from the very beginning of his
time here, was described by his Governor as one of the brightest young
men in Minnesota. Erik Paulsen is a young man who came to the United
States Congress as a seasoned and experienced thoughtmaker but also as
a person who understood the global implications of Minnesota, whether
it be with medical products and devices that are made or whether it be
with other agricultural products.
I yield at this time to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen),
the gentleman from the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. PAULSEN. I thank the chairman for yielding.
Let me just thank the chairman for his leadership not only on the
Rules Committee but for leading the bipartisan free-trade caucus and
leading that effort in knowing and understanding the value of trade and
the value of exports.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue to Members. It is good to
take time on the floor to talk about this because international trade,
I will tell you, is a vital part of my economy, to Minnesota's Third
Congressional District. The chairman just alluded to that. Statewide in
Minnesota, global trade supports almost 750,000 jobs. That is a pretty
big number. It is all about exports. It is about selling where 95
percent of the world's consumers are living outside of the United
States. Despite our successful economic relationships with a lot of
countries around the world--we have good agreements with Korea and
Colombia and Panama--there is no doubt that a lot more can be done now.
It really begins with passing this bipartisan Congressional Trade
Priorities Act, which will renew and update Trade Promotion Authority.
Why is that important?
It is important so we can make headway and get forward momentum on
the TPP and the TTIP negotiations. This ensures that we will accomplish
several very, very important goals as a part of increasing transparency
in trade negotiations and of empowering Congress, of empowering
ourselves. This is why there is bipartisan support. It will
specifically direct the administration to pursue congressional
prerogatives through congressionally mandated negotiating objectives.
It will establish very robust consultation and access to information
requirements before, during, and after the negotiations so that we have
a very open and transparent process with all Members of Congress and
the public. More importantly, it also preserves the congressional
prerogatives that are there, giving Congress the ability to vote and
giving Congress the final approval to any trade agreements through
procedures and providing an up-or-down vote, which is really critical.
Our trading partners are certainly looking for that authority to move
forward.
I want to commend the chairman, who has had a role in that
legislation, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, as well as
in the Senate, with bipartisan support in making sure the
administration will be negotiating a deal that covers the issues that
are most important in today's economy. The reason it is important, Mr.
Speaker and others, is that this is not simply about focusing on
tariffs. We always know that trade negotiations and agreements focus on
tariffs. This is about import quotas and other nontraditional barriers
to trade because the regular, traditional barriers are no
[[Page H3226]]
longer enough. This is about finding 21st century solutions to
streamline trade and end these nontariff barriers so we can
interconnect regulations across our borders and reduce foreign
regulatory barriers to our exports.
You have got the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which, of course, my
colleague from South Dakota spoke so eloquently on, in which we have
got 11 countries participating with emerging markets. Yet the area of
negotiation that I am most interested in right now is TTIP, the
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, with our Atlantic
friends. This is one of those opportunities, I think, as cochair of the
TTIP Caucus, along with Congressmen Neal and Keating and Young, in
which I want to make sure that the ongoing negotiations are going to
move forward, because the transatlantic economy is our largest in the
world. It is the most integrated in the world. It is 50 percent of the
world's GDP. It is generating about $5 trillion in total commercial
sales each year--30 percent of global trade. Mr. Speaker, those are big
numbers as well, and we have known for years that a trade agreement
between the United States and the European Union is the right thing to
do.
I remember, back in the summer of 2012, I authored a bipartisan
letter with 50 different Members of Congress bipartisanly supporting
such an agreement. Then, last year, we had the launch of the Business
Coalition for Transatlantic Trade. We had a chance to meet with our
Ways and Means counterparts and introduce the resolution calling for
swift action on TTIP. Then as I mentioned, earlier this month, we
launched that TTIP Caucus, which is the chance to move forward, I
think, significantly. I will tell you what it means to Minnesota: $4.5
billion in Minnesota goods are purchased by European countries right
now; 42,200 Minnesota jobs are supported by European investment
annually; if we pass TTIP, it is estimated that another 3,000 jobs are
going to come on hand. This is about higher wages and a healthier
economy, and that direct investment is absolutely going to be helping
us right here at home.
