[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 72 (Tuesday, May 12, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2782-S2783]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, later today the Senate will vote on whether
to proceed to a bill that was reported out of the Senate Finance
Committee, on which I serve, the trade promotion authority legislation.
What is so remarkable about this is that we are on the cusp here in the
Senate of passing a major piece of legislation--bipartisan legislation
on which a Republican majority in the Senate is working with a
Democratic President to give him trade promotion authority--something
that would be very good for our economy. If the Democrats in the Senate
do not blow it, this could be a major hallmark achievement of this
Congress. But my understanding is there is an effort on the other side
now to prevent us from even getting on the bill to debate it. I hope
that as Democrats contemplate that move, they will think long and hard
about what they will be doing. Not only will they be undermining their
own President, who is very much for this, but they will be hurting the
American economy. Almost every President, literally back to FDR, has
had trade promotion authority in which he has the ability to negotiate
trade agreements with our trading partners in a way that Congress
ultimately has to approve but in a way that expedites and gives the
maximum amount of leverage to get the best trade agreement possible.
We are taking up that legislation, hopefully, later today. But it is
all going to depend on Senate Democrats and whether they want to
proceed to this bill or not. I certainly hope, as I said, that they
will come to the conclusion that it is in the best interests of our
country, of our economy, and certainly, I think, in the best interests
of creating a bipartisan achievement here in which they are working
with their own President and with Republicans here in the Senate.
With 96 percent of the world's consumers outside the borders of the
United States, trade is essential to growing our economy and opening
new markets for products marked ``Made in the USA.''
Over the past few years, exports have been a bright spot in our
economy, supporting an increasing number of American jobs each and
every year. In fact, in 2014 exports supported 11.7 million U.S. jobs
and made up 13 percent of our Nation's economy.
In my home State of South Dakota alone, exports support more than
15,000 jobs in industries that range from farming and ranching to
machinery and electronics. We need to continue to open markets around
the globe to American goods and services. The best way to do that is
through new trade agreements. Countries with which we have free and
fair trade agreements purchase substantially more from us than other
countries.
In fact, in 2013, free-trade agreement countries purchased 12 times
more goods and services per capita from the United States than non-
free-trade agreement countries. Let me restate that. In 2013, those
countries with which we have a free-trade agreement purchased 12 times
more goods per capita from the United States than those countries with
which we do not have a free-trade agreement.
It is not just American farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers who
benefit from trade agreements. American consumers benefit as well.
Trade agreements give American families access to a greater variety of
goods at lower prices.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that trade increases American
families' purchasing power by $10,000 annually. For American workers,
increased trade means more opportunity and increased access to high-
paying jobs. Manufacturing jobs tied to exports pay on average 13 to 18
percent more than wages in other areas of our economy.
Unfortunately, while trade agreements were proliferated around the
globe over the past several years, the United States has not signed a
new trade agreement in 5 years. Altogether, the United States has just
14 trade agreements currently in effect. That is a lot of lost
opportunity for American workers and businesses, since trade agreements
have proved to be the best way to increase demand for American products
and services.
A big reason for the lack of trade agreements in recent years is the
fact that trade promotion authority expired in 2007. As I said earlier,
since 1934--you have to go back to the administration of FDR--almost
all of the United States' free-trade agreements have been negotiated
using trade promotion authority or a similar streamlined process. Trade
promotion authority is designed to put the United States in the
strongest possible position when it comes to negotiating trade
agreements.
Under TPA, Congress sets guidelines for trade negotiations and
outlines the priorities the administration has to follow. In return,
Congress promises a simple up-or-down vote on the resulting trade
agreement, instead of a long amendment process that could leave the
final deal looking nothing like what was negotiated. That simple up-or-
down vote is the key. It lets our negotiating partners know that
Congress and trade negotiators are on the same page, which gives other
countries the confidence they need to put their best offers on the
table, and that in turn allows for a successful and timely conclusion
to negotiations.
Currently, the administration is negotiating two major trade
agreements that have the potential to vastly expand the market for
American goods and services in the European Union and in the Pacific.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is being negotiated with a number of
Asia-Pacific nations, including Australia, Japan, New Zealand,
Singapore, and Vietnam.
If this agreement is done right, there could be huge benefits for
American agriculture, among other industries. Currently, American
agricultural products face heavy tariffs in many Trans-Pacific
Partnership countries. Poultry tariffs in TPP countries, for example,
can reach a staggering 240 percent. Reducing the barriers to American
agricultural products in these countries would have enormous benefits
for American farmers and ranchers.
Agricultural producers in my State of South Dakota have contacted me
to tell me how trade benefits their industries and to urge support for
trade promotion authority as the most effective way to secure trade
agreements that will benefit South Dakota farmers and ranchers.
The leader of the South Dakota Dairy Producers Association wrote to
me about the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which could have
significant benefits for South Dakota dairy farmers, and urged me to
vote in favor of trade promotion authority. He said the Trans-Pacific
Partnership talks ``have the potential to be positive for our dairy
industry, but only if the U.S. insists on settling for nothing less
than a balanced deal that delivers net trade benefits for the dairy
industry. Passing TPA is a key part of getting there.'' That is from a
dairy producer in my State of South Dakota.
Mr. President, passing TPA is a key part of getting there. Neither
the Trans-Pacific Partnership nor the United States-European Union
trade agreement is likely to be completed in a timely fashion without
trade promotion authority. If we want to make sure that trade
negotiations achieve the goals of American farmers and manufacturers,
trade promotion authority is essential.
The bipartisan bill we are considering on the Senate floor this week
reauthorizes trade promotion authority,
[[Page S2783]]
and it includes a number of important updates, such as provisions to
strengthen the transparency of the negotiating process and ensure that
the American people stay informed.
It also contains provisions that I pushed for to require negotiators
to ensure that trade agreements promote digital trade as well as trade
in physical goods and services. Given the increasing importance of
digitally enabled commerce in the 21st-century economy, it is essential
that our trade agreements include new rules that keep digital trade
free from unnecessary government interference.
This trade promotion authority bill will help ensure that any trade
deals the United States enters into will be favorable to American
farmers, ranchers, and manufacturers, and it will hold other countries
accountable for their unfair practices. Passing this bill is essential
to prevent American workers and businesses from being left behind in
the global economy.
Since Republicans took control of the Senate in January, Democrats
and Republicans have come together on a number of issues to pass
legislation to address challenges that are facing our country. I hope
this bill will be our next bipartisan achievement.
The President has made it clear that he supports this bill, and key
Democratic Senators are working to make sure it passes. I hope the rest
of the Democratic Party here in the Senate will come together with the
President and Republicans to get this done.
As President Obama said the other day, ``We have to make sure that
America writes the rules of the global economy. . . . Because if we
don't write the rules for trade around the world--guess what--China
will. And they'll write those rules in a way that gives Chinese workers
and Chinese businesses the upper hand, and locks American-made goods
out.'' Again, that is a quote from President Obama.
To put it another way, if America fails to lead on trade, other
nations will step in to fill the void, and those nations will not have
the best interests of American workers and American families in mind.
It is time to pass trade promotion authority so we can secure
favorable new trade deals and ensure that American goods and services
can compete on a level playing field around the globe and that American
workers and American consumers receive the benefits that come along
with that. I hope that will be the outcome of the vote today, and I
hope it will be a major achievement for this Senate--a bipartisan
achievement where both sides work together for the good of our economy,
for the good of jobs, for the good of higher wage levels for American
workers, and for the good of a more competitive economy in which our
consumers benefit.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
____________________