[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 176 (Tuesday, November 5, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6379-S6380]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



              United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement

  Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, about a month ago there was a headline 
in one of the publications that people pay attention to that read: 
``Senate Republicans Amp Up Pressure for an USMCA Vote.'' USMCA, by the 
way, is an acronym for the new trade agreement between Mexico, Canada, 
and the United States. I initially thought it was ``United States 
Marine Corps Always,'' but that is not the case. About nine of us came 
to the floor and pointed out this was imperative, and if we were going 
to have a new trade agreement to replace NAFTA, if we could at least 
get some price recovery and also make some progress with regard to 
Canada and Mexico--historically great trading partners--it might be a 
good thing to get the USMCA passed. That was a month ago.
  We were assured, at that particular time, by folks over in the House 
of Representatives--our colleagues over there--that they would do 
everything in their power to see if we could get it done. It is not 
done. Still, it is not done. Still, farmers, ranchers, growers, and 
everybody connected with agriculture, and, for that matter, trade, 
certainly have been waiting and waiting. Times in farm country, as I 
think most people know, are pretty rough these days. So at least 
passing USMCA would be something everybody could agree to.
  I rise in support of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement 
again--1 month later. It is time to move forward and pass this 
important legislation now. ``Now,'' that is my acronym for ``right 
away,'' ``yesterday.''
  As chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I want to talk about 
not only my producers in Kansas but all producers throughout these 
United States and across the country. Time and again, we have asked why 
there is a delay. Farmers tell me, time and again, they wonder what on 
Earth is going on back there. Well, that is obvious to everybody, with 
the ``i'' word being considered over in the House, but even with that, 
this is a situation where, if that were brought up to a vote, both the 
administration and House Members--both sides of the aisle--it would 
pass, more so especially since our Trade Ambassador, Robert Lighthizer, 
has been working with my colleagues across the aisle over there in an 
effort to settle labor issues and also environmental concerns.

[[Page S6380]]

  I have been down that road before with the Honorable Kika de la 
Garza, the late Kika de la Garza, but a wonderful man who was chairman 
of the House Agriculture Committee. I was the ranking member and then 
became the chairman. We worked on NAFTA, writing that bill. We would 
revert to that bill, but after months and months, there was finally an 
agreement between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. We were ready 
to do this, and it had to go to the House of Representatives. 
Ambassador Lighthizer and Bob--he used to work for Bob Dole, a good 
friend of mine--had been working with Democrats over time on these two 
issues. He tells me he is pretty close to a deal--except we are not. 
Now, Ambassador Lighthizer, on behalf of the administration, is not 
going to send this deal, if you will, this trade agreement, to the 
House unless there is a clear intention that it will be brought up. He 
doesn't want to be held hostage. So the House has to move.
  I want to continue to point out that USMCA, this new trade agreement, 
will not only increase market access for farmers and provide new 
opportunities for dairy, poultry, for egg producers, for all the 
commodities we talk about--wheat, corn, et cetera--but it will also 
address longstanding nontariff barriers that will help our Kansas 
farmers export wheat to Canada.
  That used to be the case with Mexico. The Kansas winter wheat, once 
harvested, would get on the Kansas City railroad, down to Mexico. They 
would sell the wheat to Mexico, where they sorely needed it. It was a 
very good business trade agreement. That has pretty much dried up.
  Let me go back to 2017. At that particular time, 110,000 Kansas jobs 
were supported by trade with Canada and Mexico, and, I am sure, the 
neighboring States are even equal to that or much more than that.
  While many of those jobs are spread across all sectors of the 
economy, many are tied to the agriculture value chain; that is, 
farmers, ranchers, and growers, to the consumer.
  In total, Kansas exports $4 billion of products to Canada and Mexico 
each year--$800 million from agriculture alone. It is nearly impossible 
for me to overstate the importance of this trade deal to my home State 
of Kansas. We are not going to experience price recovery in farm 
country because of the supply-demand situation worldwide, and we are in 
a lot of trouble in farm country. The least we could do is consider 
USMCA, where we know we have the votes to pass it in both Chambers, 
both in the House and the Senate.
  In fact, the call for Congress to get moving on this trade deal has 
united more people from different political and professional 
backgrounds than almost any other issue in recent memory, including 
organized labor. I recently started a web series, if you will, ``Trade 
Tuesday,'' to give a platform to the many constituents who have voiced 
their support to me by saying: ``Pat, where on Earth is the UMSCA 
bill?'' We have featured farmers and manufacturers from around Kansas, 
including Rich Felts. Rich Felts is a great friend of mine, a farmer 
from Southeast Kansas, and the president of the Kansas Farm Bureau. 
Rich hit the nail right on the head. He said:

