[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23879-23885]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         SUPPORTING THE BIPARTISAN TRADE PROMOTION ACT OF 2001

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Otter). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the bipartisan 
trade promotion Act of 2001 and encourage my colleagues in the House to 
support its passage when we take that crucial vote this week.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Schrock).
  Mr. SCHROCK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
come to the floor this evening with a plea for the people of the 
district I represent. When the House votes Thursday to grant the 
President Trade Promotion Authority, I urge my colleagues to support 
this important measure.

                              {time}  2015

  The district I represent sits on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean at 
the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. Millions of dollars' worth of goods 
pass through these waters every day, both from domestic sources and 
from our trading partners abroad.
  The Commonwealth of Virginia is home to four State-owned ports, the 
Newport News Marine Terminal, the Norfolk International Terminals, the 
Portsmouth Marine Terminal and the Virginia Inland Port in Warren 
County, Virginia. At these ports, importers and exporters find an 
intricate transportation network, bringing maritime commerce together 
with road and rail transport. This network allows the goods brought 
into the ports to reach two-thirds of the American population within 24 
hours. If a country or foreign company wants to do business with 
Americans, they will no doubt deal with the ports of Virginia at some 
point.
  For this reason, the upcoming vote on Presidential Trade Promotion 
Authority is vital to the people of Virginia's Second District and for 
all Americans. On Thursday, we will consider granting the President 
Trade Promotion Authority to negotiate new trade agreements with 
foreign nations. It is the first step in gaining access to foreign 
markets for our economy and to open doors to other countries for 
similar access. This measure has a great impact on the residents of the 
district I represent because we live where the effects of trade are 
most evident.
  When trade increases, more ships and barges come into these ports, 
packed with containers and creating the need for more people to handle 
these goods and ensure their safe transport to communities across the 
country.
  Equally important is the impact that the trade has on the rest of the 
country. Increasing trade by removing trade and investment barriers 
benefits all Americans in the checkout line, giving them a wider choice 
of goods at better prices. Thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs depend 
on exports, and TPA will open more foreign markets for these products, 
and American farmers will benefit as more markets open for their goods.
  When the lack of free trade agreements makes our wages lower and 
makes goods cost more, this is a tax.

[[Page 23880]]