These TTIP negotiations present a huge opportunity to tackle these
nontariff barriers, as I mentioned earlier, such as regulations that
will needlessly impact and increase the cost of trade between the U.S.
and Europe right now. Yet everyone knows getting to this agreement is
not going to be easy. There are some real differences between our
economies and our continents, such as the way we approach regulation,
but all indications are, it seems--and I think the chairman would
agree--that the negotiators are moving full speed ahead. They want to
continue to make progress towards a final agreement. The next round of
negotiations is actually set to take place this next month, but we
can't get there unless we pass the TPA.
Passing this Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act is going
to make sure we are protecting intellectual property and that we are
setting high standards. Other countries around the world are going to
be forced to look at what the United States and the EU are doing, and
then we can make sure that the bad actors are following our lead by
setting those high standards.
So, Mr. Speaker and Mr. Chairman, I just want to commend you for
hosting the time today, and I want to thank the chairman again for the
opportunity to discuss trade and the Bipartisan Congressional Trade
Priorities Act as well as the importance of trade to both of our States
and to the entire country. I know it is important to Minnesota and to
my economy back home.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Paulsen, I want you to stick around for just
another minute because I really want to engage you in speaking about
exactly what you just said.
We know TPA is that process--Trade Promotion Authority--whereby
Congress gives authority to the President of the United States. Then,
once that is done, the President and the trade ambassador go to the
world, and there are two different processes which have been started
now: one in Asia and one, essentially, that is in Europe. These really
offer America a chance to become a better and a bigger player in the
world and to even get a better deal in working so that the consumers of
the world get a better opportunity.
Is that really the way you see this working?
Mr. PAULSEN. Absolutely. I think you just pretty much laid it out.
That is the way we do see this working. This is a win-win for the
opportunities for our companies to engage in a healthier economy and to
employ more people, but also for consumers to benefit on the other
side.
I mean, I know that, without a doubt, South Korea, Panama, and
Colombia were significant trade agreements and that they had been
languishing on the sidelines for a long period of time, but with
bipartisan support, we were able to pass them all. Now we have got a
chance to show and prove that America is back on the playing field. We
know the benefits of trade. I know, when I had a chance to visit South
Korea, they spoke about the Costco in South Korea and about their
interest in selling American goods and how that was the number one
Costco in the world, essentially, after the free trade agreement
because they want to buy American. This is about exporting. It creates
more jobs at home; it keeps the innovation here at home; and it sells
where the customers are.
We can't get to these agreements, though, unless we get this Trade
Promotion Authority, which makes sure every Member of Congress is going
to have a hand in seeing the negotiations process forward to the tune
where we have not had that type of involvement among individual Members
of Congress in the past. This is very important, I think, for Congress
to exercise its congressional prerogative and, at the same time, to
work in partnership with the administration in moving some very
important initiatives forward.
Mr. SESSIONS. In continuing our dialogue here--and I appreciate the
gentleman's taking time to do this--American-made products, whether
they be manufacturing, whether they be medical instruments, whether
they be pharmaceuticals, all have to go through a really pretty
stringent viewpoint from a perspective of regulators, who look at
things that we have in our marketplace and, certainly, that travel
across State lines; but once these products and services are made
available and become generally available in the United States and once
people learn how to use them, we create a thirst for the rest of the
world to be able to buy our products.
There is a figure that we deal with--and I know the gentleman is a
strong, strong supporter of our trade working group. Essentially, 38
percent of what we manufacture and build--our output here in the United
States--is something that gets into a trading partnership one way or
another. Almost 40 percent of the output of the United States is based
one way or another off trade, of our making sure the rest of the world
gets a chance to get those products also, which lowers prices in our
country on a per-unit basis. Perhaps more importantly, it keeps our
jobs here in the United States. That has got to be good for somebody
from Minnesota.
Mr. PAULSEN. Yes.
I should just mention here that the first trade agreement that really
dealt with the opportunity to negotiate on medical devices specifically
was the Korea free trade agreement, which recently passed. Medical
devices is kind of near and dear to my heart because it is so prevalent
in Minnesota. We have one of the strongest ecosystems in the medical
device community in the country--in fact, in the world. These are high-
valued manufactured products that are improving lives, that are saving
lives, and there is a regulatory scheme that is often surrounding it,
of course, making sure these devices are approved before they move
forward.