       We are an exporting State. We produce much more than we are 
     ever going to consume [in Kansas], and if we want to grow our 
     economy, specifically our economy in the State, we have to 
     export the excess commodity. I think it is easy to say we 
     want trade, we don't want aide, and this is going to be a 
     step in that direction if we can get this passed by Congress.

  I could not agree more with Rich on the importance of this trade deal 
to farmers and producers in Kansas, but it is not only the agriculture 
industry that is interested in getting USMCA across the finish line. We 
have also featured Jason Cox, the president of Cox Machine, Inc., a 
small aerospace company based in Wichita, KS--typical of the small 
business community of my State. He recently said:

       Trade is very important to our business, both on the raw 
     material supply side as well as the selling side. This USMCA 
     is important for us to help lower the cost of raw material 
     that we buy and pass that savings along to our customers so 
     we can get more work and produce more goods [and also jobs].

  Look, my colleagues, it has been nearly a year since President Trump 
and the leaders of Mexico and Canada signed this new trade agreement. 
It was November 30, 2018. We are running out of time to get this deal 
done for folks like Rich and Jason and the many other workers whose 
livelihoods depend upon trade.
  There are deadlines. If we get past the deadline, we will go back to 
the original NAFTA bill, which--as I look back in my public career, I 
was happy to work with Kika de la Garza, as I said--the former chairman 
of the House Ag Committee, and he helped me to write NAFTA at that 
particular time. As a result, the ag sector has grown by leaps and 
bounds in not only producing enough food and fiber and other products 
for our consumers but also for a troubled and hungry world.
  We need this trade agreement. I sincerely hope my friends in the 
House can quickly come to an agreement with the administration so that 
we can all do what is right by our constituents and get this bill 
passed this year.
  I would point out that the ag chairman today in the House is Collin 
Peterson. He is a veteran. He is a friend of mine. Mike Conaway is the 
ranking member--same thing. They are for USMCA. It is bipartisan in the 
Ag Committee over there.
  I would also give a shout-out to Robert Lighthizer, who is our 
Ambassador, who has been meeting constantly day in and day out--trying 
to iron out any labor or environment portions of this trade agreement 
where we have some holdup.
  We are not going to go anywhere if we continue to insist on these 
kinds of requirements. You know, these are sovereign countries. These 
are our neighbors. For us to try to dictate labor standards and 
environmental standards for them is a little much, but I understand 
that is what we have to do.
  I don't know, here, what more we can do. I can come to the floor 
every day. I can just say that we had 9 Senators here before. I think 
we could get a mutual agreement to say: Hey, let's get this done. Let's 
separate it from all of the goings-on that are happening in the House 
of Representatives today.
  I hope Speaker Pelosi--she knows about this. California depends on 
this big time, and, as Speaker of the entire United States--I am not 
trying to lecture her or point fingers at her, but she knows exactly 
what the situation is. If she would just send a signal to Ambassador 
Lighthizer and we would send that trade pack up and we could get a 
vote, I think it would pass overwhelmingly, and at least we would have 
something we could claim we are doing in behalf of our farmers, our 
ranchers, our growers, and everybody who is supported by the 
agriculture industry.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.