The fact that America is party to only a few trade agreements amounts 
to an invisible tax on the American people and holds back American 
prosperity. American exports are burdened by harsh tariffs, making 
those goods less competitive in foreign markets and hindering the 
success of American companies. Similarly, the lack of imports gives 
Americans access to fewer competitive choices, forcing them to pay 
higher prices at the checkout register.
  The free trade agreements that America has entered into have been 
shown to benefit the economy and workers. Exports to Canada and Mexico 
have more than doubled since NAFTA was enacted in 1974. Higher exports 
translate directly into more business for American companies and more 
jobs for American workers.
  The last time trade promotion authority for America was in place was 
in 1994. Since that time, the United States has not enacted a single 
free trade agreement with any Nation. This sends a signal to our 
potential trading partners that when TPA is not in effect, America is 
either not able to negotiate effective agreements or simply is not 
willing.
  But we can send an equally strong signal to our potential trading 
partners on Thursday by telling them that we are ready to broker trade 
deals and we have the tools to do so efficiently. This vote will help 
us reaffirm America's role as the leader in international trade in 
order to bring better jobs and more business to America.
  Naysayers will argue that Trade Promotion Authority should not be 
granted until it is guaranteed that we will impose labor and 
environmental standards on the countries with which we deal. We must 
remind ourselves that these agreements are with nations as sovereign as 
our own. We would disapprove of a country who required our Nation's 
factories to meet environmental standards or pay employees particular 
wages. Environmental and labor concerns are certainly causes worthy of 
our efforts, but attaching unnecessarily strict regulations to trade 
agreements only breaks down agreements and blocks access for American 
companies and consumers.
  Experience has proven that free and fair trade gives way to higher 
environmental and labor standards abroad. As foreign economics grows as 
a result of trade liberalization, governments have a greater desire and 
greater means to enforce labor laws and environmental protection 
initiatives from within.
  Perhaps the most important result of Trade Promotion Authority is 
that America will be able to increase its most valuable export, the 
ideals of freedom and democracy. Free and open trade allows other 
countries to see the benefits of capitalism and democracy. As President 
Bush has said, ``Economic freedom creates habits of liberty. And habits 
of liberty create expectations of democracy.''
  Our vote on Thursday will send a message to our potential trading 
partners. I hope we do not send the message that Congress does not 
stand behind our President and that Congress wants to build up barriers 
to free trade. Rather, I hope that we can pass Trade Promotion 
Authority and send the message that America stands united, ready to do 
business, and ready to trade.
  Our economy is now at a crossroads. We can take the road that leads 
to increased isolationism and give up hope of creating new global trade 
alliances, or we can choose to take the road that leads to increased 
trade, better American jobs, and a better standard of living for 
America and our trading partners.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in ensuring that we travel down the 
path that leads to more opportunities and economic freedom for all of 
our citizens by supporting Presidential Trade Promotion Authority.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for 
yielding to me and for bringing this forum together for the discussion 
of an issue truly vital to Indian farmers, and congratulate the 
gentleman from Virginia for his leadership on behalf of agriculture and 
trade.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of America's farmers and 
ranchers, particularly those serving eastern Indiana. Every evening 
they leave their sweat in the fields to ensure the good health and 
well-being of their fellow Hoosiers. They do so much for Indiana, and 
this Congress can do so much for them by simply granting the President 
desperately needed trade negotiating power.
  Mr. Speaker, trade already benefits Indiana. Hoosiers exported an 
estimated $1.5 billion in agricultural goods in the year 2000. These 
exports helped boost farm prices and income while supporting 24,000 
jobs on and off the farm in food processing, storage, and 
transportation. The numbers are truly staggering in Indiana alone: 
Soybeans and products, $543 million; feed grains and products, $470 
million; live animals and red meats, $107 million; wheat and products, 
$69 million; and poultry and products, $55 million. An estimated $1.5 
billion just from the 92 counties of Indiana.
  Mr. Speaker, world demand for these products is increasing, but so is 
competition among our various and diverse trading partners. The reality 
is if Indiana's farmers and food processors are to compete successfully 
for opportunities ushered in by the 21st century, they need free trade 
and open access to growing global markets.
  Let us quickly examine previous trade agreements and how they have 
assisted my home State. As the Nation's sixth largest corn producer, 
Indiana benefited directly under the North American Free Trade 
Agreement when Mexico converted its import licensing system for corn to 
a transitional tariff rate quota. Under this system, the volume of U.S. 
corn exports to Mexico has nearly tripled since 1994, reaching 197 
bushels valued at $486 million in the year 2000. Additionally, under 
NAFTA, Mexico eliminated import licensing and is phasing out tariffs 
for wheat all together. Wheat exports to Mexico have doubled from 
Indiana since 1994.
  Mr. Speaker, the Uruguay Round agreement has also benefited Indiana 
in its capacity as America's fourth largest soybean producer. South 
Korea continues to reduce its tariffs on soybean oil, a process that 
has already supported a threefold increase in our export volume. The 
Philippines is doing the same for soybean meal.
  So, Mr. Speaker, you can see that our existing trade agreements have 
truly benefited Indiana and the entire United States. So why do we need 
additional trade agreements in the form of TPA to help our Nation's 
farmers and ranchers? Let me offer a few reasons.
  Number one, exports are the lifeblood of American agriculture. 
Without Presidential Trade Promotion Authority, we risk losing our 
existing share of foreign markets to other competitors.
  Second, with TPA, we can begin in earnest with a round of WTO talks 
where the greatest gains will be made in agricultural trade.
  Third, the only way to fix the problems that have emerged under 
existing agreements is to use the credibility of Trade Promotion 
Authority with the President of the United States at the negotiating 
table.
  Additionally, growth in purchases of U.S. food and agricultural 
products is most likely to come from the 5.9 billion people who live 
outside of the United States of America. If we do not supply their 
needs, Mr. Speaker, someone else will.
  Fifth, economic studies show that the most significant growth in 
demand for agricultural products is in societies with emerging middle 
classes. Middle-class families spend an increasing portion of 
discretionary income on food. The next decade is expected to usher in 
250 million Indians and 200 million Chinese to the level of middle 
class. These markets will be the strongest for growth in commercial 
food demand.
  Also, some of the highest growth in food demand is occurring in Asia. 
Only with Presidential Trade Promotion Authority can we tear down the 
barriers and eliminate tariffs in that region to maximize our economic 
opportunities.
  Additionally, other countries are moving forward without us. The 
European Union, Mexico, Canada, and Latin

[[Page 23881]]