We have the opportunity, I think, now, Mr. Chairman, with some of
these trade agreements that are moving forward to not only negotiate
the tariffs--making sure that these manufactured products are going to
be available to others around the world and also lowering costs for our
consumers--but also to know that the regulatory environment can be set
up in a way that, if we have oversight committees--for instance, in the
EU and in the United States and if we have got a device that is on
track to be approved, say, by the FDA in the United States--we can make
sure that, if our oversight committees agree on the other side of the
continent, on the other side of the Atlantic, that they can sign off on
it. So
[[Page H3227]]
you save a tremendous amount of time in moving forward and in having
those goods be available pretty quickly to a lot of consumers around
the world, which is going to help, again, the economy; it is going to
grow jobs; and it is going to help patient care around the world. That
is one area in particular that Minnesota will and has benefited.
Mr. SESSIONS. In continuing our dialogue, the gentleman sits on this
awesome and the most powerful committee here, the Ways and Means
Committee. The committee on a regular basis hears from people in the
United States who do a lot of business overseas, and one of the things
which they talk about is intellectual property--the rule of law and
following contracts to make sure that what you agreed to is equally
agreed to by the others.
Would you mind taking just a minute to talk with us tonight about the
importance of intellectual property, how the world can capture this
idea and how it can, in fact, increase not only the value of products
but make sure that the product which is actually bought and sold is the
real product as is the company that stands behind it.
Mr. PAULSEN. This is an area, I think, in which the United States
really stands out and shines. If anything, we are known for our
innovation. It is really part of our DNA in terms of having a patent
system that protects intellectual property, the rule of law. There are
many other countries around the world that don't have those same
standards, and that is where the benefit of trade agreements can help
bring in high-standard agreements. It is so that other countries can be
forced to follow these agreements.
Intellectual property protects the ideas. That protects the
innovation. That protects the invention and the dreamers who are coming
up with all of these ideas, and that is critical. There are some
countries that are lagging behind. We have had frustrations, I know
recently, with China by which they have targeted U.S. information
technology. They have targeted renewable energy, and they have targeted
biopharmaceuticals and other products for the express purpose of
creating local production opportunities for Indian companies, for
instance, and that is a violation of intellectual property in many
respects.
Having these trade negotiations is going to ensure that we can keep
that conversation moving forward and having those high standards. It is
going to protect our jobs here at home for the dreamers, the thinkers,
and the folks who create and innovate these new ideas and these new
products.
{time} 2000
And so, when you have unfair and you have harmful practices that are
happening in other countries--maybe it is India, maybe it is China--
that is ultimately going to damage the long-term health of the economic
health of both of our economies when we are having that type of a
situation.
Mr. SESSIONS. I guess, lastly, what I would like to do is engage the
gentleman on really a broader perspective, and that really is the idea
of American exceptionalism; how we have the greatest military in the
world, our United States military; men and women, working together all
around the globe to make sure that really there is fairness; and that
our friends and neighbors and allies have an opportunity to live in a
free world, as part of this process, American exceptionalism, where we
are able to go and compete anywhere with our goods and products and
services and to let the world have that advantage.
Would you mind taking just a second and speaking specifically about
American exceptionalism?
Mr. PAULSEN. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think what you are alluding to is
that fact that America can compete and win at any level if we are on a
level playing field. If the rules are even, if the rules of the game
are set the same, Americans can compete and win. That is, again, going
to help improve our economy, help grow jobs here at home.
In terms of American exceptionalism, there is no doubt that, when you
have got a free flow of goods going across borders, it is going to help
our foreign policy, it is going to help us lead from a position of
strength. There is someone who famously said at one time:
If goods are not crossing borders, guns will.
Having that trade connection is very, very important. It helps us
have diplomatic conversations. It helps us, as America, lead the rest
of the world, showing that we are strong, we are leading out front.
Again, if you have two pretty significant trade agreement
opportunities being negotiated right now, coming close to conclusion, I
think we can wrap those up within the year, if we pass Trade Promotion
Authority, both in the Trans-Pacific Partnership and with the TTIP
negotiations going on in Europe; and that will cover, by and large,
two-thirds of the economy in the world, and all the other countries
will follow our lead.
This is a huge opportunity, as the chairman knows, for our companies
and our economy back home.
Mr. SESSIONS. Well, I am just most impressed with not only your
thoughtful consideration and your hard work, but really the things
which I see that you bring to the table are words and ideas on a
regular basis; that is you talk about we need to make sure that we have
a stable environment where good decisions can be made, instead of in a
vacuum, they can be made on the fly and, secondly, growth.
