[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 17, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1587-S1588]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Mr. Graham):
  S. 758. A bill to establish an Interagency Trade Enforcement Center 
in the Office of the United States Trade Representative, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to discuss the 
importance of international trade and the enforcement of international 
trade agreements.
  We talk a lot about international trade in this Chamber and frame it 
in terms of opening new markets with new trade agreements. But as the 
distinguished Presiding Officer understands, while it is important to 
ensure future agreements are fair for businesses and workers, we should 
also be devoting more time to the 290 trade agreements we already have 
and ask ourselves; are we doing all we can to ensure we are enforcing 
these trade agreements on behalf of American businesses and workers who 
are affected by trade agreements, on behalf of communities that are 
affected by trade agreements?
  I do not think we are, despite strong efforts by the Obama 
administration. I say that because this particular report--which I have 
in my hand, which is very heavy--is a report from the U.S. Trade 
Representative that has 384 pages detailing all of the trade barriers 
we face around the globe. Those are 384 reasons why we need to do more 
to fight for our manufacturers, our farmers, our innovators, our 
workers--everyone employed in all of the industries that are affected 
by trade barriers.
  So today, Senator Graham and I are introducing the Trade Enforcement 
Act, which would make permanent the Interagency Trade Enforcement 
Center at the USTR.
  The Center was created in 2012 by Executive order. I appreciate that 
very much. Senator Graham and I have been working for a number of years 
to get a trade enforcement office, and I appreciate that President 
Obama put in place by Executive order this new Center with 
responsibilities to coordinate the enforcement powers of multiple 
Federal agencies.
  It has already demonstrated its value in helping our Nation win major 
trade enforcement cases. We just need to make it permanent.
  Around the same time as the Center's creation, China began imposing 
illegal duties on American cars and SUVs in defiance of World Trade 
Organization rules. These duties threatened the jobs of America's 
850,000 automobile workers and had a direct impact on more than $5 
billion of U.S. auto exports.
  With the help of the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center, the U.S. 
Trade Representative challenged this practice by China at the WTO. The 
WTO agreed with the United States that China's duties breached numerous 
international trade rules, and last June the duties were terminated. 
They ended.
  Another case, Argentina was restricting imports of U.S. goods--
blocking energy products, electronics and machinery, pharmaceuticals, 
medical devices, cars and parts--billions of dollars in potential 
sales. The Center helped to challenge that practice by Argentina, and, 
again, the WTO ruled in favor of the United States.
  The Center helped to challenge China's practice of imposing duties on 
exports of rare Earth materials--so important, again, to our basic 
technology and manufacturing. In fact, in that case, the United States 
won. The Center helped to challenge India's ban on U.S. agricultural 
products, and we won again.
  So what we are learning is that when the U.S. Trade Representative 
works with the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center--with an entity 
that is laser-focused on enforcing trade laws--to challenge unfair 
trade practices around the world, the United States wins.
  We can continue winning if only we devote more time and more 
attention to enforcing the rules in our existing trade agreements. 
Again, we have a lot of work that needs to be done with all the trade 
barriers stopping us from having the opportunities to the markets that 
would allow us to export our goods.
  For example, the USTR's report on nontariff trade barriers highlights 
how China provides export subsidies to its auto parts manufacturers so 
they can sell their parts to other countries at below market value and 
still turn a profit. This makes it impossible for our parts 
manufacturers--many of them small businesses--to compete in those 
markets.
  In a letter I wrote to the President--which I was pleased to have 188 
Members of Congress sign--I asked the administration to take action. I 
was very pleased when the USTR announced later that year that the 
United States was formally challenging China's illegal practices on 
autos and auto parts. Without the investigation and the technical work 
done by the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center, that challenge would 
not have been possible.
  We have a free-trade agreement with Korea. Yet that nation continues 
to erect new trade barriers that make it more difficult for U.S. 
automakers to do business there. Even today, despite best efforts to 
open things up, Korea is one of the most closed auto markets in the 
world.
  Our legislation is based on the fact that our enforcement needs to go 
further and faster, and we need to support it. We need to give the USTR 
the resources it needs to take swift, decisive action to crack down on 
unfair trade practices. I very much appreciate the work that is being 
done by that Center, and they are showing what happens when we are 
focused, when we as a country are focused on those things that our 
businesses and workers need in terms of eliminating unfair trade 
practices.
  But I think it is very important that this Interagency Trade 
Enforcement Center become permanent, and that is what the bill that 
Senator Graham and I are introducing would do.