America are negotiating new free trade agreements that do not include 
the United States. There are 130 agreements that exist today, and only 
two of them include the United States of America.
  Allow me to repeat that again, Mr. Speaker. There have been, over the 
last decade, been negotiated worldwide with our competitors in 
agriculture and elsewhere, 130 trade agreements, of which the United 
States is party to 2.
  Also, world agriculture tariffs today average about 62 percent, while 
U.S. tariffs average 12 percent. Trade Promotion Authority and other 
trade agreements can only eliminate foreign barriers such as this.
  Ninth, other countries are more likely to agree to WTO negotiations 
pertaining to strengthening world prices if the President is armed with 
Presidential Trade Promotion Authority.
  And last, Mr. Speaker, this Congress can no longer afford to stand 
idly by while other nations' governments improve trading opportunities 
for their citizens and their industries and their agricultural sector. 
Leadership and action by Congress must no longer be delayed. 
Congressional passage of Presidential Trade Promotion Authority is 
absolutely essential, and I hope that Congress will do so this week.
  And let me say I support Trade Promotion Authority to assist Hoosier 
farmers. I urge my colleagues to help their farmers as well. But also, 
Mr. Speaker, and I say this somewhat in jest but in a great deal of 
seriousness, I believe that this President has earned the confidence of 
the American people in the days of the fall of 2001. Trade Promotion 
Authority for the President of the United States asks one simple 
question: Do you trust the President of the United States at the trade 
negotiating table to put American agriculture, to put American 
interests, to put American jobs first?
  Well, I, Mr. Speaker, today do not believe I am in the minority when 
I say that I trust the President of the United States of America to put 
American jobs, American interests, and American agriculture first. I 
trust President George W. Bush, and I hope that all of my colleagues 
will join those many millions of Americans who have found this 
President truly trustworthy and give him the authority he needs to 
advance our interest in agriculture and for our entire economy by 
adopting Trade Promotion Authority.

                              {time}  2030

  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his eloquent 
remarks.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter).
  Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for 
putting together this opportunity tonight for us to talk about Trade 
Promotion Authority. We know that is going to be coming up later this 
week; and so the information, and there has been a lot of 
disinformation, I think we heard some of that during the 5-minute 
Special Orders tonight, disinformation that is being put out into the 
idea marketplace.
  Trade Promotion Authority has been much discussed over the last few 
weeks, anticipating this vote that we are going to have later this 
week; and I would like to share a little information about how Trade 
Promotion Authority will benefit not only Idaho, but our 49 sister 
States as well.
  Let me start with something I know best. Idaho is the world's 
foremost producer and processor of potatoes. We plant over 380,000 
acres a year, and we yield well over 100 million hundred weight as a 
result of those plantings. Most of those potatoes are processed into 
products which find themselves into the marketplace and restaurants 
throughout the world.
  Idaho potatoes dominate almost every market they have ever gone into. 
I traveled to some 80 foreign countries and opened many McDonald's 
throughout the world with the JR Simplot Company because we had the 
best potatoes in the world, and those best potatoes came from Idaho.
  One of those markets that I was part of opening up was in Chile. 
Today, as a result of our inability to get a seat at that negotiating 
table, Canada and Chile came together and put together a trade 
agreement. Idaho no longer shares in that market because that 
agreement, when we did not have a seat at that table, pushed the Idaho 
potatoes out of the market.
  What concerns me even more than the fact that we are losing some of 
these markets to some of our foreign competitors is the fact that we 
are now starting to lose situs for some of our best processors, some of 
the best processors in the world, some of them historically proven 
since Birds Eye first discovered how to freeze and then reconstitute 
products, adding portability and shelf life to some of the best 
vegetable products throughout the world, and that happened in the early 
part of the last century.
  Some of these best products and their processors are now reducing the 
size of their plants in the United States south of the Canadian border 
and are actually expanding some of their potential to be in these 
foreign markets in plants in Canada, and the result is because Canada 
has Trade Promotion Authority and they have a seat at the table that 
they can go to the markets throughout the world and negotiate trade 
agreements.
  Idaho's wheat producers is another example. They are also suffering 
from our inability to enter into new agreements. The Idaho National 
Wheat Growers for that purpose and that purpose only are supporting the 
passage of Trade Promotion Authority. We have documented evidence of 
how trade has benefited our farmers.
  Since the passage of NAFTA, U.S. farm exports to Mexico have doubled. 
The more trade agreements we enter into, the more food we can sell, 
because 90 percent of the world's people live outside of the United 
States. Ninety percent of the mouths that sit down to that plate every 
night, three times a day, 90 percent of those plates are served in 
other parts of the world, not the United States. If we are not going to 
be part of those agreements, if we are not going to have a seat at that 
table, to whom are we going to be able to sell the increased production 
that we have from our farms?
  The U.S. only consumes about two-thirds of what American farmers 
always produce because they are the best and most prolific in the 
world. Without our foreign markets, already depressed prices could be 
much lower. We need foreign markets to maintain our current production 
and to increase our market potential in the future. Because the United 
States has more productive farmers in the world, other nations maintain 
extensive subsidies and trade barriers and trade walls. The average 
American agriculture tariff is 3 percent, whereas in Europe it is 15 
percent; and worldwide the average is well over 40 percent.
  In addition, the European Union maintains export subsidies of up to 
75 percent greater than those that we have in America. Passing the 
Trade Promotion Authority, giving our President the opportunity to sell 
our wares, to strut our stuff throughout the world will help further 
our national goals by allowing the President to sit down and negotiate 
these deals. We will be able then to eliminate trade barriers, and our 
products will increase our exports and be able to reduce the export 
subsidies throughout the world.
  Let me share some of the state barriers that our farmers all over the 
United States currently face. In Australia, a monopoly wheat board now 
sets the price of wheat. American farmers are therefore priced out of 
one of the most important markets in the world. In Canada, a monopoly 
wheat board also competes against the United States in world markets.
  Mr. Speaker, passing the Trade Promotion Authority would speed the 
negotiations to remove these wheat boards from their position of power 
and monopolistic predatory practices in the world marketplace. Idaho is 
the fifth largest spring wheat producer in the country, and I would not 
promote Trade Promotion Authority if I were not certain it would 
benefit our farmers.
  China currently imposes restrictions on which varieties of apples, of 
which Idaho is one of the best producers, that

