[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.

                          ____________________