[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 181 (Wednesday, November 13, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6540-S6541]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                 United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement

  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, it has now been 13 months since the 
administration concluded negotiations on the United States-Mexico-
Canada Free Trade Agreement. It has been 13 months of uncertainty for 
U.S. farmers and ranchers, manufacturers, small businesses, digital 
firms, financial institutions, and many others. It has been 13 months 
of wondering what the rules of the road on trade are going to look like 
going forward.

  We should have passed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement 
months ago. The Republicans in the Senate have been ready to take up 
this agreement for a long time, but trade agreements have to be 
considered by the House of Representatives first, and the House of 
Representatives is controlled by the Democratic Party, which is far 
more interested in partisan pursuits than in actually doing any 
meaningful legislating.
  While the House Democrats are happy to consider far-left messaging 
bills that have no chance of going anywhere, they have no interest in 
working with the Republicans to actually get something signed into law. 
Why? The Democrats have convinced themselves that partisan posturing is 
more important than securing a bipartisan legislative victory, like a 
strong, new trade deal that will benefit the American economy. So they 
are currently opposing a trade agreement that would benefit millions of 
American workers.
  Let's be very clear. The Democrats' decision to prioritize partisan 
politics is having real consequences for the American people. Right 
now, the members of our military are unable to fund new priorities 
because the Senate Democrats are blocking the consideration of Defense 
appropriations. Farmers and ranchers in my home State of South Dakota 
and around the country are struggling, but the House Democrats refuse 
to move forward on a trade deal--the United States-Mexico-Canada 
Agreement--that would bring them relief.
  Thanks to low commodity and livestock prices, natural disasters, and 
protracted trade disputes, farmers and ranchers have had a tough few 
years, and one of the biggest things we can do to help them is to take 
action on trade. Our Nation's farmers and ranchers depend on trade.
  When I talk to farmers and ranchers at home in South Dakota, they 
emphasize that the most important thing Washington can do to boost our 
agricultural economy is to take action on trade agreements. Farmers and 
ranchers need access to new and expanded markets for their products, 
and, just as importantly, they need certainty about what international 
markets are going to look like going forward.
  The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement would help to meet those 
needs. It would preserve and expand farmers' access to two critical 
export markets, and it would give farmers certainty about what these 
markets will look like long term.
  I am particularly pleased with the improvements the agreement makes 
for dairy producers. South Dakota has experienced a major dairy 
expansion over the past few years, and this agreement will benefit U.S. 
dairy producers by substantially expanding market access in Canada, 
where U.S. dairy sales have been restricted. In fact, the U.S. 
International Trade Commission estimates the agreement will boost U.S. 
dairy exports by more than $277 million.
  The agreement will expand market access for U.S. poultry and egg 
producers, and it will make it easier for U.S. producers to export 
wheat to Canada.
  Of course, the benefits for the agricultural industry are just one 
part of this agreement. From manufacturing to digital services, to the 
automotive industry, virtually every sector of our economy will benefit 
from the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. The USMCA breaks new 
ground by including a chapter specifically focused on small and medium-
sized businesses. It is the first time that a U.S. trade agreement has 
ever included a dedicated chapter on this topic. Roughly, 120,000 small 
and medium-sized businesses around our country export goods and 
services to Mexico and to Canada. The USMCA will make it easier for 
these businesses to successfully export their products.

[[Page S6541]]

  It would be nice if the House Democrats woke up tomorrow and decided 
that 13 months was long enough to make America's farmers and ranchers 
and manufacturers and small business men wait for the United States-
Mexico-Canada Agreement, but my hopes of seeing action from the House 
grow dimmer each day.
  The Democrats in the House should be addressing the American people's 
priorities. American workers shouldn't be sacrificed for the Democrats' 
partisan political goals. I hope that enough of my Democratic 
colleagues in the House of Representatives will urge their House 
leadership to bring up the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement in the 
very near future. Americans have waited long enough.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Thune's comments about 
the USMCA. Some might call it NAFTA 1.6. It just doesn't do very much. 
I was not in this body when NAFTA passed. I was down the hall in the 
House of Representatives. I voted against it.
  I saw what NAFTA did to my State and what it did to our country in 
the number of lost manufacturing jobs. States in the industrial Midwest 
still have not recovered from that legislation, from that trade 
agreement--the North American Free Trade Agreement. During the Clinton 
administration, I opposed the President of my own party on this. In the 
Bush administration, the other party pushed the one for Central 
America. There was one after another after another of these trade 
agreements, and we see the lost jobs. President Trump made a huge 
campaign promise that he was going to do something about it, and this 
agreement simply doesn't do it.
  We have talked to the U.S. Trade Representative repeatedly about 
enforcing labor standards. The whole point of fixing this agreement is 
so that companies will not shut down in Mansfield, in Zanesville, and 
in Lima, OH, and move to Mexico to build plants there and sell the 
products back to the United States. Yet do you know what is happening? 
Even the USMCA has no language in it that is going to stop the 
outsourcing of jobs. So, if this Congress moves on the USMCA, you can 
bet that month after month after month, we are going to lose 
manufacturing jobs, that the business plan of shutting down production 
in Ohio, in Rhode Island, in North or South Dakota, or in Montana will 
continue, and that the USMCA will not do anything about it.
  This is the same President who went to Youngstown, OH, as Lordstown 
was about to shut down, and said: Don't sell your homes. We are going 
to bring those jobs back.
  No, we aren't. GM moved more and more jobs to Mexico at the same time 
it shut down the GM plant in Lordstown, OH. There were 4,500 jobs lost. 
This USMCA is simply a wallpapering over of an agreement. It doesn't do 
what you have to do to stop the outsourcing of jobs.
  I look at trade agreements in one way. Does it mean more jobs in our 
country or does it mean fewer jobs? The USMCA will do nothing to stem 
the tide of jobs that are moving to Mexico. That is why we should go 
back to the table and include the Brown-Wyden amendment on labor 
enforcement--language that will, in fact, mean there will be more 
prosperity in both countries.
  I thank Senator Whitehouse for yielding the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I am not going to be that long. I ask 
unanimous consent to speak for up to half an hour as in morning 
business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.