[[Page 23882]]

they can import into their country. Currently only three varieties can 
be imported into China, and the two versions that are actually favored 
by the Chinese consumer cannot be brought in because of trade barriers. 
With Trade Promotion Authority, we could negotiate an end to these 
barriers and benefit our apple farmers.
  Similarly, Taiwan maintains a 40 percent tariff on apples and that 
needs to be reduced and could be through the passage of Trade Promotion 
Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on; but I would simply like to 
demonstrate for this House and for those who are listening, Idaho's 
director of agriculture, Mr. Takasugi, has prepared ``Idaho Trade 
Issues: An Action Plan.'' This was produced earlier this year. As the 
Lieutenant Governor of Idaho, I led trade missions throughout the 
world. I visited some 80 foreign country. Mr. Takasugi went with me to 
many of those. We were able to break down barriers because we were 
sitting at the table when we had the opportunity to overcome some of 
the differences we had with some of these foreign countries.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a 54-page booklet that itemizes every trade 
barrier that Idaho and Idaho's farmers face in every country of this 
world, and I would like to provide this booklet to any Members who do 
not believe that passing Trade Promotion Authority to the President 
would not be a valuable asset for this country and its economy and the 
producers.
  Some may say Idaho is a small State and we have nothing to gain from 
Trade Promotion Authority and that it is actually a coastal issue; and 
I am saying nothing could be further from the truth. Last year, Idaho's 
exports alone were $826 million. That may not sound like an awful lot 
to a lot of folks; but my 1,285,000 people thought that $826 million in 
sales to foreign countries was terribly important. A lot of families 
are able to provide for themselves and provide for their future because 
of that $826 million.
  Let me break it down: $303 million was potatoes and other vegetables; 
$151 million in wheat products, $98 million in livestock; $54 million 
in dairy products; and $51 million in feed products.
  More than 12,000 Idaho jobs depend upon exports. As I said earlier, 
our ability to process this food into a portable and into a storable 
product is one of the things that has got us into these foreign 
markets.
  I am also aware of the concerns of those who are afraid of H.R. 3005 
because it means an end of our anti-dumping and countervailing duty 
legislation. If I thought that was the case, I would be opposing this 
instead of here helping the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) and 
our other folks champion this effort. I know firsthand the effects of 
illegal dumping and the value of our anti-dumping laws. Voting for the 
Trade Promotion Authority is neither an endorsement of repealing anti-
dumping laws, nor a repudiation of the English resolution that this 
House passed with such an overwhelming majority just last month.
  Mr. Speaker, earlier in the last century a fellow by the name of Hans 
J. Morgantheau said when food does not cross borders, troops will. When 
we look at most of the problems of the world that have been associated 
with folks who have something and it is desired by folks who do not, 
those troops cross the border.
  I have said twice now and at the risk of repeating myself, I have 
been in 80 foreign countries, and I have negotiated with every manner 
of government in every way that I possibly could for every kind of 
product; and having a seat at that table and being right there, face to 
face with the potential buyer, is the most important thing we can do.
  Trade Promotion Authority, Mr. Speaker, gives us a seat at that 
table. Trade Promotion Authority will indeed manifest the value that 
Hans J. Morgantheau put into his idea that when we are trading with 
people, we are building a relationship, and that relationship then 
leads to an exchange of values and an exchange of goals and eventually 
an exchange of ideas and peace.
  For those Members who may doubt the value of trade, I direct them to 
a book called ``The Lexus and The Olive Branch,'' Chapter 6, and it is 
called ``The Golden Arches Theory of Peace.'' No two countries that 
ever received a McDonald's franchise since they received that franchise 
have gone to war because they understand the value of a relationship 
and a trade consumer and a provider and supplier-consumer relationship.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me and all of those who are 
speaking on it tonight in passage of H.R. 3005, and assure that we can 
unleash the power and the potential of the American farmer and the 
American trader.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter) 
for that very well thought out and impassioned plea for the passage of 
the President's Trade Promotion Authority.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Cantor) for organizing this Special Order and rise in support of Trade 
Promotion Authority.
  One-third of all American families depend directly or indirectly on 
foreign trade for their income, and America is the number one exporting 
nation in the world. But unless we act to promote fair and free trade, 
this leadership will fade. Trade Promotion Authority ensures that the 
United States will have better access to foreign markets while 
strengthening domestic industries.
  An increasingly important force behind our Nation's economic growth 
is the high-tech sector. In the past 5 years, high-tech industry 
accounted for one-third of the growth of our gross domestic product. It 
lowered our inflation rate and created 1.5 million new high-paying 
jobs. Overall, the world market for IT products rose steadily to $1.3 
trillion in 2000 and is expected to grow as companies take further 
advantage of the Internet and e-commerce.
  In the United States, the information sector employment rose by 15 
percent from 1997 to over 2 million jobs last year. Additionally, more 
than half of the 2.6 percent increase in U.S. labor productivity 
between 1996 and 1999 was directly related to increasing investment in 
IT. What may not be known is that U.S. high-tech companies exported 
$223 billion in merchandise last year. In Illinois, the number of 
companies exporting increased by 50 percent from 1992 to 1998.
  Mr. Speaker, Motorola, which is based in Chicago's northern suburbs, 
is one of our Nation's leading exporters of high-tech goods. In the 
past several years, their exports have increased steadily. Last year 
almost two-thirds of Motorola's sales were exported. Additionally, 
thanks to the innovation of the Internet and e-commerce, health care 
companies such as Allegiance and Medline, based in northern Illinois, 
greatly contributed to overall Internet sales transactions worldwide, 
providing critical health care supplies for hospitals both here and 
abroad.
  Allegiance alone provides goods to over 80 countries and has 20 
subsidiaries worldwide. These companies support incomes of thousands of 
families in Deerfield, Vernon Hills, and Libertyville.

                              {time}  2045

  If we grant the President Trade Promotion Authority and these 
employees continue to take advantage of the Internet, more jobs will be 
created in Illinois's high-tech sector.
  New markets represent an enormous opportunity for high-tech industry 
to maintain our global leadership. With 500 million people living south 
of our border and Latin America with only 18 million personal computers 
on hand, now is the time to open new markets to America's high-tech 
goods.
  While the Information Technology Agreement eliminated duties in the 
IT sector in some major markets, the larger markets of Latin America 
are not a party to this agreement. Tariffs on IT products in key Latin 
American countries remains as high as 30 percent. Beyond tariffs, IT 
products also face nontariff restrictions such as redundant testing and 
certification requirements. U.S. suppliers, including