[[Page S1588]]

  Our bill would also establish a Chief Trade Enforcement Officer to 
lead the Center so we have one person being held accountable on 
enforcement who would be accountable to the Senate and to the American 
people.
  We also do something that I think is very important that will help 
manufacturing. Right now we have at the USTR a Chief Agricultural 
Negotiator. I support that. They are somebody helping to lead our 
efforts in agricultural policy. But we know to have a strong economy, 
it is about making things and growing things, and the making things 
part of it does not have a chief negotiator. That is why we in our bill 
create a Chief Manufacturing Negotiator to focus squarely on the 
interests of manufacturers in our country. That will clearly send a 
message that when we talk about growing the middle class, growing the 
economy, we are going to be laser-focused on manufacturing, as well as 
on agriculture.
  We know that for every $1 billion in goods we export, we support 
5,800 American jobs. By passing the Trade Enforcement Act, we will 
remove more trade barriers, meaning we will export more goods and 
create more American jobs, and we all want to create jobs and grow the 
economy.
  So I am looking forward to working with my colleagues in the months 
ahead to ensure that in this global marketplace where we find 
ourselves, there is, in fact, a level playing field and we have an 
agency and individuals who are laser-focused on making sure we have 
fair trade.
  In the end, our goal should be to export our products, not our jobs. 
That is what Senator Graham's and my bill would do.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED (for himself and Mrs. Murray):
  S. 763. A bill to amend title XII of the Public Health Service Act to 
reauthorize certain trauma care programs, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Trauma 
Systems and Regionalization of Emergency Care Reauthorization Act with 
Senator Murray. Timely and effective trauma care is critical to 
ensuring lifesaving interventions for those who have serious injuries.
  Nationally, trauma is the leading cause of death in the United States 
for individuals aged 44 and younger. According to the National Trauma 
Institute, trauma accounts for 41 million emergency room visits and 2.3 
million hospital admissions across the country each year. The nation's 
trauma and emergency medical systems are designed to respond quickly 
and efficiently to get seriously injured individuals to the appropriate 
trauma center hospital within the ``golden hour,'' the time period when 
medical intervention is most effective in saving lives and preserving 
function. Achieving this standard of access requires maintenance and 
careful coordination between organized systems of trauma care.
  The Trauma Systems and Regionalization of Emergency Care 
Reauthorization Act builds on my previous efforts to improve trauma 
care, which is an essential component of our care system. Last year, 
the President signed into law legislation I introduced, the Improving 
Trauma Care Act, which includes burn injuries in the definition of 
trauma care. Previously, the statutory definitions of trauma were 
inconsistent and outdated. Most notably, the law defined trauma in a 
way that excluded burn injuries, preventing burn centers from being 
able to apply for funding made available under trauma and emergency 
care programs. The Improving Trauma Care Act updated the Federal 
definition of trauma to include burns, a change that more appropriately 
reflects the relationship between burns and other traumatic injuries.
  This was an important step, but more must be done. The legislation we 
are introducing today would reauthorize two important grant programs: 
Trauma Care Systems Planning Grants, which support State and rural 
development of trauma systems, and Regionalization of Emergency Care 
Systems Pilot Projects, which provide funds to design, implement, and 
evaluate innovative models of regionalized emergency care. The bill 
would also direct States to update their model trauma care plan with 
the input of relevant stakeholders. These critical programs support 
emergency care in communities across the country.
  I urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in 
cosponsoring this legislation and working toward its expeditious 
passage.

                          ____________________