One of the things which I read on a regular basis, a young man named
Peter Roff, who is with U.S. News and World Report, and he talks about
how growth is important. You have to grow your economy. You have to go
and continue in the hunt, so to speak, to make sure that more and more
people not only buy your products, but the next generation of those
products come out also.
I want to thank the gentleman for his thoughtful leadership, where
you come to the meetings and you have a real thoughtful handle on
stability, making sure business knows what the rules are, making sure
we build great neighbors and have good contracts and have great
relationships, and then the generation and the next generation of goods
and services where we can make things even better for the next
generation.
I want to thank you very much for being here tonight. I know that you
want to get back to the office and call your family and tell them the
exciting Special Order that you were a part of tonight. I am sure your
wife will be very, very excited about that, Congressman Paulsen.
Mr. Speaker, we have had an opportunity tonight to speak, Members of
Congress who come really from the heartland, we have had people come
from Indiana, South Dakota, and Minnesota. Well, I am a Texan, so I
guess I would call myself from the heartland of this great Nation also,
at least from the center of the country.
As we talk about what we are attempting to do, I think that it is
important for you to know, Mr. Speaker, that the things which you have
led our Congress in trying to perform, the strong leadership of John
Boehner from the very top, in trying to say that we need to grow our
economy, that part of that job creation comes as a result of trade
agreement.
So that is why we are here tonight, to talk openly with Members of
Congress and you, Mr. Speaker, about the need for America to understand
why we must pass Trade Promotion Authority, TPA. TPA is a mechanism.
That is all it is. It is a mechanism to begin the starting point
whereby we give the administration, whether they be Republican or
Democrat, but we give the President its marching orders in developing
trade agreements.
We say to the President of the United States that we believe that
growing our economy, we believe that having trade agreements, we
believe that having agreements that make things so much easier and
better for us not only to make sure that agricultural products, that
other markets become available to us, but that we also understand that,
as we engage in this, not only do we want to grow our own marketplace,
but the world has an opportunity to reduce the taxes, the trade
barriers that are on, many times, their products and services because
American products weren't available.
Perhaps we could talk about receiving products that they have back
into our country and the consumer being a winner. We have to worry
about environmental protection. Here in the United States, we believe
that we are trying to be responsible in what we do, not only in
production manufacturing,
[[Page H3228]]
our day-to-day energy needs, but I think we also see where we could
share many products that we have in the United States, notwithstanding
we have seen many industries--energy industries selling our products
and services overseas.
We talk about intellectual property. Intellectual property is not
hard to understand. It is the opportunity to make sure that, if you
have an agreement--and it might be because you have something that you
have gotten as a patent, it could be a scientific citation that the
world, when they are going to use that product, service, or that idea,
that they give respect to not only making a payment, if that is
required, or supporting the standard as required by rule of law.
Market access, market access is so important. It is important that we
have an opportunity to make sure that the goods and services, which we
present to another country as we enter their ports of entry or to their
customs, that our products and services are to the highest standard
that they would be, based upon a contract or an agreement as we enter
those countries.
We would want to make sure that our products and services were not
held at bay by that foreign nation because of some perception about our
product or because they were trying to protect their home product,
their home base. It opens up markets and gives us market access.
Physical goods, to make sure that we would be able to reduce tariffs
on all sorts of products, whether it be clothing, whether it be
manufacturing, whether it be pharmaceuticals, we need to make sure that
the products which are passed are timely and fairly handled, not only
in these two different types of trade agreements, but that it is a good
deal for the American person who wishes to go sell, whether it be an
agricultural good or a physical good that may be manufactured in this
country.
Lastly, services, services which I think America has not only
excelled at, but been able to make sure that we are able to promulgate
effective ways of doing business, to where people can continue to have
a great product and make that product even better--the second, third,
and fourth generation of products that would be sold and available with
the protections under intellectual property and rule of law.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we are talking about, the marketplace of
the world becoming open to American goods and services and America and
its consumers gaining that benefit also.
So TPA ensures that Congress promulgates itself more fully by
incorporating ahead of time discussions with the administration. You
heard the gentlewoman from South Dakota say that she had a discussion
with the trade negotiators, and she negotiated with them and said: Here
is my understanding about what I think is in America's best interest.