[[Page 23883]]

those in Illinois, will see a rise in job creation if these barriers 
are lifted. And if we act now and give trade promotion to the 
President, we can accomplish this.
  Opportunity is a two-way street. Opening markets in Latin America to 
computers and the Internet will help modernize their economies while, 
at the same time, promoting free markets, competition, and improved 
quality of life. As computer and new technologies bring opportunity for 
economic growth in Latin America, U.S. jobs will be created.
  Since NAFTA was enacted, the United States exports to Canada and 
Mexico have increased 104 percent. Every day, America transacts an 
estimated $1.8 billion in trade with our NAFTA partners at a rate of 
$1,200,000 a minute. In 2000, America's exports to our NAFTA partners 
grew 30 percent faster than to exports to the rest of the world. Since 
1992, open markets with Mexico and Canada created more than 20 million 
new jobs in the U.S., with wages and workers supported at incomes 13 to 
18 percent higher than the national average. NAFTA is a proven trade 
agreement that has led to success for American business.
  If we fail the President on Trade Promotion Authority, we will fall 
behind the curve and the cost will be American jobs. Already, nations 
worldwide have entered into an estimated 130 preferential trade 
agreements, while the United States is just party to two, one being 
NAFTA and the other with our allies in Israel. Only 11 percent of the 
world exports are covered by American trade agreements, compared to 33 
percent for European Union free trade agreements and Customs 
arrangements. We must act now, and every day America delays, America 
loses. Communities, families, businesses, and workers lose 
opportunities and income that could come with expanded markets for 
American goods and services. During this time of economic uncertainty, 
it is crucial that we grant the President Trade Promotion Authority to 
open new opportunities for American businesses and to preserve American 
jobs.
  Past trade agreements have benefited the typical family of four in 
Illinois by $1,300 per year. Illinois exports totaled over $2,500 for 
every man, woman, and child in our State. Over 350,000 Illinois 
families depend on exports for their income, with another 150,000 
indirectly depending on export business. Since 1993 and the conclusion 
of the Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada, Illinois increased 
our exports to those two countries by 73 percent.
  Let me look at one key industry: environmental technology, which grew 
its exports to Mexico by 385 percent. Exports from the city of Chicago 
alone totaled $21 billion last year. Over 1,400 businesses in Illinois 
exported last year, and 86 percent of them were small- and medium-sized 
companies.
  Take the case of Fluid Management in Wheeling. Over 60 percent of the 
company's business depends on exports. Mr. Speaker, 360 jobs alone. And 
Fluid's skilled engineering force grew from 6 in 1989 to over 100 by 
1996. The firm has expanded here, at home, and in Australia, Europe, 
and Latin America. After NAFTA, Fluid opened offices in Latin America. 
The total number of exporting companies in Illinois grew from 9,400 to 
14,200 and, in sum, Illinois exported over $32 billion last year to 208 
foreign markets.
  That is why we need to pass Trade Promotion Authority in this 
Congress, and, once passed, we will lower tariffs against American 
goods and enable exports to lead our country out of recession.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) 
for organizing this Special Order on the need to boost exports in 
America. They are important for Virginia, and they are important for my 
State of Illinois.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Kirk), my good friend, and join with him in that heartfelt statement of 
support for the Trade Promotion Act of 2001, which we are poised to 
vote on here in this House this week, on Thursday.
  Mr. Speaker, the economists have announced what many Americans have 
known for months. America is officially in recession, and granting the 
President Trade Promotion Authority will allow him to negotiate trade 
treaties that will create jobs and deliver a much-needed boost to our 
economy. The real cost to American business of not granting the 
President Trade Promotion Authority is that other countries will 
continue to negotiate free trade agreements to the exclusion of the 
United States and its interests, putting American businesses at a 
competitive disadvantage.
  Two vital sectors of America's economy that have suffered greatly 
during the recent economic downturn here in this country will benefit 
most from Trade Promotion Authority, and those are the sectors that we 
are focusing on tonight and that have been spoken to on the part of my 
colleagues, and they are the agricultural and high-tech sectors.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like for a minute to focus on the Commonwealth 
of Virginia and how it benefits from increased trade. My district, the 
southern district, and the Commonwealth of Virginia as a whole, 
strongly benefit from America's current trade activity. We, like 
America, benefit from a vibrant international trade environment. Last 
year, Virginia sold more than $10.5 billion of exports to nearly 200 
overseas markets. Virginia exported more than $9.2 billion of 
manufactured items such as machinery, transportation equipment, 
computers, and electronics, fabricated metal products, and beverage and 
tobacco products. The number of Virginia companies exporting increased 
62 percent from 1992 to 1998. Demand is growing for the top five 
agricultural products exported from Virginia, including tobacco leaf, 
poultry products, live animals and red meats, wheat products and 
soybean products.
  Here are some of the benefits that we stand to gain from increased 
trade in Virginia. Nearly 60,000 manufacturing jobs are tied to 
exports. Roughly 6,000 Virginia citizens hold jobs related to 
agricultural exporters. Jobs supported by exports in Virginia are 13 to 
18 percent better paying than the national average. In 1997, an 
estimated 42,000 Virginia jobs depended on or were indirectly related 
to manufactured exports, and 1 in every 7 of the manufacturing jobs in 
Virginia is tied to exports.
  Mr. Speaker, no doubt that one of the tremendous engines for the 
Commonwealth of Virginia and the Nation as a whole and our economy has 
been the high technology sector. This industry is particularly affected 
by the absence of Presidential Trade Promotion Authority, and it is 
this industry which also will stand to benefit most in terms of job 
creation and increased productivity across this land.
  Firms in the United States face many obstacles in the global market 
such as high tariffs and regulatory burdens. These facts inhibit the 
competitiveness of American firms. Such obstacles, if not removed, will 
ultimately lead to the loss of American jobs to our foreign 
competitors, adding fuel to the fire of the already stalled American 
economy and associated job layoffs.
  Obstacles exist such as the soaring tariffs. These tariffs on 
American information technology products, scientific instruments, and 
medical equipment being sold in countries with which the United States 
does not have trade agreements reduces American competitiveness with 
the indigenous goods produced in that target country and our foreign 
competitors. Second, American companies face regulatory barriers on 
trade of information technology and communications products that are in 
place without trade agreements. Absence of Trade Promotion Authority, 
make no mistake, results in countries being unwilling to negotiate 
trade agreements with the United States. And why would they agree to 
negotiate with us if a deal as struck is not really a deal? As was 
stated before by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), I think our 
President, Mr. Bush, has earned the confidence of the American people 
and we must confer upon him Trade Promotion Authority to make sure that 
our American businesses stay competitive in the global marketplace.
  Mr. Speaker, to give my colleagues an example of a free trade 
agreement,