She didn't say what was in South Dakota's best interest. She didn't
say what was in her own personal interest. She looked at a more global
perspective and said: I think, in looking at this agreement, this is a
piece, a part of what should be included.
And that, Mr. Speaker, is also why this administration, when they do
consult with us--and Ambassador Froman does come up on the Hill on a
regular basis, and we should remember that he is an active,
intelligent, thoughtful man who is not just learning his job, but
learning the nuances about how he protects America and goes across the
world and negotiates what is in our best interest; what was a good deal
for others, our trading partners, to make sure that they will want to
take up the goods and services, the exchange, the ideas, the tough
things that come from these trade negotiations.
So this topic is timely because these two major trade agreements are
on the horizon. The world is speaking about TTIP, and it is speaking
about TPP. The United States is currently negotiating TPP, the Trans-
Pacific Partnership.
The discussions that take place in Asia are all about how we can form
better, longer-lasting partnerships, whereby the people of their
countries and the people of the United States of America better
themselves, lowering taxes, getting new products and services, and
having a chance to make sure that we become friends in the process.
TPP is comprehensive, and it is ambitious, and it covers really an
active and growing Asia-Pacific region. As you think about it, Mr.
Speaker, you will recall from your days in the United States Army and
your service as a member of the military, where you went and were a
part of other countries that desperately wanted and needed not only
goods and services, but really the tranquility of America and what we
would bring to them, the exceptionalism that we can pass on to these
other people to make their life better.
It will bring together 12 countries on both sides of the Pacific
Ocean in hopes of tracking and putting traditional trade barriers away
and overcoming those and giving a chance to where we can make sure that
the consumer becomes king.
The TPP would cover 40 percent of all global output. It would ensure
that participating countries conduct business, really just as we do, in
an open, thoughtful, transparent way; and we would make sure that we
reduce tariffs, regulations, while respecting intellectual property.
Meanwhile--and we have heard more about this, the European Union,
through TTIP, it would create a trade agreement that literally
encompasses about half of the global wealth in the world.
In other words, we would be doing business with a region that is
larger than the United States of America. We would be trying to ship
our goods and services and do business with half of the world's wealth,
open markets that would allow them an opportunity to have American-made
products.
Currently, $2.7 billion is traded daily between the United States and
the EU, which is about 30 percent of world trade. We think creating
this historic opportunity would mean that we can grow that amount of
trade, grow our ability here in the United States to not only have more
output and employ more people, but to pay for the next generation of
products and services to where they continue to meet the needs of
others, not just here in the United States.
So combined, these two agreements would give American businesses and
consumers, we believe, unprecedented access to global markets. That is
why the Republican Party and its members are on the floor tonight,
members of the Ways and Means Committee, members of the Agriculture
Committee, and at least one member of the great Rules Committee.
I, as chairman, have an opportunity, as a result of the chance to
have jurisdictional elements in this, to be firsthand at these
discussions where we can push and talk about how important trade is and
these basic agreements to empower and work with all parts of the United
States government.
Obviously, our great young chairman of the Ways and Means Committee
is very much up to this task, and Dave Camp has been leading not only
America with an understanding about what is in our best interest, but
how we have growth, how we move forward, and that is exactly what TPA
is all about.
{time} 2015
So, Mr. Speaker, I will tell you that we have a plan. We have ideas
which we not only well understand, but what we are trying to make sure
is that we understand that 38 million jobs are supported by trade--38
million American workers--and that in 2012 our goods and services
supported an extra 9.8 million jobs as a result of the growth.
These are all important ideas, Mr. Speaker. They are ideas that move
our country, they move countries forward, but at the same time giving
us new goods and services that on a per unit basis can drop because we
are sharing them with the rest of the world.
Mr. Speaker, I would like for you to know that Members of this United
States Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, support members of the
United States military, as you served your country so ably. We give
thanks and pause every single day to not only the freedoms that we
have, but to know that young men like you who have served our military
and come back home and married and have beautiful young babies and
represent a future in this country to where we believe that there is no
problem bigger than a solution, but that by working together, having
stability under rule of
[[Page H3229]]
law, intellectual property, and growth, that we can continue to lead
the world through American exceptionalism and the world can have an
opportunity to have that little part of America, whether it be a great
steak from Texas or South Dakota or perhaps jeans manufactured
somewhere here in the United States or, if lucky enough, something from
the great State of Ohio that said, ``Made in America.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________