[[Page 23884]]

most trade between Brazil and Argentina is now tariff free, while U.S. 
firms still face an average tariff of more than 14 percent on exports 
to those Western Hemisphere countries and neighbors of ours. Foreign 
Ministers from both Brazil and Argentina have suggested that they 
cannot negotiate trade agreements with the United States until the 
President has Fast Track authority.
  Granting the President Trade Promotion Authority will allow him to 
negotiate trade treaties that create access to new markets for the 
high-tech industry. Access to new markets will be a major force behind 
the success of our technological community and the job growth therein. 
This success will be obtained by allowing companies to expand their 
markets and their sales in developing countries in order to continue 
the rapid expansion of the high-tech industries here at home.
  As an example of how important opening up foreign markets is to 
American companies, this is a staggering statistic: 58 percent, that 
is, nearly 60 percent of Microsoft's revenues, is derived from 
international sales. Passage of TPA will allow companies like Microsoft 
to continue to increase their revenues in the global marketplace, and 
at the same time we are opening up new markets we are growing the job 
base here in America.
  Trade agreements could also help establish the framework for 
additional e-commerce by American firms between those businesses and 
their customers abroad. High-tech products from America will be 
available at lower costs as these markets continue to open. If we have 
the ability to enter into more bilateral trade agreements, American 
goods and equipment will begin to show up in more countries and more 
markets, in much greater numbers and at much more competitive prices.
  Recently, President George W. Bush addressed a meeting of leaders in 
the high-tech industry. The President expressed his vision of a world 
with increased free trade and described trade's benefits for the U.S. 
economy. And he said, ``Ours is an administration dedicated to free 
trade. I hope that Congress gives me Trade Promotion Authority as soon 
as possible so I can negotiate free trade agreements. We should not try 
to build a wall around our Nation and encourage others not to do so. We 
ought to be tearing these walls down. Free trade is good for America 
and it will be good for your industry as well.''
  Mr. Speaker, another aspect within the international trade 
environment which is providing obstacles, especially in the area of the 
high-tech sector, is the issue of piracy. Piracy is currently costing 
the high-tech sector in America a tremendous amount of revenues. The 
protection of American know-how is another benefit and an essential 
part of TPA.
  For example, 58 percent of business software applications used in 
Latin America were pirated in the year 2000, costing the software 
industry in our country nearly $869 million in licensing revenues. In 
1998, Latin America's software market generated approximately $3.5 
billion and is expected to grow by 18 percent annually.

                              {time}  2100

  Latin America is currently considered a region where a free trade 
agreement could occur fairly quickly with the United States. This is a 
region that provides a huge opportunity for the U.S. software industry. 
TPA will allow the President to negotiate trade treaties that will 
combat piracy by making intellectual property protection a fundamental 
condition of membership in multilateral and bilateral trade alliances. 
It will also open wide this natural growth market to the south for all 
American businesses, thereby increasing the job base in America.
  Singapore is also a natural destination for the President and his 
team of negotiators to engage in talks and produce a bilateral trade 
agreement to open up markets to United States business. Intellectual 
property reforms in Singapore and cooperation in that country with 
policymakers have created an environment prepared for increased high-
tech trade. We must allow President Bush to take advantage of this 
conducive environment and lock in the opportunities for American 
businesses in that country with a bilateral trade agreement with 
Singapore.
  The issue of privacy is certainly linked and has as its pillar the 
protection of intellectual property owned by American businesses. If 
America's copyright industries are to continue to be successful in the 
world markets, the President must be able to effectively negotiate 
trade agreements that reduce barriers to creative works in America. 
Trade agreements are the vehicle to license and insure the continued 
growth of the industry in America. That is why the International 
Intellectual Property Alliance supports Trade Promotion Authority.
  A recent report indicates that the copyright industries, including 
computer software makers, music, computer hardware, and many more, they 
employed more than 7.6 million Americans in 1999. Mr. Speaker, my 
colleagues before me have stated the many benefits that NAFTA has 
conferred upon this country.
  Eight years ago last month, the House of Representatives debated and 
passed the North American Free Trade Agreement. It has produced a 
tremendous growth in trade for the United States and our two partners, 
Mexico and Canada. Trade with our NAFTA partners is growing twice as 
fast as U.S. trade with the rest of the world and accounts for 
approximately one-third of all U.S. merchandise trade.
  NAFTA trade exceeds trade with both the European Union and Japan 
combined, approximately $1.8 billion a day, as was pointed out earlier. 
NAFTA has kept Mexico on track to sustain internal economic reform, 
which in turn has helped the United States. NAFTA has resulted in 
reduced tariffs for American goods, benefiting American companies and 
American workers.
  Under NAFTA, Mexico eliminated its 15 percent tariff on live 
slaughter cattle, its 20 percent tariff on chilled beef, and its 25 
percent tariff on frozen beef. Mexico has been the fastest-growing 
market for U.S. beef. U.S. beef exports to Mexico rose from the 1993 
pre-NAFTA level of 39,000 tons valued at $116 million, to 179,000 tons 
valued at $531 million in 2000.
  In the year 2000, 73 percent of Mexican imports were products from 
the United States: capital goods, from road-building equipment to 
hospital instruments; consumer goods from Mexico's emergent middle 
class; everything from blue jeans to compact disks and food. NAFTA led 
to a stronger economy, which led to improved living standards for 
Americans.
  Examples in my home State of Virginia: the Jones Group International, 
based in Fairfax, illustrates how an increasing number of American 
small service companies are competing in world markets. This firm 
provides consulting services for developing countries.
  The Regional African Satellite Communications Organization contacted 
the company in 1999 to develop two detailed documents, one for 
technology transfer and the other for know-how and an assistance 
program.
  Millicom International Cellular. This Arlington, Virginia-based 
telecommunications company announced in 1998 that SENTELgsm, a 75 
percent Millicom-owned company, has been awarded a nationwide global 
systems for a mobile communications license for the Republic of 
Senegal.
  The company plans to embark on a rapid development program to build 
and launch a GSM mobile network to initially launch service in Dakar, 
with plans to expand coverage to all the regional capitals.
  The license award is for a period of 20 years, renewable every 5 
years thereafter. The firm reports that this significant investment 
will result in nearly $10 million in U.S. exports and will create or 
retain more than 100 U.S. jobs.
  In a recent speech, Commerce Secretary Don Evans summed up the 
benefits of Trade Promotion Authority: ``The President is also 
committed to keeping electronic commerce free of roadblocks, ensuring 
the protection of intellectual property rights, and the strict 
enforcement of our trade agreements. But to achieve these goals in a 
successful trade policy that serves the

[[Page 23885]]

interests of American business and American workers, the President 
needs Trade Promotion Authority.''
  Without TPA, other nations will continue to refuse to negotiate 
treaties with the United States.
  Mr. Speaker, it is vital for our economic interest and security that 
the United States set the trade agenda for the world market.

                          ____________________